First National Center

[Spartan]

That was in a different era. If the Biltmore had survived until 2011, there is no chance it would have been imploded, Sandridge or not.

Well, it was. So you're trying to say that today we only implode dozens of little historic buildings? The problem with that argument is that they're getting bigger and bolder.

[David Pollard]

Hate to harp, but every time I think of Sandridge de-constructing the India Temple Building from the inside out it makes my skin crawl. They have created such a huge amount of bad feelings among many people and, in corporate terms, missed out on huge amounts of good will had they preserved it and made it an overall part of their re-development plans. However, the past is past and there is little to do about it now except sell all of your Sandridge shares and be as vigilant as the Inquisition for new attempts at the wholesale destruction of Oklahoma's history.

Back to the FNC though........ what was the question again?

Oh yes, it was a question of who is prepared to chain ourselves bodily to the building once it is declared too insignificant to put an ounce of thought or a moment of patience into saving.

[MikeLucky]

Hate to harp, but every time I think of Sandridge de-constructing the India Temple Building from the inside out it makes my skin crawl. They have created such a huge amount of bad feelings among many people and, in corporate terms, missed out on huge amounts of good will had they preserved it and made it an overall part of their re-development plans. However, the past is past and there is little to do about it now except sell all of your Sandridge shares and be as vigilant as the Inquisition for new attempts at the wholesale destruction of Oklahoma's history.

Back to the FNC though........ what was the question again?

Oh yes, it was a question of who is prepared to chain ourselves bodily to the building once it is declared too insignificant to put an ounce of thought or a moment of patience into saving.

Wow... you need help

[Rover]

Hate to harp, but every time I think of Sandridge de-constructing the India Temple Building from the inside out it makes my skin crawl. They have created such a huge amount of bad feelings among many people and, in corporate terms, missed out on huge amounts of good will had they preserved it and made it an overall part of their re-development plans. However, the past is past and there is little to do about it now except sell all of your Sandridge shares and be as vigilant as the Inquisition for new attempts at the wholesale destruction of Oklahoma's history.

Back to the FNC though........ what was the question again?

Oh yes, it was a question of who is prepared to chain ourselves bodily to the building once it is declared too insignificant to put an ounce of thought or a moment of patience into saving.

Perhaps everyone with the passion you exhibit should, instead of chaining yourselves to the building, should use the same determination to find and convince an investor that it has the same commercial value you and others believe it has. Without a white knight it will continue to fall more and more into disrepair and be vulnerable to the possibility of destruction or of becoming a blight in the center of the core.

[Rover]

Well, it was. So you're trying to say that today we only implode dozens of little historic buildings? The problem with that argument is that they're getting bigger and bolder.

I don't think they are getting bigger and bolder - many of the problems and gaps in the core are the result of "big and bold" actions of 4 decades ago. The glass half full view is that there is more private money being invested in downtown OKC than at any time in its history. We finally have a few leaders willing to make investments, both as corporations and as individuals. There is more discussion on the construction of OKC than at any time in its history. Yes, there are differences of opinion, but there is far less apathy than we have seen in 50 years.

[Spartan]

The glass half full view is that there is more private money being invested in downtown OKC than at any time in its history.

The funny thing about this is that it means nothing if all of that money is spent in ways that don't necessarily improve downtown. It's undeniable that we're still waiting for thousands of housing units to be proposed any time now... just waiting and waiting, lol. To me it would be even more disappointing to get bad results by spending a LOT than to get bad results but not really spending a lot anyway. So that definitely doesn't make it "feel" any better.

But I think that we can find common ground on my previous statement anyway. It's hard to deny that the proposals to destroy historic buildings are getting bolder and bigger. SandRidge took down two worthy historic buildings, which they got away with by packaging them with ones that we would all love to see gone. Keep in mind that this is a saga that first started with anger over some buildings on the north side of downtown and in Bricktown being demolished without a whole lot of prior warning.

Now everything between Main Street and 2nd Street was briefly under attack by the Skirvin until today. That was a proposal that very nonchalantly recommended the destruction of at least 7 historic buildings at once, off the top of my head.

Could the Stage Center have a target on it? What about the Preftakes block, if rumors are true? Oh and we also just destroyed (I'd say demolished, but there was the matter of the suspicious fire, on a bldg that was proposed for demolition already) the last historic storefront in the Asian District..

What about C2S? Very few historic buildings down there, but there are still a few, esp. on Robinson and on SW 3rd. Currently the plan is to see all of these wiped away, because there's not enough vacant land down there, apparently.

And this is by no means a comprehensive list, but already it seems like we've demolished more buildings in the last 2 years than we have saved. I'm not sure what an "ideal" ratio of preserved-to-demolished historic buildings would be, but I imagine our ratio is not it. This is just a list of issues that are still fresh in my mind when I think of how annoyed I am by the general apathy toward historic preservation.

[Rover]

So, what is the measurable criteria which would designate a building of historic or cultural significance? There has to be a set of measurements that doesn't always come down to opinion. And then, the properties, if truly valuable to our city, need to be kept from falling into extreme disrepair in the first place. This is what opens the door to destructionists. There has to be a way to assign VALUE to properties and to identify to WHOM the value rests with.

[Spartan]

Well, I think if something has potential to be a good renovation project, it should be kept. The point is we are slowly losing a very special type of building stock that can be adapted to fit the type of space needed for lofts and certain kinds of bars, galleries, offices, etc. It's a special "look" that you can't recreate with new construction, only with renovated historic buildings.

If we're saving buildings only because of cultural significance, then we must not take urban design too seriously. I think when the "creative class" becomes more of a force here, and we are seeing thousands of young grads living downtown, which will surely happen eventually (they can't keep 'em out forever), these will be the most cherished spaces in downtown. That's what's important.

It's not preservation just for the sake of a nice, big word.

[ljbab728]

Well, it was. So you're trying to say that today we only implode dozens of little historic buildings? The problem with that argument is that they're getting bigger and bolder.

Absolutely not what I said, Spartan.

[Larry OKC]

So, what is the measurable criteria which would designate a building of historic or cultural significance? There has to be a set of measurements that doesn't always come down to opinion. And then, the properties, if truly valuable to our city, need to be kept from falling into extreme disrepair in the first place. This is what opens the door to destructionists. There has to be a way to assign VALUE to properties and to identify to WHOM the value rests with.

I agree. That's part of the inherent problem. Appears each is taken on a case-by-case basis. And it probably should be as not every building that is X years old is necessarily of value/importance. Once it is brought to light that a building does have a "historic significance" (as in the case of the India Temple, it served as the home for the State Legislature for a couple of years) or has cultural significance (as the Little Flower Church in the C2S area). Any and all plans to destroy should be abandoned IMMEDIATELY. The ordinances that exist should be followed/enforced (or why bother having them at all). This was the case with the decision to allow the destruction of the India Temple (ordinance wasn't followed). If an ordinance is overly broad or vague and open to significant interpretation/opinion, the ordinance needs to be corrected so it doesn't happen again.

I agree that they shouldn't have been allowed to fall into disrepair or apparent abandonment to begin with. I suspect the City is limited in what it can do to prevent it from happening. Their only recourse seems to be after it has happened and in some cases beyond repair. Can the City force an owner to occupy the building etc? If so, why didn't they do so with the previous owners of the building? I again suspect they can't otherwise buildings along the Canal wouldn't have remained unoccupied for all of these years.

The problem with the way it stands now, is the owner gets to determine if there is any value to the property. If they are inclined to sell or renovate, they assign value to it. There were parties interested in doing so and a buyer was ready to complete the deal, then before it could be completed, the company changed hands and the deal fell through. Even if people came forward wanting to buy/renovate the building, SandRidge had absolutely no interest in selling it. They stated they wanted it gone to improve the sight lines to their tower. If they sold the building and it remained, they couldn't achieve that goal. If they want to destroy it, they say it has zero value (not unlike the arguments made by both sides concerning the Sonics relocation).

[bombermwc]

And back to FNC instead of turning this into another Sandridge thread....

I've said it time and time again.....FNC has to correct it's infrastructure problems before ANYTHING is viable there. There is sooooo much wrong with that place in terms of the building's guts. Suites can be torn out and rebuilt, but that doesn't corrent fundamental issues with the services of the building. It's a picture of how things were built in it's time....those methods aren't adequate for today's needs, nor should we have expected anyone at that time to be able to forsee the future's requirements. The computer hadn't even been invented yet when the place was built!

Some major issues to correct - HVAC, Drop Ceilings, Fire Suppression, Electrical, DataComm access, etc. Something else to consider is if you ever want a company of any size to call that tower its home, then there has to be somewhere for a small data center to go. Currently there's aboslutely no way to adequately provide those needs.

[HOT ROD]

does anybody have any pictures of the INSIDE of FNC?

We have seen LOTS of pics of the outside and some of the Great Banking Hall, but what about the inside the office space. Pics of the office space in the tower and 'podium'/additions so we can see the differences and challenges; pics of the bathrooms; pics of the typical office floor and ceiling; pics of the Beacon Club space, pics of the retail locations.

I think, if we could see what's inside - maybe it could help people understand the challenges and just see what it looks like. Especially greatful would be this Expat! Thanks much.

[UnFrSaKn]

I'd love to do something like this but...I'm just another nobody doing amateur video. Maybe if it was something more "official" looking. They might not want anyone seeing the ugly side of it, but it's like any bad news it's better to see it plainly than to hide it. Anyone who was serious about using space in FNC would have to be shown the ugly details anyway. I wouldn't know how to go about doing the insides of the other buildings either. Perhaps RetroMetroOKC can work something out.

[warreng88]

Valuing a landmark: Court hears testimony on First National Center’s worth
By Brianna Bailey
Journal Record
Oklahoma City reporter - Contact 405-278-2847
Posted: 09:22 PM Wednesday, May 18, 2011

OKLAHOMA CITY – A U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge on Wednesday heard dueling testimony on how much downtown’s historic but troubled First National Center is worth and whether the property’s owners can successfully emerge from Chapter 11.

The mortgage holder for the landmark property at 120 N. Robinson Ave. said the three buildings that make up the downtown office and retail center are worth only about $6.7 million – significantly less than the $21 million balance of the note on the property.

Lender Capmark Bank is asking U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Niles Jackson to allow it to continue its foreclosure on the property through the state court system on the grounds that the buildings’ owners have no equity in the property and will not be able to reorganize in bankruptcy court.

Real estate appraiser Darin Dalbom of Integra Realty Resources testified on Wednesday that he appraised First National Center twice in 2010 at Capmark’s request. Each time he arrived at the same conclusion – that the three downtown buildings were worth only about $6.7 million, about $20 million less than the buildings were appraised at only three years earlier.

First National Center suffers from small, irregular floor plates and low ceilings that make the space difficult to lease, Dalbom testified. At least one entire floor of the 33-story art deco First National tower is completely unmarketable to tenants because there is no heating, air conditioning or electricity, he said.

“Some of the space still has shag carpeting and hasn’t been leased since the 1970s,” Dalbom testified.

Capmark Bank also said the buildings’ owners will be unable to emerge from bankruptcy because First National’s largest tenant, Devon Energy Corp., plans to move out when construction is completed on its new 50-story world headquarters a few blocks away.

Devon leases about 41 percent of the occupied space in the First National Center and accounts for about 50 percent of the monthly rental revenue on the property.

First National’s owners won’t even be able to make the annual $1.5 million in debt service on the buildings once Devon moves out, testified Keith Armstrong, a vice president for Capmark.

The partnerships First National Building I and First National Building II, both associated with Los Angeles-based Milbank Real Estate, bought the First National Center in 2006 for $21 million.

First National’s owners said two separate appraisals of the property done in 2007 and 2008 put the center’s value between $25 million and $26 million. The owners have spent more than $8.5 million improving the property over the past five years, including extensive asbestos removal, they said.

James Hoyt, an independent real estate appraiser that First National’s owners called on as a witness, gave an optimistic view of First National’s value.

“I grew up in Oklahoma City and the First National property has always been what we would refer to in the appraisal and real estate business as the No. 1 corner,” Hoyt testified.

Three large independent energy companies are building or moving into new corporate headquarters downtown, bringing more office tenants to the area, he said.

“I believe all of the oil markets coming to downtown Oklahoma City will have a positive impact and attract more tenants to the area,” Hoyt said.

[Kerry]

James Hoyt, an independent real estate appraiser that First National’s owners called on as a witness, gave an optimistic view of First National’s value.

“I grew up in Oklahoma City and the First National property has always been what we would refer to in the appraisal and real estate business as the No. 1 corner,” Hoyt testified.

Three large independent energy companies are building or moving into new corporate headquarters downtown, bringing more office tenants to the area, he said.

“I believe all of the oil markets coming to downtown Oklahoma City will have a positive impact and attract more tenants to the area,” Hoyt said.

That part is true, but they are going to move into class A space that is being vacated first. FNC will never be used as an office building again. It is residential or wrecking ball.

[Architect2010]

I can't see anyone getting away with destroying the First National. But maybe I shouldn't be so optimistic about our standards. Lol.

[Kerry]

I can't see anyone getting away with destroying the First National. But maybe I shouldn't be so optimistic about our standards. Lol.

What would the alternative be? Museum of Urban Decay.

[Architect2010]

Didn't you just answer that yourself? I would guess residential, however unlikely that may be. But honestly, that place is such a landmark, I'd bet it WOULD become the "Museum of Urban Decay" before it was ever destroyed. Good joke though.

[Kerry]

Didn't you just answer that yourself? I would guess residential, however unlikely that may be. But honestly, that place is such a landmark, I'd bet it WOULD become the "Museum of Urban Decay" before it was ever destroyed. Good joke though.

Well, now that the Museum of Urban Decay in the Indian Temple Building had to close I guess it is looking for a new home. I wish someone with big bucks would turn FNC into residential instead of trying time after time to keep it as office space.

[Rover]

If the value is less than $10 million then perhaps it can get into the hands of someone who could then afford to make some fundamental changes that weren't possible when the initial investment has to be $25 Million.

I think to convert it to residential would be uber-expensive. A complete mechanical infrastructure would have to be installed.

[Spartan]

That part is true, but they are going to move into class A space that is being vacated first. FNC will never be used as an office building again. It is residential or wrecking ball.

There are opportunities other than just residential, but I agree, it isn't going to work in the future as office. Whatever it is, it will need a total renovation. Why keep it as office space in that case?

Rover, that's exactly what I was thinking about the appraisal, but does the bankruptcy court get to set its value at whatever it decides the value is? How does that work? As for the mechanical infrastructure, are you saying that if you keep the building as office, you DON'T have to update the building systems? It seems like the upper floors will have to be completely gutted no matter what. If there is more of a market for hotel rooms or residential than office, why not?

[Pete]

Remember guys, the tower is not quite half the square footage of that complex. There are two other buildings have bigger more open floorplates and aren't saddled with weird restroom configuration. It's true they are ugly! But they could easily converted to Class A or B space, especially since it seems most the asbestos has been removed. And most the retail/arcade space is pretty well leased throughout.

The tower is the space that is problematic but if they could convert the Colcord and parts of City Place to hotels and condos, why not the FNC Tower? With the Great Banking Hall as a lobby, you already have a great amenity that would require very little work.


Rover's point is a good one: if a new investor can acquire the property for a reasonable sum, then they can put more into renovation and still be able to make some money.

If the lender takes it back, they'll eventually sell to the highest bidder and you can be darn sure they aren't going to get $20 million, even with the improvements made by Milbank. You've got to think that is somebody got it for less than $10 million, they could still make some money even after renovation expenses. The downtown market is only going to get better for landlords/investors.

[bluedogok]

I still think mixed use for some small office tenants, hotel and residential. I wish somebody like Magnolia Hotels could get a hold of it, they have done some nice conversions of older office towers in Denver, Dallas and Houston.

[rondvu]

What would the alternative be? Museum of Urban Decay.

Urban Decay and the FNC it could happen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYF_S...eature=related

[Kerry]

Urban Decay and the FNC it could happen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYF_S...eature=related

That video makes me sad but that is what happens when you abandond the inner city in favor of urban sprawl. Of course, I am guilty of this myself but now that I know the cost of suburbia I will not make the same mistake again.