<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on SandRidge Energy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/</link>
	<description>The Oklahoman&#039;s Steve Lackmeyer covers downtown OKC brick by brick.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 02:42:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jess M.</title>
		<link>http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-1097</link>
		<dc:creator>Jess M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:39:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/#comment-1097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree that they need to preserve some historical pieces but again I think it needs to be modernized.  Make it stand out and mean something.  Buildings and area that they can be proud of and be recognizable.  Not just a boring building with even more boring building surrounding it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that they need to preserve some historical pieces but again I think it needs to be modernized.  Make it stand out and mean something.  Buildings and area that they can be proud of and be recognizable.  Not just a boring building with even more boring building surrounding it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chad</title>
		<link>http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-1094</link>
		<dc:creator>Chad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:16:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/#comment-1094</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That block is one of the few left in downtown with historic urban density.  Razing those buildings and creating a plaza directly across from the BOK building, which already has a large setback/plaza, would create a very open, suburban feel, the oppossite of what we should be trying to achieve downtown.

Like Steve mentions, plazas like that are historically failures, at least from a pedestrian standpoint.  And isn&#039;t downtown supposed to be about people?

While I prefer preservation in most cases, I&#039;m not a hardcore preservationist who feels those buildings should under no circumstances be demolished. However, I think the only way I personally would support it would be if they were replaced by dramatic new buildings on the same footprints, zero setback.  But they would have to be spectacular to make up for losing those buildings and their histories, especially the Braniff.

Sand Ridge seems to be most concerned with promoting the image of the company (understandable for a new player in town who is already impressive in size and stature) by means of making the tower iconic, but I think the best way they could do this would be to take the lead in remaking that section of downtown as a model of urban redevelopment rather than an easy, suburban-styled ego boost.  If they encouraged a dramatic re-thinking and reuse of those buildings instead of focusing on making a clear visual path to (I&#039;m sorry) a very average tower in both scale and architecture, they could legitimize their place at the downtown leadership table in a way that few others have.

I am glad to see that they appear to be serious enough about doing the right thing to contract Rogers Marvel.  I just hope they get the right advice, and that they listen with an open mind.

Ultimately, it&#039;s going to be up to them to do the right thing.  I think a number within the city will lobby to do the right thing, but it will be relatively easy for those voices to be overwhelmed if SandRidge decides to throw its considerable weight around.  Plus I understand that Urban Design is mostly defanged these days when it comes to working from an urban bias.

I believe that tearing those buildings down to build an unneeded plaza would create more of a PR negative for SandRidge than an unobstructed view of their tower would create a positive, and it would do irreparable harm to our already heavily compromised urban fabric.

I don&#039;t know that much about SandRidge, but what I know is good.  I only hope that they are committed to doing the right thing for the city, and not just for the company.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That block is one of the few left in downtown with historic urban density.  Razing those buildings and creating a plaza directly across from the BOK building, which already has a large setback/plaza, would create a very open, suburban feel, the oppossite of what we should be trying to achieve downtown.</p>
<p>Like Steve mentions, plazas like that are historically failures, at least from a pedestrian standpoint.  And isn&#8217;t downtown supposed to be about people?</p>
<p>While I prefer preservation in most cases, I&#8217;m not a hardcore preservationist who feels those buildings should under no circumstances be demolished. However, I think the only way I personally would support it would be if they were replaced by dramatic new buildings on the same footprints, zero setback.  But they would have to be spectacular to make up for losing those buildings and their histories, especially the Braniff.</p>
<p>Sand Ridge seems to be most concerned with promoting the image of the company (understandable for a new player in town who is already impressive in size and stature) by means of making the tower iconic, but I think the best way they could do this would be to take the lead in remaking that section of downtown as a model of urban redevelopment rather than an easy, suburban-styled ego boost.  If they encouraged a dramatic re-thinking and reuse of those buildings instead of focusing on making a clear visual path to (I&#8217;m sorry) a very average tower in both scale and architecture, they could legitimize their place at the downtown leadership table in a way that few others have.</p>
<p>I am glad to see that they appear to be serious enough about doing the right thing to contract Rogers Marvel.  I just hope they get the right advice, and that they listen with an open mind.</p>
<p>Ultimately, it&#8217;s going to be up to them to do the right thing.  I think a number within the city will lobby to do the right thing, but it will be relatively easy for those voices to be overwhelmed if SandRidge decides to throw its considerable weight around.  Plus I understand that Urban Design is mostly defanged these days when it comes to working from an urban bias.</p>
<p>I believe that tearing those buildings down to build an unneeded plaza would create more of a PR negative for SandRidge than an unobstructed view of their tower would create a positive, and it would do irreparable harm to our already heavily compromised urban fabric.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know that much about SandRidge, but what I know is good.  I only hope that they are committed to doing the right thing for the city, and not just for the company.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: justin</title>
		<link>http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-1095</link>
		<dc:creator>justin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:11:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/#comment-1095</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe its just me, but I think the kerr mcgee tower is about as boring looking as a tower can be anyway.  Why would we want a better view of it?

Maybe Im thinking of the wrong building,.....its the big ugly concrete block isnt it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe its just me, but I think the kerr mcgee tower is about as boring looking as a tower can be anyway.  Why would we want a better view of it?</p>
<p>Maybe Im thinking of the wrong building,&#8230;..its the big ugly concrete block isnt it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-1096</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:50:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/10/29/more-on-sandridge-energy/#comment-1096</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This makes me feel a bit better:

Architects website: http://www.rogersmarvel.com/publicspaces.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This makes me feel a bit better:</p>
<p>Architects website: <a href="http://www.rogersmarvel.com/publicspaces.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.rogersmarvel.com/publicspaces.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
