Guest Blog: David Pollard on SandRidge Commons
In the interest of provoking a thorough and balanced discussion on the pros and cons of the SandRidge Commons proposal, I’ve invited two guest bloggers. Our first guest blogger is David Pollard, who is watching this debate from far away and has some concerns about his hometown. Pollard was born and raised in Oklahoma City and is an OU graduate with a degree in Political Science and Business. David completed his Masters Degree in European Studies from the Catholique University of Louvain in Belgium and worked in the financial services industry in Germany and the Netherlands for 20 years. Currently a resident of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, David has started his own business consultancy called Community to Community (www.c-2-c.eu) which specializes in creating practical solutions on diversity topics for governments, international corporations and diverse communities. He is an avid fan of developments in downtown Oklahoma City and, thanks to the internet, remains close to his hometown.
The newly released proposal for the redevelopment of the Sandridge campus in downtown Oklahoma City brings a number of emotions to the surface. First of all, it is commendable, encouraging and even heartwarming to see major corporations like Sandridge and Devon take interest and be willing to invest in downtown thereby creating jobs, increased peripheral development and, perhaps even act as a magnet for new large projects. The citizens are largely grateful and politicians satiatied. This all goes without saying.
What doesn’t go without saying though is that Sandridge is making a huge design mistake that most people will not be aware of until it is far too late. Namely, the plan as presented totally disrespects the cultural integrity of Oklahoma City and even worse, totally ignores the most important lesson of the past that this city should have learned. Only now, after 30 years are the ugly, and economically devastating scars of wanton destruction due to the ill-conceived Pei Plan, being filled in by the Devon project.
The lesson of-course is that the urban fabric of the city is its lifeblood and the destruction of historical buildings should not be taken lightly: particularly not when there are so many excellent alternatives that could actually put Sandridge in a much better light with the media and the citizens of Oklahoma City.
Impossible? Not at all. To be concrete, the Sandridge proposal suggests the destruction of an historical building ‘Capitol Federal Saving and Loan Building’ on 302 N. Robinson.
The building is a prime example of the beauty that was lost as a result of Urban Renewal. Although it’s destruction, and that of the one next to it on N.W. 2nd would provide Sandridge open access to Robinson and, presumably enhance the sight lines to the Sandridge skyscraper (formerly Kerr McGee Head Office), the disservice to the streetscape of the city would be irreparable. However, instead of dwelling on what Sandridge should not do, I would like to offer some suggestions of what it SHOULD do.
For one: Restore the former glory of 302 N. Robinson (see photo below). Make at least one floor if not two a new ‘City of Oklahoma City Museum’, fully sponsored by Sandridge. Talk about corporate responsibility and service to the community! Although it may not be suitable for class A office space, there are other, economically sound reasons to restore this building in such a prime location. Yes, retail, yes housing, yes to a creative solution. The building next to it, although an interesting example of 60’s architecture, would be a candidate for a very modern update, keeping with Sandridge’s plans for the back facade of the Braniff building, and the new building planned for across 2nd Steet from the corporate headquarters.
All of this could enhance the Sandridge headquarters, reinforce the urban fabric of the city, and secure a ‘constructive’ top-of-mind presence for the company in the minds of OKC’s citizens. Really quite simple when you think about it, and likely just as cheap when potential return on investment and goodwill value is factored into the equation.
The Kermac Building, 302 N Robinson, originally home to Capitol Savings. Targeted for demolition by SandRidge Energy.
Finally, there is one aspect of the Sandridge plan that could actually go a step further. The new plan for Kerr Park has a great deal of merit. The new building facing it breathes life into the space and creates more of a corridor to the rest of the downtown, but frankly, it is too short. The intention is good, but that extra airspace only highlights the large blank wall above it, not to mention its rather bizarre configuration directly across from Sandridge’s corporate headquarters.
My suggestion? If zoning regulations would allow it, and if Sandridge has the nerve, this would be an excellent location for a tall, striking hotel addition to downtown, while still incorporating Sandridge’s original requirements for the property. Shall we add 15 to 20 stories on top? The company should go back to their architect with this challenge! Apart from the advantage of convenient and striking accommodation for Sandridge’s clients (a la Devon & the Colcord) this would be a credit to and an example of their genuine long-term interest of downtown Oklahoma City.
In summary, the current plan for Sandridges new ‘campus’ need to be slightly modified to take into account the setting, the history and the possibilities of this unique area. The company is, hopefully, a long-term ‘guest’ of the city and, in Oklahoma, we appreciate it when our guests respect our history and sense of place; just like we do theirs.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
Well put David. It should also be highlighted that with Project180 around the corner, more eyes will be watching and therefore appreciating the downtown building scape. They could do themselves a great disservice by tearing down such a beautiful building.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Once again, when do these designs go before a committee for approval? Does anyone know the answer to this question?
Kris, it’s up for consideration by the Downtown Design Review Committee this next month, but I don’t have a date yet. I’ll report it as soon as I can.
A couple of things, what does the Kerrmac building look like now and is the building with the “OCU” sign still there (is that OCU any relationship to the current OCU)?
SandRidge Energy and their design professionals evaluated MANY options for preserving the old buildings. At what cost do we force private companies to do things that are against their best interest? You say they’re doing irreparable harm… others say they’re doing incredible good. Sand Ridge is a business, not a misguided governmental authority. They’re exercising commerce, not eminent domain. I say stay out of their way!
The fact is “their architects” are one component of a massive effort involving thinking and planning by many integrated groups and teams. This design process has been going on for a long time… the presentation renderings you’re condemning are the tip of a very large iceberg. (Nay-sayers would be impressed by the sheer magnitude of the mountains of stuff they’ve evaluated and discarded to get to this point.)
I live and work within a few short blocks of this site, and can’t wait to see the improvements that should, and will be approved.
Just because a business exercises rightful decision-making authority doesn’t mean that it should ignore urban design guidelines put in place to protect from Urban Renewal part II and the suburbanization of downtown. That being said, there are many things I like about the proposal, and if approved, I will support its construction 100% going forward.
Dennis, I am sure you work for Sandridge.
I have heard from many people, and 90% of them are against the Sandridge plans.
It appears that the “architects and planners” did not take any of the buildings into account and focused on the weather in Oklahoma.
I don’t feel that destroying the older buildings will help Sandridge and their “campus” plan. If they wanted a “campus” they should have moved to Memorial Rd, or they could restore the buildings and have a true campus.
Also, I have friends that work there and they said that the company cannot afford this project. They are probably going to issue more stock to pay for it, or lay off more people.
Curt, I do not work for SandRidge… (Sound’s like you work for MoveOn.org…)
I have heard from many people too, and 90% of them are for the SandRidge plans.
We’ll see what happens!
With all due respect to Mr. Pollard, it’s quite obvious in his blog that he is several thousand miles away and speaks as someone who doesn’t have a complete grasp on current dynamics in OKC. Interesting how a \huge design mistake\ in paragraph 2 requires only a \slight modification\ in the final paragraph. Honestly, anyone that would suggest as a solution to the Sandridge campus is more mixed use/ residential in the north part of downtown doesn’t realize how much of a glut we already have of that. And a Hotel?- when MAPS is going to throw everything to the south? Does he realize this? I would rather us see the Colcord survive, which is not a given by the way, than for Sandridge to throw money down the toilet propping up an ill=placed hotel.
Just more of the \I.M Pei was an idiot-Urban Renewal killed out town-We’ll never tear anything down in Oklahoma City again.\ Hope the next blogger is better informed.
Hey Curt, just because someone has a differing opinion than yours doesn’t mean they work for Sandridge.
I work with some really smart people (way smarter than me) and they say these buildings, unfortuneatly, are beyond saving. Blame urban renewal, bad architecture in the past, blame whatever you will. Unless the city says they can’t (and the city shouldn’t unless it wants to help foot some of the bill) then I think Sandridge should be able to move forward. Urban renewal isn’t over either, it is just getting started. Because of the 30 year black hole in downtown development, there will be more arguments like this in the future concerning the future of so-so buildings. UR got rid of all the Art Deco gems downtown and left some garbage. Now the garbage is being given higher praise than it deserves.
I did like David’s comment about thinking bigger. Add 20 floors to the new glass structure and now you have something. Adding more people to that area would make Broadway and RS Kerr something worth stopping to take a look at. As it stands today, there is nothing worthwhile there. Just my opinion.
No rumors or anything if that’s what you’re asking. I do think it will be challenging with the construction going on next door. Their restaurant has already changed once (I loved Soleil but LaBaguette is awesome too) and now my undetstanding is that their ‘XO’ club has closed. That of course may mean nothing but It’s a challenging time for all hotels so I want to see us focusing on keeping these downtown hotels going rather than calling for Sandridge to develop a new one.
Of course, I agree with Matt’s thought above about that block. He brings up actually the one really unique thought David had about the situation. Adding 20 stories to the Braniff would be interesting. I wonder if the structure could support it?
It might be because I wasn’t around during the Urban Renewal but what I want in my downtown is a reason to be *here*. Whether that *here* is an old warehouse district now called bricktown or whether that *here* is the up-and-coming Central Park (which, off topic, I hope we give it a different name) but the point is that the renovations by SandRidge aren’t enticing to the everyday citizens or out-of-towners. It seems like an oasis built for their employees…which is fine if a company builds a campus for their employees, but not if you’re downtown.
If a company decides to be downtown it is because they want to be where the energy/people of the city are. They want to be where visitors flock and people find entertainment. As grand and “cool” as the SandRidge designs are…people here won’t want to visit it.
It’s fine with me if SandRidge takes down old condemned buildings as long as it gives back to the community what it is taking…to me, it is giving back to it’s employees what it is taking, and THAT is a major slight to the citizens of OKC.
If your employees really wanted a “park” in front of their building then they would work for Devon.
Knocking down historic buildings to build a park 1/5 the size of one that will be 4 blocks a way is a travesty to me.
OK, I’m going to react very forcefully on the discussion of the downtown hotels and the Colcord.
FACT: I’ve been keeping tabs on the downtown hotels. ALL of them are holding well considering the economy, and better than some of the city’s suburban hotels and much better than the rest of the state.
FACT: I’ve talked to the folks at the Colcord and it is peforming far better than expected for this phase of construction.
FACT: The original restaurant at the Colcord was a bust from the moment it opened. It was an ambitious concept introduced with the best of intentions by the Buthions, but it was doomed to fail because it didn’t fit what’s going on downtown. This is not a reflection on the health of downtown’s hotel or restaurant business.
FACT: XO was closed because it was more trouble than it was worth for management of the hotel. It did not fit in at all with a botique hotel.
All of this information is based on my day-to-day discussions with those in the know.
Plus Devon bought the Colcord to act as a buffer for any losses incurred because of the construction. I believe their plan is to sell it back once the tower is finished. You better believe the Colcord will be doing well post-construction of the Devon tower.
Steve, believe me when I say that nothing would thrill me more than for your ‘facts’ to be correct.
If you remember a couple of years ago, you made a bold new-years prediction that one of the major restaurants in Brictown would be closed by the end of that year. Were facts involved in that prediction?
Those weren’t facts – those were predictions based on observations, and never were they presented as facts. So what happened? One restaurant was bought by new owners who re-invested in the operation, streamlined it, and brought it back from the brink. A second restaurant is still on life support and I’m amazed it’s still open.
Now, with the hotels, the occupancy reports are available through CVB and Smith Travel if you don’t believe me.
I am really glad that all of the hotels are doing well, and I really hope they all make it.
Responding to Casey, I don’t think the Kermac Building or the ITB is on the historical list. I think it would be great to save them both too. From what I have heard though, it isn’t possible. Unless you shored up all of the walls (something similar was done to the building directly north of the Sieber Hotel) and completely demolished all of the structure, plumbing, electrical, etc. That is very expensive and not feasible with those buildings.
Would the city fit part of the bill to save those buildings like it did with the Skirvin? I think it is the only way.
So what I have gathered based on these comments, it appears that the buildings being scheduled to be torn down can not be economically salvaged. Does anyone know if that is really true or is there is any true estimate to repair the buildings to any useful function? If it is not economical why would we try to force SandRidge to rehabilitate buildings that are cost prohibitive and they don’t need? Just to maintain a man-made building wall with buildings that are unusable? Seems a bit odd.
If the demolition proceeds (I’m not sure how I really feel about it yet), it would appear that we should take from it that nothing is truely permanent and that includes the park area SandRidge proposes. If another corporate headquarters decides to move to OKC I have a strong feeling that SandRidge would have no qualms about giving up its “park” to make way for a new building(s) and another lavish headquarters. If these buildings are truely unsalvagable in the economic sense, I’m not sure why we would force a company to maintain them. Let alone force a private company to build a 20 story hotel. That is extremely odd, they are not in the hotel business (even Devon has said it is likely to sell the Colcord once construction is complete), why we would force any company to open another business just to satisfy a whim is a bit bizarre. To turn down another $100 million spent on downtown to maintain some decrepit unused buildings needs a better argument than what I have heard so far…but I’m still listening.
Matt – In my statement I had nothing promoting the idea of leaving up the old buildings…I was just stating that if your company decides to take over historic buildings in a community that if they “remove” them then they should be replaced with something the community can still appreciate, not a park for your employees (ESPECIALLY when a new and much larger park is being built 4 blocks away).
I probably will enjoy SandRidge’s new designs more than I enjoy looking at the old buildings (only because they are condemned) but I think they could do much better with the space in order to attract people to the area that aren’t an employee of SandRidge.
Casey, I agree. Sometimes it takes reading it more than once. I don’t like the idea of creating another park or plaza downtown either. Fill it in, it seems to work in places like San Fran and NYC.
downtown does not need more open space. i don’t care if they tear these particular buildings down, so long as they put something decent back. a city should look like a city. if you want suburbs, there are already plenty. we don’t need to create new ones in the middle of downtown.
@Jeffrey: David suggested adding floors to the new building overlooking Kerr Park, NOT the Branniff Building.
I agree David. Sandridge needs to go back to the drawing board and be the HERO. It’s clear they have Devon envy and they are clearly going about it the wrong way. I agree Kerr Park is big enough on it’s own, especially if it’s going to be a pedestrian street. TOM WARD, please reconsider your proposal, don’t be another IM Pei in OKC history books!