The Tulsa Chamber appears to be lobbying for the demolition of the downtown post office/federal building (Page Belcher Bldg) with hopes of getting a "convention sized hotel" in its place. There is some discussion about the cost of upgrading the current building to meet federal standards for security, versus tearing it down. I believe the Chamber has been working with senator inhofe on this deal, to lobby for demo and relocation.
I know that the building qualifies for inclusion on the National Register. Even though it's not one of my favorite buildings, I typically stand on the side of preservation and repurposing over demo. (Too many folks are too quick to conveniently determine that something is "functionally obsolete" when what they really mean is that they are short-sighted and they prefer surface parking lots to historic architecture. On the other hand, this is no Skelly Building.)
What do y'all think? Does Tulsa really need a "convention sized hotel?" With all the casinos and multiple downtown hotels...wouldn't that just mean that we'd be drowning in empty hotel rooms? Or is that what it takes to draw something bigger than a Pig Farmers of America convention to Tulsa?
The building is bufugly and I would assume it's interior layout makes it a poor candidate for re-purposing.
(http://www.usmarshals.gov/district/ok-n/images/tulsac~1.jpg)
I'd rather see a new federal building constructed downtown (maybe on the BOK lot at 2nd & Denver?) and the Page Belcher building demolished. Then build a park/plaza in its place. Concentrate new development around it. Someday when they expand the convention center the parking garage could be moved and the 'front door' could open up to this plaza with a better connection to the BOK Center and Aloft hotel. If another hotel is really needed after the Aloft and Hyatt Place are completed, it can go on the surface lot at 4th & Denver.
I was under the impression that our Federal building was still well over a decade away from scheduled replacement.
If so, I think a crew with a couple of power washers could do a world of good.
I think the Page Belcher Bldg adds a unique, historic style (though still underappreciated )to the architectural landscape of our downtown. I have started seeing some of the chicest new neighborhoods and shopping/office areas in Europe be ones where they have taken streets that have buildings of this style and era and refurbished them. I know we are a little slow on the uptake here and its a style that we dont quite appreciate as much as we inevitably will in the future,,, but lets please not be so short sighted. Why do we not pay attention to our very own history. We tear stuff down of a certain style thinking its terribly ugly, then a generation later bemoan its loss and wish we could go back in time and kill those who were so stupid as to tear the things down lol. What were they thinking!? What a treasure that would have been!
They didn't build this thing and think it looked ugly when they did. They thought it looked great. This whole area was very modern and cutting edge. We are so close to this style being appreciated again, even here in the backwaters of Tulsa lol. I wish I had the time this morning to show you some of the cutting edge stuff that designers and architects are coming out with in other parts of the world that very much pay homage to this style. If they were to take away the fencing they have around part of this building and put in ground floor retail, refurbish the area, the plaza and old City Hall, etc (I think we are lucky to have this building smack dab in with a "collection" of buildings from the same era. )... this building will find its place again and be very much appreciated. The facade would be difficult and expensive to replicate, and looks to be in good shape to me. Purists wouldn't like it but at worst much of the inside could be gutted and have the central core opened up to let in more light. It could even be a pedestal for something taller and more contemporary but that reflects the old design.
I think its a beautiful building with SO much potential to look utterly fantastic and be very much appreciated by more and more people as time goes by. I would hate to see us lose it.
Mid-century style or not, it's still a hulking piece of ugly concrete. Anytime I have taken people from out of town down to the BOK Center they comment on why that building has not been torn down and how it really drags that area down. Especially with it being in the natural pathway between the convention center and BOK Center, and eventually between the Aloft hotel and BOK Center. The interior is obsolete and would require tens of millions of dollars to modernize. If the federal govt. is going to pour money into a federal building, why not have them build something new? Especially if it takes up a surface lot somewhere in downtown. Hopefully we can get on the GSA's Design Excellence list and have something really ground-breaking designed for Tulsa's new federal building.
Let me be clear, I'm all for preservation and want to see the Civic Center left intact and restored. But the Page Belcher is not a building worth saving. Same for the Abundant Life building at 18th & Boulder. Just because they are from that era doesn't mean they should be preserved...
Quote from: SXSW on October 19, 2010, 09:56:12 AM
Just because they are from that era doesn't mean they should be preserved...
+1
Quote from: SXSW on October 19, 2010, 09:56:12 AM
Let me be clear, I'm all for preservation and want to see the Civic Center left intact and restored. But the Page Belcher is not a building worth saving. Same for the Abundant Life building at 18th & Boulder. Just because they are from that era doesn't mean they should be preserved...
There's probably no bigger afficinado of MCM architecture on here than myself (okay, there are some infrequent posters on TNF who live in Lortondale as well and share my passion) and I think this was mid-century done wrong. I had the same argument about old City Hall with Hometown a few years back. To me, the PBFB is a cold, intimidating, Politiburo-style fortress. It looks like a jail to me. It fit that part of downtown in 1967 when it was completed, but with the change in the cityscape around it, it's horribly out of place now.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 19, 2010, 10:23:53 AM
There's probably no bigger afficinado of MCM architecture on here than myself (okay, there are some infrequent posters on TNF who live in Lortondale as well and share my passion) and I think this was mid-century done wrong. I had the same argument about old City Hall with Hometown a few years back. To me, the PBFB is a cold, intimidating, Politiburo-style fortress. It looks like a jail to me. It fit that part of downtown in 1967 when it was completed, but with the change in the cityscape around it, it's horribly out of place now.
It's just an awful building and was the day it opened. Take it down.
A lot of funding was recently put into restoring a good part of the interior for the Federal Judge/Marshals Office. I can't imagine that they would want to now tear it down.
Quote from: stageidea on October 19, 2010, 10:49:06 AM
A lot of funding was recently put into restoring a good part of the interior for the Federal Judge/Marshals Office. I can't imagine that they would want to now tear it down.
Those are in Page Belcher and not the Federal Courthouse on Boulder? The courthouse is a beautiful building, btw.
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/119/304867512_a8df586f44.jpg)
Quote from: stageidea on October 19, 2010, 10:49:06 AM
A lot of funding was recently put into restoring a good part of the interior for the Federal Judge/Marshals Office. I can't imagine that they would want to now tear it down.
Then you don't have much experience with the federal government.
Even if this building were stylistically/architecturally worth saving, I suspect it would be cost prohibitive to retrofit it for a new use other than a postal processing center (which it doesn't do any more) and court house. That sad thing is, while the judges' chambers (I hear) and the court rooms are nice (after spending a lot of money), it is still a very user unfriendly building.
Sadly, I have too much experience with the federal government and should not of been surprised of the move. I did some design work on the remodel so I think I was more upset that they where now going to tear it down. I can attest that the existing building is certainly under utilized and it is currently unfriendly due it's current design. But it is big open space so I think someone creative could do something interesting with it possibly.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 19, 2010, 10:23:53 AM
It fit that part of downtown in 1967 when it was completed, but with the change in the cityscape around it, it's horribly out of place now.
Heh, I like the Brutalist influence. I wouldn't want a whole city looking like the federal building, but I think it makes a nice one off. It's a great contrast with the other styles surrounding it.
It does need to be spruced up a bit, though.
Quote from: PonderInc on October 18, 2010, 10:05:10 PM
The Tulsa Chamber appears to be lobbying for the demolition of the downtown post office/federal building (Page Belcher Bldg) with hopes of getting a "convention sized hotel" in its place. There is some discussion about the cost of upgrading the current building to meet federal standards for security, versus tearing it down. I believe the Chamber has been working with senator inhofe on this deal, to lobby for demo and relocation.
I know that the building qualifies for inclusion on the National Register. Even though it's not one of my favorite buildings, I typically stand on the side of preservation and repurposing over demo. (Too many folks are too quick to conveniently determine that something is "functionally obsolete" when what they really mean is that they are short-sighted and they prefer surface parking lots to historic architecture. On the other hand, this is no Skelly Building.)
What do y'all think? Does Tulsa really need a "convention sized hotel?" With all the casinos and multiple downtown hotels...wouldn't that just mean that we'd be drowning in empty hotel rooms? Or is that what it takes to draw something bigger than a Pig Farmers of America convention to Tulsa?
This is verrrry interesting. I'd be fascinated to hear the who/when/what regarding this, Ponder, if you can share. I participated on the Tourism and Hospitality subcommittee of the Chamber's One Voice (http://ww3.tulsachamber.com/nlarchive.asp?id=470) effort, and during the brainstorming this was one of the big ideas that didn't make it onto our priority list but seemed to stir up a lot of interest among certain downtown boosters. I've been a big champion of a convention hotel idea (I nattered on about it on a thread a couple months ago) and talked about it pretty incessantly at the subcommittee meetings. In our discussions, the idea that Page Belcher is 1) mostly obsolete and 2) sitting on prime real estate came up a lot. The idea was that PB was a missing piece of sorts of a slowly forming hotel or entertainment "corridor," starting with the Doubletree and the new Convention Center, continuing now with the new City Hall conversion by Brickhugger, and bookended finally by the BOK Center. Putting a 500 room (or 600 or whatever) convention hotel on the PB pad would create an excellent corridor that could be linked by shuttles, pedestrian walkways/thoroughfares/jitneys/whathaveyous and that could above all help solidify and centralize the hospitality environment downtown.
As I'm sure I've said in the past on here, one of DT's real problems from a major convention perspective is its diffusion. We have rooms scattered all over the place in relation to the Convention Center (to contrast: I'm writing this from downtown Louisville, where I'm attending a conference; there is a major Marriott, a Hyatt, and the Galt House totalling over 2300 rooms, all within two blocks of the convention center; this doesn't count my hotel -- the Courtyard -- or other limited service options, all also within three to four blocks). Convenience and proximity are key, and right now there's not a lot of that for large groups. It's getting better but it ain't fantastic yet.
And the conference I'm at right now is for religious meeting planners from around the country. This is just one type of planner; there are associations, sports, social groups . . . you name it, there're people out there who plan the meetings. I can't tell you the number of groups that won't look at Tulsa because of the number of hotel rooms we DON'T have. This is millions of dollars in revenue that we're turning down, and I saw it happen several times TODAY.
EDIT: Okay, so it wasn't millions of dollars per event, but each event could have up to several hundred thousand $$'s worth of impact when all is said and done, so we're talking millions over several years. But I was still turned down today several times because of the number of hotel rooms we're offering.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 19, 2010, 10:23:53 AM
There's probably no bigger afficinado of MCM architecture on here than myself (okay, there are some infrequent posters on TNF who live in Lortondale as well and share my passion) and I think this was mid-century done wrong. I had the same argument about old City Hall with Hometown a few years back. To me, the PBFB is a cold, intimidating, Politiburo-style fortress. It looks like a jail to me. It fit that part of downtown in 1967 when it was completed, but with the change in the cityscape around it, it's horribly out of place now.
Some of the reasons a number of people do not like the building, are some of the very reasons I do. I like that it reminds me of certain aspects of the "Cold War" era. I think its a great example of the stark, monolithic type government structures you saw from that time. I am not advocating that we build more of them lol, but if we tear this one down,,, what other buildings do we have that will stand as "stark reminders" of the time? I think there is a value in having something that does remind us of all kinds of aspects and times in our history. I think those are the reasons that make this particular building unique in Tulsa, and neat looking. The other buildings around the plaza dont have any where near the "Brutalist" feel that this one does. And its not Brutalist.
On one forum people were asking for Brutalist architecture examples from each persons city. I couldn't think of a one. They are danged ugly on the one hand, but they are a neat addition to the landscape of a city. I liken a downtown to an art gallery or museum. I think it enrichens a city if you can drive or walk down its streets and see examples of all kinds of art/architectural styles from throughout its history. You may prefer the Bougereau over the Picasso or Pollock, but hey its still a neat experience to look at a painting and go "yuck!" lol Even a not very interesting, to put it nicely, Picasso (and I think Philbrooks fits that category) is interesting and valuable to see, not just because of its particular aesthetics alone, but for what its very existance evokes concerning the rest of his works, the genre in general, and how that contrast or fits in with the rest of the works in the museum.
This may not be the finest, stark "commie block, cold war" or however you want to describe it, style building downtown... but what other ones do we have that would fit the bill to evoke that type of architecture and interesting note in our history?
I have seen photos of downtown Tulsa when it had buildings that looked very Victorian made of heavy blocks of stone, rounded turrets, etc. There is not a single example of that era and style left that I know of. Lousy example or not, common example or not, I wish we had something that could remind us of that part of our history. Its as if our downtown suddenly appeared in the late teens and early twenties with nothing before that. I think we are missing something of our selves because of that.
You may not like this building, but I think it has a unique place in the architectural and historical landscape of our downtown.
Quote from: Floyd on April 23, 2008, 08:53:45 PM
Here's the website for new federal courthouse projects. http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?programId=8393&channelId=-12922&ooid=8294&contentId=14152&pageTypeId=8195&contentType=GSA_BASIC&programPage=%2Fep%2Fprogram%2FgsaBasic.jsp&P=PM
Tulsa is on the list, but there is no telling when it could happen. Not before 2012 though, if you navigate that site to the project funding guide.
Rep. Sullivan ought to put this on his list. Maybe I'll email his office tomorrow about it.
Apparently someone more important than I am had the same idea. Here's the same list, new URL: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/101223
I am guessing that the work stageidea helped with was authorized by the $2.7 million allotted in the 2009 stimulus package: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/103683
Apparently the courthouse is not important enough to make GSA's list, though... someone left it off of the Oklahoma facilities list: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/21494
Dream on. Senator No or Senator Inhofe will kill any prospect of spending money on a new federal building.
Quote from: Markk on October 19, 2010, 06:55:19 PM
Dream on. Senator No or Senator Inhofe will kill any prospect of spending money on a new federal building.
Inhofe might if they pledged to call it the James Inhofe Federal Building as his legacy project in his hometown. Though I think that once the Aloft and One Place are completed there will be more pressure to replace it...
Quote from: we vs us on October 19, 2010, 05:04:21 PM
And the conference I'm at right now is for religious meeting planners from around the country. This is just one type of planner; there are associations, sports, social groups . . . you name it, there're people out there who plan the meetings. I can't tell you the number of groups that won't look at Tulsa because of the number of hotel rooms we DON'T have. This is millions of dollars in revenue that we're turning down, and I saw it happen several times TODAY.
Well, seems that those of us who said we could build an 18,000 seat arena and we still wouldn't get top acts like Sir Paul, Sir Elton, Springsteen, Dave Matthews, Eagles, etc. were dead donkey wrong. Your assertion that if we had more rooms we could get more convention business seems to have some traction based on the BOK Center example. Glad to have your input as someone who works in the industry.
Quote from: Markk on October 19, 2010, 06:55:19 PM
Dream on. Senator No or Senator Inhofe will kill any prospect of spending money on a new federal building.
It's not clear that you understand the way these things work. It's on the list for eventual replacement. Tulsa, as the seat of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, will someday have a new federal building constructed downtown to replace Page Belcher, which is becoming obsolete. The GSA doesn't do "adaptive reuse" unless they designate a building as historic, like the Boulder courthouse. And lemme tell you, that ain't happening here.
Now, while there's not a question of
if, there's a question of
when this will happen. In these situations, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and intervention by the office of a US Senator is how you get a new federal building fast tracked. If Senator Inhofe, the former mayor and not exactly an infrastructure obstructionist, chooses to make it a priority, I don't know any reason Tulsa couldn't be added to this list for site/design work in FY 2014 or 2015: http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/FY_2011-2015_approved_2112010.pdf.
Of course, that list also shows how long this process takes. Any earlier would really surprise me. But it has always been something that was going to happen eventually.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 19, 2010, 07:32:40 PM
Well, seems that those of us who said we could build an 18,000 seat arena and we still wouldn't get top acts like Sir Paul, Sir Elton, Springsteen, Dave Matthews, Eagles, etc. were dead donkey wrong. Your assertion that if we had more rooms we could get more convention business seems to have some traction based on the BOK Center example. Glad to have your input as someone who works in the industry.
I think that is a valid point. How big of a hotel at the Paige Belcher site is needed to attract the next level of convention/conference? Also, I assume that, like the old Westin (now Crown Plaza), the construction of any hotel that large would probably have to be at least partially subsidized by the city/county. Good luck with that in the current political/economic climate.
In the past year or so downtown added hotels rooms at the Mayo, the Atlas Life Building and the Holiday Inn. Plans are to add more hotel rooms at the old city hall, across from the BOK Center and in the Brady District. Downtown has improved, but there are very few new businesses here now as compared to a few years ago that create an increased demand for hotel rooms. Is there sufficient demand to use all these newly added and currently planned rooms above and beyond conventions/conferences? Even if we build a large hotel at the PB site and that helps Tulsa land 10 or 15 major conventions/conferences a year, that still leaves a lot of nights with a lot of vacant rooms. The recent financial troubles at the Crown Plaza demonstrate that buidling or remodeling a hotel is only the first step, then you have to fill it up to keep it open and operating.
I am not opposed, I just question if we are there yet. In the end, it may not be a bad thing that nothing is likely to happen to PB for the next few years.
Quote from: DTowner on October 20, 2010, 09:23:27 AM
I am not opposed, I just question if we are there yet. In the end, it may not be a bad thing that nothing is likely to happen to PB for the next few years.
I'd say wait for the Aloft and One Place projects to come to completion. Those two projects will completely change the dynamic of that area of downtown. If everything goes as planned (fingers crossed), there will be a 200 room hotel where an empty, rundown building currently sits adjacent to the convention center, a renovated Civic Center Plaza and a mixed-use apartment building with street level retail/restaurant space, a 120 room hotel, and a 15 story office building where there is currently a parking lot across from the BOK Center. Only then will there be pressure to remove Page Belcher and either build a larger hotel (if needed) or turn it into a park/plaza.
If a new federal building is built, where in downtown would you put it?
Those buildings reflect the personality change that Tulsa went through in the 60's-70's from well heeled oilies who moved here from back east in the early part of the century with their Deco, Gothic etc tastes to cowboy conservatives and their plane jane concepts that bullied the city in later decades. There was pressure then as now to keep government expenditure as low as possible. Originally the Civic Center complex was to be larger iirc. Combine that with the passion for modernism during that period that Oral Roberts was providing and you come up with those ugly buildings that replaced some nice period architecture. They actually thought they represented futurist, low cost government. Think George Jetson.
Blow em up or sell em to hotel chains. Doesnt' bother me a bit. Anything is an improvement at this point.
Quote from: Floyd on October 19, 2010, 11:14:26 PM
It's not clear that you understand the way these things work. It's on the list for eventual replacement. Tulsa, as the seat of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, will someday have a new federal building constructed downtown to replace Page Belcher, which is becoming obsolete. The GSA doesn't do "adaptive reuse" unless they designate a building as historic, like the Boulder courthouse. And lemme tell you, that ain't happening here.
Now, while there's not a question of if, there's a question of when this will happen. In these situations, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and intervention by the office of a US Senator is how you get a new federal building fast tracked. If Senator Inhofe, the former mayor and not exactly an infrastructure obstructionist, chooses to make it a priority, I don't know any reason Tulsa couldn't be added to this list for site/design work in FY 2014 or 2015: http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/FY_2011-2015_approved_2112010.pdf.
Of course, that list also shows how long this process takes. Any earlier would really surprise me. But it has always been something that was going to happen eventually.
hmmm. Someday our sun will nova and die, but I'm not making any plans on that either.
Quote from: waterboy on October 20, 2010, 11:19:22 AM
Those buildings reflect the personality change that Tulsa went through in the 60's-70's from well heeled oilies who moved here from back east in the early part of the century with their Deco, Gothic etc tastes to cowboy conservatives and their plane jane concepts that bullied the city in later decades. There was pressure then as now to keep government expenditure as low as possible. Originally the Civic Center complex was to be larger iirc. Combine that with the passion for modernism during that period that Oral Roberts was providing and you come up with those ugly buildings that replaced some nice period architecture. They actually thought they represented futurist, low cost government. Think George Jetson.
I don't think it is fair to blame "cowboy conservatives" in Tulsa for the ugliness that is the Paige Belcher building. As a federal court house/post office, I assume even then GSA had significant input on its style and design Governments everywhere built some pretty hideous looking buildings during that time period. Whether that was a result of some modernist style or because they were cheap, I can't say.
You could be right. Of course previous state/federal buildings weren't so hideous. I just wanted to point out that Oklahoma, and Tulsa in particular, made a quantum change in personality during that time period. We changed from a progressive, Democratic leaning state to a more conservative, gubmnt critical state. We embraced a sense of "gee whiz" futurism but we wanted it on a beer budget. Probably a function of the dichotomy of education and wealth around here.
I have been reading this thread about the Page Belcher building partly because I could never figure out what it is that I did'nt like about it, and I think it was Conan that made the comment "Politburo" feeling, and someone else made the comment about how cold it feels, and thank you Artist for some insight as well. I always felt that it was a cold structure when compared to the YMCA, Library, Civic Center, but then those contrast with the County Court House, and the original Federal Court House, and the Army Corp Of Eng. Bldg. as well as all of the Deco, and what I consider (JMO) the pre Deco of the Brady area. I think the thing that is missing in DT is the Streamline era.
I love the mix of Mid-Town, Down Town, Swan Lake, and the FLW influence. I have lived in Phoenix for 12 years, and while the down town area is fun, alot of the history is gone.
I think, that with the right planning and depending on when PBFC is scheduled for replacement, that if you look at the grand scheme, you could tie the Double Tree to BOk with above street walkways, and keep the originality of the outside of PBFC but make the inside a combination of meeting/conference/ballrooms, with hotel rooms, build a parking structure on the west side of the building, with ground floor being retail of some kind, and find something that could tie in from BOk and PB towards the Williams Center, and tie that to a Boulder overpass which would connect Brady, Blue Dome, OneOk, BOk and most of the hotels. (I know, I hear Supertramps 'Dreamer')
I hate to see old buildings be torn down but my God that is an ugly building.
(http://www.usmarshals.gov/district/ok-n/images/tulsac~1.jpg)
A friend who knows a lot about mid-century architecture once told me that the panels on this building were installed upside down. (Which, if you look at it, sort of makes sense...if they were flipped, they would look like funky arches, instead of...uh....whatever they look like now..wings?) He said that this explains the problems with the water running down and staining the walls--the signature weepy tears that the building has always produced.
On another front, does anyone know what kind of stone is on the walls inside? (The same stone was used to carve the cool "tables" in the post office area.) I assume is some sort of marble. To me, this is the most beautiful aspect of the building. Also, is it possible to salvage terrazzo flooring? My thought is that if the building DOES get torn down, there should be a concerted effort to salvage anything of value rather than just throwing it in a landfill. It could be a way to honor Tulsa's "Green City" initiative as well as trying to be a little bit respectful of our architectural history. (I've always loved the doors, too.)
Quote from: PonderInc on October 22, 2010, 10:56:50 AM
(I've always loved the doors, too.)
+1
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/2243044/The+Doors.jpg)
OK, I asked for that one... Conan, you are a brat. Thanks for the laugh. :)
Noticed a big for sale sign in front of the Page Belcher building along Denver.
Something tells me that there is probably the opportunity to fill another adjacent site with infill rather than tearing down a building for the sake of something else. What would the net gain be? Would the feds really rebuild a more modern version of the same facility on a different site, which of course, would be the perfect site (as opposed to this block) for a sterile federal building?
This is you guys' downtown in a potential infill map someone on OKC Talk made:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/eyeblink/tulsaparking.jpg)
I'd say the priority has to be keeping as much density as possible.
Quote from: spartanokc on November 17, 2010, 12:23:50 AM
Something tells me that there is probably the opportunity to fill another adjacent site with infill rather than tearing down a building for the sake of something else. What would the net gain be? Would the feds really rebuild a more modern version of the same facility on a different site, which of course, would be the perfect site (as opposed to this block) for a sterile federal building?
This is you guys' downtown in a potential infill map someone on OKC Talk made:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/eyeblink/tulsaparking.jpg)
I'd say the priority has to be keeping as much density as possible.
That map has us tearing down every parking garage, parking lot and one story building in the IDL. It's even taking out half the convention center.
The building is a useless ugly monolithic mostly empty hulk and blocks the path between the BOK Center and the Convention Center. Bring it down. Tulsa has a very nice classic Federal building, if the feds need more space than that they can build a new building or lease space in other downtown buildings near the Federal Building.
Here's the federal building to save:
(http://www.10thcircuithistory.org/images/courthouses/oklahoma/federal_building_tulsa.jpg)
And the one that needs to go:
(http://www.10thcircuithistory.org/images/courthouses/oklahoma/page_belcher_tulsa.jpg)
Could the facade be replaced?
Perhaps instead of the ugly cement, something a bit more warm, inviting, and modern... Something like the new convention-center ballroom?
Perhaps go a bit further and take a good chunk out of the middle creating an atrium/lobby/open air corridor to link the BOK center and the library/plaza/new hotel area .. after all that area is getting a major facelift with the removal of most of that parking structure / plaza..
I've never seen the inside (other than the post office) so can't say if it's fair to judge this book by its cover.
Edit: while I'm at it... this is barely related, but that stupid "2nd Street" exit ramp / bridge from the IDL needs to go. It should be a simple exit to Charles Page Blvd (aka 3rd St). As it is, the ramp takes you to a t-bone intersection at Frisco. Turning left is pretty worthless (and the only option right now as Frisco is now blocked between 2nd and 3rd for "winterfest")... Left takes you to 1st street, which is one-way in the direction you're not interested in. If the exit was to 3rd street it would give much better access to the BOK / convention center parking (simple right turn into parking structure)... and to the rest of downtown.
That map would look a lot different if you didn't include parking garages, but it does show what we all know: there is too much surface parking downtown. The best scenario for Page Belcher is for the government to build a new building on the BOK surface lot at 1st/2nd & Denver/Cheyenne, one block from the existing federal courthouse. Then demo Page Belcher creating a park/plaza in its place surrounded by the library and new Aloft hotel to the south, downtown bus depot to the east, convention center to the west, and BOK Center to the north. The One Place mixed-use development with retail/restaurant space facing Denver with apartments above, hotel and Cimarex tower would be caddy-corner to the park.
When the times comes to expand the convention center again someday the parking garage could be relocated to the west across Houston and the current garage torn down to make way for more space with giant curtain wall overlooking the park and skyline. Way down the road...
Quote from: spartanokc on November 17, 2010, 12:23:50 AM
Something tells me that there is probably the opportunity to fill another adjacent site with infill rather than tearing down a building for the sake of something else. What would the net gain be? Would the feds really rebuild a more modern version of the same facility on a different site, which of course, would be the perfect site (as opposed to this block) for a sterile federal building?
New security, technology, and LEED-Gold requirements for federal buildings pretty much mean that they're slowly replacing all obsolete, non-historic facilities. Which is what Page Belcher is. Just a matter of time... but could be a very long time.
Quote from: spartanokc on November 17, 2010, 12:23:50 AM
This is you guys' downtown in a potential infill map someone on OKC Talk made:
I'd say the priority has to be keeping as much density as possible.
That map is very inaccurate and also misleading (is a single row of parking at the county jail really a potential infill site?). Not that Tulsa is guilt-free. If I'm not mistaken, some poster on this forum created one that shows surface parking more clearly (probably needs some updates).
The map is missing our newest surface lots: the giant one across from the BOK Center that used to be the BOK autobank.
As for the Belcher building, their giant gated parking lot behind blocks a big portion of the path between the civic center and the BOK Center. I'm not even sure if it's used during the daytime, but I do know that evenings and weekends when the BOK Center is busy, that lot is probably something like 98% empty.
The only thing worse than surface parking is gated surface parking. At least ungated surface parking allows pedestrians to take more direct routes.
Quote from: swake on November 17, 2010, 07:24:37 AM
That map has us tearing down every parking garage, parking lot and one story building in the IDL. It's even taking out half the convention center.
The building is a useless ugly monolithic mostly empty hulk and blocks the path between the BOK Center and the Convention Center. Bring it down. Tulsa has a very nice classic Federal building, if the feds need more space than that they can build a new building or lease space in other downtown buildings near the Federal Building.
Here's the federal building to save:
(http://www.10thcircuithistory.org/images/courthouses/oklahoma/federal_building_tulsa.jpg)
And the one that needs to go:
(http://www.10thcircuithistory.org/images/courthouses/oklahoma/page_belcher_tulsa.jpg)
You are truly the pro of the red herring fallacy. Only one of those buildings is the Page Belcher Bldg...
Quote from: spartanokc on November 17, 2010, 04:26:31 PM
You are truly the pro of the red herring fallacy. Only one of those buildings is the Page Belcher Bldg...
ummm... I believe that is what he said. The first one was the nice looking building while the second was the ugly one.
The pretty federal building is where the bankruptcy courts are. The ugly one is where the regular federal court is.
Quote from: SXSW on November 17, 2010, 08:20:12 AM
That map would look a lot different if you didn't include parking garages, but it does show what we all know: there is too much surface parking downtown. The best scenario for Page Belcher is for the government to build a new building on the BOK surface lot at 1st/2nd & Denver/Cheyenne, one block from the existing federal courthouse. Then demo Page Belcher creating a park/plaza in its place surrounded by the library and new Aloft hotel to the south, downtown bus depot to the east, convention center to the west, and BOK Center to the north. The One Place mixed-use development with retail/restaurant space facing Denver with apartments above, hotel and Cimarex tower would be caddy-corner to the park.
When the times comes to expand the convention center again someday the parking garage could be relocated to the west across Houston and the current garage torn down to make way for more space with giant curtain wall overlooking the park and skyline. Way down the road...
I like this idea. It would also be really nice so that the BOK Center can use the park for Winterfest and the ice rink. It feels awkward and cramped right now the way they have it set up. It would also be a perfect connector of the BOK Center with the convension center. Again,that part of town feels awkward and cramped mostly because of the ugly federal building.
Quote from: DowntownDan on November 17, 2010, 05:09:19 PM
I like this idea. It would also be really nice so that the BOK Center can use the park for Winterfest and the ice rink. It feels awkward and cramped right now the way they have it set up. It would also be a perfect connector of the BOK Center with the convension center. Again,that part of town feels awkward and cramped mostly because of the ugly federal building.
I was thinking the same thing about Winterfest. That would be a cool setting for the ice rink and could be a bigger location for other downtown events like Mayfest.
Looks like we're stuck with it for at least another 15-20 years at which time the BOK center might be nearing the end of its life (seems arenas are considered obsolete after 30 years these days.)
QuoteCity needs Inhofe's help to acquire Belcher building
The Tulsa skyline is seen with the Page Belcher Federal Building (lower center) across from the and the BOK Center (left). TOM GILBERT / Tulsa World
By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
Published: 8/22/2011 2:22 AM
Last Modified: 8/22/2011 7:49 AM
City officials are working on a long-term plan to acquire the downtown Page Belcher Federal Building at no cost to the taxpayers.
The goal is to redevelop the site to enhance the activities at the Tulsa Convention Center and the BOK Center, said Economic Development Director Mike Bunney.
But to get there, he said, will require roughly 18 years and the assistance of U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe.
"It would be nice to have it done next year," Mayor Dewey Bartlett said. "Instead, it's going to take a while and it will be the next generation who will reap the rewards."
The federal building, built in the late 1960s, houses the U.S. Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, the U.S. Marshals Service and a satellite post office.
The building and parking area encompass a square block bounded by Third and Fourth streets between Denver and Frisco avenues. The site also is flanked by the convention center and the BOK Center.
The building is owned by the U.S. Postal Service and was built during a time in which it was common practice to co-locate federal courts and post offices downtown, Bunney said.
He said the postal service would sell the building to the city for $10 million, "but the city doesn't have that kind of money available."
Besides the cost, the main hurdle in acquiring the building is the federal courthouse, he said. Local officials all agree that the courthouse needs to stay downtown.
Bunney said the goal is to relocate the courthouse and a satellite post office to separate downtown sites.
However, because Tulsa is "a peaceful" place, the federal courthouse is not high up on the federal government's list for a new facility which meets the required architectural guidelines established following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bunney said.
According to the guidelines, "you can't have the public easily wandering into the courthouse anymore because they could have a bomb in their britches," he said.
This is where Inhofe's assistance is needed, Bunney said. Inhofe is a ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, which approves construction of new courthouses.
The hope is for Inhofe to move Tulsa's courthouse up on the list for a new one.
But in the interim, the building would be renovated to meet those required architectural guidelines.
A partnership would be developed between the Tulsa Industrial Authority and the Keating Group, a Philadelphia firm that does courtroom construction for the federal government.
Preliminary renovation plans indicate that to meet the guidelines, the entire building would be converted into the courthouse and the satellite post office would be relocated.
"We have a letter of intent from Keating that says if the authority will work with them, they'll acquire the building from the post office and form a Limited Liability Co. with TIA to own the building," Bunney said.
The building would be leased back to the government for a term long enough for the Keating firm to recoup the investment costs and a profit. The process is estimated to be between 15 and 18 years.
Bunney said Inhofe's help also is needed for the long-term lease. The lease would be negotiated with the U.S. General Services Administration.
If a lease is granted, at the end of the 15 to 18 years, Bunney said, the Keating Group would step away from the LLC and let the authority have the building.
The city is the sole beneficiary of the authority.
Authority Director Clay Bird said that the only exposure to the authority is roughly $150,000 for pre-development costs, which would be recouped through lease payments.
Bird said that this deal allows the building to be improved during an interim period.
Bird said that if officials can get Inhofe to agree to the plan, then it is likely an agreement between Keating and the authority can be signed in a few months.
"Right now, this is the only method to acquire the building, while preserving a downtown post office and federal courthouse that doesn't cost us $10 million in cash that we don't have," Bunney said.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20110822_11_A1_ULNShu462743
Even at today's methodical pace of downtown development, the area around the BOK Center will have long since moved on before this spot becomes available in 15-18 years. And worse, as noted above, by that time the BOK Center will be getting long in the tooth. In that sense, I'm not sure it make sense to do this deal at all. Let the Postal Service keep it's outdated building and see what it costs to buy it when Tulsa eventually gets a new federal courthouse. Given the financial condition of the PO, things could be a lot different a lot sooner than 15-18 years.
Will there be B&M post offices in 20 years?
When Kathy Taylor pushed through the ill-advised relocation of city hall, the destruction of civic center plaza and its government buildings was set in motion. I'm not one to waste words on a lost cause but I believe we will come to greatly regret the destruction of these buildings and the civic center plaza. If we had class we would have restored our civic center like Denver did.
Oh, I know it is natural for cities to reinvent and rebuild themselves but I have never seen a town with as little respect for its history as Tulsa.
Second point.
Decisions of this magnitude should be opened up for review by the citizenry. I've said before that there is a clique of insiders here that have decided Tulsa's greatest purpose is to become a Branson, Missouri knock off. The envisioned entertainment district, discussed here, is a step towards that goal. If Tulsa had devoted as much time to developing quality jobs and quality public schools, instead of entertainment venues, we would be making some real progress.
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on August 22, 2011, 02:09:51 PM
When Kathy Taylor pushed through the ill-advised relocation of city hall, the destruction of civic center plaza and its government buildings was set in motion. I'm not one to waste words on a lost cause but I believe we will come to greatly regret the destruction of these buildings and the civic center plaza. If we had class we would have restored our civic center like Denver did.
The new hotel?
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on August 22, 2011, 02:09:51 PM
When Kathy Taylor pushed through the ill-advised relocation of city hall, the destruction of civic center plaza and its government buildings was set in motion. I'm not one to waste words on a lost cause but I believe we will come to greatly regret the destruction of these buildings and the civic center plaza. If we had class we would have restored our civic center like Denver did.
Oh, I know it is natural for cities to reinvent and rebuild themselves but I have never seen a town with as little respect for its history as Tulsa.
Second point.
Decisions of this magnitude should be opened up for review by the citizenry. I've said before that there is a clique of insiders here that have decided Tulsa's greatest purpose is to become a Branson, Missouri knock off. The envisioned entertainment district, discussed here, is a step towards that goal. If Tulsa had devoted as much time to developing quality jobs and quality public schools, instead of entertainment venues, we would be making some real progress.
Ronnie, you are aware City Hall is being restored/repurposed into a hotel and will retain it's current exterior facade, right? As well, I believe the developers of the hotel plan to restore and/or improve the parts of the plaza which are a part of their property.
new hotel asked for and got center of civic center plaza busted out for surface street
discussion of relocation of library as well as county court house
new hotel is a remodel (not restoration) and their mixing of public and private space has already been problematic
largely original collection of 60s buildings already damaged and historic value diminished
we have taken several major steps towards the destruction of civic center
this is carried out against the backdrop of new international acclaim for the architect of convention center
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on August 22, 2011, 02:33:24 PM
new hotel asked for and got center of civic center plaza busted out for surface street
discussion of relocation of library as well as county court house
new hotel is a remodel (not restoration) and their mixing of public and private space has already been problematic
largely original collection of 60s buildings already damaged and historic value diminished
we have taken several major steps towards the destruction of civic center
this is carried out against the backdrop of new international acclaim for the architect of convention center
Could be worse in that case. The whole area could have been demolished and reconstructed with something hideous.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 22, 2011, 02:39:32 PM
Could be worse in that case. The whole area could have been demolished and reconstructed with something hideous.
Surface parking for the Southies coming to the BOK center.
Quote from: swake on November 17, 2010, 07:24:37 AM
The building is a useless ugly monolithic mostly empty hulk and blocks the path between the BOK Center and the Convention Center. Bring it down.
Ironically, that building was McVeigh's second choice.
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on August 22, 2011, 02:09:51 PM
When Kathy Taylor pushed through the ill-advised relocation of city hall, the destruction of civic center plaza and its government buildings was set in motion. I'm not one to waste words on a lost cause but I believe we will come to greatly regret the destruction of these buildings and the civic center plaza. If we had class we would have restored our civic center like Denver did.
Oh, I know it is natural for cities to reinvent and rebuild themselves but I have never seen a town with as little respect for its history as Tulsa.
Second point.
Decisions of this magnitude should be opened up for review by the citizenry. I've said before that there is a clique of insiders here that have decided Tulsa's greatest purpose is to become a Branson, Missouri knock off. The envisioned entertainment district, discussed here, is a step towards that goal. If Tulsa had devoted as much time to developing quality jobs and quality public schools, instead of entertainment venues, we would be making some real progress.
Nominated for post of the day....
Tulsa, one mistake stacked on top of another.....
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 22, 2011, 03:30:20 PM
Nominated for post of the day....
Tulsa, one mistake stacked on top of another.....
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?
Been fully drunk?
Actually, nominated for best TNF post ever.