I've been spending a lot of time on Doug's site and a few others trying to learn about what buildings used to be downtown but have been demolished. I must be the only 29 year old interested in such things. It amazes me that something like the Biltmore was demolished like it was nothing at all. People my age will never get to see it, whether it was boarded up and covered in pigeon crap or not. How long was the Skirvin left abandoned? Now it's one of the last gems downtown. Buildings are like a time machines, and I would bet the people who built them would roll in their graves to see their blood and sweat turned into a parking lot or whatever. Part of what makes a city unique is the wide range of architecture you see. I can't believe buildings like the Baum building, the old courthouse and the downtown library once existed. The old guys I work with like Doug's site and old pictures of downtown how they remember when they were kids. They all talk like it was a bygone era.

I've been spending a lot of time using Bing street view and Google street view trying to find what's still standing and where the old buildings were. So I'm trying to remember a lot of buildings. I had assumed the tall building across from Sandridge was the India Temple, and wondered what the one on the corner was but that makes sense now. What's the one across from Sandridge then?

I personally can't see a single reason for ever demolishing a piece of history. A city and a building is only what people choose to make of it. Were people considering tearing down the Skirvin when it was in disrepair? Money and the economy are fleeting things, that go up and down over the years. Once a building is demolished, there goes the cities history and the legacy of those that worked to build it. I guess that's my rant that's formulated in my head lately.

I'm waiting until the Spring probably, but I want to still focus on Devon construction but also do something related to the historical side of downtown as sort of a hobby. Much like the Devon work I'm doing.

I'm also planning on visiting friends in Denver in April, and maybe use the two weeks vacation to spend time there again. I haven't been on vacation there since 2004. My friend's brother builds condos in the Italian area of downtown and is renowned for restoring or preserving old buildings. After a 4th of July party at the top of his condo, my friend went riding around downtown Denver around midnight-1am, around the train station and we stopped inside the Brown Palace Hotel (http://www.brownpalace.com/).

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/21/a2/40/brown-palace-hotel.jpg

http://frysingerreunion.org/1/us/denver03.jpg

http://m.travelpn.com/images/denver/hotel/0/008268/Lobby_F_2.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Palace_Hotel_%28Denver,_Colorado%29

You talk about fascinating and a long history. This place was amazing. There are other examples of old buildings that only add to how cool Denver is that were never demolished/burnt down etc. I'm looking forward to doing video this year, if it works out.

UnFrSaKn:

Doug or Steve can undoubtedly provide more info but from what I recall, the Skirvin wasn't abandoned for too long but the last owner had allowed it to be gutted of fixtures etc (a lot of stuff ended up at Goodwill, believe it or not). Don't know if there were formal plans to demo it, but am sure that is where it was headed if the City (former Mayor Humphreys) hadn't stepped in and saved it.

I agree completely...unless if there is a very good reason (should be a minimum of at 50 very good reasons) to tear down a building that is of historical significance (the India Temple served as the temp home of the Legislature). Every reasonable effort should be taken to restore it but at the bare minimum not destroy it. Have a hard time making people see the obvious. Once a building is gone, it is gone.

29 year old here too...must be more of us than we thought. I miss the Biltmore too, even though I've never seen it in real life since it was gone before I was born. But that was a different time. It's not all Pei's fault it is gone, remember he planned on keeping it. The plans for the gardens changed, and at that time, the Biltmore had gone down the toilet. I'm not trying to make excuses for them, but you should understand why they did it. Downtown was a dead space and the Biltmore was something that was going fast. It really is a mirror of the Skirvin (which wasn't really closed all that long). The difference is, at that time, they weren't thinking of it as historic, they saw it as an old crappy building. It's much the way we would view something like the old downtown library. Who's to say in 50 years, it won't be "historic", but would we have been sad if it had been dozed? It's all a matter of time and perspective.

Remember the Skirvin took city action to make it happen. How many folks owned it before it finally just turned to the city? There wasn't anyone on the city side interested in the Biltmore like that. It wasn't historic yet, and they saw it as in the way.

Oh what a difference 25 years makes.

My understanding is that because of the low concrete ceilings even if the Biltmore was still standing it wouldn't be a candidate for saving. Some buildings were just built to be obsolete - the Biltmore was one of them.

There are tons of twenty and early thirty somethings interested, you guys aren't even close to "the only ones," myself included. OKC wouldn't be having a renaissance without the youth. I.e. Brain drain debacle

i've been spending a lot of time on doug's site and a few others trying to learn about what buildings used to be downtown but have been demolished. I must be the only 29 year old interested in such things. It amazes me that something like the biltmore was demolished like it was nothing at all. People my age will never get to see it, whether it was boarded up and covered in pigeon crap or not. How long was the skirvin left abandoned? Now it's one of the last gems downtown. Buildings are like a time machines, and i would bet the people who built them would roll in their graves to see their blood and sweat turned into a parking lot or whatever. Part of what makes a city unique is the wide range of architecture you see. I can't believe buildings like the baum building, the old courthouse and the downtown library once existed. The old guys i work with like doug's site and old pictures of downtown how they remember when they were kids. They all talk like it was a bygone era.

I've been spending a lot of time using bing street view and google street view trying to find what's still standing and where the old buildings were. So i'm trying to remember a lot of buildings. I had assumed the tall building across from sandridge was the india temple, and wondered what the one on the corner was but that makes sense now. What's the one across from sandridge then?

I personally can't see a single reason for ever demolishing a piece of history. A city and a building is only what people choose to make of it. Were people considering tearing down the skirvin when it was in disrepair? Money and the economy are fleeting things, that go up and down over the years. Once a building is demolished, there goes the cities history and the legacy of those that worked to build it. I guess that's my rant that's formulated in my head lately.

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com

I ran across this website linked on this forum some time ago, but before my interest really peaked. I had forgotten about it. When things thaw out, the co-workers will probably like to see it. Some of the photos I have seen from Doug's blog, retrometrookc and the OHS site but there are so many new ones.

I'll echo Sid and Metro...UnFrSakn, you are definitely not the only "young" one here.

I'm 28 (today).

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR3ldYE4RT4

Is that cupola (3:09) behind Philip Morris from the Baum building? (1:57) I read that one of them was preserved. What building is that being demolished? (4:47)

EDIT: Should Google first.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4153/5175572538_d02f0f7efd_b.jpg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/okchistorycenter/clarenceford09.jpg

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/baumbuilding11.jpg

Here's another related article.

http://newsok.com/will-project-180-maps-3-rearrange-public-art-displays-downtown/article/3494725

Doug's
http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/05/oklahoma-city-history-center.html

Yup, that's from the Baum building. See what we are missing out on. Look at the ornate detail. And now in place of it we have the ugly Century Center.

Here's the OHS Flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/oklahomahistory/page2/

I rarely visit Tulsa, but wow.

http://www.holyfamilycathedral.blogspot.com/

Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Catholic+Church+of+the+Holy+Family+tulsa&aq=&sll=35.470736,-97.454224&sspn=0.54579,1.332092&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=Catholic+Church+of+the+Holy+Family&hnear=Tulsa,+Oklahoma&ll=36.147869,-95.989528&spn=0.002114,0.005203&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=36.14789,-95.989659&panoid=oh2fnZjkuI7ilHBjq_3htw&cbp=12,259.07,,0,-42.97)

I'll echo Sid and Metro...UnFrSakn, you are definitely not the only "young" one here.

I'm 28 (today).

25 years old here. Don't post often but I visit the site every day.

Yeah, it's really hard to believe people actually decided to tear down the Baum for the Century Center. Just shows how drastically different ideas about "progress" were. "Tear it down and build something new" was all people knew. The idea of saving something old b/c it was historically or architectually significant hadn't yet taken hold.

Yeah, it's really hard to believe people actually decided to tear down the Baum for the Century Center. Just shows how drastically different ideas about "progress" were. "Tear it down and build something new" was all people knew. The idea of saving something old b/c it was historically or architectually significant hadn't yet taken hold.

Be nice.

http://www.newsok.com/a-look-back-at-the-oklahoma-city-sheraton-hotels-history-as-it-celebrates-2.5-million-renovation/article/3537086?custom_click=columnist



My sister and I had the run of the hotel that first week of January 1977. We were just kids — our father, Robert, was a partner in the development group that built the hotel and attached retail plaza.

Don't be nice. I think the Century Center is an abomination.

Doug referenced this book on his blog and it's actually available on Google Books.

Oklahoma City: Statehood to 1930 (http://books.google.com/books?id=JVommJ0bjgcC&lpg=PP1&ots=suDM0dd5uz&dq=Oklahoma%20City%3A%20Statehood%20to%201930%20gr iffith&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false) By Terry L. Griffith

Here's the OHS Flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/oklahomahistory/page2/

I rarely visit Tulsa, but wow.

http://www.holyfamilycathedral.blogspot.com/

Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Catholic+Church+of+the+Holy+Family+tulsa&aq=&sll=35.470736,-97.454224&sspn=0.54579,1.332092&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=Catholic+Church+of+the+Holy+Family&hnear=Tulsa,+Oklahoma&ll=36.147869,-95.989528&spn=0.002114,0.005203&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=36.14789,-95.989659&panoid=oh2fnZjkuI7ilHBjq_3htw&cbp=12,259.07,,0,-42.97)

Very similar to this:

http://stjosepholdcathedral.org/StJosephOldCathedral.asp

It looks like it could have even been the same architect.

Don't be nice. I think the Century Center is an abomination.

HAHAHA. Meeeeee too.

HAHAHA. Meeeeee too.


No more so than whatever they call the "Mummer's Theater" these days. I thought it was ugly then and it looks ridiculous now. IMHO of course.

No more so than whatever they call the "Mummer's Theater" these days. I thought it was ugly then and it looks ridiculous now. IMHO of course.

http://www.artscouncilokc.com/history

http://www.seasonsofsoulfilm.com/Mummers_Theater.html

No more so than whatever they call the "Mummer's Theater" these days. I thought it was ugly then and it looks ridiculous now. IMHO of course.

I'm glad that's just your opinion. The Stage Center building is just as important in it's own way as the Baum Building was. It is an OKC icon. I hope they succeed in getting it restored after the flood damage. I started attending events there when it first opened and I was always fascinated by the building.

I'm glad that's just your opinion. The Stage Center building is just as important in it's own way as the Baum Building was. It is an OKC icon. I hope they succeed in getting it restored after the flood damage. I started attending events there when it first opened and I was always fascinated by the building.

I doubt I'm the 'only' one w/ that opinion, but that why they say opinions are like.... elbows... everyone has one. ;).

I don't like Century Center, but it would make a perfect space for a downtown department store like Macy's or Saks, or something similar.

And, if they've started removing the facade on the India Temple Building, has anyone noticed what's underneath? so are they going to remove the facade before they demolish the building? I sure hope so. Maybe we can see what's really under there. If the ornate detail is all "sawed off" then demolish it, but otherwise, if it's still present, let's change course and preserve it.

Methinks losing the Baum was OKC's greatest urban renewal abomination. Makes me sad to think this wonderful building sat across the street from the Colcord and just a short walk down the street from FNC. I need to go find some tissue.

http://okhistory.org/research/hillerman/results.php?mapnoinput=3h&action=Search

I like Patrick's idea...yes, please tear down century center and put something venetian back in that location.

I can't even look at the picture of the Baum, or the old city hall. It makes me want to punch someone or throw up to think that we lost those needlessly.

I can picture me & betts in the same room listening to Barbra Streisand singing "The Way We Were"...betts is throwing dishes against the wall and yelling over and over, "the BASTARDS!!" and I'm in the corner curled up in fetal position bawling my eyes out and crying out over and over, "why? why? why?".

Didn't say it was a pretty picture.

Methinks losing the Baum was OKC's greatest urban renewal abomination. Makes me sad to think this wonderful building sat across the street from the Colcord and just a short walk down the street from FNC. I need to go find some tissue.

http://okhistory.org/research/hillerman/results.php?mapnoinput=3h&action=Search

I like Patrick's idea...yes, please tear down century center and put something venetian back in that location.

Ever since I first saw old postcards on Doug's blog of the buildings that used to be downtown, I've been intrigued. Especially the Baum Building, I've been fascinated by it. I couldn't believe that something like that was once downtown. That was a few years ago, but it hasn't been until the past month I've really been studying all the old buildings downtown. I guess it's a new hobby. I naturally am very nostalgic, and I can't say why. Even things I'm far too young to remember. Maybe it's just the desire to see things that make me feel like I've gone back in time. It's the only way really, to travel in time.

I didn't know until the other day that other than the Clarence Ford Park (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/05/oklahoma-city-history-center.html), the finials that decorated the building are located at two parks around the city.

I also love the old courthouse. So much character is gone forever.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/oldcourthouse1.jpg

I only have found one photo on Doug's of what the interior of the Baum looked like, but it was low quality. I know things have gotten a little off topic, but it's still basically the same discussion.

Actually, new buildings at the University of Oklahoma clearly show an effort to remain true to the traditional style of the university, while incorporating some modern touches. I wonder about how expensive it is to build the more traditional buildings, but they are clearly doing it in Norman.

I was looking around at some of the areas just outside the immediate downtown area that would be ideal for large scale urban redevelopment. I think the area just south of the Medical Campus (bounded by NE8th, Lincoln, Stonewall, and the railroad tracks) would be really cool as row houses, and mid-rise apartments/condos. The terrain is pretty cool and the views from the top of the hill would be very good (OU Medical/Capitol to the north, river to the south, and downtown to the west)

I'd like to see somebody do something with the school there. It's a great old school and is sitting empty.

Actually, new buildings at the University of Oklahoma clearly show an effort to remain true to the traditional style of the university, while incorporating some modern touches. I wonder about how expensive it is to build the more traditional buildings, but they are clearly doing it in Norman.

You're right Betts. Some of the newer buildings on campus look like they could have been constructed 100 years ago. It's just a matter of what the priorities are when designing buildings.

Kerry, several areas on the south side of the river would be ideal also. Just imagine the views they would have.

i highly recommend visiting www.impeiokc.com

Is the Pei model still on dsiplay to be seen?

Kerry, several areas on the south side of the river would be ideal also. Just imagine the views they would have.

I agree, south of Oklahoma River would be ideal place for urban development. Also, I wouldn't rule out SW of downtown, around Reno & Westen/Classen, would be ideal for residential development to compliment new boulevard.

Maybe the area south of 8th St. would be a good place for one of the new senior centers. It would be on or close to mass transit, the land would be inexpensive if the city doesn't already own some of it and it is close to the Health Sciences Center. Any new development in that area would help with its revitalization.

I think the are bounded by Reno on the S., NW 10th on the N., Classen on the E., and Penn on the W., would be a great area to target for future development. Primarily residential, both single and multi-family housing.

Maybe the area south of 8th St. would be a good place for one of the new senior centers. It would be on or close to mass transit, the land would be inexpensive if the city doesn't already own some of it and it is close to the Health Sciences Center. Any new development in that area would help with its revitalization.

I have heard that OU President Boren and OCU President Henry wanted one of the Senior centers and others hospitals,etc. I do not think these senior centers should be considered some honey pot for the powers that be. I think a demographic age study should be made and these should be located as close as possible to where the target population exists. They should not have to drive far and public transportation is not a good option for them at present.

Maybe the area south of 8th St. would be a good place for one of the new senior centers. It would be on or close to mass transit, the land would be inexpensive if the city doesn't already own some of it and it is close to the Health Sciences Center. Any new development in that area would help with its revitalization.

Betts, I was talking about the area south of 8th St and it is on the proposed downtown to Adventure District rail line. The area has 3,900 feet of track frontage. Parts of it would also be within walking distance of streetcars that serve the Health Sciences Center. Here is a picture of the area. The red and black lines are street car routes and the purpole line is the Adventure District Rail-link. The While line is commuter rail between Tinker and Yukon.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Urban1.jpg

I know that I'll probably never see it in my lifetime but, I would like to see the Top-O-Town area re-invented. The northside of that area would have some nice views of downtown and the river.

I also think the immediate area around the Farmers market would be a great place to build housing, I could just pictue going to Starbucks inside the Farmers Market as I prepare to walk to the new central park and/or bricktown.

I think it's already in the cards, but the area Chesapeake is buying up to the east of their main campus is one of the highest elevations in the city and would be a great spot for midrise residential with views of downtown.

I was looking around at some of the areas just outside the immediate downtown area that would be ideal for large scale urban redevelopment. I think the area just south of the Medical Campus (bounded by NE8th, Lincoln, Stonewall, and the railroad tracks) would be really cool as row houses, and mid-rise apartments/condos. The terrain is pretty cool and the views from the top of the hill would be very good (OU Medical/Capitol to the north, river to the south, and downtown to the west)

some of the early land speculators have already bought a bunch of land in this area

Betts, I was talking about the area south of 8th St and it is on the proposed downtown to Adventure District rail line. The area has 3,900 feet of track frontage. Parts of it would also be within walking distance of streetcars that serve the Health Sciences Center. Here is a picture of the area. The red and black lines are street car routes and the purpole line is the Adventure District Rail-link. The While line is commuter rail between Tinker and Yukon.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Urban1.jpg

I know the area well, Kerry, since I live just west of there and my post office is there. I drive through all the time and agree, there is a lot of potential there. There is a beautiful old school there that's abandoned as well, which is what I was talking about wishing someone would do something with. I don't know how much of the area OUHSC owns but I believe the Dental School may be going on 8th.

I know that I'll probably never see it in my lifetime but, I would like to see the Top-O-Town area re-invented. The northside of that area would have some nice views of downtown and the river.

Where is Top-O-Town?

The area I am talking about is larger than all of downtown so there is plenty of room to re-urbanize and almost all of it is vacant land. I checked the property appraiser web site and most of the lots are in the $1000 range with only a few being more than $10,000. You could probably buy most of the area for $250,000 to $300,000. It could be OKC's Back Bay area.

http://c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000Id5Y7JkfyUk/s/850/850/Boston-Back-Bay-Row-Houses.JPG

@ Kerry- Top-O-Town is just west of 35 and south of the river. Many older homes with no historical value.

That top of the town area actually has a few newer houses in there north of 15th and west of 1-35. But for the most part those are some old raggedy match box houses that should have been torn down years ago. That area has some of the best views of downtown OKC though. I was in that area about a month ago for some reason or another and said to myself, What a view!

But,before someone would commit big money in that area they would have to clean up/out the area between 15-29th / Central to Byers. That is a very rough hood.

I know that I'll probably never see it in my lifetime but, I would like to see the Top-O-Town area re-invented. The northside of that area would have some nice views of downtown and the river.

Old stomping grounds. I grew up and lived there for nine years. Grandparents still live there.

That top of the town area actually has a few new houses in there north of 15th and west of 1-35. But for the most part those are some old raggedy houses that should have been torn down years ago. That area has some of the best views of downtown OKC though.

My grandparents live there, plus my old house. So I would have an issue with people tearing anything down. They tore down all the houses along Kate when they rebuilt I-35. I grew up there and I know about how good the views are.

gen70...

I wonder if you really mean the Shidler-Wheeler neighborhood.

In Top of the Town the homes are older and plain but are still in good shape and very very few vacant lots... Shidler-Wheeler has a bunch of vacant lots and also has Central Ave. (which used to have a streetcar) as the main artery and a large park (Schilling Park)... interestingly there is also a synagogue with a Spanish-speaking congregation.

Shidler-Wheeler boundaries Oklahoma River/Shields/SE 29th/High
Top of the Towns boundaries are High/I-35/SE 15th/SE 25th

Large-scale developments are great, and I agree the area between 8th and the tracks would be awesome for something really big.

However, I don't really think OKC has a shortage of "large scale" developments and developers. A lot of our developments are on a large scale. What we really need are some more small scale infill developers to come into near-downtown areas and build simple 3-4 story apartment buildings with 4-10 units, or individual buildings with commercial/residential mixes. If we had more small-scale developments, the pace and extent of development would really seem increased, and developers could work with areas that already have some built structure to them. For me, completing urban areas is more important than opening new areas of development.

If it were up to me... I'd develop NW 10th and Metro Park/Rock Island warehouse area. Some of the older homes and apartments are great... plus it has some hills so most homes (especially on the north side of streets) are elevated from the street and have steps up to the front doors.

Where is Top-O-Town?

The area I am talking about is larger than all of downtown so there is plenty of room to re-urbanize and almost all of it is vacant land. I checked the property appraiser web site and most of the lots are in the $1000 range with only a few being more than $10,000. You could probably buy most of the area for $250,000 to $300,000. It could be OKC's Back Bay area.

http://c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000Id5Y7JkfyUk/s/850/850/Boston-Back-Bay-Row-Houses.JPG

If there was ever an area that could resemble Back Bay it would be Deep Deuce with more infill in between Walnut and the RR tracks from NE 1 to NE 5.

If there was ever an area that could resemble Back Bay it would be Deep Deuce with more infill in between Walnut and the RR tracks from NE 1 to NE 5.

The thing is though, even if Deep Deuce was built out (and it will be soon) it is still a small area. The area I am takling about is the size of Deep Duece, Bricktown, and downtown combined.

Imagine this type of development on the space I am talking about (minus all the surface parking).


http://rcldevelopment.com/images/quail_springs/quail_springs_5.jpg
http://rcldevelopment.com/images/quail_springs/quail_springs_2.jpg

http://rcldevelopment.com/images/quail_springs/quail_springs_3.jpg

http://rcldevelopment.com/images/quail_springs/quail_springs_4.jpg

My grandparents live there, plus my old house. So I would have an issue with people tearing anything down. They tore down all the houses along Kate when they rebuilt I-35. I grew up there and I know about how good the views are.

I am talking about the area like 12th,13th,14th east of Central Ave.but west of I-35.
South of 15th has some decent housing for the most part. But,I would pack heat if I were going to spend a lot of time there.

Lose the faux Italian, Kerry, and I'd be more for it. I'm hoping that anything we do will be a bit more contemporary and less suburban. Edmond is faux Italian paradise.

Sid - I just used those as an example for a single entity doing one mass project vs waiting for 200 different property owners to do something on each of their own little plots. That is the problem with Bricktown and is why after 20 years and several hundred million dollars there is just a small handful of retailers. It is hard to market to national retailers if there is not a single managment company in charge.

Lose the faux Italian, Kerry, and I'd be more for it. I'm hoping that anything we do will be a bit more contemporary and less suburban. Edmond is faux Italian paradise.

Yeah. I agree. Let's not do any faux. Let's keep it strictly original to Oklahoma because everything else is faux. So, what is that anyway then....tepee or mud brick dirt houses?

I love that a lot of what people want to save are actually gothic or euro design and were faux then, but were built earlier in our statehood so everyone thinks those are great. Now we want old looking but not faux. If the old train station and its Spanish mission style was being proposed today, I guess we wouldn't want it because it is faux. Or the old Baum I'm seeing posted on here...seems like it would be a stretch today as it certainly is faux. LOL

The thing is, Rover, it's nice to have a mixture and trends come and go. I've seen all the EIFS Italianate "architecture" I can stand right now. I am certainly not interested in a square mile of it. If you look at the old Italianate, Spanish and Tudor buildings in places like Nichols Hills and Heritage Hills, they have much nicer details than anything currently being built, were built with real stucco and brick, had tile and slate roofs and they're intermixed with Colonial revival and a variety of other architectural styles. The Baum building almost assuredly had carved stone, which is almost prohibitively expensive now. A few Italianate buildings are fine, although EIFS makes me want to choke and it's hard to say that knowing we probably wouldn't get real stucco. But let's mix it up a bit and make it look less like a preplanned villlage. That's all.