I don't have a problem with those that don't live here anymore, yet are still interested in what's going on "back home". Don't really care what their connection is (born/raised here, worked here, own(ed) property or just have a work/school/family connection). Sometimes it takes an "outsider" to see the forest for the trees...or its hard to remember your objective was to drain the swamp when you are neck deep in alligators. There are disadvantages of course, but divergent viewpoints and /or perspectives can be helpful. I know I have changed my views on a few things based on the info/insight others have posted.

I find it to be comical that Steve and foodiefan saw my response to Kerry's post as being a put down of non-residents posting in this forum. Kerry stated he wanted California reopened and it was not the first time he has stated the same. If you want something from the City you usually start with your city council person if what you want will require a political action to achieve what you want because only the council can grant what you want when it comes to reopening streets. My intent in pointing out to Kerry that his council person lived in Jacksonville, not OKC would make it tough to start a process to get what he wants. I realize hundreds of people post and read what is posted in this forum and you can never count on anyone to read the intent of a post as to what the intent actually was at the time it was written. As to reopening California I see that as being almost impossible as long as the Arts Council is using the property as I don't see the City Council going against the Arts Council whether an easement can be overcame or not. Also, for clarity, I have no idea if the Arts Council owns what was once California or not. Perhaps OKC still owns it or it was deeded to the theater when it was built.

Popsy - there is an ignore button so you never have to read another post from an 'outsider' again. It is just that simple.

As for that section of California St, it is still a platted street, and even if it was owned by the Arts Council, the Arts Council is 'owned' by the City of Oklahoma City - thus meaning the street is still owned by the City. The Address of the Arts Council is 400 W California - so techincally, it is still a street right now.

There's a lot of people that actually live in the city and participate in this forum, but don't actually interact with their council members or vote. How much are their opinions worth? Or all the suburbs around OKC which contributes to the cities success?

This isn't to say the opinion of out of state members isn't important, but they have a different kind of interest, unless they own properties or businesses here.

Or hope/plan to move back, relocate/start a business there, etc.

A good number of the most influential people in OKC have lived somewhere else for a least a while.

Popsy - there is an ignore button so you never have to read another post from an 'outsider' again. It is just that simple.

As for that section of California St, it is still a platted street, and even if it was owned by the Arts Council, the Arts Council is 'owned' by the City of Oklahoma City - thus meaning the street is still owned by the City. The Address of the Arts Council is 400 W California - so techincally, it is still a street right now.

"the Arts Council is 'owned' by the City of Oklahoma City"? Did you just make that up?

That Arts Council property is owned by the city of OKC.

And while that stretch of California street is closed off, it's not part of the Arts Council property. I just showed it as such on the map to illustrate the use. On the assessor's site it appears as any other street.

That Arts Council property is owned by the city of OKC.

And while that stretch of California street is closed off, it's not part of the Arts Council property. I just showed it as such on the map to illustrate the use. On the assessor's site it appears as any other street.

Thanks for the correction Pete. Yes, the land the Arts Council is on is owned by the City.

Popsy - there is an ignore button so you never have to read another post from an 'outsider' again. It is just that simple.

You know Kerry, I have this particular member you are talking about on my ignore list myself. I don't believe he will be mature enough to move on, so you're going to have to make the move and put him on ignore for yourself. And you have to STOP thinking you'll ever have a good debate with him, or even come up with a good response to his posts--this is what gets good members sucked into flame wars with Internet trolls.

Thanks for the tip Spartan. If Popsy wants to ignore or discredit the ideas of 'outsiders' that is his right. I happen to think some of my ideas are good for OKC (actually I think all of my ideas are good, otherwise I wouldn't think them). However, presenting those ideas to people who don't think they are so great helps me re-think and adjust them. One of my missions in life is 'constant improvement' so in that regard even Popsy plays his part. Someone has to play the role of devil’s advocate and there are 2 or 3 people in OKCTalk that I can always count on to play that part.

My take on what's next: http://newsok.com/stage-center-discussion-reflects-40-years-of-unresolved-debate-in-downtown-oklahoma-city/article/3596930?custom_click=rss

My take on what's next: http://newsok.com/stage-center-discussion-reflects-40-years-of-unresolved-debate-in-downtown-oklahoma-city/article/3596930?custom_click=rss

That was a very good article Steve.

Kerry, I have no plans to put anyone on an ignore list. I also have no problem with outsiders sharing their ideas and I agree many of your ideas are good. To use the ignore button is to admit you do not have the capacity to deal with someone that disagrees with you, which is very much a sign of immaturity. For two years in voicing my disagreements with Spartan I have constantly told him he needs to develop maturity and now he is saying I am immature. Go figure. Spartan has shown improvement lately in his level of maturity, but is not quite there yet and I still have hope for him. One more time let me reassure you I have no problem with anyone from anywhere posting their thoughts or recommendations concerning OKC, but I am not in full agreement with everything an urbanist comes up with and will sometimes post my opinion.

Back to the subject at hand. I was recently told that certain powers that be feel the McAlpine Center just south of Stage Center is a blight that needs to be removed. I agree it is an ugly building. The folks that feel McAlpine need to go feel the same about Stage Center. I wager that neither will still exist 10 years from now. Maybe only five years if we are quick about it.

Read more: http://newsok.com/stage-center-discussion-reflects-40-years-of-unresolved-debate-in-downtown-oklahoma-city/article/3596930#ixzz1VsXiQ5gS

For these folks, the Pei Plan forced a suburban, brutalist look and feel on downtown as it clear-cut historic urban structures such as the Criterion Theater and Baum and Hales buildings.
Curious, were these the buildings removed to make room for Stage Center? Pics if ya have them?

Unsure about Baum & Hales but IIRC the Criterion was in the 100 Blk W Main.

No, those buildings were not located at the site of Stage Center. MustangGT is correct about the Criterion (south side of Main, about where the drive into the Century Center garage is located) and the Baum Building was on the NE/c of Robinson and Sheridan, directly east and across the street from the Colcord. There really weren't any substantial buildings removed for the construction of Stage Center, 1-2 story simple brick, mostly run-down buildings.

Back to the subject at hand. I was recently told that certain powers that be feel the McAlpine Center just south of Stage Center is a blight that needs to be removed. I agree it is an ugly building. The folks that feel McAlpine need to go feel the same about Stage Center. I wager that neither will still exist 10 years from now. Maybe only five years if we are quick about it.

I agree with the demise of both buildings (and tower), but I say the time frame is 2 years or less.

Regrettably, I'm leaning toward rc's 'or less' camp

Since there seems to be no financial justification or desire for the building as an ongoing enterprise, the question now is "what is the value as art?". Is a building the same as a piece of sculpture? Should there be a national effort to preserve it conducted by the architectural community (assuming they consider it important architecturally). Should it be a protected as a heritage icon? If the value as art and history isn't established by the citizens then this building is as good as gone....dead man walking.

One of the MAJOR problems is who and what is housed in the McAlpine Center. The force that wants the building gone also is a HUGE financial backer of the tenants of that building and he would never put them out on the streets. So the 2 years is a bit overly dismal in information. First the tenants will need a new/bigger facility. After that is accomplished then it can be torn down.

I could see a timetable of 3-5 years to accomplish the task. Once the Devon tower construction is completed and the parking lot that is being used by the construction employees just to the west of Stage Center is cleared then the new Arts Center could be built on that lot and McAlpine comes down. I have absolute assurances that the welfare of the tenants of McA are upper most in the minds of those who want the building gone.

Since there seems to be no financial justification or desire for the building as an ongoing enterprise, the question now is "what is the value as art?". Is a building the same as a piece of sculpture? Should there be a national effort to preserve it conducted by the architectural community (assuming they consider it important architecturally). Should it be a protected as a heritage icon? If the value as art and history isn't established by the citizens then this building is as good as gone....dead man walking.

I have had the same thoughts the past few days, but decided not to post the thoughts as so many people want to have it razed. In my way of thinking it is probably the most iconic struture in OKC, ugly or not, and could be considered art if nothing else. I found my self wondering if the city gave a contract to Wayne Coyne to paint the structure the way he would like to paint it more people would want to see it stay as there appears to be numerous people that liked what he did with his building. Doesn't OKC need more public art?

Final Stage?

Stage Center needs deep pockets and committed partners to ensure the building a viable future, according to a new renovation study.

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-12788-final-stage.html

While it is interesting architecture, I would be in favor of replacing it was something even more interesting - and functional. It would be really cool if OKC could support a live theater district with regular long running performances. It doesn't have to be Broadway or West End but maybe 3 theaters that run 3 shows a week (Friday night, Saturday matinee, and Saturday night).

While it is interesting architecture, I would be in favor of replacing it was something even more interesting - and functional. It would be really cool if OKC could support a live theater district with regular long running performances. It doesn't have to be Broadway or West End but maybe 3 theaters that run 3 shows a week (Friday night, Saturday matinee, and Saturday night).

If you are talking about full time professional actors it is a very expensive endeavor. I don't think we have the market for that. And, that would detract from the great theater we now have with the Broadway Series, Lyric, OU productions, etc. People don't go see the same shows over and over and over, and they have limited means for buying tickets. Full time professional theater here would most likely be a money loser big time.

Click here to read Webb Management Services' final report, which was commissioned by the Oklahoma City Community Foundation, the Oklahoma City Cultural Development Council, the Oklahoma Arts Council and Devon Energy.

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-12788-final-stage.html

If you are talking about full time professional actors it is a very expensive endeavor. I don't think we have the market for that. And, that would detract from the great theater we now have with the Broadway Series, Lyric, OU productions, etc. People don't go see the same shows over and over and over, and they have limited means for buying tickets. Full time professional theater here would most likely be a money loser big time.

If the theaters are kept small, in the 300 to 400 seat range, it would take years to get through the waiting list. 300 tickets at two prime-time performances per week is 31,000 tickets per year. If the show is good it could run for 4 or 5 years. Plus, people do go to see movies a lot more than once - this is why people buy DVDs and it is a multi-billion dollar industry. As for professional actors, obviously they wouldn't make as much in OKC as the do in NYC or London, but lots of people in OKC don't make as much money in OKC as their counter-parts do in NYC or London. Plus, maybe a corporate sponsor could help off-set the cost. This would also boost the local amature live theater scene as it would give budding actors a local career path and might actually encourage young want-to-be actors to make a stop in OKC on their way to global stardom.

If the theaters are kept small, in the 300 to 400 seat range, it would take years to get through the waiting list. 300 tickets at two prime-time performances per week is 31,000 tickets per year. If the show is good it could run for 4 or 5 years. Plus, people do go to see movies a lot more than once - this is why people buy DVDs and it is a multi-billion dollar industry. As for professional actors, obviously they wouldn't make as much in OKC as the do in NYC or London, but lots of people in OKC don't make as much money in OKC as their counter-parts do in NYC or London. Plus, maybe a corporate sponsor could help off-set the cost. This would also boost the local amature live theater scene as it would give budding actors a local career path and might actually encourage young want-to-be actors to make a stop in OKC on their way to global stardom.

You need to get in the professional theater business and learn a little reality of the business.

There is already a pretty health live theater business here, btw.

You need to get in the professional theater business and learn a little reality of the business.

There is already a pretty health live theater business here, btw.

Are you in the live theater business? I thought you installed air conditioners.

AIA position paper:

http://www.aiacoc.org/weekly/Stage-Center-Position-Paper.pdf

Are you in the live theater business? I thought you installed air conditioners.

No I don't install air conditioners. For the past 25 years I have run worldwide sales and marketing for several companies engaged in the manufacturing of commercial mechanical equipment used in commercial construction projects. I've also started, run and grown other companies for myself and for other people. However, it doesn't take all that much to evaluate the opportunities for full time professional theatrical companies in a city this size. We just don't have the mass to have a sufficient market. The prices that tickets would have to be would preclude many from going or going often. The ones who seriously have the money to do so would still prefer the higher level productions such as the Broadway Series and Lyric, and would also be ones more likely to attend shows in NYC.

If you are talking about full time professional actors it is a very expensive endeavor. I don't think we have the market for that. Full time professional theater here would most likely be a money loser big time.

Well, they're not making a ton of money off it, but CityRep is a full-fledged Actors Equity theatre, paying scale.

Nice editorial in today's Oklahoman.

Wow, haven't said that in a long time. LOL

No I don't install air conditioners. For the past 25 years I have run worldwide sales and marketing for several companies engaged in the manufacturing of commercial mechanical equipment used in commercial construction projects. I've also started, run and grown other companies for myself and for other people.

I don't see Theater Owner on your resume.

Kerry, I would remind you that not long ago we all defended you when another poster tried discrediting your posts on a personal basis that was unrelated to the matter at hand. The point is that Rover has experience with buildings, and anyone who can form an intelligible opinion is at least entitled to make their say on this forum.

You're living in Jacksonville, he built an HVAC empire, and I'm back in Calgary. None of us are exactly John Johansen here...lol

Well, they're not making a ton of money off it, but CityRep is a full-fledged Actors Equity theatre, paying scale.

That may be true, but I doubt they are paying off $20-30 million of debt for a building and paying the upkeep Stage Center will require either.

Just curious, what is the total budget for the Actors Equity theater. Their annual sold attendance? Ticket costs? Are they profitable?

Just looked. They have 4 shows lasting about 9 days each. That is a far cry from a full time broadway type theater that was suggested for Stage Center. 30-40 days a year with tickets from $8-$35 will not pay for keeping SC open. That was my point.

I am glad to know about the CityRep group and look forward to attending.

I don't see Theater Owner on your resume.

You are correct sir or madam. However, I have had theater owner clients.

And, I hope we don't limit conversation to only those that actually own the type of business or property that we are discussing. This board will get really, really slow if that is the criteria.

So, it begs the question then if my credentials are lacking...what about yours?

Don't need to know...just hopefully making a point.

^^^
good question...LOL

+1 for Rover

let's get back to topic. -M

let's get back to topic. -M

Yeah I have no idea what is going on here. So I'll throw this out there:

Something that makes the Stage Center unique is that it is a rare breed of performing arts venue that was designed specifically for the theatre, hence its geometric layout, ala the "theatre in the round" -- and it is one of even fewer of these theatre-designed venues that are so interesting and cool. Most aren't. Obviously it's importance stems more from its design, but I just can't believe that the dialog has so easily accepted this argument that its functionally flawed.

I think one person who didn't like the building in the first place made that opinion and others started to go with it. If you look at the exterior, it obviously makes you scratch your head wondering how it works as a theatre. But realistically, I have always heard very complimentary things until lately about its functionality. Why the change in tone? It just seems like some people don't even want to give it a chance.

I don't know that it is a change in tone. This has been topical for as long as its been around.

Just a question...not an editorial comment... but, if it is so functional and great as a performance venue, why aren't the performing arts organizations weighing in on this with passionate support? They have been amazingly absent from this whole "save the SC" conversation.

Because they have moved on & don't have a vested interest anymore?

They have 4 shows lasting about 9 days each. That is a far cry from a full time broadway type theater that was suggested for Stage Center.

True enough, but the fact that they've survived this long tells me that the market is a long way from being saturated. (And they do good work; I've seen several of their productions.)

... Why the change in tone? It just seems like some people don't even want to give it a chance.


I think it is a combo of many think it is ugly, some think it is out of place with what they feel a DT area should be. And then you have those like me. I like the place. I have fond memories of some performances. But absent hitting a really big powerball win, the 20-25+ million price tag to get it back up and able to be functional again is a huge obstacle.

It doesn't make sense to have it simply be there, closed and secured and deteriorating, all the while running an estimated annual cost of 100G plus to just sit empty as art. It's hard to build a justification for the repair price. The absence of any white knight since it last flooded and got shut down to use suggests that even amongst its fans, there is no one that is both fan enough and fat check book enough to step up.

I wish I could. I really do. Yet I know if I hit a 50 million after tax lotto, I myself would not be the white knight it needs. I would be willing to be one of several knights at the round table in that setting, but there are many other things I would put that level of funding to before I would save the building. And as I said, I am a fan of it. Now, if I had a post tax 250 mil lotto win, that would be another matter entirely. But I suck at gambling so don't holds yer breath folks.

Hopefully if it gets remodeled the contractors won't leave their conex containers on top of the building again. Oh wait, its suppose to look that way. LOL


http://www.smallarchitects.com/sites/thesmallgroup/uploads/images/blog_images/Local_Architecture/stage_center.jpg

Hopefully if it gets remodeled the contractors won't leave their conex containers on top of the building again. Oh wait, its suppose to look that way. LOL


http://www.smallarchitects.com/sites/thesmallgroup/uploads/images/blog_images/Local_Architecture/stage_center.jpg

Spare us your jokes, they're not original and we've heard them all ever since it was built. Have you ever attended a stage production there like I have?

I think it would be interesting to solicit the comments of artistic directors around the city regarding the functionality of the building and whether the design causes any problems or special opportunities because of the layout. I would think the lack of sizable stages, the configuration of the seating, the lack of big backstage areas would restrict what and what type of productions can be held. But hey, show production isn't in my wheelhouse. We should invite some real experts to tell us.

True. Seems more like an indoor version of the water stage @ the Myriad Gardens (not a slam, just not the same type of production you would find at the Civic Center)

I don't know that it is a change in tone. This has been topical for as long as its been around.

Just a question...not an editorial comment... but, if it is so functional and great as a performance venue, why aren't the performing arts organizations weighing in on this with passionate support? They have been amazingly absent from this whole "save the SC" conversation.

There is not a single performing arts organization in this community, regardless of what venue it plays in, that has been financially solvent on its own. They all rely on funding from people who hate the Stage Center, in fact, the last tenant has been remarkably silent on the whole debate, truthfully. However one person who is very high up in Allied Arts has been weighing in with passionate support all along, care to guess who?

I think it is a combo of many think it is ugly, some think it is out of place with what they feel a DT area should be. And then you have those like me. I like the place. I have fond memories of some performances. But absent hitting a really big powerball win, the 20-25+ million price tag to get it back up and able to be functional again is a huge obstacle.

It doesn't make sense to have it simply be there, closed and secured and deteriorating, all the while running an estimated annual cost of 100G plus to just sit empty as art. It's hard to build a justification for the repair price. The absence of any white knight since it last flooded and got shut down to use suggests that even amongst its fans, there is no one that is both fan enough and fat check book enough to step up.

I wish I could. I really do. Yet I know if I hit a 50 million after tax lotto, I myself would not be the white knight it needs. I would be willing to be one of several knights at the round table in that setting, but there are many other things I would put that level of funding to before I would save the building. And as I said, I am a fan of it. Now, if I had a post tax 250 mil lotto win, that would be another matter entirely. But I suck at gambling so don't holds yer breath folks.

I'm skeptical that it will cost this entire $20-25 million figure to save it. With all of this public projects cost estimates we've been seeing lately, I think we forget that we did the original MAPS project with bare bones budgets and amazingly got excellent facilities out of almost all the permanent projects. With this budget I think we are talking about repairing the Stage Center with some bells and whistles so to speak. I don't understand the extent of this damage and why flood damage should cost $25 million to repair for a building that is not all that large.

Furthermore, we all need to wait and see what the AIA chapter of Central Oklahoma comes up with. The AIA, in its campaign to save the structure, is volunteering architectural services to brainstorm and try and come up with SOME solution that can save this remarkable structure.

I'm skeptical that it will cost this entire $20-25 million figure to save it. With all of this public projects cost estimates we've been seeing lately, I think we forget that we did the original MAPS project with bare bones budgets and amazingly got excellent facilities out of almost all the permanent projects. With this budget I think we are talking about repairing the Stage Center with some bells and whistles so to speak. I don't understand the extent of this damage and why flood damage should cost $25 million to repair for a building that is not all that large.

My guess would be that a lot of the expense comes from pulling bad electrical wires out of concrete. I doubt most of this building is compliant with ADA and the lack of fire escapes (and fire safety in general) is probably a big issue as well. They can't just rebuild it like it was - it has to meet every building code and regulation created in the last 40 years (and there has been a lot). Does anyone know if it has a fire suppression system in it? With very few windows and no obvious fire exits, how would you get out in a fire?

There is not a single performing arts organization in this community, regardless of what venue it plays in, that has been financially solvent on its own. They all rely on funding from people who hate the Stage Center, in fact, the last tenant has been remarkably silent on the whole debate, truthfully. However one person who is very high up in Allied Arts has been weighing in with passionate support all along, care to guess who?

I am not sure I buy the big bad wolf theory. If this is a great performance venue you would think the artist and local artists and artistic directors would have the cahungas to speak up. Are they all spineless?

Does anyone know if it has a fire suppression system in it? With very few windows and no obvious fire exits, how would you get out in a fire?

Kerry, it's been a few years since I've been in the building but I remember more entrances and exits than I could count. They were everywhere.

I don't know if one can dismiss the idea so readily, if they depend on financial support from particular benefactors and those people don't like it, they may see themselves as being put in a precarious spot. Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Remember the veiled threats given to the folks trying to save the India Temple? Same idea.

I don't know if one can dismiss the idea so readily, if they depend on financial support from particular benefactors and those people don't like it, they may see themselves as being put in a precarious spot. Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Remember the veiled threats given to the folks trying to save the India Temple? Same idea.

So, everyone is so intimidated that NO ONE is willing to implicate those who are doing the intimidating? NOT ONE has the courage to speak up on the record? Exactly who are the enemies of the SC that is pulling all the strings? Specific names.

I don't have the specifics, but again, I direct you to the SandRidge/India Temple mess. Not saying it is or isn't happening, just that the possibility definitely exists and can't be so easily dismissed.

I don't have the specifics, but again, I direct you to the SandRidge/India Temple mess. Not saying it is or isn't happening, just that the possibility definitely exists and can't be so easily dismissed.

Not dismissing the fact that it is possible, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. Anything is possible.

Go back and read the thread. Read the recent articles in the Oklahoman & Gazette. Spartan isn't the first to raise the question/make the suggestion. If you aren't seeing it, maybe Steve may be able to better answer the specifics as far as "who". If the powers that be don't support something, it probably ain't going to happen.