development
|category1=Core to Shore
|category2=
|category3=
|category4=Current
|
|project=Film Exchange Building (old)
|address=NW Corner SW 5th & Robinson
|status=Complete
|owner=City of OKC
|cost=
|architect=
|start=
|finish=
|contractor=
|height=
|sq. feet=16,740
|acerage=
|other=
|
|image=http://www.okctalk.com/images/wikiphotos/filmexchangeold1.jpg
|

Information & Latest News
Links
County Assessor Record (http://www.oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/AN-R.asp?ACCOUNTNO=R017204700)
Gallery

I should get Bradley Wynn to chime in here about the Film Exchange Building since he's the Film Row historian. These topics always get derailed into "old buildings vs. new" though.

RE The Film Exchange Building at 5th/Robinson - first the history, quoted from my book Oklahoma City Film Row (http://www.amazon.com/Oklahoma-City-Film-Images-America/dp/0738583812):

As the popularity of filmmaking across the nation grew, so too did the need for venues and distribution of movies being made. By 1910, over one hundred Film Exchange distributors were operating in the United States. Exchanges were usually located near a railhead and would negotiate with film studios for the rights to a completed film production, and then distribute the product to nickelodeon venues. By 1928, nearly thirty exchanges were operating throughout Oklahoma City, starting with the Oklahoma Film Exchange Company in 1907, at 221 W. California Avenue, the year of statehood.
In 1920, the Vitagraph Film Company constructed a Film Exchange building at the corner of Reno and Hudson, which housed the fledgling Fox Film Corporation and American distributor of silent British films, Robertson-Cole. This was followed by another Film Exchange building, constructed at SW 5th and Robinson for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Paramount Laskey, Universal, R.K.O. Pictures, Pathe, Vitagraph, Warner Brothers, and Fox Films.

The building on the corner of SW 5th and Robinson Avenue was the second of three known dedicated film exchange buildings erected in Oklahoma City from 1920 to 1926. The exchanges hosted here included Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Radio Keith Orpheum Distributing (R.K.O Pictures), Pathe Films, Producers Distributing, Fox Films, First National Pictures, Vitagraph Incorporated, and Warner Brothers. Film exchanges vacated the building by 1932 due to larger space needs, amenities, and consolidation of exchange offices along Film Row. The former exchange hosted other businesses that included Western Tire and Equipment Co. In July 1943, the upper floors were converted into housing units for thirteen families as a federal housing project, which included nine four room and four three room apartments. From 1968 to around 1984, the Oklahoma City Rescue Mission provided services from this location with the motto "soup, soap, and salvation." It remained vacant for many years until acquired by the Asset Group in Oklahoma City in 2009. A citywide revitalization of downtown called Project 180 and Maps 3, at the time of this writing, threatens to demolish the building. (Courtesy of the Oklahoma Historical Society.)

That said - when the Asset Group acquired the property, they approached the city for permits to do some serious ($$$) renovation to use the property as their corporate headquarters, where said offices would have brought in millions annually and along with that buku sales tax revenue. The city denied them the permits and told them they would never have them as they wanted the bldg razed for a future core to shore program. What a blow to the agency who wanted to use it and spent a great deal acquiring it. Now fast forward - I have been in this bldg and it is a SOLID structure with THICK walls and even THICKER floors. It is already open for rehab and build out and would make awesome upper residential spaces and lower retail/food spaces. EVERY core to shore plan has robinson still acting as a through street and this bldg NEVER interferes with any major aspect to a future park. At the most it could always serve a an asset to the area and provide immediate space for what I already mentioned. Can it be saved - that will be up to how big a fight the people will give it. Should it? Absolutely. It is also one of the last structures from a bygone era when that portion of Robinson was a bustle of activity. If this bldg were destroyed it would break my heart. If it can't be saved perhaps the lentil could be saved for a place on Film Row today. There ya have it - my two cents.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Downtown%20OKC/SouthRobinsonampSW4th.jpg

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Downtown%20OKC/filmexchangebuilding.jpg

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Downtown%20OKC/filmexchangebuilding2.jpg
Original Film Exchange Building

International Harvester

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Downtown%20OKC/internationalharvesterbuilding2013.jpg

StreetView (https://www.google.com/maps/preview?authuser=0&hl=en#!q=saturn&data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-97.514504!3d35.460047!2m2!1f29.89!2f109.09!4f75!2m 4!1e1!2m2!1s2JXCRUXmyAjEtVj-0si4dQ!2e0!4m10!1m9!4m8!1m3!1d1321!2d-97.5211965!3d35.4778757!3m2!1i1577!2i800!4f35&fid=5) is actally from last month.

I thought someone posted some additional history and noted the Film Exchange bldg at SW 5th and Robinson was the third such exchange location in OKC (but apparently the oldest one still standing.) All the same, I'd like to see it last and be repurposed, but mainly because it would help block the view of the substation across the way.

The Film Exchange bldg looks like a good place to stage events......

It's a great looking building. Maybe we should get a group of people to go to the next Park Committee meeting and tell them they need to alter the designs of the (at this point very generic) park in order to incorporate these two buildings on the edge?

I did a bunch of photos and video today. I'll share it all when it's ready. I don't see why they can't be incorporated. They are both along the street and next to each other.

Wow - motion to demolish old Film Exchange buildings presented by David Todd and approved.

Well, then, they'll be substantially down by the end of the week if they are smart. Well, actually they would be worked into the site plan if they were smart.

But according to several subcommittee members there are significant structural issues with each of them. Unfortunate outcome but sounds like the right decision. No one was celebrating the demo.

I'll be busy tonight to finish the photos but it seems like a moot point now though.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/IMG_46223.jpg

Wow - motion to demolish old Film Exchange buildings presented by David Todd and approved.

smh.

I know for a fact that Asset, a crisis salvage recovery construction company, bought these buildings, filed a permit to renovate them into offices, and the permit was spiked by the city. That was three years ago, and Asset was quite comfortable with being able to preserve the properties.

^^^
Which would indicate that it was the City's intention all along to have them scrapped.

That doesn't sound surprising does it? (I know the answer to that one)

^^^
Which would indicate that it was the City's intention all along to have them scrapped.

Yes.

Steve - good to see you on here.

It's pretty sad that you have a building on the edge of the property someone can renovate and turn into usuable office space and since it is in the way, it is going to be torn down instead of worked into the layout. On the other hand, you have a clean slate in the Myriad Gardens and you add a building with no tenant in mind and no permanent tenant three years later. What's wrong with this picture?

But according to several subcommittee members there are significant structural issues with each of them. Unfortunate outcome but sounds like the right decision. No one was celebrating the demo. Structural issues with the Film Exchange? HARDLY. It may look like crap but will take a force to demolish. The floors are VERY thick, along with its walls. That building could easily be re-purposed, as the original owners intended but were denied by the city way back when for Core to Shore. Ridiculous. Here is a repost of what I entioned earlier. You can also see more about it on our FBook page under Oklahoma City Film Exchange.

RE The Film Exchange Building at 5th/Robinson - first the history, quoted from my book Oklahoma City Film Row:

As the popularity of filmmaking across the nation grew, so too did the need for venues and distribution of movies being made. By 1910, over one hundred Film Exchange distributors were operating in the United States. Exchanges were usually located near a rail head and would negotiate with film studios for the rights to a completed film production, and then distribute the product to nickelodeon venues. By 1928, nearly thirty exchanges were operating throughout Oklahoma City, starting with the Oklahoma Film Exchange Company in 1907, at 221 W. California Avenue, the year of statehood.

In 1920, the Vitagraph Film Company constructed a Film Exchange building at the corner of Reno and Hudson, which housed the fledgling Fox Film Corporation and American distributor of silent British films, Robertson-Cole. This was followed by another Film Exchange building, constructed at SW 5th and Robinson for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Paramount Laskey, Universal, R.K.O. Pictures, Pathe, Vitagraph, Warner Brothers, and Fox Films.

The building on the corner of SW 5th and Robinson Avenue was the second of three known dedicated film exchange buildings erected in Oklahoma City from 1920 to 1926. The exchanges hosted here included Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Radio Keith Orpheum Distributing (R.K.O Pictures), Pathe Films, Producers Distributing, Fox Films, First National Pictures, Vitagraph Incorporated, and Warner Brothers. Film exchanges vacated the building by 1932 due to larger space needs, amenities, and consolidation of exchange offices along Film Row. The former exchange hosted other businesses that included Western Tire and Equipment Co. In July 1943, the upper floors were converted into housing units for thirteen families as a federal housing project, which included nine four room and four three room apartments. From 1968 to around 1984, the Oklahoma City Rescue Mission provided services from this location with the motto "soup, soap, and salvation." It remained vacant for many years until acquired by the Asset Group in Oklahoma City in 2009. A citywide revitalization of downtown called Project 180 and Maps 3, at the time of this writing, threatens to demolish the building. (Courtesy of the Oklahoma Historical Society.)

That said - when the Asset Group acquired the property, they approached the city for permits to do some serious ($$$) renovation to use the property as their corporate headquarters, where said offices would have brought in millions annually and along with that buku sales tax revenue. The city denied them the permits and told them they would never have them as they wanted the bldg razed for a future core to shore program. What a blow to the agency who wanted to use it and spent a great deal acquiring it. Now fast forward - I have been in this bldg and it is a SOLID structure with THICK walls and even THICKER floors. It is already open for rehab and build out and would make awesome upper residential spaces and lower retail/food spaces. EVERY core to shore plan has robinson still acting as a through street and this bldg NEVER interferes with any major aspect to a future park. At the most it could always serve a an asset to the area and provide immediate space for what I already mentioned. Can it be saved - that will be up to how big a fight the people will give it. Should it? Absolutely. It is also one of the last structures from a bygone era when that portion of Robinson was a bustle of activity. If this bldg were destroyed it would break my heart. If it can't be saved perhaps the lentil could be saved for a place on Film Row today. There ya have it - my two cents.

UPDATE - why can't they keep something old with something new? Why always push to demolish - that portion of Robinson was once a BUSTLING portion of the city that has disappeared piece by piece over the decades. That Film Exchange could represent something lost - it needs to stay.

Steve - good to see you on here.

+1

I know for a fact that Asset, a crisis salvage recovery construction company, bought these buildings, filed a permit to renovate them into offices, and the permit was spiked by the city. That was three years ago, and Asset was quite comfortable with being able to preserve the properties.

Yet another case illustrating we haven't learned to not demolish these assets.

I couldn't help myself and posted a copy of an email I just sent to Mayor Cornett. Who else can I send this to?

https://www.facebook.com/notes/oklahoma-city-film-exchange-district/a-letter-to-the-mayor-of-oklahoma-city/10152103914848709

Steve - good to see you on here.

Only to correct some pretty blatant misinformation. I'm not becoming a regular again. Shipwreck is on target on the building's history.

Steve retweeted the link. I also feel I'm ten years too late having an interest in the city's past. One more building that will only exist in old black and white photos.

So the line about the City looking at what buildings could be saved etc was less than truthful when questions were raised during the Core to Shore process. It had already been determined. Sad.

I just posted the same letter to our City Council and shared the link to the FBook page where the photos are. I am going to do all I can. If you have some ideas - please share with me. THX!

I know for a fact that Asset, a crisis salvage recovery construction company, bought these buildings, filed a permit to renovate them into offices, and the permit was spiked by the city. That was three years ago, and Asset was quite comfortable with being able to preserve the properties.

I was the only one that fought for the two film exchange buildings. They denied anyone wanting to buy or restore the buildings. I said there were two that I heard of but didn't know their names. They said they looked at saving every building. I wanted to say more but I had to get back to work.

They voted to year them down before I could speak.

Folks, I know this may be irregular, but now time is not on our side. If you agree with it, please share, tweet, Fbook, whatever you can do - media, etc, and share this link and letter to help save this building! https://www.facebook.com/notes/oklahoma-city-film-exchange-district/a-letter-to-the-mayor-of-oklahoma-city/10152103914848709

This matter is not done. Must still be approved at MAPS 3 public meeting 10 a.m. tomorrow (citizens can speak). And then by the city council.

I had along list of issues about the park I wanted to mention but I was so worked up about them voting to tear down the buildings that I did not get to go over my list. They told me to sol issues to David.todd@okc.gov

They acted like they wanted to save the buildings but made it sound like nobody wanted to pay to refurbish them. They did talk about doing anything possible to buy union station because they need it as a revenue source for the park. Anthony McDermott acted like he wanted to save the bigger film exchange building.

then the more folks know now and the more I can get 'em worked up, perhaps this will help. Steve, what chance for a future piece on this building? I just send out an email to all the local stations, but you are my Oklahoman contact. Thoughts?

I had along list of issues about the park I wanted to mention but I was so worked up about them voting to tear down the buildings that I did not get to go over my list. They told me to sol issues to David.todd@okc.gov

Just sent him an email.

I recommend going to the meetings and saying something. I am the only person that has said anything in the meetings. They just think it's one person that wants these two buildings.

I recommend going to the meetings and saying something. I am the only person that has said anything in the meetings. They just think it's one person that wants these two buildings.

lasomeday is right - go make your point to the MAPS Oversight Committee and City Council. He gave it a shot but I don't think he was going to get anywhere with that group of people today. I was very surprised when that resolution was presented.

Nice try at the meeting lasomeday - I hope you don't give up, you are obviously very passionate about this. Good luck.

Saying Goodbye to the Film Exchange Building - and the Story You've Not Been Told | News OK (http://newsok.com/saying-goodbye-to-the-film-exchange-building-and-the-story-youve-not-been-told/article/3865681)

Steve, I saw your article earlier and you beat me to posting it here. Now I'm just waiting to here from those who are going to insinuate that you were somehow paid off to present that information. LOL

Thanks for your efforts.

This took me too long to get finished. Hope it's not too late.

Film Exchange Building (July 23 2013) - a set on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157634790999762/)

International Harvester Building (July 23 2013) - a set on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157634784488953/)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jivSNzickM4

I don't believe anyone would think that Steve got paid off, but I do believe Steve's journalistic integrity could be questioned. Steve tends to write a lot of one sided stories based his personal bias. Reporting both sides of a story accurately should be the goal of every newsperson. Steve seems to be an emotional person and apparently allows his emotions to dictate his articles. I am disappointed in his editors for allowing it to continue to happen

Noted Popsy. I disagree with you.

Steve - I personally thank you for keeping us informed on what all sides of different arguments (streetcar, convention center, etc.) have to say. I don't think I would know anything about people derailing the one thing that made me vote for Maps3 without your articles.

Thanks!

I don't believe anyone would think that Steve got paid off, but I do believe Steve's journalistic integrity could be questioned. Steve tends to write a lot of one sided stories based his personal bias. Reporting both sides of a story accurately should be the goal of every newsperson. Steve seems to be an emotional person and apparently allows his emotions to dictate his articles. I am disappointed in his editors for allowing it to continue to happen

At the risk of sounding snarky, I suspect you might be behind the times in regards to modern journalism. Steve's opiniated posts come from his blog. Steve's newspaper reporting is unassailable in its professionalism and objectivity. His blog, on the other hand, is more his personal sounding board which allows him to tell the "rest of the story"/his own opinions, etc.. Blogs are gaining in popularity as consumers of news increasingly expect a continuous outflow of content from their favorite journalists. Blogs are often hastily written and published, in order to keep the flow of news coming. Feature articles (such as those Steve publishes in the print version of the Oklahoman), are still held to old-school standards of rigor, fact-checking, and objectivity.

My point is that there is a very different journalistic expectation between blogs and feature reporting. I believe you are confusing the two.

The city doesn't care about older or iconic buildings if they appear to stand in the way of shiny and new. If they don't care enough to save the Stage Center it is no surprise that this building is seen as just another obstacle to be removed.

Then betts go to the meetings and say something! I am the only person that has said publicly on their meetings we need to save theses buildings! I need help!

I am attending the meeting this morning at 10 am at City Hall - I encourage you to join me with your support.

On another note, to prove that the Film Exchange could be repurposed, just look at Film Row, along Sheridan Avenue. Merely 5 years ago it was still a scary place referred to as Skid Row. Today, the patronage and new business growth ddown there is tremendous, dubbing it the fastest growing business district in city history. The Film Exchange building there was in shambles when we found it in 2003. Completely abandoned with broken windows and more. The second floor couldn't be walked on as the thick layer of pigeon poop had deteriorated the floors. The windows and skylights were in awful shape and the entire building had bbecomee homee to vagarnts and drug usage. It took guts and private innvestment to turn that building, and in turn the entire area, back into a version of its former heyday. Today there is a waiting list for space. The projected growth forseen is that within three - five years, there won't be a single vacant lot orr building anywhere along Main, Sheridan, and California (all within the Film Row business district). You go there toda and you even see a school being built! A new law office too shall soon break ground at Sheridan and Dewey. So, yeah, the SW 5th/Robinson Film Exchange can be saved and repurposed. It is nowhere as rotted as what we had to work with and it was purrposely built to be fireproof and sturdy. Which reminds me, when they say for "Structurally unsound" reasons, who did those quality/integrity tests and inspections? How do they KNOW it isn't a sound structure? Alright, off my soap box. See ya at the meeting in an hour and a half!

I am out of town or I would. So sorry.

The city doesn't care about older or iconic buildings if they appear to stand in the way of shiny and new. If they don't care enough to save the Stage Center it is no surprise that this building is seen as just another obstacle to be removed.

not just the big bad "city" ..... lots of citizens do not care about old buildings ...and that doesn't make thier opinion invalid ..

could the building have been fit into the master plan of the park? of course it could .. is that the best thing for the future park?... I think that is a matter of opinion .. there is not a wrong answer ..

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2806/9362390115_f728fa5c75_b.jpg

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2829/9362204567_8e26ae9d73_b.jpg

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2893/9364981044_44347e105a_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7309/9364978060_68ae97682c_b.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3739/9362194771_f7ef8d8943_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5533/9364960360_984848bdeb_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5489/9362179255_1d07394c4a_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5486/9364951352_fe2cb40180_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5349/9364943316_caef0c2f83_b.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5456/9364932390_904cc55826_b.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3675/9362291055_6efffafda5_b.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3770/9365063256_13316472d1_b.jpg

So at the urban care we are going to tear down an existing building along an existing road with existing water, power, and sewer and turn it into open space - while at the same time somewhere on the suburban fringe we are going to take existing open space and put in a new building, new roads, new water, new power, and new sewer. Yea - that makes a lot of sense. A high-density core reduces pressure on outward expansion.

I don't know anything about the structural condition of these buildings. The architect on the committee said there were problems and seemed familiar with them. I posted that yesterday so those of you who are concerned would know about the resolution as quickly as possible.

From my perspective, I think the Film Exchange building is the one to concentrate your efforts. It has the most interesting facade, has the most historical significance if I understand Steve and Shipwreck's posts correctly, and is farther away from the stage and lawn planned for the NE corner of the park. It appears that is could house the park staff, the park conservancy the consultants recommended, and maintenance equipment for the park. There is probably enough room to build restroom facilities with controlled access to serve the Robinson spine and maybe even a refreshment stand. I can see where that building could perform many function for the park under one roof. Just a few ideas.....

I like the presence of older, preserved buildings among newer structures, and point to the Colcord & Devon Tower as an example. Both can co-exist, and should.

Simplistic designers prefer to scrape an area down to nothing and build everything anew, but as the Myriad Gardens v 1.0 (1980s) demonstrated, you don't always get it right. Urban renewal in the 1970s further supports this. It is harder to keep existing structures and plan around them, but when it happens, the result is a textured community where preservationists and new developers each have a hand in the outcome, find ways of supporting the other, and learn from one another.

We don't have that right now.

So at the urban care we are going to tear down an existing building along an existing road with existing water, power, and sewer and turn it into open space - while at the same time somewhere on the suburban fringe we are going to take existing open space and put in a new building, new roads, new water, new power, and new sewer. Yea - that makes a lot of sense. A high-density core reduces pressure on outward expansion.

Nonsensical isn't it? Makes you want to bang your head on the wall sometimes.....

A Closer Look at the Film Exchange Building the City Wants to Raze | News OK (http://newsok.com/a-closer-look-at-the-film-exchange-building-the-city-wants-to-raze/article/3865696?custom_click=rss)

So at the urban care we are going to tear down an existing building along an existing road with existing water, power, and sewer and turn it into open space - while at the same time somewhere on the suburban fringe we are going to take existing open space and put in a new building, new roads, new water, new power, and new sewer. Yea - that makes a lot of sense. A high-density core reduces pressure on outward expansion.

Exactly. OKC brilliance on full display once again.

I don't mind tearing something down if it is replaced by something better. Preservation for the sake of preservation is not always the best policy. If it were we'd still have wood buildings on Main St.

I believe that what is going to replace SC will better and I think the Central Park and the resulting development around it will ease the pain of losing the Film exchange building.

At the risk of sounding snarky, I suspect you might be behind the times in regards to modern journalism. Steve's opiniated posts come from his blog. Steve's newspaper reporting is unassailable in its professionalism and objectivity. His blog, on the other hand, is more his personal sounding board which allows him to tell the "rest of the story"/his own opinions, etc.. Blogs are gaining in popularity as consumers of news increasingly expect a continuous outflow of content from their favorite journalists. Blogs are often hastily written and published, in order to keep the flow of news coming. Feature articles (such as those Steve publishes in the print version of the Oklahoman), are still held to old-school standards of rigor, fact-checking, and objectivity.

My point is that there is a very different journalistic expectation between blogs and feature reporting. I believe you are confusing the two.
Thanks for posting this DoctorTaco. I agree 100% that many people can't seem to differentiate between news stories, columns and articles. The first (news) should always maintain the most impartial tone possible while giving voice to both (or all) sides of an issue in a fair manner. The other two (columns and blogs) are by their nature SUPPOSED TO contain opinion, provide "back stories" etc. These products (especially columns) are nearly always by senior writers with specialized knowledge of the subject at hand, usually due to providing years of coverage. People including editors and readers WANT to know the writer's point of view, and the "rest of the story." In this case, the blog and his columns are easily identifiable because they show his photograph and are labeled "OKC Central." If you want to avoid his opinion, simply steer clear of those, but don't read them and then act like he is doing something wrong by expressing his own (usually insightful and well-versed) viewpoint.

Regarding the news stories, they are also identifiable because they only contain a byline, and I challenge anybody here to show me Steve's personal opinion seeping through on these with any regularity. He is a journalist's journalist. I have personally seen him hold his nose and report good news about people he dislikes and does not trust, and have seen him dejectedly report bad and unflattering news about people he admired or considered friends. At the end of the day, it was news, and he takes his responsibilities to report it accurately and free of bias very seriously, whether you believe this or not. In 20+ years of following his reporting very closely and reading thousands of his stories, I only seen his opinion blatantly come through in a news story once or maybe twice (and privately called him on it when I did). Everybody's human, but that type of record despite the hurried and prolific nature of his business is nothing short of amazing.

I have now posted TWICE in this forum breaking down Steve's writing, and it feels like once or twice too many, so I plan to avoid posting further on the subject. But the way this venue has seemed to become a ceaseless referendum on his writing has really been sticking in my craw. Personally, it feels like a bunch of "if you're not with us, you're against us" nonsense from people who don't have a full understanding of journalism, or of the manner in which he performs his job.

Oh, and by the way, he doesn't write the headlines that go with his stories, either.

So is the substation getting relocated or covered up? This building covers it from view of the park. I am having a hard time comprehending the master plan on this side of the park.

I think it would make a strong statement if OKC talkers could raise donations equal to say, $400,000 to contribute towards the rehab of the building. Are there enough OKC talkers out there willing to donate? I could probably come up with $1,000.