any updates on what is going on here?

I received the following from the OKC Foundation for Architecture.

15180

This is a HUGE image (dimensionally) that will not likely translate well here so here's a short link:

http://nitnoi.io/saveegg

I received the following from the OKC Foundation for Architecture.

15180

This is a HUGE image (dimensionally) that will not likely translate well here so here's a short link:

http://nitnoi.io/saveegg
I can't read this at all. Can you share what it says?

I can't read this at all. Can you share what it says?

I couldn’t see it either. I think it’s a variation of these:

https://okcmod.com/contact/

https://okcmod.com/contact/what-you-can-do/

I couldn’t see it either. I think it’s a variation of these:

https://okcmod.com/contact/

https://okcmod.com/contact/what-you-can-do/
I think you’re right. Thanks!

There is a CUP-26 overlay but I believe that just allows for the operation of the school, and very limited use of the amphitheater.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristianzoning.jpg

Can anyone explain what a CUP-26 overlay is? Thanks.

Can anyone explain what a CUP-26 overlay is? Thanks.

CUP = Conditional Use Permit

26 is just the unique # given by the city planning department for this particular CUP.


Bascially just allows for special uses that are outlined in a planning document. For example, in R-1 you can only have single-family housing, but here there is a school, large parking lots and a small office building.

Thanks. So the CUPs are board approved exceptions to the zoning that are deemed to be in the public interest or for the benefit of the neighborhood.

To affirm your earlier point, a CUP allowing an amphitheater and church offices is one thing, but a change in zoning from R1 to allow major commercial development adjacent to Crown Heights is a whole other kettle of fish. I attended one of the meetings, years ago, at the Will Rogers Theater where Grant Humphreys presented his proposal for that space. As you can imagine, it was well-attended, and there was not an overly-warm reception to that high-density plan.

I live in Edgemere Park, and part of my back yard abuts the vacant lot across 36th street from the Egg Church, where there has recently been excavation for the construction of an office building. Prior to that development, there was a proposal for development of several condo units on that plot. They sought a variance (one of the 2-story units would have been too close to a house on 36th street--code prohibited a height in excess of 1 story), but I opposed it and the variance was denied by the Board of Adjustment. I'm not a real estate attorney, but I have a law degree so I did some legal research and drafted a pretty thorough brief in opposition to the variance sought. I tried to get backing from the City HP department as the parcel is adjacent to an HP neighborhood, but they wouldn't touch it. Only one other neighbor attended and testified in opposition to it. (The office building that is going on the plot now is a much more favorable option. And as there was no zoning variance needed by the developer for the project, I had no recourse against it.)

So I guess my point is if someone like myself who isn't politically connected can defeat a variance sought by a well-known architect who had previously served on the HP commission, I'm optimistic about the future of the Egg Church and its development.

^

All true but remember they could still tear it down without any city or public involvement.

Many is the time that happens and the new owner just lets a vacant property sit there, until people finally cave. Or they sell to the next developer who delivers what seems to be a compromise.

Things that might help save it is not fighting every single proposed development in the area leaving no option for the developer but to go the cheap and easy route of demolishing everything and building something simple.

^

All true but remember they could still tear it down without any city or public involvement.

Many is the time that happens and the new owner just lets a vacant property sit there, until people finally cave. Or they sell to the next developer who delivers what seems to be a compromise.

Yes, there is certainly that potential, especially if the purchaser is an out-of-state developer or speculator with no community ties. But I'm speculating, albeit mixed with hope, that the odds for those scenarios are slim given the sum of the factors here: high profile, architecturally important building, its location adjacent to an established HP neighborhood, the fact that much of the plot is zoned R1, etc. You'd think these factors would make a developer/speculator pause in taking those approaches. And the public involvement is growing--there's in excess of 5000 signatures for an online petition, a rally scheduled, etc. With regard to city involvement, as the article mentions, Shadid is taking it up at the next meeting, but securing 7 votes is a high bar.

I can’t reveal any details but I am cautiously optimistic and hopeful about the situation. Undeniably, all of the recent activism has helped change the dynamic. It is still the wish and desire of the majority of the congregation that the buildings be preserved.

There is a theoretically possible historic preservation tool which, while never been done before in OKC (Skirvin similarities aside), could be utilized in the First Christian Church case. Historic Preservation is one of the criteria in the Local Development Act which allows for the creation of an increment district (TIF).

http://www.oklegislature.gov/cf_pdf/2011-12%20AMENDMENTS/Amendment%20&%20Engr/hb2117%20sahb%20&%20engr.pdf

Criteria for establishing a TIF include:

Contains findings that:
a. the project area or district meets at least one of the
following criteria:
(1) is a reinvestment area,
(2) is a historic preservation area,
(3) is an enterprise area, or
(4) is a combination of the areas specified in
divisions (1), (2) and (3) of this subparagraph,

b. the improvement of the area is likely to enhance the
value of other real property in the area and to
promote the general public interest. It shall not be
necessary to identify the specific parcels meeting the
criteria

where a "historic preservation area" is defined as: "Historic preservation area" means a geographic area listed in or nominated by the State Historic Preservation Officer to the National Register of Historic Places, an historic structure or structures listed individually in or nominated by the State Historic Preservation Officer to the National Register of Historic Places,
with such area or structure being subject to historic preservation zoning, or for purposes of ad valorem tax exemptions provided for in subsection D of Section 860 of this title, a structure subject to historic preservation zoning. Rehabilitation undertaken in an historic preservation area shall meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, latest revision, in order
to be eligible for the incentives or exemptions granted pursuant to Section 860 of this title;

The First Christian Church has already been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Converting a church to private development would result in a substantial increase in property tax and the increment could be utilized for development costs. There are other ways the City could assist with bridge financing (CDBG grants/loans, GOLT bond funds etc) but this is a situation where TIF utilization is particularly well suited and could provide for community benefit or "general public interest" (one of the primary rationalizations for TIF creation).

There is a theoretically possible historic preservation tool which, while never been done before in OKC (Skirvin similarities aside), could be utilized in the First Christian Church case. Historic Preservation is one of the criteria in the Local Development Act which allows for the creation of an increment district (TIF).

http://www.oklegislature.gov/cf_pdf/2011-12%20AMENDMENTS/Amendment%20&%20Engr/hb2117%20sahb%20&%20engr.pdf

Criteria for establishing a TIF include:

Contains findings that:
a. the project area or district meets at least one of the
following criteria:
(1) is a reinvestment area,
(2) is a historic preservation area,
(3) is an enterprise area, or
(4) is a combination of the areas specified in
divisions (1), (2) and (3) of this subparagraph,

b. the improvement of the area is likely to enhance the
value of other real property in the area and to
promote the general public interest. It shall not be
necessary to identify the specific parcels meeting the
criteria

where a "historic preservation area" is defined as: "Historic preservation area" means a geographic area listed in or nominated by the State Historic Preservation Officer to the National Register of Historic Places, an historic structure or structures listed individually in or nominated by the State Historic Preservation Officer to the National Register of Historic Places,
with such area or structure being subject to historic preservation zoning, or for purposes of ad valorem tax exemptions provided for in subsection D of Section 860 of this title, a structure subject to historic preservation zoning. Rehabilitation undertaken in an historic preservation area shall meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, latest revision, in order
to be eligible for the incentives or exemptions granted pursuant to Section 860 of this title;

The First Christian Church has already been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Converting a church to private development would result in a substantial increase in property tax and the increment could be utilized for development costs. There are other ways the City could assist with bridge financing (CDBG grants/loans, GOLT bond funds etc) but this is a situation where TIF utilization is particularly well suited and could provide for community benefit or "general public interest" (one of the primary rationalizations for TIF creation).

That sounds promising. Would the City and surrounding neighborhoods be able to have a strong hand in what the development would look like?

That's a really interesting idea, assuming it can find enough buy-in to pass the city council.

Also, welcome to the board Dr. Shadid.

I'm at the rally, and it's a decent turnout. Anyone else from OKCTalk here?

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/egg030619a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/egg030619b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/egg030619c.jpg

Church hires attorney to oppose zoning change (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=594-Church-hires-attorney-to-oppose-zoning-change)

As we were first to report (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=580-Demolition-of-iconic-First-Christian-church-deemed-imminent) last week, First Christian Church appears to be poised to sell to a new owner who plans to fully demolish the iconic church.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/egg030619b.jpg


The news set off a wave of concern among preservationists and a protest was held at the church -- located at NW 36th and Walker -- this Wednesday in an attempt to raise community awareness and to place pressure on the church and potential buyer.

Councilman Ed Shadid has placed an item on next Tuesday's city council meeting to vote on starting the process towards historic landmark designation. If the resolution passes by simple majority, there would be an 180 day moratorium on demolition while the historic landmark process proceeds.

If the resolution does not pass at the next council meeting, two other city bodies have the same power. Either the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission could vote by majority to start the process which would trigger the same 180 day moratorium against razing the buildings.

OKCTalk has learned that if the resolution does not pass at city council, the Historic Preservation Committee will vote on the same matter at their next meeting in early April.

Regardless of which group passes the measure, it would later come back before the city council for final approval.

If council passes the final historic landmark status, any owner would be required to get prior approval from the city's Historic Preservation Commission before it could be significantly modified, including full or partial demolition.

On Wednesday, the same day of the protest, attorney David Box submitted the following letter to the city council and mayor, stating the church is opposed to the rezoning.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/box030619.jpg


By expressing opposition by the current owners, the final rezoning will now be required to receive 7 affirming votes among the 8 council members and the mayor. Without stated such opposition, the resolution would only need a simple majority to pass.

The move seems to underscore the intention of the church to sell to a new owner who plans to make major changes to a series of buildings that has been a landmark since its completion in 1956, where the city itself promoted the egg-shaped structure as the “Church of Tomorrow”.

As we reported on February 22nd, Shadid received a call from a church board member who told him they were under contract with a buyer who intended to demolish the main structure.

Since the property falls outside any of the city's various design districts, as things are today complete demolition could occur without public notice or any type of review.

City council will discuss and vote on the historic landmark resolution on Tuesday, March 12th.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristian022219a.jpg

i have been told that there are not 7 votes on the council to pass the historic resolution

we will see on tuesday ..

i have been told that there are not 7 votes on the council to pass the historic resolution

we will see on tuesday ..

Actually, I updated the article with more info.

On Tuesday, council just needs a majority to start the process which will cause an immediate 180 moratorium on demolition.

But utlimately, due to the legal objection of the church, the council would need the 7 votes to formally pass the histroic landmark status.

Actually, I updated the article with more info.

On Tuesday, council just needs a majority to start the process which will cause an immediate 180 moratorium on demolition.

But utlimately, due to the legal objection of the church, the council would need the 7 votes to formally pass the histroic landmark status.

wow interesting .. thanks for the update

That is a great drone shot of the Church / property in your post above.

If the City Council passes this measure, or the Historic Preservation Commission or whoever, I imagine there would be a good argument for Inverse Condemnation. The City would be taking a property right from the First Christian Church, and they have the right to Just Compensation.

In his chat today, Lackmeyer said they'd hire Box, not surprised. Also, he was pretty much condemning the congregation/church for being greedy, not having any respect for the community, and condemning the buyer for staying secret. Quite a few folks saying "just sell it and bulldoze it already". Very strange opinions on his chat today about it.

unless an angel buyer comes forward soon i am afraid that this will end up in court and perhaps limit the ability of the City in the future

I think the Takings argument isn’t necessarily the strongest here, but it will certainly be interesting to see how it plays out.

If the market value of the property before the resolution is greater than the market value after, the City has essentially damaged the property. They extracted value from the property for the public good without Just Compensation. I think there is a pretty fair argument. The City could be on the hook for the difference in these two values, not the entire property.

If the market value of the property before the resolution is greater than the market value after, the City has essentially damaged the property. They extracted value from the property for the public good without Just Compensation. I think there is a pretty fair argument. The City could be on the hook for the difference in these two values, not the entire property.

Let's get in the weeds and ask: Value to who? And for what purpose? Who is being harmed by some "loss in value" as an individual? Could I suggest that this preservation action by the City is protecting an aging congregation who has ownership and is being taken advantage of by a developer who has no understanding of, or interest in, the eternal vision of the original Disciples of Christ builders who's Church of Tomorrow is as relevant and transformational now as it was in 1955ish?

I've outlined a couple of times on here that not only is this a one-of-a-kind building on its exterior, but the perhaps one-of-a-kind cooling system for the dome could be a valuable lesson for green buildings in the future if anyone else were so bold as to try it. I know of no other building that uses such an evaporation system.

mugofbeer: Will you please expound on these thoughts and help me understand how the evaporation system works and the lessons we could potentially extrapolate for green building?

There is a water pool on the west side of the sanctuary. There is also a tunnel system that zig zags under the sanctuary that a person can walk along but also carries water. Fans blow through the tunnel system to cool air by evaporation, like a swamp cooler. The system is long enough there is kind of a cave effect for cooling air. The tunnels were also used, at one time, for a 60s bomb shelter, complete with barrels of candy, crackers and water that l helped empty. Its been a long time since l was in there so l can't recall if the sanctuary had a/c for the hottest days but l recall it only being used for the educational building. I could see a similar system being used in newer buildings.

In his chat today, Lackmeyer said they'd hire Box, not surprised. Also, he was pretty much condemning the congregation/church for being greedy, not having any respect for the community, and condemning the buyer for staying secret. Quite a few folks saying "just sell it and bulldoze it already". Very strange opinions on his chat today about it.

I find his blanket condemnation of the church membership as a whole insulting and offensive. He is not a member there. It is inappropriate for a member of the press to espouse flagrant commentary on a entire church membership’s opinion on this situation and pass it off as news. Furthermore, he doesn’t have accurate information about the situation. You can tell in the commentary he is just ticked that they won’t call him back.

^ If I ever drop my Oklahoman subscription there are a few things I would miss. He is NOT one of them.

I am not a member of the church and have zero first hand knowledge of any part of this situation. But it sure looks like there is a person or persons in a position of influence who stand to gain financially from the destruction of the complex. The activities of the last couple weeks give the appearance a secret deal with local people.
This is how it looks from the outside.

Aren't or wasn't the local office of the Disciples of Christ church located in FCC? Who owns the church? Where would the money go to? I'm thinking it may be the DOC Church?

Aren't or wasn't the local office of the Disciples of Christ church located in FCC? Who owns the church? Where would the money go to? I'm thinking it may be the DOC Church?

The state of Ok Disciples Office seems face 36th just east of the church. I believe either the church sold them or donated the property to them some years ago. Not sure of this for certain, but yes, the state offices are adjacent.

I am not a member of the church and have zero first hand knowledge of any part of this situation. But it sure looks like there is a person or persons in a position of influence who stand to gain financially from the destruction of the complex. The activities of the last couple weeks give the appearance a secret deal with local people.
This is how it looks from the outside.


The church board simply wants to retain the right to entertain all offers and bids to their membership. While I am completely against the destruction of this awesome Midcentury complex, the board is soliciting all offers and trying to preserve their property rights.

A church is more than buildings. It is a community. I gather that they want to ensure that some of the choices at hand include continuing their existence as a community for as long as possible (both with the buildings remaining intact and also selling to those that would tear them down).

In Lackmeyer’s commentary about the church’s obligation to the adjacent neighborhoods, the earlier Humphreys development proposal that included preserving the buildings seems to have been forgotten. The neighbors killed that proposal. Just pointing that out.

Given the abrupt destruction of FNB, and the alleged contract here involving an anonymous buyer, many are understandably on edge about the historic church, and ill-considered rhetoric may be being expressed in various contexts.

I attended the meeting at the Will Rogers where Humphreys presented his proposal for the site. There was a lot of concern expressed about the project by neighbors, but I wouldn't characterize it as a knee-jerk, NIMBY reaction. I'm not a planner, but the proposal seemed extremely dense given the size of the plot and its proximity to an established, historic neighborhood. The meeting concluded with Humphreys saying a traffic study would be done and we'd re-convene when the results were forthcoming. I don't recall hearing anything after that meeting.

Perhaps there were intervening events that I wasn't aware of that that may have led to a characterization, which I've read in various places, of neighbors killing the proposal. I live in Edgemere Park, and am not closely connected with local players, so it's highly possible I wasn't privy to other skirmishes occurring in Crown Heights. But my perception was that Humphreys got spooked by reasonable neighborhood concerns, didn't feel like doing the hard work of negotiating and consensus-building, and rolled up his plans and walked away (understandably) to do something easier. It may sound like semantics, but I wouldn't call that the neighborhood killing the proposal. There's no onus on a neighborhood to accept such a plan as is, and it seems unfair, based on what I know, to lay the current problem, implicitly or otherwise, at the feet of Crown Heights for not rolling over on Humphreys' plan.

For me personally, despite being surprised about how much was jammed into that parcel, I thought it was an interesting concept and was open-minded about it. At the time, I was disappointed that there was no further discussion or developments. But I also empathized with the concerns of people who have a lot invested in their home and neighborhood, both financially and in social capital.

To bring the convo back to the present, ideally the plot could be dealt with in a thoughtful way, appropriate for the location, preserving the structures, and taking the interests of all stakeholders into account. I also hope the church representatives fully appreciate how their community benefited from the larger community for decades, not the least in the form of tax exemptions, and thus feel some larger, social obligation.

Well put Broncho. I couldn't agree more. As a member, what I can say is that the volunteer board members feel obligated to entertain all offers and present them to their membership. We haven't been asked to vote on anything. As a result of all of the activism and awareness, I think it is general knowledge that several additional offers that include preserving the buildings have come into being as a result. That is why in my earlier posts, I stated that I remained hopeful.

Historic First Christian Church gets 3 more offers (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=597-Historic-First-Christian-Church-gets-3-more-offers)

After OKCTalk broke the news (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=580-Demolition-of-iconic-First-Christian-church-deemed-imminent) that a potential buyer of First Christian Church had plans to demolish the iconic sanctuary, 3 new purchase offers have been made to the church board.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/egg030619b.jpg


We have also learned that the church is not under formal contract to sell the property to any buyer and that all offers are likely to be presented to the congregation for vote before any final deal is struck.
EAK]
The church property has been listed for sale for over 2 years, but only after it became known a buyer had stepped forward with a plan to buy and demolish were other offers tendered. Of the 4 offers, at least 2 include promises to preserve the church buildings.

The amounts proposed by the various parties are not currently known, but the 32-acre property is currently listed at $5.65 million, representing a substantial reduction from the initial asking price of more than $8 million.

In the case of a least one contract, the church board has signed a non-disclosure agreement that prohibits them from disclosing details, including the identity of the buyer.

Tomorrow, city councilman Ed Shadid will introduce a resolution (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=594-Church-hires-attorney-to-oppose-zoning-change) to commence a process that could lead the church to be rezoned as a historic landmark, thus protecting it from substantial changes and demolition.

First Christian has hired attorney David Box to oppose the change in zoning.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristian022219a.jpg


The situation with the church is very similar to that of Classen Circle. When OKCTalk broke the story that Braum's was planning to purchase and demolish the historic Donnay Building in July of 2017, a public outcry led to protests and utlimately Braum's withdrew their plans. Quickly thereafter a new buyer stepped forward which is now in the process of renovating the property.

Preservationists hope for the same outcome here, where an offer is accepted that would preserve the egg-shaped church and the other related mid-century structures, such as the Jewel Box Theater.

No formal action by the church is expected for at least a month. If Shadid's resolution passes tomorrow, a 180-day moratorium against demolition will start, regardless of the final historic landmark vote.

Please forgive me for beating a dead horse, but imagine if this same scenario of soliciting proposals to save this structure played out for the Founders Building, Charcoal Oven Building, Film Exchange Building, Harvestor Building, and dare I say, the block where the BOK tower is at and the Stage Center. I suspect we would still have have those buildings, the development that replaced them would have happened nearby regardless, and the overall urban fabric of the city would be better off because of it.

I don't mean to stir this discussion up again, but rather than be thankful this situation has played out for this building and the Donnay building. At least if this church is torn down, there was a decent attempt in saving it. I suspect however in the end it will be saved and a nice development surrounds it.

It is a little funny that David Box is the attorney with something like this. Again.

^^^but this time he's on the other side of the debate haha

Please forgive me for beating a dead horse, but imagine if this same scenario of soliciting proposals to save this structure played out for the Founders Building, Charcoal Oven Building, Film Exchange Building, Harvestor Building, and dare I say, the block where the BOK tower is at and the Stage Center. I suspect we would still have have those buildings, the development that replaced them would have happened nearby regardless, and the overall urban fabric of the city would be better off because of it.

I don't mean to stir this discussion up again, but rather than be thankful this situation has played out for this building and the Donnay building. At least if this church is torn down, there was a decent attempt in saving it. I suspect however in the end it will be saved and a nice development surrounds it.

The problem with all those (except Film Exchange) was the word didn't get out until it was too late.

Give OKCTalk it's due... If First Christian gets saved, this fine publication will deserve a fair bit of credit, similar to Classen Circle.

^^^but this time he's on the other side of the debate haha

He's RUTHLESS I tell ya what!

The problem with all those (except Film Exchange) was the word didn't get out until it was too late.

Give OKCTalk it's due... If First Christian gets saved, this fine publication will deserve a fair bit of credit, similar to Classen Circle.
I am giving OKCTalk it’s due. Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough. OKCTalk will be the very reason this building survives if it does which is much more likely now to happen. You know me Pete, I always support OKCTalk!

My point was if there was a change in laws regarding demolitions of these types of buildings, word could get out and there could be ample time to save them. The building wouldn’t have to have only one salvation of a news piece being it’s only hope. Mistakes happen and things slip by, though thankfully you have been on top of everything.

I know some of the other examples are reaching like the Film Exchange building where it was known for awhile it was to be demolished, but the city really didn’t even give it a chance to be developed into part of the park or convention center which could have been done. If the Charcoal Oven or Founders Building was given enough time and marketed right, I put it on my soul a developer would have came in and made it into something great saving the buildings.

^

There are changes in the works. The Planning Dept. is working on identifying key structures and placing them on a protected list, especially those that fall outside the existing design review district.

They need to hurry up before anything worth saving is long gone.

Is there any hope to expand the design review so it encompasses more of the city. I think an expanded design review would do wonders for beautifying the city and imposing better standards for more aesthetically appealing buildings along with the added benefit of preserving historic buildings.

OMG let's hope it's not too late. OKCTalk has been on this since the intentions of the church stewards were first revealed. This structure needs to be saved.



https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6221WNSJMKw/VR024fKQtcI/AAAAAAAAD-c/-pJlONfbvLg/s1600/aaaa.jpg

https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/723468d8-25eb-49de-a515-3da4038703ae_l.jpg

We have two dome like structures (Egg shell/Gold dome) left in this city; would definitely support money for MAPS 4 to purchase these structures, allow the city to re-purpose them.

OMG let's hope it's not too late. OKCTalk has been on this since the intentions of the church stewards were first revealed. This structure needs to be saved.



https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6221WNSJMKw/VR024fKQtcI/AAAAAAAAD-c/-pJlONfbvLg/s1600/aaaa.jpg

https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/723468d8-25eb-49de-a515-3da4038703ae_l.jpg

We have two dome like structures (Egg shell/Gold dome) left in this city; would definitely support money for MAPS 4 to purchase these structures, allow the city to re-purpose them.

Seem like these domes would make great concert venues. But I really don't know,just seems like they would for some reason.

Seem like these domes would make great concert venues. But I really don't know,just seems like they would for some reason.

In general, acoustics in a dome are not good for music concerts. Too many competing echoes.

This reminds me of an event from the 1970s I was told of in the 1990s.
Friend of mine told me about how his father had been in an administrative role with OU in the 1970s which involved management of properties in the Lincoln Terrace neighborhood, south of the state capitol. Demographic changes, urban renewal and white flight had made the houses "white elephants" that had low cash value, but smart citizens had begun to donate them to the university upon the death of their parents, for a high "tax deductible" value. University hospital system had begun to use them as warehouse space and they were failing into disrepair. Sensing the problem, our hero had placed them in a high profile position of risk, and the public outrage had saved the houses.

There is a water pool on the west side of the sanctuary. There is also a tunnel system that zig zags under the sanctuary that a person can walk along but also carries water. Fans blow through the tunnel system to cool air by evaporation, like a swamp cooler. The system is long enough there is kind of a cave effect for cooling air. The tunnels were also used, at one time, for a 60s bomb shelter, complete with barrels of candy, crackers and water that l helped empty. Its been a long time since l was in there so l can't recall if the sanctuary had a/c for the hottest days but l recall it only being used for the educational building. I could see a similar system being used in newer buildings.

The area where the children’s playground was a “reflecting pool’” for the bell tower. Jets spouting water were used to cool the system. This was converted to EVAPCO cooling towers years later. I have a photograph of it in use.

Seem like these domes would make great concert venues. But I really don't know,just seems like they would for some reason.

I've played gigs at FNC. The acoustics are a huge challenge.

Landmarking First Christain Church vote postponed until the April 9th council meeting. Tons of people spoke.

Today in city council, the resolution to commence the historic landmark process was tabled for another month.

However, the planning commission can also start the process if they pass a similar resolution at their next meeting in early April.

Yes, I really appreciate the efforts of OKCtalk as well. FWIW, I have posted links to the site in various places.

I also appreciate reading comments those of you who have informed opinions and actual knowledge of the factual circumstances.

I planned to attend the city council meeting today, but was just annihilated by flu and strep. Can anyone provide context to the tabling of the resolution, and/or the sentiment of the other members of council about the resolution?

Greenwell was adamantly against it due to his opinions about property rights, socialism versus a republic, and church/state conflict beliefs.

Meg Salyer was admanent for delaying and allowing more offers and dialogue to occur. She pressed for preservation.

The Mayor acted great as a moderator and allowed everyone to speak as long as they wanted. It was extremely civil.

The resolution was postponed with a verbal commitment from the pastor and church board president that a demolition permit would not be filed in the interim.

David Box had a scheduling conflict with the upcoming council meeting. That means that the item gets kicked until after the preservation commission takes it up. Then I guess an automatic moratorium kicks in.

There was quite a debate dialogue between Stonecipher, Meg, and Box about how many offers have been received. Meg attested to being contacted by two interested parties making offers. The church via Box claims that they have only received one “legitimate” offer. This caused a fairly testy conversation.

In any case, some time was bought through today’s meeting but it was clear that the church leadership won’t prohibit a buyer from destroying the buildings although that is not their preference. If those offers do exist, someone needs to make sure they get to right people in the church and that the congregation knows about them.

This now means JoBeth Harmon and James Cooper have a say in this matter. I’ve been told JoBeth is ambivalent.

Greenwell was adamantly against it due to his opinions about property rights, socialism versus a republic, and church/state conflict beliefs.

Meg Salyer was admanent for delaying and allowing more offers and dialogue to occur. She pressed for preservation.

The Mayor acted great as a moderator and allowed everyone to speak as long as they wanted. It was extremely civil.

The resolution was postponed with a verbal commitment from the pastor and church board president that a demolition permit would not be filed in the interim.

David Box had a scheduling conflict with the upcoming council meeting. That means that the item gets kicked until after the preservation commission takes it up. Then I guess an automatic moratorium kicks in.

There was quite a debate dialogue between Stonecipher, Meg, and Box about how many offers have been received. Meg attested to being contacted by two interested parties making offers. The church via Box claims that they have only received one “legitimate” offer. This caused a fairly testy conversation.

In any case, some time was bought through today’s meeting but it was clear that the church leadership won’t prohibit a buyer from destroying the buildings although that is not their preference. If those offers do exist, someone needs to make sure they get to right people in the church and that the congregation knows about them.

Thanks so much!

I just did a quick scan of the city code, and this section seemed the most applicable:

"3300.2. Powers. Unless otherwise specified in this chapter, the Historic Preservation Commission shall have the following powers:
...
E. To recommend to the City Council the acquisition of development rights, façade, conservation, or preservation easements and the development of historic preservation plans. "

So I guess a formal recommendation from the HP commission will, in theory, inform the council members' votes.