View Full Version : Lexford Park (formerly First Christian Church)



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10

BDP
05-09-2019, 02:57 PM
I hope Stonecipher learned his lesson.

The lesson may be that conflicts of interest do not matter in today's politics, but it does seem that self dealing in politics is more or less what public office is for these days.

(Was the cynical enough? Ha.)

Pete
05-18-2019, 08:44 AM
On the agenda for City Council next week is a resolution described thusly:


"First Christian Church (“FCC”) owns an approximately 31.5 acre tract of real property located at
3700 North Walker Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73118. On March 12, 2019, City Council
continued an item proposing a Resolution initiating an application to designate First Christian
Church and Jewel Box Theater at 3700 N. Walker Avenue as a Historic Landmark Overlay District.
On April 3, 2019, the Historic Preservation Commission voted to adopt a Resolution to initiate a
proposal on behalf of the City for designation of the FCC Property as a Historic Landmark Overlay
District. On April 9, 2019, City Council struck its Resolution to initiate an application to designate
the property as a Historic Landmark Overlay District which had been continued from March 12,
2019. Subsequently, FCC entered into a real estate purchase agreement to sell a portion of its
property to Crossings Community Church.
Councilmen Cooper and Stonecipher requested the Municipal Counselor’s Office negotiate and
prepare a Memorandum of Understanding between the City, First Christian Church of Oklahoma
City, and Crossings Community Church (“MOU”) where FCC and Crossings agree not to demolish
the external structure of the First Christian Church Sanctuary, Jewel Box Theater, or Education
Center, except as may be necessary in the event of casualty damage. The MOU also provides that if
Crossings buys the Purchase Tract, Crossings will not seek a Demolition Permit or Demolish (as
defined in the MOU) such external structures during such time as Crossings owns the Purchase
Tract, and that the City shall have a right of first refusal to acquire the Purchase Tract on the terms
and conditions set forth in the MOU should Crossings buy the Purchase Tract from FCC and seek to
sell the Purchase Tract in the future. In exchange for those contractual obligations, the MOU
provides the City will withdraw the application for designation of the FCC Property as a Historic
Landmark Overlay District and agree not to initiate a new application while Crossings has the
Purchased Tract under contract or owns the Purchased Tract.

This resolution also withdraws the Historic Preservation Commission’s April 3, 2019 application,
case number PC-10586, to initiate a proposal on behalf of the City for the designation of the First
Christian Church as a Historic Landmark Overlay District. City Council has authority to make the
withdrawal on behalf of the City as the legislative body of The City of Oklahoma City and pursuant
to §59-4100.5. "

David
05-19-2019, 07:17 PM
Why does it so strongly matter that the Historic Landmark status fail if they are simultaneously super duper promising not the tear the building down?

This feels weird.

Pete
05-19-2019, 07:21 PM
Why does it so strongly matter that the Historic Landmark status fail if they are simultaneously super duper promising not the tear the building down?

This feels weird.

Their argument is that it makes it super hard to do any improvements to the property at all.

But that's pretty dubious. All they would have to do is go through the Historic Preservation Commission who would certainly be sympathetic to anything that really needed to be done.

I'm sure this is just some sort of property rights philosophy issue, which at least 4 city councilors feel strongly about.

David
05-19-2019, 07:33 PM
I can't see spending the money to threaten a lawsuit for a philosophical concern like that. Seems like a big waste of money for either congregation involved, and that's bad ministry.

bombermwc
05-20-2019, 06:58 AM
Earning the HP label does actually make it more difficult to maintain and improve things because of HOW you have to do it. It might be physically saved, but then you run into situations where its too expensive to maintain, so the occupiers are gone and then it sits empty. All you have then is hope for someone to save it.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing because if you want to preserve something historically, it needs to be properly preserved. Think Heritage Hills. If you had someone come in and put in parts from a modern home that don't match, then it sort of spoils the preservation effort.

I'd like to see the label WANTED by the church though and not forced upon them.

RustytheBailiff
05-20-2019, 07:25 AM
[QUOTE=But that's pretty dubious. All they would have to do is go through the Historic Preservation Commission who would certainly be sympathetic to anything that really needed to be done.
.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like the voice of someone who has never gone before the Historice Preservations Commission.

Buffalo Bill
05-25-2019, 01:34 PM
On the HP Commission Agenda for June:

https://agenda.okc.gov/sirepub/cache/2/o4jyls21bgrbnw55b33ll4ii/442216105252019013549492.PDF

https://agenda.okc.gov/sirepub/cache/2/o4jyls21bgrbnw55b33ll4ii/442216205252019013356285.PDF

Pete
05-25-2019, 01:55 PM
^

Yes, once James Cooper got wind of Stonecipher & Co.'s plans to withdraw the HP process, he met with the two churches and then later helped broker a compromise wherein Crossings agreed not to demolish the church and key structures, and that the City of OKC gets the first right of refusal should they ever choose to sell the property.

TheTravellers
05-25-2019, 04:31 PM
^

Yes, once James Cooper got wind of Stonecipher & Co.'s plans to withdraw the HP process, he met with the two churches and then later helped broker a compromise wherein Crossings agreed not to demolish the church and key structures, and that the City of OKC gets the first right of refusal should they ever choose to sell the property.

So glad I voted for Cooper and he won, he's going to be a great asset to OKC...

SEMIweather
05-25-2019, 04:39 PM
So glad I voted for Cooper and he won, he's going to be a great asset to OKC...

Agree. This is really good, proactive work.

David
05-25-2019, 08:53 PM
Yeah, that is excellent work.

Pete
07-14-2019, 11:03 AM
Renovation work has started on the 130-foot bell tower.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristian071419a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristian071419b.jpg

Bill Robertson
08-08-2019, 10:44 AM
I just received an email to Crossings membership. They decided that doing what they felt necessary at First Christian was going to cost more than anticipated and more than they want to commit to. So they are not pursuing taking over the property.

Pete
08-08-2019, 10:52 AM
Crossings Church decides not to pursue First Christian purchase (https://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=639-Crossings-Church-decides-not-to-pursue-First-Christian-purchase)

This morning, Crossings Church issued the following press release:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/firstchristian042119a.jpg


Crossings Community Church Decides Not to Pursue First Christian Church Property at NW 36th & Walker
Crossings leadership determines it best not to proceed following due diligence period, deliberation, and prayer

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma – August 8, 2019 – Crossings Community Church has decided not to pursue the property near NW 36th and Walker following months of prayer, research, and inspection. Earlier this year, Crossings entered into a due diligence period to thoroughly explore the possibility of acquiring the First Christian Church location as a potential Crossings satellite campus.

The official statement issued by Crossings Community Church this morning is as follows: “Today, Senior Pastor Marty Grubbs announced to the Crossings congregation the decision not to pursue the First Christian Church property at NW 36th & Walker.

“In April, we came to an agreement to pursue the acquisition of the First Christian Church building and entered a due diligence period. This period was spent evaluating the feasibility of this opportunity to make it suitable for our purposes as a satellite campus. After months of prayer, research, and inspection, we have determined it best not to proceed.

“Unfortunately, the overall cost was much higher than we anticipated. The total cost of this endeavor would exceed $20 million. It became far more than what our leadership and elders were willing to invest; particularly in light of our 60-year commitment not to incur any long-term debt.

“Though this is not the outcome that we had hoped for, we are confident that we have diligently pursued and carefully considered all aspects of this opportunity. We are especially thankful for the great friendship we have developed with First Christian Church during this process, and pray for them as they move forward.”

BoulderSooner
08-08-2019, 11:34 AM
this may signal the beginning of the end of this building

Pete
08-08-2019, 12:07 PM
Based on a recent agreement, the city has the first right to purchase.

Patrick
08-08-2019, 12:10 PM
Based on a recent agreement, the city has the first right to purchase.

It’s a money pit. Just bulldoze it.

Plutonic Panda
08-08-2019, 12:16 PM
this may signal the beginning of the end of this building
I hope not. There are so many potential uses of this property keeping the buildings which would preserve unique character of the area.

Ross MacLochness
08-08-2019, 12:19 PM
15501

gopokes88
08-08-2019, 12:24 PM
Based on a recent agreement, the city has the first right to purchase.

I didn’t know that, kinda like that.

You could make a tweak to the laws that would protect property owners rights but also preserve some of our buildings.

If you put a building under contract, the city can outbid for 10% more.
Demo and renovation permits are either approved, or the city has to buy the building for purchase price (if recent) +10% or FMV +10%, whatever is greater. Like if a building got sold, demo permit comes 2 months later, the city can buy it for 110% of what the new owner paid.

Plutonic Panda
08-08-2019, 12:25 PM
15501

LOL. We'll settle the induced demand argument after we save this building! hah

Martin
08-08-2019, 12:27 PM
15501

alright... you win okctalk today.

Patrick
08-08-2019, 12:44 PM
I just don’t think $20 million is a wise investment in this property. That’s a lot of money for what return? At least the Skirvin made financial sense because it’s a profit making hotel again and it was in a revived downtown

Pete
08-08-2019, 12:50 PM
I just don’t think $20 million is a wise investment in this property. That’s a lot of money for what return? At least the Skirvin made financial sense because it’s a profit making hotel again and it was in a revived downtown

You don't know the return until you know the use.

If the city got involved you can bet it would no longer be a single-tenant church.

The city just bought the Luster Mansion. We are pouring tens of millions into First National Center.


You save it first then work hard to find a redeveloper. You just can't assume there isn't a way to make this work.

Teo9969
08-08-2019, 12:51 PM
If the city buys this property, they basically get to tell the NIMBYs in the Heights to pound sand and developers who want to preserve the structure but make better use of the remaining land will be able to easily get a good developmnt through.

Patrick
08-08-2019, 01:11 PM
You don't know the return until you know the use.

If the city got involved you can bet it would no longer be a single-tenant church.

The city just bought the Luster Mansion. We are pouring tens of millions into First National Center.


You save it first then work hard to find a redeveloper. You just can't assume there isn't a way to make this work.

I’m all for saving it I just don’t know if it’s financially viable. With Skirvin the return came in its use as a very profitable hotel. With First National it obviously has uses as housing, hotel, offices, etc. Just not sure what use FCC could have. Im afraid it might be another Gold Dome. I hope I’m wrong. Definitely not financially viable as a church any longer. If Crossings can’t afford $20 million no other church will be able to

Pete
08-08-2019, 01:13 PM
I’m all for saving it I just don’t know if it’s financially viable. With Skirvin the return came in its use as a very profitable hotel. With First National it obviously has uses as housing, hotel, offices, etc. Just not sure what use FCC could have. Im afraid it might be another Gold Dome. I hope I’m wrong. Definitely not financially viable as a church any longer.

Everyone of those things took a very long time to make happen. The Skirvin was closed for 20 years!

We haven't even started trying with this property.

Plutonic Panda
08-08-2019, 01:13 PM
I just don’t think $20 million is a wise investment in this property. That’s a lot of money for what return? At least the Skirvin made financial sense because it’s a profit making hotel again and it was in a revived downtown
It depends on what else is proposed for the property. If an ambitious mixed-use development is proposed that is dense these buildings could be used for something really innovative. Perhaps a mixed-use trade market underneath decorative planetarium of sorts. Farmers market area. Events usage. Etc.

Pete
08-08-2019, 01:37 PM
It's gorgeous property and highly underutilized.

I went out and walked all the land and there is tons of potential.

gopokes88
08-08-2019, 02:01 PM
I just don’t think $20 million is a wise investment in this property. That’s a lot of money for what return? At least the Skirvin made financial sense because it’s a profit making hotel again and it was in a revived downtown
Kinda think this mindset needs to be reshaped.

A governments job is to first pass laws so we can have order. A police force to enforce said order and build some infrastructure so we can all get to work.

Then it’s to provide goods and services.

So to want a return on investment isn’t really what they do. Buying and saving this property is the city providing a service to the citizens to preserve some of the makeup of the city. Whether or not that’s a service people want is certainly up for debate.

But this isn’t a debate about returns it’s more of a debate is this a service we want the city to provide.

There really isn’t a return to be had, otherwise someone would take the risk to go get that return.

Pete
08-08-2019, 02:21 PM
And how do you measure intangible returns?

I can see the egg from my office and I freaking love this place. It goes way back to when I was a kid and I always thought it was so cool. I see it every single day and it always makes me feel good inside. So much so, my biz partner and I bought our building on 36th & Shartel because the area has so much character.


Such things create bonds between people and communities. And by far and away for me it is the Gold Dome, as I used to ride down with my dad who banked there and it made me fall in love with the core of OKC and the city in general; otherwise all I knew were the tract homes and strip centers of NW OKC. I have a great print on my wall of an aerial of the dome from 1968 which would have been about the time I would go down there with my father.

These are things you can't measure but they brought me back to this town after 25 years away. If you tear everything down because it doesn't add up on a spreadsheet, you are ripping out the heart and soul of a community, and then what are you left with? Just a place with some relatives and people you know, if that.

Teo9969
08-08-2019, 02:54 PM
How does this compare land mass wise to Penn Central/OAK

CloudDeckMedia
08-08-2019, 03:01 PM
And how do you measure intangible returns?

If you tear everything down because it doesn't add up on a spreadsheet, you are ripping out the heart and soul of a community, and then what are you left with?

I lay part of the fault at the feet of architects who design buildings that are inefficient and expensive to maintain. Pete - I understand that it isn't all spreadsheets and cost-savings, but as with Stage Center, it can't be all about form, design, magazine covers and awards.

Pete
08-08-2019, 03:19 PM
^

That building functioned fine for decades.

It just wasn't maintained.

dankrutka
08-08-2019, 04:03 PM
It’s a money pit. Just bulldoze it.

This is pretty much Oklahoma City's official position in regards to historic buildings: Seems hard or inconvenient, bulldoze it.

CloudDeckMedia
08-08-2019, 04:18 PM
^

That building functioned fine for decades.

It just wasn't maintained.

Edit: I lay part of the fault at the feet of architects who design buildings that are inefficient and expensive to maintain for clients who lack the ability to shoulder that financial burden.

I speak of non-profit organizations with little/no experience maintaining the commercial property they own. Jim Tolbert spoke to my Leadership OKC group years ago, and cautioned about this very thing. Summarizing, "Non-profit organizations shouldn't own their own real estate." Financial support will ebb and flow with the times, and when it dries up, that's when the HVAC needs to be replaced. Or the roof. Or the parking lot. If money is diverted from programs to pay for it, people will notice and may leave. If money isn't diverted from programs, people will wonder why the facility is so shabby. It takes a dedicated, prudent and wise board with experienced commercial property people to keep this from happening, and/or deep pocket donors who will fund a capital campaign for building improvements that have nothing to do with the non-profit's mission. In the many years since Jim Tolbert explained that to us, I've seen it happen repeatedly with my own eyes.

Patrick
08-08-2019, 06:48 PM
I wonder how much Crossing is to blame. I grew up there. Crossings has to do everything first class, crystal chandeliers and all. How much would it cost just to bring it up to code and not necessarily make it first class? Maybe $20 million is overkill?

Urban Pioneer
08-08-2019, 09:32 PM
I wondered the same.

bombermwc
08-09-2019, 08:47 AM
I would bet they are including asbestos abatement. You can't really DO much with the place without taking care of that. The place is VERY dated and would need to basically be gutted to bring it into the 21st century. Preservation is more expensive. It would probably be cheaper to doze and start over, but that defeats the whole purpose here.

Pete
08-09-2019, 08:53 AM
You only have to deal with asbestos if you disturb it.

And yes, it's always cheaper to build new and that's why we have tons of national, state and city incentives for historic renovation projects.

Bullbear
08-09-2019, 09:05 AM
Sad to me to blame architects of years gone by. I am grateful for the ones who thought outside the box and brought innovative and interesting structures to life. much better than just miles and miles of sad uninteresting buildings that are "easy to maintain"

Plutonic Panda
08-09-2019, 09:27 AM
Sad to me to blame architects of years gone by. I am grateful for the ones who thought outside the box and brought innovative and interesting structures to life. much better than just miles and miles of sad uninteresting buildings that are "easy to maintain"
+1000

Patrick
08-09-2019, 11:03 AM
Sad but it will probably be replaced with an On Cue.

Urban Pioneer
08-09-2019, 11:32 AM
As much as I LOVE the building and the complex, I have a hard time conceiving how Christian rock would work in there. Our company put the electronic carillon bells in the tower with wiring back to the sanctuary. For fun, I played the pipe organ in there which is incredible. The bells are hooked up to it. Acoustically it can be a very difficult place to play instruments. Since I do primarily AV systems for a living, it hard for me to conceive how they would modernize the sanctuary acoustically for contemporary worship using drums, guitars, and extremely loud vocals. An extraordinary amount of acoustical absorption would be required which would definitely affect aesthetics. Even the pipe organ itself was quickly modified after the original install to respond to the acoustical challenges. The guy who trained me (Jim Fentriss) suspended very cool pods around the room in the sixties to create parabolic waveforms in the room so that waveforms would work correctly for speech.

onthestrip
08-09-2019, 11:55 AM
Isnt the egg part in good shape? What major things does it need?

Wish we knew how much of that $20 million was for the other buildings around egg. Imo, you could get rid of everything but keep the egg. Keep it, re-utilize it and then use the tons of empty ground around it for another use.

rezman
08-09-2019, 12:20 PM
I wonder how much Crossing is to blame. I grew up there. Crossings has to do everything first class, crystal chandeliers and all. How much would it cost just to bring it up to code and not necessarily make it first class? Maybe $20 million is overkill?

Blame for what?. They stepped in as a prospective buyer interested in preserving the property, who did their contractual due diligence, and concluded that purchasing the property was not in the best interest of the church. Now it's the City's turn.

jn1780
08-09-2019, 12:34 PM
Blame for what?. They stepped in as a prospective buyer interested in preserving the property, who did their contractual due diligence, and concluded that purchasing the property was not in the best interest of the church. Now it's the City's turn.

I didn't read that as a finger point at Crossings. Just that they couldn't make the purchase while still being able to make the building look good for a decent price.

Pete
08-09-2019, 01:27 PM
Also, Crossings said their policy is to not take on any long-term debt.

First of all, that tells you about the money flowing through that place because they have built a mega-campus all without long-term loans.

But secondly, that is not that way a developer or just about any other non-church owner would approach this.

It wasn't just the cost, it was the cost + not being willing to borrow money that killed their deal.

foodiefan
08-09-2019, 05:13 PM
Sad to me to blame architects of years gone by. I am grateful for the ones who thought outside the box and brought innovative and interesting structures to life. much better than just miles and miles of sad uninteresting buildings that are "easy to maintain"

. . and hard to imagine what "latest and greatest" building materials and designs being used/built today will turn out to be the "asbestos" of 50-60 years from now. . .I well remember when asbestos singles/siding was a top of the line building material.

Bill Robertson
08-09-2019, 06:42 PM
Being a long time member if Crossings I have confidence in the decision not to buy First Christian. I have a lot of memories of First Christian from playing sports against them and I’m extremely sorry to see it not work out. But I know that Crossings spends their money wisely and with the best intent. So I’m sad that this didn’t work out.

HOT ROD
08-13-2019, 04:25 PM
wasn't there some sort of retail development for this area of 36th that never went forward?

could the city now help make that happen? I'd love to see the main egg and jewel box theatre saved but the rest of the land is screaming urban retail lifestyle center to me, buildings could easily be added along with structured parking to make it all work.. ....

Kill two birds with one stone?

Laramie
08-13-2019, 05:00 PM
Many of us want to save this property; this egg shell brings back memories of my first seeing the Church of Tomorrow as it was tagged in the late 60s in the World Book Encyclopedia.

Similar to the Gold Dome, this structure is iconic & historic. Muck like the Skirvin, Colcord Hotel, Criterion Theater and the Biltmore (Hotel Oklahoma) you would love to save them all.

As I see memorable structures in our city go down; it's as though a piece of me goes with it.

Hold on to hope, that's all we can desire.

bombermwc
08-14-2019, 08:09 AM
You only have to deal with asbestos if you disturb it.

And yes, it's always cheaper to build new and that's why we have tons of national, state and city incentives for historic renovation projects.

Yeah and if you're going to do ANYTHING at all to modernize the place, you're going to "touch" it. There's no way this place is viable in it's current state. So no matter who takes it, this not insignificant cost is going to be part of any deal, be it remodel or bulldozer.

Personally, I love the place. It's unique and i love those acoustics and the creative air system,etc. There are so many cool things there. But it's also still stuck in the 60's. You can't do any meaningful amount of remodeling without going down to the studs.

So we're at the same point so many historic structures are. How long do/can we wait as the structure continues to degrade, while we wait for someone willing to preserve? I believe the next closest DoC church is in The Village, and that's a bit of a drive (since NW Christian is now a Dental Depot). Eventually, the congregation will exhaust their ability to stay in this building and will have to go elsewhere (whether they nest in another church or move to a small space). What happens when they effectively abandon it and stick the For Sale sign out front to the highest bidder? Once they aren't doing the maintaining they currently are, the place is going to nose dive. No amount of HP labeling is going to help that. It might save the structure from a bulldozer today, but if it's not economically viable, then that bulldozer may come later when the place has degraded so much that it cant be saved.

As a comparison, Hopewell Baptist (teepee church) got it's outside "prettied up", but it's still a mess inside. All that happened there was that now it looks better as people drive by. Is that what we can expect here?

Mr. Blue Sky
08-25-2019, 08:21 PM
This is a must-read for this discussion.
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/24/753256634/houses-of-worship-find-new-life-after-congregations-downsize

mugofbeer
08-25-2019, 08:59 PM
Maybe its a silly idea but in MAPS they are proposing to spend millions to build Senior and kids centers and other facilities. Why not think outside the box a little, kill 2 birds (or maybe 3 or 4), save a one-of-a-kind landmark and use the FCC property instead of building totally brand new facilities? The money they are proposing to spend would pay for some asbestos remediation or they may find it can be left alone and covered (l don't know exactly where it is but l suspect the dome). There is plenty of land for a rec center and it has the Jewel Box and an amphitheater.

Dob Hooligan
08-25-2019, 11:22 PM
I
Maybe its a silly idea but in MAPS they are proposing to spend millions to build Senior and kids centers and other facilities. Why not think outside the box a little, kill 2 birds (or maybe 3 or 4), save a one-of-a-kind landmark and use the FCC property instead of building totally brand new facilities? The money they are proposing to spend would pay for some asbestos remediation or they may find it can be left alone and covered (l don't know exactly where it is but l suspect the dome). There is plenty of land for a rec center and it has the Jewel Box and an amphitheater.
I see the value in this, but I think the emotional arguments regarding the price of property and modification/defacement of same would become quicksand that all involved would rather avoid.

mugofbeer
08-26-2019, 07:30 PM
I
I see the value in this, but I think the emotional arguments regarding the price of property and modification/defacement of same would become quicksand that all involved would rather avoid.

vs. Tearing it down ?

Mr. Blue Sky
08-26-2019, 10:44 PM
vs. Tearing it down ?

Thank you. Just what I was thinking. And? I’m not sure he read the article I linked to.

Dob Hooligan
08-27-2019, 12:54 AM
vs. Tearing it down ?

No. Not vs tearing it down. But what I say might appear to be very cynical.
I’m predicting that arguments could arise over the cost of the property, method and cost of repurposing, and the new/different services impact on the neighborhood.
Racial and socioeconomic distrust and disagreements can quickly escalate. It can become a very heavy lift.