Lexford Park (formerly First Christian Church)

[Teo9969]

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]

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]

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]

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]

It's gorgeous property and highly underutilized.

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

[gopokes88]

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]

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]

How does this compare land mass wise to Penn Central/OAK

[CloudDeckMedia]

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]

^

That building functioned fine for decades.

It just wasn't maintained.

[dankrutka]

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]

^

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]

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]

I wondered the same.

[bombermwc]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Sad but it will probably be replaced with an On Cue.

[Urban Pioneer]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.