Skylines - Building a unique monument in OKC

[OU Adonis]

Hi guys, I have been lurking here for awhile but I have never posted. For my first post, I would like to bring up the topic of skylines. I know a lot of you have passion about building more towers.

Why not build something akin to the Seattle space needle or the St. Louis arch?

Obviously it would need to be something unique to Oklahoma City, but it would add to the skyline. It would give OKC another tourist attraction nationally besides the bombing memorial.

Thoughts or suggestions?

[Kerry]

This is an intereseting subject. I would like to mention a landmark that was brought up years ago. A 1000 foot oil rig that sprayed water out the top every hour. It could be built on the river. At 1000 feet it would be visable across the entire metro area. An observation deck could be placed at the top. It would dwarf every other monument in America.

[animeGhost]

that would be nice but... it sounds kinda cheesy imo

[OU Adonis]

I don't think it would have to be tied to Oil, or cowboys, or covered wagons.

How about a big clear structure could ride up in and it would be all lit up at night, kind of like a chrystal needle or something.

Anyways, this is were OKC could be creative and build a landmark. It was just a thought.

What sort of unique landmark would you guys like to see?

[Midtowner]

A giant neon cross on I-35..

[soonerliberal]

A giant neon cross on I-35..

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Nixon7]

a big space needle with an observation deck by the river would be awesome.........however, all we can get is a beacon of hope that works almost never

[ETL]

I will think about what it should be, IMO, but who will pay for it? The rich are rich and want to stay that way, so how do we get something like this. St. Louis built their arch for the World Fair, but how did Seattle land that space needle?

Oh wait, wasn't there a proposal for a statue of an indian to be like the Statue of Liberty?

[BDP]

but how did Seattle land that space needle?

I believe that was for a World's Fair as well.

It's probably too late, but the centenial was probabaly a good reason for a monument. It seems that that such efforts were directed at the capital dome project. It's nice, but it's also another example of Oklahomans feeling left out and trying to be like everyone else instead of maybe erecting something that would have been a unique and definitive monument for Oklaghoma.

[jbrown84]

The indian statue, "The American", is going in the Osage Hills up by Tulsa.

I say NOTHING symbolizing the oil industry. It is not unique to our state and there's nothing original about a giant oil derrick. There already is one at Six Flags Over Texas.

I like the idea of something clear or crystal, although we already have a Crystal Bridge, but maybe we could call it something different. I wish we could think of something other that just a tower or some sort.

[Flatlander]

I dont know the facts but what I understood was that the guy who wanted to build this statue wanted the land where the new indian museum is being constructed he wanted all the land for free to develop as he wanted.The city said heck no.Also read that there were corprate sponsors local that were supporting this project until this guy said he would build the statue in Tulsa.Another thing that I did not like was the plan was to have stairs to walk to the top and then you could not see out but there would be pictures to show what it would look like if you could see out.That is so weak.I think the museum will be a very nice project.

[metro]

I dont know the facts but what I understood was that the guy who wanted to build this statue wanted the land where the new indian museum is being constructed he wanted all the land for free to develop as he wanted.The city said heck no.Also read that there were corprate sponsors local that were supporting this project until this guy said he would build the statue in Tulsa.Another thing that I did not like was the plan was to have stairs to walk to the top and then you could not see out but there would be pictures to show what it would look like if you could see out.That is so weak.I think the museum will be a very nice project.

Flatlander, that's not exactly true. The reason OKC turned this project down that was originally slated for OKC, is because of financing. Gray, the artist designing the project, could never verify any financing but always said it was not an issue. After months if not years of haggling with him, the City told him they weren't going to support it until he could prove viable financing. Basically OKC has so much going for it right now, we didn't want to waste our time with a project that probably won't happen. The artist with no choice, then took his project to Tulsa where they are still on the rebound and are more acceptable to trying and making this work, although it still has not started as anticipated. It's a pipe dream!

On another note, both issues (this American statue, as well as building a monument in OKC has been discussed numerous times on this site. If you all do a search, you will find much more information on these topics.)

Here's just one thread:

http://www.okctalk.com/okc-metro-are...light=monument

[traxx]

I agree with the others, nothing to do with cowboys, indians, oil, old west or anything like that. The Arch and the Spaceneedle are not exact representations of either of those cities. We would need something that transcends OKC. Something new so that when people think of OKC they don't think of the same old thing but they think of this new icon. We've gotta break out of this idea that everything that commemorates our state and city has to do with our traditional image (like those poor choices for the state quarter). I mean for cryin' out loud, Seattle didn't build a huge coffee mug for thier world's fair, although that was really before Seattle was known as a coffee town, but you get my point.

[940]

It's not a "needle" a la Seattle or San Antonio, and it's not a huge oil derrick...but what is the concensus on perhaps building something like this that has now turned into one of this city's most recognizable landmarks?

http://www.londoneye.com/

[Kerry]

OKC once had a nationally recognized landmark - bit it was taken down. It was the large digtal clock on top of the City Place building. During the day you could read the time from miles away and at night you could see it from Moore.

[Flatlander]

I did not know that

[Kerry]

I looked for pictures on the internet but can't find any. I remember my grandmother had the Worldbook Encyclopedia from the late 70's and it was on the buiding in the OKC listing. The last time I remember it being there was probably around 1982. It was large with a black background and flased the time and temp.

Does anyone else remember it?

[Doug Loudenback]

A giant neon cross on I-35..

[Doug Loudenback]

I looked for pictures on the internet but can't find any. I remember my grandmother had the Worldbook Encyclopedia from the late 70's and it was on the buiding in the OKC listing. The last time I remember it being there was probably around 1982. It was large with a black background and flased the time and temp.

Does anyone else remember it?

Vaguely, yes I do. I don't think it was there for long. Before that, and remembering that the bank was Liberty Bank before the Liberty Tower (now Chase) was built, the former Liberty had a neon "Liberty" sign on top, too ... it was red, I think.

The County Assessor's website has this not-too-good pic showing the latter signage:



But, I now see (this is an edited message) that the sign you speak of was done after Liberty built Liberty Tower and City National Bank occupied the banking floors of the original Ramsey Tower. At p. 77 of Images of Oklahoma, 1930 to the Millennium by Terry L. Griffith is the B/W pic showing the CNB sign:



The pic is said to have been taken around 1980.

[Kerry]

Good find Doug. It looks like work is just beginning on the Oklahoma Tower so this would make it mid 1979. There are still leaves on the trees.

[windowphobe]

This triggered a memory. There was a time when, in between time signals, the sign would read:

CITY
NAT'L
THE
BANK

And since "THE" had fewer letters but took up the same space, hence (slightly) larger letters, you would unconsciously give it prominence: City Nat'l was THE Bank.

[muzique808]

I remember the clock also. I grew up about two miles north of downtown (70s-early80s), and when we wanted to know the time for sure, we would just go outside! I don't remember when exactly it came down, but I remember missing it for sure.

jb

[y_h]

[QUOTE=ETL]St. Louis built their arch for the World Fair
QUOTE]

Hi again from St. Louis. I'd like to make a clarification and add a comment or two. The Gateway Arch was not a Worlds Fair project (the WF was in 1904 and the Arch was completed in 1966) but rather a federal project to commemorate American westward expansion. The project began in the late 40's when land on the St. Louis riverfront (the de facto "birthplace" of the westward expansion movement) was earmarked for a monument and parkland to be supervised and maintained by the National Parks Service. In an unusual partnership of federal and local leaders, the city fathers of St. Louis commissioned a panel to select the type of monument to be erected on the site. The design for the Gateway Arch was accepted as the winning entry in 1947 but construction didn't start for many years after that and as I indicated before, the structure was not topped off for nearly 20 years after the design's selection.

Something that I think is relevant to note about the Arch is that while it certainly succeeded in providing St. Louis with a globally-recognized landmark and "signature" so to speak, it really didn't do a whole lot for the city. Yes, the construction of Busch Stadium II directly across the highway certainly led to a revival of one portion of the downtown area, the revival was short lived and generally contained to a pretty small percentage of the overall landscape. Four decades and three new sports venues later, downtown St. Louis is just now starting to experience widespread revival and you still have to play the "good block - bad block" game here and there. The Arch had very little to do with the redevelopment of downtown and what effect it did have was extremely limited.

As for OKC, I don't think a massive landmark is necessary. I know of very few people who make St. Louis a travel destination solely because of the Arch. It's a one to two hour visit at best. Yes, it's nice to have an icon to represent the city, however that can backfire just as easily. I'd rather St. Louis be recognized for its other attractions such as our 3 major league sports teams, our world class symphony, our nationally recognized art museum (admission to which is free every day), our science center/planetarium complex, our zoo (the largest free zoo in the country and second largest zoo overall) and our handful of historic districts and shopping destinations. Seems to me OKC isn't too far behind with most of those amenities. Improving your existing assets and coming up with the right marketing campaign should help tremendously.

Building a landmark, especially a publicly funded one, can be a real pain - time consuming and almost always the source of civic debate, especially when it comes to aesthetic arguments. Such debates can only fuel negative publicity and have the precise opposite effect that the construction of a landmark is supposed to have.

Frankly, OKC should trade on the friendliness of its people, the cleanliness of its streets and public spaces and the relative newness of most of its physical assets (unless something's changed drastically in the last 12 years) to attract visitors. Leave the monument building to communities that need a distraction from otherwise unsavory community elements. To the best of my recollection, OKC really doesn't need a distraction, they need more aggressive marketing of their existing positive attributes.

[jbrown84]

Interesting perspective, y_h. I think many of us can identify with having a defacto "image" tagged onto OK and OKC that we would rather see replaced by some of our lesser-known assets like our museums and arts organizations. I must say I kind of agree that we should focus money and attention more on overall improvements like more public art, more greenspace, more trees along interstates and major thoroughfares, and better upkeep of parks.

[ETL]

Thank you for the info!!!!!! y_h, you, opened my mind to this subject, and I believe that both y_h and jbrown84 are right.