OG&E Tower

[UnFrSaKn]

Group seeks to block destruction of Oklahoma City's Stage Center | News OK

[Spartan]

Interesting.

[David]

I wonder how long until they are forced to back down because their funding is threatened. Again.

[coov23]

My goodness! So we have to look at that run down building even longer? If they can't get the funding to fix it up, and upkeep, then it's futile to even try and block this. I'm all for preserving historic buildings that can be made into something with funding. These preservationists want us to pay for the upkeep that we dont really need.

[MustangGT]

Rightfully they should lose a fruitless appeal. If they want to save it buy it and renovate it themselves. Otherwise they need to get outta the way. Some buildings can be saved. This fecal pile cannot be flushed soon enough.

[OKCisOK4me]

Rightfully they should lose a fruitless appeal. If they want to save it buy it and renovate it themselves. Otherwise they need to get outta the way. Some buildings can be saved. This fecal pile cannot be flushed soon enough.

lol

[Just the facts]

Now we know why RW built in some buffer time between demolition and construction.

[OKVision4U]

If I was RW, I would give them 30 days to claim it and remove the old structure. But it would be at their expense. But the "Bulldozers" would be there on March 1 and begin the demo of the site.

[Spartan]

My goodness! So we have to look at that run down building even longer? If they can't get the funding to fix it up, and upkeep, then it's futile to even try and block this. I'm all for preserving historic buildings that can be made into something with funding. These preservationists want us to pay for the upkeep that we dont really need.

This is a bad argument. Say we were talking about your house that you don't want to let go of (RW doesn't want to let go of his prime real estate). How would you propose I get the funding to fix your house so it's not an eyesore next to mine?

This site has been in the hands of powerful interests since Stage Center was built. The issue goes deeper than you realize. By the way I don't think you are for HP, but I could be wrong. Everyone is for HP of a shiny new building that has been preserved and MADE NEW, but very few people support the diamondin the rough.

And you can be anti-preservation, that's fine, just admit it. If you're for knocking these bldgs down then that is what you support, you're a demolitionist, not a preservationist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say.

[OkieNate]

“We remain confident in our case and look forward to presenting it to the Board of Adjustment,” Williams said. “We have a unique opportunity to transform this abandoned property into an active, usable space, and we're very excited to do so.”

Glad to see RW's "world class" rhetoric has finally subsided, and he is admitting what we are really getting. Usable and active. I've moved into the "if it is just going to sit there and rot, let's stop fighting the inevitable and get the ball rolling" camp.

[hoya]

My goodness! So we have to look at that run down building even longer? If they can't get the funding to fix it up, and upkeep, then it's futile to even try and block this. I'm all for preserving historic buildings that can be made into something with funding. These preservationists want us to pay for the upkeep that we dont really need.

I've come to a realization about this city. OKC has, for a long time, had a very negative self-image. This is beginning to change but we've had this problem since basically the Dust Bowl days. As a result, the only things we really value, as a city, are those we admire in other places. If there's something in this city we love, it's because it is just like something else in another city. This is actually a fairly common sentiment in smaller cities. It's beginning to change here (note the public's general positive reaction to the Skydance Bridge), but Stage Center was already touched by those negative perceptions.

None of this means that Stage Center was a good project or a bad project, worth saving or not worth saving. It just means that a piece of what is effectively modern art built during the 70s in OKC was not going to win many hearts. If it was something that was built today I think it would have a lot better chance of getting public acceptance, if it was new and we hadn't seen it before.

As time goes by in this city, and we start getting a lot of the things that other cities have (an NBA team, a streetcar, urban neighborhoods, things like that), I think the city will become more self-confident and a bit more adventurous in the type of architecture they will accept.

[CuatrodeMayo]

like.

[Rover]

This style is not appreciated here, nor is it elsewhere. It hasn't survived and been duplicated. It is a curiosity with certain historic implications. As a useful building it has failed. Whether it deserves to be removed...probably not. But lets not make it a referendum on Okie culture.

[coov23]

This is a bad argument. Say we were talking about your house that you don't want to let go of (RW doesn't want to let go of his prime real estate). How would you propose I get the funding to fix your house so it's not an eyesore next to mine?

This site has been in the hands of powerful interests since Stage Center was built. The issue goes deeper than you realize. By the way I don't think you are for HP, but I could be wrong. Everyone is for HP of a shiny new building that has been preserved and MADE NEW, but very few people support the diamondin the rough.

And you can be anti-preservation, that's fine, just admit it. If you're for knocking these bldgs down then that is what you support, you're a demolitionist, not a preservationist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say.

No, I was all for saving the Skirvin. I'm all for saving buildings in film row. I'm all for rejuvenating First National. My deal is they were all sustainable buildings for years. The Stage Center has been nothing but a money pit for the city. It's had issues from day 1. I spent some of my childhood in that building. I bet a lot of those that are trying to save it, have not even stepped foot in the building before. All they see is a unique building. Nothing more.

So, I'm not a demolitionist. I'm for saving buildings that can be saved, while making them into something that is worthwhile. I'm sure some creative mind could think of something it could be, but would it be worth spending all the money( tax payer money I might add) to rebuild and upkeep the building, when the majority want to see it go? Does the minority always have to win in debates like this?

[Spartan]

How do you feel about the Preftakes block being cleared? Those are useable, functional buildings so that site should be the benchmark for support of preservation.

[OKCisOK4me]

How do you feel about the Preftakes block being cleared? Those are useable, functional buildings so that site should be the benchmark for support of preservation.

I answered your question here in the Preftakes block thread.

[coov23]

How do you feel about the Preftakes block being cleared? Those are useable, functional buildings so that site should be the benchmark for support of preservation.

I'm all for saving several of them. Especially, the ones that Pete and Steve have heard are being made into housing/hotel/mixed use buildings. The area that is rumored for another Devon Tower is okay for demo to me. DT needs to start to even out. The two mid-rises on Stage Center site, 4th and Hudson and Preftakes Block towers would create some much needed depth to OKC skyline. Now, I also like towers with good street interaction on bottom couple of floors. I know you agree with me on that sentiment.

[bchris02]

I've come to a realization about this city. OKC has, for a long time, had a very negative self-image. This is beginning to change but we've had this problem since basically the Dust Bowl days. As a result, the only things we really value, as a city, are those we admire in other places. If there's something in this city we love, it's because it is just like something else in another city. This is actually a fairly common sentiment in smaller cities. It's beginning to change here (note the public's general positive reaction to the Skydance Bridge), but Stage Center was already touched by those negative perceptions.

None of this means that Stage Center was a good project or a bad project, worth saving or not worth saving. It just means that a piece of what is effectively modern art built during the 70s in OKC was not going to win many hearts. If it was something that was built today I think it would have a lot better chance of getting public acceptance, if it was new and we hadn't seen it before.

As time goes by in this city, and we start getting a lot of the things that other cities have (an NBA team, a streetcar, urban neighborhoods, things like that), I think the city will become more self-confident and a bit more adventurous in the type of architecture they will accept.

Good points. I also think its partially because OKC lacks a strong musical or artistic legacy and most of what it did have was destroyed in urban renewal. Oklahoma City is a blank slate in many respects., or at least was by the 1990s. Today, OKC keeps hitting new milestones faster and faster. For instance, a lot of people think its ridiculous there is so much excitement over one CVS going to Century Center. However, chain corner retail downtown is a huge milestone and once its built it will be on to the next big milestone. Costco will be a milestone for the city as will a full service downtown grocery store (though I have mixed feelings because I want Native Roots to survive). After that, it's on to taller residential structures. As this city comes into its own, I think uniqueness will start to be valued more.

Also, you are right in that the inferiority complex is common in many small cities. When I lived in Little Rock it was very strong except there wasn't the perception there that things were getting better like there is in OKC.

[coov23]

Good points. I also think its partially because OKC lacks a strong musical or artistic legacy and most of what it did have was destroyed in urban renewal. Oklahoma City is a blank slate in many respects., or at least was by the 1990s. Today, OKC keeps hitting new milestones faster and faster. For instance, a lot of people think its ridiculous there is so much excitement over one CVS going to Century Center. However, chain corner retail downtown is a huge milestone and once its built it will be on to the next big milestone. Costco will be a milestone for the city as will a full service downtown grocery store (though I have mixed feelings because I want Native Roots to survive). After that, it's on to taller residential structures. As this city comes into its own, I think uniqueness will start to be valued more.

Also, you are right in that the inferiority complex is common in many small cities. When I lived in Little Rock it was very strong except there wasn't the perception there that things were getting better like there is in OKC.

You lost me when you said OKC doesn't haveva strong musical legacy.

[ljbab728]

You lost me when you said OKC doesn't haveva strong musical legacy.

You're absolutely correct. OCU has long been one of the premier performing arts universities in the country.

[BrettM2]

You're absolutely correct. OCU has long been one of the premier performing arts universities in the country.

Don't think for a second that facts or thinking beyond surface stereotypes will stop bchris02 from his normal routine.

I went to OCU for my undergrad ('06) and worked as staff (admission counselor) for a year ('08-'09). The kids I recruited for the performing arts came from everywhere. Sophomores and juniors would make OCU one of their most important visits and the auditions we had were always packed with kids from all over the country.

[Urbanized]

Count Basie's Orchestra and the modern jazz rhythm section have roots in Deep Deuce, before they ended up in Kansas City (which claimed the history). Charlie Christian was the first featured soloist on an electric guitar and a major influence on everyone from Chuck Berry and BB King to Jimi Hendrix. He was playing a Gibson ES-150 with the "Charlie Christian pickup" years before Les Paul designed his solid body electric, and he's in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as an early influencer.

Bob Wills relocated to OKC from Waco before he found his biggest fame, and his jilted Texas sponsor hadn't extorted the OKC radio station carrying his show, OKC's Farmers Public Market Building would probably today be known as The Home of Bob Wills instead of Cain's in Tulsa.

OKC was very influential in the early Rock and Roll movement, including being home to the first female rock star, Rockabilly queen Wanda Jackson, who still lives here and is ALSO in the RnR HOF. As mentioned, great performing arts history out of OCU, which has produced multiple Broadway performers/stars.

When you factor the influence OKC and the surrounding metro has had on country music including Vince Gill, Toby Keith, Garth Brooks (the greatest-selling artist of all time list reads: 1. Beatles 2. Elvis 3. Garth), I think it's fair to say that OKC has actually had a pretty profound influence on music and the performing arts.

[Dubya61]

... I think it's fair to say that OKC has actually had a pretty profound influence on music and the performing arts.

There you go, again, spouting fact after fact. Two Words: STOP IT.

[AP]

There you go, again, spouting fact after fact. Two Words: STOP IT.

That's not fact. OKC is a blue collar town and there is are no arts here. /sarcasm

[hoya]

OKC gets little recognition for its music history. You think Seattle, you think grunge. You think New Orleans, you think jazz. We don't have any association like that. The average person doesn't think OKC equals any of the people he just listed off.

That's not saying we don't have good musical talent that has come out of here. But people don't traditionally associate us with it.

And I am highly offended he left off Color Me Badd.