OG&E Tower

[betts]

Any plans to sell prints?

It's beautiful.

I don't know but I'll ask her. I'd buy one, definitely.

[FritterGirl]

Here's a link to an old blog from 2012. Says a lot about well, a lot... Brutalizing Brutalism: Why John M. Johansen's Crumbling Concrete Theaters Should be Saved | BLOUIN ARTINFO

[TheTravellers]

Here's a link to an old blog from 2012. Says a lot about well, a lot... Brutalizing Brutalism: Why John M. Johansen's Crumbling Concrete Theaters Should be Saved | BLOUIN ARTINFO

Great article, thanks, and the last 2 sentences sum it up - "This is because architecture — and Brutalist architecture in particular — has value outside of its ability to turn a profit. Johansen's theaters stand as important reminders of this fact."

America really needs to stop worshiping the almighty dollar and profit above everything else, it's done a lot of damage in many, many, many areas by doing that. And yes, I know other countries do it, but I don't think many are as vociferously single-minded about it as America.

[DoctorTaco]

Pete, do you have any reason to think that no architect will publicly sign on to this project because they don't want the bad publicity about demolishing Stage Center? Could it be that Williams already has someone lined up but the announcement will wait until Stage Center is gone?

[Pete]

Pete, do you have any reason to think that no architect will publicly sign on to this project because they don't want the bad publicity about demolishing Stage Center? Could it be that Williams already has someone lined up but the announcement will wait until Stage Center is gone?

You must have missed my previous post on this exact subject...

I was told by a very good source that Pickard Chilton passed on the Stage Center Tower because of how they felt about the SC demolition and how it would look in their industry.


But that's a good point. Perhaps the architect has asked not to have their name linked to the project until the demolition is complete. To make it look like they didn't come on board until after that already happened.

We know Clayco has been working with them but Rainey Williams said in a recent Steve article that they were just consultants and that no firm has been chosen for the final work. Of course, that could be a complete smokescreen.

We broke the news about Clayco being involved (same source that told me about the P/C decline) and I'm not sure they would have been mentioned if not for that fact.

[Rover]

Great article, thanks, and the last 2 sentences sum it up - "This is because architecture — and Brutalist architecture in particular — has value outside of its ability to turn a profit. Johansen's theaters stand as important reminders of this fact."

America really needs to stop worshiping the almighty dollar and profit above everything else, it's done a lot of damage in many, many, many areas by doing that. And yes, I know other countries do it, but I don't think many are as vociferously single-minded about it as America.

While I see the value in saving SC and intellectually am all for its preservation, why is it that those without the money, or at least not willing to risk or to spend the money, are so eager to tell others that money doesn't matter and that they should pay. There are many in this city, including many on this board, who keep pointing out how wrong it is to expect a profit and yet are not willing to go in the hole themselves. There has been ample opportunity for those who are interested in saving the building to raise money, invest money, or at least start a public drive to raise money....and yet nothing has been done. In the end, there seems to be an expectation that the public should rush in and do something when those with more of an interest or even a vested interest haven't been able to do so themselves.

[soonerguru]

If it's true they are "hiding" the architect, this is a sinister approach.

The demolition should be delayed until the renderings are presented.

[Tigerguy]

Here's a link to an old blog from 2012. Says a lot about well, a lot... Brutalizing Brutalism: Why John M. Johansen's Crumbling Concrete Theaters Should be Saved | BLOUIN ARTINFO

Interesting. I actually walked right by that building a few times while in Baltimore last summer for a convention. Never did get curious enough to look into why this theater had been all boarded up. I do know that while walking by at night, I couldn't get the heck out of there fast enough.

[HOT ROD]

Totally agree, guru. No demo until final renderings AND financing approved. That's how it is in other major cities.

[Urbanized]

While I see the value in saving SC and intellectually am all for its preservation, why is it that those without the money, or at least not willing to risk or to spend the money, are so eager to tell others that money doesn't matter and that they should pay. There are many in this city, including many on this board, who keep pointing out how wrong it is to expect a profit and yet are not willing to go in the hole themselves. There has been ample opportunity for those who are interested in saving the building to raise money, invest money, or at least start a public drive to raise money....and yet nothing has been done. In the end, there seems to be an expectation that the public should rush in and do something when those with more of an interest or even a vested interest haven't been able to do so themselves.

I personally have never said any of those things. I have grudgingly accepted the fact that it would be demolished for years now. Hindsight tells us that the time to save the building was a generation ago. Early on, it should have been accorded the respect it was due solely on its architectural merits. A foundation should have been established to maintain, protect and market it as an architectural icon. Such a foundation could have pursued funding from national and international sources, from tours of the building, and from revenue streams OTHER than community theater ticket sales or even OKC arts patrons. It is a very common instrument for saving other notable buildings, and it relieves the buildings of the burden of paying their own freight through tenant use. If a performing arts group could also call it home, great, but relying on a small nonprofit like a theater group to maintain such a building was crazy from the word go.

There is a lot of additional texture to this story, some of which I didn't even fully understand until reading the article linked in the past several days, not the least of which was the possibility that the (very esteemed) late John Kirkpatrick actually doomed the project financially to some degree from the beginning. The building never really had a chance due to the lack of support from people who mattered (and in fairness that was in no small part due to the way it was forced on OKC).

Again, the time to save it was a generation ago. The last real chance to save it was during P180/Devon TIF. In retrospect it never resonated with a champion who had enough horsepower, and we never brought the right mechanism to bear.

But I must say the "well if you wish it were saved why don't you just go raise the money yourself or shut up" statements to me are pretty meaningless and offensive. It is akin to telling someone who wishes we had a Nordstrom that they should either build a store for Nordstrom or shut up about it. It is like telling someone who wishes the art collection at OKCMOA was heavier in French Impressionism to pony up or shut up. It is like telling someone who wishes HVAC systems on downtown hotels were higher quality than through-the-window to come up with the money or quit complaining.

Wishing your community would aspire to do remarkable (or at least better) things is not a crime.

[Rover]

It was in response to the previous post whining about America's obsession with money by Traveler, not you Urbanized. I think it is fine to argue for its preservation and make a case for its support by the general public taxpayers. I agree with you, that should have been done a long time ago and maybe even thrown in on some other projects. It would have started with educating those who you are asking to pay for it as to why it was a worthwhile investment. It would have been a long term sale. It didn't fail because of capitalism and profit motives, or America's "worshiping the almighty dollar and profit above everything else". Preservation of the SC failed because the public is unsupportive (perhaps out of ignorance and failure to be educated), private enterprise can't and shouldn't be expected to make it work, and no altruistic saviors came forward. But, to blame this on greedy American capitalism was misguided, in my humble opinion.

The Nordstrom example would be correct if someone was saying Nordstrom wasn't coming because of greedy America and what was wrong in America was that these greedy owners focus on profit for the store. Wishing it was here is different than denigrating America because they won't come when they won't make money.

As for HVAC, my responses have always been as an observation, and to inform some that they weren't getting the quality projects they thought they were getting. I don't insist that Hilton Garden use a certain type of AC or they are wrong, but I am saying that IF they use it they aren't providing a high quality product or building a highly sustainable building, and that there is a chance they have cut corners in other places, as well.

I hope the OKC preservation standard are raised and the SC demo hadn't been approved, and I also hope they improve the building standards so that cheap through the wall HVAC is not permitted in downtown. All we can do is work to make those things happen, not keep blaming greedy Americans.

[soonerguru]

But I must say the "well if you wish it were saved why don't you just go raise the money yourself or shut up" statements to me are pretty meaningless and offensive. It is akin to telling someone who wishes we had a Nordstrom that they should either build a store for Nordstrom or shut up about it. It is like telling someone who wishes the art collection at OKCMOA was heavier in French Impressionism to pony up or shut up. It is like telling someone who wishes HVAC systems on downtown hotels were higher quality than through-the-window to come up with the money or quit complaining.

Wishing your community would aspire to do remarkable (or at least better) things is not a crime.

This is a common viewpoint in our country today. If you don't have money, shut up, your opinions are not relevant.

[zookeeper]

This is a common viewpoint in our country today. If you don't have money, shut up, your opinions are not relevant.

Well said and all too true.

[coov23]

This is a common viewpoint in our country today. If you don't have money, shut up, your opinions are not relevant.

Not so much irrelevant. It's the fact those that don't have the money, and keep being passionate and pushy to those that do, seem to be the ones that rub everyone wrong. The stage center means a lot to a lot of people. I get that. It's also not fair to push taxes on the citizens to save a building 90 percent of the people couldn't care less about. I use to go to plays in that building as a child. I get the sentimental value of it, but like a previous poster stated; I've been succumb to the fact it's going. Has been for years. It's a money put at this point. Far beyond being saved. It's an eye sore that housed transients for years, now. Sadly, it's time is up. I'm sad to see it go , but that Soave needs better use. Rainey Williams just needs to step up and show us what's going there and not I.M. Pei that property.

[zookeeper]

Not so much irrelevant. It's the fact those that don't have the money, and keep being passionate and pushy to those that do, seem to be the ones that rub everyone wrong. The stage center means a lot to a lot of people. I get that. It's also not fair to push taxes on the citizens to save a building 90 percent of the people couldn't care less about. I use to go to plays in that building as a child. I get the sentimental value of it, but like a previous poster stated; I've been succumb to the fact it's going. Has been for years. It's a money put at this point. Far beyond being saved. It's an eye sore that housed transients for years, now. Sadly, it's time is up. I'm sad to see it go , but that Soave needs better use. Rainey Williams just needs to step up and show us what's going there and not I.M. Pei that property.

I could appreciate your viewpoint without that slam. Those with all the money in this city never rub anyone wrong? Your projection is rather disingenuous - not to mention just plain wrong.

[SoonerDave]

If it's true they are "hiding" the architect, this is a sinister approach.

The demolition should be delayed until the renderings are presented.

On what basis?

[SoonerDave]

While I see the value in saving SC and intellectually am all for its preservation, why is it that those without the money, or at least not willing to risk or to spend the money, are so eager to tell others that money doesn't matter and that they should pay. There are many in this city, including many on this board, who keep pointing out how wrong it is to expect a profit and yet are not willing to go in the hole themselves. There has been ample opportunity for those who are interested in saving the building to raise money, invest money, or at least start a public drive to raise money....and yet nothing has been done. In the end, there seems to be an expectation that the public should rush in and do something when those with more of an interest or even a vested interest haven't been able to do so themselves.

I think part of that perspective is borne of a notion that tends to think of money in somewhat holistic terms rather than real, practical terms - that money should exist merely because the idea that requires it is of some inherent virtue. Some tend to translate that perceived virtue into a moral failing when those who have money choose not to spend it in that presumably virtuous way - even if the ones with the money with the best intentions knew there was no real-world way to make the "rescue" of the building happen.

You kinda pick up that theme in an indirect way here - not callling out any one person, or saying this is the only perception - just a theme - that inherently saving the SC is the "right" thing to do - that if you don't agree with saving it you don't want OKC to try to get better, do great things, as if to say there's no doubt that saving SC is the virtuous thing to do. I think *some* - repeat SOME, not ALL - simply don't connect the dots to see that of course there are deep pockets that could have saved SC, but those same deep pockets realized it was a money pit with no guarantee the end-result would have been what even the most ardent supporters remotely would have wanted. Surely anyone that thought it could have been done would have been delighted to be the building's savior with all the PR that would have flowed, but the virtual tipped heads and averted glances by those very people just said it wasn't feasible. Arguably what made the building interesting and worth saving to some is one of its biggest liabilities to bring it to its demise.

This whole thing is just a confluence of bad timing and bad economics around a bad building that just never captured the public's heart.

[Urbanized]

...it's also not fair to push taxes on the citizens to save a building 90 percent of the people couldn't care less about...

Not the first time the someone in the pro-demo crowd on the board has thrown out the straw man that preservationists were trying to "...push taxes on the citizens to save a building..."

I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but I personally don't recall a single post in the entire Stage Center discussion that advocated raising tax dollars to save the building or forcing anything on "taxpayers." Just goes to show again that the pro-demo crowd really hasn't actually bothered to even listen to the other viewpoints presented.

[coov23]

Pro demo? I am now. It's a lost cause. My point with the tax comment was to say it's the only way to have upkeep affordable in the stage center. I don't think the okc citizens would go for paying a tax to bring it back to life and then pay for the maintenance. I know that was never brought up but preservationists.

[Urbanized]

It's been a lost cause for years, but because of the culture, not because of the building.

[coov23]

It's been a lost cause for years, but because of the culture, not because of the building.

Agree to disagree here.

[betts]

As a taxpayer, I am happy to support things that improve Oklahoma City. We pay for the maintenance of every building the city owns already. I would have been thrilled to see any movement from the city to, for example, create a Children's Museum in the Stage Center. It would have cost a negligible amount of money compared to what we will pay to build and maintain a new convention center, for example.

[hoya]

Pro demo? I am now. It's a lost cause. My point with the tax comment was to say it's the only way to have upkeep affordable in the stage center. I don't think the okc citizens would go for paying a tax to bring it back to life and then pay for the maintenance. I know that was never brought up but preservationists.

If they can save the Marion, they could have saved Stage Center.

[Spartan]

Pro demo? I am now. It's a lost cause. My point with the tax comment was to say it's the only way to have upkeep affordable in the stage center. I don't think the okc citizens would go for paying a tax to bring it back to life and then pay for the maintenance. I know that was never brought up but preservationists.

Preservation has always been afraid to ask for direct funding, but we really should. We need to stop pitching this as the cheap alternative - nobody cares.

[coov23]

As a taxpayer, I am happy to support things that improve Oklahoma City. We pay for the maintenance of every building the city owns already. I would have been thrilled to see any movement from the city to, for example, create a Children's Museum in the Stage Center. It would have cost a negligible amount of money compared to what we will pay to build and maintain a new convention center, for example.

The problem with that, is that the majority don't want that. I would've wanted that before the last major flood that completely ruined the building. Today? Not so much. It's beyond repair at this point. And it's very, very sad. :/