Lexford Park (formerly First Christian Church)

[turnpup]

I think there is a charter school or something in the eastern part of the church property that used to be their youth center and softball field. Is this still part of the church land or was it sold?

Trinity School: https://www.trinityschoolokc.org Not sure who owns what, land-wise.

[Pete]

Trinity School: https://www.trinityschoolokc.org Not sure who owns what, land-wise.

The church owns all that property.

[rezman]

In this regard, the foresight that Crossings had back in the mid-90s was pretty amazing. Others have followed suit and have thrived as Pete said.

https://crossings.church/about/history

Crossings is celebrating their 60th anniversary this year. And one of the things pastor Marty Grubbs said this past Sunday is churches don’t fail because people leave, they fail because the people that stay want to remain comfortable. They close because of a failed transition plan and failed vision, which pretty much nails it.

[bombermwc]

That's pretty easy to say when you're physically sitting where Crossings is. Yes, First of OKC could have picked up and moved to another part of town and that may have helped keep the congregation going, but I'll say this. Had they done that, it would have been in the early 90s. And the place probably would have been dozed then without a second though since we weren't all as preservation minded as we are now. That also means that church wouldn't have served the role it did in the bombing.

Sometimes that physical location has meaning and purpose. Crossings, being so far out, wouldn't have had (and didn't) the same role. Now before you get all bent out of shape, no First didn't do anything any more than Crossings didn't do anything in relation to the bombing. First just happen to be in the right place at the right time. But my larger point is, Crossings (and admittedly, my own church), physically moved to stay relevant. But we didn't have iconic structures. So again, would you be as worried about the survival of First's congregation if it wasn't for the building? Did you care about what building Crossings moved out of?

It's super easy to make such a blanket statement as the Crossing minister did when you're sitting in the cozy spot they are....and have been for so long. That's great for them, and i hope they continue to prosper. But it's a reductive statement to the complications that smaller congregations face. Not everyone can afford to pick up and move. Not everyone has the capital to invest in materials to convert to a contemporary service. It's a FAAAAAR more complex thing than that statement makes it sound like.

So if you're blaming all of First's problems on that, again, i'll say that's a huge oversimplification.

[TheTravellers]

I'm not a regular church-goer, haven't been for decades, am probably kind of agnostic-ish right now anyway, and my interest in it is purely for the building. But this discussion and situation are interesting to me because my old church is Village Christian Church, another DoC church with an aging and shrinking population, with a fairly frequent pastor turnover, that is also in an iconic building, might be some lessons to be learned by my old church from this...

[Pete]

There are dozens of churches built in the '50s and '60s in OKC that all are facing big challenges.

And I will restate: Regardless of the reasons for these huge slides in membership, they have been consistently happening in these churches for decades and I don't have sympathy for the claim of "now we're in a huge bind and have to sell whoever will buy it" when these trends have been happening for 30, 40 or even 50 years.

[TheTravellers]

There are dozens of churches built in the '50s and '60s in OKC that all are facing big challenges.

And I will restate: Regardless of the reasons for these huge slides in membership, they have been consistently happening in these churches for decades and I don't have sympathy for the claim of "now we're in a huge bind and have to sell whoever will buy it" when these trends have been happening for 30, 40 or even 50 years.

Totally agree, but not all of them are in historic MCM buildings like FCC and VCC, that's what my concern is. If another standard church building gets sold and torn down/remodeled/re-purposed (like the one on NW 30th/May that will be the Dental Depot HQ and has lost its steeple), it's not quite as huge a deal as an iconic building having the same done to it.

[Pete]

^

I was addressing First Christian specifically because they are caretakers of important structures.

Most churches could be demolished without many people caring, and I suspect we are going to start seeing that with these scores of huge churches with huge parking lots that were built in what were then growing suburban areas and now have tiny congregations.

The are *everywhere* in OKC and I worry about what is going to become of just the property in general, if not the buildings in particular. It's not dissimilar to all the strip centers in the same areas that all once had grocery stores and TG&Y's and are now filled with bingo halls and flea markets.

[mugofbeer]

^^^

totally agree with this. First Christian is a unique situation. Other than the dome shape, it's nothing like the gold dome because the gold dome is a kit building. I have seen at least 3 others exactly like it around the country (Trinidad, CO, San Marcos, TX and one other place that escapes me now. First Christian is totally and completely unique. There is nothing else remotely like it anywhere. It also has the large acreage around it.

[bombermwc]

There are dozens of churches built in the '50s and '60s in OKC that all are facing big challenges.

And I will restate: Regardless of the reasons for these huge slides in membership, they have been consistently happening in these churches for decades and I don't have sympathy for the claim of "now we're in a huge bind and have to sell whoever will buy it" when these trends have been happening for 30, 40 or even 50 years.

Also easy to say when you're not the one holding the mortgage. If the city feels like this is important enough to keep, then they can bid to buy it. But i'm not willing to just jump on the bandwagon that we have to take away First's right of ownership decision making just because we dont like who might buy it. That's a dangerous slippery slope. It's also not like it just went on the market. Why now at 3 years later do we suddenly care? Where were all these people 3 years ago? Where was your own concern 3 years ago?

If it gets historic preservation status, then we also need to assist the owners vacate if they can no longer afford it. Otherwise, you'll see it fall into disrepair and it will be in really bad shape. 20-30 congregants cannot keep that place going indefinitely. So what's the solution there rather than just complain when it doesnt go the way you want it to?

[Pete]

Also easy to say when you're not the one holding the mortgage. If the city feels like this is important enough to keep, then they can bid to buy it.

That's not the way it works and there is a process in place that is being followed.

[mugofbeer]

Also easy to say when you're not the one holding the mortgage. If the city feels like this is important enough to keep, then they can bid to buy it. But i'm not willing to just jump on the bandwagon that we have to take away First's right of ownership decision making just because we dont like who might buy it. That's a dangerous slippery slope. It's also not like it just went on the market. Why now at 3 years later do we suddenly care? Where were all these people 3 years ago? Where was your own concern 3 years ago?

If it gets historic preservation status, then we also need to assist the owners vacate if they can no longer afford it. Otherwise, you'll see it fall into disrepair and it will be in really bad shape. 20-30 congregants cannot keep that place going indefinitely. So what's the solution there rather than just complain when it doesnt go the way you want it to?

LOL This thread dates back over 3 years and preservation of the dome, at a minimum, was brought up. The urgency started when the old Founders Bank was demolished almost overnight, before any opposition could be organized.

Also, literally speaking, I'm not sure there is a mortgage. At one time, this was a very well funded church. The maintenance of all that acreage is likely expensive, though.

[Urban Pioneer]

There is not a mortgage. There actually is (was) a Muir-million dollar endowment. I would presume that the endowment itself is slowly being depleted and potentially threatening other functional commitments such as salaries for the staff to continue their mission.

In essence, the endowment and stewardship is what has prevented this from coming to a head 20 years ago.

You could make an argument that the church has been a good steward of the property and the continued donations has prevented the facility from being sold some time ago.

[bombermwc]

I tend to look at this sort of like when the Thunder left Seattle. Some people may have talked about it. But until there was a legit threat on the table, it wasn't important enough for anyone to do anything. Then the legal wrangling started for people to try to insert their opinions on the matter, trying to curtail the decisions of the actual owner.

Again, i'm 100000% in support of trying to keep the place intact. I'm on the preservation side. But im also NOT on the side of telling a property owner what they can do with something they've owned for 60 years. If it's important enough, then we'll have something/someone step up to make it happen.

And mortgage or not, that point on the endowment and contributions net the same end result. The size of the congregation can no longer properly support the needs of the facility any longer. I know some of you feel like I'm not on your side. That's not the case. I just don't care for the approach being taken. I'm putting myself in the church's shoes and trying to think about how this feels from the inside, partly because I'm from a DoC church. And it feels very soap-boxy lacking practical solution.

[mugofbeer]

I think there are times that an owner doesn't fully understand or has forgotten what they own means in a more general sense. I would guaranty you that there are people in that church who have no idea what a unique building they have worshipped in and have never ventured into the maze of tunnels under it for it's one-of-a-kind (apparently original but now retrofitted) cooling system, or have any idea they were once full of cold-war civil defense supplies for the Soviet attack.

In your words, I tend to look at this as going to the home of an elderly person and seeing it is full of valuable antiques, paintings and collections but the elderly person just thinks of it as his/her house. I'm sure the remaining members have an idea of what they have but don't consciously realize there is possibly nothing else in the world like it.

[Urban Pioneer]

What happened on this today at City Council? I was there but had to leave.

[BoulderSooner]

What happened on this today at City Council? I was there but had to leave.

council met in exec session because of the very real possiblity that this could end up in court and then took no action

there has not been a suit filed yet but the attorney say that is an option

[Urban Pioneer]

Thanks. I saw the pastor John Malget there and wondered. Looking back on the video, I guess he left. Under "Items from Council" it has the agenda item for the historic status stricken and then the Executive Session you mention. Yesterday's meeting was interesting but long.

[Pete]

council met in exec session because of the very real possiblity that this could end up in court and then took no action

there has not been a suit filed yet but the attorney say that is an option

Those are completely unrelated.

The council had tabled the historic landmark resolution from the previous meeting, but during the interim the Historic Preservation Committee and already voted to pass the commencement of the historic landmark process. Therefore, there was nothing for the council upon yesterday in this matter.

The city had already received the letter from the church threatening to sue by the time the HPC met. And in fact, they had a similar executive session in the same meeting where they passed the resolution.

[Pete]

Word is that at Easter service today, Crossings Church announced their plans to purchase the iconic First Christian Church, preserve it, and do some updating for a satellite campus.

[Plutonic Panda]

That’s not the most exciting proposal but it sure is better than any proposal to demolish it. This is good news!

[Pete]

That’s not the most exciting proposal but it sure is better than any proposal to demolish it. This is good news!

It's freaking fantastic!

I can see this building from my offices at the Gazette. I'm very, very happy.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's freaking fantastic!

I can see this building from my offices at the Gazette. I'm very, very happy.

The only reason I worded my post like that is the fact that I was hoping for a mixed use but I agree with you. I am very happy to hear this building will be preserved.

Do you know if they plan on pumping more money to renovate the place?

[Pete]

Do you know if they plan on pumping more money to renovate the place?

Yes, plan to renovate and preserve.

[Pete]

Just took these: