A number of posts in other threads have discussed questions of how to promote urbanization (I love the way we use complicated words to obfuscate simple ideas) of the CBD, otherwise known as "Downtown."
All of them, it seems to me, sidestep one of the most central issues involved.
Sixty years ago, in the very early 1950s, we had a thriving and energetic downtown. In fact, in many ways it resembled Damon Runyon's romanticized vision of Times Square in NYC! Most any night, Main street would be packed with pedestrian traffic from sundown until at least 9 or 10 p.m., and weekend evenings saw the action continuing past midnight.
We had almost a dozen movie houses in the CBD, at least three top-notch hotels (Skirvin, Huckins, and Biltmore), and several notable eating places, all contributing to the liveliness of the area. Bishop's, in particular, was a gathering place for many regulars. The more Runyonesque characters could be found at places like The Greek's in the 400 block of N Broadway, where Oklahoman staffers would relax after leaving the office at 1 a.m. And we even had real baggy-pants comics and exotic burlesque at a theater on Grand (or was the Gaiety on California?)... Our town, like New Orleans, let the good times roll.
Ten years later, though, things were rather different. Many of the major downtown merchants had moved to the suburbs. One of the first was J. C. Penny, which closed its Main street location and moved to the spanking new Shepherd Mall. Kerr's followed quickly although they retained their downtown presence a bit longer. Even John A. Brown joined the flight to suburban malls, opening branch stores at Penn Square and on Capitol Hill.
And the streets were no longer so crowded every night. I recall cruising down Main street at 9 p.m. the night before the first OU-Notre Dame game in Norman, and it was almost deserted.
That loss of interest in the CBD, and our collective infatuation with the malls -- Penn Square, Shepherd, Crossroads, even Mayfair -- set the stage for the violent destruction of much of downtown via Urban Renewal, with its accompanying rape of our historic heritage.
Yes, it was tragic, but we had a "Pei in the sky" vision of out-Dallasing Dallas with our bright new downtown, and our leaders at the time deemed it worth the cost. We know now, of course, that it wasn't, but hindsight is usually 20/20 or better.
My question, though, is simple: It took us almost 20 years to make the transition from a thriving, urban downtown area to a vast empty wasteland. Is it reasonable for anyone to expect that we can reverse that process in a shorter time?
I don't think it is. I think the best we can do is to take many small steps. Sure, it would be nice to have a half dozen or more tall towers -- but one of the things that made our downtown so great was its lack of the concrete canyons that typify Manhattan. Instead, we had a wide variety of amenities. I don't see anyone suggesting that we bring back the likes of the Criterion or the Warner (which began as the Overholser Opera House), nor am I aware of anything in the CBD even remotely resembling the atmosphere at Bishop's. Renovation of Film Row is great, but we also need to fill in the activity gaps that prevent downtown from becoming a destination in itself.
While typing that last sentence, a slip of my fingers coined a word that just might describe the apparent fate of Stage Center -- "removation." I have no strong feelings about that location, either way, but it's obvious that something is about to transpire...
As for the speed with which we can recover Downtown, what you you think?
Reply With Quote
Re: Bringing Downtown Back -- Is quick recovery possible?
Originally Posted by Just the facts
Bookmarks