Unfortunately (depending on your point of view), societies/cities don’t halt their growth at one point in time. We can look to cities outside Oklahoma, for example. London wouldn’t be able to build another building if a 100 year old building couldn’t be torn down–everything in the city is that old or older. I understand the nostalgia factor, and we indeed need to keep vestiges of our past. But they should be just that, reminders of our past. I believe most would agree that it is ludicrous to expect a modern company of 500 employees to house itself in a 100 year old building that was built for ironwork in the age of horses, without at least some improvements to the building. Sometimes that is not enough, the building is not the site of a great moment in history (and no, my grandfather’s working there for 45 years doesn’t count, much to my own personal dismay) and needs to make way for modernity, again, much to the chagrin of many. Bricktown is a fairly good example of mixing old with new. Once more, does the building have historical, architectural, or cultural value? If not, let’s move on. Hey, in the end the sun will explode and all the buildings “new” and “old” will be gone anyway, right?

Seriously, I thought OKC had demolition review. Isn’t that what saved the Gold Dome?

That will really make me upset if it is true.