This isn't Friends For A Better Building. We need to quit huffing and puffing about it cause there's nothing we can do to fight it.

Functionality wise, this will far exceed the human interaction that occurred on this city block even before those tenants were thrown out of their leases.

Film Row will see much more activity between there and the new housing proposed by the Hall family.

The angled design of the building is growing on me. I really don't care about it being right up against and flush with the sidewalk. I don't think it's going to be set so far back like DEC or Sandridge. Looking forward to more construction and cranes.

If OKC is not careful, the entire SW portion of DT will start to take on that feel....cold and corporate. It reminds me a lot of Exchange Place in Jersey City, or even a lot of financial districts in Europe (Canary Wharf in London or La Defense in Paris come to mind). I've spent time in Exchange Place for work and while it is quite busy during the daytime, at night it is dead, dead, dead, even with a significant resident population. Most people head to Hoboken or NYC at night. We should consider giving this area some cutesy/corporate name. Hudson Place, maybe?

And maybe I would feel better about the retail space in the parking garages they are proposing if Devon didn't do such a half-assed job with its "storefronts" on their garage. Have they even honestly marketed them at all or are we just stuck with faux store windows with pictures of corporate propaganda?

I hate to be condescending, but posters on here have been clamoring on here for years now, OKC needs more towers!! We have to show the world we've ARRIVED!! Well, you've all gotten your wish...sometimes, though, it comes at a cost. I'm kinda over it at this point. It will be nice to have 5 active high rises under construction; most cities our size can only wish for these things. At a minimum, OKC have a lot of historical preservation activity in other districts, but its probably too much too hope for this in the CBD.

I don't think that will be an issue if the two residential towers get built. We still have a brand new school and the MBG.

We had some tallish buildings before and no one ever wanted to go downtown. It was really more the repurposing of older smaller buildings that renewed the interest in Oklahoma City's downtown to the point where people began to actually want to live there.
...snip...
You do just kind of have to accept that whatever is left from when Oklahoma City's CBD was first developed as an urban area is disposable in exchange for height. Thankfully, the surrounding districts have taken a different approach and it's easy to see the positive impact doing so has had on the city as a whole.The highlighted statement is not at all true. In the 1940s and 50s, downtown was the place to be, both for shopping during the day, and for entertainment at night. Not until the growth of smaller shopping centers such as Plaza Court, Uptown, the Plaza area, Mayfair, Penn Square, and finally Shepherd Mall, did traffic move away from the main CBD. South of the river, The Hill had been a CBD of its own little city, but it suffered the same fate without intervention of Urban Renewal; its history still stands, for the most part.

Petula Clark could have based her best known song on Oklahoma City, in those days.

Once the major stores -- John A. Brown, Kerr's, Rothschilds B&M, B. C. Clark, and Street's in particular -- opened branches in those outlying malls, traffic to the CBD declined. Loss of the streetcars in 1947 had a huge impact; the buses that replaced them operated on much less rigid schedules and hardly ever formed a true replacement in terms of convenience and reliability. That lack of satisfactory mass transit, in turn, gave rise to the huge increase in automobile traffic and the resulting parking problems which continue until today.

So far as loss of historic structures goes, while I mourn the destruction of our old downtown as much as anyone, I cannot decry the loss of the decrepit Wright Building at NW 2 and Broadway, aka the original India Temple. It was too far gone to save, in practical terms. Better to consider the razing of the Huckins, the Criterion, the Baum Building, and the Overholser Opera House aka the Warner Theater. Not to mention the first brick building in OKC, which was located on what is now E. K. Gaylord across from the Santa Fe station.

With all those already lost, I cannot be saddened by the demolition of what is essentially the last block of the original CBD. It might as well join its companions in the memories of such oldsters as myself. Those too young to remember the vibrancy of OKC's CBD during its golden years can only imagine what it was like. Those days will never return. We may, eventually, given miraculous attitude changes by TPTB, convert an almost sterile wasteland into an urban oasis (we've made almost unbelievable progress in the last 15 to 20 years; I would not have believed it possible had I not watched it happen), but it won't be the old OKC. That one is gone forever, so there's little need to hang onto a few remnants...

After all, we still have the old First Christian Church at NW 10 and Robinson, not to mention the original Oklahoma City High School a few blocks to the south. The Pioneer building still stands at NW 3 and Broadway, as does the original home of OPubCo a block to its north. Not all of our history has succumbed to the tender mercies of Midwest Wrecking Company.

As I said, we're doing it about 75% right. The sad thing is, we know how to do the rest of it right, we just aren't.

This will make a great photograph on Pickard Chilton's website. It will impress the hell out of some top of his class 22 year old college graduate who Devon wants to hire. That's what they're concerned about.

For those saying it is still so a 400 foot tower, get over yourself and I mean that in a nice way. Suburbs all over the country build mid rises all the time. If they want to build this 400 footer, do it at another site and keep what is there. For those who say it would be the 4th or 5th tallest building in Oklahoma, who cares? Lets start raising our standards to other cities and states and not what Oklahoma has. Actually, maybe we should raise our standards to even try to top some of Tulsa's high rises. They have several taller than the mid rises proposed in OKC. It is a bitter sweet feeling, on one hand happy for new projects, yet disappointed in OKC for always doing things as cheaply as possible in so many areas. We could easily have taller buildings with not a ton more money.


Here's a nice little project on Dallas North Tollway.......in Plano. Seems somewhat similar to what we are having built out in the OKC CBD.

HFF Arranges $120M Financing for Plano Office Towers | Multi-Housing News Online (http://www.multihousingnews.com/cities/dallas/hff-arranges-120m-financing-for-plano-office-towers/1004086527.html)

http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/files/2013/10/graniteparkiv.jpg

Those don't look like towers to me.

How are these like either Clayco or Preftakes?

Those don't look like towers to me.

I was referring more to the layout than the height.

I hate to be condescending, but posters on here have been clamoring on here for years now, OKC needs more towers!! We have to show the world we've ARRIVED!! Well, you've all gotten your wish...sometimes, though, it comes at a cost. I'm kinda over it at this point. It will be nice to have 5 active high rises under construction; most cities our size can only wish for these things. At a minimum, OKC have a lot of historical preservation activity in other districts, but its probably too much too hope for this in the CBD.

I'm beginning to come to the same conclusions.

The thing is though, the world has noticed, but when they write about how much better OKC is or that it's become a nice place to live, work, and visit, they write much more about what's happening outside the CBD than what's in it and those districts are mostly of 60+ year old buildings, none of which are more than 7 stories.

The highlighted statement is not at all true. In the 1940s and 50s, downtown was the place to be, both for shopping during the day, and for entertainment at night. Not until the growth of smaller shopping centers such as Plaza Court, Uptown, the Plaza area, Mayfair, Penn Square, and finally Shepherd Mall, did traffic move away from the main CBD. South of the river, The Hill had been a CBD of its own little city, but it suffered the same fate without intervention of Urban Renewal; its history still stands, for the most part.

Petula Clark could have based her best known song on Oklahoma City, in those days.

Once the major stores -- John A. Brown, Kerr's, Rothschilds B&M, B. C. Clark, and Street's in particular -- opened branches in those outlying malls, traffic to the CBD declined. Loss of the streetcars in 1947 had a huge impact; the buses that replaced them operated on much less rigid schedules and hardly ever formed a true replacement in terms of convenience and reliability. That lack of satisfactory mass transit, in turn, gave rise to the huge increase in automobile traffic and the resulting parking problems which continue until today.

So far as loss of historic structures goes, while I mourn the destruction of our old downtown as much as anyone, I cannot decry the loss of the decrepit Wright Building at NW 2 and Broadway, aka the original India Temple. It was too far gone to save, in practical terms. Better to consider the razing of the Huckins, the Criterion, the Baum Building, and the Overholser Opera House aka the Warner Theater. Not to mention the first brick building in OKC, which was located on what is now E. K. Gaylord across from the Santa Fe station.

With all those already lost, I cannot be saddened by the demolition of what is essentially the last block of the original CBD. It might as well join its companions in the memories of such oldsters as myself. Those too young to remember the vibrancy of OKC's CBD during its golden years can only imagine what it was like. Those days will never return. We may, eventually, given miraculous attitude changes by TPTB, convert an almost sterile wasteland into an urban oasis (we've made almost unbelievable progress in the last 15 to 20 years; I would not have believed it possible had I not watched it happen), but it won't be the old OKC. That one is gone forever, so there's little need to hang onto a few remnants...

After all, we still have the old First Christian Church at NW 10 and Robinson, not to mention the original Oklahoma City High School a few blocks to the south. The Pioneer building still stands at NW 3 and Broadway, as does the original home of OPubCo a block to its north. Not all of our history has succumbed to the tender mercies of Midwest Wrecking Company.

I don't think you could have made my point better. Even though many tall buildings and larger structures remained, once the services and activities left, so did the people. Height alone does not create a space people want to go to. Everything else you discussed does.

This was circa 1973 during the brief period when the old and new downtown co-existed.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/Aerial/image.jpg

Thank God we tore down most of that ****. /sarcasm

Every time you post one of these old photos, Will, I'm just bummed the rest of the day. It's an absolute travesty what has happened to most of our downtown.

This was circa 1973 during the brief period when the old and new downtown co-existed.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/Aerial/image.jpg

That is depressing.

Functionality wise, this will far exceed the human interaction that occurred on this city block even before those tenants were thrown out of their leases.


I think because of the concentration of civics buildings in the area and a few iconic lunch places, Main and Walker always seemed to have good pedestrian activity before the tenants were removed second to the Park / Robinson area . This block will certainly see an increase in car traffic that will need to be better managed, but this wasn't a dead block, especially by OKC standards.

Anyway, it is was it is and this is how it's always been done in OKC. The upside is that there is more and more areas where it is being done differently in a much more interesting way that is really helping improve the livability of the city and diversify its lifestyle options.

How are these like either Clayco or Preftakes?

Spacing. Although, I could make a case it's a good thing, so that most of the park still gets most of the evening light.

Phoenix & St. Louis are noted for new towers (post 1980s) in the 300-500 plus ft., range. As Oklahoma City's downtown continues to develop, you will see more high rise towers & skyscrapers.

Does anyone favor a moratorium on height?

BTW, I just learned that to this point, no public incentives -- TIF dollars or otherwise -- have been discussed for this project.

That could always change but it seems they are set to go forward without that type of help.


So, if that proves to be true, how does Clayco have any sort of case for the huge dollars they are requesting?

Their argument is that they can't build the garages, apartments and office space and make any money yet here comes Hines with a project right across the street that is almost the exact same (apart from the residential component) and seemingly can make it work.

AND, this land for this project cost much, much more: Over $6 million an acre vs. about $1.3 per acre for Stage Center. Not sure what the arrangement is for the south parcel owned by the City, but it's like less than that.

BTW, I just learned that to this point, no public incentives -- TIF dollars or otherwise -- have been discussed for this project.

That could always change but it seems they are set to go forward without that type of help.


So, if that proves to be true, how does Clayco have any sort of case for the huge dollars they are requesting?

Their argument is that they can't build the garages, apartments and office space and make any money yet here comes Hines with a project right across the street that is almost the exact same (apart from the residential component) and seemingly can make it work.

AND, this land for this project cost much, much more: Over $6 million an acre vs. about $1.3 per acre for Stage Center. Not sure what the arrangement is for the south parcel owned by the City, but it's like less than that.

One of the posters earlier in this thread (I forget who) made the point that the Clayco development is of much higher quality than the proposed Preftakes development and the TIF may be necessary to get a first class development. The Clayco development with no TIF may end up looking a lot more like the original concept that everyone hated. Any thoughts on that?

There is absolutely nothing to indicate that Clayco plans to build something substantially nicer than this project.

I'm sure 499 Sheridan will be up to the standards of Devon Tower.

Most of Clayco is speculative, Oil at $50..........don't see the other two being built. Hope I'm wrong.

Phoenix & St. Louis are noted for new towers (post 1980s) in the 300-500 plus ft., range. As Oklahoma City's downtown continues to develop, you will see more high rise towers & skyscrapers.

Does anyone favor a moratorium on height?

I know nothing about St. Louis, but I do know a couple of those Phoenix developments were often spaced out too, so they get noted for height and shininess, but not much else. There were a few that did include more comprehensive amenities than these. but that was in the more self contained, kind of mall feel.

And I don't know why anyone would want a moratorium on height, but height is not a good singular goal. Height is a good means, not an end in and of itself. Height's good for density and it can look neato, but it alone does not create a nice place to be. In fact, without much else, it can create a crappy place to be, especially when most people are driving to that place.

Thank God we tore down most of that ****. /sarcasm

Every time you post one of these old photos, Will, I'm just bummed the rest of the day. It's an absolute travesty what has happened to most of our downtown.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/Old%20Oklahoma%20City/Aerial/20528TO030553DonGwynneCollection-Photographs-Box1TOWNS-OKLAHOMACITY-AERIALVIEWS-VIEWLOOKINGWESTATDOWNTOWNPHOTOBYDONGWYNNEJune27197 0.jpg

Well if it looks dense in that photo, remember this is pretty much what it looks like on the east side of the core out of frame.

I know nothing about St. Louis, but I do know a couple of those Phoenix developments were often spaced out too, so they get noted for height and shininess, but not much else. There were a few that did include more comprehensive amenities than these. but that was in the more self contained, kind of mall feel.

And I don't know why anyone would want a moratorium on height, but height is not a good singular goal. Height is a good means, not an end in and of itself. Height's good for density and it can look neato, but it alone does not create a nice place to be. In fact, without much else, it can create a crappy place to be, especially when most people are driving to that place.

Phoenix is not a city that a lot of people look to as having a model urban core. I have family there and while I personally like Phoenix and think it offers a lot as a city, their downtown is more fitting for a metro of around 1.5 million population, not 4+ million. OKC could easily catch up with them within 10-15 years.

NM. Don't want to derail.

Was wondering - will these new buildings affect the stunning reflections on the Devon Tower on west the side near sunset?

Phoenix is not a city that a lot of people look to as having a model urban core. I have family there and while I personally like Phoenix and think it offers a lot as a city, their downtown is more fitting for a metro of around 1.5 million population, not 4+ million. OKC could easily catch up with them within 10-15 years.

Yeah, I'd probably go to scottsdale before downtown PHX... but that may not be for the reasons we're discussing here. ;)

Was wondering - will these new buildings affect the stunning reflections on the Devon Tower on west the side near sunset?

I'm sure it has to from some angles, but Devon will still be so much taller that I doubt it will affect from most vantage points.

I'm sure it has to from some angles, but Devon will still be so much taller that I doubt it will affect from most vantage points.

This is correct, this building won't affect squat when it comes to the sun. Are the current buildings affecting the Devon? This new mid rise won't be much taller than what is there now.

I'm sure it has to from some angles, but Devon will still be so much taller that I doubt it will affect from most vantage points.

This is correct, this building won't affect squat when it comes to the sun. Are the current buildings affecting the Devon? This new mid rise won't be much taller than what is there now.

For everyone bellyaching, I want you to ask yourselves just one question: Is this development...better than crappy????

It's not a mid-rise dude.

One quote from the article that has stuck with me was one from Jon Pickard:


“We want something that will be supportive of a great skyline. And in my perception, the shape of a great skyline is the pyramid where Devon will be the peak of the pyramid for a couple of years, maybe more.”

Perhaps Continental is already working with Pickard Chilton on plans for their taller than Devon headquarters?

That's a really bad strategy for building cities. :)

Because in a couple decades, everyone will want to live in the Muchbetterthancrappyville rather than your Justbetterthancrappyville.What's happening in super-ultra-megabetterthancrappyville?

One quote from the article that has stuck with me was one from Jon Pickard:



Perhaps Continental is already working with Pickard Chilton on plans for their taller than Devon headquarters?

I caught that also, but I don't think Continental will ever reach Devon's size in workforce. I could be wrong, but I don't think its likely.

They would likely have to partner with another large company if they wanted to build something taller than the Devon Tower, but again I could be wrong on that also.

One quote from the article that has stuck with me was one from Jon Pickard:



Perhaps Continental is already working with Pickard Chilton on plans for their taller than Devon headquarters?

I noticed that too. I'm not sure what he meant exactly, but there was clear indication that something else really big may be coming along in the future.

My guess is that if these 5 new buildings are successful (the PC one will be -- Devon and BOK are going to fill it up immediately), we'll see a lot more out of state money pour into the city. If our class A office occupancy rate remains at like 90%+, and our economy stays strong (especially if we survive this oil downturn without missing a beat -- that will definitely improve investor confidence), and if those two residential highrises fill up, then it won't be long until we see several more towers under construction. They may not be as tall as Devon, but it won't stick out like it does now anymore.

See "not livable": https://twitter.com/shanehamp/status/544623857189920771

Exactly. Along with parking garages that will be basically border the east and north sides of a brand new elementary school.

Suddenly I'm starting to think that they elementary school was built in the wrong location.

I caught that also, but I don't think Continental will ever reach Devon's size in workforce. I could be wrong, but I don't think its likely.

They would likely have to partner with another large company if they wanted to build something taller than the Devon Tower, but again I could be wrong on that also.

Continental added 500+ to their workforce downtown and are about 20% the size of Devon. They've only been really aggressive in their growth since moving to OKC. Their market cap is about half of Devon's right now, but back when oil was between $80-$100 per bbl, they were much closer in market cap size. With excellent, growing positions in two great oil plays, they could definitely get close to Devon's size over the next 5-10 years. I think it will largely be dependent on the price of oil though.

Statements like this are condescending and hurt the image of new urbanists. Why some feel you have to trash others to make a point and to try to feel superior is beyond me. Egos get out of control I guess.

While JTF makes a point that I think we all can agree on, that street interaction is more important than sheer height, it is done in a very offensive way. This from someone so dedicated to urban fabric they live in a suburb of Jacksonville. LOL

While you have a point and I'm not defending Kerry's occasionally-dogmatic viewpoints (or my own, as I too should distance myself better from looking dogmatic), it can be frustrating being a new urbanist (or any kind of urbanist) in our current system which is so heavily stacked in favor of unsustainable sprawl. We can all agree that we are generally moving in the right direction and good things are starting to happen, but we also all know that 1, OKC still has a ways to go to get where we want; and 2, we could stop taking a few steps back for once. Progress shouldn't cancel itself out.

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is it about these building that make them "historic"? I'm asking honestly, not to be a jerk. Did important things happen here? Or just because they are old they are "historic"? They knocked down Original Yankee Stadium for crying out loud. Demolition and rebuilding is what Americans do. If someone wants to move out of OKC or choose not to live here because we have a block of our DT with parking garages surrounding it on three sides, So be it, you wont be missed. Im very much looking forward to this extension of Devon and to the new life it will breathe into and around the area! Go OKC!

While you have a point and I'm not defending Kerry's occasionally-dogmatic viewpoints (or my own, as I too should distance myself better from looking dogmatic), it can be frustrating being a new urbanist (or any kind of urbanist) in our current system which is so heavily stacked in favor of unsustainable sprawl. We can all agree that we are generally moving in the right direction and good things are starting to happen, but we also all know that 1, OKC still has a ways to go to get where we want; and 2, we could stop taking a few steps back for once. Progress shouldn't cancel itself out.

Thanks. I think you bring a pragmatic but progressive view to making an area better and more urban. I think we can all agree that we keep shooting ourselves in the foot to some degree, but it isn't all gloom and doom. OKC was PITIFUL and suffering from huge mistakes. And, while we still are making mistakes, we are also making improvements. Anyone who can't see that just isn't looking. I think outside investors required to do great things are now appearing on the scene and we do have some leverage...but we need more. It has been a long road to bring OKC real estate to respectability and I think sometimes we are afraid to apply the new-found leverage we have.

I realize nothing will probably change, but I really wanted to express how I imagine this project to be.

Street frontage with office/retail, about 11 to 12 floors of parking, and the 27-floor building on top. I made the garage narrower to fit among the buildings but I wanted to keep the tower's footprint relatively the same, so that resulted in overhangs! Really interesting and completely do-able. I didn't account for the other garage though.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/9778d1418686287-preftakes-block-preftakes-block.jpg

What makes them historic?

They are (1) old buildings, that represent (2) a specific period in history, (3) and a style of architecture and construction (4) that is no longer in use, and (5) is of limited quantity in the city.

No one is going to care if you tear down a 1970s strip mall. We have them all over the city. They are not that old, they are certainly not rare, and we're still making new strip malls of pretty much the same style today. On the other hand, the Hotel Black was featured on postcards back in the old days. They are both made out of brick and masonry in a way that nobody does anymore. The Motor Hotel is still in use right this second, and the Hotel Black still had businesses in it earlier this year. Both are perfectly serviceable right this instant.

WThere are no cities that have successfully developed their downtown core after this proposed pattern and succeeded. So why is the dissension cast in such a negative light? And since we know that low-density downtowns don't thrive, why are there not more people outraged? I get that it's hard to tie the taxpayer dollar to inefficient design. But I think the urban vs. suburban argument fatigue is puzzling. Are humans that enamored with shiny new objects?

There is obviously a pretty decent grass roots movement towards solid urbanism practices and several developers who have taken it upon themselves to do things the 'right' way.

But what is clearly lacking is the leadership on these issues among people with most the power and influence.

There is a big difference between giving urbanism lip service and actually driving the change. Which of our government and private leaders are doing this right now? [crickets]


There is lots of talk about investment and public and private partnership and thus far that has worked very well for OKC. But when it comes to the mayor, City Council, the City Manager and his direct reports and the key private sector players like Larry Nichols, absolutely no one is walking the walk when it comes to upholding tried-and-true good urbanism. As someone else said, we know the right thing to do (there have been hundreds of other communities that have already gone down this road) we just choose not to do it, over and over again.

We take all this time and effort to get public input and create plans and committees... Then it all gets ignored the first time a developer opens his checkbook and claims it will cost too much. You think this doesn't happen in other towns?

And the more we completely circumvent our own rules and standards and ideals (SandRidge, Stage Cener and now this entire block) the more the precedents are set and the more the next guy is going to expect the same treatment.


Real change starts at the top. It takes making somewhat unpopular decisions and sticking to your guns.

We have absolutely no one in a position of power in Oklahoma City doing these things, and thus all you can expect is small little changes brought on by the various district-driven groups and developers who just decide to do it on their own.

Love it! Could you send that to the City?

That is brilliant. I just spoke with someone at the city council. She encouraged me to email with any concerns with the proposed project in which I just did. Can you PLEASE email this for them to present as an example of what could easily be done? Her email address is lisa.chronister@okc.gov Thank you all, it really could make a difference.

Love it! Could you send that to the City?

That is brilliant. I just spoke with someone at the city council. She encouraged me to email with any concerns with the proposed project in which I just did. Can you PLEASE email this for them to present as an example of what could easily be done? Her email address is lisa.chronister@okc.gov Thank you all, it really could make a difference.

I realize nothing will probably change, but I really wanted to express how I imagine this project to be.

Street frontage with office/retail, about 11 to 12 floors of parking, and the 27-floor building on top. I made the garage narrower to fit among the buildings but I wanted to keep the tower's footprint relatively the same, so that resulted in overhangs! Really interesting and completely do-able. I didn't account for the other garage though.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/9778d1418686287-preftakes-block-preftakes-block.jpg

That is brilliant. I just spoke with someone at the city council. She encouraged me to email with any concerns with the proposed project in which I just did. Can you PLEASE email this for them to present as an example of what could easily be done? Her email address is lisa.chronister@okc.gov Thank you all, it really could make a difference.

Exactly. Along with parking garages that will be basically border the east and north sides of a brand new elementary school.

Suddenly I'm starting to think that they elementary school was built in the wrong location.

Except it is not true. If street level is what matters that shot has 1 site that faces a parking garage.

Hey folks.

I highly suggest everyone make contact and send out emails to official representatives immediately voicing your concerns; the sooner, the better.
I do not want to tread into the affairs of another city, but in all honesty I feel like I've spent so much time in OKC and also truly want what will help make it "big league" that I almost feel obligated to contact your representatives as well.
I think most of us would feel better even if it were set to the height mentioned a couple times already of 499 feet (to match the address), or even make it a shade above 500 to crown it the second tallest in the city. I know it seems we're being picky about something such as building height, but these buildings are the first thing people see. They leave an impression.

I really like the project and just wish there was a way to keep the black hotel. But this project along with Clayco will really change that part of downtown for the better. It was not long ago when all you would see in this area was the homeless looking for a handout. This project is good for the city. Wish they would add another 5-10 floors to help balance the skyline a little better though. The auto hotel just doesn't do anything for me. I have no idea why some on here are even wasting their energy talking about that building. It's an Auto Hotel. They will be building a new parking garage. What's the deal? Is there something about the auto hotel that we don't know about?

I realize nothing will probably change, but I really wanted to express how I imagine this project to be.

Street frontage with office/retail, about 11 to 12 floors of parking, and the 27-floor building on top. I made the garage narrower to fit among the buildings but I wanted to keep the tower's footprint relatively the same, so that resulted in overhangs! Really interesting and completely do-able. I didn't account for the other garage though.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/9778d1418686287-preftakes-block-preftakes-block.jpg

I forgot to mention that, in this scenario, the total height is just over 570'.

I really like the project and just wish there was a way to keep the black hotel. But this project along with Clayco will really change that part of downtown for the better. It was not long ago when all you would see in this area was the homeless looking for a handout. This project is good for the city. Wish they would add another 5-10 floors to help balance the skyline a little better though. The auto hotel just doesn't do anything for me. I have no idea why some on here are even wasting their energy talking about that building. It's an Auto Hotel. They will be building a new parking garage. What's the deal? Is there something about the auto hotel that we don't know about?

AGREE
Before Devon, after 5 pm, no way I would be caught down their. The hints were dropped in this forum 10 days ago. Now every is in an uproar.

We did. Is this also how the City feels?



Right. So, good luck with attracting people downtown. Sheesh.



If it was only one block and only one proposal, you might have a point. But just look at the map. It's the prevailing theme of downtown OKC development.

1.) I never implied I speak for the city, yet I don't know who would want someone to live where they don't want to. If OKC is no good at urban living or not up to your par, and that's what you want, go live where that's available, and good for you for being able to have that ability financial and professionally.

2.) Attracting people downtown seems about as easy as it ever been? What do you mean by this?

3.) Where else does this have the potential to happen again DT (three garages on one street)?

Okay that's a very solid answer. Hotel Black does have a very neat design and brick scheme. It will be sad to see that go. Yet as someone just stated the motor motel, is literally just knocking down an old garage to build a new one in the grand scheme of things is it not?

I realize nothing will probably change, but I really wanted to express how I imagine this project to be.

Street frontage with office/retail, about 11 to 12 floors of parking, and the 27-floor building on top. I made the garage narrower to fit among the buildings but I wanted to keep the tower's footprint relatively the same, so that resulted in overhangs! Really interesting and completely do-able. I didn't account for the other garage though.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/9778d1418686287-preftakes-block-preftakes-block.jpg

This site plan should have been common sense, one that a good architect would see. Sadly most architects think very little about the urban fabric and how the building actually fits in with it's surroundings, particularly on street level. If you stacked the parking into the building and saved the existing building and put money into them to actually lease out the ground floor you could lease out around 60,000 square feet of retail. I think almost everyone would be happy to give TIF money for this development if it was to create a better development.

Here's an interesting TED talks, she specifically calls out developers and architects for creating these bleak and unused corporate plazas. Sadly this is exactly the direction this project is taking. The architect did they say were putting chairs in the plaza so it will be active :loll: you have to create an environment people actually want to sit in those chairs first.

Amanda Burden: How public spaces make cities work | Talk Video | TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/amanda_burden_how_public_spaces_make_cities_work?l anguage=en)

We did. Is this also how the City feels?



Right. So, good luck with attracting people downtown. Sheesh.



If it was only one block and only one proposal, you might have a point. But just look at the map. It's the prevailing theme of downtown OKC development.
You mean the thousands of new housing units that are coming to downtown and filling up faster than they can be built type of attracting people downtown? Come on! People are being attracted to downtown.

You mean the thousands of new housing units that are coming to downtown and filling up faster than they can be built type of attracting people downtown? Come on! People are being attracted to downtown.

I think Sid is specifically referring to the area in the CBD. I would not consider DD, Midtown, or Bricktown to be in this area. I could be wrong on his intended meaning however.

Got a preview of Steve's next story I think that will run tomorrow, has a neat Skyscraperpage-like diagram, showing the tallest buildings in the city including where the 3-5 proposed towers fit in. I didn't get to read much of the story though.

Okay that's a very solid answer. Hotel Black does have a very neat design and brick scheme. It will be sad to see that go. Yet as someone just stated the motor motel, is literally just knocking down an old garage to build a new one in the grand scheme of things is it not?

For some that don't know, the Hotel Black was known as a mecca for prostitution during its heyday.

That is depressing.The most depressing part of it, to me, is the loss of all that close-in residential that's visible in the background! This shot, while great, doesn't show much of the really vibrant "main drag" although the huge parking garage on the north side of Main between Robinson and Broadway is clearly visible... I think this must have been taken from high up in the Biltmore!

For some that don't know, the Hotel Black was known as a mecca for prostitution during its heyday.As was the Hudson and its Silver Lounge, across Hudson on the east side of the street. That whole area boasted more red lights than white ones during the 50s. Is that the sort of history we want to memorialize?

Of course, the Skirvin also had more than its share of working girls slipping in for visiting oilmen, as did the Huckins... Trust an old police reporter on this kind of detail. However we certainly didn't publicize it. Bad for business, y'know!