I don't know about Tulsa, but try growing up and going to Westmoore High School..
It shouldn't matter what you drive if you are a guy and go to Westmoore. There is no shortage of outstanding looking females at WHS, compared to the guy population. Pickins are pretty darn thin for Westmoore girls to choose from.

Someone send me a PM when something important is said on this thread. Preferably something to do with this "So-called" tower.

Creepers.

Someone send me a PM when something important is said on this thread. Preferably something to do with this "So-called" tower.

Nothing important has been said in this thread, hence the title. When real news comes out, it'll have it's own thread.

Nothing important has been said in this thread,

Yet you keep coming back for more...

I keep coming back to watch the fire burn. It's sort of like a car accident, it's hard to keep yourself from looking.

I'm in the same camp of everyone is full of crap and i'll believe it when i see it actually being built. Forget "proposed" or foundations done....let me see some structure going up. Far too many buildings in the U.S. have died after their foundations were prepped. Louisville Museum Center (bleh), and the Chicago Spire to think of two big name ones.

I keep coming back to watch the fire burn. It's sort of like a car accident, it's hard to keep yourself from looking.

I'm in the same camp of everyone is full of crap and i'll believe it when i see it actually being built. Forget "proposed" or foundations done....let me see some structure going up. Far too many buildings in the U.S. have died after their foundations were prepped. Louisville Museum Center (bleh), and the Chicago Spire to think of two big name ones.

What about the Corning plant? It was rising out of the ground when it died. Just to be safe, you should wait until employees are moving in before you believe it.

I like the look of Two California Plaza in L.A.
A modern building with a post-modern look at the bottom would be really unique.

http://skyscraperphotos.com/photos/00005%20Two%20California%20Plaza.jpg

Map (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Two+California+Plaza+los+angeles&hl=en&ll=34.051858,-118.25137&spn=0.001911,0.002642&sll=35.465012,-97.511878&sspn=0.010626,0.021136&t=h&hq=Two+California+Plaza+los+angeles&radius=15000&z=19)

That building in downtown OKC would be a disaster. It gets a -3 on the JTF urban development scale (meaning it would actually do more harm than good). Now if you wanted to rework the first 50 feet of that building then it would be a different story.

"disaster" ... not close to reality ...

that would look GREAT in okc

"disaster" ... not close to reality ...

that would look GREAT in okc

Just what part of downtown would it look great in? Before you answer go to google earth and look at the sidewalk around it. Do you see anything that looks like something you would like to emulate?

It would be nice to have buildings that were also a part of the human environment.

I am pretty sure we get to pick how we build the sidewalk and that an architect who was inspired by this building's design is capable of ensuring that it is pedestrian friendly. I don't think Will is suggesting we must also adjust the environment around a new building so that it exactly mimics this one.

So what exactly did he mean by "this building would look great" in OKC? Was he meaning a tall glass building would look great because I can agree with that (sort of). But if he meant a building with no visible entrance from the sidewalk, large grassy setbacks from the street, and a total lack of retail or any other public amenity then I stand by my comment. It try to look at a building in its entirety, as if it was meant to be used and interacted with by humans, not something to be viewed and appreciated from 5 miles away.

It would be nice to have buildings that were also a part of the human environment.

This.

That is the problem though - you can pick any building at random in the world and say that would be great in downtown OKC if your only criteria are height and glass. For me a building starts the second it emerges from the ground. Some people think buildings only start when the emerge up out of the surrounding urban fabric. That is why we have 3 million pictures of Devon's crown and not any of the front door.

So what exactly did he mean by "this building would look great" in OKC? Was he meaning a tall glass building would look great because I can agree with that (sort of). But if he meant a building with no visible entrance from the sidewalk, large grassy setbacks from the street, and a total lack of retail or any other public amenity then I stand by my comment. It try to look at a building in its entirety, as if it was meant to be used and interacted with by humans, not something to be viewed and appreciated from 5 miles away.

Your ideological rigidity makes it unenjoyable to converse with you. You have one thing to contribute to any "conversation" - new urbanism (I put conversations in quotes because real conversations consist of caring what others have to say... which you don't) . Are you able to even look up at a building, 10 feet off the ground? Or does your vision no longer capable of seeing anything but street level interaction? In sum, lighten up.

This building is beautiful (even if it could have better street level interaction).

Yeah, I don't know if Will was endorsing the entire skyscraper from top to bottom. I think he was referring more to the general addition on the skyline of our city.

I like it......but what do I know. Im just a lowly gardner.

The last few posts are why I'm beginning to get burnt out on keeping up around here.

The last few posts are why I'm beginning to get burnt out on keeping up around here.

Stick around Will. There are always those here who are waiting to pounce on anything that doesn't coincide with their idea of a perfect world but don't let that keep you from giving your ideas.

The last few posts are why I'm beginning to get burnt out on keeping up around here.

Don't quit Will.

The last few posts are why I'm beginning to get burnt out on keeping up around here.

Sorry, I am just trying to get an understanding of why people think certain buildings would make a 'great addition" to downtown OKC. What makes THIS building a better addition than say the building that is right across the street from this one in LA? Why is 2 California Place a better addition than US Bank Tower?

US Bank Tower
http://www.glasssteelandstone.com/Images/US/CA/LosAngeles/200801/USBankTower-Oct08-010.jpg

For the record, I am not endorsing US Bank Tower. At street level it is just as bad.

There are certain people on this board often try to demean other opinions instead of offering their own in a constructive or informative way. The constant tone of arrogance by some tend to make some hesitant to participate. There are some bright people contributing...but they need to work on their communication skills and their attitudes.

Will, don't disappear.

This building is beautiful (even if it could have better street level interaction).

I actually said that in my post.


That building in downtown OKC would be a disaster. It gets a -3 on the JTF urban development scale (meaning it would actually do more harm than good). Now if you wanted to rework the first 50 feet of that building then it would be a different story.

There are certain people on this board often try to demean other opinions instead of offering their own in a constructive or informative way. The constant tone of arrogance by some tend to make some hesitant to participate. There are some bright people contributing...but they need to work on their communication skills and their attitudes.

Will, don't disappear.

Point noted. So let me rephrase from the beginning:

The building as some very likeable architectural features but if it was in OKC I would hope that it would have better interaction with the sidewalk.

Point noted. So let me rephrase from the beginning:

The building as some very likeable architectural features but if it was in OKC I would hope that it would have better interaction with the sidewalk.

15 Penn Plaza which was one proposed in NYC a few years ago that didn't happen. A similar building would be a great addition. It is tall glass, but had retail on the bottom floors with great interaction to the sidewalk/street. It looks too much like the Devon tower, but the base could stay the same yet have a different tower arise from it.

15 Penn Plaza which was one proposed in NYC a few years ago that didn't happen. A similar building would be a great addition. It is tall glass, but had retail on the bottom floors with great interaction to the sidewalk/street. It looks too much like the Devon tower, but the base could stay the same yet have a different tower arise from it.

Yes - that would be a good addition to OKC.

http://www.bloomberg.com/image/iawRHVY8y2ZU.jpg

http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18522/739619-T1200800.jpg

My favorite new building in NYC is 8 Spruce Street (Beekman Tower). I could see a similar building being built at Main and Hudson on the Builder's Square building.

This building kept the originall small buildings and built a tower through it. It kept the street interaction while creating a breathtaking tower. The building is futuristic sleak yet has the classic interaction with the street. The first few floors are actually a school.

I wish I was in NYC to take pictures of this building to show the interaction with the street because I cannot find any online.

I agree with the sentiment that environmental interaction is more important than height or even aesthetics when it comes to a development increasing the appeal of Oklahoma City and, specifically downtown. I'm all for pretty buildings with 50+ stories, but the end game is to create an vibrant urban option in Oklahoma City that people want to go to, not just look at.

That is the problem though - you can pick any building at random in the world and say that would be great in downtown OKC if your only criteria are height and glass. For me a building starts the second it emerges from the ground. Some people think buildings only start when the emerge up out of the surrounding urban fabric. That is why we have 3 million pictures of Devon's crown and not any of the front door.

I don't think the Devon "front door" area is finished yet (on the Myriad Gardens side), so getting photos there now would be premature. I'm not an urban architect or engineer, but I agree the street view of buildings should get first attention when designed. The Devon project does that, as we'll see more of once the ground-level outside work is finished. In the meantime, the significant change to the downtown skyline understandably gets the greatest public reaction.

I think the size Is important in that housing large numbers of well paid employees creates a volume of traffic in the vicinity. Without that, there won't be a lot of interaction going on anyway. The street level environment will always be of prime importance too, of course. Devon won't create any excitement along the street, except on the west side and at the Colcord. I agree we don't need another Devon building right now, but we sure need the bodies it houses.

It will be interesting to see how much sidewalk traffic Devon creates. Most employees will drive to work, park in an on-site garage, eat in an on-site restaurant, and then leave in their car. My hope is that a highrise residential building will open a few blocks away and we will see people walk to and from work during the day and remain in the area after 6PM.

point noted. So let me rephrase from the beginning:

The building as some very likeable architectural features but if it was in okc i would hope that it would have better interaction with the sidewalk.

bravo!!!

That makes no sense. Talking about how a building looks without any context of how it functions is much more akin to building porn. Some are just more pragmatic in their approach and consider a development's total impact on an area. I would certainly consider that much less masturbatory than simply musing only about a building's size and form.

No it makes complete sense to normal people. I want to see a cool building... my assumption is that all that mundane crap you say here will be done by the people that are paid to make those decisions... And why would a company in OKC put up the kind of money necessary for a new tower, suddenly decide to absolutely ignore the more pragmatic design elements?

Your argument is the equivalent of saying, "I only like that ferrari if they make sure to properly install brakes and that all the tires are the proper size for the vehicle."

No it makes complete sense to normal people. I want to see a cool building... my assumption is that all that mundane crap you say here will be done by the people that are paid to make those decisions... And why would a company in OKC put up the kind of money necessary for a new tower, suddenly decide to absolutely ignore the more pragmatic design elements?

Your argument is the equivalent of saying, "I only like that ferrari if they make sure to properly install brakes and that all the tires are the proper size for the vehicle."

You would like to think that, but yet there is 2 California Plaza and they didn't do it. Go figure.

http://skyscraperphotos.com/photos/00005%20Two%20California%20Plaza.jpg

Have you walked around downtown L.A.? I've not been out there since 1996, but the photo certainly looks as if it's not far from the old Angel's Flight area and if that's the case, those stairs might well be leading up to what is indeed "street level" on the other side of the building, and the two rows of windows with no doors that we see could be the first and second basement level!

Have you walked around downtown L.A.? I've not been out there since 1996, but the photo certainly looks as if it's not far from the old Angel's Flight area and if that's the case, those stairs might well be leading up to what is indeed "street level" on the other side of the building, and the two rows of windows with no doors that we see could be the first and second basement level!

If you look on Google Earth street-view the entire building is very close to (or worse than) what you see in that picture. It literally looks like they never intended anyone to walk to it. BTW - it is close to Angel's Flight.

It will be interesting to see how much sidewalk traffic Devon creates. Most employees will drive to work, park in an on-site garage, eat in an on-site restaurant, and then leave in their car. My hope is that a highrise residential building will open a few blocks away and we will see people walk to and from work during the day and remain in the area after 6PM.

Agreed

I will say that it seems most skyscraper designers are so in love with their project and it's size that they forget or worse, don't care, about how it interfaces in the neighborhood. They tend to think that ,since they are the big dog that they are the only important thing and the neighborhood will conform to them. These big project designers tend to be fairly arrogant, by my experience.

My favorite new building in NYC is 8 Spruce Street (Beekman Tower). I could see a similar building being built at Main and Hudson on the Builder's Square building.

This building kept the originall small buildings and built a tower through it. It kept the street interaction while creating a breathtaking tower. The building is futuristic sleak yet has the classic interaction with the street. The first few floors are actually a school.

I wish I was in NYC to take pictures of this building to show the interaction with the street because I cannot find any online.
I should be down in SoHo / Financial District sometime in the next few days....I'll try to take some pics of the Beekman tower & post for u.

How about this as a solution for the conflict that comes from this thread:

1) When there is something new and specific, a new thread will be created with that information
2) Until then, this thread is for speculation and dreaming


Therefore, if you don't like #2, stay away and wait for #1.


Thanks.

How about this as a solution for the conflict that comes from this thread:

1) When there is something new and specific, a new thread will be created with that information
2) Until then, this thread is for speculation and dreaming


Therefore, if you don't like #2, stay away and wait for #1.


Thanks.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Perfectly stated.

One would think the title, "Mystery Tower" would allude to that, to most people.

how about this as a solution for the conflict that comes from this thread:

1) when there is something new and specific, a new thread will be created with that information
2) until then, this thread is for speculation and dreaming


therefore, if you don't like #2, stay away and wait for #1.


Thanks.
agreed

I should be down in SoHo / Financial District sometime in the next few days....I'll try to take some pics of the Beekman tower & post for u.

That would be awesome! I have never seen any street level pictures. They just zoom up to the tower and don't show how it looks walking down the street.

Agreed

And why would a company in OKC put up the kind of money necessary for a new tower, suddenly decide to absolutely ignore the more pragmatic design elements?

I don't know, but it happens all the time. And if you acknowledge that there are pragmatic elements to consider, then why the hostility towards the conversation about those elements? The point is that if a developer did indeed build a tower just for "oohs and ahhhs" from a distance, then it would be a missed opportunity to improve downtown as whole as it will inevitably command a great deal of prime real estate. Without interaction with the street, it actually just ends up being a large barrier in the middle of a district trying to improve itself. The reality is that the better it interacts with the whole neighborhood, the better the districts becomes and the more motivation other companies and developers have to locate and build there. That's the best way to see exponential growth and improvement. If companies are going to pay a premium to be downtown, there has to be justification for that premium. If all it is is a tower farm with no real difference in interaction with its surroundings, then that premium makes no sense and it's much more sensible to just build a neato looking tower in a cheaper, more isolated location in the suburbs. Some are just looking at the big picture of downtown development as a whole and acknowledge the importance of each development working together with what is already there. The best way to make sure the developments keep coming is for each individual development to make downtown a better place to work, live and play for everyone there, instead of just making it a better place to look at from the freeway.

You would like to think that, but yet there is 2 California Plaza and they didn't do it. Go figure.

http://skyscraperphotos.com/photos/00005%20Two%20California%20Plaza.jpg
At first I didn't understand JTF's opposition to it as it looks like the building is as close to the sidewalk as you can get (no suburban style setbacks etc) but the no interaction part makes more sense now but then again if it is the "basement side" of the building that is a consideration (but why can't "basements" be accessible too?)

At first I didn't understand JTF's opposition to it as it looks like the building is as close to the sidewalk as you can get (no suburban style setbacks etc) but the no interaction part makes more sense now but then again if it is the "basement side" of the building that is a consideration (but why can't "basements" be accessible too?)

Larry, if you go to Google Earth street-view you can go around the entire building. The other side of this building does have suburban style setbacks, 120' from the street and no sidewalk interaction. The parking garage is accessed via an 800' tunnel under Grand Ave. The whole area is screwed up. The only Humans they ever intended to walk to this buildings are the ones dropped off by a taxi.

Could this be the company building a tower downtown.? Dippin' dots! hahaha

http://newsok.com/article/3665878?click_action=1

Could this be the company building a tower downtown.? Dippin' dots! hahaha

http://newsok.com/article/3665878?click_action=1

No.



He said the company's operations and management will remain in Paducah.

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-firm-will-pay-12.7-million-for-dippin-dots/article/3665878#ixzz1rvreNetc

I am NOT a one of the ones that is buying into the possibility of a new tower..
I was at Mark Befforts Forecast presentation and he did NOT say anything about a new tower.
I think this has been TREMENDOUSLY blown out of proportion.

However.. I keep hearing about out of state construction workers staying in the area because for whatever reason they were told that a new huge project is coming down the pipe. Workers are taking odd jobs all around the metro just to stay and wait. This IS happening. I dont know if their union is lying to them? Probably wouldn't be the first time a union has lied, but because of this; consider myself less of a skeptic. It is fun to dream though!

The MidFirst rumors are still running strong and it seems it's just a matter of time before they announce a downtown tower. However, I don't think it will be on the Pretakes block (immediately west of Devon).

I'm also hearing things about American Fidelity but that is less firm.

^^I was curious if American Fidelity was still being talked about.

Being connected to the commercial real estate industry I know that it is a "sexy" trend to no longer own your own building, but rather have someone else own it and long term lease it. That removes a great deal of debt and operations cost from the company balance sheet.

With that said, why would American Fidelity want to BUY a building again when they sold their current space and are in a long term lease on Classen? AND they don't even occupy all their space they have available in their current location.

Midfirst is by far the more reasonable choice for my rational.

A friend with whom i went to High school with here in Oklahoma, now lives in Arizona with her husband and she is a loan officer at a MidFirst somewhere around Glendale. and she was talking to me the other day that they are hearing rumors all the way out there about a possible move my MidFirst offices to downtown OKC

I hung out with three of the construction workers a few weeks ago. Two are leaving and one will be working one the Sandridge buildings. They didn't know of any new towers.

I know this has nothing to do with the towers, but has anyone heard anything about the two mystery companies that might be relocating to OKC? I heard one was definitely an oil and gas company.

I heard it was a space rocket company....

I heard it was a space rocket company....
Whaa????????

Ha, lots of people including myself, (based on the information that was given) said there would probably be an announcement sometime about now..