I'd be more conflicted about losing this structure if it hadn't spent almost it's entire existence in extreme disrepair.

I can't remember a time where that place didn't look like absolute crap and/or showed even the smallest amount of life.

And amazingly, I've never even been in it -- one of the very few structures in the central core I can say that about.


As long as we get a great tower in it's place, I'm ready for the next chapter where that corner is teeming with life and activity.

Will also draw many more into the park and downtown in general.

I would be curious to see if some of the pods could be reassembled somewhere else in town. Like in the C2S park, or somewhere in Capitol Hill or Classen-10-Penn or some other neighborhood that is in the early stages of revitalization.

I think Rand would have the expertise in dealing with this building to be able to find some way to reassemble it without the concrete anchor structures.

Aren't there 2 or 3 intimate theaters at the Civic Center?
The intimacy of Stage Center production was thanks to the fact that the rooms are in-the-round. Leads to a completely different type of production. But of course, not every (or even very many) company wants to do non-traditional productions. That is probably a part of the problem.

Aren't there 2 or 3 intimate theaters at the Civic Center?

There is a small theatre with a couple of hundred seats and a standard proscenium type of stage. To my knowledge it has not been updated like the main venue at the CC. And there is another hall, but I don't think it is set up for stage shows.

And as to Stage Center being great as a play house type of setting...that is correct. I think the thing that has really killed it is the lack of up-keep and then the flooding. I guess the cost of restoration is more than it would take to build a new playhouse. And the value of the real estate is way more than can ever be recouped by a playhouse. Playhouses are not money makers. Sadly.

FYI, there are plans to remodel that smaller theater at the Civic Center.

The intimacy of Stage Center production was thanks to the fact that the rooms are in-the-round. Leads to a completely different type of production. But of course, not every (or even very many) company wants to do non-traditional productions. That is probably a part of the problem.

Shakespeare in the Park uses the water stage which is a half-circle, for lack of having the theater verbiage at my fingertips

I guess the cost of restoration is more than it would take to build a new playhouse. And the value of the real estate is way more than can ever be recouped by a playhouse. Playhouses are not money makers. Sadly.

It would cost $30 million to restore. I haven't heard what the selling price is but I wonder how that money is going to be spent? Maybe a new playhouse?

I would be curious to see if some of the pods could be reassembled somewhere else in town. Like in the C2S park, or somewhere in Capitol Hill or Classen-10-Penn or some other neighborhood that is in the early stages of revitalization.

I think Rand would have the expertise in dealing with this building to be able to find some way to reassemble it without the concrete anchor structures.
I keep hearing people say this, but other than the walkways and the mechanical rooms perched on top, the building is basically a giant reinforced concrete structure. There is no option whatsoever to "relocate" it; only to rebuild it. And as challenging as it has been to keep the thing going in its current location it would be pure folly to invest tens of millions into rebuilding the same structure elsewhere. When it's gone, it's gone. Real talk. I think the relocation argument is mostly a cop-out that keeps folks from admitting it is (or should be) a tough decision to tear it down.

That said, I have always been consistent in saying while I am 100% against tearing it down speculatively I would not personally be haunted by a decision to demolish it for a real project of measurably higher and better use.

Yes, and I also want to say that for the longest time I was not crazy about Stage Center being demolished.

But I've come to a place of acceptance, especially because I think we'll see something great built on that site in the very near future.

Yeah, and it kicks the sh*t out of most local art theater houses.

No doubt Stage Center is not ideal for housing large traveling productions of Cats or anything. Nor is it some Grand venue. But that doesn't make it worthless. As a performer, I know you know that most playhouses, even in the country's largest cities, are very nondescript rooms with very little seating and modest intimate green rooms, if at all. I'm pretty amazed that a city like Oklahoma City, with it's less than stellar history of supporting local arts, was ever at a place where it was willing to spend the time, energy and money to go out on a limb and build something like Stage Center at all, honestly. Ironically, it is probably more in a position to do so now than it has been for awhile, but instead will be losing another intimate venue.

My opinion on Stage Center has changed over the years I've been on this site. At first I couldn't wait to see it go. Now I see it differently. I understand that there were a lot of people back in the IM Pei days who looked at the Biltmore and other old buildings we'd love to have back, and said "but it's all run down now..." Today I'd prefer not to repeat those mistakes. I'd love to see Stage Center saved and renovated.

The question is, how long do we wait? Do we let it sit empty for another 20 years just on the chance that someone comes along and saves it? I actually wouldn't mind that, but we seem to have someone who wants to put a 700+ ft tall tower there. I'm not going to clap if and when this thing gets torn down, but if a new skyscraper does get built there, isn't that an acceptable trade-off?

When I was in grade school they used to take us downtown to go to the arts festival. I didn't know what Stage Center was back then, but I do remember running around inside of it like it was a big playground/jungle gym. If there was a concerted effort to turn it into a children's museum or something, someone actively working to save it, maybe we could redirect OG&E/Centerpoint or whoever to some other property (it's not like we are out of empty land downtown). But unlike some of those old buildings we lost in the 70s, Stage Center has never had that many people who liked it. I don't think there's much popular support for it.

Shakespeare in the Park uses the water stage which is a half-circle, for lack of having the theater verbiage at my fingertips
The Globe and other Elizabethan theaters were very similar to in-the-round theaters of today, with audiences on three sides and the action protruding into the crowd somewhat, so the Water Stage actually lends itself to Shakespeare pretty well.

One good thing about any Stage Center demolition controversy: People will be expecting/demanding something of good quality that interacts with the street & park with guarantees it WILL get built and soon.

Be pretty difficult to reveal plans to develop that site without some big promises.

It would cost $30 million to restore. I haven't heard what the selling price is but I wonder how that money is going to be spent? Maybe a new playhouse?

If it will cost that much...there is literally no way that it will ever reach a break even point. No use of the current structure will ever make a 30 million investment worth while. No wonder it sits empty. No one is willing to invest that with no chance of any type of return on that investment. If it was a large venue that could house large productions and shows, it might work...but this setup will never get there. I hate to see it go, but a big new beautiful tower that enhances our skyline is built...it needs to go.

You know if the city used the money from the sale of the property to build a new avante-garde theater somewhere else, it may more than make up for the loss of a non-functional Stage Center.

There is a small theater in the basement of the Civic Center which houses "in the round" plays staged by Oklahoma Repertory Theater - CityRep. It is great. We don't really need SC to remain open to support these. That doesn't mean I want SC to go, just that there is an active theater seen already going on that isn't dependent and wouldn't necessarily expand with SC. Certainly the sect that will attend these wouldn't be large enough to justify the huge reconstruction expense. If SC is to survive, it needs other and additional justification than this.

You know if the city used the money from the sale of the property to build a new avante-garde theater somewhere else, it may more than make up for the loss of a non-functional Stage Center.

the city doesn't own the stage center

Thought they owned the property and it was under management by someone else. Who does own it?

Thought they owned the property and it was under management by someone else. Who does own it?

oklahoma city communtiy foundation

The Globe and other Elizabethan theaters were very similar to in-the-round theaters of today, with audiences on three sides and the action protruding into the crowd somewhat, so the Water Stage actually lends itself to Shakespeare pretty well.

Right, but would you call that a theater in the round? I'm curious just what kind of stage we would call the water stage.. esp after we've dumped so much money into it in the last five years.

As for re-assembling the Stage Center, I think that you use the brightly-colored pods, the exposed building systems (which in this case would be purely aesthetic and non-functioning), the connecting tubes, and the metal walkways. There is more than enough going on around the concrete anchor structures to be able to re-assemble it into a meaningful and unique park feature.

I'm just angry that we're now bending over backward just to design and build a boilerplate urban park when instead we should be bending over backward to design and build a park that is meaningful and locally relevant and useful. MAPS3 is nothing but money in search of a use and it just so happens to coincide with a very significant period of historic demolition. Sound familiar?

There is a small theatre with a couple of hundred seats and a standard proscenium type of stage. To my knowledge it has not been updated like the main venue at the CC. And there is another hall, but I don't think it is set up for stage shows.

And as to Stage Center being great as a play house type of setting...that is correct. I think the thing that has really killed it is the lack of up-keep and then the flooding. I guess the cost of restoration is more than it would take to build a new playhouse. And the value of the real estate is way more than can ever be recouped by a playhouse. Playhouses are not money makers. Sadly.

Yes. The reality is that Stage Center was probably over reaching for this market to begin with and it really has come down to that. Playhouses don't make much money even in the best of markets and the uniqueness of the structure has made maintenance hard and the flooding made it impossible. The economics of small scale and local independent art productions and showings is the reason why most small scale art venues are often very understated. It was actually ambitious and optimistic, to say the least, to think Oklahoma City could and would support something like Stage Center and those who did get to experience it in multiple ways were always treated to something that's hard to find in a lot of cities. So, even without the infrastructure challenges, it's long term viability in OKC may have been a long shot from the beginning.

Ideas have been floated on how to save it through re-purposing and fundraising, but it seems nothing has gotten close. I realize its just a dream to think that OKC will have both new corporate towers and a one of a kind mufti-faceted community theater to present local works. Without a rich and powerful angel, Stage Center is probably lost either way and, as a result, Oklahoma City will lose something that was unique to the city. If it hadn't run into maintenance problems that created insurmountable funding shortages, we would probably be able to have both new towers and a local performance and visual arts center. There's no doubt that there is no shortage of land in downtown Oklahoma city to build new high rises. Even as a vacant structure that some view as an eyesore, SC is not preventing anyone from building in downtown Oklahoma City. The existence of SC in any capacity and new towers are in no way mutually exclusive. So, I don't really view it as a trade off. I don't feel like "well it's okay to tear it down, if they build another skyscraper". It's just a loss. One that simply reflects the priorities of a community, priorities that are in no way unique to Oklahoma City, that doesn't feel a place like Stage Center is worth subsidizing to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

And I get that, but I'm not going to pretend that a new tower will enhance my life like Stage Center did or that I don't think it was a very cool place in which to check out some art and some plays.

But, hey, maybe the corporation that tears it down will value local art and build a couple of equally interesting venues for local productions and art shows in its place as part of its new complex. Maybe even some genius tax accountant can come up with some angle to justify it. Not counting on it, but who knows...

Right, but would you call that a theater in the round? I'm curious just what kind of stage we would call the water stage.. esp after we've dumped so much money into it in the last five years.

As for re-assembling the Stage Center, I think that you use the brightly-colored pods, the exposed building systems (which in this case would be purely aesthetic and non-functioning), the connecting tubes, and the metal walkways. There is more than enough going on around the concrete anchor structures to be able to re-assemble it into a meaningful and unique park feature.

I'm just angry that we're now bending over backward just to design and build a boilerplate urban park when instead we should be bending over backward to design and build a park that is meaningful and locally relevant and useful. MAPS3 is nothing but money in search of a use and it just so happens to coincide with a very significant period of historic demolition. Sound familiar?

I guess we can put you down in the columnfor those who are against MAPS 3

I guess we can put you down in the columnfor those who are against MAPS 3

I promise you I'm really not. I'm the biggest proponent of investing in the core with capital investment projects. But I cringe at how poorly MAPS3 is being executed. It's gruesome to watch.

You should have seen the first one. Point being, the butchering of the steer is not pretty, but hopefully we all get a steak in the end.

You should have seen the first one. Point being, the butchering of the steer is not pretty, but hopefully we all get a steak in the end.

I'm kind of tired of that phrase because it's not accurate. Besides, I did see the first one as I grew up during it, just wasn't as involved as a little runt.

MAPS1 was successful because we were so far behind at the time that we had nowhere to go but up by taking care of all the low-hanging fruit. This is so totally different. This is the art of taking a successful, revitalized mid-sized downtown to the next level altogether. So far our art is lacking vision and clarity.

Right, but would you call that a theater in the round? I'm curious just what kind of stage we would call the water stage..

It seems like a hybrid between a thrust stage and an amphatheater

There is a small theater in the basement of the Civic Center which houses "in the round" plays staged by Oklahoma Repertory Theater - CityRep. It is great. We don't really need SC to remain open to support these.

I have been to several productions at the Reduxion Theater on Broadway and it is definitely a true theater "in the round".

No Spartan, I am saying the controversies surrounding the first MAPS were FAR more mainstream than the ones surrounding this one currently are. For this MAPS the wailing and gnashing of teeth is - believe it or not - generally confined to this board and a few other places where MAPS and downtown are the primary fodder for the gristmill. The rest of the city is blissfully unaware - at least for the time being - that there are ANY significant controversies surrounding MAPS 3 and/or any of its projects.

Between 1993 and 1998, around half of OKC was legitimately convinced that MAPS was a giant scam and that roughly NONE of the projects would come to fruition. There are light years' differences in public perception between today and the mid-nineties. I'm sorry; our particular world(s) is(are) quite insular. The things that we think of as earth-shaking often don't even register with the at-large world of the 405.

No Spartan, I am saying the controversies surrounding the first MAPS were FAR more mainstream than the ones surrounding this one currently are. For this MAPS the wailing and gnashing of teeth is - believe it or not - generally confined to this board and a few other places where MAPS and downtown are the primary fodder for the gristmill. The rest of the city is blissfully unaware - at least for the time being - that there are ANY significant controversies surrounding MAPS 3 and/or any of its projects.

Between 1993 and 1998, around half of OKC was legitimately convinced that MAPS was a giant scam and that roughly NONE of the projects would come to fruition. There are light years' differences in public perception between today and the mid-nineties. I'm sorry; our particular world(s) is(are) quite insular. The things that we think of as earth-shaking often don't even register with the at-large world of the 405.

You are right about that. Everyone still had the failed "String of Pearls" fresh in their minds and had doubts that MAPS would actually materialize. The biggest outcry was that we were building a new arena across from the cox center. Opponents said "we don't need 2 arenas" and we all know how that turned out. I personally think the first MAPS projects turned out better that we expected and an fine will waiting for this one to play out. I am not losing any sleep over it anyway.

No Spartan, I am saying the controversies surrounding the first MAPS were FAR more mainstream than the ones surrounding this one currently are. For this MAPS the wailing and gnashing of teeth is - believe it or not - generally confined to this board and a few other places where MAPS and downtown are the primary fodder for the gristmill. The rest of the city is blissfully unaware - at least for the time being - that there are ANY significant controversies surrounding MAPS 3 and/or any of its projects.

Between 1993 and 1998, around half of OKC was legitimately convinced that MAPS was a giant scam and that roughly NONE of the projects would come to fruition. There are light years' differences in public perception between today and the mid-nineties. I'm sorry; our particular world(s) is(are) quite insular. The things that we think of as earth-shaking often don't even register with the at-large world of the 405.

Is this supposed to be of consolation? OKC is a conservative city and opinion of MAPS can turn on a dime if the conservabots feel threatened. So far it's become something they know to just let happen...

Is this supposed to be of consolation? OKC is a conservative city and opinion of MAPS can turn on a dime if the conservabots feel threatened. So far it's become something they know to just let happen...

Ironically it isn't "conservabots" that are the most imminent threat to MAPS - instead it is likely to come from the most liberal member of the city council who will attempt to use libertarian/conservative style talking points for political gain. The vast majority of people in very conservative OKC are fairly happy with what MAPS has accomplished for the city despite some bumps along the way.

You are right about that. Everyone still had the failed "String of Pearls" fresh in their minds and had doubts that MAPS would actually materialize. The biggest outcry was that we were building a new arena across from the cox center. Opponents said "we don't need 2 arenas" and we all know how that turned out. I personally think the first MAPS projects turned out better that we expected and an fine will waiting for this one to play out. I am not losing any sleep over it anyway.

I agree. This is going to have to be an "in hindsight" evaluation of MAPS 3. Hardly anything is done yet, or certainly none of the big ticket items. Let's withold some judgement until we're farther along in the process. And I agree with Urbanized that most people are unaware of any controversies. Even looking at our best attended meetings, there were generally more positive than negative reactions to the projects and relatively few complaints about the process or timeline. This forum and a few people outside of it create a skewed idea of what the general public is thinking, in my experience.

This forum and a few people outside of it create a skewed idea of what the general public is thinking, in my experience.

So true.

So less than 15 days until we find out ! Is anybody else counting down?

So less than 15 days until we find out ! Is anybody else counting down?

See this post (http://www.okctalk.com/other-urban-development/28630-mystery-tower-speculation-news-ideas-post-here-197.html#post664657)

Ironically it isn't "conservabots" that are the most imminent threat to MAPS - instead it is likely to come from the most liberal member of the city council who will attempt to use libertarian/conservative style talking points for political gain. The vast majority of people in very conservative OKC are fairly happy with what MAPS has accomplished for the city despite some bumps along the way.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I consider myself conservative, and voted for MAPS3, but I have a coworker who is ultra-conservative and didn't believe in any of the MAPS stuff, thought all of them were scams just to increase taxes, and felt that the city should just try to convince private entities to invest that money in projects instead of the taxpayers. Yeah, like the city doesn't already work it's tail off to get private investment.

Can we take all the Maps stuff to another forum PLEASE? Why does every thread turn into the same posturing?

...and felt that the city should just try to convince private entities to invest that money in projects instead of the taxpayers. Is that guy originally from Seattle...a Sonics fan, perhaps?

And came across this as I was making space on my iPhone 7S.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf8hhRrOPJI

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I consider myself conservative, and voted for MAPS3, but I have a coworker who is ultra-conservative and didn't believe in any of the MAPS stuff, thought all of them were scams just to increase taxes, and felt that the city should just try to convince private entities to invest that money in projects instead of the taxpayers. Yeah, like the city doesn't already work it's tail off to get private investment.


Is that guy originally from Seattle...a Sonics fan, perhaps?

I have heard that type of sentiment more from Tulsa, especially with some that remember how back in the day they had the people writing those kind of checks for seemingly everything, not nearly so much today. It is nice when you have that but really you can not count on it for everything.

Is that guy originally from Seattle...a Sonics fan, perhaps?

And came across this as I was making space on my iPhone 7S.

Yeah, I had to do a double take on that!

Maybe we will find out this month after all:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/downtown-moves-could-signal-new-tower-for-oklahoma-city/article/3862947)

Uh oh...here we go. Put your seatbelts on, everyone.

Maybe we will find out this month after all:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/downtown-moves-could-signal-new-tower-for-oklahoma-city/article/3862947)

I'm totally for the Preftakes' block being redeveloped but I certainly hope that doesn't entail the destruction of the old Hotel Black building.

nor the destruction of the auto hotel

Maybe we will find out this month after all:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/downtown-moves-could-signal-new-tower-for-oklahoma-city/article/3862947)

Wonder why comments are disabled by The Oklahoman? ;)

Out of curiosity, were a spec tower to be built, let's pretend on the Preftakes block, who would (could?) build such a structure? It's not exactly cheap, but could be very profitable for that individual.

Maybe we will find out this month after all:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/downtown-moves-could-signal-new-tower-for-oklahoma-city/article/3862947)

So I guess this is Mystery Tower #2?

Out of curiosity, were a spec tower to be built, let's pretend on the Preftakes block, who would (could?) build such a structure? It's not exactly cheap, but could be very profitable for that individual.

Doubtful it's one individual, but possibly a group lead by Mark Beffort if it were spec class A with possibly an anchor company.

Two articles in a week.....it appears things are about to pop. If it is two separate towers, and to leverage the maximum "wow" factor for OKC, I could see where behind the scenes this is being synchronized for a simultaneous announcement, or close to it, including the likes of the Mayor, Roy Williams, Cathy O'Conner, Mary Falin, CEO's like Pete Delaney, Beffort........

Maybe we will find out this month after all:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/downtown-moves-could-signal-new-tower-for-oklahoma-city/article/3862947)

What a great way to start my morning!

Just dangling that carrot.

Out of curiosity, were a spec tower to be built, let's pretend on the Preftakes block, who would (could?) build such a structure? It's not exactly cheap, but could be very profitable for that individual.

Do you not buy into the theory that Devon was behind the Preftakes' buy up of that block for a second Devon Tower?

Regarding the Preftakes block, keep in mind the City was very aggressive with their timeline for the new Main Street parking garage.

It's already well under construction and they didn't even wait around to see if they could get the housing piece to work.

Just dangling that carrot.
Exactly. Some of the "ususal suspects" trying to keep themselves pertinent.

Just dangling that carrot.

Yes and no.

Steve putting as much information out as he has, he really is on the hook for a tower (or two). If it (they) is not announced by the end of the year, he will have alienated readership. To be honest, if some sort of concrete details don't come out within the next 3 months, I can't see Steve not losing some credibility.

The "March" announcement was reasonably well predicted. The MLP was a pretty big deal and that coming to the surface, though it ended up not being a tower announcement, is every bit as sizable of an announcement as a tower announcement.

I think with all this, Steve is probably both very certain and very correct that announcement is imminent. With Pete saying similar things, I'd be willing to make a good wager that we know something before the Red River Shootout.

Do you not buy into the theory that Devon was behind the Preftakes' buy up of that block for a second Devon Tower?

No, I buy into it, but I'm leaving open other possibilities. I'm still 85% behind the idea that it's Devon.

I think we all need to give Steve a break.

He's a newspaper reporter for a big company with several editors. Trust me, he would love to be able to say more but he has built-in limitations, and that's how it should be: He does the fact-checking and we can speculate.

Most of you have no concept of what goes into one of his articles; and he cranks out several a week, plus his blog, plus his chats, tweets all the time and writes comprehensive history books on the side! I consider myself a prolific writer and I am completely in awe of what he does, especially because there is so much work around research, interviewing, and having to be get everything exactly RIGHT, otherwise people go crazy.

At some point, I should write an extensive piece about my experience in working with Bloomberg on an article about Chesapeake. Short version: I worked for weeks with one of their national reporters; even met with him for a whole day in OKC. And in the end, all of it came to virtually nothing due to their own relationship with CHK, journalistic realities and trying to please multiple editors. It was one of the most frustrating things I've ever encountered. And it was incredibly hard work!


Anyway, I really appreciate this article because Steve does present a lot of information, like people being given a hard deadline about moving out by next April, that the Devon sub-contractors leased tons of space in One N Hudson, that Preftakes won't even talk to him, etc.


Imagine OKC without Steve Lackmeyer. He does a fantastic job and is an incredible champion for downtown.

He and I also share a lot of information and I usually can't give him credit.

Just to clarify, my post was not meant to dog Steve in anyway.

I think objectively speaking (meaning as someone a non-OKCTalker) Steve has painted a picture that people are going to expect to see come to fruition soon enough. I think the general public has more patience than OKCTalk, and that's why I think you see some here think that a tower isn't even going to happen. But frequent readers of the general public will want information at some point as well and I think that point is approaching.

I also think Steve is very aware of his readership and what their expectations are and I imagine he will meet those expectations. That, or at some point he will have to be vindicated for the delay of a major story.

My guess is OG&E will build on Stage center, while Devon does on the Preftakes block and labels it a "multitenant" building so they can house their growing workforce and others who need class A space downtown.

That leaves the MLP and continental left to build in the meat future. Also, Steve tweeted me yesterday that, with the downtown housing boom, and occupancy rates very low, there are several contractors looking to build mid and high rise residential downtown, as well.

There could be a construction boom in the works for downtown in the next 5-10 years!

Just to clarify, my post was not meant to dog Steve in anyway.

Understood!

My post was more about the recent frustration by many here; something I inadvertently fueled.

I get frustrated with the traditional media as well and I posted some things that set the wrong tone, and I apologize for that.


Local journalists will never give this site it's proper due, but that will probably never change and in the end, it really doesn't make much difference.

New Video:

Downtown moves could signal new tower for Oklahoma City | News OK (http://www.newsok.com/article/3862947)

Thanks for posting that, Pete. I've kept my mouth shut on this because Steve is a longtime friend of mine, and anything I might say would surely be partisan. But I've become really dismayed how this forum seems to have become a daily referendum on Steve and his work.

Most of the negative posts I see come from people who obviously didn't go to J-school and have no idea how journalism actually works. I often see posts from folks who can't/won't differentiate between (opinion-based) columns, blog posts and hard news. He does an excellent job of staying true to each format.

We (non-journalist users of this board) have the luxury of being able to pass rumor and conjecture here for entertainment's sake and without consequence. Those who are anonymous can even pass falsehoods, with the only risk being the loss of credibility of their anonymous profiles on this board. Steve and other journalists play by a different set of rules. On the record vs. off the record must be respected. Editors must be placated. Facts must be nailed down and sourced.

I personally know of many stories (even a few blockbuster ones) that Steve had basically nailed but could not report because those directly involved remained tight-lipped. Sometimes he can get them nailed anyway thanks to inadvertent public statements by the players, or through open-records requests, but not always. He religiously honors his promises to keep off-the-record conversations and leads exactly that, even though it can be personally frustrating for him. This his how powerful sources are developed; through trust. Steve has powerful sources, largely because they know that they can trust him with off-the-record information. He might not be able to report what they tell him, but he can use it to chase the story and get it nailed elsewhere. He is a master at putting fragments together and figuring out the whole story.

Pete is absolutely correct when laying out how mind-numbing the professional reporting of news stories can be; and they can often take months if not years to come together. Many of us seem to think that major stories (and developments) happen roughly overnight. It often could not be further from the truth. Perhaps scandals reveal themselves suddenly, but large (and real) developments usually do not. For instance, I know for a fact that Steve was on the trail of the Devon Tower story for a couple of years, and had the basic facts nailed months in advance of the official announcement.

Thanks to my friendship with him, I knew many of the facts that he COULD repeat (because he trusted ME not to repeat them), but much as this thread is frustrating to many, there were a large number of things he could NOT tell me, because he had learned them in confidence. I wanted to know more, but he wouldn't/couldn't tell me. End of story. If he would have REPORTED prematurely, he would have burned sources (and placed them at-risk professionally), lost an opportunity to closely cover the construction with Devon's cooperation, and even perhaps might have jeopardized the project itself. That is weighty responsibility.

That's the way he works. If he were in a position where he had everything nailed and could professionally report the mystery tower story without violating journalistic ethics, he would do it. When he can, he will. None of us on this board, besides the other true journalists who occasionally post here, are bound by those types of restrictions, except as set by our own consciences.

That leaves the MLP and continental left to build in the meat future. Also, Steve tweeted me yesterday that, with the downtown housing boom, and occupancy rates very low, there are several contractors looking to build mid and high rise residential downtown, as well.

There could be a construction boom in the works for downtown in the next 5-10 years!

I think over the next few years (and probably even well after that), the number of residential building constructed will vastly out number the office buildings constructed. Downtown OKC is going to change and residential development will be the primary driver. It might not change the skyline as much but it will definitely thicken the urban fabric.