I know , why don't we just take the average of what we heard so far form reliable sources, 20, 28, 33, and 35. That would make it 29 stories, lol....

Well the original thought was 40 stories. That puts us at 31 :)

Everything regarding the Mystery Tower(s) is like the stock market. OKCTalk emotions are like the stock market on crack.

*like*

I don't disagree with any of this - and in fact I'm one of the few fans of Stage Center left apparently - but separately only want to point out that vista terminations, plazas or other elements that provide interesting relief from monotonous repeating street wall are only necessary when, well, when there is existing monotonous street wall. We are so far from having that problem that it is funny to even think about. We need about a generation's-worth of focus on rebuilding the urban fabric using tried-and-true urban design principles before we worry TOO much about getting fancy with the street wall.

Or, we can take our "Plätze" and develop around them...In Germany/Austria it would be called "Bühnezentrumplatz" (literally Stage Center Place), and everything on Hudson/Reno/Walker/Sheridan would be associated with and draw their identity from Stage Center. Street walls do not inherently create an urban fabric and they are not the most effective route to good urbanism. Places/Destinations are the best route. They draw people in from all places and prompt development in proximity to the place.

I would love to save the SC but realize there is <.0001% chance of that happening. I'm not really arguing to save SC...it's the reasoning presented that has me troubled because it demonstrates a possibility that we'll overlook future opportunities for similar reasons.

I'm not really arguing to save SC...it's the reasoning presented that has me troubled because it demonstrates a possibility that we'll overlook future opportunities for similar reasons.After listening to Bradley Winn at last night's get-together and seeing his video urging that we save the original Film Exchange (over on Robinson) from C2S demolition and turn it into an Oklahoma City Museum, I think perhaps we should turn our attention away from what appears to be a lost cause, and toward backing that effort -- it's exactly the sort of future opportunity that you mention, and would create a Destination for the area!

The reason why nobody will walk by Stage Center is because...get this...there's nothing to walk to...

That's a good observation. The reality is that even if this development incorporates good street interaction with retail and dining services, it will still feel pretty isolated from a walk-ability standpoint, at least initially. It will be surrounded by a park, a garage along with a lot of surface lots, a school, and Devon, which was not built with street interaction in mind. Devon looks pretty, but there's really nothing to do there for a non-employee except look at it. The block to north could change that and a repurposed Century Center could create more flow into the area. Stage Center, when active, along with the park, was really the only thing that would draw people who did not have business in the area to this intersection and, obviously, community theater is not much of a draw in OKC.

Who knows how much the developer intends to do and whether or not the Preftakes block will add to the block in a similar way, but taken on its own, initially it will be at least a block in every direction before a pedestrian will encounter other services. It will be surrounded by an urban "moat", if you will. To some extent, it could have a negative effect on establishing a dense collection of retail in downtown, as it will essentially add square footage but only in the fragmented way we have seen so far. Granted, there are a ton of moving parts and variables to all of this, but it's certainly possible that this will be more of the same when it comes to creating a contiguously walkable city center. Certainly this development won't do it on its own. I think what happens on the Preftakes block and Century Center will be just as important. With Devon, the Convention Center, and Cox being neighbors, it's going to remain fragmented for some time and every new development in the area will have to fully contribute to street interaction before there is any real improvement in the walk-ability for this quarter of downtown.

The problem though is that Stage Center exist today and it doesn't attract a crowd. For some reason people don't like to hang out in front of abandoned theaters.

The tower height is like the stock market... Rising and falling every day.

Today I heard the number is 33 -- but that's certainly not final.

How many floors today Pete?.... :)

The problem though is that Stage Center exist today and it doesn't attract a crowd. For some reason people don't like to hang out in front of abandoned theaters.

Or any of the completely undeveloped lots we have all over downtown.

Perhaps population/volume is dynamic between this tower and MT2 and/or MT3 (Mystery Tower II/III).


-signed-
Daydreamer

Considering the relationship.between Enable/Enogex and OG+E i think you're right

The problem though is that Stage Center exist today and it doesn't attract a crowd. For some reason people don't like to hang out in front of abandoned theaters.

To be real blunt, there's no much in our downtown that does, so it's not a stretch to assume SC is the same thing.

I'm not surprised you're trying to hold on to this so rigidly. But to play your game...go to Wien and find out how many locals go down to Stephansplatz to go to the Stephansdom...If you eliminated all the tourists from the area, you'd have a bustling area with little to no attention being paid to the cathedral.

But, I can assure you the Stage Center, even it's current form, would be in every OKC tourist pamphlet if there were purposeful development on the SW side of Downtown.

Obviously if the Stage Center were in use, it would be better...but I also assure you, that if you built an entire square around the theater (like we should be an entire section of the park around the Film Exchange) that pretty quickly you'd find someone ready to drop some money in the theater to make it a useful business.

To be real blunt, there's no much in our downtown that does, so it's not a stretch to assume SC is the same thing.

I'm not surprised you're trying to hold on to this so rigidly. But to play your game...go to Wien and find out how many locals go down to Stephansplatz to go to the Stephansdom...If you eliminated all the tourists from the area, you'd have a bustling area with little to no attention being paid to the cathedral.

But, I can assure you the Stage Center, even it's current form, would be in every OKC tourist pamphlet if there were purposeful development on the SW side of Downtown.

Obviously if the Stage Center were in use, it would be better...but I also assure you, that if you built an entire square around the theater (like we should be an entire section of the park around the Film Exchange) that pretty quickly you'd find someone ready to drop some money in the theater to make it a useful business.

Is the Stephansplatz usable? If not, would it take multi-million-dollars to make it usable in ANY form? The unfortunate reality of Stage Center is that it is not even usable. It would be better to remove it and replace it with art or a corn maze, or a single piddly-assed jungle gym.

Is the Stephansplatz usable? If not, would it take multi-million-dollars to make it usable in ANY form? The unfortunate reality of Stage Center is that it is not even usable. It would be better to remove it and replace it with art or a corn maze, or a single piddly-assed jungle gym.

Yes, the Stephansdom is in use. But it's a church congregation of an (relatively) inconsequential number. 25x (and that's probably a gross underestimation) more people go through that building every week as tourists than do as actual users of the building. And while the building would still garner tourists if it were placed on the outskirts of town all by itself, the number would be nowhere even close to the number that come through the building because they're in Stephansplatz or the other major corridors that lead into Stephansplatz.

What I'm saying is that of course nobody is going to Stage Center just to see Stage Center. 1. We don't have much tourism to speak of 2. Locals go to local tourist attractions rarely as tourists (i.e. I may go to the Memorial by myself, in a touristy way, once every 3 to 5 years). However, that doesn't change the fact that it is iconic. One may choose to disagree with that assertion, but that is simply a choice to be wrong.

If you bulldoze Stage Center, put in the 4 to 6 story mixed-use development that many of us crave so much, and you build that kind of development from here all the way to the river and west to Classen, why should I come to *this* spot over any other spot in this "urban utopia" established earlier in this sentence?

Again, the point isn't to save Stage Center. The point is that good urbanism is about place-making not formulaic development. And I'm sorry, but Stage Center, in the long run, beats out a block of 6 story mixed-use development. It beats out almost anything in OKC because of how unique it is.

If you bulldoze Stage Center, put in the 4 to 6 story mixed-use development that many of us crave so much, and you build that kind of development from here all the way to the river and west to Classen...

You could pull much of that off without tearing anything down, too.

The reality is that Stage Center's usability is kind of a moot point because there's so much land with nothing on it at all or, at most, just paved over for parking. I understand that Stage Center is much too unique of a structure to exist long term in a place like Oklahoma City, but it is pretty amazing that so many find it more of an eye sore than the multitude of surface and grass lots that take up so much space around it and around downtown. But, I guess parking lots are more viable than art here.

You could pull much of that off without tearing anything down, too.

The reality is that Stage Center's usability is kind of a moot point because there so much land with nothing on it all or, at most, just paved over for parking. I understand that Stage Center is much too unique of a structure to exist long term in a place like Oklahoma City, but it is pretty amazing that so many find it more of an eye sore than the multitude of surface and grass lots that take up so much space around it and around downtown. But, I guess parking lots are more viable than art here.

I don't think Stage Center's usability is a non-issue. Would anyone think that Stage Center was as wonderful as they do if it were filled with cement? I love(d) Stage Center because it's (or was) a fascinating theater. Now, however, with it's ZERO utility, it's about as interesting as this interesting grain facility: http://www.okctalk.com/norman/34718-what-structure.html. The only value to Stage Center is that it's an architectural work of art. Great, let's document it, raze it, and let the city continue to grow. Without the multi-million-dollar rehab it requires, it's blight.

The reality is that Stage Center's usability is kind of a moot point ... I understand that Stage Center is much too unique of a structure to exist long term in a place like Oklahoma City, ... I guess parking lots are more viable than art here.

Right, cause if it were not unusable then it would be helping the arts community, would probably not have been for sale (certainly not at the current asking price) and baseless shots could not be taken at OKC citizens, but due to a poorly designed roof and break-ins stripping what they can get it is at present just a liability risk. All the while the land it is on is worth a lot of money that can actually go to furthering the arts community, but we should feed bad because for some reason our theater community is not going to keep this as a perpetual monument to an architecture style that was at best controversial and always had a lot of people who never like the style.

The reality is that Stage Center's usability is kind of a moot point because there's so much land with nothing on it at all or, at most, just paved over for parking. I understand that Stage Center is much too unique of a structure to exist long term in a place like Oklahoma City, but it is pretty amazing that so many find it more of an eye sore than the multitude of surface and grass lots that take up so much space around it and around downtown. But, I guess parking lots are more viable than art here.

This building was a failure for many reasons: 1) It could not seat audiences large enough to generate a profit; 2) It was a difficult building to navigate and move around in, especially for the elderly and disabled; 3) It was difficult if not impossible to renovate it without changing the exterior; 4) The thermal inefficiency and cost to heat & cool was extraordinary; 5) No arts organization could justify the maintenance costs of such a building; and 6) The land on which it sits is far too valuable, and its highest & best use is arguably office (exclusively or mostly).

BDP, "unique" isn't what condemned this building, all of the factors I listed condemned the building. This doesn't indict Oklahoma Citians for not appreciating and supporting the arts or interesting architecture, it is a lesson for architects to make their structures functional and efficient. Remember that this building was sold to Rainey Williams' group by the Kirkpatrick Fund of the Oklahoma City Community Foundation, and it will be harder to find a larger patron of the arts in this town than John Kirkpatrick's grandson, Chris Keessee, who runs that fund.

This building was a work of art that was ironically unusable by any other artist who tried to occupy it. Think about that over the weekend.

I am perplexed by this notion that office is the highest and best use, even/especially independent of site characteristics.

I am perplexed by this notion that office is the highest and best use, even/especially independent of site characteristics.

True, but once you add its location back to the mix, residential use makes a great deal of sense, even though it is headed another direction.
Beautiful, when properly maintained, park to the east.
New elementary school to the west
Excellent library a short stroll away.
Close in to many employment opportunities in a wide, wide range.

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

Skyscrapers are far less likely to suffer major damage from tornadoes than smaller structures even in a direct hit. Downtown Ft Worth got hit directly back in 1999 I think. Atlanta got hit even more recently than that. Events like May 3rd 1999 and May 20, 2013 are supposed to be extremely rare. A normal strength tornado hitting downtown would be bad but I think it would be mostly cosmetic damage. Miami and Salt Lake City have also been directly hit by tornadoes in their downtown. Surprisingly *knock on wood* OKC has not had a downtown tornado strike in recent history.

Oklahoma City has been building skyscrapers and mid rises since 1910. Not saying it won't happen, but to say that OKC should stop building skyscrapers because of tornadoes is very shortsighted.

I've said it before and I will say it again. It s not a matter of if but a matter of when densely populated areas of Dallas will get hit by an EF5. I hope it does not happen. And I hope Dallas is prepared. I hope they have a plan, because one life lost is one life too many. It bothers me that people slam others for choosing to live in Oklahoma when they should be looking south at Texas where DFW adds hundreds of thousands of new residents each decade to what is also tornado alley. The strikes are less frequent, but Dallas is not exempt from wedge tornadoes. I pray they do not get hit.

The only reason I can see for OKC to stay away from skyscrapers is if it instead had companies buying up dead, empty and surface parkign land and doing infill building of 3-`12 story structures on that land.

Surprisingly *knock on wood* OKC has not had a downtown tornado strike in recent history.It's not exactly recent, but one went through the downtown area in the spring of 1959 and did minor cosmetic damage at SW 3 and Robinson. During most of its transit, however, it was aloft and didn't touch down. In the early 60s, another one passed just south of Main and Virginia; at that time the KTOK studios were at that location, and the news crew watched it pass by and described it on the air.

Somewhere I once had a photo of the one that went through downtown Atlanta that showed the funnel itself crossing Peachtree Street. Can't find it any more, though; probably on one of my unreadable backup tapes from the 80s/90s...

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

Link ?

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

These people probably also think the Devon Tower was a "waste of taxpayer money". Also, "We should stop investing downtown and start making the suburbs better!"

They really don't know how things work.

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

Have you been reading the comments section on Channel 9's website again? Always a treasure trove of intelligent commentary there.

Have you been reading the comments section on Channel 9's website again? Always a treasure trove of intelligent commentary there.

I think it is an excellent barometer of the public opinion. Or something..

Yay. Another tall building in downtown. How about we fill up the other buildings first.

Um all the available class A space is full...

Um all the available class A space is full...

Spoil sports always bring up facts. LOL

How full is First National Center. Or are the facts on the FNC page old and outdated?

FNC isn't class A. It is class C. If not for a corrupt owner that is getting ready to go to jail for 30 days FNC would be on its way to redevelopment already.

Gotcha. I don't just want to buildings just for the sake of filling the skyline. I want to make sure they to capacity or close it.

This city's skyline will eventually be Dallas like...not that it should, but it will be.

I suspect that any 'mostly vacant' downtown building that isn't already converted (or in the process of being converted) to office will be converted to housing/hotel. This is where Rick Dowell is losing lots and lots of money. If he would have worked with a residential developer for the Dowell Center he would be collecting rent right now.

FNC isn't class A. It is class C. If not for a corrupt owner that is getting ready to go to jail for 30 days FNC would be on its way to redevelopment already.

Exactly right. Any unused office space in the FNC has nothing to do with demand. Class A office space in downtown is in very short supply and new space will be snapped up quickly in whatever new towers are built.

Gotcha. I don't just want to buildings just for the sake of filling the skyline. I want to make sure they to capacity or close it.

I promise that no developer is going to build a new tower just to fill up the skyline.

;)

I promise that no developer is going to build a new tower just to fill up the skyline.

;)unfortunately, you're right. :( lol

Yay. Another tall building in downtown. How about we fill up the other buildings first.

Lolwut?

True, but once you add its location back to the mix, residential use makes a great deal of sense, even though it is headed another direction.
Beautiful, when properly maintained, park to the east.
New elementary school to the west
Excellent library a short stroll away.
Close in to many employment opportunities in a wide, wide range.

I agree mixed-use should be considered the highest and best use but it's not. OKC wants new office skyscrapers, nothing more or less, I guess.

There are a great number of open spaces in the immediate area suitable for residential. Sometimes best use is to provide a facility suitable for housing high paying jobs which supports residential growth. This should be a great facility in a good spot to draw companies willing to invest in high quality jobs.

I don't think we are going to see a ton of mixed use large projects for the short term future.

As long as we have large amounts of open space, you will have basically single use structures. When vacant land becomes scarce, developers will need to diversify the use of their land developments to get a maximum return on investment.

There are a great number of open spaces in the immediate area suitable for residential. Sometimes best use is to provide a facility suitable for housing high paying jobs which supports residential growth. This should be a great facility in a good spot to draw companies willing to invest in high quality jobs.

These jobs don't necessarily support downtown residential growth. An inordinate portion of downtown residents still commute home TO downtown from the suburbs.

And likewise, there are a great number of open spaces in the immediate area suitable for office. It's just that OKC development does have warped priorities.

Yes, jobs and commerce sure are warped....who needs them. We can all work for min wage and support a great city. Lol.

also, I'm sure (and rightfully so) that downtown will always have more jobs/employment that will draw on the suburbs. We surely do not want it to be the other way around do we?

What we want is a healthy downtown business district with healthy entertainment and residential districts ringing the CBD; hence the design of downtown OKC as it is today. The main issue aside from the healthy CBD (which we're working on, significantly - thankfully) is the residential population (which we're also working on, organically - thankfully). These all take time but I am sure things will be like we all want in about 5-10 years.

I must say it is nice that OKC has its medical district (hence a 2ndary CBD) so close by. Having the Oklahoma Health Center + the Capitol Campus only 2 miles or less away takes the pressure off the CBD to be the high wage earner by itself, which is what is making central OKC successful right now until the CBD can reach critical mass (say 50,000+ office workers).

Some people are actually saying that Oklahoma City needs stop building skyscappers because of the fact that we have so many tornadoes

That would be a very bizarre thing to say. There reason it feels like we have more tornadoes now is because they do more damage and the reason they do more damage is because development keeps spreading out, effectively creating a larger target. You can never predict exactly where a tornado will go or what it will hit, even when its happening, but the odds of one hitting something go up the more cities spread out.

That would be a very bizarre thing to say. There reason it feels like we have more tornadoes now is because they do more damage and the reason they do more damage is because development keeps spreading out, effectively creating a larger target. You can never predict exactly where a tornado will go or what it will hit, even when its happening, but the odds of one hitting something go up the more cities spread out.



This concept is actually very difficult to understand for general population (especially outside of tornado areas). It amazes me how many people think it is actually easy to get hit by tornados.

Yes, jobs and commerce sure are warped....who needs them. We can all work for min wage and support a great city. Lol.

Nah jobs are great but for housing we can just throw the little worker bees in some tents or trailers or some other semblance.of workforce housing. Like ND

Nah jobs are great but for housing we can just throw the little worker bees in some tents or trailers or some other semblance.of workforce housing. Like ND

We have plenty of surface lots to build housing on too. We have been doing a pretty good job of getting housing starts downtown, especially affordable housing. Using this location for a Class A office use is a pretty reasonable and high use. Too many on here act like the ONLY thing that is important to build a strong core is cheap apartments and places to get drunk. It is nice to have a strong core of well paying jobs for all us minions to be able to afford those apartments and condos we want, and to have spending money to frequent the cafes and bars. Walking around on the street looking at all the cool urban architecture is not the end all and be all of urban development....affording it is also necessary. Don't know why this isn't considered a good office site by some. Especially since it has already indicated a couple of floors of retail at street level.

I must say it is nice that OKC has its medical district (hence a 2ndary CBD) so close by. Having the Oklahoma Health Center + the Capitol Campus only 2 miles or less away takes the pressure off the CBD to be the high wage earner by itself, which is what is making central OKC successful right now until the CBD can reach critical mass (say 50,000+ office workers).

Just think though if downtown, the medical complex, and the capitol complex where all in the same place. Alas, the modernist movement that influenced so much OKC development dictated that every use should be isolated from every other use (business goes over here, medical/education goes over there, government use goes up that way).

I tell people all the time, OKC would be just like Austin if we had our capitol district, medical district and OU all downtown.

I tell people all the time, OKC would be just like Austin if we had our capitol district, medical district and OU all downtown.

No doubt.

I hope we could do better than Austin - but I know what you mean. I would prefer Madison, WI (which will blow your mind if you aren't familiar with it).

We have plenty of surface lots to build housing on too. We have been doing a pretty good job of getting housing starts downtown, especially affordable housing. Using this location for a Class A office use is a pretty reasonable and high use. Too many on here act like the ONLY thing that is important to build a strong core is cheap apartments and places to get drunk. It is nice to have a strong core of well paying jobs for all us minions to be able to afford those apartments and condos we want, and to have spending money to frequent the cafes and bars. Walking around on the street looking at all the cool urban architecture is not the end all and be all of urban development....affording it is also necessary. Don't know why this isn't considered a good office site by some. Especially since it has already indicated a couple of floors of retail at street level.

Yes, warped.

Sorry we have so many cheap apartments and places to get drunk, I guess it's that pesky free market thing. Nobody can afford what you'd consider to be not a cheap apartment.

OKC's best development site needs to see a major mixed-use development like the kind we sorely lack, it's that simple. Not another energy corporation. As for this project, as far as I'm concerned we don't have a proposal yet, so your attempts to pigeon hole urbanists in a corner are premature. I don't know if I like this tower or not because I know nothing about it and nor does anyone else.

I'm just saying that I wish we weren't surrounding these beautiful parks with nothing but energy corporations. Your attempt to frame a land use and urban design debate on pro vs anti JOBS is absurd and smacks of trolling.

I tell people all the time, OKC would be just like Austin if we had our capitol district, medical district and OU all downtown.

Some helicopter flyover videos of Austin for comparison:

Lady Bird Lake Hike and Bike Trail Helicopter Tour in Downtown Austin Texas - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCLFNnp_FWc)

Helicopter Ride Over Austin - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZErHPKnSbQ)

Downtown Austin Condo Helicopter Tour 555 Capitol of Texas Terrace on Shoal Creek Nokonah - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W-KI6yZWGY)

I tell people all the time, OKC would be just like Austin if we had our capitol district, medical district and OU all downtown.

Political party affiliation aside...yes.

Why are we now obsessed with Austin on a Stage Center Tower thread? Who cares about Austin?

Yes, warped.

Sorry we have so many cheap apartments and places to get drunk, I guess it's that pesky free market thing. Nobody can afford what you'd consider to be not a cheap apartment.

OKC's best development site needs to see a major mixed-use development like the kind we sorely lack, it's that simple. Not another energy corporation. As for this project, as far as I'm concerned we don't have a proposal yet, so your attempts to pigeon hole urbanists in a corner are premature. I don't know if I like this tower or not because I know nothing about it and nor does anyone else.

I'm just saying that I wish we weren't surrounding these beautiful parks with nothing but energy corporations. Your attempt to frame a land use and urban design debate on pro vs anti JOBS is absurd and smacks of trolling.

Thats the best insulting you can do?

You are actually agreeing with me that it is way too early to condemn this use when we have no actual plans yet. To throw a tantrum that if it doesn't have housing it isn't a good use for the site is terribly myopic and rigid. Putting mixed use all along a major park will be an option. This isn't the only parkside space to be available. We will have a great deal of available space near the new park and at a better price for the developers. Throwing a fit and insulting people you don't agree with is just uncalled for. I guess trolling is anyone who doesn't agree huh?

Why are we now obsessed with Austin on a Stage Center Tower thread? Who cares about Austin?

Sorry thread police... please don't take me to jail lol.

Yeah, this thread is only for Rover and I kvetching at eachother and nothing else, get on topic!


Thats the best insulting you can do?

You are actually agreeing with me that it is way too early to condemn this use when we have no actual plans yet. To throw a tantrum that if it doesn't have housing it isn't a good use for the site is terribly myopic and rigid. Putting mixed use all along a major park will be an option. This isn't the only parkside space to be available. We will have a great deal of available space near the new park and at a better price for the developers. Throwing a fit and insulting people you don't agree with is just uncalled for. I guess trolling is anyone who doesn't agree huh?

All I know is this is the era where the best development sites and historic buildings get eaten up buy energy corporation HQ campuses and beautiful, verdant parks get split up by convention centers. And you, Rover, argue on behalf of it all more than anyone.

You can disagree but it becomes trolling when you unfairly characterize anyone who disagrees with you as anti-jobs. I'm obv so anti-job I moved to rust belt America to get one. As for more land, why can't the energy corporations go elsewhere? Why is everything else expected to go on the scraps surrounding the energy metropolis? This park will be surrounded by Enable, a new convention center, an old convention, and Devon. Honestly, Devon is awesome, but as a part of that awful mix even Devon sucks.

I am so annoyed as well at everyone saying to stop complaining about the Myriad Gardens land use because not to worry, we'll do it right with the next one. Which we clearly aren't by separating it with a CC and tearing down every historic building that is EVEN JUST visible from the park. And what happens when an energy corporation wants to build ere, too? It never ends. OKC's economy is growing and energy is booming and Enable, just like Devon was, is far from the last new energy campus we'll add to downtown. We will be dealing with this issue over and over and setting lower and lower precedents the whole way unless we reaffirm and build on the high standard set by Devon.

So yes I am annoyed and want real mixed use that we all know isn't going to happen. That's why the CBD core is still completely dead. And that's what we're enveloping the Myriad Gardens with.