There was a real plan to turn it into a Children's art museum, which would be perfect. They just couldn't get funding. And as I said, there is so much open land in downtown Oklahoma City that I don't see why the Stage Center site is the only option for a 20 story tower. That is a pretty significant piece of real estate. Are we so desperate for any construction downtown that we allow something as cool as the Stage Center to be destroyed for a tower being built on spec?

I think the Stage Center would make a very nice museum of modern art. Ever seen the Pompidou Museum in Paris?

Even though the both have an unusual exterior, Stage Center center will be difficult to transition to anything but a theater, even that is prohibitively expensive and apparently it was not very flexible as a theater either.

Although MF does need room to expand(they've offered to buy 2 of CHK's buildings near them, which CHK was not willing to sell at this time), I can't see them being a tenant in the new SC tower for 2 reasons: 1)Jeff Records likes his office to be close to his home, and 2)He is a buyer, not a renter.
It could also be done as a "turnkey" project for a specific client, with the "tenant" purchasing the building after a CoO is issued.

Did you guys all of a sudden forget that it costs $30 million to fix it?

Did you guys all of a sudden forget that it costs $30 million to fix it?

Nooooo....... it can probably be done for $5M. It's mostly flood damage.

I am willing to listen if we're talking about replacing this site with an iconic structure. That said, I'm just not willing to talk about tearing the Stage Center down until someone shows me an iconic structure they will build on the site.

It's that simple. We all got caught up in assuming an iconic structure was in the works. I'm not saying I don't think one is in the works, either, but it sounds far from being 100%.

In this case I don't yet think we are ready to entertain tearing the Stage Center down. Like I said, it's that simple. Let's be reasonable here, we should NEVER be gung ho about tearing down an icon, nor we should we prevent something truly magnificent for fear of change. I'm not fighting a preservation battle this time, I'm just saying that both sides need to be reasonable and give a little.

Nooooo....... it can probably be done for $5M. It's mostly flood damage.
I think the number is somewhere in between. The 30MM figure was floated out by those wishing to see the building gone knowing that it was such an absurd number to justify their position.

So won't putting another tower almost right next to the Devon Tower sort of screw up the view (from the Devon)?
Or is that just a misplaced urbane feng shui concern?

So won't putting another tower almost right next to the Devon Tower sort of screw up the view (from the Devon)?
Or is that just a misplaced urbane feng shui concern?

Unless they like the view of stage center it should not be blocking any key points of interest at the current time. Building on the Preftakes block could block some peoples view of sunset parts of the year depending on how tall, wide and exact position it is

Interesting find in the NewsOK.com comments on Steve's downtown demolition story - does this refer to the area south of Stage Center or the Preftakes block?

Matt McDowall · Follow · London, United Kingdom
What about the millions of parking lots downtown? Surely they could be consolidated into a multi-storey structure and towers built in the remaining empty lots.
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 8 hours ago

Steve Lackmeyer · Top Commenter · Business reporter and columnist at The Oklahoman
Matt, in the downtown core those surface parking lots have pretty much disappeared. The only lots left are the ones across from Stage Center that are set to be used as part of another development. I understand your frustration and I'm not taking sides - just showing why we've gotten where we are now.
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 7 hours ago

With all the talk of parking limited downtown, has the old car dealer site been considered for temporarily used for parking till they construction gets to the point the asphalt needs to go. Of hand I do not remember any cars being parked there in a long time during the day.

I hope it does'nt turn into one of these type projects. A pretty picture which turns into a nondescript spec office building...

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/14972015_BG21.jpg (http://s278.photobucket.com/user/gandjdunlap/media/14972015_BG21.jpg.html)

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/1-View-from-NE-LARGE1-460x310.jpg (http://s278.photobucket.com/user/gandjdunlap/media/1-View-from-NE-LARGE1-460x310.jpg.html)

Nooooo....... it can probably be done for $5M. It's mostly flood damage.

I am willing to listen if we're talking about replacing this site with an iconic structure. That said, I'm just not willing to talk about tearing the Stage Center down until someone shows me an iconic structure they will build on the site.

It's that simple. We all got caught up in assuming an iconic structure was in the works. I'm not saying I don't think one is in the works, either, but it sounds far from being 100%.

In this case I don't yet think we are ready to entertain tearing the Stage Center down. Like I said, it's that simple. Let's be reasonable here, we should NEVER be gung ho about tearing down an icon, nor we should we prevent something truly magnificent for fear of change. I'm not fighting a preservation battle this time, I'm just saying that both sides need to be reasonable and give a little.

Well for some reason the people who tried to save it said it would take $30 million. A city study in 2003 estimate it would cost just over $17 million to bring it up to modern standards, and that was before the 2010 floods and damage and 10 additional years of neglect.

Saving Johansen’s Stage Center | News | Architectural Record (http://archrecord.construction.com/news/2012/02/Johansen-Theater.asp)

Look, high cost or not, modern standards notwithstanding, skyscraper or not, I just don't want Stage Center torn down for this:


I hope it does'nt turn into one of these type projects. A pretty picture which turns into a nondescript spec office building...

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/14972015_BG21.jpg (http://s278.photobucket.com/user/gandjdunlap/media/14972015_BG21.jpg.html)

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/1-View-from-NE-LARGE1-460x310.jpg (http://s278.photobucket.com/user/gandjdunlap/media/1-View-from-NE-LARGE1-460x310.jpg.html)

I wouldn't mind tearing it down for a 20 story residential tower. But I don't think we need to surround the Myriad Gardens with anymore nondescript office buildings. If it's office, on that site, it needs to match the standard established by Devon Tower or it needs to accommodate some mixed-uses beyond just a first floor retail arcade.

Well, where's that developer at? We've been waiting & calling on him for quite awhile, but we're still sitting here looking at an empty Stage Center.To be realistic, I don't think there is one. If I had millions to blow, I would do it. I highly doubt whoever invest in it would ever get their return, or it would take a really long time. What we need is a dev who has heart and can see that this is something we will likely miss down the road.

Someone said in the retail thread that the only reason we want an Ikea or QT or these other stores that really aren't that big of a deal, is they aren't here. So the only reason we want it, is because we don't have it. Once we get it, it won't be that big of deal in year or two. Bass Pro is the same way, when it was first built it was like "ah we're going to Bass Pro AWESOME!!!!" now it's more like "we're going to Bass Pro, meh cool". This is reversed for the Stage Center. Once it's gone and a new tower is built, not many people will likely miss it, but down the road, I think we will regret it as this "awesome" office tower ages and isn't really significant in any way, esp. if we get 3-5 more super-tall buildings(50-80 story). Even if it is 30 years down the road, we will still hate ourselves.

What I'm trying to say is, when this building that will replace the Stage Center is built, it will be cool and impressive for some, but down the road in 20 years when we have other massive buildings built and this thing starts to age, I think we will regret it.

Unless somebody can fix up the Stage Center & make it function properly again then I don't care if it's a 20 story tower or an 80 story tower, an unused building shouldn't just be sitting there doing nothing on such a prime spot that has proposals lined up to build something that will actually function with the rest of downtown.Well, I'm still sticking to my statement, if it were a taller building, I'd be less sympathetic, but now that I really think about it, I still think it could be built somewhere else. Just my opinion though. I'm not attached to the Stage Center and never gave it much thought until now, but I think it will be missed and there isn't much like it anywhere.

There was a real plan to turn it into a Children's art museum, which would be perfect. They just couldn't get funding. And as I said, there is so much open land in downtown Oklahoma City that I don't see why the Stage Center site is the only option for a 20 story tower. That is a pretty significant piece of real estate. Are we so desperate for any construction downtown that we allow something as cool as the Stage Center to be destroyed for a tower being built on spec?Agreed and this is one of the things that bothers me the most now.

Nooooo....... it can probably be done for $5M. It's mostly flood damage.

I am willing to listen if we're talking about replacing this site with an iconic structure. That said, I'm just not willing to talk about tearing the Stage Center down until someone shows me an iconic structure they will build on the site.

It's that simple. We all got caught up in assuming an iconic structure was in the works. I'm not saying I don't think one is in the works, either, but it sounds far from being 100%.

In this case I don't yet think we are ready to entertain tearing the Stage Center down. Like I said, it's that simple. Let's be reasonable here, we should NEVER be gung ho about tearing down an icon, nor we should we prevent something truly magnificent for fear of change. I'm not fighting a preservation battle this time, I'm just saying that both sides need to be reasonable and give a little.Very reasonable and fair approach to this.

I heard that one possible reason One North Hudson (Hotel Black) is being emptied is to house the construction workers while they are working on the new tower. Just rumors.

I heard that one possible reason One North Hudson (Hotel Black) is being emptied is to house the construction workers while they are working on the new tower. Just rumors.

Interesting. Well, there's probably nothing to it, but I really like the idea. Why?

Rainey Williams has already stated that the Arts Festival 2014 (in late April) will not be affected by construction (meaning they won't have started yet), but would not say the same for the festival in 2015. That means the absolute earliest that construction on the tower would begin is early May 2014. If the old Hotel Black is actually being prepped for worker housing, that would imply that this very early, fast track schedule for beginning construction could actually take place.

So, I like that rumor.

To be realistic, I don't think there is one. If I had millions to blow, I would do it. I highly doubt whoever invest in it would ever get their return, or it would take a really long time. What we need is a dev who has heart and can see that this is something we will likely miss down the road.

Someone said in the retail thread that the only reason we want an Ikea or QT or these other stores that really aren't that big of a deal, is they aren't here. So the only reason we want it, is because we don't have it. Once we get it, it won't be that big of deal in year or two. Bass Pro is the same way, when it was first built it was like "ah we're going to Bass Pro AWESOME!!!!" now it's more like "we're going to Bass Pro, meh cool". This is reversed for the Stage Center. Once it's gone and a new tower is built, not many people will likely miss it, but down the road, I think we will regret it as this "awesome" office tower ages and isn't really significant in any way, esp. if we get 3-5 more super-tall buildings(50-80 story). Even if it is 30 years down the road, we will still hate ourselves.

What I'm trying to say is, when this building that will replace the Stage Center is built, it will be cool and impressive for some, but down the road in 20 years when we have other massive buildings built and this thing starts to age, I think we will regret it.

I think we'll have to wait until a rendering comes out to know for sure. I agree we shouldn't destroy the Stage Center for a mediocre 20 story tower, but that may not be what is planned.

I think we'll have to wait until a rendering comes out to know for sure. I agree we shouldn't destroy the Stage Center for a mediocre 20 story tower, but that may not be what is planned.Hell, I'm sure Charlotte was getting a new 20 story announced once a month or more lol

A few days back I created a graphic containing my best guesses for basic info on the "mystery tower".

But now that the Mystery Tower has been revealed, I'm posting an updated version of the graphic that contains all the information that we now know about the tower:

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/hctvy1pxkfbdozs/sc_tower_figures.jpg

Man, I'm sure glad that the mystery is finally over!

:(

Well, I'm still sticking to my statement, if it were a taller building, I'd be less sympathetic, but now that I really think about it, I still think it could be built somewhere else. Just my opinion though. I'm not attached to the Stage Center and never gave it much thought until now, but I think it will be missed and there isn't much like it anywhere.

The problem is, no one on this board knows the height of the new proposed building. It's just all presumptions it'll be around 20 floors. Also, if it's absolute first class ala Devon, that takes a new development a long way. I'd still like seeing the north elemsnt somehow worked into the new tower, but who knows if that's possible.

I heard that one possible reason One North Hudson (Hotel Black) is being emptied is to house the construction workers while they are working on the new tower. Just rumors.

This is what happened when Devon was being built. Not really emptied, but the construction management teams took a few floors.

I think the Stage Center would make a very nice museum of modern art. Ever seen the Pompidou Museum in Paris?

Yes I have, and it is one of the few buildings in the world that is uglier than Stage Center. Plus, I don't think OKC would be a good place for a modern art museum.

People who want Stage Center to stay need to get over it. There was only one taker to keep it and the plan for a Children's museum was going to cost almost $30 million and then continue to need subsidized to the tune of $100,000 a month. It was a losing option no matter how you look at it.

So, Stage Center will be torn down and the City will move on, as it should.

In this case I don't yet think we are ready to entertain tearing the Stage Center down.

Who is the WE you are referring to, or are just using the royal we?

Before anyone panics that it isn't tall enough:

RSA Battle House Tower - Mobile, AL
35 floors (25 office floors, 3 lobby floors, 4 hotel floors, and 1 service floor)
Height 745 feet includes 202' spire

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/71066999.jpg

Terrible street interaction. I expect better, JTF.

Terrible street interaction. I expect better, JTF.

No doubt, which I why I posted a picture of the entire buidling and not just the top. For street interaction it is among the worst I have ever seen (go to Google StreetView and check it out). You should see how it conects to the convention center. I only posted it for those who only seem to care about height. It has a 200' spire on top.

If we can just nail down the architect we would instantly know what quality this office tower. Meaning if the architect was Pickard Chilton or Cesar Pelli, we would know it will be "world class", but if it was somebody local like Miller Associates or ADG, then we might be in trouble, lol.

Hell, I'm sure Charlotte was getting a new 20 story announced once a month or more lol

Charlotte had their building boom in the 2000s but today it has come nearly to a halt. I doubt they get any new towers any time soon with their local economy the way it is. I am not sure what you meant by this comment.

I heard that one possible reason One North Hudson (Hotel Black) is being emptied is to house the construction workers while they are working on the new tower. Just rumors.

The building was much more full when the Devon contractors were in there than is is now.


Also, sorry for not being able to update the article but I am traveling with limited wi-fi access and time. I'll get back in the swing tomorrow and will follow up with my sources to see if this can be sorted out a bit more.

Lots and lots of moving parts but only there is so much interest in downtown development by developers and companies.

If we can just nail down the architect we would instantly know what quality this office tower. Meaning if the architect was Pickard Chilton or Cesar Pelli, we would know it will be "world class", but if it was somebody local like Miller Associates or ADG, then we might be in trouble, lol.

Leroy's Bricklaying and Tile, I think.

If we can just nail down the architect we would instantly know what quality this office tower. Meaning if the architect was Pickard Chilton or Cesar Pelli, we would know it will be "world class", but if it was somebody local like Miller Associates or ADG, then we might be in trouble, lol.

Agreed. And this is a piece of information that could be "leaked" without revealing any other specifics on the height, floor count, tenants, etc.

I am curious, though -- does it have to be a famous out-of-town architectural firm for the building to be world class? Certainly I will be thrilled if I find out that Pickard Chilton or someone else of their reputation is designing the tower. But is there no local architectural firm that would be capable of creating a truly first rate building design? I'm not trying to be cute or sarcastic... I really don't know.

Agreed. And this is a piece of information that could be "leaked" without revealing any other specifics on the height, floor count, tenants, etc.

I am curious, though -- does it have to be a famous out-of-town architectural firm for the building to be world class? Certainly I will be thrilled if I find out that Pickard Chilton or someone else of their reputation is designing the tower. But is there no local architectural firm that would be capable of creating a truly first rate building design? I'm not trying to be cute or sarcastic... I really don't know.

The only local architect I think that would do a good job on this, if it had to be a local, I would say Rand Elliot. The new office buildings his firm designed for the Chesapeake campus are pretty sleek and modern.

http://www.e-a-a.com/

Before anyone panics that it isn't tall enough:

RSA Battle House Tower - Mobile, AL
35 floors (25 office floors, 3 lobby floors, 4 hotel floors, and 1 service floor)
Height 745 feet includes 202' spire

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/71066999.jpg

Thank you. Story count doesn't include the crowns/spires of some. It doesn't have to be a supertall to be iconic. Frost Bank in Austin or a mini BOA Tower in Charlotte type top is greatly needed (IMO) in DTOKC. What if they compromised with the demo of SC and hired an architect that maybe could incorporate some of it's elements or Frank Lloyd Wright's style into a tower? I'm hopeful we would end up with a really cool, iconic, unique tower (like Frost) easily seen by anyone passing by on 40, going to Thunder games or spending time at Myriad/C2S Park.

Yes, it's not the size of the tower that is as much of a concern, it's all about architecture. The Stage Center is all about the architecture too. That's why some of us love it so much and don't want to see it replaced by the mundane. The question is: Will a developer in OKC who's not built any other large buildings (as far as I know) have the vision and be willing to spend the money on a world-class architect and world class materials for a tower built on speculation? If the answer is yes, then like before, I might at least understand why people would be willing to demolish the most decorated piece of architecture in the city. If we're going to get a square beige or glass building the only significance of which is the fact that it's taller than the Stage Center, then I would question why it couldn't be built elsewhere. I know Tom Ward has a piece of land on Broadway.

Yes, its all about the quality of the development not necessarily the height. There are some really nicely designed 20 story towers. Below is an example of a new 20 story office tower planned for Houston:

http://highrisefacilities.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Energy-Center-Three-Kirksey-Architecture.jpg

In Steve's article, Williams says:

“I've been in this community my entire life, and we've seen where out-of-state owners didn't work out as well.
We're going to build a high-rise that will be world class in every way.”

Let's hope that he is true to his word.

I would be happy with something like this to replace Stage Center, both 20 stories:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/21/45/65/4611441/5/rawImage.jpg

Yes, several folk have alternative bits of land. I hope something goes on all of them in the coming years. However, SC has sat all but abandoned since 2010, and recently dealt with yet another flood issue that likely received little work to truly abate.

It is an interesting shaped, very remarkable, structure. It is also a dead structure, with no one, notwithstanding what appeared to be a sincere effort a short time back, willing to bring it back to a usable status.

I wish it was otherwise, but it just isn't.

Nice rendering, G. Walker. Yeah, that's a pretty slick tower.

I seriously doubt, though, that we're actually getting only a 20 story tower. I think what's finally built will be much taller than that. (*cross fingers*)

If we end up getting a 20 story tower, that is nicely designed like the examples above, that would be great. If I had to make an educated guess, I think it will end up being 25-30 stories high, I doubt we will see it taller than that. Devon Tower set the bar really high, and we can't expect every office tower we get to be on that same level, Devon Tower is a once in generation iconic tower.

Even though the both have an unusual exterior, Stage Center center will be difficult to transition to anything but a theater, even that is prohibitively expensive and apparently it was not very flexible as a theater either.

I went to a few art showings there and it was a very cool venue for it and I have never seen a theater used in such creative ways. It was different, for sure, but it was way more flexible that say Freede Little Theater, which only offers a traditional stage set up, one that is available in just about every high school auditorium in existence. There are a lot of cities of Oklahoma City's size that don't have any theater options that Stage Center offered. It was very unique in that way and part of the reason it was celebrated, but also probably part of the reason it didn't last in a city like Oklahoma City.

You often hear people question why Oklahoma City can not offer the arts and culture that ever smaller peer cities have. Well, there are several examples of why in this very thread. Oklahoma City, in general, has a very narrow definition of what constitutes art or creativity, and it does not have a big enough constituency that value out of the ordinary works or aesthetically challenging art and design for it to exist here. The result is that anything that does not manage some sort of mass appeal struggles, disappears completely, or simply never shows up. The irony is that the local art community is full of talent and puts on tons of great events, but few people of the non-artist general public (i.e. would be art "consumers") take notice. In the end, this is why Stage Center is a multi-million dollar problem now. This is why Oklahoma City struggles to match other peer communities in terms of art venues and performance facilities and continues to go backwards, not forwards, in that capacity. In general, enough people just don't care about them. It seems Stage Center was a reach for OKC from the beginning.

I'm not trying to be critical, I'm just pointing it out. Really, in general, this is a community that champions the latest chain restaurant pad site development on Memorial or Broadway, yet can never seem to muster up enough enthusiasm for its unique developments for them to survive. Simply put, Stage Center wasn't enough like something else, found somewhere else, for it to be accepted here. A city's developments and structures simply reflect the values and way of life of its community and they do so objectively. The disintegration of Stage Center and its impending demolition to make way for something that makes Oklahoma City look and feel like something more familiar is simply a reflection the broader community's disinterest in fostering a uniquely Oklahoma City experience. Most people measure this city's relative worth based on what we have or get that others have, not based on what we have that no one else has.

All that said, OKC is probably at a point where it has more pride in itself and has more people interested in developing a less homogenous way of life for the city. But, for the most part, these people still don't have enough resources or access to make singular "angelic" saves like the one Stage Center requires. They can only make slow collective efforts like you see Better Block doing, which has helped foster some of the most interesting developmental turnarounds in the city and is actually helping create things that feel like Oklahoma City experiences as opposed to imported concepts.

Obviously, Oklahoma City does not need this lot to have a new 20-40 story tower, whether iconic or not. That's instantly apparent to anyone who takes a 2 minute drive around downtown. It is just the one preferred by this developer. A developer who is familiar enough with the market's general attitude towards unique development and the arts, that he knows any resistance to his project will be mostly ceremonial. And, in the end, I don't think I would blame Williams for not going out on a limb to build an "iconic" spec tower. Usually, such an effort requires some level of unique and creative design. In this market, that can introduce unnecessary risk, which is not exactly the best coarse of action for a spec development (if that's what this actually turns out to be).

I went to a few art showings there and it was a very cool venue for it and I have never seen a theater used in such creative ways. It was different, for sure, but it was way more flexible that say Freede Little Theater, which only offers a traditional stage set up, one that is available in just about every high school auditorium in existence. There are a lot of cities of Oklahoma City's size that don't have any theater options that Stage Center offered. It was very unique in that way and part of the reason it was celebrated, but also probably part of the reason it didn't last in a city like Oklahoma City.

You often hear people question why Oklahoma City can not offer the arts and culture that ever smaller peer cities have. Well, there are several examples of why in this very thread. Oklahoma City, in general, has a very narrow definition of what constitutes art or creativity, and it does not have a big enough constituency that value out of the ordinary works or aesthetically challenging art and design for it to exist here. The result is that anything that does not manage some sort of mass appeal struggles, disappears completely, or simply never shows up. The irony is that the local art community is full of talent and puts on tons of great events, but few people of the non-artist general public (i.e. would be art "consumers") take notice. In the end, this is why Stage Center is a multi-million dollar problem now. This is why Oklahoma City struggles to match other peer communities in terms of art venues and performance facilities and continues to go backwards, not forwards, in that capacity. In general, enough people just don't care about them. It seems Stage Center was a reach for OKC from the beginning.

I'm not trying to be critical, I'm just pointing it out. Really, in general, this is a community that champions the latest chain restaurant pad site development on Memorial or Broadway, yet can never seem to muster up enough enthusiasm for its unique developments for them to survive. Simply put, Stage Center wasn't enough like something else, found somewhere else, for it to be accepted here. A city's developments and structures simply reflect the values and way of life of its community and they do so objectively. The disintegration of Stage Center and its impending demolition to make way for something that makes Oklahoma City look and feel like something more familiar is simply a reflection the broader community's disinterest in fostering a uniquely Oklahoma City experience. Most people measure this city's relative worth based on what we have or get that others have, not based on what we have that no one else has.

All that said, OKC is probably at a point where it has more pride in itself and has more people interested in developing a less homogenous way of life for the city. But, for the most part, these people still don't have enough resources or access to make singular "angelic" saves like the one Stage Center requires. They can only make slow collective efforts like you see Better Block doing, which has helped foster some of the most interesting developmental turnarounds in the city and is actually helping create things that feel like Oklahoma City experiences as opposed to imported concepts.

Obviously, Oklahoma City does not need this lot to have a new 20-40 story tower, whether iconic or not. That's instantly apparent to anyone who takes a 2 minute drive around downtown. It is just the one preferred by this developer. A developer who is familiar enough with the market's general attitude towards unique development and the arts, that he knows any resistance to his project will be mostly ceremonial. And, in the end, I don't think I would blame Williams for not going out on a limb to build an "iconic" spec tower. Usually, such an effort requires some level of unique and creative design. In this market, that can introduce unnecessary risk, which is not exactly the best coarse of action for a spec development (if that's what this actually turns out to be).

Outstanding piece of writing. Kudos.

I would be happy with something like this to replace Stage Center, both 20 stories:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/21/45/65/4611441/5/rawImage.jpg

To me, that's just a glass box. Meh. But I just spent the last week in Chicago and that kind of how I feel about everything here right now.

Outstanding piece of writing. Kudos.

It's sad that the subject of that excellent post was about mediocrity.

I'll wait until there is more concrete information about this whole situation before I form an opinion. I'm still in a wait and see mode.

Yep, BDP nailed it. Sad commentary.

Something like penzoil place in Houston wold be pretty cool

It's sad that the subject of that excellent post was about mediocrity.

I agree. BDP put it in a way I hadn't thought of before. The standard of mediocrity around here compared to almost anywhere else is mindnumbing and hits the nail on the head of why I've had such a difficult time adjusting to it here from Charlotte. All of my complaints about OKC can be summed up by that. Question is, why is that? What makes OKC different from Tulsa, Austin, Kansas City, Albuquerque, etc that the majority has so much lower standards?

We've basically been told of the most stripped down version. At the minimum, we are looking at a 20 story box. That is not very exciting at all. I would say that's probably not what people were expecting when they did their own internal balancing to come to peace with losing Stage Center. It feels underwhelming. If this is just going to be a 20 story box then they can put something like that anywhere. I don't want another Oklahoma Tower there.

Now if this later proves to be a 40 story, 700 foot tower with a beautiful design, I'll be able to stomach the loss much more easily. What we as a city need to say is that the minimum is not enough.

Agreed. And this is a piece of information that could be "leaked" without revealing any other specifics on the height, floor count, tenants, etc.

I am curious, though -- does it have to be a famous out-of-town architectural firm for the building to be world class? Certainly I will be thrilled if I find out that Pickard Chilton or someone else of their reputation is designing the tower. But is there no local architectural firm that would be capable of creating a truly first rate building design? I'm not trying to be cute or sarcastic... I really don't know.
There is plenty of talent in OKC that are capable of doing a tower and not just the CD's. Most have never had the opportunity presented to them but that doesn't mean they don't have some towers floating around in their head or on a board somewhere.....I know that I do.

People in OKC always seem to have the mentality that someone from out of town is always better than someone at home so talented people don't get that chance because of location. I work with a guy who worked for SOM in Chicago for many years before moving back to Denver and another one in Austin, you never really know what someones experience is based off of what the office produces because most offices don't have the chance at doing that kind of work. We can only do the type of projects that we can get contracted for and in many cases the client and/or budget dictates poor design, most architects are not trying to design a bad looking building. I worked on a lot of I.M. Pei and PeiCobbFreed towers in Dallas, most of them are horrible and poorly designed but they have a rep for them, the SOM towers were much better.

Also about mediocrity, you have a large segment of the population who thinks that anything other than a Star metal building is spending too much money, they aren't frugal, they are cheap. It doesn't matter whether it is a private or public building, they just don't seem to like anything, period and they tend to be a noisy minority when it comes to public buildings. They don't want to have to get outside of their comfort zone, anything modern challenges that so if there is money to be spent on "adornment" they think it needs to be some neo-classical style because that is all they are comfortable with. That has been OKOC's make up for a long time, design is not appreciated by the masses but then that could also be said of many places.

There is plenty of talent in OKC that are capable of doing a tower and not just the CD's. Most have never had the opportunity presented to them but that doesn't mean they don't have some towers floating around in their head or on a board somewhere.....I know that I do.

People in OKC always seem to have the mentality that someone from out of town is always better than someone at home so talented people don't get that chance because of location. I work with a guy who worked for SOM in Chicago for many years before moving back to Denver and another one in Austin, you never really know what someones experience is based off of what the office produces because most offices don't have the chance at doing that kind of work. We can only do the type of projects that we can get contracted for and in many cases the client and/or budget dictates poor design, most architects are not trying to design a bad looking building. I worked on a lot of I.M. Pei and PeiCobbFreed towers in Dallas, most of them are horrible and poorly designed but they have a rep for them, the SOM towers were much better.

That's true and really ironic isn't it? You have to leave your home city to get a job and then, maybe some day you'll have the chance to design for your home city!
Very strange.

Also about mediocrity, you have a large segment of the population who thinks that anything other than a Star metal building is spending too much money, they aren't frugal, they are cheap. It doesn't matter whether it is a private or public building, they just don't seem to like anything, period and they tend to be a noisy minority when it comes to public buildings. They don't want to have to get outside of their comfort zone, anything modern challenges that so if there is money to be spent on "adornment" they think it needs to be some neo-classical style because that is all they are comfortable with. That has been OKOC's make up for a long time, design is not appreciated by the masses but then that could also be said of many places.

I would add there are many people that know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

I would be happy with something like this to replace Stage Center, both 20 stories:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/21/45/65/4611441/5/rawImage.jpg

Towers like this, set so far back from the street and focal point, can go anywhere in downtown. It can even just as well go on the Northwest Expressway. This rendering above doesn't absolutely command the Stage Center site.

We have so many sites that are ripe for development. Look at our downtown, pot marked with brownfields and parking lots and vacant sites still:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/eyeblink/parkingandgreenfields.jpg

To say that a nondescript, non-iconic, new 20-story office development absolutely commands the Stage Center site is ludicrous. I would literally rather just leave the Stage Center as a non-functioning monument to architectural modernism, removing the trees, add some fountains for kids, clean up the exterior, and then just let it sit there for people to enjoy. That would be far more valuable on this site than what has been announced to date.

I would add there are many people that know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

That is a harsh thing to say about our urbanist posters.

Also about mediocrity, you have a large segment of the population who thinks that anything other than a Star metal building is spending too much money, they aren't frugal, they are cheap. It doesn't matter whether it is a private or public building, they just don't seem to like anything, period and they tend to be a noisy minority when it comes to public buildings. They don't want to have to get outside of their comfort zone, anything modern challenges that so if there is money to be spent on "adornment" they think it needs to be some neo-classical style because that is all they are comfortable with. That has been OKOC's make up for a long time, design is not appreciated by the masses but then that could also be said of many places.

This is the utilitarian mindset in effect. Perhaps it's a Depression-era mentality. Don't forget the hostility you face if you try to suggest OKC become more of a world city. You'll be greeted with sneers and derision and comments about how OKC "will never be a New York or San Francisco so just give it up."

The facts are there were no standards in OKC for a long time. We didn't even employ a city planner until the 1990s, and he got run out of town. We didn't have zoning that was conducive for public beautification. Now we at least have a planning department, a big step forward, but it would seem they are not often consulted on big projects.

Our business community has been convinced that we need to raise the stakes on public art, beautification, and planning simply to compete with other cities. They can understand making money. But when the discussion becomes more esoteric, we lose them. A good example of this is Larry Nichols' comments about the "ugly" streetcar. Another would be this discussion. There would probably be a lot of surprise among the business community that people aren't more excited we're tearing down that "ugly albatoss that has outlived its use" for a shiny new skyscraper. There isn't a lot of sophistication there.

I would argue that OKC is growing up in many ways in the cultural department. We have a thriving art scene at this point. Our food scene is better than it has ever been. Events like H&8 are wildly well attended, and the hottest neighborhoods in our city are Paseo, Midtown, Plaza, AA, and downtown. Clearly there is a large segment of people who are looking for more authenticity, less homogeneity, and fewer chain-related restaurants. There also is a growing and obvious demand for more urban experiences.

It is sad that OKC has a legacy of destroying virtually every significant landmark, be it Classen Circle, Belle Isle Power Plant (nice tradeoff for the ugliest Wal-Mart in the US), thousands of buildings, many of them with historical significance, wonderful theatres like the Criterion and others, its interurban transit system, the list goes on and on. It's another punch to the gut to see this happening yet again with the Stage Center; it is a very disheartening sense of deja vu.

I would add there are many people that know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
So true....just because you saw a residential grade item at Home Depot/Lowe's for 1.29/SF doesn't mean that it is appropriate for a commercial installation. They also seem to think these items magically install themselves without a labor cost being involved. A labor cost that includes having to pay income taxes, SS taxes, Medicare taxes, insurance, etc. and other fees that the government and unions (if there is a union trade involved) heap on top of contractors. A big problem is many people only value their labor and expect to be paid but they don't value the labor of others.


This is the utilitarian mindset in effect. Perhaps it's a Depression-era mentality. Don't forget the hostility you face if you try to suggest OKC become more of a world city. You'll be greeted with sneers and derision and comments about how OKC "will never be a New York or San Francisco so just give it up."
I heard a lot of the same talk from long time Austinites who are resistant to the changes happening there. They want Austin to remain the sleepy, little hippie town that it was in the 70's when they moved there to go to college. Sorry guys, that Austin died long before the recent boom, they just didn't notice because the Armadillo World Headquarters and the Liberty Cafe were still open.