The majority of the population didn't know about it, especially 8 years ago. The media landscape has changed a lot since then.

The majority of the population didn't know about it, especially 8 years ago. The media landscape has changed a lot since then.

The majority of the pop doesn’t know about it now

I remember hearing before the vote that the convention center would probably require a new hotel, and that it would need some sort of public funding. It was talked about pretty openly on this website. Now obviously, that wasn't part of the ad campaign for MAPS 3, but it wasn't unknown.

The point being that if they did know about this an advance (and they did, since 1) it was talked about and 2) the Chamber did the study in 2008 that is always used as the proof of need) they should have educated voters and included the needed funds as part of MAPS, instead of passing something that showed a $280 million budget then have it turn out to be almost twice that much... And causing the City to incur $50 million in interest charges because the money wasn't allocated.

And when it was discussed, it was mainly Ed Shadid forcing this issue, not the people trying to drive the project forward.


I don't see how anyone could follow this for the last 10 years and feel good about how it has been handled. Especially to the point of not even asking for accountability and change.

Pete, are you for, against or don't care about having a new CC? Just curious.

Do you advocate the city not progressing on projects or details of projects until they have the explicit detailed approval of a majority of the OKC voters, and that unless all details of city projects are known absolutely we will not move forward? Do you believe in change orders or do projects halt and get re-approved before changes occur?

Pete, are you for, against or don't care about having a new CC? Just curious.

Do you advocate the city not progressing on projects or details of projects until they have the explicit detailed approval of a majority of the OKC voters, and that unless all details of city projects are known absolutely we will not move forward? Do you believe in change orders or do projects halt and get re-approved before changes occur?

I'm fine with the convention center, just not at all happy about the way it's been handled, as I've explained in great detail.

And of course not everything should be voted on by the public and I never said that should be the case. The issue is being open and transparent throughout the existing approval process, and again I have documented what I see as the issues in that regard.

I don't see how anyone could follow this for the last 10 years and feel good about how it has been handled. Especially to the point of not even asking for accountability and change.

You continuously call them out. I would assume that is also accountability. You have a partner in Channel 4. Name names. File lawsuits (or get others to) on behalf of the citizens who apparently have been lied to and cheated. Let's see if the scoundrels will be voted out of office. That is the accountability referendum for the citizens.

A big part of my effort is tracking, interviewing, monitoring and writing about it here.

Otherwise, this and similar issues barely get a mention and there is no other watchdog function, as opposed to the state level where you have hundreds of journalists putting every $100 charge under the microscope.

The local press is far, far too cozy with City Hall and the various power brokers to monitor them properly.

Pete, do you think the weak mayor form of municipal government is inherently less accountable to the citizens when undertaking huge projects?

...

The local press is far, far too cozy with City Hall and the various power brokers to monitor them properly.

So I guess this means no "KFOR and OKCTalk reveal stunning lack of oversight for MAPS3" headline will be forthcoming? :p

Pete, do you think the weak mayor form of municipal government is inherently less accountable to the citizens when undertaking huge projects?

They mayor's only real role is that of ambassador. The mayor only votes if there is a deadlock among the 8 council members so effectively holds less power than someone on the council.

And who holds city council accountable? Almost no one does... And the way these small groups are held in advance and outside the public eye, most of them make up their mind long before these bigger issues ever become public.


The central problem is that the local press and their bosses have far too personal relationships with city leaders, both the elected form and just the power brokers like the Chamber and big business types. Then, there is a massive conflict of interest because they sell a ton of advertising to Devon, CHK and everyone else.

This doesn't happen at the state level. Just look at Twitter and watch local reporters absolutely eviscerate state lawmakers and have virtually nothing to say about city government unless it is positive.

The net result is that you have journalists playing a hugely important watchdog role at the federal and state level, and if anything they are in bed with city government and leaders. It's completely messed up and why I chose to focus on these issues.

You think if the state caused $50 million to be fritted away on interest that could have easily been avoided there wouldn't be hundreds of reporters all over their case, not to mention the teacher's union, state employees and legions of others? That just doesn't happen at the city level and there are many of the same issues, they just go unreported or effectively swept under the rug.

As I documented in great detail, look no further than how this $50 million interest charge was handled by both the city and then the Oklahoman.

Thank you, Pete, for reporting and investigating these local issues when no one else will. I would like to plug Strong Towns (http://www.strongtowns.org), which is a movement towards locally driven, locally financed, incremental development that is fiscally sustainable over time. OKC could learn a thing or two from them as we are doing all of the things Strong Towns advocates say not to do. The convention center hotel financing issue is a prime example.

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2012/7/11/convention-centers-its-a-race-to-the-bottom.html

The convention center & hotel is being paid from tax dollars from people who will probably never use neither, that is a shame, & its the most expensive of the MAP3 project. The biggest positive of the convention center is that it will provide permanent full time jobs.

People from out of town will be staying at the hotel & using the CC more than the locals. It's not like the park, street car, & wellness centers where the locals will use on a daily basis.

Just my opinion, but I could of thought of several different ways to spend close to $500 million that could benefit the city & will present high use to the locals.

They mayor's only real role is that of ambassador. The mayor only votes if there is a deadlock among the 8 council members so effectively holds less power than someone on the council.



That is what I was lead to believe. While some feel that the voters have the power to hold those responsible through elections, the real power brokers and decision makers are not directly accountable. The city manager is not directly accountable to the voters, yet holds far more power and influence then the mayor. The voters put way to much stock into the influence and power of the mayor when he really is nothing more than an ambassador.

People stay home and don't vote on council seats. Then they accuse and complain. There is accountability but our citizens seem to uninterested to exercise it. We get weak people elected with a few paltry votes.

The mayor does have the power to appoint a number of people to boards and commissions. That is a fairly strong executive power.

The mayor does have the power to appoint a number of people to boards and commissions. That is a fairly strong executive power.

Yes, excellent point.

The convention center & hotel is being paid from tax dollars from people who will probably never use neither, that is a shame, & its the most expensive of the MAP3 project. The biggest positive of the convention center is that it will provide permanent full time jobs.

People from out of town will be staying at the hotel & using the CC more than the locals. It's not like the park, street car, & wellness centers where the locals will use on a daily basis.

Just my opinion, but I could of thought of several different ways to spend close to $500 million that could benefit the city & will present high use to the locals.

The out of town people will also be paying millions of dollars into a tax base where the don't live. Tourism is a 4 billion dollar industry in Oklahoma. Oklahoma County get the largest share of it. I believe that once it is open that locals will also be using it. I attend events at the Cox Center every month.

The out of town people will also be paying millions of dollars into a tax base where the don't live. Tourism is a 4 billion dollar industry in Oklahoma. Oklahoma County get the largest share of it. I believe that once it is open that locals will also be using it. I attend events at the Cox Center every month.

Yes, there are a number of replies in this thread that I have been trying to find time to address, and this was one. The fact that G.Walker - who is a quality, insightful poster on this site - doesn't connect the dots that the chief benefit of the CC and hotel is not jobs but instead GROWTH IN SALES TAX REVENUE (a direct benefit to all OKC residents and our quality of life) just goes to show how little our citizenry grasps about the impact of this industry.

Sure, it creates a few hundred hotel and cc staff jobs. And it creates service industry jobs for dining and other services required by attendees. But most importantly it brings NEW CITY TAX REVENUE from sources outside of our metro. The CC is one of the only MAPS projects that does this directly, which is one of the reasons it is a priority for the City and for the Chamber.

How does the increase in tax revenue compare with the current and future costs of the public subsidy, interest, and maintenance of the facilities? And also compared with other possible land uses on the same parcel that may not require a public subsidy?

Yes, there are a number of replies in this thread that I have been trying to find time to address, and this was one. The fact that G.Walker - who is a quality, insightful poster on this site - doesn't connect the dots that the chief benefit of the CC and hotel is not jobs but instead GROWTH IN SALES TAX REVENUE (a direct benefit to all OKC residents and our quality of life) just goes to show how little our citizenry grasps about the impact of this industry.

Sure, it creates a few hundred hotel and cc staff jobs. And it creates service industry jobs for dining and other services required by attendees. But most importantly it brings NEW CITY TAX REVENUE from sources outside of our metro. The CC is one of the only MAPS projects that does this directly, which is one of the reasons it is a priority for the City and for the Chamber.

This is a good point Urbanized. IMHO, I agree with Pete that transparency is lacking and needs to be fixed. On one hand, I'd prefer that the general "all government is evil" public is never made aware of these issues because I want future MAPS projects to pass. On the other hand, I REALLY applaud Pete for "sticking it to the man" by tracking and reporting these additional costs and mismanagement issues. At times, I'm sure Pete feels like it is a thankless position to be in.

At the end of the day, OKC needs as much tax revenue as humanly possible, and the BEST source to get tax revenue is from those that don't live in your city. With the state government in shambles, and the feds pushing for the same OK/KS "cut taxes to prosper" ideology, I assume that OKC is going to have to do everything they can in their power to ensure that our infrastructure needs are funded properly. If that means an expensive convention center, then I'm for it, reluctantly.

How does the increase in tax revenue compare with the current and future costs of the public subsidy, interest, and maintenance of the facilities? And also compared with other possible land uses on the same parcel that may not require a public subsidy?

Good point.

Addressing Urbanized, I understand where you are coming from, but the average resident in Oklahoma City & metro area will not be using CC or the CC hotel. I have lived here almost 20 years, and can count on one hand how many times I have been to the Cox Center.

Sure tax dollars will pour into restaurants, hotels, etc...but as krisb said, does the financing & accoutnability level out with how much we will have to pay long-term? I am not against the CC or CC hotel, just think that the city could of found a better use of $500 million dollars. Why not put that in police/fire safety, education, & health. That is where you will get the most impact for your city. Most of the MAP3 projects are "leisure" projects, not projects centered around acually improving the quality of life of citizens of the city.

Good point.

Addressing Urbanized, I understand where you are coming from, but the average resident in Oklahoma City & metro area will not be using CC or the CC hotel. I have lived here almost 20 years, and can count on one hand how many times I have been to the Cox Center.

Sure tax dollars will pour into restaurants, hotels, etc...but as krisb said, does the financing & accoutnability level out with how much we will have to pay long-term? I am not against the CC or CC hotel, just think that the city could of found a better use of $500 million dollars. Why not put that in police/fire safety, education, & health. That is where you will get the most impact for your city. Most of the MAP3 projects are "leisure" projects, not projects centered around acually improving the quality of life of citizens of the city.

Increasing leisure increases quality of life. As far as I can tell, all of the MAPS projects from the start have increased quality of life in the city.

Increasing leisure increases quality of life. As far as I can tell, all of the MAPS projects from the start have increased quality of life in the city.

It will also pump new money (from out-of-state) into the OKC economy; this is how you grow your community. That's why many cities want to attract new money from out-of-state.

The more we grow our hotels; we increase room night availability.

Downtown Hotel Summary: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=34292&p=659682#post659682

The more events & attractions we can lure will allow OKC to keep a steady diet to feed these hotels because the more hotels you have available; you increase chances of being awarded certain regional & national events.

It will also pump new money (from out-of-state) into the OKC economy; this is how you grow your community. That's why many cities want to attract new money from out-of-state.

The more we grow our hotels; we increase room night availability.

Downtown Hotel Summary: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=34292&p=659682#post659682

The more events & attractions we can lure will allow OKC to keep a steady diet to feed these hotels because the more hotels you have available; you increase chances of being awarded certain regional & national events.

+1. With additional revenues going to pay for police, fire, streets, etc. These types of projects and facilities are investments. When you don't make and maintain your investments, you lose events and lose the ability to pay for things like fire, police and streets

And, to be a full service modern city you need to act like one and support a full range of competitive services ...like conventions and meetings.

...I am not against the CC or CC hotel, just think that the city could of found a better use of $500 million dollars. Why not put that in police/fire safety, education, & health...

First of all, you are now making an argument against MAPS in general. Second, you understand, don’t you, that increasing the overall tax collection via this type of economic development (room nights, meals, goods and services purchased by visitors to our city) by definition increases available monies for police, fire, safety, etc.? The very point of this project is to increase sales tax collection going to the general fund, which it quite clearly will do.

Also, MAPS 3 was quite clear in which projects were to be built. It is a CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS tax, and voters went to the polls believing they were there to fund a convention center, among other things. This tax could not be suddenly switched to a public safety tax, subverting the will of the majority of voters who participated in the process. Because if we are still debating whether or not the CC should happen at all, that’s what is being suggested, right? We can’t do this. The point is moot. Besides, we very recently DID pass new public safety funding (which will now include greater collections due to aforementioned taxes gained from CC use).

Debating whether or not the CC should happen at all is a waste of energy and bandwidth. It’s happening. THIS thread is about the hotel. I suppose it’s fair in this thread to discuss how/why it came to be, but it is also happening. The fact of the matter the hotel is required for the City (and its taxpayers) to fully benefit from our new convention center, for ways I have described many times before in this thread, so I won’t bore. Suffice to say it is a must, and public participation is a must, for reasons I’ve also described. Again, in a nutshell, the REAL point of public involvement for the hotel is to allow the City (via the CVB) to have some say in room blocks and discounted rates to lure events, which again bring NEW tax dollars to our economy.

Regarding whether the City Council has the authority to do such deals without a vote of the people, OF COURSE they do. They manage an annual budget of more than a billion dollars. The City does deals all of the time for millions of dollars. They have multiple legal mechanisms at their disposal whereby to do so, Over a decade ago they put together funding deal to save the Skirvin hotel; more than $50 million. They did this using similar instruments to what are being used for the CC hotel.

The fact of the matter is, the City 100% has the discretion to do deals like this. It’s why we as voters have hired them, at the polls. If you have questions or complaints about how they are doing their job, you as a voter and taxpayer have the right to dismiss it with them. Go to meetings and ask questions. E-mail your councilperson. Call them. Call the council offices and ask to meet your council person. They are very accessible. If you don’t like the answers you’re given, tell them. Support an opposition candidate in the next election. Run yourself. Whatever. But the fact of the matter is that it is 100% in their purview to do projects like this one.

By the way, regarding Strong Towns, I concur that it is a great blog and great resource. I am a voracious reader of it, as you can see from how often I personally tweet links back to it, or retweet their postings. But to suggest OKC’s leaders are unaware of it is innacurate; the Downtown OKC Partnership brought Chuck Marohn - Strong Towns Founder and President - to OKC a couple of years ago, where he met with prominent OKC leaders and developers. He even did a podcast while here, I think. And to say that OKC is “...doing all of the things Strong Towns advocates say not to do...” is a wild and disingenuous overstatement.

Urbanized has spoken +1

First of all, you are now making an argument against MAPS in general. Second, you understand, don’t you, that increasing the overall tax collection via this type of economic development (room nights, meals, goods and services purchased by visitors to our city) by definition increases available monies for police, fire, safety, etc.? The very point of this project is to increase sales tax collection going to the general fund, which it quite clearly will do.

Also, MAPS 3 was quite clear in which projects were to be built. It is a CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS tax, and voters went to the polls believing they were there to fund a convention center, among other things. This tax could not be suddenly switched to a public safety tax, subverting the will of the majority of voters who participated in the process. Because if we are still debating whether or not the CC should happen at all, that’s what is being suggested, right? We can’t do this. The point is moot. Besides, we very recently DID pass new public safety funding (which will now include greater collections due to aforementioned taxes gained from CC use).

Debating whether or not the CC should happen at all is a waste of energy and bandwidth. It’s happening. THIS thread is about the hotel. I suppose it’s fair in this thread to discuss how/why it came to be, but it is also happening. The fact of the matter the hotel is required for the City (and its taxpayers) to fully benefit from our new convention center, for ways I have described many times before in this thread, so I won’t bore. Suffice to say it is a must, and public participation is a must, for reasons I’ve also described. Again, in a nutshell, the REAL point of public involvement for the hotel is to allow the City (via the CVB) to have some say in room blocks and discounted rates to lure events, which again bring NEW tax dollars to our economy.

Regarding whether the City Council has the authority to do such deals without a vote of the people, OF COURSE they do. They manage an annual budget of more than a billion dollars. The City does deals all of the time for millions of dollars. They have multiple legal mechanisms at their disposal whereby to do so, Over a decade ago they put together funding deal to save the Skirvin hotel; more than $50 million. They did this using similar instruments to what are being used for the CC hotel.

The fact of the matter is, the City 100% has the discretion to do deals like this. It’s why we as voters have hired them, at the polls. If you have questions or complaints about how they are doing their job, you as a voter and taxpayer have the right to dismiss it with them. Go to meetings and ask questions. E-mail your councilperson. Call them. Call the council offices and ask to meet your council person. They are very accessible. If you don’t like the answers you’re given, tell them. Support an opposition candidate in the next election. Run yourself. Whatever. But the fact of the matter is that it is 100% in their purview to do projects like this one.

+++ Very well put!

By the way, regarding Strong Towns, I concur that it is a great blog and great resource. I am a voracious reader of it, as you can see from how often I personally tweet links back to it, or retweet their postings. But to suggest OKC’s leaders are unaware of it is innacurate; the Downtown OKC Partnership brought Chuck Marohn - Strong Towns Founder and President - to OKC a couple of years ago, where he met with prominent OKC leaders and developers. He even did a podcast while here, I think. And to say that OKC is “...doing all of the things Strong Towns advocates say not to do...” is a wild and disingenuous overstatement.

I did not say the city was unaware of Strong Towns, just that we have failed to embrace most if not all of their guiding principles, which is probably worse than doing things out of total ignorance. Downtown OKC and ULI (which hosted the events with Chuck) are usually more progressive than the City itself when it comes to issues of sustainability and responsible land use. As I recall from the podcast, Chuck asked some tough questions and seemed less than enthused with our over-reliance on huge civic projects and federal matching dollars. MAPS in the pay as you go form is very Strong Towns, but the projects have all been very expensive and not on the incremental, granular scale. What has the City learned and actually implemented from that conversation with Chuck a few years back? It's a positive step to at least know what you don't know, but then what are we doing about it?

Boom!

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-convention-hotel-design-revealed/article/5578173

" the hotel will feature a tower that is oriented to minimize its shadow footprint on the new park across Robinson Avenue."

It's nice to see they are thinking ahead, but I have read absolutely zero stories about people bothered about the shade of a tall building on a hot day, and far too many where the sun reflecting off the glass caused issues up to and including starting fires.

Yes, very strange they would have the hotel mainly fronting the boulevard rather than the new, huge park.

BTW, I had talked to the director of the Myriad Gardens who will also be overseeing Scissortail Park and she said shade from downtown structures had very little impact on the horticulture and any small issues were easily handled through a planting plan.

BTW, this design shows very little change from their original proposal.

What is the projected height?

Yeah, that design is pretty damn boring. A little curve at the corner (similar to the Dallas OMNI) where some rooms could overlook the park would have looked awesome.

Two things that stood out to me that I didn't previously know:

1. "Another feature of the design unique to Oklahoma City is the creation of an underground drive from the garage to the hotel's drop off for guests. By building the connection, along with underground parking for about 20 cars, Omni is designing a hotel that won't cause traffic backups for valet parking." Interesting that they did this. I don't know if I have ever seen it before.

2. "O'Connor, meanwhile, is working on potential plans to wrap the garage with workforce housing that could change the city's cost for the structure. I remember in the original plans for the Core to Shore area, there were plans for townhomes along the convention center/hotel facing the park. I am curious how the logistics of that would work. The title work/surveying on that would be a nightmare to separate it from the building itself.

From the article .... the hotel will front the future downtown boulevard with restaurants and bars designed also to draw visitors at the future Scissortail Park.

If I have the location right, the cafe being built in the park is a block west down Boulevard from the hotel. I do wonder about the cafe being a component of the park, and how it will play with other services in the area. More is more? I assume the primary function of the park cafe will be to serve those attending events at the stage and on the oval, rather than day to day business. Somewhat related...does the cafe that was built at Myriad Gardens get any use?

I like it, but I am a little surprised they aren't taking more advantage of the park frontage.

I like it, but I am a little surprised they aren't taking more advantage of the park frontage.

I believe they said the restaurants face the park, as well as deck area above facing the park. Looks like the loading and unloading is on the boulevard side, which is better than using the parkside, imo. You would think the rooms on the south would have a pretty good park view, and the rooms on the north would have a spectacular cityscape view.

Unless I'm facing an ocean or large body of water (or something I'm really interested in), I don't like east or west facing rooms due to sunlight in the morning or a hot room in the afternoon in the summer.

I don't think that is probably a huge factor, but it's one I consider when booking hotels and a request when checking in.

Huge fail. I can not wrap my head around why they chose this layout. They could have hired a professional botanists that would have told them this building would have no significant impact on the vegetation. This once again reeks of OKC not understanding how to do things bigger cities have done for decades with success. I mean I guess other cities that have parks with much larger buildings adjacent just don't know what they're doing. I guess people in the hotel would rather look at a convention center or an arena than a park.

The design really isn't that bad. It's the layout I don't like. I'd even be happy with a compromise and have an L shaped tower at the corner. They even can charge premiums for having a park view. The way I think they should really do it is reduce the footprint of the entire structure including the podium(that would add about 10-15 storeys or so), shove a garage over the new aligned Broadway Ave., give it a Vegas Style entrance, and then you'd have some extra land to sale to developers where the parking garage would have been.

Could there be something on the horizon (5-7 years) with the Producers Coop Mill since that site nears clearance. They still need to do the toxic clean-up; however it will make the area more attractive for OKC's next building boom.


https://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w640-dbd1ce98a3a13c3f26fc10d48251bb2d.jpg

The 17-story 605-room Omni Hotel & a city built garage are the last components next to new convention center will front the future downtown boulevard with amenities designed to draw visitors to the future Scissortail Park.


http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kgou/files/styles/medium/public/201503/bb-convention-revisit-bbf-1-3-5-15.jpg
Remember: Omni hotels has first rights on the Cox Convention Center site if a hotel is to be developed on that site, the streetcar is on that route. The future looks bright & ripe for downtown development.

It's actually going to look a lot like the 15-story downtown Sheraton.

I wonder if they don't want half their rooms facing the now-bulldozed Co-op site. If that takes 15 years to develop, maybe Omni would rather give up the park view to avoid the view to the east.

North-facing rooms (boulevard frontage) will never get direct sunlight, so will not have near the cooling load in summer. South-facing rooms will only get direct sunlight in the dead of winter when the sun is at its lowest on the southern horizon, at which point sunlight actually will help keep the rooms warm. The passive heating and cooling savings for a building with this orientation vs. E/W orientation are probably very significant.


Not sure why anyone would prefer a park view to a skyline view. The north-facing rooms will probably have an incredible skyline panorama. South-facing will be able to see the park and also to the river, which could be good in the future. Upper stories would have no interaction with the park anyway, and I'll take a skyline view with no afternoon sun blasting me every time.


Restaurant frontage along Robinson is the correct frontage to be concerned with facing the park. Will lead to much more ground-level interaction with the street and the park.
I'm no planner, but based on what I know about planning, I think they got these things right.

Makes sense.

Given the taller bottom floors I predict this will be about 240 ft or so tall. Which given its placement will be a prominent structure. I really like the design.

From our news partner KFOR:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/omni010418csm.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/omni010418bsm.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/omni010418asm.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/omni010418d.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/omni010418e.jpg

My 2 cents on this is I honestly think this will be the nicest structure in the city minus the devon tower. Having a sports bar directly across from the Chesapeake Arena is awesome, the cafe's fronting the park will invite connectivity, the tower across from the arena fronting the boulevard will be quite a sight. You can see in that last pic overlooks on the 2nd floor to the park, and also the 3rd floor pool and cabana deck is awesome looking. I mean the cafes are open air for goodness sake, that will be the place to be in the future! Do we have any details on the exterior lighting program?

! Do we have any details on the exterior lighting program?

Would be cool if they could do something like the Kansas City Marriott.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K00TqIiTdmg

My 2 cents on this is I honestly think this will be the nicest structure in the city minus the devon tower. Having a sports bar directly across from the Chesapeake Arena is awesome, the cafe's fronting the park will invite connectivity, the tower across from the arena fronting the boulevard will be quite a sight. You can see in that last pic overlooks on the 2nd floor to the park, and also the 3rd floor pool and cabana deck is awesome looking. I mean the cafes are open air for goodness sake, that will be the place to be in the future! Do we have any details on the exterior lighting program?

I will rent a room just to chill out on that pool deck in the summer!

I think this is fantastic and a pretty sharp looking development.

Pretty surprised by all of the negativity. This looks really great to me, and I definitely agree with the points about preferring the skyline view as well as avoiding E/W due to direct sunlight. Hopefully this all turns out as good as the plans indicate. Should be a really spectacular stretch with First National, the arena, Omni, convention center, park, etc.

Pretty surprised by all of the negativity. This looks really great to me, and I definitely agree with the points about preferring the skyline view as well as avoiding E/W due to direct sunlight. Hopefully this all turns out as good as the plans indicate. Should be a really spectacular stretch with First National, the arena, Omni, convention center, park, etc.
There is no negativity here. Just initial criticism which is quite common. I stand by my original post.

Urbanized made great points about the skyline and I agree with him. A skyline view is nice. So is a park view. There might be times I would prefer a park view. Many times I've preferred ocean views over city views whenever I book in Santa Monica to get away from Hollywood. Ocean views and park views aren't really comparable, but still, I'm sure there are a sizable amount of people that would prefer park views. I still think an L shape would have been the best for this building. Now the park won't have hardly anything higher than 3-4 stories on the majority of it's east side giving it less of an urban feel, imo. We'll see.

All that said, no negativity coming from me. This looks to be a good development. FYI, it is possible to make criticisms and express your opinions without being negative. Sorry I came off that way.

Now for the finishing touch, an Oklahoma shaped pool on that deck. The Texas shaped pool at the Marriott Marquis in Houston is awesome, think of the look of that from all the planes on approach from the south when making that sweeping turn over downtown to land at WRWA from the north.

Someone with more pull than me make this happen.

Man those renderings look great! And let's be real, the orientation of the building is for the pool!

Add another 7 floors then you have something. Looks kind of small to me for the price tag.

Add another 7 floors then you have something. Looks kind of small to me for the price tag. Just looks like something a smaller sized city like LR would build. I was hoping for something a little more.

Now for the finishing touch, an Oklahoma shaped pool on that deck. The Texas shaped pool at the Marriott Marquis in Houston is awesome, think of the look of that from all the planes on approach from the south when making that sweeping turn over downtown to land at WRWA from the north.

Someone with more pull than me make this happen.

The panhandle could be the stair-step down into the pool ;-) ....which make sense because the panhandle is the highest elevation in the state!

Add another 7 floors then you have something. Looks kind of small to me for the price tag. Just looks like something a smaller sized city like LR would build. I was hoping for something a little more.

Agree, not impressed with design or size., but hey its Okc