Remember the crappy rendering they made to market this property? I wonder if this is just an upgraded marketing piece to try to sell the land.

Ohh lawd jezzus please let this happen!

Remember the crappy rendering they made to market this property? I wonder if this is just an upgraded marketing piece to try to sell the land.

That was for the Co-op site. Some times I have nightmares that include that rendering.

I agree. As much as I like this tower and want downtown to become larger, I just hope we don't end up with a sprawled out skyline. I like tall dense skylines.

Oh well in that case, maybe they'll change their plans and site location for you. I kid, I kid.

Remember the crappy rendering they made to market this property? I wonder if this is just an upgraded marketing piece to try to sell the land.

As pointed out, this is a separate property and ownership.

These are also very professional and detailed renderings by a high quality architectural firm. It wasn't cheap to produce these, I'm sure. There has to be some basis of reality behind this...

That was for the Co-op site. Some times I have nightmares that include that rendering.

I had a nightmare that I was hunted by a rich guy on his private island with his pet Tyrannosaur.

I think my nightmares are significantly more interesting.

If this is built, I wonder what the effect of having an extra 1000 or so people living immediately adjacent to Bricktown will be. There are still a number of surface lots in Bricktown that need filled in.

With more people comes the need for more stuff to do, so I'm sure this (if it's built) will spur a lot of new projects.

If this is built, I wonder what the effect of having an extra 1000 or so people living immediately adjacent to Bricktown will be. There are still a number of surface lots in Bricktown that need filled in.

I completely agree. This should kick start boulevard development including (hopefully) the surface lots in Lower Bricktown.

6000 square feet of retail

yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

Oh well in that case, maybe they'll change their plans and site location for you. I kid, I kid.Oh, I'm fine with the site plan and think this will kick start development along the new BLVD. and increase the desirability on the COOP site, which is what okcisOK4me said(he told me and I quote "you'll be sleeping with the fishes if you don't give me the credit I deserve" lol j/k ;)).

Oh, I'm fine with the site plan and think this will kick start development along the new BLVD. and increase the desirability on the COOP site, which is what okcisOK4me said(he told me and I quote "you'll be sleeping with the fishes if you don't give me the credit I deserve" lol j/k ;)).

Haha...I didn't say that.. You're not Spartan.

Sent from my BNTV600 using Tapatalk

Haha...I didn't say that.. You're not Spartan.

Sent from my BNTV600 using Tapatalk;)

That is a nice tower :congrats: Hope there are legs behind it!

I would imagine there probably is with such a detailed rendering. This is probably the big development Steve has been hinting about for probably over a year now but has never been able to disclose what was really going on.

I would imagine there probably is with such a detailed rendering. This is probably the big development Steve has been hinting about for probably over a year now but has never been able to disclose what was really going on.

I actually believe Steve has been hinting about something completely different, pertaining to an entertainment venue.

^^^^^
I agree, though I have no specific knowledge.

I couldn't disagree more. Density can come later. Having a large skyline when driving through town is what people will remember. You can infill later but keeping the entire downtown to six blocks for eternity means that we'll all be dead before it ever looks impressive. I say downtown needs to spread out. 90% of people don't even walk downtown and never will regardless of the make up of the "walkable space". If you were to lay the Devon building on its side, it is over half the length of our compressed downtown. I never understood this logic of density downtown. It makes no sense to me at all.

Now that Shadid has been put to pasture in the mayoral race, it will be interesting to see all of the developments that have been waiting in the wings.

I couldn't disagree more. Density can come later. Having a large skyline when driving through town is what people will remember. You can infill later but keeping the entire downtown to six blocks for eternity means that we'll all be dead before it ever looks impressive. I say downtown needs to spread out. 90% of people don't even walk downtown and never will regardless of the make up of the "walkable space". If you were to lay the Devon building on its side, it is over half the length of our compressed downtown. I never understood this logic of density downtown. It makes no sense to me at all.

So... your biggest concern is how downtown looks to people who drive by, not how it works for people that live in the area? I'd rather have quality infill than a high tower or two. Luckily, it's not an either/or situation and both could happen.

Yes, that is my view.

If this is built, I wonder what the effect of having an extra 1000 or so people living immediately adjacent to Bricktown will be. There are still a number of surface lots in Bricktown that need filled in.

I'd love to see a mixed use development along Reno (maybe even something similar to the Steelyard) in the Bricktown Events parking lot with a parking garage behind it and a two way alley way in front of the events center. This could help define Reno and encourage the other side of the street to get it's act together. ;)

Whoever is behind it, is way ahead of the game. They know there is demand for a high-end residential tower. This exactly what we need. Very nice.

I couldn't disagree more. Density can come later. Having a large skyline when driving through town is what people will remember. You can infill later but keeping the entire downtown to six blocks for eternity means that we'll all be dead before it ever looks impressive. I say downtown needs to spread out. 90% of people don't even walk downtown and never will regardless of the make up of the "walkable space". If you were to lay the Devon building on its side, it is over half the length of our compressed downtown. I never understood this logic of density downtown. It makes no sense to me at all.

I do agree with this somewhat. Building this and other high profile developments will show the nation this isn't the old Oklahoma City. Like I was saying earlier, you don't become the next Austin by being a "best kept secret." You have to be in the media spotlight for being able to offer jobs and a quality of life that young, educated people as well as families seek. The way to do that is through developments that will get the country's attention. Sorry if this post offends anybody, I am not trying to slam OKC, just to give my opinion on why developments like these are so important.

I do agree with this somewhat. Building this and other high profile developments will show the nation this isn't the old Oklahoma City. Like I was saying earlier, you don't become the next Austin by being a "best kept secret." You have to be in the media spotlight for being able to offer jobs and a quality of life that young, educated people as well as families seek. The way to do that is through developments that will get the country's attention. Sorry if this post offends anybody, I am not trying to slam OKC, just to give my opinion on why developments like these are so important.

We are not the "best kept secret." Not by a long shot. Have you been paying attention to the reams of national and international press OKC is getting? It's happening. We're not a secret. Did you read the LA Times piece from just two weeks ago about our restaurant scene?

I do agree with this somewhat. Building this and other high profile developments will show the nation this isn't the old Oklahoma City. Like I was saying earlier, you don't become the next Austin by being a "best kept secret." You have to be in the media spotlight for being able to offer jobs and a quality of life that young, educated people as well as families seek. The way to do that is through developments that will get the country's attention. Sorry if this post offends anybody, I am not trying to slam OKC, just to give my opinion on why developments like these are so important.

This is the momentum I was speaking of. By having several "large / high profile projects" going at the same time, is the snowball-effect we are needing. It will create a buzz across the lower 48 that OKC is the place to be for jobs, jobs, jobs.

I couldn't disagree more. Density can come later. Having a large skyline when driving through town is what people will remember. You can infill later but keeping the entire downtown to six blocks for eternity means that we'll all be dead before it ever looks impressive. I say downtown needs to spread out. 90% of people don't even walk downtown and never will regardless of the make up of the "walkable space". If you were to lay the Devon building on its side, it is over half the length of our compressed downtown. I never understood this logic of density downtown. It makes no sense to me at all.I agree to a certain extent. Downtown should have a skyline that looks good for people that are passing by but should also the density to make people want to walk around when they decide to stop by. Luckily, OKC is getting to the point where it does not have to choose either or and there are tons of high density projects and we can stand to have big projects pushed further out then before.

This is the momentum I was speaking of. By having several "large / high profile projects" going at the same time, is the snowball-effect we are needing. It will create a buzz across the lower 48 that OKC is the place to be for jobs, jobs, jobs.

100% Agree.

OK, so apparently the project is fantasy. A spec portfolio-building exercise. Don't shoot the messenger. Nobody would like to see it happen more than me. :(

OK, so apparently the project is fantasy. A spec portfolio-building exercise. Don't shoot the messenger. Nobody would like to see it happen more than me. :(

Figures. I would really be very surprised if a project of this magnitude was actually built in OKC. In 15-20 years maybe but not now.

Damn!!

OK, so apparently the project is fantasy. A spec portfolio-building exercise. Don't shoot the messenger. Nobody would like to see it happen more than me. :(since you brought the news, you get the blame.

DAMMIT URBANIZED!!!!!!! ;)

That does suck though. Are you sure it is purely fantasy? How long ago was this rendering made?

OK, so apparently the project is fantasy. A spec portfolio-building exercise. Don't shoot the messenger. Nobody would like to see it happen more than me. :(

I think if you're going to make a statement like that you need to elaborate a little more. Not that I'm doubting you, just that I'd like to know why you are saying this is fantasy.

I had pretty low confidence in this deal being real, but it was nice to see what's possible for that site someday.

That doesn't surprise me. It's just a few renderings. Really, it only would take me a week or two to put this together.

I think if you're going to make a statement like that you need to elaborate a little more. Not that I'm doubting you, just that I'd like to know why you are saying this is fantasy.

Urbanized isn't the type to just shoot off the hip on something like this. He runs the Bricktown Water Taxi, and used to own/run another business in Bricktown. He's been there for the long haul and is well connected in the area. I'm sure his sources are legit.

My favorite part of this rendering is looking at the actual OKC skyline…Where's First National, lol! (It's only there as a hint, but it looks almost replaced with a modern building, and several other buildings further in the background look to be changed/heightened/modernized.

At least we only had our hopes up for one day instead of multiple years before being disappointed. I can live with one day of exciting daydreaming followed by a letdown.

True!

There is no reason to be let down at all. Urbanized said these were fantasy drawings. That's fine. These were put up by a big architectural firm and I would like to know why they have this under their master planning section with other REAL ACTIVE projects. Surely they didn't just throw one random fantasy in with other real ones. Time will tell I guess. My big question is, how long have those been up on the site? If they were posted recently, as in the last week, then I will still be hopeful, if they have been there for a few years, and anything in between, I don't know what to think of that.

If this were to be built, the retail space would be PERFECT for a Super Target and LA Fitness like DT Ft Worth has.

There is no reason to be let down at all. Urbanized said these were fantasy drawings. That's fine. These were put up by a big architectural firm and I would like to know why they have this under their master planning section with other REAL ACTIVE projects. Surely they didn't just throw one random fantasy in with other real ones. Time will tell I guess. My big question is, how long have those been up on the site? If they were posted recently, as in the last week, then I will still be hopeful, if they have been there for a few years, and anything in between, I don't know what to think of that.

I agree. I can count on no fingers the number of times companies I have worked for have done things 'just for fun'. Heck, most companies underfund things they should be doing, let alone spend real money on fantasy things. Anyhow, real or not, I have to time to wait to know for sure.

I actually believe Steve has been hinting about something completely different, pertaining to an entertainment venue.

Remember, Steve stated that the first bid for the Stage Center site was a 40 story tower. But that developer was not chosen for whatever reason. However, Steve also stated that particular developer was considering other sites to build the 40 story tower, so maybe this is that tower.

Just an educated guess...

If your intention is to build a "large" tower w/ condos, you would use this method. If it is a "spec", then you want to get started on the marketing side of "selling / pre-leasing" those units ASAP. ...there may be more substance here than you might think.

I think sometimes you guys in OKC get spoiled. I grew up there and moved in 2005 to Tulsa.
While I like it up here, every time my wife and I come to visit friends and family in okc we are blown away at how fast it continues to grow and change.

My take is okc is probably not quite ready for a 500+ unit 40 story tower. You do NOT want to overbuild your absorption rate or you will discourage other development.
I think a good midrise with 300 or so units is a better option at this particular point.

I don't understand the negativity because every city that is growing or of substantial size has projects come up and get cancelled or downsized.

OKC is killing it and my wife and I talk about moving back fairly often. Whether it is this or a other project okc will be in good shape.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

My take is okc is probably not quite ready for a 500+ unit 40 story tower. You do NOT want to overbuild your absorption rate or you will discourage other development.
I think a good midrise with 300 or so units is a better option at this particular point.

The only thing I will say is that there is no way OKC can overbuild urban housing. Urban housing doesn't play by the same assumption and economic laws that suburban housing plays by. In suburban housing each new house detracts from the reason existing owners moved there for. The exact opposite is true in urban housing where each new residents adds to why existing people moved there. In other words, the more people that move to urban settings the more other people want to move there, which in turn benefits the first inhabitants.

I completely agree with what OUGrad05 is saying. As much as I enjoy the idea of a high-rise residential tower with 500 units, I would prefer to see a ton of Midtown/AA/DD/BT infill happen where we aren't staring at enormous surface parking lots or two acre lots right next to a brand new development. DD is getting to the point of completion, it doesn't have too much more space to fill in. Midtown has a long ways to go with as many open spaces as there are but that will just take a little time. SC is coming down soon and something will be built on that site with the new DT school on the west side of it. If the new CC and hotel come to fruition, that will take up a large portion of open space in DT. Then we have to rely on development around the new park that might break ground by the end of the year. I don't think we will see any large tower developments surrounding the park, probably more 3-10 story developments, but I wouldn't be disappointed if they were higher. The Plaza district really only has a few more open areas for retail/restaurants, etc and then the main area is full. 23rd street still has a ways to go. I guess my point in all this is that as exciting as this development would be, there are so many other areas I would like to see reach their max potential before something like this. Of course, if they were to both happen, I wouldn't be disappointed.

I think sometimes you guys in OKC get spoiled. I grew up there and moved in 2005 to Tulsa.
While I like it up here, every time my wife and I come to visit friends and family in okc we are blown away at how fast it continues to grow and change.

My take is okc is probably not quite ready for a 500+ unit 40 story tower. You do NOT want to overbuild your absorption rate or you will discourage other development.
I think a good midrise with 300 or so units is a better option at this particular point.

I don't understand the negativity because every city that is growing or of substantial size has projects come up and get cancelled or downsized.

OKC is killing it and my wife and I talk about moving back fairly often. Whether it is this or a other project okc will be in good shape.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

OKC is far from any "overbuilding". We have space-a-plenty. If this developer is an ( Outside ) group, then his concern is purely ROI and 40 stories helps secure that. It becomes the place to be, thus values will remain steady for each unit. This complex brings its own "self-contained environment" of Large / High End / Mixed-use / Destination point and would thrive. On the Blvd, Highly Visible to all.


If the developer is local, then this project will most likely be scaled back or cut due to ( tight financing / short leash ) approach.

The only thing I will say is that there is no way OKC can overbuild urban housing. Urban housing doesn't play by the same assumption and economic laws that suburban housing plays by. In suburban housing each new house detracts from the reason existing owners moved there for. The exact opposite is true in urban housing where each new residents adds to why existing people moved there. In other words, the more people that move to urban settings the more other people want to move there, which in turn benefits the first inhabitants.

In principle you are right. I do think urban housing can be overbuilt though if there is more available housing than there are people seeking to live in an urban environment. A lot of people in Oklahoma City actually prefer suburbs and will never live downtown regardless of how much gets built. Once you reach that point, you have to rely on new in-migrants to make new development feasible. At this point in OKC's development, a 40 story residential tower could very well be a catalyst for creating that glut that halts further development for a while. I agree with OUGrad05 that we aren't quite ready for it yet. I think when the metro population gets to the 1.5-1.7 million range projects like this will start to become more realistic.

In the spirit of keep threads on track I'll just leave you with the last word on this tangent. :)

I don't think we know what our demand for urban housing is yet. So far just about every downtown apartment complex has a long wait list. And while people in OKC have seemed fairly satisfied with suburban living, we don't know how many of those are ready to jump downtown, if only the right space opens up.

I like the sustained, steady growth that we've been showing so far, but we also need to be ready for opportunities like this (theoretical) tower. It would bring a new level of development to OKC and may draw a new type of resident downtown. When someone buys a home in Gallardia, that behavior may not be "I want a huge house in a gated community". It may be "I want the most prestigious living arrangement available in the city". If that's the case, then a high rise might appeal to them.

Even if they announced this tower today (which they aren't), it would be probably 4 or 5 years before anyone could move in. By that point in time a lot of our existing urban areas will have filled up and downtown will be a more desirable place to live than it is today.

I agree it would be cool but it seems like a bit of an odd location for a residential tower. That said, there will be streetcar access, so maybe that's not much of a factor.

It could be a cool location, if there weren't that big fat bifurcating expressway masquerading as a boulevard. Otherwise, it would have great access to bricktown, the arena, the park, CBD, and the street car. I'm not sure where the final designs are on the boulevard, but some serious pedestrian issues are going to pop up if developers really are interested in doing things like this on the south side of the artery.

^^^^^^^

Not to get off-topic, but this is one of the main reasons the convention center doesn't work south of Chesapeake.

I think sometimes you guys in OKC get spoiled. I grew up there and moved in 2005 to Tulsa.
While I like it up here, every time my wife and I come to visit friends and family in okc we are blown away at how fast it continues to grow and change.

My take is okc is probably not quite ready for a 500+ unit 40 story tower. You do NOT want to overbuild your absorption rate or you will discourage other development.
I think a good midrise with 300 or so units is a better option at this particular point.

I don't understand the negativity because every city that is growing or of substantial size has projects come up and get cancelled or downsized.

OKC is killing it and my wife and I talk about moving back fairly often. Whether it is this or a other project okc will be in good shape.

I think saturation is a consideration, but this looks like it would have been a new option for downtown. I think the real threat could be building a lot of the same thing at this point, which we may be seeing (though demand seems to be keeping up). However, an owner occupied tower or even just a luxury high rise rental option would expand the market and possibly attract a new type of downtown resident that want to live downtown, but is currently not interested in what's available. 3 or 4 of these would be a bad idea at this point. 1 or 2 is probably doable, imo. Regency seems to do well and it's kind of shabby. And even the Classen does very well and, honestly, it falls short on its promise of "luxury". A new building with well kept amenities and quality services would probably have no problem maintaining a good occupancy rate.

OKC is far from any "overbuilding". We have space-a-plenty. If this developer is an ( Outside ) group, then his concern is purely ROI and 40 stories helps secure that. It becomes the place to be, thus values will remain steady for each unit. This complex brings its own "self-contained environment" of Large / High End / Mixed-use / Destination point and would thrive. On the Blvd, Highly Visible to all.


If the developer is local, then this project will most likely be scaled back or cut due to ( tight financing / short leash ) approach.

I think you misunderstand. It is not a function of over building land. It is a function of over building you absorption rate as I said.

In other words there is demand for 300 units you build 1000 so 700 stay empty and rents collapse making projects uneconomic. (that is an example number to make the point clear)

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

I think saturation is a consideration, but this looks like it would have been a new option for downtown. I think the real threat could be building a lot of the same thing at this point, which we may be seeing (though demand seems to be keeping up). However, an owner occupied or even just a luxury high rise option would expand the market and possibly attract a new type of downtown resident that want to live downtown, but is not currently not interested in what's available. 3 or 4 of these would be a bad idea at this point. 1 or 2 is probably doable, imo. Regency seems to do well and it's kind of shabby. And even the Classen does very well and, honestly, it falls short on its promise of "luxury". A new building with well kept amenities and quality services would probably have no problem maintaining a good occupancy rate.

Agree with that too. A development like this would really only have the effective impact of two Edges or similar developments, and I don't think we would worry about those for a second. I think we're far from saturated.

JTF makes interesting points about new suburban housing subtracting value from existing suburban neighborhoods (which would be amplified in a city without positive population growth), while new urban actually adds to the appeal of the existing urban. In 20+ years of downtown advocacy I had never thought about it in those terms (personally I don't like pitting urban vs. suburban), but I think that point actually makes a lot of sense.

That doesn't of course change the fact that supply CAN exceed demand (will probably never happen in downtown OKC due to the fact that we effectively started at zero).

OKC is far from any "overbuilding". We have space-a-plenty. If this developer is an ( Outside ) group, then his concern is purely ROI and 40 stories helps secure that. It becomes the place to be, thus values will remain steady for each unit. This complex brings its own "self-contained environment" of Large / High End / Mixed-use / Destination point and would thrive. On the Blvd, Highly Visible to all.


If the developer is local, then this project will most likely be scaled back or cut due to ( tight financing / short leash ) approach.agreed

It could be a cool location, if there weren't that big fat bifurcating expressway masquerading as a boulevard. Otherwise, it would have great access to bricktown, the arena, the park, CBD, and the street car. I'm not sure where the final designs are on the boulevard, but some serious pedestrian issues are going to pop up if developers really are interested in doing things like this on the south side of the artery.I liked the BLVD in the rendering. We need to make sure we have the infrastructure to handle this and make it more attractive to developers.

I hate the Boulevard design more than anyone else, but if you put enough people around it, and at least give the pedestrian a chance, (Long timed crosswalks, strict enforcement of people blocking the crosswalk while queuing, etc.) people will still walk, provided there are destinations on either side of it.

Plenty of examples around the world of very wide 4-6 lane streets working in an urban environment, where people still have good crossing ability. While not ideal, it can be done, and something of this scale would provide enough people on one side, where you can balance it out some.

People will not cross the street if there is nothing on the other side worth doing. That's just common sense.

Oh well. Maybe this same firm can do real renderings for the Stage Center tower site.