Hines was brought in by Devon, that's different. I'm not changing my tune nor do I have anything less than the utmost respect for your posts. It's for that reason that I just want to set the record straight. OKC real estate remains the realm of corporate energy as the city refuses to support actual private developers. The collateral damage of this policy is that development activity will remain constrained and stymied.

That said, I know you got this directly from the city. It's their perspective that you're pushing, and I'm not rejecting you or them, but rather just trying to challenge the thinking to GET A DEAL DONE. I can't believe this isn't transpiring, despite the pessimists. Yes I hated to demo a landmark, but only because I'm really an optimist that knows OKC could be great if it got serious. We are not even close to serious about becoming a great city. We are an okay city that now has a downtown lake.

Remember, this was never a situation where a little TIF money would get this deal done. They want way, way more than they've ever given out before and it's brand new construction in one of the most primo and non-problematic sites in town.

There is simply no objective argument for giving them a bunch of free money, other than them holding the property hostage and claiming they can't get it done otherwise. That is no way to dispense tens of millions of tax dollars, which is why the TIF part has stalled.

Also, I don't think anyone is convinced this deal would go forward as presented even with decent TIF dollars.


I was told about Clayco being involved long before that was every made official and I was also told there were tremendous doubts about their ability to pull this off. I think that's just proving out.


BTW, where is Rainey Williams in all this? For the guy who bought the property and then put himself forth as the ostensible developer, he's been completely absent in any of these dealings for a very long time. If Clayco can't get the job done then it's his job to find someone who can.

Remember, the sale of the Stage Center to Williams was not a case of going to the highest bidder. The foundation used Mark Beffort to field proposals and purchase price was not at all the only criteria. They wanted someone who would develop the property in a responsible manner and that burden is still squarely on Rainey Williams as he's the one that made the promises to get this done and was awarded the right to buy based on promises he made.

BTW, where is Rainey Williams in all this? For the guy who bought the property and then put himself forth as the ostensible developer, he's been completely absent in any of these dealings for a very long time. If Clayco can't get the job done then it's his job to find someone who can.

Remember, the sale of the Stage Center to Williams was not a case of going to the highest bidder. The foundation used Mark Beffort to field proposals and purchase price was not at all the only criteria. They wanted someone who would develop the property in a responsible manner and that burden is still squarely on Rainey Williams as he's the one that made the promises to get this done and was awarded the right to buy based on promises he made.

"As for those who question whether Rainey Williams is just a front, and question his capacity for doing this development, well, you don't know Rainey Williams."

"As for those who question whether Rainey Williams is just a front, and question his capacity for doing this development, well, you don't know Rainey Williams."

This is part of the propaganda that Steve Lackmeyer is responsible for.

I can't believe there is hardly any outrage in this thread. I guess that is just the typical OKC attitude though. What will we let them tear down next with broken promises?

This is part of the propaganda that Steve Lackmeyer is responsible for.

I can't believe there is hardly any outrage in this thread. I guess that is just the typical OKC attitude though. What will we let them tear down next with broken promises?

It's quickly building with each day this is set back. The past few pages is indicative that people are growing impatient.
I'll stand by in my sentiment that I, along with others, thought this project was more sure footed than 499 originally was, TIF or not. One example being how quikly SC was torn down and how we heard we were just waiting to hear back from the city. Of course, when I said that a few days ago it was challenged by a couple folks who then took the stance that this project was "never really" as serious as originally thought. Yea, sure.

Now, we're seeing dialogue that suggests this may be scrapped if no TIF is received, or at least scaled back so completely that we'll be right back where we were when the original proposal (wasn't a proposal, per se, as it was an "idea") showed a generic 12 story (I don't recall the exact floor count) glass building, and was met with public resistance.

-

This will be another fight it seems. God forbid we ask for quality projects in place of what was torn down. It's not much for us to ask and even demand respectable measures from developers and architects. This is "our" city, and we want what's best. So, again, I say that we're starting to see the tide rise now that the 499 fight is over. Just wait.

end rant, for now.

This has always been an OG&E project.

I knew OG&E was behind buying the property long before anything was announced, and from the best possible sources. I was very surprised when suddenly Rainey Williams was the guy but it made sense when you think about the difficulties of OG&E buying, demolishing Stage Center, then developing an elaborate corporate HQ while simultaneously operating a public utility and routinely seeking rate increases.

But no way Williams -- who has never built anything as far as I know -- was even close to equipped to pull off a development like this. So, they have been trying to figure out another way to get this deal done.

Lackmeyer recently mentioned that OG&E is now the party trying to negotiate a TIF. Not Clayco and not Rainey Williams. That should tell you all you need to know about the realities of this situation.

This is part of the propaganda that Steve Lackmeyer is responsible for.

I can't believe there is hardly any outrage in this thread. I guess that is just the typical OKC attitude though. What will we let them tear down next with broken promises?

It's not just Lackmeyer, who merely serves an audience that goes to him for downtown development excitement. This forum also has a huge role. I am just trying to set the record straight.

If anything, Steve does a good job of portraying both sides without obfuscating the issue(s). Do ALL "insider" sources do the same, or are they occasionally beholden to their sources to spin the story in order to maintain that insider status? It's great we have insiders, but at the end of the day it's no different than any other source that must be weighed against others.

This is part of the propaganda that Steve Lackmeyer is responsible for.

I can't believe there is hardly any outrage in this thread. I guess that is just the typical OKC attitude though. What will we let them tear down next with broken promises?

If you think Steve was a shill for the destruction of Stage Center, you're mistaken.

As my memory recalls, OG&E was going to do a new building many moons ago, late 80's or early 90's possibly, don't recall, but it never materialized. I've seen the programming documents and renderings......no idea why it never happened. Clayco was in way over their head on the initial proposal for this development.

With this rate increase, they better build something nice with my extra money.

As my memory recalls, OG&E was going to do a new building many moons ago, late 80's or early 90's possibly, don't recall, but it never materialized. I've seen the programming documents and renderings......no idea why it never happened. Clayco was in way over their head on the initial proposal for this development.

Clayco is bigger than you realize.. Or you just don't know Clayco. Lol

Clayco is big but is primarily a builder with architectural services as opposed to a developer.

Yes they have a bank of investors normally. Would be nice if OKC invested in itself (the TIF).

It's really not that different than most developers who rarely use their own equity anyway.

I just want to point out that at $550 M this is a bigger project than Devon, which came in way under budget. This is an opportunity to get a non oil player to do a project every bit as big as Devon, and we have likely squandered it. It is mind blowing, truly. In true OKC fashion we have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory bc we expect developers to act the same as a Fortune 500 oil corp.

OKC may not be destined for greatness, and never mind diversification.

As nice as the ClayCo renderings are, and as much as I'd like to see them get built exactly as described, the money they asked for was so outrageous that it's just not worth it. That TIF money could be better used elsewhere.

As nice as the ClayCo renderings are, and as much as I'd like to see them get built exactly as described, the money they asked for was so outrageous that it's just not worth it. That TIF money could be better used elsewhere.

Like across the street, to fund parking beneath the tower. That battle has already been lost though.

With the price of oil, a lot of battles will be lost.

As nice as the ClayCo renderings are, and as much as I'd like to see them get built exactly as described, the money they asked for was so outrageous that it's just not worth it. That TIF money could be better used elsewhere.

When people object to the dollar AMT of the TIF request (the $63M or whatever) are they suggesting there should be a cap on it, and if so how should that work? Are people's objections to this accounting for the SCALE of this compared to a MidtownR deal on 10th Street? I'd also like to point out that all of those projects mostly had historic tax credits (20+10/20% equity from state + federal HTC), which combined w TIF is a hefty development subsidy. Hefty or not though, it was the right amount to deliver the right project for OKC. I am so glad those weren't held back by this kind of small thinking.

I'd also like to point out that high-rise living doesn't even really compete w the Deep Deuce low-rises bc it's just such a different product. The product is more the view and vibe than the space or even the neighborhood. It's just a different niche, truly. We need an array of niches in order to actually maximize the capacity for downtown/urban living, and this small thinking just isn't getting it done. OKC is thousands of units behind where it should be according to its own demand analysis via a vis that outdated market study (I'm willing to bet urban living demand hasn't shrunk).

TIF has been used for all developments as gap financing. How is that not consistent with what Clayco needs? They are requesting a potentially appropriate amount of gap financing...for a high-rise development.

TIF is supposed to be for *blighted* areas and problematic properties that have special challenges, like huge utility line relocation (Steelyard) or historic renovation issues (like 21c, which is also in a blighted area).

This particular property is perfectly clear, rectangular, one of the primo spots in all of downtown and sits on a giant public park completely funded with hundreds of millions of tax dollars and surrounded by hundreds of millions more of TIF work in the form of Project 180, John Rex Elementary and tons of other public projects.

TIF is to jump-start troubled areas and help challenged properties be reworked, not to be corporate welfare to rich developers and tenants.


And keep in mind, when you give one developer TIF for a very straight-forward development, you are putting at disadvantage all the other competing developments that are already built or will be built. At what point do you let the free market work it's magic?? We should have passed that point a very long time ago as we now contemplating a 4th MAPS program.


If this type of development can't be done without public assistance (and of course it can, as has been proven several times) at this point in time, when can it ever?

Time to get developers off the public teet, apart from very unique circumstances.

Did you read any of my post? Just curious, because it's not worth it to keep talking past eachother. We have our positions. But I just explained how precedent has gotten us to this point (you yourself have even defended it as gap financing before) and how this project is a unique project with unique needs and a unique market that it appeals to. OKC needs more projects that expand the market rather than drill deeper down into the preexisting market. It's the Apple business model of selling the product you didn't know you needed until you saw it. It's called vision.

You can fight a moral fight about the free market and keeping developers off the public teet, but when it comes to OKC are urbs are at a nearly insurmountable disadvantage compared to the burbs that receive nearly all of our systematic public investment. When downtown gets a crumb of public investment it's a "special project" with a "special project manager" to ensure we screw it up.

Rather than fighting a moral battle for the free market, which is great and all, why isn't there a LITTLE more concern for filling the HOLE we now have? Since naming it Lake Lackmeyer is totally unfair albeit funny and catchy (the poor guy gave far more coverage to efforts to save it than ANYONE and he deserves our appreciation for his responsible reporting), perhaps Libertarian Lake is more fitting? Free Market Marsh? Development Principles Pond?

Regardless of what we call it and how we articulate development principles, all I see is a failed deal.

This is the essence of the problem with TIF...

Every developer comes along and holds their development hostage claiming they can't do it without public assistance. And in this case (like most others) they demolish a historic structure, spend tons of time and money on PR and pretty pictures then long after the fact slip in they need tens of millions to develop the property.

It's simple blackmail and it defies logic and all civic and business sense.

Yet, the masses have already been baited with these cool renderings and people clamor just to give them millions.


It has to stop somewhere otherwise it's this endless cycle of subsidy and we should be way, way past that now. Billions of public money have already been invested downtown.

ClayCo proposes 4 towers, each around 25 stories. 2 office towers, 2 residential towers. These are on land that they got for a song, next to a major public park. There are no issues with utilities needing to be moved. There are no issues with site contamination. This land is perfect. It's across the street from the tallest building in the state, and the entire area has just been renovated. Private developments are taking place all around them, including another tower being built directly across the street. Oh yeah, and they've got one tenant lined up who will completely fill one of the corporate towers.

And ClayCo still can't get this done? Hell, for as much money as they're asking, you could give me that money and I'll build the thing. How much of a sweetheart deal do you have to give someone?

If it really requires that much public financing, then OKC doesn't need 4 more towers. If that is really the case, then we should ask ClayCo to scale down their towers, maybe build something really nice in the 8 - 12 story range, and be happy with what our market can truly support. Now... I don't really believe that that is all OKC can support. I don't think you do either, Spartan. I think we'd fill up those four towers pretty quickly. ClayCo may not have the financing in place, but that doesn't mean we should just give them lots of public money.

People also need to keep in mind that at this point all they are proposing is the one office tower and parking garage. They want separate TIF funds for that, then want TIF funds *IF* they build further.

Giving them a bunch of money to build the OG&E building and huge parking structure provides zero guarantee they'll ever do anything further.

People also need to keep in mind that at this point all they are proposing is the one office tower and parking garage. They want separate TIF funds for that, then want TIF funds *IF* they build further.

Giving them a bunch of money to build the OG&E building and huge parking structure provides zero guarantee they'll ever do anything further.

This is what really stinks about this entire deal. Why do they need such a large TIF for the main OG&E HQ? They already have a tenant. I can understand there being some reservations now in the face of low oil prices but at the time this was proposed, there should have been absolutely no question of whether or not the market could support a 25 story tower especially being that it already had an anchor tenant. I can understand needing a TIF for the second spec tower and especially the high-rise residential.

Pete and Hoya and others - I'm right there with you on the same page that Downtown OKC should be an extremely attractive investment locale. However for some reason it isn't getting the deal done, and we need to ask WHY? I think we need to stop focusing on these isolated issues (where often we disagree over what the issue is, for instance you see a subsidy, while I see a massive hole where a landmark once stood) and pan out to the full view. What is happening across the entire downtown landscape?

After you get past the reality of OKC's dominant suburban landscape, the issue comes to land assembly. We have an urban renewal kinda downtown. With our public sector actors as the biggest culprit, specifically the convention center project, in my mind. That CC project alone has set its sights on just about every big valuable plot of land, thus creating illusory competition, and drastically inflating land values through smoke and mirrors. Furthermore, OCURA's wrecking ball has been even worse for small-time property owners than for historic architecture, which is saying a LOT. We have used our vehicles of land assembly to really put a lid on the kind of private mixed-use development that could be possible. Which is insane considering we use that private mixed-use development as a barometer of our own success, not that we aren't complacent enough in this town that that's an issue.

We have a lot of sites that should be attractive for investment, and one public sector actor or another (whether it be OCURA, ODOT, crappy design review boards, economic development funds like "Medical Business District Inc." etc) have all done a truly marvelous job of ensuring that said investment just doesn't flow. I am absolutely not one of these "get da gubment out da way" shills, but it's kind of true in a way, speaking from my own experience back east.

All that said, I can agree that there are a lot of things that went wrong here. However Clayco itself isn't the issue, but could rather have been part of the solution. For one their subsidy request shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who expected a "big-time" project there, which I think we all did. I know Clayco from some projects in Ohio and I know that they do good development work, but I could give or take them as far as this site goes. I just don't want to see the same kind of parking lot that used to span the block where Devon Energy Center now sits (despite fond memories of parking there to watch the 4th of July fireworks as a kid). A site which, by the way, was cleared by the public sector for another one of these "big-time" deals with a notorious developer who was promising a done deal (Carozza).

How about Lake "Let's carefully add the red tape after the site is cleared but before anything is built in replacement"?

People also need to keep in mind that at this point all they are proposing is the one office tower and parking garage. They want separate TIF funds for that, then want TIF funds *IF* they build further.

Giving them a bunch of money to build the OG&E building and huge parking structure provides zero guarantee they'll ever do anything further.

Give them 0 for OGE and parking garage. If they want some money to be the trendsetter for high rise condos that's a little more reasonable. It's hard to get financing when there are 0 comps in the market. So helping getting the first 2 built might be worth the public's money.

Give them 0 for OGE and parking garage. If they want some money to be the trendsetter for high rise condos that's a little more reasonable. It's hard to get financing when there are 0 comps in the market. So helping getting the first 2 built might be worth the public's money.

Agree with this.

I am going to break my posting rule on this thread (sorry Rover) and clear this issue up. Spartan's point is that suburban OKC is way past the point where private money should have taken over as well, but it doesn't stop the city from giving millions to outlet malls and sporting goods retailers and spending billions more on roads in the far flung reaches of the southern plains, so if they can do it on Memorial Rd why can't they do it on Sheridan? Maybe Clayco/OG&E should suggest moving the project to Edmond. It worked for Sandridge.

The lack of forward movement has absolutely nothing to do with downtown vs. suburbia or lack of development inertia in the central core.

It has to do with this all being a ruse for OG&E from the outset and they can't step forward and really take care of this deal due to the negative PR.

If this property came on the open market there would be a line of developers looking to snatch it up but that never did really happen.


If you are looking to place blame, aim at Rainey Williams. He bought the property and promised a "world class development". That was long before Clayco got involved or there was even a hint of a big TIF request.

The property is still being held by Williams. It's his responsibility to deliver on the promises he made when we was awarded the right to develop by the foundation that sold Stage Center.

The lack of forward movement has absolutely nothing to do with downtown vs. suburbia or lack of development inertia in the central core.

It has to do with this all being a ruse for OG&E from the outset and they can't step forward and really take care of this deal due to the negative PR.

If this property came on the open market there would be a line of developers looking to snatch it up but that never did really happen.


If you are looking to place blame, aim at Rainey Williams. He bought the property and promised a "world class development". That was long before Clayco got involved or there was even a hint of a big TIF request.

The property is still being held by Williams. It's his responsibility to deliver on the promises he made when we was awarded the right to develop by the foundation that sold Stage Center.

Where's the 'like' when you really need it? Well said, Pete.

This is what Rainey Williams said after getting approval to demolish Stage Center:


“We look forward to getting started with what we promised to build, which is a world-class headquarters for OG&E,” said Williams.

Committee approves demolition of one of OKC?s most unique buildings | KFOR.com (http://kfor.com/2014/01/16/committee-approves-demolition-of-one-of-okcs-most-unique-buildings/)


He used the term "world class" multiple times in the press and again, this was long before Clayco became officially involved.

That quote was also from 1 year and 7 months ago and all we have to show for the repeated promises is a demolished Stage Center, a huge stagnant pond and evidently no forward momentum at all.

It seems to me that it's about time for Rainey to make some type of public statement regarding the OG&E Tower and the rest of the project.

all we have to show for the repeated promises is a demolished Stage Center, a huge stagnant pond

To be fair to Rainey, that's an improvement over SC.:)

Give them 0 for OGE and parking garage. If they want some money to be the trendsetter for high rise condos that's a little more reasonable. It's hard to get financing when there are 0 comps in the market. So helping getting the first 2 built might be worth the public's money.

I also agree with this.

I'd only like to point out that the term is not "teet", but rather "teat."

I've been a little out of the loop on this but have read several of the recent posts on this thread.

Am I correct in assuming this project is either severely stalled or dead?

Severely stalled is probably the best way to put it.

According to Steve's chat this morning, he seems to think talks are moving forward between the city and OG&E. He believes that south parcel is completely dead but he says we may be looking at two towers. Here is exactly what was said.

"Steve Lackmeyer: 11:05 AM That said, negotiations went badly between Clayco and the city, and it is now OGE Energy Corp. that is now at the negotiation table with the city. Those talks are ongoing. The two sides are closer to an agreement on TIF for the OGE tower. But I really think the south half of this development is dead, and that at best we're back to looking at just two towers. And quite honestly, that might be for the best - I never understood how so much office and high-rise housing space could be absorbed by the market."

Honestly at this point, I think any news that something may be built at all is good news for this project.

Honestly at this point, I think any news that something may be built at all is good news for this project.

I think this is precisely what the folks behind this want you to think. They are playing a long game.

I think it was a mistake to lump the north and south parts together in the first place. It expanded the scope to such a large development as to make it impractical to develop densely, fully, and all at once. It almost made it a necessity to ask for a large subsidy of some sort. Of course, that means that doing what should have been done in the first place, focusing just on the SC site, seems like a disappointment. By trying to make something so grand and so immediate we made it unrealistic. Let's get the OGE and residential tower built as well as it can be and then worry about the south half. Sometimes when you try to jump too far you just land on your face.

I think it was a mistake to lump the north and south parts together in the first place. It expanded the scope to such a large development as to make it impractical to develop densely, fully, and all at once. It almost made it a necessity to ask for a large subsidy of some sort. Of course, that means that doing what should have been done in the first place, focusing just on the SC site, seems like a disappointment. By trying to make something so grand and so immediate we made it unrealistic. Let's get the OGE and residential tower built as well as it can be and then worry about the south half. Sometimes when you try to jump too far you just land on your face.

Right.

In hindsight I wish Milhaus would have been awarded the south site. Everyone here, including myself, was salivating over the Clayco rendering, but had Milhaus been awarded the south parcel it would probably already be under construction and secondly, it would have provided some park-front housing. The Milhaus proposal was also more realistic (though not as ambitious). Myriad Garden is such a great park it will be a real shame if housing doesn't end up fronting it at least somewhere.

So I assume it's back to the low rise 10 story building for OG&E. What a waste of prime real estate IMO. Typical OKC.

Rover said it best, Clayco expanded the scope of the project and made it unworkable. Let's just focus on the Stage Center block, in reality - they could develop four towers on it if they must have four towers. There was no reason to create another superblock even if it was to have four towers.

To Bchris, I disagree about the milhaus proposal, I think it did not add density to that block, essentially taking an entire block for one tower and a parking garage? There are much better, smaller parcels of land downtown that would accommodate that development much better.

I reality, I think both proposals were stupid to begin with because both were unrealistic (over promise on one, under deliver on another). Clayco should have just been awarded the stage center block, develop two or more towers on it. Come up with a realistic TIF request that puts all parking under ground with retail on the first and second floors and you very likely will get buy-in from all stake holders involved. Build at least one tower above 500 feet and you will no doubt get nearly every fan on this board, especially if the towers are built to the corners with no setbacks!!.

Hot Rod, I wanna have your baby.

I don't think Clayco's plans for the south parcel in any way impacted their ability to perform on the north parcel.

They were in way over their heads from the beginning and now that the south parcel is pretty much off the table, they still aren't making any progress.

Remember, all four towers were to be built completely separately and they can't even get one off the ground.

I wish the local media would start putting Rainey Williams feet to the fire and ask the hard questions. I guess my top question would be "Why did you not disclose from the beginning that your project needed the highest amount to off TIF requested ever to even become a reality?" Also, "why do you even need that much when you already have a corporation that is going to be a primary tenant of the building?"

Im a pretty optimistic person and even I am disgruntled over this debacle. Someone needs to be held accountable.

Has there actually been anything solid in terms of a source claiming that this deal is crumbled to pieces or is it still speculation?

Has there actually been anything solid in terms of a source claiming that this deal is crumbled to pieces or is it still speculation?

There is no pending TIF action, i.e. a recommendation by the Alliance for an amount to be approved by the City Council.

No building permit application.

Also, hearing that now OG&E is trying to negotiate directly with the City for TIF and that the powers that be do not want to give them a cent, mainly because their request lacks any real justification other than "we don't have enough money".


I suspect there will ultimately be a compromise where they get some TIF money but not nearly what they've been asking for.

They need to negotiate with the city by asking the city what they want to see across from the park. Then untidy TIF that way. I agree pure HQ mid-rise w a lead tenant has no risk at all and doesn't deserve subsidy..


I wish the local media would start putting Rainey Williams feet to the fire and ask the hard questions. I guess my top question would be "Why did you not disclose from the beginning that your project needed the highest amount to off TIF requested ever to even become a reality?" Also, "why do you even need that much when you already have a corporation that is going to be a primary tenant of the building?"

Im a pretty optimistic person and even I am disgruntled over this debacle. Someone needs to be held accountable.

It seems like they're trying but he won't answer their calls

To Bchris, I disagree about the milhaus proposal, I think it did not add density to that block, essentially taking an entire block for one tower and a parking garage?

I'm starting to think that might actually be the new design standard for anything built around the Myriad Gardens.

The Milhaus proposal was very rushed because developers only had 90 days to respond to the RFP.

Remember, Clayco already had detailed plans and then OCURA decided to put on a super quick RFP and no one else really had time to put together a meaningful response, which is why there is was only one other group to apply.

The question is, in light of the current economy, would responses be worthwhile if a new RFP were issued today?

The property is going to be used for the convention hotel, so it really doesn't matter now.

You say that as though it's been definitively decided (and by "the property" I presume you mean clayco/south is where the conv hotel is going). I didn't see anything like that in the convention hotel thread. Did I miss a post? Can you please update that thread with the latest info?

I think he just means that it is by far the presumptive choice, and I agree. I thought about that when asking my question, but mostly just wanted to ask it as an exercise. Would better (or any) projects be proposed on that or a similar property if an RFP were issued today?

Oh okay. Seemed more definitive, just figured I missed it being announced on here somewhere.

The question is, in light of the current economy, would responses be worthwhile if a new RFP were issued today?

It wouldn't be Class A office space. That said, just about every single city but OKC is developing high-rise apartments now.

Just watching the Kings and Queens of Oklahoma City play chess.

http://i.imgur.com/qv49xWr.jpg

It wouldn't be Class A office space. That said, just about every single city but OKC is developing high-rise apartments now.

Agreed, it is pretty amazing in the current downtown building boom going on across the country that someone hasn't tapped into the OKC market for an apartment tower or 2.

One would think a luxury tower would pencil out in the $2-2.25 sq/ft range. What are the rental rates going to be for some of the new developments like Steelyard or LIFT?

It wouldn't be Class A office space. That said, just about every single city but OKC is developing high-rise apartments now.

Curious. Why do you think that is? Besides the current economy, OKC's downtown housing market seems robust. Does it have to do with our large glut of empty lots and lack of continuous density? Roght now, it seems building up past 5 stories isn't yet thr standard. Or maybe developers are keeping eye on the current stock of under construction apartments to see how the market fares once they're all completed? What do you think? How do we compare to the other cities building highrise housing.