Steve brightened my night even more with this story

http://www.newsok.com/bob-howard-downtown-ford-closing-site-being-eyed-for-redevelopment/article/3516295?custom_click=lead_story_title



Houston-based Group 1 confirmed Friday it is closing Bob Howard Downtown Ford, clearing the way for plans by property owners Fred Hall and Bob Howard to develop a mix of housing and retail.



Read more: http://newsok.com/bob-howard-downtown-ford-closing-site-being-eyed-for-redevelopment/article/3516295#ixzz15mzVtC00

Hmmmm.....future highrise?not a bad location for one!

Very nice...wouldn't say that lot was an eyesore but it certainly doesn't enhance the area

Great news, can't wait to see the plans!

A highrise across the park from Devon would be very successful.

Can't wait to see the plans. More people = even more restaurants and amenties downtown, potentially including a grocery store. Not to mention it won't be hard to improve the aesthetics of that block.

The area I really see taking off after Devon is done is the Main Street row of [vacant] shops between Hudson and Walker. An Irish Pub or a Brooks Brothers couldn't help but be successful there.

This could be really exciting if done well. Hopefully, they'll have a nice pub or bar on the side closest to OKC Arena b/c they could get a lot business. There's nothing right by the arena now...

^^Agreed!I didnt even stop to think of that but it's a great idea!

While this is poised to be yet another high-priced residential complex, it's great to see some new developments going up near the future park area!

Brooks bros, high rise...I always love the speculation. This does have incredible potential though. Probably the greatest downtown location for a retail residential development, or any development for that matter. A definite prime piece of real estate

very good news! can't wait to see what happens.

While this is poised to be yet another high-priced residential complex, it's great to see some new developments going up near the future park area!

I suspect this will be the highest priced, the way it will be located between both parks. Still, our per square foot housing prices in Oklahoma City are far lower than almost anywhere else, even our highest-priced neighborhoods. One of the prices of moving up is that housing prices will move up as well. And, since we have chosen a capitalist economy, there will always be homes and goods out of reach for most of us. Still, I look forward to the possibility of watching a building like that built.

I think it would actually be a great location for a hotel.

Why not both, with the prime real estate they would be shortsighted and foolish not to consider having a full service hotel with a large number of rooms as the podium of the building with a named restaurant and a public Bar, and then add the residential part as the tower element above.

ya, the space is big enough for several buildings, you wouldn't want to put just one residential tower or one hotel or whatever on 3 square city blocks. .....

I think the land could support quite a wealth of development and it should be done right since it will be downtown's new centre.

W hotel and residences

Hopefully they do it right, anything less than 15 stories wouldn't be wasting that prime location.

Zimmer Gunsal would be a good architect to design the development, the are known for good residential/condo development www.zgf.com

I have a question for anyone who could possibly answer it!Is there a market or need for a 30-40 story residential tower like you see in other large cities?

I have a question for anyone who could possibly answer it!Is there a market or need for a 30-40 story residential tower like you see in other large cities?

I don't think so, the downtown area can't support that tall of a residential tower at it's current state, now if more commercial towers are built, and are high paying jobs in those commercial towers, then yes, 15-20 stories is more feasible right now.

If it hits the right price points it could meet demand. It is also possible that a 30 story tower could also house a hotel and apartments. This site is pretty big so they could get a lot on it if they want. With parks on both sides I sure hope they don't do a lot of green space on the site. I could see a 20 story hotel, a 15 story residential tower and a multi-level retail/parking structure.

I've brought this up in another thread but something like Branson Landing in Branson, MO would do really well in OKC IMO.

http://www.bransonlanding.com/

http://www.bransonlanding.com/images/hiltonoutside.jpg
The hotel is actually above the shopping and dining.

I've brought this up in another thread but something like Branson Landing in Branson, MO would do really well in OKC IMO.

http://www.bransonlanding.com/

http://www.bransonlanding.com/images/hiltonoutside.jpg
The hotel is actually above the shopping and dining.

I would soil myself if something like that got built.

Steve,

Does the new development have financing locked in?

Steve,

Does the new development have financing locked in?

The two men involved are probably the financiers themselves. I think finance will be the least of their concerns.

That Branson Landing hotel looks like Lower Bricktown. I would hope that the developers of this particular site would think substantially more sophisticated-ly (probably not a word) for that site. Branson Landing is how I imagine the Quail Springs mall development to eventually look.

That Branson Landing hotel looks like Lower Bricktown. I would hope that the developers of this particular site would think substantially more sophisticated-ly (probably not a word) for that site.

I was there over spring break and it was actually really nice! I would be ecstatic if something like this was built.

I don't want to judge. I'm glad you had fun on your trip. But to my mind, Branson is a small town that caters to young families on a budget and a segment of older people that seek mild-level shows and think Vegas is naughty. There's a time and place for everything. But 5-story pre-cast construction, while appropriate for Branson and Plano and Quail Springs, should not be the standard for the most urban part of one of America's 30 biggest cities. Just my humble opinion.

I have been to Branson Landing many times and I can assure it is NOT what we want for this site or anywhere in Downtown for that matter. The Construction is cheap, cheap, cheap, and the Architectural style is about as plain and boring as it gets. Branson Landing is like the Wal-Mart of mixed use development, meaning it is laid out, and looks like every other cheap, standard mixed-use development around the country.

The area I really see taking off after Devon is done is the Main Street row of [vacant] shops between Hudson and Walker. An Irish Pub or a Brooks Brothers couldn't help but be successful there.

The only way a Brooks Bros is coming downtown is if it's included in a large development from a prominent developer like Cordish or someone like that and if the project is modeled closely after the West Village, ala, Brooks Bros.

Also, anybody notice Mayor Mick's comment about this site being too central for the convention center? "Too 'in the middle of things'" I think is what he said. So the park is not supposed to be in the middle of things, so that's a natural fit for the convention center. Just because of the extent to which that logic does not make sense, I really am starting to think Cornett is getting it, but that others who might have more say are going to take longer to catch on.

I also think with Fred Hall putting Alison Oshel to work on this, hopefully she can earn her stripes for downtown here.

Spartan, they Mayor is correct. This would be the worst spot in OKC for a Convention Center. The Convention Center should be nowhere near the park, and especially fronting parks on two sides. C.C. create huge dead spots. They are only open from 9Am to 5PM and are closed on weekends. Their sheer size discourages people from even trying to walk past them. Take a trip to any convention center in America on Friday night at 8PM and tell me how many people you see around it. Even the C.C. at Mandalay Bay (Las Vegas) is dead during that time.

Yeah we both agree on that, I was just juxtaposing his correct assessment that the Downtown Ford site is bad with the incorrect assessment that the park-side site is an appropriate for a convention center.

That Branson Landing hotel looks like Lower Bricktown.

Ha. I wish. While not that special, relatively, it is 10 times better than lower bricktwon and that Residence Inn. If that had been built instead of the Residence Inn, retail in bricktown might be light years ahead of what it is now.

Yeah we both agree on that, I was just juxtaposing his correct assessment that the Downtown Ford site is bad with the incorrect assessment that the park-side site is an appropriate for a convention center.

I got you now. Your right, we are talking a difference of one or two blocks between this site and the one south of Ford Center, but all the charactersits stay the same. It needs to be located closer to Lower Bricktown.

Zimmer Gunsal would be a good architect to design the development, the are known for good residential/condo development www.zgf.com

That is great work.

Don't rule out http://www.ahmm.co.uk

They are already doing several projects in OKC.

I'd kinda just like to see TAP designing downtown developments again.

I'd kinda just like to see TAP designing downtown developments again.

Seconded. Seems like they fell off the surface.

These three blocks have always had a retail/residential development with two towers on the Core to Shore planning documents- and the owners have known for a while that they were going to do something like this, according to the article. Maybe the C2S planners also had conversations with Howard and Hall about their future plans for the area, and we've already seen a general idea of what they'd like to do? Hopefully we see some drawings soon! Cool.

http://www.okc.gov/planning/coretoshore/images/redevconcept.jpg

http://www.downtownokc.com/Portals/0/images/SkylineSnapShotImages/SkylineContent/small%20for%20q1%20web/Core%20to%20shore%20park-aerial-looking-dt%20small.jpg

Seconded. Seems like they fell off the surface.

Are they involved in any active OKC projects?

RE: TAP. I'm not completely lit up about the residential things they have designed so far. Maybe we should look beyond our city borders for this.

Hopefully they will outsource the architectural design work. Haven't seen a local architectural firm with notable residential high-rises. Ziegler Cooper would be a great fit www.zieglercooper.com, their residential portfolio is astonishing.

I am not completely sure, but I think TAP has been occupied lately designing churches and medical office buildings and single residences; types of projects that hardly utilize their principals' creative talent.

While TAP seems to have fallen off the surface, Rand has gotten a lot more prominent lately and as a result maybe his creative talent has fallen off the surface as well? I miss the pre-recession days for architecture. All we have designs from these days are outside architects and Rand, who is great as a part of a whole and not so much as the most prominent architect in town.

I am not completely sure, but I think TAP has been occupied lately designing churches and medical office buildings and single residences; types of projects that hardly utilize their principals' creative talent.

While TAP seems to have fallen off the surface, Rand has gotten a lot more prominent lately and as a result maybe his creative talent has fallen off the surface as well? I miss the pre-recession days for architecture. All we have designs from these days are outside architects and Rand, who is great as a part of a whole and not so much as the most prominent architect in town.

Architects are struggling. The recession really took a toll on the entire construction industry and especially architects. It's not something the media ever talks about so most people outside of the industry have no idea, but nationwide the unemployment rate for architects was over 30% and it hasn't improved much. The aftermath of this recession will be felt for a long time in the design/construction community.

A lot of them have had their pay slashed in half too. I think I read something where only 15% of architects can claim to not be majorly affected right now.

A guy I was talking to today said that there has been talk of a twin mid-high rise building configuration of some sorts being bandied about. He said 30 stories plus and to me that sounds like more of a high rise. How many stories is the old 1st nat. building?

Of course this is prob. just more speculation as I am not sure that anyone knows for sure what will be built there yet. All we do know for sure is ,something will be built on that property.

^^I HOPE your correct on these speculations because currently no building in OKC has more than 36 stories! http://search.mywebsearch.com/mywebsearch/redirect.jhtml?qid=f1573669c22fd33edac079c45b62bd0 1&searchfor=first+nationalcenter+in+okc&action=pick&pn=1&si=&n=77cef101&ptb=TPaB3MRI5djiJf.GhpayCA&ptnrS=ZUxdm080YYUS&ss=&st=bar&cb=ZU&pg=GGmain&ord=0&tpr=&redirect=mPWsrdz9heamc8iHEhldETQ7yG7eb7Dq8XWywy0uC 6ABu%2FIykSjoB2SGgg5%2ByskyA6m0UcPGJL3GI6Io6snPJe6 ie6SK7uw1fNGda4yPtSY%3D&ct=AR FNC is 493 ft tall w/33 floors!

A guy I was talking to today said that there has been talk of a twin mid-high rise building configuration of some sorts being bandied about. He said 30 stories plus and to me that sounds like more of a high rise. How many stories is the old 1st nat. building?

Of course this is prob. just more speculation as I am not sure that anyone knows for sure what will be built there yet. All we do know for sure is ,something will be built on that property.

I doubt they will be that tall, more likely 15-20 stories.

Actually the First National is more like 440. I know that the Oklahoma Tower is taller, although Oklahoma Tower, City Place, and First National are all 3 very close in height.

Assuming the C2S renderings are to scale, the C2S renderings place the two towers at roughly 250 feet tall. Going off the Ford Center height of 108ft from ground level to the top of the roof (exterior).

I'd be surprised if they built them that high, also assuming they are going with a tower setup.

Actually the First National is more like 440. I know that the Oklahoma Tower is taller, although Oklahoma Tower, City Place, and First National are all 3 very close in height.
^^FNC is 493'ft tall to the spire which is also correct!440 is ground level to rooftop,and 493 is to spire!Multiple towers all over the World use spire heights like The Sears tower,Burj Dubai(Khalifa),and The Freedomtower(u/c) so 493'ft tall is also correct!http://search.mywebsearch.com/mywebsearch/redirect.jhtml?qid=f1573669c22fd33edac079c45b62bd0 1&searchfor=first+nationalcenter+in+okc&action=pick&pn=1&si=&n=77cef101&ptb=TPaB3MRI5djiJf.GhpayCA&ptnrS=ZUxdm080YYUS&ss=&st=bar&cb=ZU&pg=GGmain&ord=0&tpr=&redirect=mPWsrdz9heamc8iHEhldETQ7yG7eb7Dq8XWywy0uC 6ABu%2FIykSjoB2SGgg5%2ByskyA6m0UcPGJL3GI6Io6snPJe6 ie6SK7uw1fNGda4yPtSY%3D&ct=AR and this is ground level to roof top http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Oklahoma_City by ALL accounts The FNC is OKC's 2nd tallest!And The Oklahoma Tower is shorter even w/o FNC's spire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_Tower

RE: TAP. I'm not completely lit up about the residential things they have designed so far. Maybe we should look beyond our city borders for this.
I know there are people in town that more than have the ability, what most people don't seem to realize that owners and financiers have a whole lot more to do with "design" than people outside the building industry realize. Many times you are designing to their tastes and budgets, in many cases they are lacking both.

I know there is very little of my "style" in the projects that I have worked on, I have a few elements in JDM Place (I came onto the project after construction started) and most of the design was done by Quentin Remy based on Dr. McKean's wishes. On most projects I get some elements in there but for the most part the style is determined by the client which is the norm for 90% of the industry. Most high design is dead at the moment and those who have work are doing what their client wants.


I am not completely sure, but I think TAP has been occupied lately designing churches and medical office buildings and single residences; types of projects that hardly utilize their principals' creative talent.
TAP has gone back to their core, that is what we were doing when I was at TAP in 1993. I am sure they would rather be doing development work if there was money available. Most firms have had to go back to core competencies since the development dollars have dried up, just the nature of the business. I know developers that want to do projects, they just want us to do them for free on the hope that we will get paid if the project gets funded. We have drawers full of "paper architecture" for which we did not get paid for so we are trying to do a lot less of it because we don't have the cash flow that we did 4-5 years ago.


A lot of them have had their pay slashed in half too. I think I read something where only 15% of architects can claim to not be majorly affected right now.
I haven't been affected pay wise, we had a 10% reduction in effect last year for about 8 months. What has been affected is some of the benefits have been lessened. We have a bunch of work right now but we also have half the staff. I am now having to do design, CD's, CA and the rendering work because we let go of the people who did the 3DSMax work in our office last year. The last time that I used 3D Studio a bunch is before it went to Windows and the "Max" added to the name. We went to using Skyline before I left Benham and moved to Austin.

This is very exciting. I just hope they don't botch it.

This is very exciting. I just hope they don't botch it.

I am sure no matter what they do, some will believe they "botched" it.

It will be interesting to see what long term owners/developers believe will be economically viable there for the long term.

I am sure no matter what they do, some will believe they "botched" it.

It will be interesting to see what long term owners/developers believe will be economically viable there for the long term.

The can-be-critical-of-anything standard can apply to anything, but generally the standard for criticism has been pretty low. I don't think you understand the level that design transgressions must be on in order to draw ire from the people that care about that stuff. This is Oklahoma City. There is no way to scrutinize everything...

Just don't give us Lower Bricktown and we'll be happy. Lower Bricktown would not have even been accepted anywhere else. A real planning dept and planning commission would have laughed at it.

Lower Bricktown is far less than most of us would like to see. However, over time I believe it will continue to develop. Most cities develop over 50 years, not 50 minutes. At the time of lower Bricktown's development there was virtually no value there. Sometimes it takes something and someone to jump start development and it probably isn't going to be what the purists desire. There is a real pragmatism to investing private money in projects and an expectation of profit. Developers don't deal with high ideals but rather low risk and promise of rewards. I don't know all the dealings of lower Btown, but it may well have been the best deal that could be done at that time and for the foreseable future at that time. Sometimes it is better to get started than to wait for the perfect and never get going. As the area becomes more valuable then we will see better and better developments.

The exception I know of in the world is Dubai where the Khalifa controlled everything and have defied the market to invest BILLIONS and have given incredible tax rewards for quasi citizenship in the Emirates by individuals and corporations who would buy condos and offices. They have created an immediate world city for people wanting to do business in a most important area of the world. The Khalifa control everything and have put up huge sums of money. Elsewhere developers have to be good businessmen and most aren't great visionaries with a willingness to risk huge sums of money to advance high ideals.

Dubai is also a ghost town compared to three years ago with abandoned condos and cars all over the place because a bunch of those people lost their jobs when the markets crashed and fled back to home instead of ending up in debtors prison. Ex-pats have no citizenship when it comes down to it, they were just allowed to purchase property to help fuel the boom. It has succumbed to the same failings as any other risky venture that was overbuilt on credit and those gov't related entities financing everything there have had to be bailed out by the other Emirates.

Dubai is also a ghost town compared to three years ago with abandoned condos and cars all over the place because a bunch of those people lost their jobs when the markets crashed and fled back to home instead of ending up in debtors prison. Ex-pats have no citizenship when it comes down to it, they were just allowed to purchase property to help fuel the boom. It has succumbed to the same failings as any other risky venture that was overbuilt on credit and those gov't related entities financing everything there have had to be bailed out by the other Emirates.

You are exactly correct. But that is an example of artificially created urban development without consideration of the fundamental economics of the situation. I am just trying to point out that we can dream all we want, but for long term success the market has to dictate what will be developed and at what scale, and any developer who ignores it will wind up bankrupt.

Lower Bricktown is far less than most of us would like to see. However, over time I believe it will continue to develop. Most cities develop over 50 years, not 50 minutes. At the time of lower Bricktown's development there was virtually no value there. Sometimes it takes something and someone to jump start development and it probably isn't going to be what the purists desire. There is a real pragmatism to investing private money in projects and an expectation of profit. Developers don't deal with high ideals but rather low risk and promise of rewards. I don't know all the dealings of lower Btown, but it may well have been the best deal that could be done at that time and for the foreseable future at that time. Sometimes it is better to get started than to wait for the perfect and never get going. As the area becomes more valuable then we will see better and better developments.

I would not go there lol..