do we have any idea when we will see more on this? think they will start ground work or something soon for the first phase?

The next step would be the submittal of a new PUD that if approved would allow for height variances and the general design of Phase I.

That hasn't been filed as of yet.

It may be that when it is filed, they will also include more detailed plans for at least Phase I, as there is often a 'Master Design Statement'. Could also include more renderings but it's not required.

Then, and hopefully shortly thereafter, they have to submit detailed plans for design review.

After all that, they will then file their building permit applications and on a project of this scale, it usually takes many months of back-and-forth before it is issued.


I believe Matteson said they wanted to break ground this year, but they'd better be hustling behind the scenes and even then that would represent an ambitious timeline.

Make of this what you will:

***************
Who is Scot Matteson, the developer planning the tallest tower in the US? (https://therealdeal.com/national/2024/01/28/who-is-real-estate-developer-scot-matteson/)
A virtual unknown has big ambitions in Oklahoma City
JAN 28, 2024, 7:00 AM
By Ted Glanzer

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boardwalk020924a.jpg

Several questions were prompted by recently publicized plans to build the country’s tallest tower in, of all places, Oklahoma City.

One is: Who is Scot Matteson, the developer pitching such a project?

In its current iteration proposed on Jan. 22, The Boardwalk at Bricktown would include four towers and 2.7 million square feet of space across nearly 4 acres, with 1,900 residential units, a 480-key hotel and 110,000 square feet of retail and restaurants.

The centerpiece would be the tallest tower in the U.S., a 1,907-foot supertall that would dwarf the 1,776-foot One World Trade Center. Another three towers would each rise 345 feet.

“Oklahoma City is experiencing a significant period of growth and transformation, making it well-positioned to support large-scale projects like the one envisioned for Bricktown,” Matteson, 63, said in a press release.

The developer, however, has an opaque background.

Neither of Matteson’s companies cited in the press release — Matteson Capital and Centurion Partners — have a website.

Details of his completed projects are sparse, other than what he has told the press. He claims to have 40 years of development experience and to have been involved in The Residences at Little Nell in Aspen, Colorado, the Icon Hotel in Houston, the Sapphire Tower condominiums in San Diego and Miami, and “a 5,000-acre master plan in Tuscany, Italy.”

Prior to 2020, most of what was written about Matteson had to do with his brief relationship with Shannon Beador, a cast member of the “Real Housewives of Orange County.” Their relationship lasted about six months in 2018. During that time, salacious allegations about the couple were published in online tabloids, which told of bounced child support checks and too much drinking.

There is a 2006 Aspen Times feature about Centurion Partners’ co-founders, Matteson and two others development plans for Aspen, including building Residences at The Little Nell.

A 2016 court record shows a small claims case for an unspecified amount of less than $10,000 filed against Matteson — which is nothing compared to the 8-, 9- and 10-figure lawsuits many large developers face throughout their careers. The case was mediated two years later. It’s unclear if it was connected to his business dealings.

In addition to listing Matteson Capital and Centurion Partners in his employment history, his LinkedIn profile says he had a four-year stint as executive chairman and founder of Quiksilver Hotels & Resorts International from 2013-2017. Like Matteson’s other ventures, there is very little information on the company.

A LinkedIn page describes it as “a newly-formed hospitality company that will manage, acquire, and develop luxury hotel and resort projects using the Quiksilver brand.” Some news outlets ran stories about the company’s strategy in 2014, as well as its plans to build a $350-million-dollar “world class” surf resort in Palm Desert. Ten years later there are still no signs of the resort.

Aside from his brief high-profile relationship, little else is out there on his personal life. A Facebook account bearing his name says that he’s a pancreatic cancer survivor and a widower. And a 2019 GoFundMe page set up by his four daughters includes Matteson’s picture and an appeal to raise $100,000 to help him fight Stage 3 pancreatic cancer. Around $15,000 from 77 donors has been raised as of Jan. 26.

Since 2020, however, Matteson has almost no digital footprint, until he resurfaced with The Boardwalk at Bricktown plans.

While it’s hard to get a clear picture of who Matteson is, what is plainly in focus is why a developer would eye OKC for a major project. It’s one of the fastest-growing markets in the U.S., having expanded its population from about 400,000 to more than 600,000 over the past 10 years. It’s also got a new $900 million downtown arena on the way for its NBA team, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Still, in a city like OKC, where the skyline is far more modest than other urban centers, a supertall flanked by three much shorter towers would stand out like a huge middle finger to the Southwest. Perhaps that is an implicit statement the clandestine developer is hoping to make?

Matteson’s partners have expressed doubts about the project becoming a reality.

Randy Hogan, an Oklahoma developer who is partnering with Matteson on the project, called the supertall proposal “aspirational,” according to The Oklahoman. And that was back when the plans called for the tower to rise only 1,750 feet.

But Matteson insists that he is determined to push forward.

“I’m used to being told you can’t do things,” he told The Oklahoman in December. “But I’m used to getting it done.”

While that’s bold talk, his ability to back it up could be met with a slew of challenges, particularly in securing financing when interest rates are high and distress is piling up everywhere across sectors.

So how Matteson can pull this off — or whether he has to rethink his plans altogether — will remain unanswered questions for now.

Damn, that makes me not feel good at all even about the 3 towers :'(

What was the quote someone on here said? “Oklahoma City is a great place for a scam.”

The 3 towers, I am very comfortable in happening. The other tower was always aspirational.

Big time international developer who wants to build the tallest tower but his daughters started a gofundme campaign to raise $100k for his cancer treatment? Hmmm...

Yikes, Is Lucy about to pull the football away from OKC again? I have been watching "Hello Tomorrow" on Apple TV. I'm noticing similar things happening in real life.

It has already been stated that the three non supertall towers will be built based on demand. So I think at least the hotel + first residential tower is a solid chance.

People on this board keep assuming the original 3 towers will be built all at the same time. Remember the OGE towers?

It has already been stated that the three non supertall towers will be built based on demand. So I think at least the hotel + first residential tower is a solid chance.

People on this board keep assuming the original 3 towers will be built all at the same time. Remember the OGE towers?

What did we ever do to you? Why would you bring up these painful memories???let us all take a moment and remember the fantasy of those gorgeous buildings. Instead we got Rainey swamp

What did we ever do to you? Why would you bring up these painful memories???let us all take a moment and remember the fantasy of those gorgeous buildings. Instead we got Rainey swamp

At least there are no buildings to worry about being demolished at this site, just a parking lot.

Interestingly, the TIF for this project represents 27% of the total cost. Compared to Omni's TIF which was > 35% of the cost. I'd say OKC is getting a better deal out of this - at least 3 345' highrises and RETAIL for less exposure comparatively vs an underbuilt 17 floor hotel. In addition, this TIF is in the form of a rebate (which doesn't pay until the full development, aka 3 towers, are built and paying ad valorem, btw) thereby limiting the city's risk even moreso vs. Omni which was up-front added to the funding formula where the city had to divert funds from elsewhere.

Also, this isn't Matteson's first go at development. Also, I think AO has designed a number of developments as well. This thing has beenn in the works for years, but now we're to believe that it's a scam when they're likely ready to get started just because someone outside of OKC wants to write an article to continually shed doubt about it. Why would he incurr signifcant costs hiring AO if this were a scam? It's as if they're more than happy to write about the cons mostly because it's about OKC.

I think we're often looking for the negatives too much that we ignore what's right in-front of us. I wonder if this proposal was for NY or Chicago, or media poster-child Seattle - if there'd be as much negative press about this. I say it might very well be OKC's time to grow and shine, let's see if this happens.

Interestingly, the TIF for this project represents 27% of the total cost. Compared to Omni's TIF which was > 35% of the cost. I'd say OKC is getting a better deal out of this - at least 3 345' highrises and RETAIL for less exposure comparatively vs an underbuilt 17 floor hotel. In addition, this TIF is in the form of a rebate (which doesn't pay until the full development, aka 3 towers, are built and paying ad valorem, btw) thereby limiting the city's risk even moreso vs. Omni which was up-front added to the funding formula where the city had to divert funds from elsewhere.

Also, this isn't Matteson's first go at development. Also, I think AO has designed a number of developments as well. This thing has beenn in the works for years, but now we're to believe that it's a scam when they're likely ready to get started just because someone outside of OKC wants to write an article to continually shed doubt about it. Why would he incurr signifcant costs hiring AO if this were a scam? It's as if they're more than happy to write about the cons mostly because it's about OKC.

I think we're often looking for the negatives too much that we ignore what's right in-front of us. I wonder if this proposal was for NY or Chicago, or media poster-child Seattle - if there'd be as much negative press about this. I say it might very well be OKC's time to grow and shine, let's see if this happens.
At least 2 is the way I read it. The third if the market deems feasible. The fourth is pie in the sky. Probably just trying to get visible in order to pony up investors.

Don’t get me wrong two towers even at that height in that spot would be a welcome addition. The more I read about this the more I think he doesn’t have this fully financed and needs additional backing. Of course a third tower would be great. Or even two tallish towers. But these deals fall apart way more often then not. I’m not 100 this is going to happen at all until I see some expensive ass tower cranes going up

What was the quote someone on here said? “Oklahoma City is a great place for a scam.”

I shared that when it was told to me by a local attorney (who I very much respect) about TEEMCO and the broader issue of how and why OKC seems to be a magnet for these types of things, even after getting so burned by Penn Square Bank which everyone quickly realized had been waving big red flags in our faces before they collapsed in spectacular fashion. When I started to dig into TEEMCO, absolutely everyone including this attorney had been more than suspicious for some time. Yet until my first article, all you could find was glowing press and positivity.

It was an idle, resigned comment but one that stuck.

And nobody had bothered to do even a basic Google search about the TEEMCO CEO; they just printed all this total BS he and a PR firm (which he never paid) completely fabricated. He also stiffed Channel 9 and the Oklahoman yet neither bothered to do any follow-up, other than continuing to perpetuate his lies.


I also feel the responsibility due to my large platform to be skeptical, especially when something seems at least a little off. Like the Sunset Amphitheater stuff, playing the skeptic comes with a cost in OKC because almost nobody wants to hear any bad news. It's a strange thing here, something I noticed right away upon moving back, and I'm sure one of the main reasons for that pull quote.

At least 2 is the way I read it. The third if the market deems feasible. The fourth is pie in the sky. Probably just trying to get visible in order to pony up investors.

They run the risk of that PR backfiring when someone releases articles trying to discredit the developer. I think he just dreams big, but there are plenty of cases in Oklahoma where big dreams fell flat or worse they turned out to be scams. So its like we can call those who are skeptical as being too negative. There is strong precedence for it in Oklahoma unfortunately.

They run the risk of that PR backfiring when someone releases articles trying to discredit the developer. I think he just dreams big, but there are plenty of cases in Oklahoma where big dreams fell flat or worse they turned out to be scams. So its like we can call those who are skeptical as being too negative. There is strong precedence for it in Oklahoma unfortunately.

Right. Hogan’s involvement is what makes me take this seriously

Right. Hogan’s involvement is what makes me take this seriously

If you read between the lines or know people who have spoken to him about this project directly, he is being very guarded which is somewhat out of character.


And I don't know for sure, but the extent of his involvement may be contributing the land (he owns that parking lot), which he acquired from the City a long time ago for a very reasonable price.

What was the quote someone on here said? “Oklahoma City is a great place for a scam.”

To add to my previous long response, the same attorney who made what I believe to be a pretty astute observation also added, "How would we know if something really bad was happening in OKC? " And after I didn't respond he said, "We wouldn't, at least not until a lot of damage had been done."


I like to think that's a little less true than it was in 2014 but I'm not so sure.

I shared that when it was told to me by a local attorney (who I very much respect) about TEEMCO and the broader issue of how and why OKC seems to be a magnet for these types of things, even after getting so burned by Penn Square Bank which everyone quickly realized had been waving big red flags in our faces before they collapsed in spectacular fashion. When I started to dig into TEEMCO, absolutely everyone including this attorney had been more than suspicious for some time. Yet until my first article, all you could find was glowing press and positivity.

It was an idle, resigned comment but one that stuck.

And nobody had bothered to do even a basic Google search about the TEEMCO CEO; they just printed all this total BS he and a PR firm (which he never paid) completely fabricated. He also stiffed Channel 9 and the Oklahoman yet neither bothered to do any follow-up, other than continuing to perpetuate his lies.


I also feel the responsibility due to my large platform to be skeptical, especially when something seems at least a little off. Like the Sunset Amphitheater stuff, playing the skeptic comes with a cost in OKC because almost nobody wants to hear any bad news. It's a strange thing here, something I noticed right away upon moving back, and I'm sure one of the main reasons for that pull quote.

What is skeptical about the sunset amphitheater?

What is skeptical about the sunset amphitheater?

That is well-covered ground in that thread.

I think Miami and Ft Worth are the only places that have skyscrapers that have been hit, and honestly I think Ft Worth is the only actual downtown that I can think of that's been directly hit. In terms of the liklihood of a direct hit, it's just so unlikely and improbably. That couple of square miles compared to the entire state.

Now in Ft Worth, the Bank One building (correct me if i got that wrong) and the much smaller Cash America building, were both hit. I dont think Cash America was demolished. but there were plans to implode it before someone bought it and converted it. Honestly, pretty much all that happened was a bunch of glass got blown out. And that's really what happened with most of the buildings that got hit. Not nearly like what people think of when they think tornado damage. This was an F3, so it wasn't some little piddly thing either.

Would you have wanted to be sitting at your office desk when that blew through? No way. But if you were in the core in a protected space, you were fine.

So in my opinion, it's not really something that anyone should spend any time worrying about.

A few other data points worth noting (though they're not direct comparisons) - in 1970, an F5 tornado hit downtown Lubbock, TX and impacted the 20-story Metro Tower (now called NTS Tower). The building survived the tornado, but the force of the tornadic winds actually twisted the frame of the building to the point where most of the building's elevators were disabled. The building was extensively renovated and reopened 5 years after the tornado. It's the 2nd-tallest tower known to have survived a direct hit by an F5 tornado; the tallest is the 22-story ALICO building in downtown Waco, which was hit in 1953. Although neither of these building would meet the definition of "skyscraper", I think it's still significant that buildings of this magnitude can still survive extreme weather events like this. But that said, the Bank One building in Fort Worth is the only building that meets the definition of skyscraper that has been directly hit by a tornado that I'm personally aware of, and like you mentioned, that building survived too.

Should we stop building high rises in Oklahoma? That seems to be the suggestion with all of the tornado talk.

A project of this size, why only 100,000 sf of retail and restaurants? That is half the size of a Walmart Supercenter.

A few other data points worth noting (though they're not direct comparisons) - in 1970, an F5 tornado hit downtown Lubbock, TX and impacted the 20-story Metro Tower (now called NTS Tower). The building survived the tornado, but the force of the tornadic winds actually twisted the frame of the building to the point where most of the building's elevators were disabled. The building was extensively renovated and reopened 5 years after the tornado. It's the 2nd-tallest tower known to have survived a direct hit by an F5 tornado; the tallest is the 22-story ALICO building in downtown Waco, which was hit in 1953. Although neither of these building would meet the definition of "skyscraper", I think it's still significant that buildings of this magnitude can still survive extreme weather events like this. But that said, the Bank One building in Fort Worth is the only building that meets the definition of skyscraper that has been directly hit by a tornado that I'm personally aware of, and like you mentioned, that building survived too.

I don’t know if you saw my comment on the last page but if not, it’s top shelf how our minds went to the same two examples when talking about tornadoes impacting tall buildings haha

In 2017 the 19 Story Remington Tower on I-44 in South Tulsa took a direct hit from a EF-2 tornado and WAS largely destroyed. The tornado got into the elevator shafts and blew out most of the windows in the building from the inside.

The building is currently being rebuilt into lofts.

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/tornado-damaged-offices-transform-to-apartments

^ I was told that Remington Tower basically took a direct hit, but the only reason it got destroyed on the inside is because the maintenance/elevator shaft on top of the building wasn't sealed or blew open, so all the pressure was able to run down the elevator shaft and blow things around in every story of the building. I was always curious about how much damage was actually done inside. Some floors were obliterated near the top, while the bottom was mostly spared from what I could tell. The big issue affecting the re-opening of the tower as actually insurance. The building wasn't doing great financially beforehand and either the owner the insurance company (I forget which) wanted to write it off while the other wanted to fix it and sell. They finally ended up selling it to a new investor after years of fighting about it.

Dream Hotels still has OKC on their website under coming soon. I know that's not a set in stone guarantee that it will get built, but to me that's outside the Matteson scrutiny.

Thanks for sharing this article, Pete. I'd tried to do my own digging at well but was really surprised at how little I found. Just references to obscure LLCs on websites. I just assumed I was missing something.


While it’s hard to get a clear picture of who Matteson is, what is plainly in focus is why a developer would eye OKC for a major project. It’s one of the fastest-growing markets in the U.S., having expanded its population from about 400,000 to more than 600,000 over the past 10 years. It’s also got a new $900 million downtown arena on the way for its NBA team, the Oklahoma City Thunder.


That said, while this isn't the main point, what's up with this reporting? OKC hasn't had a population of 400,000 since 1980. And 40 years later, we're up at just about 700,000. Not only are the numbers wrong, but growing from 400k to 600k in the span of 10 years would be an absurd and totally implausible amount of growth.

in 2000, wasn't OKC at 444,000 (or was that 1990, I forget)? in 2010, wasn't OKC at more than 580,000? in 2020, wasn't OKC at 681,000? Today (2023), isn't OKC above 702,000 - which I honestly consider 2023 to be the correction for 2020 since it's post-covid.

so in 23 (or 30) years, OKC grew by nearly 260,000 people. That's not as absurd as you're making it out to be, it's actually outstanding, particularly when you consider OKC hasn't really had any major corporate relocations (YET) or truly major expansions. Now, OKC is in position to start really making some moves - and with OKC investing in itself at record amounts this developer is the first to take a risk on OKC. I think he is right, but we'll see how big the 4th tower will be.

in 2000, wasn't OKC at 444,000 (or was that 1990, I forget)? in 2010, wasn't OKC at more than 580,000? in 2020, wasn't OKC at 681,000? Today (2023), isn't OKC above 702,000 - which I honestly consider 2023 to be the correction for 2020 since it's post-covid.

so in 23 (or 30) years, OKC grew by nearly 260,000 people. That's not as absurd as you're making it out to be, it's actually outstanding, particularly when you consider OKC hasn't really had any major corporate relocations (YET) or truly major expansions. Now, OKC is in position to start really making some moves - and with OKC investing in itself at record amounts this developer is the first to take a risk on OKC. I think he is right, but we'll see how big the 4th tower will be.

I was just going off of the census population history from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City#Demographics

1970 368,164
1980 404,014
1990 444,719
2000 506,132
2010 579,999
2020 681,054

I don’t know if you saw my comment on the last page but if not, it’s top shelf how our minds went to the same two examples when talking about tornadoes impacting tall buildings haha

Don’t know if it was said earlier but the first major occurrence of a tornado hitting a downtown type area (according to Wikipedia) was when an F2 hit downtown Salt Lake City in 1999.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Salt_Lake_City_tornado

A few other data points worth noting (though they're not direct comparisons) - in 1970, an F5 tornado hit downtown Lubbock, TX and impacted the 20-story Metro Tower (now called NTS Tower). The building survived the tornado, but the force of the tornadic winds actually twisted the frame of the building to the point where most of the building's elevators were disabled. The building was extensively renovated and reopened 5 years after the tornado. It's the 2nd-tallest tower known to have survived a direct hit by an F5 tornado; the tallest is the 22-story ALICO building in downtown Waco, which was hit in 1953. Although neither of these building would meet the definition of "skyscraper", I think it's still significant that buildings of this magnitude can still survive extreme weather events like this. But that said, the Bank One building in Fort Worth is the only building that meets the definition of skyscraper that has been directly hit by a tornado that I'm personally aware of, and like you mentioned, that building survived too.

The Landmark Tower in Fort Worth was also hit by the tornado and was demolished as a result of the damage and high cost to restore it. It had been abandoned for around 16 years as well which didn’t help. Apparently was one of the tallest buildings ever demolished.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmark_Tower_(Fort_Worth,_Texas)

^ I was told that Remington Tower basically took a direct hit, but the only reason it got destroyed on the inside is because the maintenance/elevator shaft on top of the building wasn't sealed or blew open, so all the pressure was able to run down the elevator shaft and blow things around in every story of the building. I was always curious about how much damage was actually done inside. Some floors were obliterated near the top, while the bottom was mostly spared from what I could tell. The big issue affecting the re-opening of the tower as actually insurance. The building wasn't doing great financially beforehand and either the owner the insurance company (I forget which) wanted to write it off while the other wanted to fix it and sell. They finally ended up selling it to a new investor after years of fighting about it.

Every time I drive by that monstrosity of a pile of crap, i wonder how long it will be before someone gives up and finally dozes it. Its one of the ugliest buildings i've ever seen. Is it an office build? Is it a airport control tower? Is it a flat glass face or a balconied one? It doesn't know what it is, other than it's ugly AF.

How does that relate at all? Well, storm damage is something you have to consider here. But really, a 100 story building isn't any different from a 30 story building in that regard. If a window blows out from either, you dont want to be anywhere near that base when it hits the ground because those shards are doing to become death missiles. You don't really need to be hit by an actual tornado to have this happen, but also think about how absolutely and incredibly rare it would be that hail or other debris would blow around strong enough to blow out what's in effect, ballistic glass. This stuff is extremely tough, and for good reason.

Switch topic
I did notice that skyscraperpage moved this tower to it's "vision" thread and closed it off. Basically, their view is that it's DOA and we're done with it. That may be, but the buzz it's created has been crazy. I was recently at an IT event in another state and when I mentioned i was from OKC, people from all over the country mentioned this tower as the first thing they associated with the city. "Isn't that where they are wanting to build that big tower?" So regardless of what happens, this thing has made the name OKC come up for publicity in a positive way. There have been articles shown here about different views about how it's not necessary or even recommended/outdated. But you know what, those people are talking about OKC and making people that may not have thought about it, think about it, and in a positive way.

Switch topic
I did notice that skyscraperpage moved this tower to it's "vision" thread and closed it off. Basically, their view is that it's DOA and we're done with it. That may be, but the buzz it's created has been crazy. I was recently at an IT event in another state and when I mentioned i was from OKC, people from all over the country mentioned this tower as the first thing they associated with the city. "Isn't that where they are wanting to build that big tower?" So regardless of what happens, this thing has made the name OKC come up for publicity in a positive way. There have been articles shown here about different views about how it's not necessary or even recommended/outdated. But you know what, those people are talking about OKC and making people that may not have thought about it, think about it, and in a positive way.

They see a lot of "Vision Towers' over there. There just going to keep it there until something real happens. Otherwise, they may start talking about tornados when that isn't what is preventing this tower from happening.

In 2017 the 19 Story Remington Tower on I-44 in South Tulsa took a direct hit from a EF-2 tornado and WAS largely destroyed. The tornado got into the elevator shafts and blew out most of the windows in the building from the inside.

The building is currently being rebuilt into lofts.

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/tornado-damaged-offices-transform-to-apartments

They are marketing the units at the newly-renamed Reese Tower: https://reesetower.com/

I should create some sort of pool where everyone force-ranks the likelihood of the following proposed developments:

Legends Tower
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers)
Sunset Amphitheater
Strawberry Fields
Heartland Theme Park


And before the usual crew of neg-heads jump all over this, wanted to reiterate there are some amazing things already in the process of coming to fruition:

OKANA
OAK
Convergence
New Thunder arena
Multi-purpose stadium
Fairgrounds Coliseum
The Half
Wheeler District
Planetarium / Zoo improvements
and the 2028 Olympics

I should create some sort of pool where everyone force-ranks the likelihood of the following proposed developments:

Legends Tower
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers)
Sunset Amphitheater
Strawberry Fields
Heartland Theme Park


I'll bite!

Legends Tower - 0% in it's proposed size.
Boardwalk at Bricktown 3 towers - 75% eventually.
Sunset Amphitheater - 80% (A viable proposal, though l wish it were being built in another location)
Strawberry Fields - 75% (have there been plans released? Did l miss that? It might not be by the current owner.
Heartland Theme Park - 5% in it's proposed form.

Legends Tower - 2% in its proposed size. 15% of something half that size (955 ft).
Boardwalk at Bricktown 3 towers - 85% but I think the time it takes will be a couple years longer..
Sunset Amphitheater - 80% this location is good. Should not infringe much.
Strawberry Fields - 15%
Heartland Theme Park - 3% in it's proposed form.

I just feel like the idea for Heartland Theme Park came about due to on going Florida politics involving Disney. Hard for me to take it seriously. Reminds me of radio, TV, or social media networks being created for similar reasons.

Legends Tower: 1% (So you're saying there's a chance). 5% of it being built but taller than Devon. 0% chance to be started in 5 years or less.
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers) 60%.
Sunset Amphitheater: 50%
Strawberry Fields: In the next 5 years 10% chance of 10% being built out. In the next 20 years: 100% chance of being substantially built out.
Heartland Theme Park: 5% as proposed. 60% as scaled down version.

The Landmark Tower in Fort Worth was also hit by the tornado and was demolished as a result of the damage and high cost to restore it. It had been abandoned for around 16 years as well which didn’t help. Apparently was one of the tallest buildings ever demolished.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmark_Tower_(Fort_Worth,_Texas)

I wish there were a better thread to discuss this because it feels off topic. That said, for clarity, Landmark Tower had been abandoned for 10 years when the tornado struck it and it switched hands many times with multiple plans to redevelop it but ultimately it was indeed demolished. How much of it being demolished was a result of the tornado can be debated but between the damage and years of neglect, the powers that be deemed it better to just demolish it rather than rehabilitate it.

Don’t know if it was said earlier but the first major occurrence of a tornado hitting a downtown type area (according to Wikipedia) was when an F2 hit downtown Salt Lake City in 1999.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Salt_Lake_City_tornado

There’s definitely varying degrees of downtowns being impacted and it’s kind of fascinating in its own right. Baralheia and I were using instances of the strongest tornadoes as a way to measure whether a large structure - alas the one in this thread - could survive a particularly strong tornado.

lol at the term "neg-heads" - I'm going to start using that.

This looks fun! Here's my best guess:

Legends Tower - 0.1% chance it gets built to proposed size. 5% chance any "tower" gets built there which is taller than the 3 adjoining proposed towers. Hope I'm wrong.
Boardwalk at Bricktown 3 towers - 75%, but I doubt the renderings look anything like the final product.
Sunset Amphitheater - 51%. This investor-based idea smells super scammy. Only giving it a chance based on what I've read on this forum.
Strawberry Fields - Can we not call this "dead" now? 5%?
Heartland Theme Park - .01% that it gets built according to plans. 75% chance a very large RV park is built.

I wish there were a better thread to discuss this because it feels off topic. That said, for clarity, Landmark Tower had been abandoned for 10 years when the tornado struck it and it switched hands many times with multiple plans to redevelop it but ultimately it was indeed demolished. How much of it being demolished was a result of the tornado can be debated but between the damage and years of neglect, the powers that be deemed it better to just demolish it rather than rehabilitate it.

I say someone should start a topic in Weather and Geoscience. Its tornado destruction science.

Legends Tower - 0%
Boardwalk at Bricktown 3 towers - 15% that we will get what they announced. 30% that we will get 3 tall buildings. 50 percent we will get 2 of the 3 announced.
Sunset Amphitheater - 75%
Strawberry Fields - 1%
Heartland Theme Park - 5% of what they announced. 50% a theme park will be built but not the size and attractions they announced.

Legends Tower: -1000%
Boardwalk at Bricktown: 3 towers 5% for 3 towers. 25% for 2. 50% for one, but it will be drastically different than renderings.
Sunset Amphitheater: 35%
Strawberry Fields : 0%
Heartland Theme Park: 0%. Only the RV park will get built.

Legends Tower - -1000%

At first I didn't see the negative symbol and I was gonna vote for you to be president


I think most of us are on the same page with these. I'd vote similarly to everyone else.

What about you, Pete?

I'm less optimistic about the 3 towers in this development than most.

I'd settle for the Dream Hotel but there is obviously some concern about Matteson and his lack of verifiable track record. I know some local investors opted out of this pretty early on because they didn't think it was realistic. The good thing is we should start to see some real progress this year or maybe not, so optimism around this will either rise quickly or fall off a cliff.

Do you think the touting and over publication of the "Legends" Tower turned some locals off to it?

Do you think the touting and over publication of the "Legends" Tower turned some locals off to it?

Its the motivation for announcing the Legends tower that interests me. Do they feel that optimistic about the project or do they feel like they needed a PR boosts for some reason? They released a crappy early version that didn't catch anyone's interest and a month later they actually put a little bit of work into it.

I think the better question is did any investors or partners get turned off by it?

Do you think the touting and over publication of the "Legends" Tower turned some locals off to it?

This was before the craziness that is Legends Tower.

Legends Tower: 25%
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers): 75%, they have been working on this for sometime, and things seem to keep moving forward.
Sunset Amphitheater: 50%
Strawberry Fields: 5%
Heartland Theme Park: 25%

My skepticism about the 3 towers centers around demand. What does Matteson see that other, local developers don’t? I realize occupancy rates are very high in existing developments, but if the demand is such that it would make the building of residential towers economical, why isn’t phase 2 of the Steelyard rising out of the ground? Why is Boulevard on year 400 with no movement whatsoever? Why was the EK Gaylord site plan scaled back?

Maybe there’s a good answer for each, but I’d expect more to be happening downtown with those developments if the confidence level is so high for demand in towers.

My skepticism about the 3 towers centers around demand. What does Matteson see that other don’t? I realize occupancy rates are very high in existing developments, but if the demand is such that it would make the building of residential towers economical, why isn’t phase 2 of the Steelyard rising out of the ground? Why is Boulevard on year 400 with no movement whatsoever? Why was the EK Gaylord site plan scaled back?

And all those were proposed as mid-rise developments and there are a bunch more ready-to-go that have been stuck on the launch pad due to financing and concerns about filling up quickly at rents that would make them cash flow. (Hub, Alley North, all of Strawberry Fields, 4th & Shartel, McKown in Deep Deuce, on and on...)

Hi-rise is considerably more complex and expensive. At the same time, the lack of it OKC might be the answer to your question. But it took a quite a while for First National to lease their most expensive units. And looking at their website, looks like they have plenty of units available or coming available and they've been open a couple of years now. Urbanized could provide more perspective but it's not like they have a waitlist.

Legends Tower: 60%
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers): 100%
Sunset Amphitheater: 90%
Strawberry Fields: 0%
Heartland Theme Park: 0%

Boardwalk at Bricktown has always proposed 4 towers, it wasn't until recently that the 4th tower became Legends Tower. So, my opinion is it WILL happen. The only question is it's height and when, which I'll return to after the next point.

I say Boardwalk happens at 100% because this isn't something that was cooked up overnight or shown in a fad mag, Boardwalk has had a few iterations and received approval from the city and a $200m TIF rebate. The rebate mandates at least two residential towers and podium yet I'm sure the developer truly wants the Dream Hotel by Hyatt and the supertall since more $$ can be made. When you consider the aformentioned, as well as who's involved (Hyatt, AO, Hogan/land, etc), this will happen. Now, as to the supertall, Legends Tower, it will happen because there is a purpose. Whether it happens quickly, or at 1907 is the question - that depends on how successful the 2 towers are. I think the 2 are set up to be quite successful, with a significant amount of workforce housing which "should" be easy to fill up. So we're talking about half or so for market rate, which given OKC doesn't have much of this to offer (and NONE in a modern highrise), I also think that will fill quickly esp since it's rental. People may not realize or admit that numerous people come in and out of OKC temporarily, that don't care about school or school districts, that want to reside where the action is. Downtown is it, and given the primary comp that is First National's occupancy - I'm sure this will get built and be a success. Again, the only question is how tall and when will the Legends Tower be. But I am sure it WILL be OKC's landmark tower (and not some oil derrick).

Sunset - this will happen because it fills a niche that OKC doesn't have (but likely demand is there) and the developer will build on the success of earlier parks to assemble capital. He NEEDS OKC to be built in order for the other locations, OKC would be its biggest city until the DFW location. And since the land is there and W OKC is rapidly expanding, this will get built and likely in 2 years or so.

Strawberry Fields - enough already. Sell it to the developers building Wheeler.

Heartland Themepark - knee-jerk

Legends Tower: 60%



60%?

Did I ever mention I'm actually a Nigerian prince?

If you set the bar low then sure, I can see 60%"eventually", but scaled down for towers 2 through 4.

To my knowledge American heartland is 100% funded and it’s by an individual not a group of investors phase 1 has already broke ground which has been discussed in the thread but it’s not just the RV park it’s also housing for the employees(which they’re already hiring I believe or at least looking for experienced park operators according to the post I’ve seen

Legends Tower: 0%
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers): 35%
Sunset Amphitheater: 60%
Strawberry Fields: 0%
Heartland Theme Park: 100% - just as soon as Jimmy Lee Farnsworth can wrestle the Belle Isle Plantation away from Fletch.

I actually felt better about this project before the Legends tower thing popped up. It's been fun(ny) to watch how much attention it's gotten, though. Hopefully they do at least two towers. I'm sure a Dream hotel would work and downtown seems very ready for new high rise apartments. But just activating this end of Lower Bricktown would be nice. Even if it's just something that gets it closer to the version the city was sold on when Hogan got it.

Im surprised by some of these guesses. I’d say it’s more like:
Legends Tower: 0%
Boardwalk at Bricktown (all 3 towers): 10%

Both seem very unlikely.