Sure if we ignore everything else we know about Matteson's resume.

And that the article is equating civil works projects to an idea for a hotel / condo building.

In what way?

People move or don’t move because of some press releases about a building project. Companies don’t invest in cities or make decisions to move based on buildings that may not get built.

People need to get out in the real world and quit going up or down and obsessing over things in their echo chamber.

General reputation damage for the city as a whole, making us look less serious in the eyes of the world.

General reputation damage for the city as a whole, making us look less serious in the eyes of the world.

The Olympics and completion of the arena will wipe away any residual knowledge of this farce. The 537 people outside of OKC who remember about this in 2035 will also have to live down those 2 things.

This is marginally more important than the Clayco buildings, if not actually less given that Stage Center was given up for those to never coalesce

The Olympics and completion of the arena will wipe away any residual knowledge of this farce. The 537 people outside of OKC who remember about this in 2035 will also have to live down those 2 things.

This is marginally more important than the Clayco buildings, if not actually less given that Stage Center was given up for those to never coalesce

Agree.

General reputation damage for the city as a whole, making us look less serious in the eyes of the world.

Get real. Less serious about what? People do business here if they believe they can make money here. They couldn’t care less about dreamed of buildings not getting built. If you think wild plans aren’t announced in Atlanta, or LA or NYC then you don’t follow it much. If this doesn’t happen then there will be no damage to OKCs reputation at all. The sky doesn’t fall over deals like this, no matter how many Chicken Littles post on this board.

Good grief… we have posters with rose colored glasses who refuse to believe it won’t happen, and then those who are ready to call it existential for the city. Get a grip OKCitians.

ATL does have the most magnificent skylines. Much better than LA. It almost deserves its own thread. That said reputation does count. Austin, san Francisco both prove points about reputation delivering

ATL does have the most magnificent skylines. Much better than LA. It almost deserves its own thread. That said reputation does count. Austin, san Francisco both prove points about reputation delivering

What are you talking about? lol. Nothing about those cities’ “reputations” deliver more tall buildings, the economics do. People build where they know they can make money, they don’t look around and say “look at this magnificent skyline, I’m going to add to it regardless of whether it makes financial sense to do so!”

In my opinion, this is such an idiotic idea in the first place.

The Oklahoman puff promotion of this project is absurd. Equating things in a public park, lake projects, etc, with somebody proposing the tallest building in the world (in the middle of the plains in the United States!) is SO over-the-top. And a PR person was involved in penning that?

Put me down as not wanting this ridiculous-looking tall tower in Oklahoma City even if it could somehow happen. It would look silly, be a laughing stock, like a city with a few small buildings with this monstrosity sticking up. No way do I want that.

Get real. Less serious about what? People do business here if they believe they can make money here. They couldn’t care less about dreamed of buildings not getting built. If you think wild plans aren’t announced in Atlanta, or LA or NYC then you don’t follow it much. If this doesn’t happen then there will be no damage to OKCs reputation at all. The sky doesn’t fall over deals like this, no matter how many Chicken Littles post on this board.

Good grief… we have posters with rose colored glasses who refuse to believe it won’t happen, and then those who are ready to call it existential for the city. Get a grip OKCitians.

This ^^^

I love all the drama.

For example I listen to The B1M construction YouTube channel and podcast pretty religiously and to my disappointment their coverage of this was more or less just general mockery. It'd be hard to quantify but Matteson has done some amount of actual damage to OKC with this nonsense.

The basic US citizen does not listen to this podcast. Even people who are thinking of moving to a different state and relocating don't listen to it. The people who frequent OKC Talk are not representative of the general population. We're a niche audience. I've been reading these forums for nearly 20 years and I've never heard of this podcast. So I really don't think a pod or a video that got a few hundred thousand views is creating a lot of negative imagery for OKC. Most of the US doesn't care about this.

Personally, I don't think this will get built. I don't think it should get built. It's ridiculous. If everything but the super tall gets built, then that'll be fine.

In my opinion, this is such an idiotic idea in the first place.

The Oklahoman puff promotion of this project is absurd. Equating things in a public park, lake projects, etc, with somebody proposing the tallest building in the world (in the middle of the plains in the United States!) is SO over-the-top. And a PR person was involved in penning that?

Put me down as not wanting this ridiculous-looking tall tower in Oklahoma City even if it could somehow happen. It would look silly, be a laughing stock, like a city with a few small buildings with this monstrosity sticking up. No way do I want that.

Not to mention that if there really is the supposed demand for all these high rise apartments, hotels and condos, that one huge building takes away the opportunity for the 3-6 high rise buildings that could hose those units, provide needed infill and actually add to the skyline in a way that makes it more attractive instead of stupid.

Is his PR firm promoting the Boardwalk development? If so, that needs to be disclosed in the op-ed. If not, why write this piece?


From Sunday's Oklahoman. The author is a principal of a local PR firm.

********

Is Scot Matteson’s 1,907-foot skyscraper a pipe dream? Naysayers never build anything (https://www.oklahoman.com/story/opinion/columns/2024/03/31/okc-skyscraper-plan-is-it-really-a-pipe-dream-opinion/73105542007/)
Russ Florence Guest columnist

I wonder what Ray Ackerman would have thought of Scot Matteson?

If Matteson’s name doesn’t ring a bell, his project will. He’s the man behind the proposed 1,907-foot skyscraper in Bricktown, which would make it the tallest building in the country.

The plan has been met with skepticism, to say the least. Critics have questioned the wisdom of building such a structure in Tornado Alley. There are also factors of the market. While Oklahoma City is one of the fastest-growing cities in the country, it also sprawls over 621 square miles. Density is not an issue.

As for Ackerman, if you don’t know his name, you know his legacy. Ray Ackerman was a visionary. He was an optimist. No dream was too audacious. In the early 1980s ― decades before Riversport OKC and the Boathouse District ― Ackerman proposed turning the blighted North Canadian River into a national attraction.

It seemed preposterous. “We have the only river in Oklahoma,” the joke went, “that you have to mow.” Who would dream of such a thing?

I’m not privy to the conversations, but I imagine that Ackerman’s idea was met with derisive cynicism. Imagine if social media had existed then. The idea would have been beaten to a pulp as soon as it left his mouth.

Is Scot Matteson’s plan a pipe dream? Could it happen? Admittedly, I’ve rolled my eyes at the drawings. But I also admire big thinkers ― people who create a plan, evangelize it to the masses, work it endlessly and prove the naysayers wrong. Can you show me one good thing that naysayers have built?

I have my doubts about Matteson’s plan. But I’m also rooting for him.

A few days ago, I stopped to read a plaque at Will Rogers Gardens about Margaret Annis Boys. You may not know her name either. She was born in 1909 and spent her career as a teacher and principal in Oklahoma City. She loved taking weekend excursions to see wildflowers and foliage across the state.

When she died in 1990, she left $1.5 million to establish a fund to support beautification efforts. The arboretum at Will Rogers wasn’t built by a cynic or a naysayer. It was built by a humble, committed dreamer: Margaret Annis Boys.

Outside of City Hall is a statue of Stanley Draper. Like Ackerman, Draper was known for his Utopian ideas. Better yet, he had the fortitude and tenacity to make it happen. Much of Oklahoma City’s mid-century progress ― Tinker Air Force Base, Will Rogers World Airport, the National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum ― was because of Draper.

Fittingly, the inscription at the base is a quote from Ackerman: “He dreamed impossible dreams … then inspired and united all who could make them probable.”

Outside the Chesapeake Boathouse, on the west end of the district, is a statue of Ackerman himself, standing tall, arms crossed, gazing toward a downtown and a city that only the visionaries could ever imagine.

There’s not a statue of a cynic in sight.

Russ Florence
Russ Florence lives and works in Oklahoma City. His column appears monthly in Viewpoints.

Not to mention that if there really is the supposed demand for all these high rise apartments, hotels and condos, that one huge building takes away the opportunity for the 3-6 high rise buildings that could hose those units, provide needed infill and actually add to the skyline in a way that makes it more attractive instead of stupid.

Yep. Wouldn’t a balanced skyline look awesome here with even two or three new mid/high rise towers that weren’t some novelty? Why anyone would even hope that supertall had a chance is lost on me. But, it’s a forum, all opinions welcome.

Idk who wrote that piece but Ackerman wanting water in a river is not the same as building a super tall building that the market probably can't support. Calling them both dreamers ahead of their time is a false equivalency.

Idk who wrote that piece but Ackerman wanting water in a river is not the same as building a super tall building that the market probably can't support. Calling them both dreamers ahead of their time is a false equivalency.

It was maybe the worst article I have ever read, and there is a ton of competition for that title.

Yikes Developer of Brooklyn’s tallest building is in default of 240 million loan.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/developer-brooklyn-tallest-skyscraper-defaults-213100634.html

I would be very happy if we at least get the Dream Hotel out of this project.

But they only have 6 operating hotels worldwide and list 11 more as coming soon. Doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.

Hyatt purchased Dream Hotels about a year ago and is trying to expand across all it's newly acquired brands so I wouldn't totally discount it. Hyatt has been selling it's owned hotels to independent operators to fund the expansion so they do have capital backing it.

Recent WSJ interview with Hyatt CEO: https://youtu.be/h8VX85IR7bQ?si=ZFzDlV2FbXFWPX9Z

Would Hyatt taking over 21C affect this at all?

Would Hyatt taking over 21C affect this at all?

I believe it was the French company ACCOR that bought 21C.

Documents have been officially filed with the Planning Commission for the April 11th meeting. The staff report can be found here: https://okc.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=ce254ae5-b416-4565-81b6-e120fd9df71b. Note this is just the first step for the rezoning and doesn't in and of itself imply anything about the legitimacy of the development, AFAIK. Further approvals appear necessary before construction could begin.

Notably, the Planning Commission, at least in their report, does not indicate opposition to the (nominally) proposed building height. On this, Tinker AFB's statement reads,

"The height of 1,907-foot tall tower proposed will exceed the Outer Horizontal Surface (500ft elevation) as defined in UFC 3-260-01. The proposed tower is approximately 10,400 feet southwest of the centerline of runway 13/31, but not in the Approach Departure Surface. The proposed tallest tower is 3,094 Mean Sea Level (MSL); the maximum height that would not negatively impact operations is 2,000 MSL."

and the Planning Commission's explanation of building height regulations for this lot reads,

"Building Height: While not located in the DBD Downtown Business District, which allows unlimited building height, the southern portion of the subject site where the 1907’ foot tall building is depicted in Exhibit C is bordered on the west, south and east sides by DBD zoning, which does not have a maximum building height (except in Automobile Alley). The northern portion of the site abuts the BC Bricktown Core Overlay District to the north, which limits building height to 140 feet. Directly north of the site and adjacent to East Reno Avenue are two surface parking lots and one fivestory warehouse building. The proposed SPUD would limit building height within 20 feet of East Reno Avenue to 80 feet. Both the DBD and BC Districts require design review and approval, which does not apply to the subject site. The proposed SPUD requires building and site design review for SPUD conformance to be completed by the Planning Director at the building permit stage."

Additionally, I hadn't previously realized this, but this development will not connect directly with the OKC Boulevard road-wise.

Here is the master design concept document: https://okc.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=060b6455-5235-4b27-bb0d-614d57581912

I'm not sure if any of the renderings are new, but I don't recall previously seeing the proposed building breakdown by floor (apologies if I just missed this/am forgetting). I'm also not sure if I'd realized that the tall tower had signage that was specifically Hyatt branded.

https://i.imgur.com/MDw8a6Q.png

https://i.imgur.com/5K31iLD.png

https://i.imgur.com/uyLAOXy.png

Here is the site plan:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boardwalk040524a.jpg

The three buildings in the first phase would be 345' tall.

That would make them the 8th tallest buildings in OKC, between City Place at 395 and Valliance at 321.


The planning commission rezoning is usually just a formality. The entire complex is subject to design review and that's where things can get interesting, especially since this project is nothing like anything around it in Bricktown or Lower Bricktown (or the entirety of the United States, for that matter).

Don't understand the one image that shows almost the entirety of Legends Tower covered with electronic billboards.

^ ^ ^

Good news, now we'll await an announcement on ground breaking ceremonies.

Here is the site plan:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boardwalk040524a.jpg

Really great to see a grocery store in there.

The three buildings in the first phase would be 345' tall.

That would make them the 8th tallest buildings in OKC, between City Place at 395 and Valliance at 321.


The planning commission rezoning is usually just a formality. The entire complex is subject to design review and that's where things can get interesting, especially since this project is nothing like anything around it in Bricktown or Lower Bricktown (or the entirety of the United States, for that matter).

Don't understand the one image that shows almost the entirety of Legends Tower covered with electronic billboards.

at this point why not add it?

Really great to see a grocery store in there.

Well there’s the final nail in the coffin of this development LOL.

I do like the idea of a grocery store!

at this point why not add it?

It's a gullibility test. They should add it to all 4 sides.

This thing looks like it is actually going onto the Vegas strip. There is even a room called sportsbook lobby?

The videoboards scaling up the tower stand no chance on review. Those things could cover the like 70% of the windows, which is kind of the whole allure about being in the tallest building in America.

What a bizarre deal all around.

It's a gullibility test. They should add it to all 4 sides.
I’m sure you are unaware of existing technology. https://yahamled.com/applications/outdoor-see-through-mesh/

I’m sure you are unaware of existing technology. https://yahamled.com/applications/outdoor-see-through-mesh/

Sure, I'm aware of the technology. Adds more even expense to an already hypothetical gaudy tower( for reasons?).

The entire complex is subject to design review and that's where things can get interesting, e

i don't believe that any of this is in a design district ..

https://www.okc.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/18930/637303976189100000

Sure, I'm aware of the technology. Adds more even expense to an already hypothetical gaudy tower( for reasons?).

The tower is not gaudy in and of itself. May be over ambitious. May not be feasible. May be highly unlikely. But the tall sleek glass tower itself is not gaudy.

i don't believe that any of this is in a design district ..

https://www.okc.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/18930/637303976189100000

I think you are right. That entire stretch between the Boulevard and Reno -- which is basically Lower Bricktown -- is not inside the boundaries of any design district.

This means that once this passed the Planning Commission, they can file building permits and start work.

A mere 86 levels of luxury residences simply will not do.

The area described as Lower Bricktown definitely is NOT subject to design review. Instead, it is subject to the terms of the development agreement between Hogan and OCURA.

ah... so, can you clad a 100ish story tower in eifs? asking for a friend.

Basically, yes. So long as OCURA is OK with it. I mean, it would still have to meet code, but no specific design guidelines apply south of Reno.

sometimes my attempts at humor are a little too dry... looks like today is one of those days. : )

The area described as Lower Bricktown definitely is NOT subject to design review. Instead, it is subject to the terms of the development agreement between Hogan and OCURA.

South of the boulevard in Lower Bricktown is part of design review.

For example, the Truck Yard had to be specifically approved.

Yes, south of the boulevard is subject to DBD review, as is the U-Haul building. Everything between Reno and the boulevard is excluded.

sometimes my attempts at humor are a little too dry... looks like today is one of those days. : )

EIFS is always a joke.

sometimes my attempts at humor are a little too dry... looks like today is one of those days. : )
Haha no, I knew you were being funny. Just stating that - from a design review standpoint - this literally COULD be a 100 story EIFS tower, so long as it otherwise conformed to standard building code and so long as OCURA allowed it (which of course they would not).

An example of OCURA influencing design in Lower Bricktown was when the Charleston's structure was built to house Kd's. HSRG initially intended to put the front door on the parking lot side and have no patio, but thankfully OCURA intervened and insisted on something more oriented to the canal. Besides that, however, that strip of land (Lower Bricktown) has literally zero official design oversight, with nothing codified to address design elements there. Same would be true of video wall elements.

North of Reno is quite a different story.

so givenn there are no design district regulations for the site, what are the chances that Planning Commission approves the height variance?

also - is it just the PC that approves or does City Council need to "rubber stamp" it (or possibly even reject it after the fact)?

so givenn there are no design district regulations for the site, what are the chances that Planning Commission approves the height variance?

also - is it just the PC that approves or does City Council need to "rubber stamp" it (or possibly even reject it after the fact)?

The Planning Commission approval should be a big deal.

And yes, the City Council would then have to provide it's rubber stamp.

so givenn there are no design district regulations for the site, what are the chances that Planning Commission approves the height variance?

FWIW, while it will ultimately be up to their vote on Thursday (and then the City Council vote a few weeks later)—which I'll be very interested to see—the staff summary recommended the approval of the application subject to a few technical changes which only pertain to signage and and the design of lower-level facades, not height. So at least based on that the "no maximum height" request doesn't seem to be a major impediment to getting approval.

They still need to get approval for building permit applications which have yet to be filed, and on a project this size that will take months.

However, you can start excavating and foundation work without a building permit, and that's what Matteson has said will happen this summer.

Matteson is a plant from Shadid to remove a large amount of parking in Bricktown to force more of his lots to be used.

thanks Pete and Loco for the clarifications and additional information on the process. I did cite you two on the national forums for the great work and prospectives you've given so it can be received nationally/internationally via re-post.

Curious to hear how the planning commission meeting went today for this project.
Was at 1:30pm today..

Curious to hear how the planning commission meeting went today for this project.
Was at 1:30pm today..

It’s on YouTube right now

Approved, but they spent an hour talking about the signage. Ultimately signage will have to be approved at later date.

The Planning Commission just passed the rezoning, with the exception of all the signage which will still require a separate submission and approval by the PC.

The next step is approval by City Council, which is almost always a rubber stamp.

https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB1h9CGF.img?w=1280&h=720&m=4&q=50
Oklahoma City's Pipe Dream

Won't believe it until I see it. Now this is the type of development that will make Dallas, Kansas City and many large cities Jealous--IF it comes to fruition. Did any see the 4 p.m., KFOR News report.

First off stop calling it Oklahoma City’s pipe dream!! The citizens of Oklahoma City are not financing any of this!

First off stop calling it Oklahoma City’s pipe dream!! The citizens of Oklahoma City are not financing any of this!

Correction: Do you think this dream skyscraper will ever get built. :dizzy::bright_id:dizzy:

I think something serious will be built. At least it seems further along in the news over whether the $5.5 billion new refinery will really be built in Cushing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzO5svP1ynQ

I think something serious will be built. At least it seems further along in the news over whether the $5.5 billion new refinery will really be built in Cushing.

I've been wondering about that refinery

Seeing the "sportsbook entrance" along with the full body, 4 sides of digital boards makes me think this is a development that was originally made for Vegas but never saw the light of day and is now being peddled on OKC. I wish I was more positive about it, but it just doesn't add up.