New Mixed-Use Tower

[JOHNINSOKC]

I frequently read the Texas and South Central Section of Skyscraperpage.com as well as the Southeast portion and it's getting a bit discouraging to see that numerous cities are building towers in their downtowns, whether it be residential,office,hotel,or even a mixed-use development that combines them all. The cities of Nashville, Austin, San Antonio and even Fort Worth are leaving OKC WAY behind in this area. I used to live in Nashville and the city is barely larger than OKC, however, they are going to build a 55 story tower that will be the largest until an even larger tower that will be finished in 2009 takes over that spot. Hear this: The new signature tower wil be the tallest in the U.S. outside of New York and Chicago that will combine condos, a hotel and office space. I do not understand how OKC continues to sit around and do nothing of this magnitude. Nashville's new projects will totally transform that city into the next level. Frankly, we as a city need to think MUCH bigger than we are right now. Despite all that is going on around here, it pales in comparison to our peer cities.

[Patrick]

We have a lot of empty space right now with First National and KMG empty. KMG will be for sale soon.

[BDP]

Despite all that is going on around here, it pales in comparison to our peer cities.

It kind of brings you back to earth, doesn't it?

I agree, OKC is improving, but it is still years behind in terms of offering the kind of living many are seeking these days. We'll see how the new developments do downtown. If they can muster some sense of real urban living with all of its conveniences, then I think we'll be better off. You don't necessarily have to build up to achieve urban living, but it does help the density and therefore the motivation for services.

Mixed use high rises is definitely the trend in developments these days. If the market continues to support them and OKC does not offer it, then we will once again find ourselves behind the 8 ball in terms of competing with other cities for lifestyle choices. It would be just another point inserted into the often heard “Oklahoma City? Why would I live there? It doesn’t even have (fill in the blank)?”

[ksearls]

You don't necessarily have to build up to achieve urban living

BDP, I agree. We are so lucky to not have to build up; we have plenty of space to utilize. I think this "tower" obsession is some sort of phallic male thing!

[The Old Downtown Guy]

I think this "tower" obsession is some sort of phallic male thing!

Actually it's all about the cost of land. The towers being built in other cities mentioned sit on land costing $100.00, $300.00, $500.00 or more per square foot. The net land cost to the developers of the Triangle, The Hill and Legacy was about $3.00 per square foot. No need to build tall when land is bargin basement priced.

And, it will likely be several years before there is much of a market for these taller, mixed use buildings in OKC. The Oklahoma River corridor or somewhere on all of the vacant space being created between the realigned I-40 and downtown may be where a twenty or thirty-plus story mixed use building is errected around 2025. Could be sooner than that if the downtown core population surges dramatically in the next few years, but I can't see anything tall other than conversions of existing office buildings before that count goes over 10,000 people.

[Midtowner]

BDP, I agree. We are so lucky to not have to build up; we have plenty of space to utilize. I think this "tower" obsession is some sort of phallic male thing!

Sometimes size does matter.

[okcpulse]

BDP, I agree. We are so lucky to not have to build up; we have plenty of space to utilize. I think this "tower" obsession is some sort of phallic male thing!

No matter how much I love Oklahoma City, and even though our skyline is nice and compact, the common question I get asked is "why is Oklahoma City's skyline so small for a city that size?"

So lucky to not have to build up? Come on, cities are defined by highrises. It's why people love cities. It's why they take pictures of cities. It's why they take video footage of cities. What's so lucky about not building up? I take it you like flat atmospheres. That isn't Oklahoma City's destiny. Sorry.

As far as this being an obsession and a male thing, maybe you were kidding. Maybe not. But I don't find it funny. We need to stick with aggressive goals for Oklahoma City. I want to be able to drive up I-35 from Texas and say "wow" when downtown Oklahoma City comes into view. When people see towers, male OR female, they are always in awe.

[writerranger]

I agree with you OKCPulse. 100%. People buy postcards of cities with what on them? Skylines. I think it's a visionary thing for Nashville and others to bring the amenities of Manhattan-like living to cities their size. Kudos to them!

I have said many times I think OKC is resting on its laurels in the wake of Bricktown/MAPS success - that was all on the drawing boards years ago. What's our big-league visionary goals on the drawing boards now? Gulp.

BTW, anybody here know the latest on the First National project? Sounds like we could see some of that mixed-use with residential there.

------------------

[Saberman]

I have to agree with ODG, with the cost of land here much lower then in other cities. It just isn'tworth the cost to build large towers.

Also that is the appeal that OKC has , that it's not like other cities. I have lived in some "Big Cities", LA,DC, and haven't missed them since I came back. Try sitting in a traffic jam on the Beltway in DC for 2 hours without moving. I always joked rush hour in OKC is 55 miles an hour. Fly in to OKC at night, and if that site does't stir you nothing will, the lights seem to go on for miles.

OKC needs to set itself apart from other cities, for the most part we have good schools, low crime, and frendly people, that sounds like a great place to live to me. That not to say we don't need to improve.

Where Downtown will go, I think, will depend on what happens once I-40 moves.

[JOHNINSOKC]

I remember when the above mentioned cities were much smaller than OKC in the 1980's. Since then, we've been passed in metro population by Nashville, Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, Austin, Fort Worth, Jacksonville, and Memphis. In addition, cities such as OMAHA and DES MOINES, which are much smaller have reinvented their skylines with new construction. In fact, I think Omaha just recently built a 60-story tower. That in itself makes our theory of not building up sound ridiculous. Vacancies ARE going down substantially metrowide according to the 2nd QTR office survey and despite the fact that KMG will leave an empty tower, Class A and Class B space are showing fast absorption and Class C is being bought up rapidly for housing. I hope the plans for First National come to fruition so it will bring overall vacancy down to a level conducive for NEW construction. I find it hard to believe that a mixed-use tower couldn't work. This city is going up and has grown consistently for the past 15 years, at least. There should be no excuse for not building something.

[ETL]

Both, johninsokc and old town guy are right. The land in OKC is cheap, and that meant that there is no reason to build up. I think if the city can come up with new incentives for company headquarters, then OKC has a shot. OKC should implement some sort of an incentive that entices company headquarters to locate here and build a high-rise within a certain distance of the business district.

Cheep land is on our side, but what would be enticing to a national HQ?

[Omaha Cowboy]

. In addition, cities such as OMAHA and DES MOINES, which are much smaller have reinvented their skylines with new construction. In fact, I think Omaha just recently built a 60-story tower. There should be no excuse for not building something.

Lumping Des Moines and Omaha together is a bit misleading as the size difference between the 2 cities (Omaha's metro being 300,000 larger than Des Moines) is the same size difference between OKC and Omaha..Historically, there was a significant time period in our cities' histories where Omaha was larger or of similar size as OKC..So they are more similar that you may like to rationalize (or admit )..

For the record, downtown Omaha has seen impressive highrise construction this decade..Including: The 634FT, 40 story First National Center, the 19 story, 319 FT Union Pacific HQ's, and will start construction on the 32 story, 375 FT Wallstreet Tower (282 condo units and 5 stories of retail). Pretty impressive for a metro of 850,000..

And to your final quoted comment as it relates to OKC, you can't just build a highrise for the sake of building one because you're falling behind the 'smaller Omaha's of the world' (God forbid)..There must be a needed, rational reason for contructing any bulding of substance..

Just my .02 cents..

..Ciao..LiO....Peace

[okcpulse]

Both, johninsokc and old town guy are right. The land in OKC is cheap, and that meant that there is no reason to build up.

Cheap land is not a reason to not build up. That, IMO, would be just a little extra incentive TO build up. Although you both are correct... cheap land is part of the reason developers are into office parks. Still, there needs to be a developer that will take that risk and plan an ambitious project for OKC. Will people have their doubts with the proposal of a 70-story mixed use tower? Probably. Even though real estate experts believe such a project would cannibalize the downtown market, it might just have the opposite effect, attracting more tennants to an attractive signature downtown.

We're not asking to become Dallas, Houston or LA, we're just asking for someone to step up to the plate with a project the entire city can get really excited about, and change the scenery of our skyline, which has been the same for twenty years.

[JOHNINSOKC]

AMEN to that, OKCPULSE!! I totally agree with you on the fact that if a developer would just take a risk on building something that would combine everything we need downtown into one huge complex, then it would create new enthusiasm that may be lacking in the office sector. I think the post oil bust mentality is causing an unnecessary caution out there that is going to hold this city back unless we take the ambitious mentality and take this city in a new direction. I think there are more developers that would take a risk than ones that wouldn't. After reading about the proposals in Nashville, it really sickened me to think how behind our downtown really is despite all the new projects. Another thing we need downtown is a true convention center hotel. Nashville built a 33-story Stoeffer Hotel(now a Renaissance Hotel) back in the mid-1980's and it was the tallest building in Nashville before they built the BellSouth tower that looks like Batman which changed the city's skyline again in the early 1990's. Now, that tower will be the THIRD tallest in just a few short years. What is this city waiting for?? It's time for a new signature tower for this city to be proud of. I think the city needs to pull out all the stops and go out and lure a developer just like they did to get Dell and the NBA Hornets to come here. We have a downtown where the newest tower is 22 years old. Absolutely unacceptable for a growing city that has dreams of being bigtime in the national conscience.

[BDP]

While OKC does have cheap land, that does not mean that it has to be relegated to cheap developments. It should be noted that many residential high rise buildings are being built in many markets not due to land restrictions, but becuase that is what people are looking are demanding.

At the end of the day, if we are not offering what the market is demanding, we will be overlooked, no matter what the cost of our land is.

[BDP]

While OKC does have cheap land, that does not mean that it has to be relegated to cheap developments. It should be noted that many residential high rise buildings are being built in many markets not due to land restrictions, but becuase that is what people are looking are demanding.

At the end of the day, if we are not offering what the market is demanding, we will be overlooked and continually surpassed, no matter what the cost of land is. While many people in OKC simply say, "hey, if we don't have what you want, then leave", other long term thinking cities are making efforts to offer options that leave people of all tastes and needs little reason to leave.

[dcsooner]

I just returned from a weekend visit to OKC and as a native Oklahoman(Lawton) which really sucks, I must say although progress has been made, Oklahoma City is still woefully lagging in basic amentities one expects from a major city. Downtown is not vibrant after hours, no shoppping etc. I do not want to believe that Oklahnoma will forever be relegated to 2nd or 3rd tier status among states, but these are some of my observations. Oklahomans are fat (billy and betty bob are alive and well in Oklahoma), Oklahomans smoke alot, haven't you gotten the message (why all these Indian smoke shops?) wonder why health care costs are so high in Oklahoma (duh). Oklahomans LOOK poor and uneducated. Sorry but not shoes and shirts standard attire. When development does occur it's done second rate. You rave about your airport expansion but I have been through airports in cities much smaller than OKC and they are equal to or better. I do not know what it will take for Oklahoma to progress beyond where it is today, but I do believe without a fresh influx (population projections suggest this will not happen) of people who haven't been stiffled by low expectations, my home State (that I really do love) will always remain at the bottom of most areas related to quality of life. JUST MY OPINION

[Easy180]

So...You didn't enjoy your weekend then?...Can't really tell from your glowing review of OKC

I stopped at your Oklahomans' look poor and uneducated comment

[BDP]

You rave about your airport expansion but I have been through airports in cities much smaller than OKC and they are equal to or better.

True, but then again, I have been through many much larger airports in much larger cities that are toilets compared to OKC's. Most days when I travel, OKC is the nicest looking of the airports I visit. It is not large, but it is one of the more "surprising" things to new visitors. Now, the drive from the airport to their destination is another story...

[dcsooner]

Easy180,
I enjoy my visits to the extent that I get to revisit OU (I am a graduate) and see my Mom in Lawton, but I seem to come away disappointed in the "progress" talked about in the newspaper which I read everyday on line. I really want to see Oklahoma "GROW and PROSPER" so that I can consider returning, but each visit makes it even more unlikely as change seems to be brutally slow. Interesting that no one has disputed my observations. For those who live in OKC and want to see the City truly grow, START some kind of grass roots movement to get city leaders moving, maybe even tax yourselves again, but don't stay silent, get people into leadership who believe in Oklahoma like David Boren and the Governor who want to WORK to bring business and commerce to the City and State in a big way. Their is no reason Oklahoma has to continue to lag behing other states and Cities. It will take citizen action to demand better. Gosh even NW
ARKANSAS is growing faster than OKC.

[Easy180]

I think we all know the ONLY reason NW Arkansas is growing is the evil discount empire is HQ'd there

OKC and it's suburbs are progressing rather nicely, but I'm sure coming in with a DC view it wouldn't appear to you to be

You have some good points...Just not necessary to comment on how poor, fat and uneducated the city appears to be

[okcpulse]

Oklahomans are fat (billy and betty bob are alive and well in Oklahoma), Oklahomans smoke alot, haven't you gotten the message (why all these Indian smoke shops?) wonder why health care costs are so high in Oklahoma (duh). Oklahomans LOOK poor and uneducated. Sorry but not shoes and shirts standard attire.

You just described three-fourths the state of Texas, and they are considered to be a first-tier state. I conside Houston the smoking capital of the nation.

Despite your brief visit, Oklahoma is progressing in a lot more areas than meets the eye. Some qualities of life just aren't so obvious. And please, please consider, we are a work in progress. We have to start from the bottom and work our way up.

[traxx]

I think dcsooner makes several good points. We need a wakeup call instead of patting ourselves on the back for what we've already done. Instead of seeing our shortcomings and just pointing to texas or other states and municipalities and saying "look they're doing it too and they seem to be successful" we need to leave them behind and lead the change, not follow. It's good to see an outsider's view who has a love of Oklahoma. If some Joe from Oregon had stopped by Oklahoma and said those things, I probably wouldn't have been so quick to agree, but with dc, he's not trying to put us down but help out.

[dcsooner]

okcpulse,
Your comments encourage me because it shows that my fellow Oklahomans BELIEVE in our city and state. I am not ready to throw in the towel and give up, my comments reflect frustration in wanting to see faster progress

[dcsooner]

Easy 180,
Apoligies are due, just another reason to fight like heck for good schools and better paying jobs in the
State. Yes comparing where I live, one of the most afflunent areas of the country to Oklahoma is unfair, I plan to retire someplace else in 5 years, I would like for it to be Oklahoma if I could get SOME of the quality of life ammenties available in bigger cities. The NBA would be a start, but I am not holding my breath