OG&E Tower

[Pete]

Hope to find out more details now that I'm in town and out pressing the flesh.

Things seem to be solidifying and we are already a couple of weeks into the 90-day waiting period.

[Praedura]

Hope to find out more details now that I'm in town and out pressing the flesh.

Things seem to be solidifying and we are already a couple of weeks into the 90-day waiting period.

By all means, "press" away. And keep those ears flapping.

[s.hoff]

Is it possible to have the parking garage inside the building? Not that the bottom floors would be a garage, but more like if it was the "core" of the first five floors or so. This would keep it hidden and would require the building to be taller to accommodate the space it is taking up. I just didn't know if there was precedent for this or if it is even a good idea. Would it be too noisy for the offices and stores (or whatever) that are surrounding the garage, or do garages have to be more exposed to the outdoors for ventilation?

[Urbanized]

Yes, even though they really wanted to go to Macy's, they can't bear to walk past that empty spot so they just turn around and leave. They will come back later when that gap is filled. It is an amazing phenomena which can kill a whole wing of a mall. LOL.

Actually JTF is correct on this one. I know you are representing it as extreme - and using an extreme example to bolster your point - but there is science behind this. I recall in a Main Street or IDA training that I participated in that there is a pretty precise number of feet someone will walk past a gap in street frontage before becoming uncertain about safety or desirability of the area and seeking another route. I think it might have been as little as 200' (in an outdoor, urban area). To some extent, it supposedly has to do with our evolutionary (if you believe in that sort of thing) response to environment. That is, we instinctively feel less safe when exposed in the open in an unfamiliar environment, and we prefer "cover" provided by street wall, which reduces the directions from which danger can approach. This combines with stimuli provided by store windows, activity in them, other people walking, etc., to hold our interest and make us feel like there is something ahead that will reward us for the effort of walking there. Most of it is hugely related to the subconscious.

It is why walking 40-blocks in Midtown Manhattan feels like nothing, but 8-10 blocks in downtown OKC feel almost insurmountable to those not closely acquainted with the area.

I have racked my brain to remember those figures and find the source for them, because I found the whole subject pretty fascinating, but I haven't been able to find them since.

[HOT ROD]

IIRC, the blocks in OKC are larger than those in Manhattan.

Just sayin.

[Urbanized]

I'm sure that is possible. My point is, walk a mile there (or in Boston, or Chicago, or in downtown Portland, or a number of other places) and then a quarter mile here and see which is more enjoyable. It has little to do with distance.

[Just the facts]

IIRC, the blocks in OKC are larger than those in Manhattan.

Just sayin.

Actually, you kind of made my point. It just 'feels' like the blocks in NYC are shorter because it has items of interest on them. In midtown Manhattan the blocks are about 225' X 820'. Downtown Manhattan they are around 300' X 400' - the same size as typical downtown OKC block (not counting the high concentration of super blocks in OKC).

[Rover]

IIRC, the blocks in OKC are larger than those in Manhattan.

Just sayin.

Not necessarily. Between the numbered streets are much longer in NYC, depending on where you are.

[Rover]

Actually JTF is correct on this one. I know you are representing it as extreme - and using an extreme example to bolster your point - but there is science behind this. I recall in a Main Street or IDA training that I participated in that there is a pretty precise number of feet someone will walk past a gap in street frontage before becoming uncertain about safety or desirability of the area and seeking another route. I think it might have been as little as 200' (in an outdoor, urban area). To some extent, it supposedly has to do with our evolutionary (if you believe in that sort of thing) response to environment. That is, we instinctively feel less safe when exposed in the open in an unfamiliar environment, and we prefer "cover" provided by street wall, which reduces the directions from which danger can approach. This combines with stimuli provided by store windows, activity in them, other people walking, etc., to hold our interest and make us feel like there is something ahead that will reward us for the effort of walking there. Most of it is hugely related to the subconscious.

It is why walking 40-blocks in Midtown Manhattan feels like nothing, but 8-10 blocks in downtown OKC feel almost insurmountable to those not closely acquainted with the area.

I have racked my brain to remember those figures and find the source for them, because I found the whole subject pretty fascinating, but I haven't been able to find them since.

The original statement, as you point out, is a gross oversimplification. Visual context is extremely important. I object to these absolute statements with no context. They are inane. It is like quoting averages. I grossly exaggerated to make a point. My point was silly, just as the original is silly. Neighborhoods, streets, etc. must be evaluated in context...even as to walkability and desirability. This micro-micro examination and using rigid dogmatic rules of thumb distorts reality and hurts the urbanists argument.

[Urbanized]

I don't disagree with most of that. However, the fact remains that the desire to bring buildings to the street, minimize gap-tooth street front, and encourage active windows and mixed use come from somewhere. They aren't just feel-good arbitrary notions and dogma; they are based on studies of human behavior, and of existing development, some successful, some failed. For us to get the most bang for our buck when pursuing urban and inner-city development - utilizing significant public resources BTW - we have to be mindful of these truisms.

[Bellaboo]

Is it possible to have the parking garage inside the building? Not that the bottom floors would be a garage, but more like if it was the "core" of the first five floors or so. This would keep it hidden and would require the building to be taller to accommodate the space it is taking up. I just didn't know if there was precedent for this or if it is even a good idea. Would it be too noisy for the offices and stores (or whatever) that are surrounding the garage, or do garages have to be more exposed to the outdoors for ventilation?

I've seen to buildings where the first 6 floors are parking. They'll have a street level lobby and then you just hit the elevators.

[s.hoff]

I've seen to buildings where the first 6 floors are parking. They'll have a street level lobby and then you just hit the elevators.

Hmm. Sounds ugly. And if the first two floors are going to be retail, it probably wouldn't work.

[CaptDave]

I've seen hotels contructed in that manner. It can work fairly well if designed properly.

[Teo9969]

Stage Center, even in its current form, is not a gap in the urban fabric...it's just not. If anything, it's the SW corner of urban fabric.

Stage Center would be infinitely more interesting, even in its current form, if there were development on all 4 sides. It would garner more attention and provide an interesting juxtaposition to whatever was placed around it. The reason why nobody will walk by Stage Center is because...get this...there's nothing to walk to...

OKC is not fortunate to be a city that receives frequent visitations from around the world so we don't usually think in this mind-frame, but after traveling through Europe for the past month, having been so far to Wien, Salzburg, Praha, Krakow, Warszawa, and Berlin...Stage Center is the exact type of thing that would make me stop in my tracks and soak it in, as would the Crystal Bridge in MBG. I may even decide that I don't actually like the architecture, but it is nothing if not interesting, and that alone makes it a valuable piece to any urban fabric because it is a place maker (the real mistake is that it wasn't somehow tied into MBG along with the south side of the block)

Also: Dense mixed-use development is great and all...but it becomes trite very quickly when it is profuse. It has its advantages, but place-making does not tend to be one of those things. I would prefer it over what we currently have throughout much of downtown, yes, but it's only a part of the puzzle.

[windowphobe]

In the Manhattan street grid, it's 20 blocks per mile (say, 53rd to 73rd up Second Avenue). However, the avenues aren't evenly spaced (610 to 920 feet apart).

[CuatrodeMayo]

Stage Center, even in its current form, is not a gap in the urban fabric...it's just not. If anything, it's the SW corner of urban fabric.

Stage Center would be infinitely more interesting, even in its current form, if there were development on all 4 sides. It would garner more attention and provide an interesting juxtaposition to whatever was placed around it. The reason why nobody will walk by Stage Center is because...get this...there's nothing to walk to...

OKC is not fortunate to be a city that receives frequent visitations from around the world so we don't usually think in this mind-frame, but after traveling through Europe for the past month, having been so far to Wien, Salzburg, Praha, Krakow, Warszawa, and Berlin...Stage Center is the exact type of thing that would make me stop in my tracks and soak it in, as would the Crystal Bridge in MBG. I may even decide that I don't actually like the architecture, but it is nothing if not interesting, and that alone makes it a valuable piece to any urban fabric because it is a place maker (the real mistake is that it wasn't somehow tied into MBG along with the south side of the block)

Also: Dense mixed-use development is great and all...but it becomes trite very quickly when it is profuse. It has its advantages, but place-making does not tend to be one of those things. I would prefer it over what we currently have throughout much of downtown, yes, but it's only a part of the puzzle.

Exactly. Thanks for the post.

[GaryOKC6]

Stage Center, even in its current form, is not a gap in the urban fabric...it's just not. If anything, it's the SW corner of urban fabric.

Stage Center would be infinitely more interesting, even in its current form, if there were development on all 4 sides. It would garner more attention and provide an interesting juxtaposition to whatever was placed around it. The reason why nobody will walk by Stage Center is because...get this...there's nothing to walk to...

OKC is not fortunate to be a city that receives frequent visitations from around the world so we don't usually think in this mind-frame, but after traveling through Europe for the past month, having been so far to Wien, Salzburg, Praha, Krakow, Warszawa, and Berlin...Stage Center is the exact type of thing that would make me stop in my tracks and soak it in, as would the Crystal Bridge in MBG. I may even decide that I don't actually like the architecture, but it is nothing if not interesting, and that alone makes it a valuable piece to any urban fabric because it is a place maker (the real mistake is that it wasn't somehow tied into MBG along with the south side of the block)

Also: Dense mixed-use development is great and all...but it becomes trite very quickly when it is profuse. It has its advantages, but place-making does not tend to be one of those things. I would prefer it over what we currently have throughout much of downtown, yes, but it's only a part of the puzzle.

All I can say about the SC is that it IS interesting but then again we all make mistakes. It was a terrible design from the beginning as far as being functional. Despite all the efforts to repurpose it there is no way to make it happen.

[Pete]

Heard a rumor today this building will be at least 35 floors.

It's going up!!

Not super solid on this info but will certainly have more to share within a week.

[Dustin]

Oh LAWD... I can't take the emotions...

[dmoor82]

Heard a rumor today this building will be at least 35 floors.

It's going up!!

Not super solid on this info but will certainly have more to share within a week.

The Chase Tower is 36/500ft, so with modern floorplates 35 floors might be between 625- 700' ft????

[dmoor82]

Btw Pete, what happened to the like button?

[Dustin]

Btw Pete, what happened to the like button?

like

[dmoor82]

At least 35 floors, Which means it could be more than that! I hope Pete's info is right, because we still might get that 700'ft tower.

[Thundercitizen]

"Heard a rumor today this building will be at least 35 floors.

It's going up!!

Not super solid on this info but will certainly have more to share within a week."




Thundercitizen likes this post.

[hoya]

Now that is more like it! And the taller it is, the stronger that indicates our getting the MLP HQ as well.