OG&E Tower

[OkieNate]

I would love to have the discussion stick with the 'replacement' but when the focus seems to center on building height I just don't know where we go from there. It seems like if he just added 20 stories to the current design all opposition would just melt away. In reality - the height difference between 16 stores and 36 stories should the LAST item of contention. There are so so many other consideration that should take priority over height.

1) Streetwall
2) retail space
3) Exterior lighting
4) Sidewalk interaction
5) Set backs
6) Curb cuts
7) parking ingress/egress
8) terminal view on California Ave
9) 10,000 things I can't think of right now
10,010) Building height

I don't completely disagree with any of this but what has RW done so far in this process besides offer a proposal of a proposal to make you so confident all of your 10,000 + considerations will come to fruition? Or even be considered (besides parking, and good point Hoyasooner)

[dankrutka]

I know exactly what he said, but let's not forget that what they showed was just rough draft sketchings. We have no clue what the final rendering will look like. My advice would be to wait and see if its "world class" when the real renderings are presented. Otherwise, you are making a huge issue over nothing at this point.

I think there's a well established track record showing that the final product is much better when the public provides constructive criticism early in the process. If you wait too late to critique even early renderings it can be too late to meaningfully influence the direction of a project. So, I'd recommend against the "wait and see" approach.

In this case, I'd let those involved with this project know that it's not well received by the public and encourage them to make changes to their next rendering, not wait for it to be released.

[shawnw]

This I can agree with. Those who know people involved in the process, please funnel the constructive criticism onward...

[G.Walker]

I've made the shift...thanks OKCTALK.COM for 2 years of anticipation...

[OKCRT]

I've made the shift...thanks OKCTALK.COM for 2 years of anticipation...

I would just as soon see that site sit empty till someone has the funds to build a real skyscraper there of at least 36 stories. A real 1st class Tower.

So,

[catcherinthewry]

The entire purpose of this development is so they can build a giant ass parking garage. This building has way more parking than OG&E needs. Rainey Williams has proposed the bare minimum just so they can put a public parking garage there.

Finally, someone has exposed their nefarious scheme. Rainey Williams was recently heard saying, "And I would've gotten away with it,too if hadn't been for that meddling kid, hoyasooner".

[Urbanized]

Hmmm...I wonder if there is a previously-hinted-at reason for that... *headscratch*

[hoya]

Finally, someone has exposed their nefarious scheme. Rainey Williams was recently heard saying, "And I would've gotten away with it,too if hadn't been for that meddling kid, hoyasooner".

Don't be a douche, it's Christmas.

[UnFrSaKn]

Don't be a douche, it's Christmas.

Doesn't that apply to every day of the year preferably?

[Urbanized]

Like

[Just the facts]

Yes there is a lot of parking but the building is going to hold 1,000 people - plus however many go into tower 2, and let's not forget there is a convention center going in as well. Without a regional rail system in place how are people going to get downtown to these facilities? Answer - drive.

[catcherinthewry]

Don't be a douche, it's Christmas.

Have a sense of humor, it's Christmas.

[kevinpate]

On parking, isn't the southern half of that block potentially in play as well, not to mention other nearby space? Building extra parking to elase while one is building seems a right fair plan, so long as there is a reason to expect a reasonable return for the effort.

[Spartan]

I don't completely disagree with any of this but what has RW done so far in this process besides offer a proposal of a proposal to make you so confident all of your 10,000 + considerations will come to fruition? Or even be considered (besides parking, and good point Hoyasooner)

Yes, there are a lot of valid concerns. Kerry is just saying the least of which should be the height, and I agree, and it sounds like a lot of us agree on this.

I'm not going to stand here and tell a developer that they can't build the development they can sell. This is the development that Rainey Williams is possibly, maybe, someday capable of selling. The 40-story tower of everyone's dreams is pretty clearly NOT the tower he can pull off.

Let's move past this "not tall enough" issue. The street interaction looks pretty good, actually. The lighting has the potential to be good, with the curtain wall element, and I'm sure they'll work that out. The parking egress/ingress is a MAJOR issue because it is absolutely vital that California's easement is kept clear so that we can reconnect it. Furthermore, a visionary should step in here and try and reconnect California now rather than "leave it for later." We're addressing this block now, so now is the time.

I'd even respect Rainey Williams for making an argument that he doesn't want to leave anything unresolved for the future with the investment he is making in this block. We need to respect that these guys are developers and not philanthropists and work with them and not against them. This development would be improved with extending California flush through and doing ingress/egress off of the new street, which is a win-win between the development and civic needs.

Height, however, is irrelevant. The public has the right to weigh in on several aspects of development, especially aspects that come into contact or conflict with other investments (especially public investments) OR public goals. The developer gets to decide how big of a bite he can chew.

[Thundercitizen]

Yes, there are a lot of valid concerns. Kerry is just saying the least of which should be the height, and I agree, and it sounds like a lot of us agree on this.

I'm not going to stand here and tell a developer that they can't build the development they can sell. This is the development that Rainey Williams is possibly, maybe, someday capable of selling. The 40-story tower of everyone's dreams is pretty clearly NOT the tower he can pull off.

Let's move past this "not tall enough" issue. The street interaction looks pretty good, actually. The lighting has the potential to be good, with the curtain wall element, and I'm sure they'll work that out. The parking egress/ingress is a MAJOR issue because it is absolutely vital that California's easement is kept clear so that we can reconnect it. Furthermore, a visionary should step in here and try and reconnect California now rather than "leave it for later." We're addressing this block now, so now is the time.

I'd even respect Rainey Williams for making an argument that he doesn't want to leave anything unresolved for the future with the investment he is making in this block. We need to respect that these guys are developers and not philanthropists and work with them and not against them. This development would be improved with extending California flush through and doing ingress/egress off of the new street, which is a win-win between the development and civic needs.

Height, however, is irrelevant. The public has the right to weigh in on several aspects of development, especially aspects that come into contact or conflict with other investments (especially public investments) OR public goals. The developer gets to decide how big of a bite he can chew.

Yeah, but it's just too short.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah, but it's just too short.

I really agree, even if you're being sarcastic.

[Urbanized]

OK, Christmas is over. Everyone can go back to being a douche, if desired.

[OKCisOK4me]

Have a sense of humor, it's Christmas.

I thought it was funny lol

[Spartan]

OK, Christmas is over. Everyone can go back to being a douche, if desired.

By the way this is an urbanist forum, so anyone who isn't on board with that can go to... the politics forum.

[Dubya61]

By the way this is an urbanist forum, so anyone who isn't on board with that can go to... the politics forum.

Odd. Shout it from the rooftops all you want, but OKC is much more than an urbanist enclave, so I'd wager that OKC Talk is much more than an urbanist forum. I'm sure all points of views are welcome therein. Even the most recent re-arrangement seemed to remove the delineation between the CBD, the central urban ring, and the suburbs.

[Spartan]

Because we're an urbanism forum...

There are no 200-page threads for mystery Walmarts.

[SOONER8693]

Yeah, but it's just too short.

That's what she said.

[shawnw]

But there would be if it were going to be an urban walmart. :-P

[Pete]

Because we're an urbanism forum...

There are no 200-page threads for mystery Walmarts.

The thread and information about Costco and the stuff happening on Memorial brought record-shattering traffic here. And the thread tracking Whole Foods was pretty epic.

Downtown is the one area that is common to everyone in a community but considering that only a tiny fraction of the Metro's population lives in the central core, there is also a lot of interest in things closer to home; it's just that those topics are more fractured due to the wide dispersion of population.

[Dubya61]

Because we're an urbanism forum...

There are no 200-page threads for mystery Walmarts.

Don't confuse interest in seeing OKC CBD succeed and thrive with wanting to live an urban lifestyle and / or discuss only that.