OG&E Energy Center

[adaniel]

^
FWIW that project has been dead for some time.

[Plutonic Panda]

At least until Midland builds its tower: Midland's 58-story tower will become a symbol of oil boom - Dallas Business Journal

yeah that project died. I wish they'd build it in OKC



I would like the base to be more pedestrian friendly and less plaza like

[ljbab728]

It's amazing how much these 20-25 story buildings do to balance out the skyline though. I love tall buildings just as much as anybody else, but OKC was seriously spoiled by the Devon Tower. Metro areas of only 1.3 million in population don't typically see such grand developments. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if the Devon Tower was by far the tallest tower in a city this size in the country. I hope the Main/Hudson tower ends up taller than expected but if it doesn't, this will still double the size of the skyline from certain angles. I think architectural style is just as important if not moreso than height and from what we've seen thus far, this project will deliver.

The tallest building in any US city that is smaller than OKC is the Goldman Sachs Tower in Jersey City at 781'. Any other comparable towers are in cities much larger than OKC.

[skanaly]

I guess I thought I'd post it...haha

[KayneMo]

The tallest building in any US city that is smaller than OKC is the Goldman Sachs Tower in Jersey City at 781'. Any other comparable towers are in cities much larger than OKC.

Here's a list I compiled a while ago, it's a list of the top 25 US cities ranked by their tallest building:

1. New York - One World Trade Center, 1,776'
2. Chicago - Willis Tower, 1,450'
3. Atlanta - Bank of America Plaza, 1,023'
4. Los Angeles - US Bank Tower, 1,018'
5. Houston - JPMorgan Chase Tower, 1,002'
6. Philadelphia - Comcast Center, 975'
7. Cleveland - Key Tower, 947'
8. Seattle - Columbia Center, 932'
9. Dallas - Bank of America Plaza, 921'
10. Charlotte - Bank of America Corporate Center, 871'
11. San Francisco - Transamerica Pyramid, 853'
12. Oklahoma City - Devon Energy Center, 844'
13. Pittsburgh - US Steel Tower, 841'
14. Indianapolis - Chase Tower, 830'
15. Minneapolis - IDS Tower, 792'
16. Boston - Hancock Place, 790'
17. Miami - Four Seasons Hotel, 789'
18. Jersey City - Goldman Sachs Tower, 781'
19. Mobile - RSA Battle House Tower, 745'
20. Las Vegas - Fontainebleua Resort, 735'
21. Detroit - Marriott at Renaissance Center, 727'
22. Denver - Republic Plaza, 714'
23. Atlantic City - Revel Resort, 710'
24. New Orleans - One Shell Square, 697'
25. Austin - The Austonian, 683

Atlantic City, Mobile, New Orleans and OKC are the smallest metros on this list, but OKC is the smallest of the top 17!

[Pete]

I deleted several posts that were a bit heated.

Let's please keep things respectful. Thanks.

[Laramie]

^
FWIW that project has been dead for some time.

Then in May of 2014, Energy Related Properties confirmed the evolution of the nearly half-a-billion-dollar development plans, saying the Energy Tower project would become the Energy Twin Towers project moving forward.

Discussion on the purchase and sale agreement for the property were tabled during the City Council meeting, on August 26, 2014, with the city giving the developers a deadline of September 30, 2014, to submit a new purchase and sale agreement plan.

But as of Tuesday, the massive downtown development project is now off the table.

UPDATE: Midland Reacts to Developers Cancelation of Downtown Energy Tower Project - Permian Basin 360

[David]

I just got back from spending half a week in the middle of DC, mostly near the convention center plus a little at the zoo, and spent quite a bit of my time there looking at the buildings. My conclusion? Height doesn't really matter once you have a certain amount, what matters is density of the developments. What we have here in the prospective OG&E Energy Center will be wonderful assuming it is built similar enough to what has been proposed, but after what I have just seen I would happily take eight towers at half the height of the proposal instead of the four.

[HOT ROD]

you have to admit that you were also on the east coast in a perfectly planned city that was designed pre-WW1/vehicles, and said city that doesn't have 621 sq miles to cover (if it did, it would NOT be that dense given the height limits). Said city is also the seat of govt and the spots you visited sounds like mostly the tourist/business spots - of course they're going to be nice/world class because (again) said city is perfectly planned to knock the socks off of visitors. venture out of the broken path in 'd.c.' and tell us how you think.

my point is, while I don't disagree with your argument about density I think OKC has density more than covered downtown. What we need is quality development and height. We need critical mass. There is nothing wrong with a few towers above 600 feet to help heighten the skyline AND still have mid-rise and low rise infill. Why do people here in OKC keep talking like it is ONE or the other? why not have all? As an aside: Here in Seattle, most buildings are less than 400 feet but we do have a few (6 or 7) that are higher and THAT is why folks like this skyline; density, height, and topography/elevation. You can have both mass and some height.

OKC has no option right now for 8 half-height buildings, the choice is 4 high-rises (plus 1) so let's be happy with that. You're getting more density, all on one superblock. I am hoping Main Hudson is above 700 feet and that Milhaus will consider 4th/EKG OR the lumberyard for their proposal; with this equation everyone wins (height and density). ... this does not have to be a zero game.

[Brownwood]

Interesting ... the Clayco website has the project listed with the client name of OGE Energy Corp., not Kestrel.

OGE Energy Corp - Clayco

[s00nr1]

Interesting ... the Clayco website has the project listed with the client name of OGE Energy Corp., not Kestrel.

OGE Energy Corp - Clayco

Of course, they also spelled Sheridan wrong (Sheraton), so...

[NWOKCGuy]

OGE, Kestrel Investments and Clayco have selected Robert A.M. Stern Architects to design the office buildings and Clayco’s subsidiary, Forum Studio, to complete the master planning, retail, parking and residential structure design.

They list OGE as the client, probably bc they'll be the occupant. Kestrel is mentioned in the project description.

[sroberts24]

Interesting ... the Clayco website has the project listed with the client name of OGE Energy Corp., not Kestrel.

OGE Energy Corp - Clayco

Kestrel is mention at the bottom of their description as working with them. This is just the OG&E part not the entire development. Or at least that's how I read it.

[soondoc]

Ok, just a little poll here. We are going to be getting 4 mid rise buildings that look beautiful. Would you all rather have four 27 story buildings, three 36 story buildings, or two 54 story buildings on this site? I personally would rather have 3 towers at about 36 stories as it would fulfill both density and height that would balance out and add so much to the skyline. These mid rises will be in the 400 foot range and will not be able to be seen from long distances or add the height that we would like to see. Just by adding 8-10 stories would put the buildings around 600 feet and that would look amazing. For that matter, just by adding 5-6 more stories on a couple of the 4 proposed would at least put them at or above the Cotter Tower which is what I think really should be done. I am sure they could line up a few more tenants in the next few months to make it happen.

Imagine 4 plus towers as tall or taller than the Cotter and the beauty of their design. That's a game changer, mid rises are good for OKC but I think we could raise the scale just a little bit and it would be breath takingly nice and great for the city. Regardless, I am happy with this project. I just want something a little more grand so when visitors come here, businesses want to relocate, they see what is going on and are literally wowed. I think people will be impressed with these towers but not wowed and I think a little bit of that could go a long ways not only short term but long term. Perception is reality to so many people and they may go back and say OKC has really got it going on. I think we need to consider our company headquarters in this place.

[Bellaboo]

I read the OG&E Clayco page and they stated 500,000 sq feet for the building. At 25 floors, that's a 20,000 sq ft foot print.

[Thundercitizen]

Ok, just a little poll here. We are going to be getting 4 mid rise buildings that look beautiful. Would you all rather have four 27 story buildings, three 36 story buildings, or two 54 story buildings on this site? I personally would rather have 3 towers at about 36 stories as it would fulfill both density and height that would balance out and add so much to the skyline. These mid rises will be in the 400 foot range and will not be able to be seen from long distances or add the height that we would like to see. Just by adding 8-10 stories would put the buildings around 600 feet and that would look amazing. For that matter, just by adding 5-6 more stories on a couple of the 4 proposed would at least put them at or above the Cotter Tower which is what I think really should be done. I am sure they could line up a few more tenants in the next few months to make it happen.

Imagine 4 plus towers as tall or taller than the Cotter and the beauty of their design. That's a game changer, mid rises are good for OKC but I think we could raise the scale just a little bit and it would be breath takingly nice and great for the city. Regardless, I am happy with this project. I just want something a little more grand so when visitors come here, businesses want to relocate, they see what is going on and are literally wowed. I think people will be impressed with these towers but not wowed and I think a little bit of that could go a long ways not only short term but long term. Perception is reality to so many people and they may go back and say OKC has really got it going on. I think we need to consider our company headquarters in this place.

Given the floor count scenario, I'd like a 20-story building, a 34-story tower, and a 54-story tower.

[NWOKCGuy]

Ok, just a little poll here. We are going to be getting 4 mid rise buildings that look beautiful. Would you all rather have four 27 story buildings, three 36 story buildings, or two 54 story buildings on this site? I personally would rather have 3 towers at about 36 stories as it would fulfill both density and height that would balance out and add so much to the skyline. These mid rises will be in the 400 foot range and will not be able to be seen from long distances or add the height that we would like to see. Just by adding 8-10 stories would put the buildings around 600 feet and that would look amazing. For that matter, just by adding 5-6 more stories on a couple of the 4 proposed would at least put them at or above the Cotter Tower which is what I think really should be done. I am sure they could line up a few more tenants in the next few months to make it happen.

Imagine 4 plus towers as tall or taller than the Cotter and the beauty of their design. That's a game changer, mid rises are good for OKC but I think we could raise the scale just a little bit and it would be breath takingly nice and great for the city. Regardless, I am happy with this project. I just want something a little more grand so when visitors come here, businesses want to relocate, they see what is going on and are literally wowed. I think people will be impressed with these towers but not wowed and I think a little bit of that could go a long ways not only short term but long term. Perception is reality to so many people and they may go back and say OKC has really got it going on. I think we need to consider our company headquarters in this place.

I'm super happy with what's proposed. These aren't mid-rise. I think anything over 10 floors is technically considered high-rise. They may not be skyscrapes, but we're not getting 8 story apartment buildings either. These are going to be game changers and will really let us know what the OKC market is. If they go fast, we'll see taller proposed going forward.

[Plutonic Panda]

I might make some people here mad, but I wouldn't mind seeing all of those consolidated to a 100+ story skyscraper.

[OKCisOK4me]

^^unrealistic

Not the same as mad.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^unrealistic

Not the same as mad.

Well, it would look way out of place anyways. Even the Khalifa Tower looks out of place, but all the tall surrounding buildings help. It is still considerably taller than any other building there.

[bchris02]

Given that these buildings will double the size of the skyline from certain angles, I will say I am pretty happy with it as proposed. Now of course I would like to see taller but OKC will still be very lucky if these get built as shown in the renderings. I really think this will be the next big test of the OKC market and taller may be proposed going forward if they are successful.

[hoya]

OKC needs density more than it needs height. As cool as a 70+ story tower would be, this proposal is a grand slam. I'd have been pleased with just one of these towers. Now we are getting four. I cannot put I to words how happy this makes me. Complaining that they are too similar in height is like complaining that Kate Upton's boobs are too perky. Don't be that guy.

[Plutonic Panda]

OKC needs density more than it needs height. As cool as a 70+ story tower would be, this proposal is a grand slam. I'd have been pleased with just one of these towers. Now we are getting four. I cannot put I to words how happy this makes me. Complaining that they are too similar in height is like complaining that Kate Upton's boobs are too perky. Don't be that guy.

Hey man... I love this development! I'm very happy with it and Kate Upton's boobs. No hate here ;P

[HOT ROD]

I'm super happy with what's proposed. These aren't mid-rise. I think anything over 10 floors is technically considered high-rise. They may not be skyscrapes, but we're not getting 8 story apartment buildings either. These are going to be game changers and will really let us know what the OKC market is. If they go fast, we'll see taller proposed going forward.

I was just going to say this. These are highrises, anything over 12-floors is a highrise. Mid-rise is generally 3-floors to 11-floors. Low-rise is less than 3-floors. It is possible that these towers may be taller than 400 feet (particularly the office buildings) and it is very highly possible that the Main Hudson tower(s) will be significantly above 500 feet.


Why do people here keep downplaying anything that isn't above 500 feet? We have several towers u/c in Seattle in the 400 foot range and less, and we're thrilled about it and NOBODY is walking around calling them mid-rises. Just because they're shorter than Devon? Is Kerr-McGee/Sandridge a mid-rise building all of sudden? or Oklahoma tower? Looks like a skyscraper to me and these buildings will be in the same height if not a bit taller, and significantly more modern (meaning larger floors, taller floor-to-ceilings).

As to the original question, I'd rather have four towers because of the size of the site (a superblock). it would be ridiculous to have just two (or even three) towers on a two square block site. We sort of got that with Devon, but at least there are a couple of mid-rises on their campus AND the Colcord Hotel. If it were JUST the sage center square block, then I'd be fine with the two towers.

[zorobabel]

Wow, back after a year. This proposal is excellent. Love the Deco Echo.

Is there a good chance this will get built?