OG&E Energy Center

[Tigerguy]

Are we still on about the height? Some people have decided to take a risk that 10 years ago might have been pie-in-the-sky. Yeah, it's nice to fill out the skyline, but I'd rather not see a half-empty building that's tall for the sake of making a better skyline photograph.

In fact, our step brother Tulsa would still say they have several taller buildings than the proposed identical quadruplet mid towers. Sadly, they would be correct and they do have several high rises that impact their skyline much more than these will.

Tulsa can say whatever they darn well please. Yes, they have nice-looking buildings. At the end of the day, I'll let the construction cranes do the talking. On that front, the chatter will be louder on this end of the Turner.

[soondoc]

I am just stating my opinion as was Panda. We both agreed that we are happy that they are being built but it's not a big high rise. At least one that most big cities would call a high rise. I also didn't say that you cared about Tulsa's development, sounds like you are taking it personally that they have a more impressive skyline and taller buildings. Telling me to put down the bottle and that I have a horrible imagination is a bit of an over reach based on my last post because I wasn't attacking like you just did. What isn't an over reach is that maybe you need to lay of the estrogen just a tad bit because you took that way to personal for the average person.

[Plutonic Panda]

Except there are international standards specifying what constitutes a high rise..? It's like saying you disagree that the sky is blue or that a pear is a fruit.

No, that's not really a valid comparison. The sky is blue. I don't think that a 25 story building is a high-rise.

This is my definition and you don't have to take it seriously, I could care less either way.

Low-rise: 2-10 stories

Mid-rise 11-30 stories

High-rise or skyscraper: 31-50 stories

Supertall: 51-100 stories

Skyrise: 100+

Those are just my definitions and as the population increases and technology/engineering gets better, all of the buildings will start to get taller, not shorter. soondoc is posting some valid points and concerns and that is fine. Even when I posted the building in city-data, I had a couple people say it really isn't a high-rise but it's still nice and I agree. I love these buildings already and hope they get built. Would I be mad if they were a bit taller? No. But right now, I'm just hoping they get build as shown in the ClayCo plans.

[Pete]

While there are no hard and fast definitions, I would think most would agree with this categorization:

1-3 stories = low rise
4-12 stories = mid rise
12-40 stories = high rise
40-70 stories = skyscraper
70+ / 1,000 feet = super tall

[Urbanized]

Well, I disagree that an hour has 60 minutes in it. My days are only 20 hours long, but the hours are 72 minutes. I don't get as many hours of sleep as I used to, but I get a heck of a lot more done in an 8 hour day.

[Plutonic Panda]

Well, I disagree that an hour has 60 minutes in it. My days are only 20 hours long, but the hours are 72 minutes. I don't get as many hours of sleep as I used to, but I get a heck of a lot more done in an 8 hour day.

I understand.

[soondoc]

Exactly, I agree. That is much more in the line of thinking of what most people think of as a high rise. These are very nice on the taller side mid rises. If you are offended by that, I can't really help you there. I am sure they will be nice, better than nothing for sure. I don't understand why not a little taller to be a true high rise on a couple of them but hey, it's not my project. It certainly is not worth people getting all upset because I think this way.

When I was talking to people at the NCAA wrestling tourney last March, they seemed to like OKC and BT. One thing I remember a few talking about was why we only had "one" tall building in our DT? These people are from all over the country, so I guess their definition of a high rise is more similar to mine and a few others. Go to an Austin, Dallas, etc. board and tell them about our 26 story high rises and they will yawn. They build hotels taller than than quite often. That is my point I am trying to get across but people get upset.

[OkieNate]

I am just stating my opinion as was Panda. We both agreed that we are happy that they are being built but it's not a big high rise. At least one that most big cities would call a high rise. I also didn't say that you cared about Tulsa's development, sounds like you are taking it personally that they have a more impressive skyline and taller buildings. Telling me to put down the bottle and that I have a horrible imagination is a bit of an over reach based on my last post because I wasn't attacking like you just did. What isn't an over reach is that maybe you need to lay of the estrogen just a tad bit because you took that way to personal for the average person.

Accuse me of being jealous, then say I need to lay off the estrogen LOL oh the irony. Where in Tulsa do you live? And I wasn't attacking you I was facting you. NBA team > "impressive skyline". If you can't take the responses don't spew diarrhea of the mouth(key board).

[Plutonic Panda]

Exactly, I agree. That is much more in the line of thinking of what most people think of as a high rise. These are very nice on the taller side mid rises. If you are offended by that, I can't really help you there. I am sure they will be nice, better than nothing for sure. I don't understand why not a little taller to be a true high rise on a couple of them but hey, it's not my project. It certainly is not worth people getting all upset because I think this way.

When I was talking to people at the NCAA wrestling tourney last March, they seemed to like OKC and BT. One thing I remember a few talking about was why we only had "one" tall building in our DT? These people are from all over the country, so I guess their definition of a high rise is more similar to mine and a few others. Go to an Austin, Dallas, etc. board and tell them about our 26 story high rises and they will yawn. They build hotels taller than than quite often. That is my point I am trying to get across but people get upset.

+1

[OkieNate]

I am just stating my opinion as was Panda. We both agreed that we are happy that they are being built but it's not a big high rise. At least one that most big cities would call a high rise. I also didn't say that you cared about Tulsa's development, sounds like you are taking it personally that they have a more impressive skyline and taller buildings. Telling me to put down the bottle and that I have a horrible imagination is a bit of an over reach based on my last post because I wasn't attacking like you just did. What isn't an over reach is that maybe you need to lay of the estrogen just a tad bit because you took that way to personal for the average person.

Accuse me of being jealous, then say I need to lay off the estrogen LOL oh the irony. Where in Tulsa do you live? And I wasn't attacking you I was facting you. NBA team > "impressive skyline". If you can't take the responses don't spew diarrhea of the mouth(key board).


"In fact, our step brother Tulsa would still say they have several taller buildings than the proposed identical quadruplet mid towers. Sadly, they would be correct and they do have several high rises that impact their skyline much more than these will."

Short memory much? I was letting you know, myself and most others on here do not care one iota what Tulsa's opinion is.

[HOT ROD]

its all prospective.

Does Chicago just have only 6 tall buildings? They have 6 supertalls, that are significantly taller than anything else in the skyline.

We have one building significantly taller than the rest, but I would NOT say OKC has only one tall building. More like 6 (downtown) that just show up differently, with one being a monster.

[Plutonic Panda]

its all prospective.

Does Chicago just have only 6 tall buildings? They have 6 supertalls, that are significantly taller than anything else in the skyline.

We have one building significantly taller than the rest, but I would NOT say OKC has only one tall building. More like 6 (downtown) that just show up differently, with one being a monster.

Hot Rod, soondoc is right, if you took these buildings into a city like Austin or Dallas and called them a high-rise they would laugh. I have also heard a few people ask why we only have one tall building. I guess the fact that the Devon is so much taller than any other building, might be why. For a city our size, we really are lucky to have a building like the Devon Tower.

[PhiAlpha]

Why does Dubai only have one tall building?

[OkieNate]

Hot Rod, soondoc is right, if you took these buildings into a city like Austin or Dallas and called them a high-rise they would laugh. I have also heard a few people ask why we only have one tall building. I guess the fact that the Devon is so much taller than any other building, might be why. For a city our size, we really are lucky to have a building like the Devon Tower.

The tallest building in Austin is less than 700', and including that they have 3 buildings taller than 500'. As a matter of fact all four of the proposed Clayco buildings would be a welcome addition to Austin and would beef their skyline up also. if all of them are 400,-450', each would be in Austins top ten tallest buildings or very close, within a few feet...

[Plutonic Panda]

Why does Dubai only have one tall building?

They're actually building another one taller than the Khalifa, but if you want to get technical about the tall building, it would be THE tall building and none others come close. Tall by their standards which was set by the Khalifa would imply they have one tall building. Place those other buildings by any building in OKC besides Devon and see the result. UAE has so much oil money, they are throwing billions at building things they don't even care whether it makes money or not. It's a status symbol. I haven't checked the vacancy rates lately, but last time I did check, the Khalifa tower wasn't even half full. You can not compare an economy like what the UAE has to the position OKC is in. Even the big oil guys here have to do what makes financial sense but over there they can waste what they like because it just keeps coming. I saw a 12 year old kid who doesn't even have a drivers license and owns 3 Bugatti Veyron's. Go look up pictures of what kind of cars the students at the University of Dubai drive. Completely different world over there.

[Plutonic Panda]

The tallest building in Austin is less than 700', and including that they have 3 buildings taller than 500'. As a matter of fact all four of the proposed Clayco buildings would be a welcome addition to Austin and would beef their skyline up also. if all of them are 400,-450', each would be in Austins top ten tallest buildings or very close, within a few feet...

New condo project set to start in downtown Austin | www.statesman.com

Up to 50-story tower planned at Fifth and Brazos | www.mystatesman.com

That was quickly compiled using the Austin development thread. Austin would laugh if you brought this down there and branded it a high-rise. I never said Austin wouldn't take it, and I don't speak for Austin. If I was living in Austin and Austin was my hometown, I'd laugh if someone called the Stage Center Towers skyscrapers.

[BrettM2]

[ChrisHayes]

IMO, you also have to look at the size of the Dowtown area where all the mid and high rises are clustered. I would like to have one or two more high rises about the height or a little less than the height of Devon, but we have a relatively small Downtown area. If you look at the area of mid and high rises it's smaller than that of DT Austin. We need one or two more to balance the skyline a bit, but the Clayco project will also fit nicely.

[NWOKCGuy]

Austin is my hometown. I think OGE towers are high-rise. That's backed up by industry standard definitions and aren't just my opinion.

[Plutonic Panda]

Austin is my hometown. I think OGE towers are high-rise. That's backed up by industry standard definitions and aren't just my opinion.

Just talked with someone from Austin on city-data and he doesn't consider them high-rises, but you can have your opinion.

[NWOKCGuy]

Again. These are your opinions and the opinions of people on city-data. Removing my opinion from the matter, these are high-rise by definition.

[OkieNate]

I guess I just don't understand what you and others think is so laughable about these OG&E buildings. They would stack up with or be taller than most of those buildings on that list? I know a half a billion is a pretty sublime number and 400 ish feet isn't exactly what you want, but laughable? Is it too much to ask for a little bit of a sense of reality here?

[AP]

Just talked with someone from Austin on city-data and he doesn't consider them high-rises, but you can have your opinion.

No one is debating opinion. Your opinion does not matter on the topic. By the definition, these are clearly high-rise. Get over it and move on.

[Plutonic Panda]

Again. These are your opinions and the opinions of people on city-data. Removing my opinion from the matter, these are high-rise by definition.

Ok.

[Plutonic Panda]

No one is debating opinion. Your opinion does not matter on the topic. By the definition, these are clearly high-rise. Get over it and move on.

I never argued against it.