Preftakes Block

[soondoc]

Oops, these are what I was talking about. Sorry.

[soondoc]

Here's more on "The Exchange" in Vancouver:

Harry Gugger Studio?s ?The Exchange? to Rise in Vancouver | ArchDaily

Here is the other. Why oh why can this not be done here? It is a WIN-WIN for all! Can these get to the right people to consider something like this?

[Laramie]

Maybe I missed this but what is the expected height of this building?

443 feet.

[gopokes88]

Some people in life just aren't ever going to be happy and you just need to ignore them.

[Bellaboo]

Soondoc,

The developers do consider the costing of projects too. To incorporate into an older building not only would be an engineering nightmare but would be way more expensive too. Also, going more vertical as opposed to a little bit more horizontal is expensive.
They have to concern themselves with the cost and return on investment.
They don't always go out of their way for what the average Joe wants.

[JRod1980]

443 feet.

443 feet would make it 3 feet taller than City Place Tower. Making it the 4th tallest building in OKC and 8th tallest building in Oklahoma.

Adding 5 floors to this building would make it taller than the Chase/Cotter Ranch Tower.

[Just the facts]

Statements like this are condescending and hurt the image of new urbanists. Why some feel you have to trash others to make a point and to try to feel superior is beyond me. Egos get out of control I guess.

While JTF makes a point that I think we all can agree on, that street interaction is more important than sheer height, it is done in a very offensive way. This from someone so dedicated to urban fabric they live in a suburb of Jacksonville. LOL

So why do you think people are concerned about the height or what the skyline looks like from an angle that only airline pilots will ever see?

[Pete]

I posted this up-thread:

[Bellaboo]

Actually 4 more floors (kind of, it's average is 16.4 feet per floor) would make it 508 feet. I'd like to see them add a nice crown for that matter.

[JRod1980]

Actually 4 more floors would make it 508 feet. I'd like to see them add a nice crown for that matter.

Do we know for certain that these are the final design plans, or might this be similar to the initial OG&E first building concept that everyone hated?

[JRod1980]

Do we know for certain that these are the final design plans, or might this be similar to the initial OG&E first building concept that everyone hated?

Not saying that everyone hates this design, but I definitely did not expect to see a rectangle glass building being proposed on this sight. I was hoping we would see a building that would be different than anything Dallas or Houston is currently building, a little less glass and a little more detail.

[JRod1980]

Actually 4 more floors (kind of, it's average is 16.4 feet per floor) would make it 508 feet. I'd like to see them add a nice crown for that matter.

With 5 additional floors, it would surpass Tulsa's First Place Tower for 4th tallest in the state.

[Pete]

Do we know for certain that these are the final design plans, or might this be similar to the initial OG&E first building concept that everyone hated?

These are meant to be the final design and will soon be submitted for approval.

The OG&E thing was always labeled as conceptual and they said from the outset it was just a general idea.

[LocoAko]

That building plan for Vancouver is stunning. Sigh.

[Bellaboo]

Not saying that everyone hates this design, but I definitely did not expect to see a rectangle glass building being proposed on this sight. I was hoping we would see a building that would be different than anything Dallas or Houston is currently building, a little less glass and a little more detail.

I agree, I was expecting something a little more less blah. I was expecting half way striking at least. Not that I hate it and I'm sure the finished real life building will be admirable.

[adaniel]

I think at best it will create our own little sterile and cold corporate district you find in the financial centers of a lot of urban cities. Most people flee these areas to more urban and vibrant neighborhoods when the shift whistle blows at the end of the day.

If OKC is not careful, the entire SW portion of DT will start to take on that feel....cold and corporate. It reminds me a lot of Exchange Place in Jersey City, or even a lot of financial districts in Europe (Canary Wharf in London or La Defense in Paris come to mind). I've spent time in Exchange Place for work and while it is quite busy during the daytime, at night it is dead, dead, dead, even with a significant resident population. Most people head to Hoboken or NYC at night. We should consider giving this area some cutesy/corporate name. Hudson Place, maybe?

And maybe I would feel better about the retail space in the parking garages they are proposing if Devon didn't do such a half-assed job with its "storefronts" on their garage. Have they even honestly marketed them at all or are we just stuck with faux store windows with pictures of corporate propaganda?

I hate to be condescending, but posters on here have been clamoring on here for years now, OKC needs more towers!! We have to show the world we've ARRIVED!! Well, you've all gotten your wish...sometimes, though, it comes at a cost. I'm kinda over it at this point. It will be nice to have 5 active high rises under construction; most cities our size can only wish for these things. At a minimum, OKC have a lot of historical preservation activity in other districts, but its probably too much too hope for this in the CBD.

[soondoc]

Is it really a stretch on their part to take it a little higher? I mean they are destroying a part of OKC history- literally wiping it out. These buildings are gone forever like so many others in the past. I personally think that everything in our power should be done to try to preserve 1 or more of these buildings. If not, they should NOT ever be replaced with a mid rise and a couple of parking garages. If they are going to delete history, they need to make some new history with something more than this.

For those saying it is still so a 400 foot tower, get over yourself and I mean that in a nice way. Suburbs all over the country build mid rises all the time. If they want to build this 400 footer, do it at another site and keep what is there. For those who say it would be the 4th or 5th tallest building in Oklahoma, who cares? Lets start raising our standards to other cities and states and not what Oklahoma has. Actually, maybe we should raise our standards to even try to top some of Tulsa's high rises. They have several taller than the mid rises proposed in OKC. It is a bitter sweet feeling, on one hand happy for new projects, yet disappointed in OKC for always doing things as cheaply as possible in so many areas. We could easily have taller buildings with not a ton more money.

To top that off, they are going to be asking for TIF money- which is fine if done in a win-win situation. Can an argument be made that if they are going to do this as planned and destroy these buildings for the mid rise, then no TIF money. If they try to preserve (even at a higher cost) than money can be allocated? If they do a partial, keep at least one building and go higher like they should, then TIF will be available. I say under no circumstances should TIF be used for destruction of historical buildings to replace them with a slightly taller building and parking garages. People, wake up and let this be known now.

[Rover]

So why do you think people are concerned about the height or what the skyline looks like from an angle that only airline pilots will ever see?

There are lots of legitimate reasons that don't have to do with ego or people embarrassed about pathetic civic life. It is a cop out to just insult anyone who disagrees with a single dogmatic view.

[Rover]

That building plan for Vancouver is stunning. Sigh.

Yes it is, but there are lots of buildings in Vancouver much more like this tower proposal with similar street interaction and lack of architectural cache. Look in that very same picture above at the dozen buildings in the picture that have already been built and have no particular outstanding exterior design. Go to NYC and see how many buildings are pretty plain. They all add to the fabric and density. And SOME will be signature architectural jewels. We have added Devon and Parkside downtown that are pretty unique and cool. But all aren't going to be. We need good, revenue enabling high density buildings. This will be one.

[Stickman]

Yes it is, but there are lots of buildings in Vancouver much more like this tower proposal with similar street interaction and lack of architectural cache. Look in that very same picture above at the dozen buildings in the picture that have already been built and have no particular outstanding exterior design. Go to NYC and see how many buildings are pretty plain. They all add to the fabric and density. And SOME will be signature architectural jewels. We have added Devon and Parkside downtown that are pretty unique and cool. But all aren't going to be. We need good, revenue enabling high density buildings. This will be one.

AGREE. Look at post 1801 and besides Devon, how many towers have been built in downtown in the last 30 years? I we are complaining, we are not Dallas, Houston, Chicago, NY........well you get the point. I thought people would happy with this.

[OKCisOK4me]

This isn't Friends For A Better Building. We need to quit huffing and puffing about it cause there's nothing we can do to fight it.

Functionality wise, this will far exceed the human interaction that occurred on this city block even before those tenants were thrown out of their leases.

Film Row will see much more activity between there and the new housing proposed by the Hall family.

The angled design of the building is growing on me. I really don't care about it being right up against and flush with the sidewalk. I don't think it's going to be set so far back like DEC or Sandridge. Looking forward to more construction and cranes.

[jn1780]

If OKC is not careful, the entire SW portion of DT will start to take on that feel....cold and corporate. It reminds me a lot of Exchange Place in Jersey City, or even a lot of financial districts in Europe (Canary Wharf in London or La Defense in Paris come to mind). I've spent time in Exchange Place for work and while it is quite busy during the daytime, at night it is dead, dead, dead, even with a significant resident population. Most people head to Hoboken or NYC at night. We should consider giving this area some cutesy/corporate name. Hudson Place, maybe?

And maybe I would feel better about the retail space in the parking garages they are proposing if Devon didn't do such a half-assed job with its "storefronts" on their garage. Have they even honestly marketed them at all or are we just stuck with faux store windows with pictures of corporate propaganda?

I hate to be condescending, but posters on here have been clamoring on here for years now, OKC needs more towers!! We have to show the world we've ARRIVED!! Well, you've all gotten your wish...sometimes, though, it comes at a cost. I'm kinda over it at this point. It will be nice to have 5 active high rises under construction; most cities our size can only wish for these things. At a minimum, OKC have a lot of historical preservation activity in other districts, but its probably too much too hope for this in the CBD.

I don't think that will be an issue if the two residential towers get built. We still have a brand new school and the MBG.

[Jim Kyle]

We had some tallish buildings before and no one ever wanted to go downtown. It was really more the repurposing of older smaller buildings that renewed the interest in Oklahoma City's downtown to the point where people began to actually want to live there.
...snip...
You do just kind of have to accept that whatever is left from when Oklahoma City's CBD was first developed as an urban area is disposable in exchange for height. Thankfully, the surrounding districts have taken a different approach and it's easy to see the positive impact doing so has had on the city as a whole.

The highlighted statement is not at all true. In the 1940s and 50s, downtown was the place to be, both for shopping during the day, and for entertainment at night. Not until the growth of smaller shopping centers such as Plaza Court, Uptown, the Plaza area, Mayfair, Penn Square, and finally Shepherd Mall, did traffic move away from the main CBD. South of the river, The Hill had been a CBD of its own little city, but it suffered the same fate without intervention of Urban Renewal; its history still stands, for the most part.

Petula Clark could have based her best known song on Oklahoma City, in those days.

Once the major stores -- John A. Brown, Kerr's, Rothschilds B&M, B. C. Clark, and Street's in particular -- opened branches in those outlying malls, traffic to the CBD declined. Loss of the streetcars in 1947 had a huge impact; the buses that replaced them operated on much less rigid schedules and hardly ever formed a true replacement in terms of convenience and reliability. That lack of satisfactory mass transit, in turn, gave rise to the huge increase in automobile traffic and the resulting parking problems which continue until today.

So far as loss of historic structures goes, while I mourn the destruction of our old downtown as much as anyone, I cannot decry the loss of the decrepit Wright Building at NW 2 and Broadway, aka the original India Temple. It was too far gone to save, in practical terms. Better to consider the razing of the Huckins, the Criterion, the Baum Building, and the Overholser Opera House aka the Warner Theater. Not to mention the first brick building in OKC, which was located on what is now E. K. Gaylord across from the Santa Fe station.

With all those already lost, I cannot be saddened by the demolition of what is essentially the last block of the original CBD. It might as well join its companions in the memories of such oldsters as myself. Those too young to remember the vibrancy of OKC's CBD during its golden years can only imagine what it was like. Those days will never return. We may, eventually, given miraculous attitude changes by TPTB, convert an almost sterile wasteland into an urban oasis (we've made almost unbelievable progress in the last 15 to 20 years; I would not have believed it possible had I not watched it happen), but it won't be the old OKC. That one is gone forever, so there's little need to hang onto a few remnants...

After all, we still have the old First Christian Church at NW 10 and Robinson, not to mention the original Oklahoma City High School a few blocks to the south. The Pioneer building still stands at NW 3 and Broadway, as does the original home of OPubCo a block to its north. Not all of our history has succumbed to the tender mercies of Midwest Wrecking Company.

[hoya]

As I said, we're doing it about 75% right. The sad thing is, we know how to do the rest of it right, we just aren't.

This will make a great photograph on Pickard Chilton's website. It will impress the hell out of some top of his class 22 year old college graduate who Devon wants to hire. That's what they're concerned about.

[s00nr1]

For those saying it is still so a 400 foot tower, get over yourself and I mean that in a nice way. Suburbs all over the country build mid rises all the time. If they want to build this 400 footer, do it at another site and keep what is there. For those who say it would be the 4th or 5th tallest building in Oklahoma, who cares? Lets start raising our standards to other cities and states and not what Oklahoma has. Actually, maybe we should raise our standards to even try to top some of Tulsa's high rises. They have several taller than the mid rises proposed in OKC. It is a bitter sweet feeling, on one hand happy for new projects, yet disappointed in OKC for always doing things as cheaply as possible in so many areas. We could easily have taller buildings with not a ton more money.

Here's a nice little project on Dallas North Tollway.......in Plano. Seems somewhat similar to what we are having built out in the OKC CBD.

HFF Arranges $120M Financing for Plano Office Towers | Multi-Housing News Online