Meanwhile, in Oklahoma City, someone says they wanna build a 134-story apartment tower.
https://www.oklahoman.com/picture-galle ... 944622007/
https://www.oklahoman.com/picture-galle ... 944622007/
I grew up in OKC, have many friends and family there, and follow their urban development on a regular basis. Suffice it to say this is a stupid proposal, everybody knows it, and most people are quite embarrassed that it saw the light of day. What isn't stupid is the two 30-story residential towers and Hyatt Hotel that this same group is proposing for most of that same lot. That has gone through a lot of due diligence over a year or so, as well as TIF financing and should break ground in 2024. Although this pie-in-the-sky 134-story thing is making some people question whether this group is serious enough to pull off what should be an exciting and doable proposal.
- 3,757
I was in OKC last weekend. I do not see how a developer would even consider this. I know OKC claims to be a top 20 growth metro, but they often focus on being a one the largest US cities due to their massive SQ. mileage within the city limits. The density there is non-existent. North OKC where I stayed was a large swath of strip malls, retail, churches and cookie-cutter suburban housing developments. I know they have some things going for them, but I found the place to be bland and smallish. The tolls are enough to make you pull your hair out. I just don't see why a tower like this would even be talked about. They already have Devon, which sticks out like a sore thumb. Maybe I am too hard on OKC, but not my kind of place.
DogTown, I get it, I really do. Even though I love OKC and it is my hometown I acknowledge its shortcomings.
I'd be curious where you stayed. OKC really does have quite a bit going on, but you definitely have to know where to find it.
I always say that both OKC and STL have pluses and minuses, but they are almost diametrically opposite. OKC would kill to have St. Louis's history, density and built environment. St. Louis should be envious of OKC's optimism, momentum and unity of purpose. The opposing poles are demonstrated by the huge amount of square mileage in OKC proper. OKC is almost always classified as a very conservative big city, yet if you shrunk the city limits down to the size of St. Louis it would be quite blue. Much like if you increased the square mileage of St. Louis, it wouldn't have the same crime stats. That's just one example.
A perfect place would be a mix of what is good about each city.
I'd be curious where you stayed. OKC really does have quite a bit going on, but you definitely have to know where to find it.
I always say that both OKC and STL have pluses and minuses, but they are almost diametrically opposite. OKC would kill to have St. Louis's history, density and built environment. St. Louis should be envious of OKC's optimism, momentum and unity of purpose. The opposing poles are demonstrated by the huge amount of square mileage in OKC proper. OKC is almost always classified as a very conservative big city, yet if you shrunk the city limits down to the size of St. Louis it would be quite blue. Much like if you increased the square mileage of St. Louis, it wouldn't have the same crime stats. That's just one example.
A perfect place would be a mix of what is good about each city.
Indeed. It's pretty crazy when you see an overlay like that.
The even funnier thing is that maybe only half of OKC is even developed at all. A past mayor once joked that OKC grows more wheat than any other city in the world.
There are pluses and minuses to this, of course. When the natural (and unfortunate) sprawl that affects almost every American city takes place in OKC, at least the sprawl is often taking place within the city limits. My parents live on a golf course in a neighborhood that looks like Chesterfield and they are well within OKC proper. They are within sight of an office park that looks like Maryville Centre, and that office park is in the city proper. So taxes, etc are going to the city rather than some other fiefdom. You also don't have nearly as many suburbs competing with and cannabilizing each other. On the other hand, the city maintains paved roads (and other infrastructure like police and fire) for miles through said wheat fields, at terrible cost. There is actually a movement in OKC to dramatically deannex almost everything east of I-35, which is about 99% undeveloped. I doubt it will happen but there are people pounding the drums for it.
The even funnier thing is that maybe only half of OKC is even developed at all. A past mayor once joked that OKC grows more wheat than any other city in the world.
There are pluses and minuses to this, of course. When the natural (and unfortunate) sprawl that affects almost every American city takes place in OKC, at least the sprawl is often taking place within the city limits. My parents live on a golf course in a neighborhood that looks like Chesterfield and they are well within OKC proper. They are within sight of an office park that looks like Maryville Centre, and that office park is in the city proper. So taxes, etc are going to the city rather than some other fiefdom. You also don't have nearly as many suburbs competing with and cannabilizing each other. On the other hand, the city maintains paved roads (and other infrastructure like police and fire) for miles through said wheat fields, at terrible cost. There is actually a movement in OKC to dramatically deannex almost everything east of I-35, which is about 99% undeveloped. I doubt it will happen but there are people pounding the drums for it.
One other interesting by product of this is that people are a lot less parochial about the 3 or 4 square miles they happen to live in. One reason OKC has been growing robustly is they have managed to pass a series of taxes over the last 25 years (the MAPS taxes) that have poured money into the central city. Billions of dollars. (I can't even imagine what a program like that could do for STL.) But the reason these have passed is that people identify with the city and its progress.
I generalize, of course. There are plenty of outliers and cranks. But it's a real sentiment.
I generalize, of course. There are plenty of outliers and cranks. But it's a real sentiment.
- 3,757
I stayed north OKc near Edmond. I’ve stayed Downtown and in Norman in the past. OKC residents do have a lot of pride and a positive attitude. They are way better than STL in that regard. That is one of our biggest hurdles. Negativity and lack of unity.
There was a nice residential are north of the capital complex. It reminded me of St. Louis Hills. Seemed out of place with the City’s architecture. I also had a nice dinner at Flint downtown. I may have sounded harsh. OKC is just not my kind of city, but I agree, they have solid leadership and a positive mindset.
There was a nice residential are north of the capital complex. It reminded me of St. Louis Hills. Seemed out of place with the City’s architecture. I also had a nice dinner at Flint downtown. I may have sounded harsh. OKC is just not my kind of city, but I agree, they have solid leadership and a positive mindset.
If you go again, be sure to explore the neighborhoods between Downtown and Nichols Hills. Specifically Midtown, Heritage Hills, Crown Heights, Mesta Park, Uptown/23rd, Paseo, Edgemere and Putnam Heights. And up Classen Blvd as far up as 63rd/Western. My cousin lives in SOSA which is neat. Basically between I-235 and Western/Classen. It's certainly not the size or scope of St. Louis but there are some great gems in that area.
Such an overwhelming percentage of the OKC metro area developed post-WW2 that large areas north and northwest are basically reasonable facsimiles of west county and St. Charles county on and on and on.
Such an overwhelming percentage of the OKC metro area developed post-WW2 that large areas north and northwest are basically reasonable facsimiles of west county and St. Charles county on and on and on.
- 502
- 1,290
^ I vote for a 2km tall, 300 story building on the North Riverfront in STL in that case.
- 502
Just take Frank Lloyd Wright’s mile high tower and build it in St. Louis. Upset Chicago in the process. A double win.Trololzilla wrote: ↑Dec 21, 2023^ I vote for a 2km tall, 300 story building on the North Riverfront in STL in that case.
Oklahoma City also voted at like a 71/29 ratio a few weeks ago to spend $850 million to replace the NBA Thunder's arena.
Yes, this arena that opened in 2002 is "outdated"
![]()
And they're doing it with a 1% sales tax increase.
Yes, this arena that opened in 2002 is "outdated"
And they're doing it with a 1% sales tax increase.
Well, the arena actually is outdated and has been outdated almost since it was built. It was built for a relative shoestring, without an anchor tenant, to the bare minimum of NBA (and NHL) specifications, in hopes that OKC could at some point attract a team and in the meantime would provide space for concerts, conventions and the like. I think it is either the second or third smallest NBA arena, which has been fine since OKC is the second or third smallest NBA market. But obviously they want more and this arena will be almost 30 years old by the time the new one is built.
Also, it's actually not a 1% sales tax increase, it is a continuation of the current iteration of the 1% MAPS sales tax.
There are many reasons why this may (or may not) have been a good idea, or even smart public policy, and there are convincing arguments either way, but the citizens did vote for it pretty decisively which kind of goes to my earlier point upthread about "unity of purpose." It also may be a little bit of "little brother syndrome" and trying to prove they belong in the "big time." This is another thing about OKC, there has been a little bit of an inferiority complex ever since the city got big enough to start swimming in some bigger city waters. Like in my childhood when OKC compared themselves with Wichita and Omaha they could be comfortable, even arrogant, about who they were, but now that they are looking at Kansas City and Indy as the "next step" they are trying to up their game.
Also, it's actually not a 1% sales tax increase, it is a continuation of the current iteration of the 1% MAPS sales tax.
There are many reasons why this may (or may not) have been a good idea, or even smart public policy, and there are convincing arguments either way, but the citizens did vote for it pretty decisively which kind of goes to my earlier point upthread about "unity of purpose." It also may be a little bit of "little brother syndrome" and trying to prove they belong in the "big time." This is another thing about OKC, there has been a little bit of an inferiority complex ever since the city got big enough to start swimming in some bigger city waters. Like in my childhood when OKC compared themselves with Wichita and Omaha they could be comfortable, even arrogant, about who they were, but now that they are looking at Kansas City and Indy as the "next step" they are trying to up their game.
I understand what you're saying. But that $850 million public money and just $50 million private money split of a $900 million arena cost is just ugly. Doesn’t matter how you justify it.stlokc wrote: ↑Dec 22, 2023Well, the arena actually is outdated and has been outdated almost since it was built. It was built for a relative shoestring, without an anchor tenant, to the bare minimum of NBA (and NHL) specifications, in hopes that OKC could at some point attract a team and in the meantime would provide space for concerts, conventions and the like. I think it is either the second or third smallest NBA arena, which has been fine since OKC is the second or third smallest NBA market. But obviously they want more and this arena will be almost 30 years old by the time the new one is built.
Also, it's actually not a 1% sales tax increase, it is a continuation of the current iteration of the 1% MAPS sales tax.
There are many reasons why this may (or may not) have been a good idea, or even smart public policy, and there are convincing arguments either way, but the citizens did vote for it pretty decisively which kind of goes to my earlier point upthread about "unity of purpose." It also may be a little bit of "little brother syndrome" and trying to prove they belong in the "big time." This is another thing about OKC, there has been a little bit of an inferiority complex ever since the city got big enough to start swimming in some bigger city waters. Like in my childhood when OKC compared themselves with Wichita and Omaha they could be comfortable, even arrogant, about who they were, but now that they are looking at Kansas City and Indy as the "next step" they are trying to up their game.
Plus if the OKC arena is an outdated, too small and built cheaply, let’s not be shocked when a replacement for Enterprise Center is demanded. Because it’s all of those things.
- 991
Regardless of what we think, 71% of OKC voters were in favor of this. It's not as if it passed with just 51% of the vote or something or by a board of alderman or the legislature.
- 3,428
Right. But since the OKC city limits include most of the metro area including suburbs, it’s not very much per person. Kind of like when all our counties support GRG. And OKC downtown is the very center of the metro area. Not far from any home. Ours is almost on a peninsula no longer a central crossroads.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
$1250 per resident. There's non-resident shoppers of course, but not as many as our munis are jonesing for because OKC is a larger portion of its metro.
$850M / 25 years / 18,00 seats = $1900 per seat per year.
$850M / 25 years / 18,00 seats = $1900 per seat per year.
I'm not trying to stop the arena. If the voters want it, all power to them. And you are right in that at least its not the middle of the night backroom rushed through deal like the new Titans stadium in Nashville.Laife Fulk wrote: ↑Dec 23, 2023Regardless of what we think, 71% of OKC voters were in favor of this. It's not as if it passed with just 51% of the vote or something or by a board of alderman or the legislature.
But I think I'm allowed to say that it's a bad deal.
Plus given OKC, the Clippers new arena. the 76ers new arena, the Capitals/Wizards new arena, talk of a new arena for the San Jose Sharks I have real concerns that in the next couple of years the Blues will be wanting a new building.
- 3,757
When I was in OKC a few weeks ago, I remember hearing radio ads for the arena. If I’m not mistaken, the ads claim that no new taxes would be levied on the public. There was some tax that was expiring that would just be replaced by the arena tax.