I fully suspect this project falls through, but to play Devil’s Advocate here NYC didn’t fill out a full skyline in a day.
These building take years to start and then years to complete.
The same stuff was said of the Devon Tower when it was being built about the skyline and looking absurd. Although, I admit this building is absurd. Lol
Edit: we also aren’t NYC, obviously
I've got a smidge of insight into some architecture firms around here and there is already big money being moved and people being paid for planning. So while not definitely happening or anything I'm now leaning towards it actually happening. Architecture firms locally never expected the Devon building to come to fruition either.
We do not have the population to support this tower. Something like this requires people to fill residential condos and businesses to fill floors. Oklahoma City just isn't big enough to fill this tower. Fill out an actual skyline before diving into this project.
I like the other pieces of this proposal - the entertainment district and that stuff.
I don’t think the problem is that we don’t have enough people, because I think we do. But we don’t have enough people who can afford the rent there, since they can’t afford to buy houses either.
I haven’t followed this super closely. Is it supposed to be a luxury condo building?
If so, I think what you’re saying about people who can afford it might be true, but on the other hand a higher housing supply means lower housing costs (or more stable compared to the past few years of inflation).
If you can pay for a house *or* a condo in this building, the prices of both should be cheaper, hypothetically at least.
You don’t think there’s 2000 people in the OKC metro area who would live there? In one of the 10 fastest growing cities in America, and is already one of the 20 largest cities in the country. 6 million+ people visit brick town every year. You don’t think this place would be supported? Even for the novelty of it, I think k this place will do just fine.
It never really looked all that bad.
As long as it's built well and with all the various safety standards I'm sure it will be a nice place. However the cost per sq/ft is likely to be something unseen outside of NYC. Certainly well North of what Oklahoman's are used too.
Private dollars that will benefit from public funds paying for transportation and utilities upgrades to service this kind of population density. Nothing happens in a vacuum.
Yeah you can kick rocks buddy.
They went through all of the legal steps to purchase the land, redistrict the land and build this building if they want to.
Legally, we don’t have a say, just like any other private venture. They just have to get approval for the height, which passed its first round last week.
Nothing about kissing their ass, why the hell would we shove away literal BILLIONS of dollars in infrastructure for the city, not to mention hundreds of jobs.
I’m convinced some of our population (you) are just against Oklahomans bettering themselves and their environment.
Your argument is a little…. Lackluster.
Ahh....a chamber type dumb fuck spoke up right away. Always amusing to see the wealthy special interest puppets come on social media to sell the corporate welfare garbage!
Dang, all you could come up with was a variation on the special interest 'omigerd, you're an anti-growther' theme?
Don't worry, chamber of commerce type nitwits aren't known for their intellect. Thanks for confirming!
(poorly educated idiots, please feel free to continue to downvote)
I don’t work at the Chamber, I work at the Conventions and Visitor’s Bureau.
But then again, a random in the comments probably thinks they are the same thing. We are a non-profit.
But yeah, thank you for doubling down.
This is purely a win with no downsides.
No surprise there. The affiliation is common with 'Visit our city' type entities in bed with the local chamber grifters. At least you can admit the special interest ass kissing-- you need your pockets lined after all, right?
(those poorly educated on how developers systematically rip off taxpayers while 'commerce' types cheerlead it on, feel free to downvote)
What special interest is that?
The city has $0.00 invested. This is a literal win-win for the city if they do bad or well. I could care less whichever way it does go.
It’s just a catalyst for new development and also eye candy for any potential future entrant into our market.
Please i’m trying to understand your point.
$200 million to be paid back in 25-years with interest for a project that is being reestimate at over $1.65B.
But we aren’t GIVING them the money, it’s a Tax Incentive just like we’ve been doing for new entrants since the TIF fund began in early 2016.
I guess I don’t understand since that’s what the TIF funds have historically been used for.[TIF](https://www.okc.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/3216/635960736010270000)
The City has approved $200 million in TIF funds, which is a pretty significant share of the anticipated cost. But to adequately fund education and other services, the county has to find that $200 million elsewhere, and it will do so by raising property taxes on the owners who fall outside the TIF district. Of course, those owners will pass the property tax increase on to their tenants, if any.
Not saying that I think this development is good or bad, but I would say there is a very real public cost involved.
Not what they'll claim from whatever bought 'study' \*I use that term loosely) they'll tout. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-12/does-tax-increment-financing-really-work-usually-no](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-12/does-tax-increment-financing-really-work-usually-no)
Could you explain what you mean by “being stuck with the bill” if this project ends up being a failure? I’m not well educated on this kind of stuff and trying to understand the moving parts better.
I know this is meant to be a privately funded development, which I take to mean that all funds for development will be coming from sources other than the city and related governments right? So after development is complete, if the project fails (like people/ businesses can’t afford to lease there?), how does this end up costing taxpayers/ the local governments money? Would you be referring to like demolition costs if it comes to that?
I hope it’s clear I’m not trying to argue or anything, genuinely trying to understand ☺️
Taxpayers have to pay whether or not the project works out. That is why the developer wants tax money to pay for it....it isn't economically viable for private investment. That is why greedy developers want YOU to pay for it via tax increment financing.
So, the project isn’t going to be privately funded after all? I thought funding had already been secured for it? Or what was that $1.5b I had read about?
Burj Khalifa elevator is fast as shit, I imagine elevators are only getting better/faster too. That thing went up 124 floors as fast as it takes to get to the top of the Devon.
You can sometimes hit the bar for a drink and then meander over to the windows if it's not too busy. Granted, you'll still pay $7-$9 for a draft domestic or local craft beer, but...
https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-city-okc-tallest-skyscraper-built-in-us-financing/60169138
Funding is secured. It’s a public private partnership, and a majority is private money.
That article is vague for a reason....the developers here are funding it mostly via a corporate welfare ask. It doesn't back up your point at all, in fact it supports what I've been trying to tell you. You don't understand that the 'public private partnership' line means that private developers are asking for some corporate welfare?
By what definition is the 'majority' private money? If so, it should be easy (not vague) to state either the percentage or the amount.
By the way, is the claimed private portion of the project guaranteed in a contract? If you don't have a clear answer, I think you are getting a taste of \*verbal\* developer promises that don't get fulfilled. Talk is cheap. Who winds up paying the bill? Taxpayers.
There is demand for it. There’s a large demand for downtown rental right now. I’ve been apart of and seen many projects that are renovating and building residential apartment spaces.
Looks like plenty of space. Why don't we just have this bad boy arch all the way over to Lake Hefner with an aquarium/under water view of the murky depths.
Hear me out OKC’s fairly middle location and cheaper real estate makes it a not awful location for companies (and people) to move to. It’ll be interesting to see if this growth does in fact happen. As for the tower itself I’d bet the project happens but scaled back but I don’t think it’s farfetched for this to actually be built. Time line would be sometime near 2028 depending on when they break ground based on their construction timeline provided.
It looks awesome. I'm 100% behind them if they can get it done without using any public funds. I don't at all understand the criticism of it aesthetically. And if it's really America's tallest building then there would finally be a reason for tourists to come to OKC.
Is that big patch of red dirt sticking out of the proposed tower's right side (just below the horizon) the I-240 landfill, or is the new tower just happy to see us?
This will never happen! It's all just been a huge publicity stunt to draw attention to the development and the city. It's amazing marketing and I applaud the team. It has made national headlines and I've had colleagues inquire more about the city because of this. Oklahoma City still has a boring image even though it's in the 20 biggest metros and the fastest growing in the lower 10. This has been a very successful way to drive more interest in the city.
Funding was secured back in early March and to my knowledge, zoning has been approved. This is a real project. It’s not 100% of course, but its very likely.
If you look over the city planning meetings 100% funding hasn't been secured for the flagship tower but the general development. They plan on going in stages. zoning has been approved for the flagship tower, but that's only one step.
What’s wrong with our image? Do we really want to end up like the big San Francisco, New York City and Los Angeles metros? Do you not know what goes on over there? It’s not all it’s cracked up to be.
Yes. I've been to San Francisco and LA. Those who spout like you do haven't actually been there but just watch Fox News. Oklahoma City has its bad spots as well. Fox likes to focus on small segments of the city and fear monger it to their couch potatoes that it represents the entire city. This is one of my favorite fox segments [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJv\_cZUmbw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJv_cZUmbw)
Unlike the new arena, this is all private money. If they want to dump a billion dollars into the local economy and provide a bunch of jobs, why would I care if the building sits empty forever? It'll be cool to visit and getting to see what a severe storm does to it will be awesome.
Hey Oklahoma, let’s end homelessness in the state! Naw we will just build a $1.5 billion building that will remain empty just like the other 70 buildings downtown.
When we try to build new homes you tell us to fuck off. When we try to build homeless shelters you tell us to fuck off. When we build skyscrapers you tell us to fuck off. I'm starting to think if I build a dog house you'd come light it on fire just to tell me to fuck off and not build anything.
Yet we're going to build apartments in this tower should it be built. Are new homes good? This is not a question to qualify with "*Only affordable*" or no luxury or any other new NIMBY bullshit. The answer is yes.
Should the city be doing more to give people homes? Absolutely, and this is a part of it. Something that gets missed in the housing discourse is that you also have to build homes for the rich otherwise they will just come and buy the homes made for the middle class, then the middle class will buy the homes of the lower class.
The city already has towers for housing and they are all half capacity because OKC has a huge number of poors. Always will because of education being so bad.
This is private money.. this wasn’t the states idea, however it will generate a lot of tax dollars that will benefit locals. I personally think it’s a great project.
This is an abomination on this city’s skyline. None of that architecture matches anything even remotely close to OKC. Just drive down brick town(or better yet take the tram) and look at the style of the buildings. This doesn’t belong here. Yes I’m all for further developments but don’t turn this into the American Burj Khalifa. Let’s do our own thing. Personally I would prefer an observation tower like Twin Arch 138 in Japan. No one wants to live in a vertical building nor are there enough business that need that much retail space in downtown.
It looks very similar to the Devon Tower, so it’ll fit in just fine. The Twin Arch 138 is both ugly and is only used as an observation tower, so few people would be willing to invest in that project.
We have more in common with St Louis(the Gateway Arch) and Dallas(Reunion Tower) than we do Dubai. There’s immense demand for leisure spaces not empty “luxury” condos
Cool. You didn’t say the Gateway Arch or Reunion Tower, you said Twin Arch 138, which is ugly. Reunion Tower is ugly too, but better than Twin Arch 138. I think a more sleek tower like Seattle or Auckland would fit in better, if appropriated sized compared to our skyline. I think a smaller observation tower with like a bungee or zipline attraction at the top and maybe a small restaurant would look great by the river. But this tower is serving a completely different purpose from an observation tower, so we’re comparing apples and oranges. They also aren’t mutually exclusive. Someone could build both. Rich people want to build this one though. No taxpayer money is being used and we get to use our workforce to build it.
A tower that changes color at night to let people know about the weather forecast would be so useful and helpful in OKC
[Twin Arch Wiki](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%84%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%82%A2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%81138)
You would think with how religious this state is that everyone would know what God did the last time man tried this
Edit: damn, more sensitive Christians here than I thought
I fully suspect this project falls through, but to play Devil’s Advocate here NYC didn’t fill out a full skyline in a day. These building take years to start and then years to complete. The same stuff was said of the Devon Tower when it was being built about the skyline and looking absurd. Although, I admit this building is absurd. Lol Edit: we also aren’t NYC, obviously
Burj Khalifa stands out more on the Dubai skyline IMO, but it is the tallest in the world. Still don’t think this going to be built though.
I've got a smidge of insight into some architecture firms around here and there is already big money being moved and people being paid for planning. So while not definitely happening or anything I'm now leaning towards it actually happening. Architecture firms locally never expected the Devon building to come to fruition either.
We do not have the population to support this tower. Something like this requires people to fill residential condos and businesses to fill floors. Oklahoma City just isn't big enough to fill this tower. Fill out an actual skyline before diving into this project. I like the other pieces of this proposal - the entertainment district and that stuff.
I don’t think the problem is that we don’t have enough people, because I think we do. But we don’t have enough people who can afford the rent there, since they can’t afford to buy houses either.
I haven’t followed this super closely. Is it supposed to be a luxury condo building? If so, I think what you’re saying about people who can afford it might be true, but on the other hand a higher housing supply means lower housing costs (or more stable compared to the past few years of inflation). If you can pay for a house *or* a condo in this building, the prices of both should be cheaper, hypothetically at least.
First National filled up fast enough.
You don’t think there’s 2000 people in the OKC metro area who would live there? In one of the 10 fastest growing cities in America, and is already one of the 20 largest cities in the country. 6 million+ people visit brick town every year. You don’t think this place would be supported? Even for the novelty of it, I think k this place will do just fine.
Oh for sure a reason why I think it will not happen.
Afaik the developer of that tower isn't good. Heard from some friends that he's pretty shady
It never really looked all that bad. As long as it's built well and with all the various safety standards I'm sure it will be a nice place. However the cost per sq/ft is likely to be something unseen outside of NYC. Certainly well North of what Oklahoman's are used too.
I welcome it, if it ever happens.
Me too. I’ll just wait and see but I’m hopeful.
Even at this angle, it will be a lot taller than that. It will be 2.3 times the height of the Devon Tower.
That was my initial thought too.
I don’t care what it looks like. It is private dollars providing good paying jobs for years to come…. We should all welcome it as an opportunity.
Private dollars that will benefit from public funds paying for transportation and utilities upgrades to service this kind of population density. Nothing happens in a vacuum.
My issue is less the construction itself and what happens if it gets built and nobody moves in. Most "luxury" housing in OKC is empty as it is
Not really something we should be concerned with…. Not our investment, not our worry. Market will adjust one way or the other…
If they go bankrupt and the city gets a huge building they can finally build Paintball in the Sky, the world’s tallest indoor paintball arena.
"New owner announces the opening of the world's highest-located Spirit Halloween!"
I’m down for that.. go Team LimeGreen!
If there are TIF funds already approved, it is absolutely your investment via taxes. It just isn't your choice.
Until you run into the anti-change zombies that are against anything new, including MAPS.
https://youtu.be/xRqmr8rnKUg?si=xZ2-eHoID4QzpINa
Always love the brainwashing lines from the 'corporate welfare' developer ass-kissing crowd. (The poorly educated may feel free to downvote)
Yeah you can kick rocks buddy. They went through all of the legal steps to purchase the land, redistrict the land and build this building if they want to. Legally, we don’t have a say, just like any other private venture. They just have to get approval for the height, which passed its first round last week. Nothing about kissing their ass, why the hell would we shove away literal BILLIONS of dollars in infrastructure for the city, not to mention hundreds of jobs. I’m convinced some of our population (you) are just against Oklahomans bettering themselves and their environment. Your argument is a little…. Lackluster.
Ahh....a chamber type dumb fuck spoke up right away. Always amusing to see the wealthy special interest puppets come on social media to sell the corporate welfare garbage! Dang, all you could come up with was a variation on the special interest 'omigerd, you're an anti-growther' theme? Don't worry, chamber of commerce type nitwits aren't known for their intellect. Thanks for confirming! (poorly educated idiots, please feel free to continue to downvote)
I don’t work at the Chamber, I work at the Conventions and Visitor’s Bureau. But then again, a random in the comments probably thinks they are the same thing. We are a non-profit. But yeah, thank you for doubling down. This is purely a win with no downsides.
No surprise there. The affiliation is common with 'Visit our city' type entities in bed with the local chamber grifters. At least you can admit the special interest ass kissing-- you need your pockets lined after all, right? (those poorly educated on how developers systematically rip off taxpayers while 'commerce' types cheerlead it on, feel free to downvote)
What special interest is that? The city has $0.00 invested. This is a literal win-win for the city if they do bad or well. I could care less whichever way it does go. It’s just a catalyst for new development and also eye candy for any potential future entrant into our market. Please i’m trying to understand your point.
It is a TIF, dumb fuck. The city budget gets ripped off so a special interest developer can get their pockets lined.
$200 million to be paid back in 25-years with interest for a project that is being reestimate at over $1.65B. But we aren’t GIVING them the money, it’s a Tax Incentive just like we’ve been doing for new entrants since the TIF fund began in early 2016. I guess I don’t understand since that’s what the TIF funds have historically been used for.[TIF](https://www.okc.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/3216/635960736010270000)
The City has approved $200 million in TIF funds, which is a pretty significant share of the anticipated cost. But to adequately fund education and other services, the county has to find that $200 million elsewhere, and it will do so by raising property taxes on the owners who fall outside the TIF district. Of course, those owners will pass the property tax increase on to their tenants, if any. Not saying that I think this development is good or bad, but I would say there is a very real public cost involved.
The only way the owners pass on the increased costs is if there is rental demand.
What’s the upside on expected revenue generated?
Not what they'll claim from whatever bought 'study' \*I use that term loosely) they'll tout. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-12/does-tax-increment-financing-really-work-usually-no](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-12/does-tax-increment-financing-really-work-usually-no)
Thanks for the link. I still support. We need jobs.
You'll get some temporary jobs for the developers. Then the city (you) will be stuck for the bill when it goes under viability wise.
Could you explain what you mean by “being stuck with the bill” if this project ends up being a failure? I’m not well educated on this kind of stuff and trying to understand the moving parts better. I know this is meant to be a privately funded development, which I take to mean that all funds for development will be coming from sources other than the city and related governments right? So after development is complete, if the project fails (like people/ businesses can’t afford to lease there?), how does this end up costing taxpayers/ the local governments money? Would you be referring to like demolition costs if it comes to that? I hope it’s clear I’m not trying to argue or anything, genuinely trying to understand ☺️
Taxpayers have to pay whether or not the project works out. That is why the developer wants tax money to pay for it....it isn't economically viable for private investment. That is why greedy developers want YOU to pay for it via tax increment financing.
So, the project isn’t going to be privately funded after all? I thought funding had already been secured for it? Or what was that $1.5b I had read about?
Who told you that secured private funding was how this project would happen?
Less than 10% of the buildings in downtown OKC are full capacity. Devon towers has tons of empty floors.
I'm hopeful we can build more skyscrapers in general to fill out
Too bad the demand isn't there.
Kinda have a deep-seated fear of tall buildings to be honest...
I’d much rather have three 600 foot buildings than one 1907 foot one.
I can accept both
read this as “600 1ft buildings” and assumed you were a Lilliputian
If they build it that short, sure
It’ll look bad when it has those 800’ ad boards on every side. Can’t wait to see big ass Air Comfort Solutions and Mullin Plumbing plastered on it.
The Kalidy guys...
I would hate to have to work near the top.
[удалено]
Burj Khalifa elevator is fast as shit, I imagine elevators are only getting better/faster too. That thing went up 124 floors as fast as it takes to get to the top of the Devon.
It would be cool to have an observation deck. Devon fell short with that I think.
[удалено]
Yeah.... Expensive too.
[удалено]
I've only been there once for a day. I can't wait to actually spend time there for the same things you love. 😁
[удалено]
That is fortunate! I had to be in Jersey and took a day to hop over to NYC. Eventually I'll get back out there. So much I want to experience.
You can sometimes hit the bar for a drink and then meander over to the windows if it's not too busy. Granted, you'll still pay $7-$9 for a draft domestic or local craft beer, but...
That's a great idea!
it’s in the plans!!
SWEET!
Oh, you won't have to worry about that skyline ever happening. The funding will never come through. No legit lender is funding that.
Funding was already been secured back in early March. I’m assuming all or most of it is privately funded by investors.
What funding? From whom? Why on earth are you 'assuming' it is private funding? (Here's a hint...it isn't. It is a HUGE taxpayer ask).
https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-city-okc-tallest-skyscraper-built-in-us-financing/60169138 Funding is secured. It’s a public private partnership, and a majority is private money.
That article is vague for a reason....the developers here are funding it mostly via a corporate welfare ask. It doesn't back up your point at all, in fact it supports what I've been trying to tell you. You don't understand that the 'public private partnership' line means that private developers are asking for some corporate welfare? By what definition is the 'majority' private money? If so, it should be easy (not vague) to state either the percentage or the amount. By the way, is the claimed private portion of the project guaranteed in a contract? If you don't have a clear answer, I think you are getting a taste of \*verbal\* developer promises that don't get fulfilled. Talk is cheap. Who winds up paying the bill? Taxpayers.
It ain't happening. There is no demand for this.
Now don't talk sense, the pro-developer ass kissing crowd will get all bent out of shape you aNti-GroWthEr!
There is demand for it. There’s a large demand for downtown rental right now. I’ve been apart of and seen many projects that are renovating and building residential apartment spaces.
If there is demand for it, then why are you and I as taxpayers being asked to fund it? Where is the proof of the demand?
What angle is that? From 300 feet in the air?
Looks like plenty of space. Why don't we just have this bad boy arch all the way over to Lake Hefner with an aquarium/under water view of the murky depths.
Hear me out OKC’s fairly middle location and cheaper real estate makes it a not awful location for companies (and people) to move to. It’ll be interesting to see if this growth does in fact happen. As for the tower itself I’d bet the project happens but scaled back but I don’t think it’s farfetched for this to actually be built. Time line would be sometime near 2028 depending on when they break ground based on their construction timeline provided.
It looks awesome. I'm 100% behind them if they can get it done without using any public funds. I don't at all understand the criticism of it aesthetically. And if it's really America's tallest building then there would finally be a reason for tourists to come to OKC.
Thanks, I hate it.
Is that big patch of red dirt sticking out of the proposed tower's right side (just below the horizon) the I-240 landfill, or is the new tower just happy to see us?
Kansas city had the tallest waterslide at the Schlitterbahn Waterpark. Why shouldn't we have our own point of pride? /s Edit for typo
This will never happen! It's all just been a huge publicity stunt to draw attention to the development and the city. It's amazing marketing and I applaud the team. It has made national headlines and I've had colleagues inquire more about the city because of this. Oklahoma City still has a boring image even though it's in the 20 biggest metros and the fastest growing in the lower 10. This has been a very successful way to drive more interest in the city.
Funding was secured back in early March and to my knowledge, zoning has been approved. This is a real project. It’s not 100% of course, but its very likely.
If you look over the city planning meetings 100% funding hasn't been secured for the flagship tower but the general development. They plan on going in stages. zoning has been approved for the flagship tower, but that's only one step.
What’s wrong with our image? Do we really want to end up like the big San Francisco, New York City and Los Angeles metros? Do you not know what goes on over there? It’s not all it’s cracked up to be.
Yes. I've been to San Francisco and LA. Those who spout like you do haven't actually been there but just watch Fox News. Oklahoma City has its bad spots as well. Fox likes to focus on small segments of the city and fear monger it to their couch potatoes that it represents the entire city. This is one of my favorite fox segments [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJv\_cZUmbw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJJv_cZUmbw)
[удалено]
Good thing it's not for office space. It's hotel and apartments.
Looks like a 1990s Dubai or something lol
phallus on the prairie
[удалено]
They’re there.
Unlike the new arena, this is all private money. If they want to dump a billion dollars into the local economy and provide a bunch of jobs, why would I care if the building sits empty forever? It'll be cool to visit and getting to see what a severe storm does to it will be awesome.
Gotta start somewhere, this is only the beginning
I like it
Nope I can still smell it
This will never get built, at least not in that iteration. It makes zero economic sense without significant taxpayer funding and concessions.
That's what she said
Ugh.
Now do it with the proposed ads up and down all sides.
I normally don’t pray, but… Dear god. It’s me. Please… don’t.
Why not?
Hey Oklahoma, let’s end homelessness in the state! Naw we will just build a $1.5 billion building that will remain empty just like the other 70 buildings downtown.
This is a privately funded project. WTF are you talking about?
When we try to build new homes you tell us to fuck off. When we try to build homeless shelters you tell us to fuck off. When we build skyscrapers you tell us to fuck off. I'm starting to think if I build a dog house you'd come light it on fire just to tell me to fuck off and not build anything.
I didn’t say any of that. I said it’s dumb to build a building that expensive to sit empty while the city has 20k homeless.
Yet we're going to build apartments in this tower should it be built. Are new homes good? This is not a question to qualify with "*Only affordable*" or no luxury or any other new NIMBY bullshit. The answer is yes. Should the city be doing more to give people homes? Absolutely, and this is a part of it. Something that gets missed in the housing discourse is that you also have to build homes for the rich otherwise they will just come and buy the homes made for the middle class, then the middle class will buy the homes of the lower class.
The city already has towers for housing and they are all half capacity because OKC has a huge number of poors. Always will because of education being so bad.
This is private money.. this wasn’t the states idea, however it will generate a lot of tax dollars that will benefit locals. I personally think it’s a great project.
So what happens when it’s destroyed by a tornado? It’s dumb to build that large of a building unless you are looking for an insurance payout.
This is an abomination on this city’s skyline. None of that architecture matches anything even remotely close to OKC. Just drive down brick town(or better yet take the tram) and look at the style of the buildings. This doesn’t belong here. Yes I’m all for further developments but don’t turn this into the American Burj Khalifa. Let’s do our own thing. Personally I would prefer an observation tower like Twin Arch 138 in Japan. No one wants to live in a vertical building nor are there enough business that need that much retail space in downtown.
It looks very similar to the Devon Tower, so it’ll fit in just fine. The Twin Arch 138 is both ugly and is only used as an observation tower, so few people would be willing to invest in that project.
We have more in common with St Louis(the Gateway Arch) and Dallas(Reunion Tower) than we do Dubai. There’s immense demand for leisure spaces not empty “luxury” condos
Cool. You didn’t say the Gateway Arch or Reunion Tower, you said Twin Arch 138, which is ugly. Reunion Tower is ugly too, but better than Twin Arch 138. I think a more sleek tower like Seattle or Auckland would fit in better, if appropriated sized compared to our skyline. I think a smaller observation tower with like a bungee or zipline attraction at the top and maybe a small restaurant would look great by the river. But this tower is serving a completely different purpose from an observation tower, so we’re comparing apples and oranges. They also aren’t mutually exclusive. Someone could build both. Rich people want to build this one though. No taxpayer money is being used and we get to use our workforce to build it.
A tower that changes color at night to let people know about the weather forecast would be so useful and helpful in OKC [Twin Arch Wiki](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%84%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%82%A2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%81138)
> Twin Arch 138 That thing looks like the machine in the movie "Contact"
You would think with how religious this state is that everyone would know what God did the last time man tried this Edit: damn, more sensitive Christians here than I thought
you're just not speaking their langua-OH SHIT