The big question of course is it economically viable.
1 Like
Who is funding this for $1.5 billion?
It looks like the article from “The Oklahoman” is paywalled, so I can’t see if an actual financial institution was identified. If indeed someone is lending them that much, then you would think the lender would have done their due diligence and determined that the project is viable and therefore they stand a reasonable chance of getting the principal repaid with interest.
Per another article, which may be quoting the interview given to “The Oklahoman”, construction may start this year:
Matteson said that preparations on the site could begin as early as June.
“We will be first getting a grading and infrastructure permit,” said Matteson, who has reportedly partnered with local construction consultants Thinkbox and engineering firm Thornton Tomasetti for the tower.
“And then we will get a building permit in September. The entire project is financed, including the tower — if the tower gets approved.”
Oklahoma City is the 20th largest city in the United States. In most countries the tallest building is in one of the two or three largest cities. There are a few notable exceptions:
- Australia - tallest building is in Gold Coast (6th largest city)
- Brazil - tallest building is in Balneário Camboriú (214th largest city)
- Germany - tallest building is in Frankfurt (5th largest city)
- Iraq - tallest building is in Erbil (5th largest city)
- Mexico - tallest building is in Monterrey (9th largest city)
- Morocco - tallest building is in Salé (5th largest city)
- Philippines - tallest building is in Taguig (8th largest city)
7 Likes
I could guess that it won’t be. And tbh I find it surprising they found the funding.
Another exception which is in my opinion most comparable to the US is the European Union - the tallest building is in Warsaw (Varso Tower) which is the 7th largest city, but when it comes to its profile in Europe it feels like European Denver. Same can be said about Frankfurt, which has the second tallest building in the EU.
I think the US should have dream big again and build this and it would actually be in many ways great news that the tallest buildings in America aren’t all in NYC and Chicago!
3 Likes
Monterrey is Mexico’s 2nd largest and wealthiest metro so probably doesn’t belong on this list.
2 Likes
Lots of odd justifications on this thread.
Look, if they have the funding and it’s get built, great. But:
-
The building is not economically viable, period. Towers like this in Chicago and New York are rarely viable… let alone with the much lower land value of Oklahoma City. Land value dictates size for the most part. Oklahoma has no shortage of land, no culture of condos, no attraction for enough of the ultra wealthy (which NYC already has trouble filling their premium tower residences with), not near enough density, the list goes on and on. Do not need to be a genius to understand why this tower is not economically viable. And no, besides us skyscraper nerds, not nearly enough tourists are going to Oklahoma City to see this thing and help fund it after construction.
-
None, and I mean none, of the cities mentioned as comparisons are at all comparable to how low density, low importance, and odd of a pick Oklahoma City is. This isn’t like Warsaw. This isn’t like Gold Coast. This isn’t even like Salé. All these cities are much more dense, populated, and have cultural and economic significance to their respective regions. This is like building a 1500ft tower in a random town 10,000 in the Czech countryside that is not near any other major city. This is like Pristina, Kosovo building a 1500ft tower. And even I think that would be more appropriate since thats the capital and cultural center of that country.
This project is completely -objectively- ridiculous and if it gets built then my jaw will be on the floor. If they have the funding and they build then so be it, I’m not gonna nay say. At the end of the day, in 5 to 10 years if we see a tower there I will be one of the first to go see just out of sheer shock.
And rest assured, Chicago and/or NYC will definitely not let OKC hold onto tallest tower. If this project has a shovel hit the ground I fully expect a project to suddenly materialize in NYC for something even taller.
12 Likes
Yeah, I’m sorry — this thing is a joke. Or charitably, you could call it performance art.
Just read The Real Deal’s piece on the developer’s background. The guy’s track record and employment history is full of projects and companies that may not even exist.
My guess is this stunt is intended to drum up interest and a couple investors in the smaller hotel/apartment towers, which actually are appropriate for the charming, if fairly sleepy, tourist neighborhood of Bricktown.
5 Likes
Again my only interest in this project has been to inspire NYC to build larger towers and surpass One WTC’s (or CPT if you hate spires) title as tallest. But ironically NYC doesn’t do that because it relies on financially prudent decisions. Something that may be missing from this project.
3 Likes
But Oklahoma City already has a ridiculously tall tower. Why can’t it have another one?
5 Likes
Well I disagree with this assertion, Oklahoma has a bigger economy than both Qatar and New Zealand while having leen than 4 million inhabitants, so there is certainly lots of wealth around and there are countries/cities in the world that punch above their weight with much less resources.
It’s also about priorities and ambitions.
4 Likes
Chicago and NYC are worlds apart in terms of what is viable and what is actually capable of being built. And they are very viable in NYC, as can be seen when they keep getting built (most of the trouble coming from NYC zoning, not demand).
But even so this is a silly point. It assumes that demand can’t be created, when it very much can be.
This may come as a surprise but the United States is very rich. And a lot of that exists outside of NYC, including in Oklahoma. Also lol, this building is not going to be selling units like NYC. NYC premium tower residences sell for amounts that even billionaires take a second look at. This tower won’t, obviously.
Not to mention that those premium towers in NYC have substantially less rooms than Legends Tower alone. The tower itself has more units than every supertall in billionaires row combined, then there’s the other buildings in the development to consider. Also keep in mind it’s mixed use with several hundred hotel rooms.
No it isn’t. It’s not even close.
As it should be. Hopefully something 2000+ goes up in nyc in a relatively reasonable amount of time (decades instead of centuries lol)
7 Likes
That is definitely not the case for any planned development in NYC that is currently stalled, they are exactly stalled because of demand/the market. Unless you are talking about height in which case zoning still isnt a factor since there is no height limit.
Regardless of what’s being said about what city and whatever, as I am with the dissenting opinions on this project, I also do not like this project because it in no way merits being the tallest building in the US, there is no merit or anything interesting to its design, not to mention that its another building people will bring up the stick at the top about, which was clearly an after thought photoshopped onto the render after the fact. Even Devon Tower actually has merit to its design.
1 Like
Here’s the Realdeal article -
Would you agree with me if I claimed that a discussion of hypothetical skyscrapers in the Bohemian countryside belongs in this thread instead?
I shouldve been more clear that I was referring to commercial developments since those are the developments current underway or on hold due to the market more specifically, not because of zoning issues. Residential projects is a different story because there are no excessively large ones underway in NYC. Its clear that there is a demand for residential units in the city, but thats not what i was referring to.
I will say though that FAR limits the area of a building through its lot area, not its potential height as that is purely based on how a building is designed.
1 Like
Did anyone else responding to me about how this is a reasonable project even read this article???
The developer is basically a scam artist, holey moley. He has built basically nothing, his companies have no track record, and he himself seems to have been struggling with personal income for years on end.
This thread should be suspended until (IF) shovels hit the ground because I have as much confidence in this developer as I do in Aliens announcing their presence and love for Twinkies tomorrow.
Please lets all have healthy skepticism. A 1900ft tower in Oklahoma? And 2 WTC is still a ghost project? Yea right. Guys we cannot be falling for every vanity or press tour project. I remember people playing devil’s advocate for that ridiculous flag pole in Maine and where is it now? (Status: Cancelled) And those developers actually had money!
Edit: This criticism is just for the supertall. I would not be surprised at all if those shorter towers are built; or if the supertall is cut significantly (>50%) in size. But the developer’s track record makes me skeptical on the whole project. Apparently those in the know in OKC say the supertall is not a serious part of the project; moreso just to get news buzz.
6 Likes
It has full funding
4 Likes
The “full funding” claim has not been reported anywhere except in an interview that the developer gave to “The Oklahoman” newspaper. It has not been subject to fact-checking or any other verification by newsgatherers, as far as I am aware. Until we receive further information, I think it is fair to say that any claims of financing should be taken with a large heap of sodium chloride.
8 Likes
Agreed. Funding updates usually come with an amount. What does “fully funded” mean in this case? The project is also phased, so it’s unlikely all funding for all phases is already secured. I would not be surprised if this is doublespeak for funding the land or the smaller towers.
3 Likes
