http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/DEVONTOWER-SW.jpg

This will be the new view of the skyline I'll bet. On news broadcasts, postcards and whatnot. Otherwise, it's just not balanced right. At some angles, it's just asinine.

:)
dammit luke, i was fixing to post that.

hahah

I've added a follow-up Devon article, "Height is fleeting - Beauty Endures" at Doug Dawgz Blog: Height Is Fleeting - Beauty Endures (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2008/08/height-is-fleeting-beauty-endures.html)

This article shows what was meant by other articles when they said, compared to buildings actually completed today, were the Devon Tower to exist today, it would be the 20th tallest US building ... the map below identifies the handful of other cities presently having taller buildings.

Larger image: http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/devon_tower/usacities.jpg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/devon_tower/usacitiess.jpg

But, that's not realistic. If other buildings already under construction are included, the Devon Tower would be 25th, and if other proposed buildings included, the Devon Tower (also at this point a "proposed" building) would be 35th. Links to articles on each of the other buildings are included.

It was also interesting to discover that, when the 33 story 1st National and Ramsey Tower buildings were finished in 1931, the tallest building in Los Angeles appears to have been only 15 stories -- the point being that our ancestors were doubtless experience much the same sensations then as we are today.

However, it's just as Jon Pickard said, "Height is fleeting. Beauty is not." The article tries to put that truth into perspective without diminishing our present joy.

Very few people have been above the 29th floor of First National.. Rain leaks down to the 30th :/

I hope this new tower stands the test of time better.

Once again Doug, thanks for the information. This is the kind of thing I just love to see. 35th tallest is still not bad for a place like OKC.

There is an underground service/loading dock (similar to what Oklahoma & Corporate Towers have), but there is also hundreds of parking spots on 2 levels.


I'd love to "know" how you "know" this stuff. :) I realize there is underground parking there now, but I was relaying what was actually stated in the meeting.

List of tallest buildings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_the_United_States)

According to this there are about 27 built, under construction, approved, and proposed buildings that will be taller than Devon Headquarters. So yes, height is not everything.

Once again Doug, thanks for the information. This is the kind of thing I just love to see. 35th tallest is still not bad for a place like OKC.
I agree.

But, frankly, were I guessing, I'd expect it to be better than 35 since I'll be very surprised if the complete group of "planned" buildings happens. As I said at the end of the 3rd set, see this link: Empire World Towers developer faces default judgment - South Florida Business Journal: (http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2008/08/11/daily53.html) as to the pair of Miami projects which are included. On the other hand, I have no reason to have a lack of confidence that Devon will do what has been proposed, or better. Compare what Larry Nichols said in March with the actual proposal submitted on Wednesday. If anything, it seems as though he tends to "understate" rather than "overstate" things, and that is good.

List of tallest buildings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_the_United_States)

According to this there are about 27 built, under construction, approved, and proposed buildings that will be taller than Devon Headquarters. So yes, height is not everything.
Somehow, I perceived that the source utilized by Business Week, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (http://www.ctbuh.org/), was a more credible source than Wikipedia, but that's just me. I do acknowledge that I didn't look at the Wikipedia list, much less track down anything in its list -- which I did do with each item contained in the information located at the Chicago-based Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat database files.

I think they are referring to the fact Chesapeake recently purchased the former Pier I hq in Fort Worth, significantly increasing their presence in the DFW area.

But yeah, the DMN, should have said something like 'the Oklahoma-based company.....'

I agree. I am a native of OKC now residing in Dallas and the DMN is very biased against Oklahoma in general. It seems to only print "negative" stories coming out of Oklahoma and nothing really positive. Even the news stations in Dallas mention Chesepeake as a Fort Worth based energy giant. When I met people in Dallas and we strike up a conversation, they usually ask where are you from, I tell them and most of them are very forthright and say how could anyone live there? I can see why you moved to Dallas. Dallas is not very fond of Oklahoma as every newspaper, newstation and a vast majority of people living in Dallas will attest to.

Out of curiosity, what are those?

Infrastructure, mostly: plumbing, A/C issues, poor air circulation, lots of roof issues (it leaks non stop after rain, and always in a different place). It even leaks into the basement areas down through the walls.

If I recall correctly, the a/c and air handling units are in the white metallic "clouds" at the uppermost part of the structure. Remember, these are isolated from the rest of the building, and are attached only by the long exterior ducts and tubes through which they have to circulate the air. That air has to blow down through the tubing structure and into the two main theatres and lobby areas. Not very efficient at all.

On top of that, the interior is in need of a significant upgrade - new carpets, lighting, bathroom facilities, seating, just new interior everything.

And it is NOT AT ALL by any means ADA accessible. Of course, there wasn't such a thing as ADA accessibility when it was built in the 70s, so that was not at all taken into consideration.

From those I've spoken with about it, they realize it will be a pretty costly "fix," but at the same time, there is no push, at least from what I have heard, to make any kind of renovation that would compromise its current exterior architecture. They recognize that as something unique to OKC, and that for many, it is an architectural treasure, even though for others it is another "gold dome."

I certainly hope that whatever is done to it does not alter the structure significantly. Isn't there sort of an elevator thing in one of the stairways that will raise a wheelchair up to the Cabaret Bar?


the Devon Tower (also at this point a "proposed" building)

I think Devon would be classified as "Approved". At least it is at Emporis.com. Perhaps your source doesn't distinguish between proposed and approved.


I'd love to "know" how you "know" this stuff. :) I realize there is underground parking there now, but I was relaying what was actually stated in the meeting.

I would assume that it was not mentioned at the meeting, hence why it hasn't been mentioned in articles or by anyone else.

im just glad we'll have a signature architectural building there are some nice building around town but nothing of this calibur. We should look to Kansas City and Louisville both have or will add amazing new buildings downtown
i'm sorry, my brother, but (with the exception of that one in boston) i'd rather none of those buildings be built in okc. especially that weird thing that everyone rags on in louisville.

I think Devon would be classified as "Approved". At least it is at Emporis.com. Perhaps your source doesn't distinguish between proposed and approved.
Probably, it's exactly the opposite. The Wiki article mentioned earlier in this thread mentions many more "proposed" buildings than does the Chicago source. My guess is that for a project to be listed on the Chicago source as "proposed" that a threshold element is that it BE approved before it would be included in the "proposed" list ... but I didn't check that out ... but will.

I'm not certain what it takes to get listed on the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat but I expect that it's more than it takes to get listed in the Wikipedia article list, and I would assume (but do not know) that to make the "Chicago" list that "approval" is a given, even if an item is "proposed," else it would not be listed as "proposed" ... as well all know too well, anyone can "propose" something but it never gets approval, or even if it does, it may never happen.

I'm guessing, but do not know, that for a building to be included in the "proposed" category in the Chicago list that it must be "approved." But, for a building to be listed in the next group, construction status (there are 2 subdivisions in that category, buildings that have "topped out" and those that haven't), it would have to have actually started construction.

To illustrate, I'd suppose that, even though the twin Miami "Empire World" projects, each at 93 stories, since they have been "approved" by local governing people, that doesn't qualify them to get to the "next level" since construction has not begun. "Approval" for this project doesn't necessarily give it more credence (since ... I said that I'm guessing ... "approval" is likely required to make the Chicago "proposed" list. But, such "approval" doesn't mean at all "approved" projects will get done, particularly when ugly stuff rears its head as it has in that instance. See Empire World Towers developer faces default judgment - South Florida Business Journal: (http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2008/08/11/daily53.html).

You do raise a good point ... "terms" need to be clarified ... your "approved" point may well explain the difference in the number of projected buildings between the two lists, Wiki and Chicago lists ... I'll see if I can find clarification about what it takes to get "listed" on the "Chicago" list and, if I find something, modify my article as needed, as well as make further comment in this thread. But, as for Wiki, my guess is that editing that list has much lower standards. But that's just a guess. And, since you apparently prefer Emporis, it would be good to check out each of the buildings in both the Wiki and Chicago lists to see how they compare. It would take some time, but that would be a good project! Maybe we can collectively find a "list" that is the "most reliable." But for the Emporis listing of the Devon Tower, relative to the # of "proposed" or "approved" buildings to have any meaning, the various buildings in the lists would need to be cross-checked with each other to see what pops out in the analysis.

In the end, we're all just working with various internet resources. I've not yet found one that is without flaws of some kind. I chose the "Chicago" database since (a) it was utilized in the earlier mentioned Business Week article and since, after looking at it, (b) it looked professionally well done. Of course, appearances can be deceiving!

I agree. I am a native of OKC now residing in Dallas and the DMN is very biased against Oklahoma in general. It seems to only print "negative" stories coming out of Oklahoma and nothing really positive. Even the news stations in Dallas mention Chesepeake as a Fort Worth based energy giant. When I met people in Dallas and we strike up a conversation, they usually ask where are you from, I tell them and most of them are very forthright and say how could anyone live there? I can see why you moved to Dallas. Dallas is not very fond of Oklahoma as every newspaper, newstation and a vast majority of people living in Dallas will attest to.
well... with all the OU bumper stickers and what not all over dallas, i could see how it would piss off the native texans. anyways, i lived in dallas for 6 years and always made sure everyone knew i was an okie. sure, they'd congratulate me for wearing shoes and ask if i've slept with any cousins lately, but now i constantly get hit up by dallasites seeking dj gigs in okc.
regardless, as far as the chesapeake thing goes... let's barrage them with emails about where they are really based.

Someone needs to make a page like this.
List of tallest buildings in Tulsa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Tulsa)

Someone needs to make a page like this.
List of tallest buildings in Tulsa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Tulsa)
Why do you place such reliance upon the accuracy of Wiki posts? They can be helpful but they are often inaccurate and need to be read with a very critical eye.

Even the news stations in Dallas mention Chesepeake as a Fort Worth based energy giant.

It does piss me off to no end that Chesapeake is building a sleek, modern high rise office tower in Fort Worth, and we're left with a sprawling neo-Georgian campus in the outer ring of our city here.

Why do you place such reliance upon the accuracy of Wiki posts? They can be helpful but they are often inaccurate and need to be read with a very critical eye.

So make one that's accurate and doesn't need to be read with a critical eye.

It does piss me off to no end that Chesapeake is building a sleek, modern high rise office tower in Fort Worth, and we're left with a sprawling neo-Georgian campus in the outer ring of our city here.

Is Chesapeak building a new tower in Ft. Worth or did they just buy the one they have been renting space in? I thought they just bought the existing one. Either way, I am not a fan of the campus atmosphere. I agree with Larry Nichols when he said spreading employees across a lot of building is not the best way to run a company.

Chesapeake only purchased the building. They are NOT building a new one.

Forcing your employees to walk is a good thing.

Forcing your employees to walk is a good thing.

Spreading employees across multiple buildings encourages web meetings - not walking.

Also, forcing your employees to walk on company time is not so productive... just looking at it from the perspective of simple cash money!

^^ Have you spent much time around the Chesapeake Campus? Because it's always full of people walking now. The employees walk a lot, and I think the fact that there is a nice place to walk has made the neighborhood a better place for non-Chesapeake people to walk. Functions just like a college campus- people in Norman so much more likely to bike/walk when they can travel through the OU campus, even when they aren't OU students or personnel.

If the employees and Chesapeake enjoy walking from building to building then that is fine with me. I just wouldn't want to do it.

Also, forcing your employees to walk on company time is not so productive... just looking at it from the perspective of simple cash money!

I would wager that the employees will be more productive overall having to go for walks on company time. One of the companies I do work for has a fitness center/shower inside of it, and employees are encouraged to use it on company time because it gives them more energy to get more work done. Healthy employees also get sick less.


If the employees and Chesapeake enjoy walking from building to building then that is fine with me. I just wouldn't want to do it.

There are a couple people I see running around in golf carts. Or maybe you could get one of those machines that do the walking for you, like they have at the grocery stores.

I live in the Chesapeake area...and I agree that they have really made it a nice place to be. I'm torn because as much as I agree that it's great to have your employees walking/staying fit/etc...I just as much would love to see them put up a tower downtown! But now with the Devon project...I think we'll see at least a couple of new towers on the planning books before too long.

I don't work there, have only rarely been close to the campus, but I don't see how having it where it is could be worse for the city than leaving what used to be there on the ground and them tossing another tall building DT. Nothing against tall buildings on my part, but the University of Gas campus seems pretty nice all in all.

I would wager that the employees will be more productive overall having to go for walks on company time. One of the companies I do work for has a fitness center/shower inside of it, and employees are encouraged to use it on company time because it gives them more energy to get more work done. Healthy employees also get sick less.



There are a couple people I see running around in golf carts. Or maybe you could get one of those machines that do the walking for you, like they have at the grocery stores.

I'm not opposed to walking at all - I just don't want to do it in a suit and 100 degree heat or rain or sleet just so I can attend some meeting in another building.

Drop the suit, get a speedo!

I think there needs to be variety in a city, and chesapeake's campus is first class and top knotch.

I agree with the posters who said we should make sure Texans know that Chesapeake is OKC based!

we don't have that many companies based here.... so we mos def can't let dee eff dub rob us of chesapeake.

Chesapeake only purchased the building. They are NOT building a new one.

I don't believe this is true. Someone I work with very closely has actually seen the architectural renderings of their new Fort Worth HQ. According to him/her it is very sleek and modern -- and high rise. Chesapeake is going to have a major footprint in Fort Worth.

I don't believe this is true. Someone I work with very closely has actually seen the architectural renderings of their new Fort Worth HQ. According to him/her it is very sleek and modern -- and high rise. Chesapeake is going to have a major footprint in Fort Worth.

From what I understand they did purchase the building but they are going to do interior and exterior renovations. But the overall shape of the building will remain intact, here is a pic...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1432/1374586165_42952aba12.jpg?v=0

My guess is exterior stuff will be landscaping and minor things.

From what I understand they did purchase the building but they are going to do interior and exterior renovations. But the overall shape of the building will remain intact, here is a pic...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1432/1374586165_42952aba12.jpg?v=0

My guess is exterior stuff will be landscaping and minor things.

I'll take your word for it. An associate of mine had seen renderings of building that looked much cooler than this, and hyperventilated with excitement when telling me about it. I'll see what I can find out and get back to you.

Drop the suit, get a speedo!

LOL - you are getting very close to my ideal way to get fired.

Fired.. or a HUGE promotion.

This is up at Skyscraperpage.com (http://skyscraperpage.com/) now

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/UnFrSaKn/okskyscrapers.jpg

Wow!!!

I don't believe this is true. Someone I work with very closely has actually seen the architectural renderings of their new Fort Worth HQ. According to him/her it is very sleek and modern -- and high rise. Chesapeake is going to have a major footprint in Fort Worth.

Chesapeake already moved into the existing building in downtown fort worth.

my original post said "someone should fix the date on skyscraper page stating that mid-continent in tulsa was built in 1918 and not 1984."

however, i read up on it and found out that they added 20 stories in '84. sooooooo.... my bad. didn't know that tho, they did a great job... can't even tell.

Every other building in OKC just became very small. The new bar has been set.

my original post said "someone should fix the date on skyscraper page stating that mid-continent in tulsa was built in 1918 and not 1984."

however, i read up on it and found out that they added 20 stories in '84. sooooooo.... my bad. didn't know that tho, they did a great job... can't even tell.

The 20 story addition actually cantilevers over the 1918 building because it wasn't originally built for such an expansion. The architects and Flintco did an AMAZING job making it look like it's always been that tall though down to the intricate details at the crown. Mid-Continent is a beautiful building both inside and out. It is revered in Tulsa just as First National is in OKC.

the devon tower only has two more floors than the bok center, but is almost 300 feet taller....is that correct? How could that be?

Scroll back a few pages and someone extensively explained it. Keep in mind the lobby is going to be like 60 ft tall ceilings, first few floors will have like 17 ft ceilings to allow for mechanical and other things, then mechanical floors are like 20 ft ceilings, then you have like 75 ft crown, so needless to say, not all floors will have the same floor height, also modern buildings have bigger ceiling heights than older buildings did.

the devon tower only has two more floors than the bok center, but is almost 300 feet taller....is that correct? How could that be?

Tulsans discussed it here: TulsaNow Forum - OKC to get highrise/ possible tallest skyscraper (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9290&whichpage=2)

It is kind of how like a geo metro seats 4, but so does my mercedes.

I saw some surveyors out around the new Devon property today, at approximately 9:30am. Looks like the ball is rolling.

I've seen surveyors out there before the announcement.

Geez, metro, burst my bubble. I still think post-announcement surveyors are cooler. Ha.

I know this is kind of an advanced question but do we know what the elevator situation will be like? I remember seeing a documentary on the twin towers (sorry, the only thing I can use to compare) and they had different sets of elevators depending on what floor you were going to. They also had mini lobbies around 30-40 stories apart for people to take an express elevator up to and then a regular one several more floors to the one they need. I am wondering if the Devon Tower will have something like this as well.

warren, with only 54 floors they should have elevators that go all the way from the ground floor to the top.

However, they'll like break up the elevator banks into 3 or 4 groups; for example 1-20; 1, 21-38; 1, 29-54.

However, since all floors will be used by Devon employees, I'm not sure if they'll make people on the top floors go all the way to the bottom before going back up to floors 1-20 as shown in the example.

If you check out the renderings, there is a pic illustrating the cutaway of the floors with elevators. You can see there is three banks of elevators, going from ground with two as express to mid and highrise sections. There is another set of elevators which goes from ground all the way to the top floors (can you say CEO's offices....).

As was said, since the skyscraper will ahve a very high fsr - there's no need for a skylobby despite the tower being an almost supertall.

warren, with only 54 floors they should have elevators that go all the way from the ground floor to the top.

However, they'll like break up the elevator banks into 3 or 4 groups; for example 1-20; 1, 21-38; 1, 29-54.

However, since all floors will be used by Devon employees, I'm not sure if they'll make people on the top floors go all the way to the bottom before going back up to floors 1-20 as shown in the example.

The other buildings downtown that have local/express setups have at least one floor overlap between each section to prevent having to go all the way down just to go to a different section. So, they might be 1-18, 18-36, and 36-54.

Here is the info on the elevators...

There will be a total of six (6) elevator banks (32 individual elevators) in the main loby...
1. There will be two service elevators that span the entire building (all 55 floors...floor 55 is the roof)
2. There will be four elevators that serve the rotunda (floors 1-6)
3. There will be eight elevators that serve the low rise (floors 7-23)
4. There will be eight elevators that serve the mid rise (floors 23-37)
5. There will be eight elevators that serve the high rise (floors 37-53)
6. There will be two elevators that serve the exec offices only (floors 52-53)

Here is the info on the elevators...

There will be a total of six (6) elevator banks (32 individual elevators) in the main loby...
1. There will be two service elevators that span the entire building (all 55 floors...floor 55 is the roof)
2. There will be four elevators that serve the rotunda (floors 1-6)
3. There will be eight elevators that serve the low rise (floors 7-23)
4. There will be eight elevators that serve the mid rise (floors 23-37)
5. There will be eight elevators that serve the high rise (floors 37-53)
6. There will be two elevators that serve the exec offices only (floors 52-53)

Awesome, thanks Insider.

...or they could have gone with wonkavators.

GRANDPA JOE: It's an elevator.

WONKA: It's a Wonkavator. An elevator can only go up and
down, but the Wonkavator can go sideways and slantways and
longways and backways . . .

CHARLIE: And frontways?

WONKA: . . . and squareways and frontways and any other ways
that you can think of. It can take you to any room in the
whole factory just by pressing one of these buttons. Any of
these buttons. Just press a button and ZING! You're off.
And up until now I've pressed them all . . . except one.
This one. Go ahead, Charlie.

CHARLIE: Me? (He pushes the button.)

WONKA: There it goes. Hold on tight. I'm not exactly sure
what's going to happen. Faster, faster . . . If we don't
pick up enough speed, we'll never get through.

CHARLIE: Get through what?

WONKA: Ah-ha!

GRANDPA JOE: You mean we're going . . .?

WONKA: Up and out!

GRANDPA JOE: But this roof is made of glass. It'll shatter
into a thousand pieces. We'll be cut to ribbons!

WONKA: Probably. Hold on, everybody. Here it comes.

(The Wonkavator crashes through the roof and flies into
the sky.)

Tulsans discussed it here: TulsaNow Forum - OKC to get highrise/ possible tallest skyscraper (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9290&whichpage=2)


When can we begin construction on a few extra floors atop the BOK tower?

Some of them just aren't too bright.

and they're total a-holes to each other as well...

makes me appreciate the people who post on this forum.

...or they could have gone with wonkavators.


bwahahahahah... you rock!