Some wishful thinking here. Chase Tower has remained unchanged since it was erected in '71. I would love to see architectural fins added to the top like IFC1 and 2 in Hong Kong (Google it & see for yourself). Yeah it would cost some bucks, but with all the improvements going on DT, I think it would improve the looks of the big black box immensely.

Thoughts?

I like the way that you are thinking! You are right that it would cost the current owner some substantial money, however if done right, would give the building a renewed sense of place and relevancy amidst the renaisance that continues to evlove in OKC. With some effective lighting schemes it would further enhance its presence in the downtown skyline and may aid in retaining tennants as well as attracting new ones as the need arises. That would be a fun sketchup / photoshop study to see what the possibilities are for the building.

With some effective lighting schemes it would further enhance its presence in the downtown skyline and may aid in retaining tennants as well as attracting new ones as the need arises.
On the subject of lighting, I would squeal with glee if someone were to do something similar to the Empire State Building's ever-changing light scheme that celebrates current events, holidays, etc. If you're unfamiliar, you can check out the schedule here:
Empire State Building : Official Internet Site (http://www.esbnyc.com/tourism/tourism_lightingschedule.cfm)

On the subject of lighting, I would squeal with glee if someone were to do something similar to the Empire State Building's ever-changing light scheme that celebrates current events, holidays, etc. If you're unfamiliar, you can check out the schedule here:
Empire State Building : Official Internet Site (http://www.esbnyc.com/tourism/tourism_lightingschedule.cfm)

Have you seen what they are doing on the First National tower with the thunder blue lights? it is very cool and a great start! It is on the Thread labeled the next 10 games. toward the end of the thread. you can't miss it. It looks stunning! Squeal away!

I can see the Chase owners doing this but not until the office market looks a lot better.

Have you seen what they are doing on the First National tower with the thunder blue lights?
Thanks for directing my attention to those great pics! It looks beautiful. :-)

You mean First National, but yes they do a good job with Thunder Blue and White, Green for St. Patty's, Red & Green for Christmas, etc. etc.

As far as Chase aka Cotter Ranch Tower, that cowboy does the opposite of progress on purpose. He's not creative enough to even think or hear a proposal about updating the looks of his tower. Comparing it to HFC1-2 is a stretch. Anyone have a comparable building or Photoshop design of some realistic ideas?

I would love to see the chase tower updated on the outside, that would be a nice addition to the Devon tower.

You mean First National, but yes they do a good job with Thunder Blue and White, Green for St. Patty's, Red & Green for Christmas, etc. etc.

As far as Chase aka Cotter Ranch Tower, that cowboy does the opposite of progress on purpose. He's not creative enough to even think or hear a proposal about updating the looks of his tower. Comparing it to HFC1-2 is a stretch. Anyone have a comparable building or Photoshop design of some realistic ideas?

Certainly it was not intended to be a literal cap matching the HFC1-2 but rather a conceptual thought meant to stir up possibilities for the building to become visually more than it currently is.

Any proposed cap would have to be appropriate and marry well with the current exterior architectural fenestration that you see today. Unless a much more agressive and expensive approach was taken, which I can tell you would not be likely. Changing the entire exterior would be prohibitively expensive.

But a treatment for the top of the building would be possible and more realistic in cost associated. Now whether the current owner would be willing to pony up for such a statement is another story entirely.

What about changing the dark windows to something more clear like they did with Founders Tower (Founders Tower (http://founderstower.com/?task=Photo)) or that building in Tulsa (Clear glass building in downtown tulsa image by alyssacannon on Photobucket (http://media.photobucket.com/image/clear%20glass%20building%20in%20downtown%20tulsa/alyssacannon/365/Day121.jpg))

What about changing the dark windows to something more clear like they did with Founders Tower (Founders Tower (http://founderstower.com/?task=Photo)) or that building in Tulsa (Clear glass building in downtown tulsa image by alyssacannon on Photobucket (http://media.photobucket.com/image/clear%20glass%20building%20in%20downtown%20tulsa/alyssacannon/365/Day121.jpg))

Certainly possible, but not probable. Way too expensive...you have to think about it in terms of return on investment. The existing building envelope was paid for once and still works. So to scrap it and then replace it with an entirely new building envelope is very costly, and is a good chunk of the new construction cost of the original building, so it would take an owner who has deep pockets who doesn't mind turning them out to make a statement, that may not pay him back for a very very long time, even with the enhanced thermal properties of improved glazings systems, which would be the only case that makes sense for replacing the glazing system.

http://top-10-list.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/international-finance-centre.jpg

OOOOooo!

http://top-10-list.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/international-finance-centre.jpg

OOOOooo!

Here are the ones on 1180 Peachtree here in Atlanta. At night the glow blue.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/227/482741168_53e4efcbf9.jpg

Here are the ones on 1180 Peachtree here in Atlanta. At night the glow blue.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/227/482741168_53e4efcbf9.jpg

Interesting that you chose another building by Architect Pickard Chilton...the same that is responsible for the Devon Tower in OKC...But I am sure that you knew that already!

There are tons of possibilities.

I do like the ribs or fins used in the building in Hong Kong, because it would translate the verticality of the window system skyward and allow for a change in geometry at the top that could change with lighting. It also would not hamper wind flow which would be another major consideration. can the existing structure handle the added wind loading by adding surface area at the top? With fins it would be more permeable so would not be so significant.

I think these inward curving fins would make CT look sexy.

My favorite (ok, not favorite but definitely unique) buildings in Madrid: The leaning towers of Madrid < Travel < Wolfstad Blog (http://www.wolfstad.com/2006/09/the-leaning-towers-of-madrid/) "Leaning towers" over the street

Wow! Those are super cool, would be sweet if we had those over the new boulevard!

I agree that Chase Tower could use a facelift. I would not want it re-clad in the opaque blue glass that has become ubiquitous in current skyscraper design. So much of those buildings have been put up in cities like New York and Chicago that they're beginning to look like a hall of mirrors, where all the glass buildings reflect all the other glass buildings around them.
I like the dark glass of the Chase Tower, but the vertical striping and the arched windows at the top are very dated. Strip those away and you could have an elegant, simple, refined building that would still keep the essence of the building's 1970s Internationalist style.
A recent building that captures this esthetic is the Trump World Tower at the United Nations in New York.http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=trumpworldtower-newyorkcity-ny-usa

http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=trumpworldtower-newyorkcity-ny-usa

Taurus? I'm not seeing your pix!am I The only 1?

No, I can't ever seem to upload a photo. I'm a retard. Go to Emporis.com to see the image.

I agree that Chase Tower could use a facelift. I would not want it re-clad in the opaque blue glass that has become ubiquitous in current skyscraper design. So much of those buildings have been put up in cities like New York and Chicago that they're beginning to look like a hall of mirrors, where all the glass buildings reflect all the other glass buildings around them.
I like the dark glass of the Chase Tower, but the vertical striping and the arched windows at the top are very dated. Strip those away and you could have an elegant, simple, refined building that would still keep the essence of the building's 1970s Internationalist style.
A recent building that captures this esthetic is the Trump World Tower at the United Nations in New York.http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=trumpworldtower-newyorkcity-ny-usa

Great tower, but those condo's have awfully plain interiors, I know it's NYC and you have stunning view’s, but geez they are blah on the inside!

Who knows, maybe if something like this did happen, we would be as disgusted with in in 50 years as we are now with the concrete cladding over the India Temple.

Who knows, maybe if something like this did happen, we would be as disgusted with in in 50 years as we are now with the concrete cladding over the India Temple.

Shane that is a good point and reason to take what is there and enhance it with a cap treatment that is appropriate to the architecture of the building. Re-glazing the entire building would be too expensive unless it was shown that there was enough cost recovery from enhanced thermal performance to justify the additional expense. But that does not mean the articulation of the fenestration must be removed. Just the glazing replaced.

I think there are certainly ways to make an improved and nice looking cap to the building that would be appropriate and not destroy the architecture. You are never going to please all parties with something like this, as there will no doubt be purists that will argue that a cap treatment like this does just that simply because it came later. Again this area is fairly subjective.

No, I can't ever seem to upload a photo. I'm a retard. Go to Emporis.com to see the image.

Here you go.

Trump Tower, NYC

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2051/2143174385_6490124554.jpg

Actually, Trump has his name on dozens of buildings in New York. The image you showed is his building on Fifth Avenue. I was referring to the Trump World Tower by the United Nations.

I have entertained the thought of a revamped Chase Tower as well and thought Centerpoint Energy Plaza in Houston was a good example........although a somewhat easier building to work with, given its square footprint and more simple detailing.

Before
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/cenetrpointbefore.jpg

After
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/centerpoint-2.jpg

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/centerpoint-1.jpg

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/arch_Centerpoint1_mainimg.jpg

Concerning revamping highrises downtown, I think Oklahoma Tower holds more promise than Chase. Chase is at least complete, whereas OT has always appeared incomplete to me as if they ran out of money and had to stop short, which may be the case.......there was a planned 50 story highrise perhaps on the NW corner of the Galleria Site (correct me if I'm wrong, Steve?)

Anyways, if the market could make use of the additional office space I would like to see something like this............

Existing Oklahoma Tower
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/OKLAHOMATOWER-NOW.jpg

Oklahoma Tower with added floors and topped off
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/OKLAHOMATOWER-FUTURE.jpg

I love your renderings, Architect!!! I'm in total agreement with you.

I had another brain wave for the fins idea atop CT...install a large 'egg-beater' type wind generator inside the fins for a kinetic look that also gives the tower a Green element.

Actually, Trump has his name on dozens of buildings in New York. The image you showed is his building on Fifth Avenue. I was referring to the Trump World Tower by the United Nations.

Here is the Trump World Tower. I only thought of the 5th Ave building because I just modeled it using Lego Designer.

http://skyscrapermodels.us/models/photos/Trump_World_Tower_stWTC.JPG

Anyways, if the market could make use of the additional office space I would like to see something like this............

Oklahoma Tower with added floors and topped off
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/OKLAHOMATOWER-FUTURE.jpg[/QUOTE]

If the building was infact designed and constructed to carry the loads I would love the idea of extending the tower to reach its full potential. Would probably like to see some variations on how the top of the tower could be treated, but it is a great way to add vertical class A office space or even a residential highrise component to the downtown core. that would provide opportunities for an ammenity deck mid-span somewhere or at the top. Lots of potential cool ideas with that.

It would also go along way in helping the Devon Tower to not stick out quite as much in our skyline.

The next types of projects that I would love to see come to the CBD is true mixed use Highrise buildings. With Ground floor retail and a grand entrance for the main lobby with office/hotel/residential in stacking configurations. This type of project requires good planning on the part of the Developers to bring the right end users together, but is often a much safer proposition for large scale highrise buildings economically speaking because it is not pure speculative building that lenders are terrified of these days and it is not sole tennant reliant. Much higher likleyhood of longterm success.

I for one envision the core of the CBD expanding and south as well as west. I think that (I know that I am dreaming here) it would be awesome to see the area around the civic center surrounded with taller buildings.

I agree with the vision of tall bldgs. around the civic center. Not sure why but, I think it would create a sorta cool plaza area. Which I guess it kinda is already.

It was the image that was provided yesterday by scapula on the Devon Tower Construction thread that illustrated to me how it could be a great to increase the density with larger buildings there as a natural extension of the CBD and to accentuate the articulation of the Park area that is already there and make it stand out from the vacant spaces that are all around it. The key to all of this is brining the services and supporting retail etc. that will make living in the downtown area not only possible but an advantage.

It is the ole chicken or the egg dillema, which comes first. I think in this case the answer is the rooftops and residents need to reach a certain critical mass to draw the supporting retailers, grocers etc...to set up shop in the areas thus attracting more residents....the cycle becomes self supporting at some point as it creates its own momentum. But I have to say that we need real urban homes and even rowhouses done correctly. Not as facade's hiding an appartment type structure behind it; but real honest to goodness rowhouses.

I would like...no Love to see a developer take a tract of vacant lots near downtown and masterplan it as a series of true rowhouses and allow residents to pick from say 15 designs that will work in a partywall configuration that have a minimum 3 story configuration to create the types of urban neighborhoods that many of the great cities in the east have that become very desirable locations to live. Break it up with some larger residential buildings done with the same quality and attention to detail and provide some cool rental options so that the community is not all one strata of age and or socioeconomic ilk. That is what makes the beginings of a vibrant community in an urban setting.

Since we're all at the wishing well...one more from me is the old Sonic HQ building located directly west of the Skirvin. I believe its construction was also halted midway, so it could add another 15-20 stories and really add some density.

These ideas underscore yet again how much potential this city has...on the one hand it's great to see progress underway, and on the other it's frustrating how amazing it all could be and how far we have to go!

Downtown OKC in the near future?

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/DowntownOKC2020-1.jpg

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/DowntownOKC2020-2.jpg

I see you left a lot of open space between high-rises. I would like to see them closer together like the existing core.

Concerning revamping highrises downtown, I think Oklahoma Tower holds more promise than Chase. Chase is at least complete, whereas OT has always appeared incomplete to me as if they ran out of money and had to stop short, which may be the case.......there was a planned 50 story highrise perhaps on the NW corner of the Galleria Site (correct me if I'm wrong, Steve?)

Anyways, if the market could make use of the additional office space I would like to see something like this............


Your renderings are good - thanks for doing them.

Not Steve, but you're correct - the original Galleria plan envisioned a 50-ish story office building on the nw/c of the site (or the se/corner of Park and Harvey, site of the new library).

As for OKTower - it's a good idea and would definately look good on the skyline, but as OKC@Heart mentioned, the building wasn't designed for additional story's and the superstructure likely couldn't withstand the additional weight. I agree with you though, it's never looked good and a new, architectural element on top would be great.

Aside and FYI: I've always thought we got ripped off with OKTower (on various levels...). It's not a particularly handsome building, certainly not memorable. But..it's not even ours.

The developer of the building, along with CorpTower, was Vincent Carrozza from Dallas. He was developing buildings there in the late 70's and I think it was him, who built the building there, today called Patriot Tower. You guys be the judge (see picture below), but it appears to me he did some tweaking on the plans for that one and in the early 80's, we ended up with a knock-off of an ugly Dallas building....

http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww242/luckynedpepper/p5-2221.jpg

[QUOTE=DelCamino;304264]

"as OKC@Heart mentioned, the building wasn't designed for additional story's and the superstructure likely couldn't withstand the additional weight."

DelCamino, just to clarify, I have no knowledge that would suggest whether or not Oklahoma Tower was designed to support additional floors or not. My intention was to state that adding height would be great (qualifier) so long as the structure was designed originally to support the addional loads of additional floors.

Just so we are all on the same page.

I too enjoyed the renderings Architect5311. shows real possibilities for the growth of the CBD. It is important to maintain and add to the density as was mentioned in Kerry's post. It is always nice to have the density swell outwards from the core, but with C2S the likelihood is that we will see a jump made like you illustrated and then need to fill in to tie it all together. Developers will want to locate large projects off of the park. It was the same with the woodall rodgers park in Dallas. Granted they had a Higher density to begin with, but the sheer knowledge of the reality of the park being built over Woodall Rodgers spured a virtual land grab that resulted in the building of several highrise buildings, some mixed use with office and residential. So it wouldn't be all that surprizing to me and I don't think that it would be bad either.

DelCamino, I agree and would further say OK Tower is the offspring of Patriot Tower and Carter+Burgess Plaza in Fort Worth.

I recall OK Tower, CorpTower, and Mid America tower all going up in short order back in '81-'82 as part of the Pei plan then everything came to a halt when the economy tanked.

As for OKTower - it's a good idea and would definately look good on the skyline, but as OKC@Heart mentioned, the building wasn't designed for additional story's

We really don't know, the structure could have been designed to take on additional floors, it is not uncommon...........although being a spec office building maybe not.

I see you left a lot of open space between high-rises. I would like to see them closer together like the existing core.

Those buildings were placed on somewhat empty lots, i.e. car dealership and the open lot at Reno and Walker. It's fantasy architecture at this point, I could see alot of lower rise infill to fill the gaps............

We really don't know, the structure could have been designed to take on additional floors, it is not uncommon...........although being a spec office building maybe not.

Yes, it's not uncommon. But with this building, I'm very sure this isn't the case. I remember when it was built and followed the news accounts of the construction at the time (like some of us are now with the Devon building) and there was never any mention the building's substructure was constructed in a manner that could support additional stories.

Since we're all at the wishing well...one more from me is the old Sonic HQ building located directly west of the Skirvin. I believe its construction was also halted midway, so it could add another 15-20 stories and really add some density....

Yes that's right, halted by the 30's Depression, or thereabouts. There was a proposal during the late 70's early 80's to double the height of this building, I think by Continental S&L ?? Didn't Steve L. have a picture of this proposal in his 2nd Century book? Anyway -- the doubling of that building would be great for density and skyline views.

There is something to be said of having some breathing room, if you will, between highrises. We officed downtown in the FNC on the 28th floor and the best views were not looking out the window at City Place just across the street or Oklahoma Tower. Because of the lack of density we have here, I think we can look at a city like, say Atlanta, where the CBD & highrises are strung out over several blocks............

There is something to be said of having some breathing room, if you will, between highrises. We officed downtown in the FNC on the 28th floor and the best views were not looking out the window at City Place just across the street or Oklahoma Tower. Because of the lack of density we have here, I think we can look at a city like, say Atlanta, where the CBD & highrises are strung out over several blocks............

If you are on the 15th floor or lower in Atlanta then you look at the building acorss the street. The only people in Atlanta with views are the ones above the 15th floor or in buildings that are on the edges.

I see you left a lot of open space between high-rises. I would like to see them closer together like the existing core.

If that's your preference...........here is a google earth image of Atlanta.

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/ATLANTA-google1.jpg

Leadership Square sure would look better with some space around it vs buried where it is. Point being you can benefit from viewing a building and having views from the building.

Chesapeake Building in Ft. Worth sure looks nice in space..........

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/ChesapeakePlaza-1.jpg

Chesapeake Building in Ft. Worth sure looks nice in space..........

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/ChesapeakePlaza-1.jpg

As well done as I think their campus is for the area it is in...I sure wish they would have pulled a Devon or even a Chesapeake, Fort Worth, in Downtown OKC. Would have been great to have another vertical tower there! I am still holding out hope that they will eventually outgrow their campus and realize that due to their success surpassing their wildest dreams that they need to move to downtown, and sell off the office space to smaller companies that could share amenities such as the parking structure and pay for the maintenance through an HOA type structure.

I know...I know...dreaming again!

The 50 story affiliate to Oklahoma Tower was planned for the NW/corner with a hotel on the top 10 floors....I do not believe there was ever a plan to add to the current Oklahoma Tower a/k/a First Oklahoma Tower....

More space around a tower...that's what Mr. F. L. Wright's preference definitely was.
See Bartlesville.

If that's your preference...........here is a google earth image of Atlanta.

Leadership Square sure would look better with some space around it vs buried where it is. Point being you can benefit from viewing a building and having views from the building.

FYI Kerry is an executive that works/lives in Atlanta and also Jacksonville. He's definitely familiar with it. Comparing most cities to Atlanta is laughable. Here is just a portion of it's skyline, looking towards DT from Buckhead (in which Buckhead itself has several mid and high rises).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Atlanta_Skyline_from_Buckhead.jpg/800px-Atlanta_Skyline_from_Buckhead.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/PanATL1.jpg/1200px-PanATL1.jpg

wow an executive..............what's your point?

FYI Kerry is an executive that lives in Atlanta. He's definitely familiar with it. Comparing most cities to Atlanta is laughable. Here is just a portion of it's skyline, looking towards DT from Buckhead (in which Buckhead itself has several mid and high rises).

I am sitting on the 9th floor of Wildwood Plaza right now overlooking all five metro Atlanta skylines (Downtown, Midtown, Buckhead, Perimeter, and Cobb Overlook).

The Towers at Wildwood Plaza - Northwest Atlanta (http://thetowers-wildwoodplaza.com/Home.axis)

What Architect5311 is looking at when he see Atlanta is the top floors of Atlanta's tallest buildings sticking up out of the urban fabric. What he doesn't see are the 10 to 15 stories it takes to get up out of the urban fabric. When you are in downtown Atlanta you can't see out of it at the street level. There are many many urban canyons along the streets of downtown Atlanta.

FYI - I live in Jacksonville, FL. I work in Atlanta. After 3 years, I have no love left for I-75.

Leadership Square sure would look better with some space around it vs buried where it is. Point being you can benefit from viewing a building and having views from the building.

Leadership Square would have been better if built as originally designed. It was supposed to have been a 50 story building but got cut in half due to the oil crash. If people on the 2nd floor want a view I recommend Memorial Road. You can see for miles.

BTW – before I forget, nice work on the fantasy buildings.

Kerry, my understanding is the Leadership Square site could not support a 50-60 story skyscraper which is why we have 2 towers there instead. It's arguably OKC's most beautiful office building, but yes, the view is obstructed on 3 sides.

wow an executive..............what's your point?

LOVE it!

wow an executive..............what's your point?

He could have probably left that adjective out as it didn't add to or take away from the rest of the story.

wow an executive..............what's your point?

My point is that he works in the urban fabric of Atlanta, and you were showing him a partial mockup skyline of Atlanta. I'm sure he is very familiar with it. :fighting2

He could have probably left that adjective out as it didn't add to or take away from the rest of the story.

Not to knit pick, but "executive" isn't an adje... oh hell. I hate grammar nazis, so forgive me.