The legends tower is genius 

Honestly can’t wait, the USA is starting to get back on track with the tall skyscraper trends, this is the start of another skyscraper boom in the USA

But it will still be a second tier city. Getting an NFL, or MLB team would do more to attract attention. Invest in better public transit if you want to up your game.. I helped set up a call center in OKC years ago. It's a real snooze, strip malls and chain stores. Higher population density around downtown would help. It's better than Wichita, but that's not saying much.

​@@Zoods_I just moved from NYC to south Florida. Rather than focus on height, we should focus on a esthetics. A lot of tall buildings are not attractive. One World Trade is a good example. It's a real dog to look at, a missed opportunity.

@markrichards6863 does not have to be either / or. Get a NFL team, invest in public transport and build the skyscraper.

@markrichards6863 seriously? I think it is elegant. Have you seen the 3 tallest buildings in Shanghai? 2 of them look ridiculous.

A lot of people try to make excuses as to why it’s a bad idea, but if you actually put some logic into it you’ll find zero down sides besides that it will mess up the skyline until enough skyscrapers are built to fix it. The good outweighs the bad ten fold.

Someone would have to invest to build higher, the cities themselves would not pay to make a building taller.

Yea, I think vinita can become the next big city in the state because of the theme park, it could even become the next Orlando, considering it can easily get the biggest mc Donald’s in the world (they used to have the biggest in the world but lost the title, they have the building size so all they would need to do is make the entire b building a McDonald’s) vinita has the potential to become big, although I do think it would lead to more growth being in Guthrie or Edmond instead of vinita. Even without these projects Oklahoma is expected to grow my 500k by 2040 and most of those people will be going to OKC and Tulsa.

I mentioned at the end of the video that the developer said they made it to withstand strong tornados and it would probably be one of the safest places to be during a tornado. They said they used the same engineers that built the burj khalifa, and Dubai is in a place with similar wind speeds to Oklahoma, with their sand storms.

@@-OAK- yes. I’m sorry I saw that after I posted the comment. Thank you.

Tornadoes do hit high rises on occasion. Here and in Texas. They just break windows though. Steel beams are architectural magic

@@jerrytherobot I think they are also using some kind of glass that is strong enough not to break, and not slip out of place, because in the planning commission interview, he said that the decorate stuff like glass have even been taken into consideration for a tornado.

I doubt it. But it can start a building boom IF demand is high. Big cities with ten times the corporate footprints can’t fill buildings half that big in Austin or Dallas. So the final size is likely going to be half that. Dallas was supposed to build their new super tall ( and it’s growing faster than the entire state of OK ) but now the tower is scheduled to be half the height due to pre lease demand.

That density will take decades to centuries to achieve, this is basically like steroids, it will push its growth to achieve such density, also I said in the video that Dubai is triple OKCs land size so shouldn’t that logic go for Dubai to? Going the normal route will take a long time to reach a big population, but this will put OKC on the map which will lead to it growing faster, it will mess up the skyline sure, but the same thing can be said about Dubai, the towers whole purpose is to push the never ending potential that OKC has.

city center density is around 3 to 5 thousand people per square mile, city limits doesn't mean anything as cities are not ranked by square mileage but rather population. I live in uptown OKC and my neighborhood is almost 5k per square mile. There is absolutely nothing that says a city can't have a huge building, I mean devon has been the odd tall building for over decade now so the legends tower will be the new devon and more buildings the size of the devon will be built in the next 20 years. Are you not familiar with austin? In the 90's it had no tall buildings now it has giant skyscrapers.

Improving public transport won’t lead to a higher growth rate, but doing something that would put them on the map would….

@@-OAK-nobody is moving to OKC because of one building. Transit does far more to make a city an attractive place to move to than a gimmicky building. Also, tourists aren’t going flock to the city just to see THIS building

@@tylerkochman1007 It would put it on the map making more people know about OKC world wide. Yes people would come for it, and the only thing there isn’t a tower they would go to the city and the tower would be one of the things they see. Public transport does not lead to much growth especially in America You’re saying this but literally like I said In the video Dubai tripled it’s growth rate and it’s soul reasoning behind that was a tower. And it also boost its tourist rate just for people to go see a building. People will literally go anywhere just to look at something look at Route 66, people will travel that just to look at structures, people will go to paris just to look at the Eiffel Tower. So on and so on. This tower literally offers more than just being tall, it has a lagoon, retail, restaurant, ect. The tower is what will attract people to visit and once they are there they will obviously do more than just look at the tower. The towers point is literally to attract people to visit. And I’m not saying people will just move there because of a tower, what I’m saying is that people will move there because more jobs will open and business, because it will be so much easier to get easy attention building your business next to the tallest building in America, it gives companies easy recognition. So the boost in jobs and companies from these buildings the towers would draw in is what will ultimately lead to people moving. The leading cause for a cities growth are the open jobs. You can see this with Dubai, once making the tower, all these companies started building outside the main downtown area (which Just proves my point in easy recognition because if it weren’t that case they would continue to build across the highway) and these new buildings tripled its growth rate. Because it gave more opportunities, and jobs.

@@-OAK- no, people quite literally DO weigh transit when considering which cities and suburbs are desirable to live in. People want an easy commute. Young and educated professionals and creatives are increasingly put-off by auto-centric locales. and jobs, yeah. And big corporate employers look at transit as one of their metrics when choosing where to locate their HQ. That was one of Amazon’s major criteria for their HQ2: transit that their workforce could take. Corporations want to attract top talent: and having an hassle-free transit commute to offer their employees is one of those things. Nobody visits an otherwise desolate downtown just because their’s an architecturally uninteresting tall tower. build a quality downtown with cultural institutions and attractive neighborhoods. Boston, San Antonio, San Diego, etc. are tourist meccas with relatively short skylines.

@@tylerkochman1007 people almost never visit a place for good public transit they visit for the stuff actually there, OKC is also no where near the size to need public transportation, you can walk across the whole downtown in 30 minutes, the only really good public transportation we can use is the one we already have. Nowhere in the world gets visitors because of its transportation, look at LA it’s gotta have some of the worst public transit in the world and it’s extremely popular and well known, they didn’t get that big from transportation but from attractions. A tower will definitely bring more people than the public transportation that the city doesn’t even need I live in San Diego, there isn’t much public transportation either, I went to Boston, we used the public transportation, but that New York and Philly are places with giant downtowns are the only places you need that transportation, you could walk across downtown SD in a hour, compared to Boston it would take you a really long time. Places that are big like that are the only ones that need public transportation, La doesn’t have it because it’s downtown isn’t big. No one and I mean no one will visit OKC just because it has a good public transit system, this tower actually draws attention to the city, transportation doesn’t. When you have a big attractions like the tallest tower in the country being in a random city, it’s going to draw more attention to the city, which would lead to more tourism and jobs. Having a subway or bike paths won’t do much. The attractions are what draw people in not how they get to them, a giant skyscraper being in the most random location, that also offers stuff to do, and the stuff that are also around the city draws more people in that just bike paths and trains.

I couldn’t find a exact date, but it should start either before June 4th (which is when I’m pretty sure the voting is held) or it will start after, the tower itself won’t start construction until either after the smaller buildings are built or during (depending on if they reach their demand before then), but it’s supposed to start early summer.

The cities vote for approval is June, it’s either tomorrow June 4th, or some other day this month, the project starts construction either June or July, the tower won’t start until the 350ft tall towers are complete or earlier if they reach the demand for it before then So if they don’t reach their said demand before the 350ft towers are built then they would start the 1907ft tower in 24-30 months and the tower itself would take 12-18 months. But once again if they reach their demand before then they will start construction

They approved it on June 4th

@@-OAK- thank you for letting me know . I have another question . When they will start to built it

@@jennpika6301 they don’t have a set date, they said in the city meeting that it would be soon, and in the summer of this year, so June or July is my guess, they will start construction for the 350ft towers on the bottom and once those are done they will start the skyscraper, so the tower itself won’t start for another 2 or so years The whole project should be done by the same time the new OKC arena is built, so 2028-2029

You got a point, but the point of the video isn’t necessarily to say that OKC will get as drastic of a change as Dubai, it’s just to show what could happen based on what happened to Dubai, by tripling in growth, like I said there are some other stuff that lead to Dubais big growth, but OKC and early Dubai are relatively similar, yes Dubai is a big oil reserve for the country, but Oklahoma is one of the biggest oil producing states in America, and America produce the most oil world wide. But I’m not saying the impact will be the same, but if a city can triple its growth rate to 900k all because the tourism and investors that came because of a tower, why can’t the same happen for OKC? The max growth I projected is 270k for OKC but that’s not even that Insane compared to what Dubai went through, that’s still less than early Dubais growth rate. So a 270k growth rate every decade isn’t too extreme.

the funding has already been secured by investors, I swear people do not watch the news or study issues they claim to know about

@@zebrajenks I'm aware the funding had been secured and I've kept myself up to date on the project. I'm still skeptic on the economic viability of it in OKC, or if it will be built to this scale. Like I said, I hope it will. And I hope that OKC continues to grow like it has so that the building can be profitable.

site plan is already approved, TIF has been approved, and now zoning has been recommended approved (city council blessing is next). After the council approval removing height restrictions, the only approval left would be the FAA which should be close. Permitting would be next, and shovel in dirt over the summer.

@@rchilde1 I've been a planning commission chair; it's got a long way to go!

@@twolaneasphalt4459 no it doesn't, money gets everything done just like the new arena. You really thing the vote mattered? that was for show the arena was always going to be approved.

@zebrajenks Yes, it does. And as for the new arena - which isn't what I was commenting about - guess who gets the bill for? Taxpayers! The Thunder owners ponied up spit!

It will be built to survive tornados like I said in the video, and in terms of marketing it’s better than building it in nyc or Chicago because it draws more attention. I don’t think you watched the video based on this comment, it will be more of a tourist attraction being in OKC than nyc or Chicago because it’s in a unlikely place and stands out. Compared to it being expected so people don’t have to talk about it unlike this

And half the price as NY or LA

Everything else won't be have the price for long

@@-OAK- people are just contrarians and like to argue because it is the internet and they are anonymous. Everything you say in the video is correct and OKC is the 6th fastest growing large city in the US at a rate of 3.19% higher than 15 of the top 20 most populated cities in the US

It’s not the light pollution in general, they want to increase their population so a little bit more lit pollution from more people living there won’t bother. It’s just that the screens give off too much in a single area, that’s why they didn’t want it. Also even with out this project, Oklahoma is projected to grow by a ton, it’s currently expected to grow 500k in 20 years, but projects like the American heartland theme park have that number will surly be more, vinita could probably get a population of 100k in 10 to 20 years so oklahoma will be getting a big growth even without this project, it’s just I think this much like the theme park will make the growth even more extreme

I agree, focus on density and good architecture instead. Create a pedestrian friendly, location with good shopping and entertainment options. Give people a reason to keep going back. A super tall building, you'll go visit once and not go back. Besides, at the top, what is there to see, some nondescrilt suburbs fading into nothing.

no, its height is good, i really hope it stays the height its planned to be

Theme parks, some of the most well known Route 66 locations, multiple famous museums like the OKC bombing memorial & museum, and the cowboy and western heritage museum, famous restaurants like cattlemen’s cafe, the most diverse terrain in America, frontier city, bricktown, river walk, thunder games, factory obscura, myriad botanical gardens, the OKC zoo. And some really good architectural buildings like Henry Overholser Mansion, Oklahoma State Capitol, Saint Joseph's Old Cathedral, Frontline Church Downtown, The Skirvin Hilton Oklahoma City, the golden dome bank building, and more. There’s a lot to do in OKC. The majority of people don’t go to see something more than once unless they live there, that can be said about every attraction aside from theme parks. The people coming once will still draw companies to build, it will still increase the growth rate, ect. Dubai only got all that stuff after the burj khalifa was built, Dubai had practically none of that before, OKC has more than early Dubai (before they built the burj khalifa)

Engineering, I said in the video it will be built to survive tornados. Dubai has stronger wind speeds, and sand storms and they have the tallest in the world. Downtown OKC has also never once been hit by a tornado and the only parts of OKC that get hit are the very edge of the borders. If you were to shrink OKC down to a. Normal size city it would have 0-1 tornados yearly

you act like every other city with tall buildings doesn't have natural disasters, LA and SF have earthquakes and Miami has hurricanes all the time

Chicago built the sears tower when there was so much land, Dubai is triple the size of OKC and building a tall tower when there was sooo much undeveloped land and the tower is what lead to it getting as big as it did, it wouldn’t loose money because everything in the tower is stuff ok needs and would instantly work for that reason. It’s not necessary but what it does to the city is what makes it worth it

The developer has secured all of the money to build it, OKC is the 5th hottest job spot RN, and is one of the fastest growing cities, OKC is also stated to have some of if not the most potential out of any US city, the developer has already seen demand for it, OKC is one of the best business cities in the country, it has a high success rate for businesses, and is home to multiple country wide businesses like sonic and loves. OKC is at a high demand for housing and this project is almost entirely housing, OKC is also behind 3000+ on hotels and what do you know this building also consists of part hotel, literally OKC is in the perfect spot for this to work. you got literally everything wrong in your comment

@@-OAK- Please guide me to verification that the developer has secured all the money to build it.

@@GlobalWarning-dv5el literally any article you can find, news videos on koco 5, it’s not hard they secured funding over a month ago Literally all you have to do is search up “legends tower secured funding” and tons of articles will show up saying how and when they secured funding, even just searching up “has the legends tower secured funding” it will say it has

@@-OAK- I did the search for "legends tower secured funding" and am not finding any lender specified. It is noted that the developer says that funding has been secured, but I would expect a name of a bank, larger insurance company or some other institutional source. This is not a project that a small lender or a consortium of lenders (as mentioned in one article) would take on. Construction on the tower is not to commence until the small apartment buildings are 50% leased, which sounds peculiar to me. A consortium of lenders seems improbable because each one would want to have the first position to foreclose on the property if/when loan payments ceased being made by the owner. Also, there are two types of funding involved here: The first is the construction loan, which would then be taken out by permanent financing once the property reaches a certain financial goal (such as gross income production). Given the potential for massive cost overruns with this scale of property, I find it difficult to believe that anyone would make a construction loan on this property without the developer bringing in a substantial amount of equity (such as 20% of costs). This particular developer just doesn't have the background to suggest that he could pony up $300 million in cash.

@@danoc51 literally there are tons of articles saying it has secured funding, they will build the hight off demand considering they have the money it’s just based on the demand they have, idk what to tell you there is no point in arguing when there is literally tons of evidence to support how they have secured funding and everything. It’s being funded by major banks, private investment firms, and several public funding initiatives, also why would it be hard to believe that people would want to take part in funding the biggest tower in the country that would be a instant success if built, that logic of yours doesn’t make sense.

I said in the video it will be built to survive tornados and it will be one of the safest places to be during one

@@-OAK- We'll see, won't we? Mother Nature is Awesome and she'll test this building out! 🌪️🧲💪

@@keithwilliams5600 I mean downtown OKC has never once been hit by a tornado, so I don’t think building this will attract one

OK has all of that as is so i dont know what you are talking about

@@Charmedone9805 there are about only 1000 homeless people in Oklahoma City, it ain’t homeless filled

@@Charmedone9805 One third of the homeless in the entire US live in 1 state. Many stores like CVS and Walgreens are leaving California cities because of shoplifting. CA has insane natural advantages and seems determined to mess it up.

​@@Jonus_Grumby It's California based, not run by Newsom. Thanks for not adding anything to the discussion of this building.

@@SirSayakaMikiThe3rd Lol at based. Newsom, is the Governor, was the Mayor of San Francisco and is related to Nancy Pelosi, so yeah, he is a big part of the power structure of CA. The conversation sometimes goes places organically, much like pizza in CA.