[jqpabc123]

Atlanta, GA has 3 times the population density of OKC and it hosts NBA, NFL and MLB teams. All without any apparent need/justification for the tallest building in the country.

There are lots of other similar examples. The justification for this in OKC just isn't there IMO --- and is unlikely to ever be there for one major reason --- limited water supply.

https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-city-utilities-departm...

Major high density cities demand a large water supply.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

OKC is a bit weird, in that it's the center of a particular sort of religious movement. "Prosperity doctrine" types. The headquarters of Hobby Lobby and several other major "christian-owned" brands are there.

This is more about them proving themselves ascendant, than anything else, if I don't miss my guess. A better model might be Dubai, also home to some famously tall skyscrapers... its density is probably lower than can justify those, but they were built anyway to prove how ascendant their form of Islam is.

[bobthepanda]

Record setting skyscrapers are usually a leading indicator of a bust, since they get financed when credit is at its easiest to get and there aren’t more pressing priorities to invest in.

Burj Khalifa is named so because Sheikh Khalifa of Abu Dhabi had to bail out both the Burj Dubai and the government of Dubai during the 2007 financial crisis.

[jqpabc123]

This is more about them proving themselves ascendant

In other words, it's all about marketing --- not logic, reason, economics or good urban planning.

[lupusreal]

Even in cities that rationally justify tall buildings, the "tallest building" competition is always about showing off. They set the records with tall spires on top that don't have any usable floorspace.

[jqpabc123]

Yes, the spires on top of rationally justified buildings is showing off.

In OKC, it's not just the spire but the entire building that is about showing off. The rationale is missing --- which is why I doubt it will ever be built as proposed.