hoa is quoted at $420/month... what kind of services go with that? can't imagine landscaping upkeep would cost that much... seems a bit exorbitant. -M

If The Hill is good enough for KD, it's good enough for me. lol
I met Steve Allen at a Thunder game last year.

They're not my favorites, but then neither are the Brownstones. I'm quite traditional in my tastes, and the exteriors of these look too modern for me. Still, I understand that some people love them.

Modern? Interesting, that's probably the last word I'd use to describe them. I think more like SoSa when I think modern. These actually seem aimed at the more traditional tastes to me, so I guess I'm not really sure what taste they appeal to.

I really like the Hill. In fact its one of my favorite developments currently happening in the Deep Deuce area. I can't wait until they are built out.

I'd agree that these are more traditional. I used to really not like them, but they have grown on me the last year or so.

I think they're neat-looking, especially when you're looking at them in person, as opposed to just seeing the pictures posted here. They're not my personal cup of tea (we live in a 1930s house--old house junkies at least for the time being), but in my opinion it's neat to have differing styles of housing available in DD. Something for everyone.

A few years ago, I was lamenting why people liked the suburbs and new construction so much--why they didn't "get it" about the charm and quality construction of old houses--and the person I was with reminded me that if EVERYONE preferred old houses, we might've been priced out of the market and not able to have our current house.

I'd agree that these are more traditional. I used to really not like them, but they have grown on me the last year or so.

I'm not a fan of the design or the layout of the development (or levelling a hill for a project called "the Hill") personally, but I don't think it looks bad bad. Just not my taste. I think what's really helped it from the outside is the newer unites cover a lot of the ugly siding on the "backs" of the townhouses.

It's condo. Home ownership and downtown living. And they're surrounded by other condos, leaving little to mystery.

That's probably why the much more-attractive Brownstones haven't been selling as well...

I love the hill, but I can understand how some wouldn't because they are very unique in design.

It's condo. Home ownership and downtown living. And they're surrounded by other condos, leaving little to mystery.

That's probably why the much more-attractive Brownstones haven't been selling as well...

I think all the brownstones finally were sold? Betts can clarify this if that's wrong. I think several of them went to auction so weren't sold at nearly the price desired, but they sold nonetheless.

My wife has mentioned more than once how much she like The Hill development over all the other new urban choices. It's not really my style but it is starting to grow on me too.

I think all the brownstones finally were sold? Betts can clarify this if that's wrong. I think several of them went to auction so weren't sold at nearly the price desired, but they sold nonetheless.

They all sold. Several that sold at lower price points appear to be getting significant interior remodels. And 2 new townhouses are in the pipeline on empty lots I'm told.

hoa is quoted at $420/month... what kind of services go with that? can't imagine landscaping upkeep would cost that much... seems a bit exorbitant. -M

insurance on the property is included in that, I know. there was actually quite a bit included from what I can remember when my wife and I looked at one, then realized we're lolpoors

insurance on the property is included in that

interesting... if that's a full homeowner's policy, then that's not such a bad deal. -M

I think some of the other properties downtown work on the same level. The "building(s)" is/are insured, thus your home is insured. Also this probably includes water and trash services.

interesting... if that's a full homeowner's policy, then that's not such a bad deal. -M

I don't believe it covers contents, but everything else in the structure.

I love the hill, but I can understand how some wouldn't because they are very unique in design.

That's interesting, as well. Unique, modern etc.... these are probably the last words I'd use for them. I think it looks like a very standard retirement community type design to me (and really, they kind of marketed them that way). They don't look like urban townhouses to me and really that may have more to do with the very strange layout they went with that makes it feel more like a planned suburban gated community than an urban neighborhood. I'm not saying there are ugly and they certainly seem to appeal to people who must want an urban location, but not necessarily an urban environment. At the end of the day I think it's a very "safe" development for some who are still getting used to the idea of urban living and urban homes in Oklahoma City.

I think some on here think "urban" and "contemporary" are the same. To call this a suburban style gated community is absurd. You may not like traditional style or row-houses, but that doesn't make them un-urban.

2/12/2015

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7320/15891165264_d2f95152e9_c.jpg

interesting... if that's a full homeowner's policy, then that's not such a bad deal. -M

More then likely it's a studs out policy. It is just like it sounds, covers everything from the studs out.

Probably not a direct comparison, but the Hill looks like most of the housing in downtown San Francisco or Brooklyn. I see it as more of an homage to early 1900's west coast architecture.

That big blank wall that people were freaking out over last year is now covered by the buildings in PluPan's picture, just as I and others said it would be. Problem solved.

I think some on here think "urban" and "contemporary" are the same. To call this a suburban style gated community is absurd. You may not like traditional style or row-houses, but that doesn't make them un-urban.

It looks very suburban to me and much of it is isolated from the rest of the urban environment, so I wouldn't call it urban design. The brownstones (and the other handful of proposed townhouse developments) seem much more urban because they are part of the urban landscape. These are mostly walled off from it. Just because they are modeled off the idea of "row houses" doesn't make them urban. I have been to many suburban condo developments that are very similar. I have not been to a traditionally urban city that has neighborhoods laid out like this or separated from the rest of the neighborhood.

Really, it's a suburban city's idea of what an urban neighborhood is, and that's fine. At the end of the day, that's probably a pretty good approach for OKC, I just see more in common with what I see in Vegas or Phoenix condos (specifically the low rise gated community ones), than say the upper east side or SF's Victorian neighborhoods, which is what I think of when someone says "row houses", of which, by the way, I am a big fan.

To me, the Hill is more this (Vegas):

http://www.newcondosonline.com/photos/off2171.jpg

Than this (NYC):

http://images.metroscenes.com/images/2012/new-york-city-may-2012/new_york_city_may_2012_metroscenes.com_58.jpg

The interior layouts and style are pretty suburban.

The Hill might not be great urbanism, they are in no way suburban, even if the interior layouts are not what most urban houses tend to have.

The Hill might not be great urbanism, they are in no way suburban, even if the interior layouts are not what most urban houses tend to have.

I certianly can't claim to have been to every condo development, but they have a lot more in common with the suburban condo developments I've been to or driven by than any urban development or urban areas I have been to or lived in, that's all. I know everyone's experiences are different, but I certainly couldn't say these are in no way suburban from what I've seen.

At least their garages don't face the street, which is a massive amount of progress for this type of build in OKC - I'm sure plaza district fans would agree.

Here in about 5 years, the rest of Deep Deuce will have grown into The Hill. Right now it is kind of separated, but once the neighborhood is complete it won't feel that way.

I don't really mind what the interior of the houses feel like -- it's not like I'm going in those peoples' houses.

Here in about 5 years, the rest of Deep Deuce will have grown into The Hill. Right now it is kind of separated, but once the neighborhood is complete it won't feel that way.

That would be great, but I'm not sure how that would happen. It's basically a self contained loop, like a subdivision. I think the west side already feels like part of deep deuce, but it also kind of serves to shield the rest of The Hill from Deep Deuce.

And I'm not trying to make a qualitative judgement when I say it looks like a lot of subruban condo developments I've seen. That's just what it looks like. There's room downtown for a secluded development for those that want one and there are several online and in the works that offer more of an urban feel.

And while it may not be the best urban development I've seen, it's certainly not the worst. We put those in the CBD. ;)

Here's another good one of how close to the street they are. If you think this is suburban, than I don't know what to tell you.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100611142859/callofduty/images/a/a8/Long-cat.jpg

I think the difference is that the Hill is laid out like a subdivision, without through streets. I walk my dog through there because it extends the length of my walk, and always feel a bit like I'm entering a gated community that has the gates open - like they'd really be happier if only people who lived there were inside. Now I have a friend who bought there for precisely that reason. She loves the location, but also likes the more private feel. When you're in the Back Bay of Boston or walking among the Brownstones in NYC, or even Brooklyn (going to disagree that the Hill feels like Brooklyn), you feel like you're on a public street. I prefer that feel, which is why we chose a brownstone instead, but different people like different things. I also like having my kitchen and living room on the 2nd floor and some people hate that layout. When you're in a townhouse in the Hill, you feel like you're in a regular house. Mine doesn't feel like a regular house, which was my choice.

I think the difference is that the Hill is laid out like a subdivision, without through streets. I walk my dog through there because it extends the length of my walk, and always feel a bit like I'm entering a gated community that has the gates open - like they'd really be happier if only people who lived there were inside. Now I have a friend who bought there for precisely that reason. She loves the location, but also likes the more private feel. When you're in the Back Bay of Boston or walking among the Brownstones in NYC, or even Brooklyn (going to disagree that the Hill feels like Brooklyn), you feel like you're on a public street. I prefer that feel, which is why we chose a brownstone instead, but different people like different things. I also like having my kitchen and living room on the 2nd floor and some people hate that layout. When you're in a townhouse in the Hill, you feel like you're in a regular house. Mine doesn't feel like a regular house, which was my choice.

Totally agree. It's really just a matter of perspective. If your reference point is Edmond, it seems urban to you, if your reference point is urban places like Boston or Brooklyn, it feels decidedly suburban. At the end of the day, it's a nice option for those wanting to live in the city and have a private community feel.

Honestly, the design of The Hill is probably a great business move for the OKC market. It allows homeowners the benefits of urban living while maintaining characteristics that many people look for or are used to in the suburbs.

If you so choose, you can walk out of your front door and experience downtown; walk to eat, get groceries, to go to the dentist, to the movies. At the same time, you have your own private garage, so you can pull in and close the overhead door behind you, walking directly into your home. You can interact with neighbors completely on your own terms, including no interaction at all if that's what you prefer.

The layout of the streets provides subdivision-like sameness and seclusion, which can be comforting to someone moving from the 'burbs (which statistically is almost everyone moving downtown from somewhere else in OKC). Since it is self-contained with no through streets, you don't have to worry about poor people - the definition of which can even include nearby Deep Deuce renters - walking down your streets to get from one place to another. No real chance of being accosted by a panhandler, and really you can avoid even being accosted by neighbors if you stay in your car and home.

Describing it as a gated community, only without gates, is apt. The traditional interiors only help reinforce the appeal to the market they are going after. Personally it doesn't fit my tastes at all, but I really don't intend for my comments to be disparaging; merely observational. I suspect there are far more people in the metro who would gravitate to this type of living than the true/unfiltered urban experience or to modern design, because it's familiar and comforting. Lots of people want to be close to downtown; but not everyone is 100% comfortable with sharing the sidewalk in front of their house with the rest of the city.

The Hill doesn't do a lot to add to the urbanity of downtown but what it DOES do is add people to support nearby mixed use areas, and it also provides a way for those craving the advantages downtown living, but still somewhat unsure about it, to dip their toes.

Excellent post, urbanized. Couldn't agree more with your points.

The brownstones are decidedly more open in both their location and style. I continue to be shocked at how few units at the hill have street-facing patios or balconies. Contrast this to the brownstones, which I believe all of them are far superior in terms of engaging the street.

Just FYI. Several of the hill units have living and kitchen on the second floor the same as the brownstones

Aren't there around 150 townhouse units planned in the Hill? How many brownstones are there? Seems with 150 two-three story townhouses, it makes sense to create a community environment. They probably tried to utilize the plot of land they owned in the best way possible since one side curves along a freeway and there is not way to have through streets. They had to curve the streets to accommodate the plot of land.

A "community environment," in the urbanism sense, would involve mixed use. The Hill is more of a "subdivision environment." That said, there are surely plenty of people who will be drawn to a hybridized urban/suburban environment, and this provides an option for those people. It's always good to have choices.

I definitely agree that it feels gated. Everytime I've walked or run through there I always feel like I don't belong. Like I'm not supposed to be there.

You're not. You and I are among the undesirable poor people I'm talking about. ;)

Aren't most of the loft style buildings effectively gated in OKC? I know that most all of the residential buildings in downtown San Diego have gated entry and gate parking. Many are 5 or 6 story units with a central courtyard area and all of it is gated from the general public.

I understand what you are saying about having mixed use maybe on the perimeter of the development, but isn't the Hill on the edge of DD, tucked up next to the freeway? Not every development can be in the heart of the community. In the East Village area of San Diego, the closer you get to the Gaslamp entertainment area, the more restaurants and other uses, but on the outside areas of East Village, you don't see that much retail.

Also, I wouldn't totally discount safety. The city just opened the new $185 million downtown library and charter school in East Village and have already had a murder in its entryway and the library had to hire added security to try to control the drug use going on around the premises.

Wasn't this project praised when it was first announced?

While I admit projects like this exist all over suburban areas of major cities like Dallas or Charlotte, I don't see the design to be suburban at all. I really like it and think it fits very well in Deep Deuce. This isn't NYC. They have done the best they could do with the land this is on. I also agree that many Oklahomans like their privacy and developments like this are great compromises, keeping with urbanism but being a bit more private than a mixed-use development.

Just FYI. Several of the hill units have living and kitchen on the second floor the same as the brownstones

That may well be. All the ones I've been in have a living/dining/kitchen option on the first floor but I haven't been in every type of unit design.

Wasn't this project praised when it was first announced?

IIRC, it actually wasn't. There was a competing proposal and many believed that the wrong developer was chosen. Don't quote me as I can't recall exactly but wasn't it Marva Ellard?

On edit: Found a thread from 2004! There were three competing proposals. The one I was referring to was Walnut Hill by TAParchitecture. The project selected as we know today did not even adhere to guidelines set forth by OCURA. They had originally requested retail, for sale, and for rent units. The Hill at Bricktown obviously lacked the retail and for rent units of the other two proposals.

My point is not that it is suburban. My point instead is that it is NOT purely urban. It straddles the line, but stays more on the suburban side of it than say, the Brownstones, LEVEL, Steelyard, etc.

The Brownstones freely share their sidewalks with the rest of the neighborhood, on main (through) streets, and the even more urban LEVEL and Steelyard actually invite the community into their attached stores and restaurants.

But again, lots of people from OKC are going to feel safer in a place like The Hill, which falls more closely into their comfort zone. It's a good compromise, it is appealing to many and therefore is selling well, and since it is on the fringe of the urban area its lack of engagement with the neighborhood really doesn't do any harm. Honestly, I think it's fine.

IIRC, it actually wasn't. There was a competing proposal and many believed that the wrong developer was chosen. Don't quote me as I can't recall exactly but wasn't it Marva Ellard?

On edit: Found a thread from 2004! There were three competing proposals. The one I was referring to was Walnut Hill by TAParchitecture. The project selected as we know today did not even adhere to guidelines set forth by OCURA. They had originally requested retail, for sale, and for rent units. The Hill at Bricktown obviously lacked the retail and for rent units of the other two proposals.

I think it was TAP. And yes most/lots prefered it to this project

It's a great development for OKC, really. The highway and train tracks here really create a sort of Urban Cul-de-Sac, and I think that's why this development fits so well here.

I think having retail here would have been a mistake, because the location would be relatively forgotten. The center of Deep Deuce really should be 3rd/Walnut (That ship may have sold because Level has a blank wall on that corner).

It's okay though, Deep Deuce has really ended up being sort of a "let's get our feet wet in Urban Development neighborhood". It works for what it is, but it's a far more residential area than it is a true mixed use area, like Midtown should be expected to be.

I was reading Walkable Nation this morning and he indicated that numerous studies have shown that urban environments actually aren't less dangerous. I think he said there are 19% more motors by strangers in the suburbs then in urban areas.

I think people are confusing this issue by trying to make it an either or situation. Obviously some of the Hill's design features urban but others are suburban. It's not one or the other.

IIRC, it actually wasn't. There was a competing proposal and many believed that the wrong developer was chosen. Don't quote me as I can't recall exactly but wasn't it Marva Ellard?

On edit: Found a thread from 2004! There were three competing proposals. The one I was referring to was Walnut Hill by TAParchitecture. The project selected as we know today did not even adhere to guidelines set forth by OCURA. They had originally requested retail, for sale, and for rent units. The Hill at Bricktown obviously lacked the retail and for rent units of the other two proposals.

Yes, TAP was the competitor and there was another company as well.

The selection of Canfield & Co. (the developers of The Hill) is one of the darkest days of the old OCURA.

TAP came in with a better funded proposal in response to the RFP, but just before OCURA made their choice, Canfield revised his numbers; something everyone involved later admitted should never have been allowed.

Then, the final vote came down to Stanton Young, a major benefactor for the Health Sciences Center. Canfield operates his biotech company out of the HSC.

I was furious at the time because it was so ridiculously unfair and TAP's proposal was pure mixed-use, where Canfield was only going to build condos and nothing else for the public at large.

And then after receiving the award, Canfiled dramatically increased the price of the units from what was originally proposed.


So, I've had a bad taste in my mouth about this project ever since. Things are much better at OCURA these days, thankfully.

It's okay though, Deep Deuce has really ended up being sort of a "let's get our feet wet in Urban Development neighborhood". It works for what it is, but it's a far more residential area than it is a true mixed use area, like Midtown should be expected to be.

I think Deep Deuce, even today is light years ahead of Midtown. In my opinion, Midtown is still a good 5-10 years away from being filled in enough to actually be impressive to somebody who doesn't know the neighborhood's history. Deep Deuce however is somewhat impressive even today despite the fact it only covers a few blocks. You don't expect to find that kind of neighborhood in Oklahoma. I am glad to see The Hill proceeding especially after it stalled out for a while. Things will only get better in the near future as it becomes more built out and as infill connects Deep Deuce with Bricktown.

Im excited to see the Hill completely build out, should turn into a true urban sub-neighborhood on its own. I am also looking forward to the build out of the Brownstones and hopefully more Brownstones pop up elsewhere in other downtown and inner city districts.

Marva was actually part of the LP, but exited the partnership when things started to go south. That's what Architect2010 is probably remembering. She realized that a weakening market (at the time) wasn't going to bear a huge, badly conceived condo development. Since the market has improved and specifically, banks want to get money out the door again, this project is selling because it is at least decent.

I still think the Brownstones are more marketable because they do offer top-notch design, which I'd expect at this price point. (Remember Maywood Park, back when we found palatable uses for TIF money?)

I walked by there today and I sure wish they hadn't made this development so symmetrical. My least favorite townhouse exterior is the one with the hexagonal tower and they've got one on every corner.

I walked by there today and I sure wish they hadn't made this development so symmetrical. My least favorite townhouse exterior is the one with the hexagonal tower and they've got one on every corner.

I absolutely hate those. They look cheap. Bad design. That is really the thing about them I like the least, by far. I also hate the cul-de-sac, too, but I love the way they look on Joe Carter or whatever that street is called now.

Stiles?

It's interesting, they seem to be doing a better job of framing the BNSF tracks (where you don't see the ugly hexagonal tower corner units) than Stiles. That said, KD likes them twice as much so there is obviously a market for them. Funny how the considerably more stylish #0 lives in a different development, while The Hill is sort of the big roomy Chevy Astro van of Downtown Living.

Stiles?

It's interesting, they seem to be doing a better job of framing the BNSF tracks (where you don't see the ugly hexagonal tower corner units) than Stiles. That said, KD likes them twice as much so there is obviously a market for them. Funny how the considerably more stylish #0 lives in a different development, while The Hill is sort of the big roomy Chevy Astro van of Downtown Living.

Just to be sure, Russ lives in the burbs.

Wait, so the Ozarka water commercial is a lie?

Wait, so the Ozarka water commercial is a lie?

Yup.. that was shot in the brownstones show home..

Didn't know or forgot, so thanks for the info!

I'm certain this is a dumb question, but I'm uninformed about such matters so apologies in advance. It seems like at the rate that The Hill property is being filled in (i.e. molasses slow), East Bricktown, West Downtown, and mid-Midtown might all be filled in by the time The Hill gets to that point. Is it possible someone could approach the folks that own the Hill land and say, "we want to buy the rest of your land and build something else"? Or was there some conditions in the arrangement during the original acquisition of the land that precludes that?

^

This was a deal with OCURA and the ownership group with The Hill has a contract which requires them to develop on a certain timetable.

All the undeveloped property is still owned by OCURA and is only released to the developers when they complete a phase and OCURA signs off. Then, they apply to transfer a set of lots for the next phase.

So, if they don't keep developing on the stated timeline, OCURA could put the remaining lots out to bid. However, they've already given The Hill extensions and I'm sure that would be the case again unless things completely grind to a halt.