I don't care if people lived in dog condos - I just want to do whatever uses up the available land the fastest. Once the land is used up then the only place to go is vertical. Personnaly, I wold rather see ten 3-story condos vs one 30-story condo but the location is also important. If we are talking about the urban core as defined by the CBD on the downtown district map, then higher is better. All other districts mid and low rise works for me.

I don't care if people lived in dog condos - I just want to do whatever uses up the available land the fastest. Once the land is used up then the only place to go is vertical. Personnaly, I wold rather see ten 3-story condos vs one 30-story condo but the location is also important. If we are talking about the urban core as defined by the CBD on the downtown district map, then higher is better. All other districts mid and low rise works for me.

:congrats: Thanks!

Lots of great architecture to post, but little real information which shows a developer will risk their money to build something like it. Having grand ideas is easy...getting it done is not.

Or this type of concept in places like SoSA and JFK would work. Although I like contemporary housing, not everyone does and there are "skinny house" options that appeal to people with different taste:

http://www.metropolismag.com/story/20061206/revenge-of-the-small

http://chatterbox.typepad.com/portlandarchitecture/2006/05/living_smart_pr.html

http://www.portlandonline.com/bds/index.cfm?c=51302

Yes. I've noticed a lot of housing of this type in Midtown Tulsa just north of Cherry Street. Great residential infill projects there.

It's all over Midtown, not just Cherry Street. Personally I only care that something is pedestrian friendly, which "The Broadway" pictured above doesn't really seem to be.

nm

Lots of great architecture to post, but little real information which shows a developer will risk their money to build something like it. Having grand ideas is easy...getting it done is not.

Thanks a lot, Debbie Downer.

Yes. I've noticed a lot of housing of this type in Midtown Tulsa just north of Cherry Street. Great residential infill projects there.

This website shows some of those projects, I like, wish we did have more of this for infil in OKC.

http://www.moderntulsa.net/2008/11/03/tulsa-cherry-street-lofts/

Thanks a lot, Debbie Downer.

Not trying to be a downer, but it takes more than imagination to make these things work. If this is a "what if" discussion, then fine. If this is a serious discussion on what it would take and what kind of incentives actually work to make development downtown happen, than we need to be real about what we are dealing with. It is fun to just imagine, but that doesn't really get it done.

Yes, yes, yes!

This city is an empty canvas. It could be wonderful. I hate to say it, but I think part of the problem comes from the attitudes of the ruling class of this town. The only acceptable places for them to live are Edmond, far Northwest OKC, Nichols Hills, and if they're kinda arty, Heritage Hills or Crown Heights. They actually think of the inner city as ugly and worthless (with bad schools, too, ahem). Therefore, they only really care about the CDB, Bricktown, and the interstates that take them to their suburban enclaves.

I note that you mention NW 10th, 13th, etc. You are a true urbanite, and that's why you see the potential of these areas. Unfortunately, a lot of the OKC ruling class would never find beauty in these areas because they are not urbanites at all. They would rather live in all-white, "safe" areas of town and would never consider walking anywhere. They simply cannot see the potential in our city because they could never envision taking advantage of a true urban environment. In fact, even when they visit places like NYC they probably cluster in Midtown and go the shows, Times Square, the park, and that's it.

I wish more of our rich people had an urban orientation.

I registered just so I could say that I completely agree with the both of you! This is my vision for the city- not just development of highrises downtown but revitalization in the inner city. Midtown, Plaza District, 16th St, 23rd St., and the Paseo have made great strides in the past years, drawing in locally-owned restaurants and retail. Now these areas need some better medium-density housing options, as well as the continued renewal and preservation of historic neighborhoods. What Midtown Renaissance, http://midtownr.com/, is doing is right in line with that vision.

As a wanna-be urbanite with kids, I would never move downtown to a condo, much less one with a $300k price tag. However neighborhoods like Venice, Crestwood, Cleveland, Mesta Park, Shepherd, Venice, Gatewood, and Edgemere Park are all appealing. Even moreso now that there is restaurants and retail within reasonable walking distance. What these areas need now are higher quality medium density apartments and townhomes, more sidewalks and bike lanes/paths to downtown and the nw exp corridor, better public transportation, and last but not least, beautification efforts. Okc schools are another downside but many surbanites fail to realize that Okc actually has some award winning Elementary schools and nationally-recognized arts and science/magnet high schools.

In order to stop the sprawl OKC HAS to get more middle-class families into this core area, north of downtown. Not just artsy folks or hipsters who think it's cool to live in a turn of the century home with drug dealers down the street.

Not trying to be a downer, but it takes more than imagination to make these things work. If this is a "what if" discussion, then fine. If this is a serious discussion on what it would take and what kind of incentives actually work to make development downtown happen, than we need to be real about what we are dealing with. It is fun to just imagine, but that doesn't really get it done.

Then what do you suggest?

...and this whole time I thought the world ran on lollipop wishes.

Are there any developers (big or small) reading this? We would like to hear your take on why more in-fill doesn't happen and what it would take to make it happen.

You know I've been visiting or spending extended time in Austin for the better part of 15 years now, and really the thing about their downtown is that it seems to me like everything down there falls into one of two categories... you have the more traditional businesses in office towers, and then you have the recreational activities. Let's start with the recreational activities... because if you are talking about downtown housing that is what is drawing people there. A while back I was down there and in a single night I couldn't tell you the number of places I was able to hit to eat, meet friends, have drinks, listen to live music, see real art, take in a show, and on and on and on. For the most part, all of the places I visited were locally owned. The few chains that were around were what I would consider more upscale places. There is a lot of creativity and vibrancy. The housing places that are built DO NOT look like brownstones or other things that would appeal to empty nesters. I mean hell look at the area surrounding the Whole Foods corporate headquarters... some of those condos remind me of something avante garde you would see in Amsterdam. The whole place is built for young, creative, hip, and unmarried people. That is why people are moving there.

Now that isn't to say that this is what OKC has to market for. The actual point is that downtown Austin has a very good grasp on what niche it is marketing to. You're not going to see families pushing baby strollers down Sixth. You're just not. That's neither a good thing or a bad thing, it just is what it is. There are a lot of good things about targeting that demographic. If you're trying to capture raw creativity and also capture people in a stage of their lives where they can spend a lot of money on entertainment, and are on the verge of spending huge amounts on starting up their lives, then that is the way to go. If you're strategy is something else then it's something else.

Does downtown OKC have any discernible strategy on who it wants living down there? Not that I can tell. That's a problem.

The thing about Austin is that it really did not have a government entity stand up and say, "let's build a downtown for urban hipsters." Not really. They just had a government that didn't get in the way, and made some decently smart choices about their town when they realized what was going on down there. For the most part, they had the demographic and a lot of private folks with enough money to start a business moved in down there and took advantage of the climate. When that started to happen, their city didn't try to squash it.

At times I have felt that downtown OKC started to get a sense of itself and create its own identity, but every time the city government and/or your typical busybodies in this city have either gotten in the way or squashed whatever was happening. There was a brief moment early-on where I think this city had an opportunity to appeal to the "Austin demographic," but it quickly faded as the city became hell-bent on ensuring that downtown was a place for families/everyone/everything/anything/etc. That is just extremely poor vision. Shortly after that city leaders began clamoring for the creative class, and yet they continue to build housing units downtown that do not appeal to them. They continue to spend tax dollars attracting things like a Bass Pro, but still have yet to attract any substantial retail. People around town say that they want to attract young professionals, but then the Bricktown Association decides to paint all folks of that demographic in a particular light and paint in a great swath across the canvas of downtown a giant "not in my backyard, get off the lawn damn kids" banner at the first sign of any unruly behavior, typically by folks who aren't even in the demographic they are supposedly targeting. Are downtown leaders really this bipolar? Apparently.

Now say that isn't the demo you want in your downtown. That's perfectly fine. Admit it, and figure out what demo you want because you can't have it all. You're not New York. Ask yourself why someone would want to spend the kind of money they would spend in virtually any comparable urban market in the country, when a lot of them have a lot more entertainment and dining options going on 24/7/365? If it's not that then what is your product differentiation? If it is entertainment then shape up and get on the ball.

Now with respect to the Austin downtown office building aspect of this post, I actually think that goes back to an area being created where there's a critical mass of business that tends to feed off of itself. I've posted lengthy thoughts on this before so I want ramble on about that again, but really I think a lot of that just has to do with businesses being in close proximity to one another, which creates B2B opportunities, knowledge sharing, and being close to a customer base of folks. If you're specifically talking about the technology industry, then I have to say part of the reason those companies are there is because of that 'creative class' stuff that Austin has going for it. If you're young, really smart, and have a lot of disposable income you are probably going to be looking for some of the finer things in life... and amidst its bar scene Austin has that in abundance everywhere. There are clothing brands there that you just can't get here. Types of interesting food there that you can't get here. Hair salons with amenities beyond anything you can find downtown. Bars and bartenders offering services that you can't find here. World-class artists and musicians playing in random bars all over town every night of the week that you just aren't going to get anywhere else. If you're a technology worker you probably have a creative and somewhat strangely unique side to your personality. Austin certainly is appealing to that. If that is what OKC is interested in attracting then it needs to step up its game at all levels. If OKC realizes its future lies with something else then it needs to admit that, figure out what its niche is, and try to capitalize on that.

I'm sorry for the long post, but I'm just not brief on this issue. Take it for what it's worth, just another rant from a random on the interwebs I suppose.

OKC has some unique opportunities and at the same time challenges. I just think that sometimes cities and well intentioned and professional groups tend to get very philosophical and sometimes miss the real reasons why development does or doesn't get done. The bottom line is that the city has to help make developments of the kind they want financially attractive. I think there are many ways for the city to do that and it isn't all with $$ incentives.

I think that it would be worthwhile to work with some urban developers to really find out what THEY would find to be real incentives and what makes or breaks their opportunities. Our opinions don't matter, but theirs matter greatly. They aren't in the business for altruistic reasons, but for investment purposes.

Well, what dismayed is talking about is something that everyone can agree with in general, and then when it comes to specific issues I think people would be surprised at which side of the issue they come down on.

I used to think we needed to maximize the higher-end real estate market because people were so convincing back in 2005 that we'd have to build out that demographic which would then attract the lower income groups. But the lower income groups aren't artists and beatniks, they're empty nesters and CEOs--so that's what we're trying to appeal to in our downtown. I didn't begin to realize what a moronic development strategy that was until time went on and development failed to meet expectations.

Another issue is Reggae Fest in Bricktown. They got that the hell outta there.

Another issue is that drinking bar crawl thing for cancer. That was a huge stink, and apparently the families in Bricktown were angry at being surrounded by binge drinking in the middle of a weekday. No more bar crawl.

I also have seen more than 5 times the cop presence in Bricktown, especially late at night, that I've seen on 6th or other big nightlife areas. They also have a completely different mentality--cops on 6th Street will disperse and hang out at bar entrances to make sure there aren't fights either in clubs or in the street and to make sure bouncers do their job, whereas cops in Bricktown will find one crowded area and just line up in a group of 10 and look all imposing and then occasionally swoop in on someone who's too drunk. What's the use in that?

Also look at the businesses that have opened up in Bricktown. Candy Shop. Banjo Museum. We were firing on all guns trying to get a toy museum to come. Come on, what is that? I'll be honest, there is absolutely no way that Bricktown will thrive as a family destination. There is no way that can make a thriving urban district, absolutely no way. Basically a lot of Bricktown's latest destinations have simply replaced the family-friendly kiosks and stuff you would have found in Crossroads Mall 10 years ago. And most families still aren't going to say, "let's load up the strollers and take those whiney loud kids to Bricktown for the day."

And as long as you put the focus in Bricktown on families, it's not going to attract much more unless you let those families be surrounded by other elements. People in charge aren't gonna let that happen, either. Family-friendly is the worst type of no-sum game you can play when it comes to downtown.

I think family friendly is fine during the holidays, when we have ice skating, tubing, etc. But otherwise, I agree...downtown and Bricktown are not, and will probably never be, areas that will attract primarily families. The Adventure District is a better place to emphasize families, with the Zoo and Science Museum. However, if you want to at least make Bricktown an option for families, one thing that could do that is getting the train between Bricktown and the Adventure District up and working. People might be interested in staying in Bricktown, with its hotels and restaurants and hopping on a train to the Adventure District. It might stimulate development in both areas. If not, I agree, we should focus on that area for adults. If you look at the demographics of people living downtown, as has been said, it's not families. Everyone I know downtown is either pre- or post-kids (or close).

And again, I certainly don't think attracting lower income groups is ultimately going to attract higher income groups downtown, because what you have to build for people with lower incomes will never be remodelable for higher incomes. The building quality nowadays isn't good enough, as materials and labor are now expensive. That leaves us stuck permanently with people of lower incomes, and we definitely need a mixture. Our problem is that we don't have many attractive, but aging, buildings to attract the young creative class. The city had the right idea....we're just impatient. In older cities, the wealthy built right around downtown because there was no transit. Over time, and with the availabilty of transit and then ultimately the car, some of them moved farther out, leaving beautiful old homes that eventually, as they aged, became more affordable for the younger and more creative. We don't have 200 years of row house building that created that cycle, and we tore down half the buildings that might have worked as lofts or second to fourth floor walkups. Our city wasn't wrong in their idea that higher end housing would eventually attract lower income groups, it's just that it takes too long. And I'm going to argue that $150,000 to $800,000 housing is as good as it's going to get in new construction. You don't have to be wealthy to afford those prices, just middle class. The people that cannot pay that much will need to look to older neighborhoods close to downtown that are more affordable, or rent. That would be a more attractive prospect if we had mass transit. I've mentioned it before, but in Chicago, my daughters cannot afford to live downtown...that is for the wealthy. So, they live 2 miles out, but they have bus service.

Spartan - your demographic blinders are on. People in my demographic can out spend you and 5 of your friends everyday of the week, and do it without the assistance of a single cop. But the area has to appeal to my demographic. Now I will say that I am a little more on the rough side than my wife. I am a pretty big guy and can take care of myself, but my wife is a small woman who's first priority is providing security for our two boys, so she won't go anywhere that she thinks has even a remote chance of putting them in harms way. Even places like Daytona Beach, famous for Bike Week and Biketoberfest are seeing the value in becoming family freindly because they can bring about the same number of visitors but with none of the crime, destruction, and hassle. When you get older you will realize that (I know you hate hearing that but it is true). Oklahoma City got to where it is today by being family friendly.

When we lived in Tampa they expiremented with turning Ybor City (a historic district once know for its trendy clothing stores and ethnic restaurants) into a hip 24/7 party zone. The result was all the shops closing and murders every weekend. All the progress made by bringing in the TECO Streetcar line was lost when businesses stopped taking clients to the area because you can't lure a new employer if violent crimes happen on the street right outside window.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/jan/04/ybor-city-night-day/news-opinion-commentary/


Tampa - If you ask a local resident about Ybor City, you'll likely hear about difficult parking, aggressive panhandling and crime fears.

And that's according to the president of the Ybor City Chamber of Commerce.

Tom Keating, speaking at a recent luncheon in Ybor City for a public relations group, acknowledged Ybor City's reputation is the 800-pound gorilla in the room when he's trying to drum up visitors.

"These are the things we hear most about," he admitted


Once your reputation is gone it is very very hard to get it back.

This website shows some of those projects, I like, wish we did have more of this for infil in OKC.

http://www.moderntulsa.net/2008/11/03/tulsa-cherry-street-lofts/

Yes. These are the ones. Very cool. I think this is the type of housing Urban Pioneer is talking about.

RE: Dismayed's post about Austin


The thing about Austin is that it really did not have a government entity stand up and say, "let's build a downtown for urban hipsters." Not really. They just had a government that didn't get in the way, and made some decently smart choices about their town when they realized what was going on down there. For the most part, they had the demographic and a lot of private folks with enough money to start a business moved in down there and took advantage of the climate. When that started to happen, their city didn't try to squash it.


You make great points, but their city government has played a huge role with zoning and other activities to encourage the development they have downtown. Their mayor has been preaching density and public transit, they have all kinds of restrictions on the kinds of building that can take place, etc. My uncle lives there and downtown Austin did not happen by accident, it happened because of planning. And, their city government didn't screw it up.

How about not having to pay the price of sprawl. All those new four lane roads going out into the country in all directions have to be paid for and maintained. Police are patroling hundreds of square miles of low density areas, etc...

Those folks are paying city sales taxes just as much as people living in the inner city areas.

Well, what dismayed is talking about is something that everyone can agree with in general, and then when it comes to specific issues I think people would be surprised at which side of the issue they come down on.

I used to think we needed to maximize the higher-end real estate market because people were so convincing back in 2005 that we'd have to build out that demographic which would then attract the lower income groups. But the lower income groups aren't artists and beatniks, they're empty nesters and CEOs--so that's what we're trying to appeal to in our downtown. I didn't begin to realize what a moronic development strategy that was until time went on and development failed to meet expectations.

Another issue is Reggae Fest in Bricktown. They got that the hell outta there.

Another issue is that drinking bar crawl thing for cancer. That was a huge stink, and apparently the families in Bricktown were angry at being surrounded by binge drinking in the middle of a weekday. No more bar crawl.

I also have seen more than 5 times the cop presence in Bricktown, especially late at night, that I've seen on 6th or other big nightlife areas. They also have a completely different mentality--cops on 6th Street will disperse and hang out at bar entrances to make sure there aren't fights either in clubs or in the street and to make sure bouncers do their job, whereas cops in Bricktown will find one crowded area and just line up in a group of 10 and look all imposing and then occasionally swoop in on someone who's too drunk. What's the use in that?

Also look at the businesses that have opened up in Bricktown. Candy Shop. Banjo Museum. We were firing on all guns trying to get a toy museum to come. Come on, what is that? I'll be honest, there is absolutely no way that Bricktown will thrive as a family destination. There is no way that can make a thriving urban district, absolutely no way. Basically a lot of Bricktown's latest destinations have simply replaced the family-friendly kiosks and stuff you would have found in Crossroads Mall 10 years ago. And most families still aren't going to say, "let's load up the strollers and take those whiney loud kids to Bricktown for the day."

And as long as you put the focus in Bricktown on families, it's not going to attract much more unless you let those families be surrounded by other elements. People in charge aren't gonna let that happen, either. Family-friendly is the worst type of no-sum game you can play when it comes to downtown.

Your comments about the morons who decided "empty nesters" and millionaires would jump start downtown housing are spot on. We did everything exactly backward from the way development happens in big cities, and for our stupefying efforts, we got bupkus.

Now we have our moral values mayor chasing off potential entertainment suitors.

It's not a winning strategy.

By contrast, there are arty, hip, interesting things happening in OKC, but not downtown.

Memorial Road (and accompanying infrastructure) IS the incentive. Do you think there would be any development along Memorial Road if it was a graded dirt section line road? Nope. But the City pays for a lot of asphalt, pipes, etc and development takes over. I know you are saying to yourself 'but look at all the money the city collected in sales taxes'. Two things, 1) if that development had been directed to where exisiting infrastructre is already in place then the additional sales tax would have been all profit so taxes could have been lowered across the board for everyone, 2) currently the money just gets rolled over to even more expansion so in the long run nothing ever gets better, it just keeps expanding but every new mile of expansion cost more than the previous mile. It is the law of diminishing returns.

The city is going to do the exact same thing when the new Boulevard gets built. I don't see the difference. And the city is spending much more downtown through the MAPS programs. Yet, developers still can't get it done in places like Bricktown due to greed. The problem is not that we need to offer more incentives for development downtown. The problem rests with downtown property owners.

Spartan - your demographic blinders are on. People in my demographic can out spend you and 5 of your friends everyday of the week, and do it without the assistance of a single cop.

Yeah, but you all will do it at Old Navy or Lane Bryant. I think you underestimate the disposable income of younger, unmarried people who have no commitments. The advantage that has most cities competing for younger grads is that if you can get the young professionals to come to your city they will attract more vibrant retail and diversity and they'll do it while spending a lot more in your city over their lifetime. Plus, the stores have more of a draw factor, which is why OKC has nothing.

By contrast, there are arty, hip, interesting things happening in OKC, but not downtown.

Very true. Who would have ever thought OKC's so-called "urban renaissance" would begin to apply more to areas outside downtown this soon? NW 9th and the Plaza are reaching for the sky.

Also look at the businesses that have opened up in Bricktown. Candy Shop. Banjo Museum. We were firing on all guns trying to get a toy museum to come. Come on, what is that?

That is embarrassing is what it is. I mean it's not a bad thing that those entities are down there in Bricktown, but the expectations people had in relation to them and the way the news of their openings was treated here and in the news... it would suggest that our expectations for Bricktown are far too low.


I'll be honest, there is absolutely no way that Bricktown will thrive as a family destination. There is no way that can make a thriving urban district, absolutely no way. Basically a lot of Bricktown's latest destinations have simply replaced the family-friendly kiosks and stuff you would have found in Crossroads Mall 10 years ago. And most families still aren't going to say, "let's load up the strollers and take those whiney loud kids to Bricktown for the day."

Totally agree if that's the goal (urban city core). The thing is if that is what city planners really envision Bricktown being then they need to drop this non-strategy strategy of trying to be something for everyone and just go full-bore with the above vision. I mean really even that (a family-friendly entertainment and shopping district) could work if someone did some real planning, used superior construction materials, and for example tried to create some sort of Branson on our canal or something somewhat Disneyfied. That wouldn't be my first choice, but I think from a business standpoint it could work. At that point though you really are relegating the area to an Entertainment District and are kissing goodbye to any dreams of urban living. But again the problem is that there is no real strategy... the plan is just to make Bricktown a place for everyone. Business 101 says if your strategy is that you are going after everyone as opposed to a niche then you have a disaster on your hands.

That isn't to say that downtown as a whole can't be a place for everyone... it can, but I don't believe it is possible without specific districts popping up and really having their own unique identity. If Bricktown's identity is to become a family-friendly entertainment district them for the love of God stop building condos there and start building them in Midtown or Deep Deuce. Build hotels in Bricktown if that is the strategy.

I don't really find myself going to Bricktown much these days anyway. The place feels exactly like what I described above, a place for out of town visitors. The problem with that strategy, one that excludes your local population, is that you could easily end up like Dallas West End if you are not careful....

I guess that somebody needs to firmly identify the hipsters who will pay for the kinds of buildings that many on here want. The demographics Spartan believes is the answer should be identified, confirmed that they are truly interested and committed, and then developers should be presented with the evidence. So far, apparently a good enough case hasn't been made. If the economics are there, developers will create the kind of projects some want. But developers don't commit their money based on emotions and some sense of obligation to build a perfect city. A business case must be made.

I guess that somebody needs to firmly identify the hipsters who will pay for the kinds of buildings that many on here want. The demographics Spartan believes is the answer should be identified, confirmed that they are truly interested and committed, and then developers should be presented with the evidence. So far, apparently a good enough case hasn't been made. If the economics are there, developers will create the kind of projects some want. But developers don't commit their money based on emotions and some sense of obligation to build a perfect city. A business case must be made.

This is precisely the attitude many of our city leaders have, and it's why it takes so long for this city to move forward. You act as if what is discussed here hasn't happened or isn't happening now in other cities. Your responses seem condescending, and it's odd, because based on your comments it seems as if you only have a surface-level understanding of the discussion. Yes, I think everyone participating in the discussion understands that development takes money, and that developers need to make money on their investments. Thanks, Captain Obvious. However, you don't really acknowledge that the actions city leadership undertakes influences development and where developers choose to spend.

This is a discussion. No one is required to produce a business plan and undergo a credit check to contribute. It's not about emotion, it's about imagination.

Yeah, but you all will do it at Old Navy or Lane Bryant. I think you underestimate the disposable income of younger, unmarried people who have no commitments. The advantage that has most cities competing for younger grads is that if you can get the young professionals to come to your city they will attract more vibrant retail and diversity and they'll do it while spending a lot more in your city over their lifetime. Plus, the stores have more of a draw factor, which is why OKC has nothing.

Here is the difference Spartan. Your generation/demographic is looking for a place to party and hangout. My generation/demographic is looking for a place to build a home. You will have to drink a lot of beer and watch a lot of LFL to even begin to match the money involved in buying a $250,000 condo. The problem is that the people building condos/townhomes at the beginning went for the $500,000 and up crowd. If they had priced condos in the $150,000 to $400,000 range we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. Instead, we would be discussing how many people are living in downtown.


I think you underestimate the disposable income of younger, unmarried people who have no commitments.

...and you seriously underestimate the required spending of older, married people who have commitments. If you are business person you want to be in a business that people have to spend money on. Disposable income is just that, and people have less of it every month.

This is precisely the attitude many of our city leaders have, and it's why it takes so long for this city to move forward. You act as if what is discussed here hasn't happened or isn't happening now in other cities. Your responses seem condescending, and it's odd, because based on your comments it seems as if you only have a surface-level understanding of the discussion. Yes, I think everyone participating in the discussion understands that development takes money, and that developers need to make money on their investments. Thanks, Captain Obvious. However, you don't really acknowledge that the actions city leadership undertakes influences development and where developers choose to spend.

This is a discussion. No one is required to produce a business plan and undergo a credit check to contribute. It's not about emotion, it's about imagination.

I'm sorry. Didn't realize this was a fantasy only thread. I thought OKC talk was about finding ways to actually improve our city. Naive imagination is all that is required?

It is amazing that you are surprised that before investing 10s of millions of $ someone might actually want a business plan and some idea of what the risks are.

That is embarrassing is what it is. I mean it's not a bad thing that those entities are down there in Bricktown, but the expectations people had in relation to them and the way the news of their openings was treated here and in the news... it would suggest that our expectations for Bricktown are far too low.


Remember when I said the Action Figure Museum (along with the Banjo museum) should go to the Arts District and EVERYONE on OKCTalk ripped me a new one. Not one person agreed with me. Weird. A year later and no one can figure out why these things don't work in Bricktown.

This is precisely the attitude many of our city leaders have, and it's why it takes so long for this city to move forward. You act as if what is discussed here hasn't happened or isn't happening now in other cities. Your responses seem condescending, and it's odd, because based on your comments it seems as if you only have a surface-level understanding of the discussion. Yes, I think everyone participating in the discussion understands that development takes money, and that developers need to make money on their investments. Thanks, Captain Obvious. However, you don't really acknowledge that the actions city leadership undertakes influences development and where developers choose to spend.

This is a discussion. No one is required to produce a business plan and undergo a credit check to contribute. It's not about emotion, it's about imagination.

Again, I go back to my comments about relying on the "developers" too much. "Real" neighborhoods with "real" vibrancy are typically not created by developers. Case in point is the Plaza District. Artists and creatives went there because there is enough urban architecture in one place to form cohesion, and it is cheap enough for them to rent or buy.

Downtown proper will never have that kind of depth unless space is made available at affordable prices. The problem with the market/demand theories is that it is the actual "creative fabric" that attracts other tennants. Steve Mason figured this out with Coffee Slingers and Iguana for example. Totally unique "mom and pop" concepts that have subsequently attracted others who want to be near that energy. His understanding of this has created a neighborhood pocket and is generating a nice investment return.

The real problem is greed. It prevents a great many things from happening. People who want to stimulate a diverse attractive tennant base have to understand that market/demand is created by beloved anchor tennants. Most of whom would have to have a subsidized rent to gain a foothold. The rest will follow.

However, the people downtown who grasp these fundamentals of how to stimulate "real" and subsequently profitable urbanization can be counted on my two hands, if that.

Remember when I said the Action Figure Museum (along with the Banjo museum) should go to the Arts District and EVERYONE on OKCTalk ripped me a new one. Not one person agreed with me. Weird. A year later and no one can figure out why these things don't work in Bricktown.

Kerry, and the Action Figure Museum would still have no place in the Arts District so there is still no one who agrees with you about that.

"Real" neighborhoods with "real" vibrancy are typically not created by developers. Case in point is the Plaza District. Artists and creatives went there because there is enough urban architecture in one place to form cohesion, and it is cheap enough for them to rent or buy.

Truer words were ne'er spoken. If you have the best design in the world and open up your wallet, you get something like Disney's Epcot: dazzling on the surface, but you never forget that it's as synthetic as Naugahyde.

I really wish folks would stop trying to make the downtown issue into a single person vs. family debate. I can't even begin to count the number of my friends who are married, married with children, or in long term relationships who moved away from here because they felt that our city was lacking. Recently an opportunity arose that might have allowed one such friend to move back here from Austin, and he told me bluntly that he would never come back. He and his wife regularly enjoy arts and entertainment opportunities that simply do not exist here, and are able to shop (be it organic groceries, $250 jeans, or pieces of furniture that are truly works of modern art) at a level that is not possible here. There is a vast market out there, we'll just call them the professional and under 40 crowd, that this city's business folks, and the city which has leadership responsibility for areas of the city that is has basically propped up and created, are simply ignoring. It's like leaving money on the table. Except the money isn't staying on the table. Everyone I know goes to Dallas to shop, or the coasts or Austin for entertainment, orders their furniture from out of state, goes to Dallas to buy their cars because there is basically one luxury dealership serving 1.1+ million people here, and so on. There's always going to be some of that, but it shouldn't always have to be like that here. At times I seriously wonder if this city will never be more than it is today, but then I think about the vast numbers of people I know who make good money and who do enjoy the same things that I do and I simply cannot believe that new opportunities will not arise. At the end of the day I know that it eventually has to happen... and then I realize it just isn't going to happen downtown, it's probably going to happen on the Curve or elsewhere. And honestly I think that is why I care less and less about downtown and Bricktown with each passing year. The city and local business entities there have moved too slowly and the opportunities that they could have had aren't going away... they are simply going to happen in other parts of town.

I really wish folks would stop trying to make the downtown issue into a single person vs. family debate. I can't even begin to count the number of my friends who are married, married with children, or in long term relationships who moved away from here because they felt that our city was lacking. Recently an opportunity arose that might have allowed one such friend to move back here from Austin, and he told me bluntly that he would never come back. He and his wife regularly enjoy arts and entertainment opportunities that simply do not exist here, and are able to shop (be it organic groceries, $250 jeans, or pieces of furniture that are truly works of modern art) at a level that is not possible here. There is a vast market out there, we'll just call them the professional and under 40 crowd, that this city's business folks, and the city which has leadership responsibility for areas of the city that is has basically propped up and created, are simply ignoring. It's like leaving money on the table. Except the money isn't staying on the table. Everyone I know goes to Dallas to shop, or the coasts or Austin for entertainment, orders their furniture from out of state, goes to Dallas to buy their cars because there is basically one luxury dealership serving 1.1+ million people here, and so on. There's always going to be some of that, but it shouldn't always have to be like that here. At times I seriously wonder if this city will never be more than it is today, but then I think about the vast numbers of people I know who make good money and who do enjoy the same things that I do and I simply cannot believe that new opportunities will not arise. At the end of the day I know that it eventually has to happen... and then I realize it just isn't going to happen downtown, it's probably going to happen on the Curve or elsewhere. And honestly I think that is why I care less and less about downtown and Bricktown with each passing year. The city and local business entities there have moved too slowly and the opportunities that they could have had aren't going away... they are simply going to happen in other parts of town.

I hear what you’re saying Dismayed, but don't fret. That whole "creative class" stuff is just a buzz word. The City needs to attract the "urban middle class". The 30 to 50 age bracket not only has a lot of disposable income, but we also have a lot of income that isn't disposable. The problem is the middle class are not urban pioneers for the most part.

I try to look at things though my wife’s eyes. We recently discussed moving back to OKC. She wants to move to Norman because she is comfortable there. She know where things are and is used to the idea of a fenced backyard, driving to eat, driving to the store, living in a house that looks like the house across the street, etc. I would prefer Heritage Hills or Mesta Park.

When I mentioned this she was flat-out against it. She said she didn't want to live in that area and in true Cornett style said there were too many reasons to list. Then I mentioned that I would like to live in a 100 old iconic house where we could walk to dinner, the gym, the beauty salon, the coffee shop, etc. I then told how the streetcars were coming back and we could ride to the Ford Center, downtown, the new park, and Bricktown (movies and more food options). She became intrigued by that thought. Over the next 30 years we could easily spend several million in the urban core (or we could not). It comes down to who wants our money, urban OKC or suburban Norman.

The good thing about Bricktown is that is adaptable, meaning family friendly during the day, and single friendly during the night.

Everyone I know goes to Dallas to shop, or the coasts or Austin for entertainment, orders their furniture from out of state, goes to Dallas to buy their cars because there is basically one luxury dealership serving 1.1+ million people here, and so on.

dismayed, I have had a longtime argument with Spartan about this issue. You obviously know a very different crowd than I do because I can't think of one person that I know that does that. I'm not saying it doesn't happen just that isn't a large enough issue to get excited about. My opinion has always been that many people who shop elsewhere do it as more of a status symbol so they can say to people "Oh, I went to Dallas, or Miami, or New York, or LA to buy whatever".

I really don't have anything to add to this discussion, except to compliment all of you who are very intelligently expressing your thoughts and rationales on very important matters, or so it seems to me. Good discussion, good job, keep it up. That is all.

dismayed, I have had a longtime argument with Spartan about this issue. You obviously know a very different crowd than I do because I can't think of one person that I know that does that. I'm not saying it doesn't happen just that isn't a large enough issue to get excited about. My opinion has always been that many people who shop elsewhere do it as more of a status symbol so they can say to people "Oh, I went to Dallas, or Miami, or New York, or LA to buy whatever".

Or they are like me and my wife. We travel quite a bit and shop wherever we are. However we don't escape from OKC to shop elsewhere.
We try to buy here but sometimes local businesses don't like to compete or you can't get the selection you want here.

Again, I go back to my comments about relying on the "developers" too much. "Real" neighborhoods with "real" vibrancy are typically not created by developers. Case in point is the Plaza District.

Who is Rick Dowell?

Who is Rick Dowell?

Former OU prof. who is a developer in the metro including some space in Norman.
Some find him a bit of an odd duck, but he's an ok chap.

Former OU prof. who is a developer in the metro including some space in Norman.
Some find him a bit of an odd duck, but he's an ok chap.

He is also a real estate developer with a big hand in Midtown.

He is also a real estate developer with a big hand in Midtown.

The problem with Rick Dowell is that he has created an exclusively 9-5 extension of the CBD with absolutely no other uses other than offices. It would be an area completely devoid of evening and weekend pedestrian activity if it were not for the Legacy apartments and Sycamore Square. His properties also lie in the transition area to SOSA.

To his credit, he stabilized the area from further structural decay although many will debate his "Trumpish" sort of architecture. He claims to be pursuing a Mediterranean theme. He always builds using stone, brick, and steel versus the cheaper alternative of ephis. There are many great and amusing stories about Rick and his escapades.

However, he vehemently opposes Project 180. He does not want to see Walker torn up again and does not appreciate the "modern" aesthetics of the new lighting, benches, etc incorporated into the design.

I disagree with him on trying to prevent the construction. 4th street is in desperate need of traffic calming and the entire area could use additional pedestrian enhancements. Also, it might help the area if it felt more connected to the CBD. Project 180 could provide some degree of continuity at least on some overall levels.

Expect to see him at the Board of Adjustment meeting in full force this Thursday opposing this project according to the Journal Record via the P180 thread..

Rick also owns the office tower across from Sandridge that is undergoing asbestos abatement.