We have plenty of high-paying jobs, but our high-paid residents tend to live in the 'burbs and go to megachurches. Not criticizing, just pointing out this obvious fact.

Our urbanists are either very high-paid individuals or young folks still making their way. What's missing is quality-built for-sale housing for middle to upper-middle class incomes. That is the sweet spot. That is the market that is underserved. Clearly, there's a market demand for this type of housing, but it's not available. I don't know if our developers are greedy, unimaginative, or if building quality housing for this demographic is simply not economically viable, but that is the void that we have all seen and discussed for years on end (I joined OKCTalk in 2005, and we were discussing it then!).

As of this month, the median home price in OKC has reached $160,000, but when you shop around, you quickly realize you can find very nice three-bedroom homes in nice neighborhoods for far less than this. Yet Downtown, you can barely afford a studio loft at that median price.

Is this a matter of economics, or is it not possible to sell a nice, well-built, two-bedroom multifamily unit in the downtown area for the OKC median home price at a reasonable profit? I believe that it IS possible, but that this type of housing is simply not being built for whatever reason.

Remember: the city fathers thought it would be a great idea to offer half million and up housing for sale downtown first. Their argument was that you start upscale first, because if you start with "midscale" or "downscale" housing, you cannot improve values. And they were wrong, as this approach has rarely worked in any real city. "Hot" downtown or urban neighborhoods almost always start out with relatively affordable housing, which quickly escalates in value, leading to further, more upscale development. This has happened everywhere else but our city leaders chose to ignore it, or else they simply do not understand the economic forces involved with urban development and gentrification.

Put another way, why would you invest in half million and up real estate in an unproven market area? If you do, you have enough faith and / or money to blow to lose that bet. Conversely, if you invest in a neighborhood that is already "happening," you're making a wise investment in the future, knowing that values will rise. OKC did this all ass-backwards.

Part of the problem is that our city leadership is not very urban. Witness the recent boulevard ado and other issues. These folks just don't understand what drives urban residents, which has been evident for years. Our Chamber and others know we need to have urban residents, but they don't know how to make it happen. And why would they? Most of our city leaders live in suburban or quasi-suburban enclaves and that's all they know, excepting the theatre junkets they take to NYC or conferences in other big cities. This mentality may explain why so many of them believe that a flipping convention center could play any role in improving our inner-city quality of life.

The Brownstones at Maywood Park fit the market segment that you are talking about, but they have stopped construction and are selling off their unbuilt lots. So is there really a huge demand for this?

I really do not see the connection to the city government. If someone wants to seize the opportunity and build homes for families downtown what does it matter what the city council thinks? I think some of the best districts in the city are developing with little to no intervention from the city.

The Brownstones at Maywood Park fit the market segment that you are talking about, but they have stopped construction and are selling off their unbuilt lots. So is there really a huge demand for this?

I really do not see the connection to the city government. If someone wants to seize the opportunity and build homes for families downtown what does it matter what the city council thinks? I think some of the best districts in the city are developing with little to no intervention from the city.

Are you high? WTF?

The Brownstones most certainly DO NOT fit the demographic I'm talking about. Middle and upper-middle class folks will not buy these. They start at over a half million and go up. They are the poster child for the wrongheadedness of the city leadership.

I know Betts lives there and loves them but she can afford to buy one, and few people outside Serge Ibaka and local CEOs can.

That is a small market segment.

As for your comment about city government, perhaps you're ignoring the incentives, TIFs, infrastructure enhancements and other key decisions made by government that impact development. But you obviously just skimmed my post and didn't even consider the content, because I talked about CITY LEADERSHIP, not city government. City leadership includes our rich folks, developers, Chamber, Rotary club, etc. They are not evil, they just aren't terribly skilled at leading urban development.


Are you being purposely obtuse?

It seems to me that the people most likely to live in this area are 20somethings who are looking to have fun. These rentals cater to them. When older people show more interest in the area, and urban lifestyle, then there will be more of a market for higher rents, etc.

The reason this is relates to my post. No strings apartment rental living appeals to 20 somethings. $750,000 for-sale condos are only attained by older folks. There's nothing in between for people who, say, get married and want to buy something. This isn't that complicated to understand.

The reason this is relates to my post. No strings apartment rental living appeals to 20 somethings. $750,000 for-sale condos are only attained by older folks. There's nothing in between for people who, say, get married and want to buy something. This isn't that complicated to understand.

Yeah, I know. What I'm pointing out is, are you sure these people want to live downtown? Is the demand there? It's a chicken or egg argument.

Yeah, I know. What I'm pointing out is, are you sure these people want to live downtown? Is the demand there? It's a chicken or egg argument.

There have been several studies that have shown this. Anecdotal, personal conversations with dozens of acquaintances support this. People on this and other forums have talked about it for years, so yes, I'm quite sure the demand is there. You probably know several people who would buy downtown RIGHT NOW if there were a quality alternative close to the median home price in OKC. This isn't a "chicken or egg" argument. There are no chickens.

Honestly, Soonerguru has it right. I can attest as a new "20-something" that so many friends and other young adults my age would LOVE THE CHANCE to live downtown. Unfortunately, we are priced out of the market and there is close to nothing that is even remotely acceptable for reasonable rent downtown. The places that do have reasonable rent have already been snatched up. The Millennials want to be a part of the renaissance, but unfortunately I'd already have to have my bachelor's and probably a few years of work behind my back before I could ever consider moving downtown. It's so depressing because I was born an urbanist and I've always seen myself living in a walkable, vibrant, and urban environment, but for right now, that's being reserved for only the wealthy. I'll have to make due with the inner-city for the foreseeable future.

>.<

There have been several studies that have shown this. Anecdotal, personal conversations with dozens of acquaintances support this. People on this and other forums have talked about it for years, so yes, I'm quite sure the demand is there. You probably know several people who would buy downtown RIGHT NOW if there were a quality alternative close to the median home price in OKC. This isn't a "chicken or egg" argument. There are no chickens.

I hope you're right. Could you post some of those studies? I'd like to read them.

Are you high? WTF?
]


No need for the harsh language. Your response is more or less a personal attack. You are correct however that the Brownstones only fit your criteria of well built and multifamily. They are not with in your price point that you outlined.

1 NE 2nd Street-The lofts at Maywood Park has 2 bed 2 bath unit for sale in the 200's.

When you say "Is this a matter of economics, or is it not possible..." then you go on to talk about leadership. If a project like the one you are describing makes sense, which I do not think it does in Deep Deuce, then it should not need a huge incentive package. If it does need a huge incentive package, then it not economically feasible in the first place.

http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/wschnitt/ScreenShot2012-08-18at63118PM-1.jpghttp://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/wschnitt/ScreenShot2012-08-18at63042PM-1.jpg

Those 2 fit the parameters of what you are talking about all but the point that they are not in Downtown or multifamily. Do you honestly think that considering land cost, which would be quite different from what it is in Mustang where one of those is, it could be down(obviously it would look differently and be in a building with a other units)? I do not think so.


On a side note, if someone were able to build "quality multifamily housing" and be able to sell it at a profit for $150k I bet it would sell really fast. So as a salesman myself, if something was selling quickly at $150k I would try for more. And I would bet that if something sold hot at $150k it would also sell at $250, the price of units currently for sale that do fit your parameters.

Honestly, Soonerguru has it right. I can attest as a new "20-something" that so many friends and other young adults my age would LOVE THE CHANCE to live downtown. Unfortunately, we are priced out of the market and there is close to nothing that is even remotely acceptable for reasonable rent downtown. The places that do have reasonable rent have already been snatched up. The Millennials want to be a part of the renaissance, but unfortunately I'd already have to have my bachelor's and probably a few years of work behind my back before I could ever consider moving downtown. It's so depressing because I was born an urbanist and I've always seen myself living in a walkable, vibrant, and urban environment, but for right now, that's being reserved for only the wealthy. I'll have to make due with the inner-city for the foreseeable future.

>.<

soonerguru is not talking about rentals but for sale housing.

No need for the harsh language. Your response is more or less a personal attack. You are correct however that the Brownstones only fit your criteria of well built and multifamily. They are not with in your price point that you outlined.

1 NE 2nd Street-The lofts at Maywood Park has 2 bed 2 bath unit for sale in the 200's.

When you say "Is this a matter of economics, or is it not possible..." then you go on to talk about leadership. If a project like the one you are describing makes sense, which I do not think it does in Deep Deuce, then it should not need a huge incentive package. If it does need a huge incentive package, then it not economically feasible in the first place.

http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/wschnitt/ScreenShot2012-08-18at63118PM-1.jpghttp://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/wschnitt/ScreenShot2012-08-18at63042PM-1.jpg

Those 2 fit the parameters of what you are talking about all but the point that they are not in Downtown or multifamily. Do you honestly think that considering land cost, which would be quite different from what it is in Mustang where one of those is, it could be down(obviously it would look differently and be in a building with a other units)? I do not think so.


On a side note, if someone were able to build "quality multifamily housing" and be able to sell it at a profit for $150k I bet it would sell really fast. So as a salesman myself, if something was selling quickly at $150k I would try for more. And I would bet that if something sold hot at $150k it would also sell at $250, the price of units currently for sale that do fit your parameters.

I think I understand what you're saying, but what is your non-sequitur about incentives? TIFs, block grants, and all of that are often used for properties, whether or not they are what we are looking to build long term. Are you questioning the use of, for example, the historic tax credits used to rehab properties in Midtown? Surely not.

I don't think we're communicating.

Honestly, Soonerguru has it right. I can attest as a new "20-something" that so many friends and other young adults my age would LOVE THE CHANCE to live downtown. Unfortunately, we are priced out of the market and there is close to nothing that is even remotely acceptable for reasonable rent downtown. The places that do have reasonable rent have already been snatched up. The Millennials want to be a part of the renaissance, but unfortunately I'd already have to have my bachelor's and probably a few years of work behind my back before I could ever consider moving downtown. It's so depressing because I was born an urbanist and I've always seen myself living in a walkable, vibrant, and urban environment, but for right now, that's being reserved for only the wealthy. I'll have to make due with the inner-city for the foreseeable future.

>.<

But is that really any different from other cities? My kids, who live in Chicago, have to live two miles from downtown in an area undergoing "gentrification". The Plaza District is our most comparable neighborhood, and thats where I'd be loOking if I were young. My nieces and nephews in Manhattan share spaces I consider almost too tiny to be habitable. Another daughter lives in SFO and pays $4500/month (with a bunch of roommates) for about 1200 square feet. Their friends are moving to Brooklyn and New Jersey to find affordable housing in NYC. If developers could afford to build and sell "affordable" housing downtown, they'd be falling all over themselves to do so.

Those homes might have a base price of $137,500 but what you don't see in that picture is the requirment to buy $50,000 worth of cars every 6 years. Over the course of a 30 year loan that is $250,000 bringing the total cost of living in one of those house to $387,500 and that is before interest, maintenance, lawn care, gasoline, insurance, inflation, the need for a 3rd or 4th car (children turning 16) and all the time wasted driving from point A to point B.

That first house now has a base price of $294/sq ft.

But is that really any different from other cities? My kids, who live in Chicago, have to live two miles from downtown in an area undergoing "gentrification". The Plaza District is our most comparable neighborhood, and thats where I'd be loOking if I were young. My nieces and nephews in Manhattan share spaces I consider almost too tiny to be habitable. Another daughter lives in SFO and pays $4500/month (with a bunch of roommates) for about 1200 square feet. Their friends are moving to Brooklyn and New Jersey to find affordable housing in NYC. If developers could afford to build and sell "affordable" housing downtown, they'd be falling all over themselves to do so.

Betts, the example cities you cite all have well-developed inner-city residential neighborhoods that have escalated in value. That is my point. Take the East Village and Lower East Side for example: That housing was built to be "affordable" and housed immigrants for generations. Now, you can't touch property there for less than an exorbitant monthly rent. My point is that OKC did it wrong by foolishly believing you could build a desirable, dense neighborhood of owner-occupied housing by only offering high-end priced options.

Did anyone watch Cathy O'Connors presentation to Council this past Tuesday under City Manager reports? If you didn't, so so. The developmental mind set is in high gear with her at the wheel. I think we are on the cusp of getting where people want to go. Hopefully her people read these blogs in not her directly.

I'd guess the next 5-years is all about rentals. But the foundation is being laid for something bigger.

The amazing thing about the "high" rents and insatiable apartment demand, is that 20 some things become 30 something's, and many of us do not want to continue to rent.

Guru's right. Because there is no product to transition to, the downtown apartments have become amazing incubators for suburban developers. I can't tell you how many thousands of people downtown has lost to the suburbs over the years. Not having the product was a huge part of it. But the other chickens/eggs that factor into these decisions are also being resolved.

Core infrastructure for actual "living" is finally going to be resolved over the next 5 years. Transit (streetcar), school (Rex Elemantary), grocery (Native Roots).

Now we can go around and around as to whether these were ever actual issues that should/would prevent for sale property, but undoubtedly the perception was there these were major issues/inhibitors.

Those excuses that I heard many a developer profess are now being taken away.

All these coming developments have me leaning strongly toward moving downtown in the next 2-3 years. Every time I look at my monthly budget and see over $1000 dedicated to automobile ownership I get sick. I have started looking at existing home inventory downtown and closely follow new developments. People like me are among the prime targets for suburban returnees to downtown in the near term - my kids are nearly out of school so I no longer "need" to live in the school district that affords them the best educational opportunities, and I have decided I do not need or want a large yard and all that comes with it. These are personal choices that until recently and in the near future had only one viable solution and that was to deal with all the negatives of suburban living to gain the advantages I deemed important at that stage in my life. I am very hopeful for there to be more lifestyle choices available in OKC in the coming years and foresee a great surge of downtown residents if these things UP mentioned come to fruition as planned.

Betts, the example cities you cite all have well-developed inner-city residential neighborhoods that have escalated in value. That is my point. Take the East Village and Lower East Side for example: That housing was built to be "affordable" and housed immigrants for generations. Now, you can't touch property there for less than an exorbitant monthly rent. My point is that OKC did it wrong by foolishly believing you could build a desirable, dense neighborhood of owner-occupied housing by only offering high-end priced options.

Actually a lot of close in housing was initially built for the wealthy - that of high enough quality to survive generations. With the advent of the car the wealthy began moving further out and the inner city housing went through a cycle of downward valuation. Then, the young, artistic and adventurous returned because of affordability and the areas became desirable again, which led to further renovation and renewal. Ultimately those areas again became unaffordable to the young and the less financially secure. Who thinks that any housing considered affordable or entry level being built today will stand the test of time of Haarlem brownstones? You need high quality to begin with to create lasting architecture, and high quality and durability are expensive.

Actually a lot of close in housing was initially built for the wealthy - that of high enough quality to survive generations. With the advent of the car the wealthy began moving further out and the inner city housing went through a cycle of downward valuation. Then, the young, artistic and adventurous returned because of affordability and the areas became desirable again, which led to further renovation and renewal. Ultimately those areas again became unaffordable to the young and the less financially secure. Who thinks that any housing considered affordable or entry level being built today will stand the test of time of Haarlem brownstones? You need high quality to begin with to create lasting architecture, and high quality and durability are expensive.

That is true. But this housing was built in dense urban cities with transit, not sprawling metros like OKC with a disemboweled urban core. Areas like the Upper East Side were always wealthy. Ditto Heritage Hills in OKC. That's not what I'm talking about.

In OKC, we don't have many bones to rediscover and improve; we have empty spaces. The question is what to put in those empty spaces. The decision to build minimal for-sale housing in our downtown core for anyone outside the upper income brackets has failed.

I think Betts is expressing her concern regarding the quality of materials that developers might use to develop "affordable" housing and their ability to survive for future generations. And she's right. Particularly when you starting talking about "stucco" versus brick. I which the developers have been using the word "stucco" but in reality have actually been using ephis/drivet in many cases.

I think that "affordable" and/or "reasonably priced" housing is viable here, but it takes developers willing to take a little bit less than the premium return that they are used to and maximum assistance from the city.

There is a resolution to some of this- subdivide large Urban Renewal parcel into smaller lots, have a development "overlay" with materials criteria, and allow individual development applications by actual individuals/families with their own independent architect. Basically generate SOSA type personalized development where the costs are reduced because the land values are forcibly reconciled to what they are actually worth at lot value.

I'm hoping Cathy O'Connor is thinking far enough outside of the box to see these types of "innovative" mechanisms that can spur actual "organic" development rather than the "mega-block", over-arching, control focused, Urban Renewal development strategies of the past. That is how you level the playing field. Think smaller and in large distributed quantities spurring diverse costing development that is truly market driven though individuality.

That is true. But this housing was built in dense urban cities with transit, not sprawling metros like OKC with a disemboweled urban core. Areas like the Upper East Side were always wealthy. Ditto Heritage Hills in OKC. That's not what I'm talking about.

In OKC, we don't have many bones to rediscover and improve; we have empty spaces. The question is what to put in those empty spaces. The decision to build minimal for-sale housing in our downtown core for anyone outside the upper income brackets has failed.

Actually, it was mass transit that led to suburban development....electric trains. It allowed those who had to work in the city to be able to commute from more affordable suburbs where they got space and privacy they couldn't get in town, or couldn't afford in the city center. Density was caused by having to live near their work.

And Betts is correct in her concern about quality and lack of permanence in new structures being built.

By the way, you should all visit the tenement museum in NYC and see how the early affordable housing stacked up. Totally different than what most here would accept as affordable housing. And you see why they wanted out to the burbs.

Actually, it was mass transit that led to suburban development....electric trains. It allowed those who had to work in the city to be able to commute from more affordable suburbs where they got space and privacy they couldn't get in town, or couldn't afford in the city center. Density was caused by having to live near their work.

And Betts is correct in her concern about quality and lack of permanence in new structures being built.

By the way, you should all visit the tenement museum in NYC and see how the early affordable housing stacked up. Totally different than what most here would accept as affordable housing. And you see why they wanted out to the burbs.

I agree with Betts about the materials. The question posed was: "Is it not possible to build quality, for-sale housing that is affordable to middle and upper-middle class buyers?" I believe that it is. Right now we have entry-level rental housing for 20-somethings and corporate transients and very high-end for-sale housing. That leaves a big opportunity.

Developers are doing this to make money, and I have no problem with that. Hopefully, though, developers will step up to fill this void and build housing that is produced with quality materials that is accessible to this currently unserved market segment.

Regarding the tenement housing in the Lower East Side, those were solidly built with materials that Betts would approve of. Cast stone, brick, etc.

Your point about transit is partially true, but there are two types of transit: commuter transit and inner-city transit. NYC has both, and without the extensive inner-city transit, it would not be possible for NYC to have developed the density it has. PATH trains to Jersey are not what I was talking about, and I'm not sure why you seem to limit your argument to those types of trains.

What we consider high end in OKC is barely above entry level housing in other cities. $200/sq foot isn't unreasonable at all. Perhaps it's our perception of how many square feet we need that is unrealistic. And I firmly believe that the reason the higher end housing wasn't initially successful was that people in OKC were completely unfamiliar with the concept of downtown living. That perception is changing slowly right now, but definitely changing and I expect it to snowball once the central park is completed and the streetcar is running. The developers weren't wrong, just a wee bit ahead of public perception, coupled with the real estate disaster and the extreme difficulty obtaining jumbo loans for homeowners. The majority of the downtown for sale housing is sold at this point in time.

something to note from this artice:

http://www.elpasoinc.com/news/top_story/article_0f205fb6-ea42-11e1-94cd-001a4bcf6878.html

In recent years, downtown Oklahoma City has become home to nearly 7,800 residents living in refurbished apartment buildings, offices turned into lofts and, in Bricktown, condominiums.

One new looking, five-story near the canal has condos upstairs and a hive of businesses on the ground, including Starbucks and Bolero Restaurant, specializing in Spanish food.

At Bolero, the hostess said she’d love to live downtown but can’t.

“It’s way too expensive for me,” she said.

The chef added he can’t afford it either, but the owner lives upstairs.

something to note from this artice:

http://www.elpasoinc.com/news/top_story/article_0f205fb6-ea42-11e1-94cd-001a4bcf6878.html

In recent years, downtown Oklahoma City has become home to nearly 7,800 residents living in refurbished apartment buildings, offices turned into lofts and, in Bricktown, condominiums.

One new looking, five-story near the canal has condos upstairs and a hive of businesses on the ground, including Starbucks and Bolero Restaurant, specializing in Spanish food.

At Bolero, the hostess said she’d love to live downtown but can’t.

“It’s way too expensive for me,” she said.

The chef added he can’t afford it either, but the owner lives upstairs.

Does anyone know how many total units we have downtown? I think someone used to keep a list of the number of living units, but I can't find it. It would be fun to graph the trajectory of downtown's population to see how quickly it is growing. With all these new apartments being built and planned, I'd like to see any estimate as to how long it would take to reach 10,000, 15,000 and 20,000 people living downtown.

something to note from this artice:

http://www.elpasoinc.com/news/top_story/article_0f205fb6-ea42-11e1-94cd-001a4bcf6878.html

In recent years, downtown Oklahoma City has become home to nearly 7,800 residents living in refurbished apartment buildings, offices turned into lofts and, in Bricktown, condominiums.

One new looking, five-story near the canal has condos upstairs and a hive of businesses on the ground, including Starbucks and Bolero Restaurant, specializing in Spanish food.

At Bolero, the hostess said she’d love to live downtown but can’t.

“It’s way too expensive for me,” she said.

The chef added he can’t afford it either, but the owner lives upstairs.

These numbers seem wildly inflated.

Wow. Just read that entire article... Not well written. There's about 20 mistakes and 10 assumptions. For instance, why does the author repeatedly write, "The Thunder?" There is no need to capitalize the "T" in the "the." A lot of weird stuff.

If one includes Heritage Hills and Mesta Park, it's likely the 7,800 isn't too far off from being accurate

I guess it comes down to how you define the urban residential core. If you use walkability as a guide what percentage of Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents are within walking distance of most of life's daily needs? Can they walk to buy a gallon milk? Do they walk to buy a gallon of milk?

73102 zip code: 2,963
73103 zip code: 4,911
73104 zip code: 1,369

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/73102.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/73103.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/73104.jpg

I guess it comes down to how you define the urban residential core. If you use walkability as a guide what percentage of Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents are within walking distance of most of life's daily needs? Can they walk to buy a gallon milk? Do they walk to buy a gallon of milk?

Kerry, if you use that definition we don't have an urban residential core.

what percentage of Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents are within walking distance of most of life's daily needs?

Almost all.


Can they walk to buy a gallon milk?

Yes.


Do they walk to buy a gallon of milk?

I do.

According to the Funding/Operating Agreement between the City and Bricktown Apartments, LLC, this project is slated with a price tag of $35 million with $4.5 million of it being Neighborhood Stabilization Funds. This price also does not include hotel portion. This project will be the most expensive housing development to come to the urban core in a while, even more than The Edge.

http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/cache/2/gwclanuao2tltr3avu1n1b31/166489808252012080238583.PDF

The stabilization funds will be used to only provide a portion of 'affordable' units...

So, that is $140,000 per apartment. That should be sufficient for decent quality. It is almost identical to the Edge budget and 30% more per unit than Level.

I think they key to building quality affordable units is to focus on the structure and not the finishing touches. As Bett's pointed out, concrete block is far superior than wood. What they need to do is build with the block but don't put granite in the kitchen and bath and don't put tile or carpet down - just stain the concrete floor. Let the homeowner apply the finished touches when they can afford/want to. You don't even have to build interior walls, the homeowner can do that when they get around to it. Sadly, US building codes prevent most housing from actually being affordable because there is so much overhead cost built in.

Of course, you need a developer who is willing to do that because a home with granite sells for $20,000 more than a home with wood counter tops even though the material cost is not near that price difference. And of course these affordable homes should make up 10% to 15% of any development and not have an entire project be dedicated to "affordable".

Lot of activity going on today on the east side of Bricktown. I should have snapped some pictures. There are concrete barriers now completely blocking off the SW corner of Joe Carter and Sheridan. The construction trailer is there as well now. If I get the chance later, I will walk by again and grab some pictures. T

I'm confused. So are they still tearing down buildings or preparing for constuction? Don't they have to submit drawings to OKC or the Bricktown Design Review Board before they can start construction?

I'm confused. So are they still tearing down buildings or preparing for constuction? Don't they have to submit drawings to OKC or the Bricktown Design Review Board before they can start construction?

This is for the dual Hotel project he's speaking about, the SW corner.

This is for the dual Hotel project he's speaking about, the SW corner.

So, it isn't about the topic of this thread? That is confusing then.

Sorry, I think I am confused about where the hotels are going then. I thought that was the site that is being built along with the apartments.

Nope the SW part is the dual-hotel development. The NE corner is where the hotel/apartments are going.

Ah okay. So what exactly is the dual-hotel project? Is there a thread of that yet?
http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Hilton+Garden+Inn+and+Homewood+ Suites&highlight=hilton+garden+inn%2Fhomewood+suites

Okay, all this is starting to make sense now...

OCURA is giving Robert Meinders the "South Parcel" in exchange for for the "West Parcel" so the latter can be incorporated into this East Bricktown Development that will be overseen by OCURA.

I'm sure Meinders will then sell this South Parcel to Mr. Patel, who already bought from Meinders the property to the immediate west and now has plans for two hotels on that corner.



Also, the East BT development is to be built in the following phases (NSP = HUD Neighborhood Stabilization Program):


Phase 1 (NSP Site): A predominantly residential mixed-use development, including 249 apartments (approximately 50 of which are affordable units meeting NSP requirements) and approximately 8,000 square feet of commercial/retail space on the ground floor, as well as structured parking and other amenities.
Phase 2 (West Parcel): A hotel or other commercial or mixed-use development.
Phase 3 (East Parcel): A second predominantly residential mixed-use development, including approximately 90 apartments and approximately 8,000 square feet of commercial/retail space





http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/meinders1.jpg

Did Meinders get the funding necessary to start work on this?

Meinders is flipping all the property north of Sheridan to OCURA which in turn is striking an agreement with Bricktown Apartments LLC (Gary Brooks & Co.).

Forgive me, I had this switched in my mind with the Edge. Which I heard secured funding recently. How is progress on this coming along? Has Meinders started the remediation yet?

He has received approval to demolish all those metal buildings north of Sheridan.

I think what's happening is that OCURA, Brooks and Meinders are all finalizing the terms of the deal while at the same time conceptual plans are being drawn.

Not sure if Meinders will actually be the one pulling down the buildings and doing the cleanup as I suspect that is a big part of the negotiations with OCURA & Brooks.

On the south side of Sheridan, does Meinders own everything north of IHOP, Coca-Cola Events center and the blue metal building?

No, he doesn't own the parking lot on the SE corner of Perry & Sheridan, but everything else to the east.

Brooks said the redevelopment agreement was “a big step forward” in what is a “very difficult project.”

“We have a year just to finish the engineering, get approval from the city, relocate utilities and move the contaminated soil off the site,” Brooks said.

“We have made tremendous progress. But this is the most complicated project I've ever been a part of and it requires the coordination of the federal government, the state and the city. We have a lot of work yet to do.”


Read more: Bricktown housing, hotel development advances with land swap | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/bricktown-housing-hotel-development-advances-with-land-swap/article/3711247#ixzz272JxKFd9)

Yesterday, the city council approved $1.5 million in loans for environmental cleanup for this project, so it continues to move forward.

Good sign, but do you think this project ends up happening?

Good sign, but do you think this project ends up happening?

very much yes

Not much doubt now that it's happening as per Steve's update.

Developers in Oklahoma City pay $4.4 million for Bricktown site planned for $75 million housing and retail complex | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/developers-in-oklahoma-city-pay-4.4-million-for-bricktown-site-planned-for-75-million-housing-and-retail-complex/article/3732812)

$75 million - cha ching. That is some serious coin.

You're not kidding. I'd love to see a mock-up of what they have planned, but that's probably still far off.

This will be as big of a deal as the Devon Tower, IMHO. Bricktown is going to feel about twice the size when this done and if they put in actual retail space and are successful at attracting it, it will fill a massive void in this area.

In the grand scheme of things, this will be much bigger. This project promotes time diversity and Devon doesn't even come close to that (which is why their retail space is empty and their cafe closes at 2 PM).

This is excellent, but a very long time away. Would love to see them get the site cleaned up quicker so construction can begin next year.

My downtown development greed is showing, isn't it?

This is excellent, but a very long time away. Would love to see them get the site cleaned up quicker so construction can begin next year.

My downtown development greed is showing, isn't it?

I know. It makes me want to get a shovel and go over there at night and help them along.

This is excellent, but a very long time away. Would love to see them get the site cleaned up quicker so construction can begin next year.

My downtown development greed is showing, isn't it?


I know. It makes me want to get a shovel and go over there at night and help them along.

I would be there with you!

BIG credit goes to the new incarnation of OCURA, who has coordinated lots of complicated parts (different owners, site cleanup issues, utilities, federal funding, etc.) and really made this project possible.

Cathy O'Connor is doing a great job with OCURA and the Economic Development Trust.


I really, really wish they could get their mitts on First National Center.

BIG credit goes to the new incarnation of OCURA, who has coordinated lots of complicated parts (different owners, site cleanup issues, utilities, federal funding, etc.) and really made this project possible.

Cathy O'Connor is doing a great job with OCURA and the Economic Development Trust.


I really, really wish they could get their mitts on First National Center.

I'll interject here a bit. The City actually helped much of this happen when it desired land for the fire station. Jim Thompson and JoVan Bullard really helped move the property exchange together. Bob Meinders also deserves a ton praise also. While it may look like he just sat on the property, it took him about 5 years to find all of the correct owners and obtain title in the first place.

Cathy has been instrumental now on the current project, that's for sure, but I also see it as a success at the front end as well.

Thanks for that insight and good to know lots of people helped and cooperated.

For all the worry about the establishment of the EDT, they seem to be fulfilling their mission of moving employers and projects along through the coordination of lots of different resources.