NE 1st & Russel Perry (http://goo.gl/maps/zp0gd)
owner=Atul Patel
cost=$4.8 million
6 floors
sq. feet=77,538
acerage=.6
115 rooms, small indoor pool
http://www.okctalk.com/images/wikiphotos/springhill1.jpg
Information & Latest News

Milestones

5/21/13 - $4.8 million building permit


Links
Application to Downtown Design Review Committee (http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/springhill.pdf)
Gallery

Exciting news and infill for Deep Deuce.

All the BT hotels are nice. Now if we can get more residential conversions or new builds...

That's about $50 a square foot for construction. Is that what we would expect for a nicer hotel? I would think that being in Deep Deuce, the level of construction required would be at a minimum that required of the Hampton Inn and Hilton Garden Inn.

That should be at least $150/SF. No way it is being built for $50/SF.

Well luckily the forum has enough time to self-implode at least three times between now and 7/18 so bring on those renderings!

Is there a chance this permit is only one of several?

I don't have a lot of confidence this will be a structure wildly supported by this forum.

Those are my concerns as well. Who has oversight of this? Same as the lincoln/reno proposal? I imagine any resistance on site layout will be met with the variance for that project.

Edit: I see it's DDRC, who had oversight for the Reno/Lincoln, BUDC? I understand these are not the same developers.

aLoft was $152.28/sq. foot (Although some of that includes the structured parking garage)
This will be $61.91/sq. foot.

The only reason I'm worried is because of the developer's past projects and the current estimated project cost of this one.

This developer has never done a downtown project before though. Below is a picture of Richard McKown's past projects before getting involved downtown:

http://www.newhomesdirectory.com/Blog/image.axd?picture=2010%2F4%2FIdeal-Homes-Sundance.jpg

Are the DDRC meetings open to the public?

Yes

Well, if the price is correct and this hotel goes through then it would really speak poorly to the future of the area. One awful hotel has already gone though. Another and there's a precedence set - it's okay to build crap* in the heart of OKC's core.

*It would only be crap in relation to its surroundings. I'm sure the design would be acceptable outside the urban core.

What did Russell M Perry Avenue used to be named?

Well, if the price is correct and this hotel goes through then it would really speak poorly to the future of the area. One awful hotel has already gone though. Another and there's a precedence set - it's okay to build crap* in the heart of OKC's core.

*It would only be crap in relation to its surroundings. I'm sure the design would be acceptable outside the urban core.

different area and different design board with a different set of standards

different area and different design board with a different set of standards

Same urban core. These projects are pretty close to each other. I'm not talking about the micro decisions of a board, but how these types of decisions affect the core as a whole.

These projects are pretty close to each other.

Be careful. Boulder has argued that properties as close as 100' have no relation to each other.

No doubt this developer will be inspired by Staybridge and argue it's a difficult development. And if they chose to do so, they will be armed with plenty of recent ammunition to justify heavy compromises that disregard the area. For example, it's a whole two blocks from bricktown and bordered by an empty lot and surface parking. It's their land and surly they can't be expected to invest in improving the area and raising the bar of development in the area. Their rooms will always be full and that's all that matters, right? :rolleyes:

I feel like ideally this hotel should be close to the corner of Russell M Perry and NE 1st with parking to the west. Is there a ROW issue with this space like the Staybridge Suites or just limited to the north of the RR tracks?

Exciting news and infill for Deep Deuce.

This plot should be residential, not hotel. This project needs to be flagged. I suspect it's not going to improve the area. If I were selling quarter million dollar townhomes at The Hill I would be paying attention.

I have no problem with a hotel, it just needs to be built to same design and style of the surrounding area - at a minimum. In fact, if I only had a 2 bedroom home I would want a hotel as close as possible so family could visit and stay close by.

Hotel...yes. Motel...no. Cheap hotel or motel....no. This construction cost indicates a bottom end business that will be poorly run and cheaply maintained. This is why others will avoid investing close by as it has the opportunity to drive down property values. For that money there will be no investment in aesthetics, no enhancements, virtually no landscaping/sidewalk enhancement, etc. It will be cheap to rent and for the most part draw guests who have or are willing to spend little on quality entertainment, food, etc.

At what point do we have an acceptable bar to meet and require going over rather than around it?

Any word on branding: Motel 6, Suburban Inn, Roadway, Microtel?

Any word on branding: Motel 6, Suburban Inn, Roadway, Microtel?

Come on Super 8!

I am still thinking it is a typo. There isn't much land there to have a surface parking lot and if they plan on using mostly on-street or space somewhere else that will reduce cost. I'll wait till I see the proposal before condemning it.

Any word on branding: Motel 6, Suburban Inn, Roadway, Microtel?Are those real names? Or you just made those up??? lol

Any word on branding: Motel 6, Suburban Inn, Roadway, Microtel?

No-tel Motel

Wasn't this going to be a Springhill Suites?

Any word on branding: Motel 6, Suburban Inn, Roadway, Microtel?

Isn't this going to be the Springhill Suites?

No-tel Motel

Could be a Get & Go ....

This plot should be residential, not hotel. This project needs to be flagged. I suspect it's not going to improve the area. If I were selling quarter million dollar townhomes at The Hill I would be paying attention.

They're not only selling quarter million dollar homes at The Hill, but $800,000+ homes. Probably not a bad idea to alert the Hill's developer.

Half a dozen homes on The Hill together cost more than this hotel.

I am still thinking it is a typo. There isn't much land there to have a surface parking lot and if they plan on using mostly on-street or space somewhere else that will reduce cost. I'll wait till I see the proposal before condemning it.

That's where I'm at, but I'm standing ready to tar and feather a developer at any point.

It would be nice if we ended up with a Springhill Suites like this one in downtown Memphis (located on their streetcar line)

http://i2.bookcdn.com/data/Photos/OriginalPhoto/70/7016/7016090/Springhill-Suites-Memphis-Downtown-photos-Exterior.JPEG

Nope. No cheap anything downtown. Build it somewhere else.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentrification

They're not only selling quarter million dollar homes at The Hill, but $800,000+ homes. Probably not a bad idea to alert the Hill's developer.

I will make sure it gets to the right people...

It would be nice if we ended up with a Springhill Suites like this one in downtown Memphis (located on their streetcar line)

http://i2.bookcdn.com/data/Photos/OriginalPhoto/70/7016/7016090/Springhill-Suites-Memphis-Downtown-photos-Exterior.JPEG

What a Towering monument of eifs

It is better than sprawling EIFS. Anyhow, I prefer vernacular architecture myself but several people think we have to build with modern materials which leaves glass and EIFS, so what can you do?

Another hotel would be fine, as long as it fits in with the quality of the neighborhood and isn't an eyesore.

It would be nice if we ended up with a Springhill Suites like this one in downtown Memphis (located on their streetcar line)

http://i2.bookcdn.com/data/Photos/OriginalPhoto/70/7016/7016090/Springhill-Suites-Memphis-Downtown-photos-Exterior.JPEG

I like the layout of this one very much, but would hope to see it built with different material.

That is not an urban design. It is just a building pulled close to the street. That design can be found all over in suburbs. And, it isn't modern design, just cheap materials (EIFS, PTACS) and cheap construction...a contemporary version of a motel whether you have to drive there or take a bus. This would just be another cheap hotel which will look bad and be bad in 20 years. I find it hard to believe JTF seems to be endorsing that type of building for our urban corp just because the parking lot isn't in front.

That is not an urban design. It is just a building pulled close to the street. That design can be found all over in suburbs. And, it isn't modern design, just cheap materials (EIFS, PTACS) and cheap construction...a contemporary version of a motel whether you have to drive there or take a bus. This would just be another cheap hotel which will look bad and be bad in 20 years. I find it hard to believe JTF seems to be endorsing that type of building for our urban corp just because the parking lot isn't in front.

Rover, I referenced what I liked (the layout close to the street) and what I didn't (the building materials), but I'm not sure I can think of a hotel that would meet your criteria but realistically go on this particular site. Can you supply an example of a hotel that you think would work well here?

Most franchise hotel franchises allow their franchisee to select particular building materials and building types within a range of options. Many of the cheaper choices are actually the preference of the owner, not the brand. The brand allows them to use the reservation system and certain business systems. They may also be able to get special buying privileges and discounts through the franchiser's national accounts and proprietary brands agreements. Therefore, it is Patel that needs to step up, not the franchise brand.

Now, keep in mind, that the particular brand denotes a certain level of service and amenities. Therefore, you generally can't get $200 a night for a Holiday Inn Express. The income you can generate dictates how much you can spend to build your building. Therefore, this explosion of lower end limited service hotels in BT and DD dictates that they will build cheaper buildings and attract lower spending clientele.

I've seen it posted that this is great in that having a hotel at this location will be good for the visitors of the occupants of the neighborhood. I would guess this is true for the visitors to the lower priced apartments, but not to residents of say The Hill. Their guests likely will stay with them or in one of the better hotels...Skirvin, Colcord, Renaissance and will be more likely to eat in Midtown. As for guests of the lower end apartment dwellers, you have to wonder when that market will get saturated as there are lots of those rooms built or being built.

To answer the previous question, I probably wouldn't do a hotel on this location, but would prefer a residential building of moderate price apartments or a quaint unique euro style boutique hotel that isn't a cookie cutter national chain and one that becomes a neighborhood gem. If hotel, it needs to be different than the others going in and needs to be embraced by the neighborhood itself. Put a small (8-12 tables) high quality intimate dining room that isn't exorbitant prices (something like Italian or Lebanese food where you can serve great rice and pasta dishes for moderate prices). Put in a small, quiet bar not designed as a sports bar or a pick-up bar. Think of the Metro or Chalkboard. Think moderately priced but sophisticated.

Most franchise hotel franchises allow their franchisee to select particular building materials and building types within a range of options. Many of the cheaper choices are actually the preference of the owner, not the brand. The brand allows them to use the reservation system and certain business systems. They may also be able to get special buying privileges and discounts through the franchiser's national accounts and proprietary brands agreements. Therefore, it is Patel that needs to step up, not the franchise brand.

Now, keep in mind, that the particular brand denotes a certain level of service and amenities. Therefore, you generally can't get $200 a night for a Holiday Inn Express. The income you can generate dictates how much you can spend to build your building. Therefore, this explosion of lower end limited service hotels in BT and DD dictates that they will build cheaper buildings and attract lower spending clientele.

I've seen it posted that this is great in that having a hotel at this location will be good for the visitors of the occupants of the neighborhood. I would guess this is true for the visitors to the lower priced apartments, but not to residents of say The Hill. Their guests likely will stay with them or in one of the better hotels...Skirvin, Colcord, Renaissance and will be more likely to eat in Midtown. As for guests of the lower end apartment dwellers, you have to wonder when that market will get saturated as there are lots of those rooms built or being built.

To answer the previous question, I probably wouldn't do a hotel on this location, but would prefer a residential building of moderate price apartments or a quaint unique euro style boutique hotel that isn't a cookie cutter national chain and one that becomes a neighborhood gem. If hotel, it needs to be different than the others going in and needs to be embraced by the neighborhood itself. Put a small (8-12 tables) high quality intimate dining room that isn't exorbitant prices (something like Italian or Lebanese food where you can serve great rice and pasta dishes for moderate prices). Put in a small, quiet bar not designed as a sports bar or a pick-up bar. Think of the Metro or Chalkboard. Think moderately priced but sophisticated.

Assuming it does have to be a hotel on this site, have you seen a building anywhere that matches what you think you'd like to see here in terms of a hotel?

Most franchise hotel franchises allow their franchisee to select particular building materials and building types within a range of options. Many of the cheaper choices are actually the preference of the owner, not the brand. The brand allows them to use the reservation system and certain business systems. They may also be able to get special buying privileges and discounts through the franchiser's national accounts and proprietary brands agreements. Therefore, it is Patel that needs to step up, not the franchise brand.

Now, keep in mind, that the particular brand denotes a certain level of service and amenities. Therefore, you generally can't get $200 a night for a Holiday Inn Express. The income you can generate dictates how much you can spend to build your building. Therefore, this explosion of lower end limited service hotels in BT and DD dictates that they will build cheaper buildings and attract lower spending clientele.

I've seen it posted that this is great in that having a hotel at this location will be good for the visitors of the occupants of the neighborhood. I would guess this is true for the visitors to the lower priced apartments, but not to residents of say The Hill. Their guests likely will stay with them or in one of the better hotels...Skirvin, Colcord, Renaissance and will be more likely to eat in Midtown. As for guests of the lower end apartment dwellers, you have to wonder when that market will get saturated as there are lots of those rooms built or being built.

To answer the previous question, I probably wouldn't do a hotel on this location, but would prefer a residential building of moderate price apartments or a quaint unique euro style boutique hotel that isn't a cookie cutter national chain and one that becomes a neighborhood gem. If hotel, it needs to be different than the others going in and needs to be embraced by the neighborhood itself. Put a small (8-12 tables) high quality intimate dining room that isn't exorbitant prices (something like Italian or Lebanese food where you can serve great rice and pasta dishes for moderate prices). Put in a small, quiet bar not designed as a sports bar or a pick-up bar. Think of the Metro or Chalkboard. Think moderately priced but sophisticated.

Great post.

That is not an urban design. It is just a building pulled close to the street.

What isn't urban about it?

In the sense it is in a city, I guess it is urban. I guess you got me.

In that sense I suppose, none of the hotels or buildings are urban or suburban or otherwise...just where they are placed on the lot. LOL.

Some people just like to be contrarians, it seems. I can always get a predictable response from certain posters.

Some people just like to be contrarians, it seems. I can always get a predictable response from certain posters.

I was thinking the exact same thing which is why I asked you what isn't urban about it.

Because specifically that kind of cheaply built structure will become dilapidated relatively quickly. If you are okay with disposable design and that is "urban" in nature, then who am I to dispute. I guess I incorrectly understood that sustainability was one of the categories, not just closeness to the street.

Glad you like and endorse that kind of structure. Should be easier to make downtown "urban", and certainly cheaper.

I love it!

Wait, what were we talking about?

;)

WHAT!!!!!! There's an actual topic to this thread?

:ot:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5464/8797014385_c65e443e1e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/77483833@N04/8797014385/)
Deep Deuce (http://www.flickr.com/photos/77483833@N04/8797014385/) by lazio85 (http://www.flickr.com/people/77483833@N04/), on Flickr

Because specifically that kind of cheaply built structure will become dilapidated relatively quickly. If you are okay with disposable design and that is "urban" in nature, then who am I to dispute. I guess I incorrectly understood that sustainability was one of the categories, not just closeness to the street.

Glad you like and endorse that kind of structure. Should be easier to make downtown "urban", and certainly cheaper.

Are you familiar with the 55 N. Robinson Building? It was pretty darn cheap to build and it is considered Class A office space, plus has a walking score of 89. This hotel (at 6 stories) is not going to be built out of wood.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5464/8797014385_c65e443e1e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/77483833@N04/8797014385/)
Deep Deuce (http://www.flickr.com/photos/77483833@N04/8797014385/) by lazio85 (http://www.flickr.com/people/77483833@N04/), on Flickr

To be fair, if you look back at the old Hill threads, the same people who are arguing about what is urban here were saying that the Hill is not urban in design. So, at least we're consistent. And, I really don't like the fact that The Hill basically has brick false fronts, but no one asked me when they approved the project. To be fair, neither do the Deep Deuce Apartments, but they disguise it better. The problem with this new hotel is that it's basically open to view from all 4 sides and that makes hiding anything other than all brick construction difficult.

The other concern is that this developer won't even want a brick false front - that he's going to try to build the whole thing out of EIFS.

Are you familiar with the 55 N. Robinson Building? It was pretty darn cheap to build and it is considered Class A office space, plus has a walking score of 89. This hotel (at 6 stories) is not going to be built out of wood.

If you say so. You would rather be right in an argument than to actually promote the right thing.

We will check back in 20 years. At that price, it WILL be an inferior building and WILL hurt the neighborhood.

From Steve's chat today:

Comment From Nick
There seems to be a bit of backlash to the proposed hotel in Deep Deuce at 1st and Perry. What are your thoughts? Are people getting too upset at the cost per sq. foot by reading too much into it or is cheap BT hotel construction headed north?

Steve Lackmeyer: I think people are uninformed and need to wait and see what is proposed first. This is a typical example of the downside of online message boards.

Well, Steve has kinda had his feelings hurt lately on this board. We'll see. I am not inspired by the proposed cost.

I don't think it's a backlash. I think people are expressing justified concern based on the square foot price that is available to us. If it's a misprint, great! If the developer is planning something similar to the Holiday Inn and Hilton Garden Inn that will be fine and there will be no problem. But, let's not pretend that developers are always concerned with how to best design a project that suits the neighborhood.

Also, full agendas with site plans and details are only released 48 hours before the committee review, so if we don't get out in front of these issues, it's always too late to rally for constructive change.

One of the things we try to do here is get information ASAP so concerned parties can participate in the process, and we do that by publishing information that is provided by the various public entities as it becomes available. We don't wait until the meeting to find out all the details, because by then it is too late to do anything about it.

I can't see how people being informed and expressing opinions in any way represents a "downside". This very process has already engaged many more people and decisions affecting our community are absolutely better because of it.

We will check back in 20 years. At that price, it WILL be an inferior building and WILL hurt the neighborhood.

If this turns out to be a repeat of Staybridge you can expect me to be one of the most vocal critics, but my criticism will be based on the actual project - not how much it cost. For all I know Patel owns a concrete company and is getting his materials at cost or has traded equity in his real-estate company in exchange for work on it.

Lol