The 21c. thread has brought up an important topic of conversation: The strategic use of resources to build the best downtown districts possible. So I'd be interested to hear opinions and discussions about general state of health (scale of 1 to 10) for these areas districts, what percentage of unannounced resources over the next 5 years you think they should receive (leaving the CBD out, because it functions very differently than the other parts), and time-frames of when you would like to see them meet certain milestones.

Here are my thoughts going from SE to NW. Definition of downtown here is River-235-13th-Classen...I'm incorporating announced developments in my assessments:

East River Development (Lincoln/River/235/40) -- 8 --
When all proposed projects are completed. 2.5% or resources…This area doesn't need a lot once the Olympic facility is built, but it's unique in that any development it will gain is going to be different from the rest of DT. This will be in great shape by 2017.

Cotton Mill Site and surrounding area (Shields/40//Boulevard) -- 2 --
And only because of OKC Rocks. 0% of resources I expect and hope that this area isn't even thought about until 2020/25…unless a very unique project comes around from an otherwise uninterested investor.

C2S South (Western/River/Lincoln/40) -- 3 --
That factors in the South Park. 0% of resources...I just don't think this this area should be touched in the next 6 years.

C2S North (Western/40/Shields/Boulevard) -- 4 --
Factors in the Central Park…maybe a 4.5 if we keep the Film Exchange building. 5% of resources…would like to see established developers buy some of the land surrounding the park but wait to announce plans for construction until at least 2017.

Bricktown (BNSF/Boulevard-40/235/4th) -- 8 --
Steelyard/Rock Island Plow/etc. 7.5% of resources…I know this sounds weird, but I'd like to keep most of those empty lots empty for the next 3 to 6 years…It would be nice for Bricktown to be able to see what other up and coming areas start offering that Bricktown doesn't have. Those surface parking lots are not fun to see, but they are blank slates and given the right project, can keep Bricktown competitive for years to come…but just filling them in for the sake of filling them in would likely give us nothing new to really be excited about.

Deep Deuce (BNSF/Tracks/235/4th) -- 8 --
Maywood Phase II, Hill, Flats… 12.5% of resources…I'll be disappointed if this district is not entirely filled in in the next 5 years…or at least under construction to be entirely filled in. I don't think this neighborhood is lacking anything honestly…The only thing Deep Deuce needs is more public art in some of the drab spots (RMP between 2nd and 4th…maybe the concrete should be opened up to Graffiti artists). I think tops for Deep Deuce by itself is a 9.25, but in terms of what Deep Deuce has contributed to downtown, it may be the most important neighborhood in OKC.

CBD (Walker/Boulevard/Shields-BNSF/4th) -- 7 --
CBD is just going to take a long time, the problem is that some of the streets are just horrendous in terms of interaction. But the business that are in the CBD are strong and it's at least not totally void of mixed-use elements. Realistically, it will take, I dunno, a trillion dollars for this area to even think about approaching a 9, let alone a 10.

West Downtown (Western-Classen/40/Walker/4th) -- 5 --
This area is very disjointed, and I think needs serious attention from some planners. Half of it is supposed to be an Arts district, but there are Police Headquarters, a Jail, Random businesses scattered about…It needs residential in the long run, but it can't be at the expense of other downtown districts (Midtown). If we're going to give resources focus to this area, I'd rather us not touch South Midtown for the next 5 years. I think the 21c. development forces the hand here for this area, so I think 12.5% of the resources.

Auto-Alley (Broadway/4th/235/13th) -- 6 --
Broadway is great, the Metropolitan will bring so much life. I'd like to see this area get about 25% of the resources going forward. I've made it clear that I think area has the chance to be the best entertainment district in the city, and primarily because it has a nice mix of structures to renovate and blank slates to develop. I think over the next 5 years, we should strive to get this area to an 8.5 or 9…it has the chance to have the best feel of any area in the city.

South Midtown (Walker/4th/Broadway/9th) -- 3.5 --
South Midtown is just bad, but it's also really important, and I don't think we have the resources to develop this area the way it needs to be developed in the long run. I'd like to see us give very little of our resources here until we're ready to have $75M developments. So…0% of our upcoming resources.

SOSA (Classen/4th/Walker/9th) -- 4 --
Since this will be mostly residential, it's going to have to develop organically…that being said, it would be nice if the city would invest resources into the infrastructure of this area, as it's horrific. I'd like to see 5% go to this area.

North Midtown (Classen/9th/Broadway/13th) -- 6.5 --
Even with The Edge/10th&Shartel/11th&Francis, there are still just so many empty lots. I'd like to see this area make rapid progress over the next 5 to 6 years, and I think it will. Therefore, I'd like to see 30% of resources go toward this area. It has the chance to be the complete package: Residential, Business, Retail/Restaurant, Entertainment. If we focus on this area and get it right, we then have an excellent blueprint for C2S. It's not going to be perfect, but it merits a lot of focus.

Thanks for posting this. This is something I'm kind of passionate about because what I see currently happening is too many competing districts getting investment resources creating many "meh" districts rather than just a few awesome ones. Ultimately OKC will be a better place with 3-4 amazing districts than 8 districts like today's Midtown or Film Row. Charlotte has a metro almost twice the size of OKC and they only have 6 or 7 urban districts depending on what you count as urban, but all of them are totally awesome districts. OKC isn't large enough to fully support as many competing districts as we have now. There needs to be winners and losers and in my opinion public incentives for development should be targeting just a few districts. The ratings I give the districts are through the lens of the urban districts I was used to in Charlotte and not where these districts originally started. Bricktown, Deep Deuce, and the Paseo are the strongest districts in OKC and the only ones that have any feeling of being "complete." Bricktown loses points with me though because of Randy Hogan's Memorial Canal. Midtown, despite its hype, is still extremely underwhelming but with focused investment I think within 5-7 years it can reach potential. I think resources should be focused into Midtown, SoSA, Auto Alley, Uptown and maybe the Plaza district over the next 5 years. The city of OKC should offer incentives for people to buy up old, historic homes and renovate them if they do not already do that. After the Maps3 projects come online, then we can start talking Core 2 Shore.

Bricktown - 7 - I would give it a 9 if not for Hogan's atrocious development in Lower Bricktown that isn't likely to be fixed in the near future.

Midtown - 4

Auto Alley - 5

SoSA - 2

Deep Deuce - 7

Film Row - 4

Plaza - 6

Uptown -5

Paseo - 8

Core2Shore - 2

The Boulevard is a vital "artery" of positive health for several of these districts. It needs to be very soon, and amazing at the same time. When this Boulevard is in place, then you will see the south / west take off with plenty of new investments ( ie. 21c ) & anchor developments.

I disagree with the central premise of this thread. As was said elsewhere a rising tide floats all boats. Having "competing" districts allows for businesses and residents to find the spot that meets their needs. A lot of folks here think the 21c development is too risky, but the fact is that the success of Bricktown/CBD/Midtown/Film Row made this risky move possible. Same with the Plaza district. Some might bemoan all the energy and enthusiasm going into that area at the "expense" of other areas. But we all agree that the Plaza has created a niche for itself where one never existed before, and has made OKC more welcoming to a certain type of person who may otherwise have felt adrift here. Were you to find a time machine would you stop the Plaza from developing in order to accelerate a critical mass in some other area? I think not. Success breeds success. Having a booming plaza district improves the prospects of Classen-Ten-Penn and other areas to the south. Improving prospects in these neighborhoods facilitates the westward expansion of downtown. The westward expansion of downtown facilitates 21c. You see where I am going with this.

Ultimately if the economy of OKC keeps thriving each and every district you list will thrive, and much sooner than you think. If the economy tanks (think $60/barrel WTI Crude) then they will all suffer. But they are not going to suffer because developers didn't follow your formulae and timelines for "proper" development.

A lot of folks here think the 21c development is too risky

I have not seen one person say this. What has been discussed is that the site 21c chose is riskIER than other options, and that's hardly debatable.

I think everyone agrees that 21c will be a great success in the Fred Jones Building, just questioning if that location is best for all of downtown at this point in time.


This is a sore point of mine where someone sets up a straw man (Steve did so in his article today, calling out "naysayers") by misrepresenting healthy discussion.

OKC has moved well past the anything-is-better-than-nothing mentality and it's a good thing that more people are engaging in active dialog about what is best for the community -- especially when public funds and government officials are involved. And doing that is not being a naysayer or akin to predicting failure.

Generally speaking, having several thriving urban districts is good for OKC.

But they do absolutely compete in some ways... For example, there is only going to be one 21c built in OKC. If it didn't go into Film Row it's quite likely they would have located in another district.

Also, public funds and resources definitely get divided up. Film Row got a lot of money from the City for a street improvement plan that other districts (other than the CBD) have not received. And there are dedicated City staff (like the Alliance for Economic Development, the people managing Project 180) that only have so much time and energy. When they are spending time trying to put together a complex deal for the Stage Center Tower (or similar) there is a definite opportunity cost.


I generally agree that more is better but there is also a strong argument to be made for concentrating limited resources (tax dollars, incentives, personnel, business interested in the core) until a few districts have reached critical mass before running off in a bunch of new directions.

I have not seen one person say this. What has been discussed is that the site 21c chose is riskIER than other options, and that's hardly debatable.

I think everyone agrees that 21c will be a great success in the Fred Jones Building, just questioning if that location is best for all of downtown at this point in time.

This is a sore point of mine where someone sets up a straw man (Steve did so in his article today, calling out "naysayers") by misrepresenting healthy discussion.

OKC has moved well past the anything-is-better-than-nothing mentality and it's a good thing that more people are engaging in active dialog about what is best for the community. And doing that is not being a naysayer or akin to predicting failure.

Well, if you will keep scooping Steve...
:)

Active dialogue is fine, but sometimes people are seeing a blessing as a curse.

People are questioning whether the Fred Jones building is the best place for 21c. Okay, no problem. But there appears to be something specific about that site that attracted those developers. It's not a question of whether they put the hotel there or some other place. It appears as if they were going to put it in the Fred Jones building or nowhere at all.

This isn't "anything is better than nothing". It looks like a very high quality development. But we aren't in a position to tell someone not to renovate one building, we'd prefer if they went somewhere else instead. Our ultimate goal should be to revitalize all of downtown. This is a key part of that. We will now have a cornerstone around which to rebuild West Film Row. It might not happen exactly when or how we would have picked, but private development doesn't work that way.

I am not worried about Deep Deuce. It's so close to full right now that this project won't affect it one bit. Automobile Alley isn't as far along, but with the Metropolitan (and with Deep Deuce having filled up), those districts will start to grow together. AA will have the streetcar, and it appears to be making good progress right now. Bricktown has its issues with unreasonable property owners, and it may take a very long time before it becomes the district we all want, but it is still a huge success and is the engine of a lot of this redevelopment. Perfect? No. Functional? Yes. Midtown has a ton of developments coming online, and when the streetcar connects to it, we'll have even more.

Will development into West Film Row slow down the growth of some of these other districts? Perhaps. There may be some surface parking or some empty lots that stick around for 5 years longer than they otherwise would, because somebody decides to build in Core 2 Shore instead of up around NW 10th. But I really think they are mostly independent. 21c was not looking at spending money in Midtown. Preftakes is looking at his own project for One North Hudson, whatever that may be. We are not going to get a perfect, centrally planned growth patten here. It will be uneven, even random-looking, but infill will happen.

OKC is perfectly large enough to redevelop this entire area. Unless the economy crashes, it will all get done eventually.

Generally speaking, having several thriving urban districts is good for OKC.

But they do absolutely compete in some ways... For example, there is only going to be one 21c built in OKC. If it didn't go into Film Row it's quite likely they would have located in another district.

Also, public funds and resources definitely get divided up. Film Row got a lot of money from the City for a street improvement plan that other districts (other than the CBD) have not received. And there are dedicated City staff (like the Alliance for Economic Development, the people managing Project 180) that only have so much time and energy. When they are spending time trying to put together a complex deal for the Stage Center Tower (or similar) there is a definite opportunity cost.


I generally agree that more is better but there is also a strong argument to be made for concentrating limited resources (tax dollars, incentives, personnel, business interested in the core) until a few districts have reached critical mass before running off in a bunch of new directions.

Deep Deuce is about two seconds away from critical mass. Yeah, it's a small area, but it is just about done. With the Steelyard and the continued development of the Hill (and then especially when the streetcar comes in), it will have a stronger connection to Bricktown. I think the east part of Bricktown will quickly merge together with Deep Deuce. We are not quite at critical mass but we are very nearly there.

It's only a few small blocks to connect DD and Automobile Alley. With the Metropolitan and the streetcar, AA (which is aleady doing quite well) will open more places to eat, a few bars, more businesses, etc. There's a lot of money to be made in that area at the moment. It isn't at critical mass yet, and there's still probably 7 or 8 more years before it is as developed as Deep Deuce is right now. That Bricktown to Deep Deuce to AA corridor will be fantastic by about 2020.

Are we hurting ourselves by jump starting Film Row too early? Maybe, but I don't think by very much. Development in other areas is moving very quickly. We aren't really needing big incentives from the city to make developers put up buildings.

OKC is perfectly large enough to redevelop this entire area. Unless the economy crashes, it will all get done eventually.

If the economy crashes the only places that will get developed will be the urban core. High density development is the solution to a decreasing money supply. For 60 years we have been using the availability of cheap money to over come distance. When the cheap money goes away - drive 'till you qualify goes away with it.

Active dialogue is fine, but sometimes people are seeing a blessing as a curse.

Again, I don't see anybody saying anything like this.

Are we hurting ourselves by jump starting Film Row too early? Maybe, but I don't think by very much. Development in other areas is moving very quickly. We aren't really needing big incentives from the city to make developers put up buildings.

In the beginning stages of all these districts -- including Film Row -- there were tremendous public incentives and tax dollars spent.

And in most cases, they are still being used in even the most established districts like Deep Deuce and Bricktown.

I think there is an assumption that the only people Steve talks to are OKCTalkers. If he says there are naysayer it is possible that he has heard from one of the 1.29 million in OKC who don't post on OKCTalk. Heck, you can read the comments on any article Steve publishes on-line and find a boat load of these people. The same goes for breaking stories. It is only breaking news for those who don't already know, and if you don't already know - the person who told you is breaking it to you.

I think there is an assumption that the only people Steve talks to are OKCTalkers. If he says their are naysayer it is possible that he has heard from one of the 1.29 million in OKC who don't post on OKCTalk. Heack, you can read the comments on any article Steve publishes on-line and find a boat load of these people.

He had 11 comments on his story about 21c.

10 were overwhelmingly positive, this is the only one that raised any real concern:


I love the hotel and think it will be a great addition to downtown OKC. However, I am a bit concerned about the location. It seems to be a bit off by itself, away from the up and coming districts that currently define downtown. Being that there is still so much work to do in places like Midtown, why not build this there instead of way out away from everything?

On this subject, here's a timely tweet from Mode Development, the people doing the Lisbon Lofts:


All we want for Christmas is for Midtown to have sidewalks and street lights.

I would like to see Capitol Hill included in the list of important Urban Districts. There is so much potential there that I think, with a very small amount of resources allocated there, it would develop organically. Maybe the most important thing to do there would be to modify zoning, find a way to mentor current business owners, or start a streetscape project there.

I would like to see Capitol Hill included in the list of important Urban Districts. There is so much potential there that I think, with a very small amount of resources allocated there, it would develop organically. Maybe the most important thing to do there would be to modify zoning, find a way to mentor current business owners, or start a streetscape project there.

I wish someone would map out each urban neighborhood in OKC and do a transect diagram as part of it. I think this would provide developers and the City with a road map of how things should develop. This can be accomplished by doing a transect walk.

http://catcomm.org/transect-walk/

My bad, I should definitely have said Downtown and not Urban in the title. Pete, if you could change that for me, that would be great.

I think the people developing 23rd/Plaza/Paseo and eventually Capitol Hill (though that area will likely need a nice chunk of public dollars to really reach its full potential) for the most part are going to be very different developers than the people developing in downtown. It's also why I didn't really include the CBD, because a $100MM development in the CBD is really nothing notable…whereas a $100MM in Midtown would be the talk of the town for a very long time.

Obviously if the choice was between 21c. in the FJ building and no 21c. I'll take 21c. I will always take outside development as long as it is not HURTING downtown. But this isn't just about 21c…this is a big picture thread. I don't understand how you can disagree with the central premise of this thread which is "How Healthy are the various downtown districts" The overall answer is…not very healthy, even with all the announced projects coming to fruition (How long ago was it that we were wary of Gary Brooks actually building what he proposed with The Edge…It looks like we've turned over a new leaf).

Downtown will eventually get there, but big holes in downtown is better than having a spotty downtown. It boils down to consistency and that's why Deep Deuce blows everything in OKC out of the water. It's not even close how far ahead of every other district Deep Deuce will be when construction finishes on all the projects underway. It's become consistent and fantastically (though no perfectly) developed over the last 5 years.

To me, the thing that I dislike the most about spreading our development all around town is that we don't get the chance to put together a complete Urban District and then look at it and say "Oh…here's where we messed up". Instead, 25 years down the line, we're going to look at the entirety of downtown and say "Well…it's better than it was, but now we have to back and fix a bunch of things, and some can't even be fixed". If we round out Deep Deuce first we can see the flaws in the district and then apply the corrections to development standards in North Midtown, and then once we finish out North Midtown, we can look at our mistakes and avoid them in either South Midtown or C2S.

I still doubt OKC is presently large enough to fully support all the currently competing districts. Of course it will get there regardless, but if competition from other districts causes Midtown for instance to take 10 years to reach critical mass rather than five, that's a big deal especially considering how bad of shape most of downtown is still currently in. In 2020, would you rather see a couple of districts that are totally awesome and are "the" place to be in OKC or eight districts that are still an emerging patchwork of new development and boarded up ghetto with crumbling sidewalks and no streetlights. OKC is making a mistake in my opinion by spreading resources too thin and is banking too much on the far future that is yet unknown. Cities OKCs size and even larger have fewer districts but the districts they do have put anything in OKC other than Bricktown to shame. Don't get me wrong I want to see all these districts develop and think they will eventually, but public incentives should be concentrated in specific areas to steer development there.

It should be pointed out that OKC is spending millions to acquire land in the Core 2 Shore area adjacent to the new park. As far as I know, this is the only area of town where they are actively buying.

So, this is an example of spreading our resources to an area that has zero development right now.

Why not do this in the No Man's Land between 5th & 10th in Midtown where on either side there has already been hundreds of millions of private and public investment? I'll tell you why: We don't have enough money and staff/resources to do both.

It should be pointed out that OKC is spending millions to acquire land in the Core 2 Shore area adjacent to the new park. As far as I know, this is the only area of town where they are actively buying.

So, this is an example of spreading our resources to an area that has zero development right now.

Why not do this in the No Man's Land between 5th & 10th in Midtown where on either side there has already been hundreds of millions of private and public investment? I'll tell you why: We don't have enough money and staff/resources to do both.

SoSA and South Midtown is absolutely sad. I am hoping some redevelopment happens sooner rather than later in that district.

Personally I think we should just forego Core 2 Shore altogether, but we are already committed. C2S will be a perfect example of what Teo was talking about above in regards to learning from past mistakes. Hopefully the city has learned from Lower Bricktown and will demand a higher standard in this next publicly subsidized district.

Core 2 Shore is really the only area I don't think the city should be dealing with at this point. There's nothing there and we need to focus on the other areas first. As for the other districts you mention, I have no problem with what's going on with them.

Right, so the dialogue I want to start is what districts should be focused on and why?

Personally, I don't want us to touch South Midtown, especially if we have no idea about the future of the Cox Convention site. If the Cox site gets developed into another arena (the idea of which makes me physically ill) then South Midtown becomes the most important area for a grand mixed-use neighborhood: 8 to 15 story buildings that are a mix of office, residential, chic hotels, great restaurants and a concentration of high caliber retail.

There are plenty of stop gaps to put in place until OKC is ready for 9 digit investments outside of the CBD, and the city has shown the ability to think of those things like the cage courts on the Convention site.

North Midtown and Auto Alley are the obvious answers because 1. A lot is already happening 2. They eventually give us an urban pathway from essentially the SE edge of downtown all the way up to the NW edge. The quicker that is totally filled in, the quicker OKC becomes a complete, competitive city in terms of quality of life. We have suburbia locked down…it's our urban lifestyle that needs work. 3. SM and AA are peripheral in the long run. Counterintuitively, I think that means we need to focus on them while we continue to attract more money to make the developments that are going to turn this city into a world-class city.

This pertains to far more than just Downtown OKC development, but the idea that everyone needs to pioneer and this underlying cultural notion of Manifest Destiny contributes to some of the major inefficiencies that the US and it's culture sees on a regular basis. Sometimes it's good to sit down and focus on how to make make good great and how to make better best. As it stands, we seem to want to make everything new.

Core 2 Shore is really the only area I don't think the city should be dealing with at this point. There's nothing there and we need to focus on the other areas first. As for the other districts you mention, I have no problem with what's going on with them.

When Core 2 Shore was originally proposed, Midtown was still entirely boarded up as was Auto Alley. Deep Deuce development was just getting started and Lower Bricktown was still in its early stages. Things have changed considerably since then.

Eventually, I want to see development go from 23rd street down to the river, and go as far west as Exchange and Classen, all the way east to I-235. I want it to connect to a revitalized Stockyards City and Capital Hill, and cross over the interstate to the Capitol and the OU medical center.

That's what I'd like to see. We are probably 25 or 30 years from that being completed. But we've got to plan for it now, and if a unique opportunity arises in one of these areas, we have to be ready to seize it. I'm not worried about having a few empty spaces in each area. Those are small scale problems. Overall our downtown is benefitted more, I think, by having a larger area that's 70% developed rather than a smaller area that's 100% developed. Perfection is the enemy of good enough, and if we wait until one area is completely full before starting on another, we'll miss out.

The big keystone properties are what we need to focus on. The Fred Jones building is a keystone property. There are a lot more investors who can renovate a small building than a big one. We should work on getting the big pieces in place and then the smaller developments will follow.

^
Even if the Cox site gets redeveloped that is a relatively small area and there would still be plenty of need -- especially mid-rise housing -- in the southern part of Midtown. However, I get the feeling the City is trying to force that to happen in Core to Shore.

^
Even if the Cox site gets redeveloped that is a relatively small area and there would still be plenty of need -- especially mid-rise housing -- in the southern part of Midtown. However, I get the feeling the City is trying to force that to happen in Core to Shore.

Exactly my problem with Core 2 Shore. It's the one area (IMO) that seems to siphon off what could be put to better use in existing areas, in particular South Midtown.

Remember, at the end of the day, we're looking at a relatively small area as far as a geographical footprint. I understand the fear of spreading ourselves too thin, and there is a lot of empty space in the downtown area that needs filled at some point. But I'd expect we'll see another dozen large apartment complexes, on the size of Level or the Edge, will be announced within the next 5 years. That's not counting the ones we have already heard something about, I'm talking "doesn't have a thread yet on OKCTalk" brand new announcements. They'll range from Bricktown up through AA, over into Midtown, and probably one south of St Anthony or somewhere around there.

I believe a lot of empty lots are going to disappear rather quickly, and people will be surprised at what downtown looks like very soon.

^
Even if the Cox site gets redeveloped that is a relatively small area and there would still be plenty of need -- especially mid-rise housing -- in the southern part of Midtown. However, I get the feeling the City is trying to force that to happen in Core to Shore.

I get the feeling the city wants to have our central park resemble New York's Central Park, with very expensive midrise housing all around it.

Here's my timeline of when I'd like to focus on these areas, again, taking into account all that has already been announced:

East River Development (Lincoln/River/235/40) : Whenever a sensible development comes up for this area. It's not sharing development resources with other districts.

Cotton Mill Site and surrounding area (Shields/40//Boulevard): Start brainstorming 2020 to 2030, start pursuing/developing 2030 to 2045

C2S South (Western/River/Lincoln/40) : Start brainstorming after MAPS 3 is finished, start developing after 2027.

C2S North (Western/40/Shields/Boulevard) : Start brainstorming after MAPS 3 is finished, start developing 2022-25.

Bricktown (BNSF/Boulevard-40/235/4th): A project here or there, but just don't rush to fill in Bricktown for the next 6 years.

Deep Deuce (BNSF/Tracks/235/4th): Finish out by 2017/18 should be the goal. That essentially means committing the rest of the land to projects in the next 2.5 years

CBD (Walker/Boulevard/Shields-BNSF/4th): Again, this is far more dependent on big business than it is developers. Encourage places to make street level interaction more bearable and if a new project does happen to spring up, hold it to the highest of standards.

West Downtown (Western-Classen/40/Walker/4th): It seems so early to start working on this, but I guess start work now and continue through 2025

Auto-Alley (Broadway/4th/235/13th): Develop now and finish out by 2020.

South Midtown (Walker/4th/Broadway/9th): Stop gaps until Maps 3 is finished, brainstorm until 2022, Fill out by 2030

SOSA (Classen/4th/Walker/9th): This is probably going to be mostly single family residential area, which will be fine. Try and make the infrastructure nice by 2017.

North Midtown (Classen/9th/Broadway/13th): Develop now and finish out by 2022

I get the feeling the city wants to have our central park resemble New York's Central Park, with very expensive midrise housing all around it.

That's what the master plan calls for. Personally I think that is very ambitious for OKC and will likely end up scaled down from what is envisioned. It may have been possible back in the mid 2000s if Core2Shore would have ended up being the primary focus of all development but as thinly as things are spread even today I don't see it happening.

^
Even if the Cox site gets redeveloped that is a relatively small area and there would still be plenty of need -- especially mid-rise housing -- in the southern part of Midtown. However, I get the feeling the City is trying to force that to happen in Core to Shore.

Right, but let's be real…OKC is going to need a whole lot more financial resources to be able to build that kind of development all over South Midtown. Doing so on 4 blocks right across from the transit hub would be cake probably even now. Getting $5B to $10B of investment in South Midtown is going to require OKC being somewhat of a proven commodity.

Why not develop Core 2 Shore similar to Mud Island in Memphis? That may be a pie in the sky idea and it may receive a lot of criticism, but I think it might be a good idea for that land. It's not too ambitious and would provide downtown with a family-friendly district. It would also go a long ways towards getting retail downtown. The other districts currently developing can then become the places for young professionals and hip bars, restaurants, and art galleries.

If our local economy continues this path for the next 10 - 15 yrs, you will see the C2S areas be a large target for outside investment groups. They should fill this area in nicely w/ Mid-rise Mixed use properties. This will be a "Hot" spot for R/E investments.

A little (vision) here, but the south portion of C2S riverfront, might even have a couple of Corporate HQ's for expanding energy companies.

My wife and I just got back from a week in Charleston and Savannah and in Savannah we discovered Forsyth Park. It is about a 30 acres (10 acres less than the proposed upper park) with a lot of older trees and a one mile jogging trail around the edge. This park is about 150 years old so it will be hard to compare, but there are a few spots for larger gatherings, a big fountain, a restaurant and a couple of playgrounds, so the amenties will be about the same with the addition of a small pond. If you go to googlemaps.com and do a street view of the area surrounding the park, there are a lot of 2-4 story single/multi family and hotels/B&B's surrounding the park with several small shops on the south side of the park. Is this what people are expecting with our park or something bigger? I don't think we are going to get a bunch of 10-30 story buildings like the ones that surround Central Park in NYC and I am ok with that.

There could be ( 2 - 4 ) on each side of the park that are 8 - 10 stories, but most likely it will be closer to what you described Warreng88 like Savannah.

If our local economy continues this path for the next 10 - 15 yrs, you will see the C2S areas be a large target for outside investment groups. They should fill this area in nicely w/ Mid-rise Mixed use properties. This will be a "Hot" spot for R/E investments.

A little (vision) here, but the south portion of C2S riverfront, might even have a couple of Corporate HQ's for expanding energy companies.

I think plans for the downtown air park are going to jump start people looking south of the river and hopefully their glance continues on to Capitol Hill. I like the suggestion of a future MAPS proposal for a soccer venue along the south side of the river. I'd also like to see a strictly pedestrian bridge built that crosses the river.

I'm not worried about spreading ourselves too thin. I think there's enough momentum for all districts. The park and streetcar will speed up interest in C2S. I'd love to live along the park.

Great ideas for the soccer venue and bridge.

Yes, each district should provide enough "flavor" to stand on its own merit and pull enough continued development in the next 10 to 20 years. ...and fill in nicely.

The new Central Park OKC will be a "gem".

I think plans for the downtown air park are going to jump start people looking south of the river and hopefully their glance continues on to Capitol Hill. I like the suggestion of a future MAPS proposal for a soccer venue along the south side of the river. I'd also like to see a strictly pedestrian bridge built that crosses the river.

I'm not worried about spreading ourselves too thin. I think there's enough momentum for all districts. The park and streetcar will speed up interest in C2S. I'd love to live along the park.

I think it should be at least 20 years before OKC even starts thinking about south of the river, the exception being if there is an Austin or Charlotte style boom which I personally don't see happening. I think mid-term is just as important as the long-term. It's great to have a long term vision, but we cannot bank everything on the long term at the expense of near-term. That's what OKC did during the I.M. Pei era and look how it turned out. Even today, OKC still doesn't have that "amazing" urban district most other cities its size have. Bricktown is a good district, don't get me wrong, but it is not amazing. It was where everything started though and early its where most resources were focused, bringing it to critical mass within 10 years. Huge mistakes were made (Hogan, suburban design, Bass Pro) but its something OKC can and most likely has learned from and will consider when developing future districts. Midtown and Auto Alley at the very least need to be brought to potential before focus is shifted elsewhere. There is a TON of potential in those two districts but they, especially Midtown, sit in sad shape today. There is still so much work to do there and within 5-10 years, if the resource and focus was allocated right, they could be OKC's "amazing" urban districts.

nm

Remember, at the end of the day, we're looking at a relatively small area as far as a geographical footprint. I understand the fear of spreading ourselves too thin, and there is a lot of empty space in the downtown area that needs filled at some point. But I'd expect we'll see another dozen large apartment complexes, on the size of Level or the Edge, will be announced within the next 5 years. That's not counting the ones we have already heard something about, I'm talking "doesn't have a thread yet on OKCTalk" brand new announcements. They'll range from Bricktown up through AA, over into Midtown, and probably one south of St Anthony or somewhere around there.

I believe a lot of empty lots are going to disappear rather quickly, and people will be surprised at what downtown looks like very soon.

Exactly... All the downtown districts being discussed fall within an area of just 1.5 square miles. That's really compact. We forget how interrelated all the districts are- Someone living in one district has access to all the others by less than a 10 minute bike ride.

What we have had success with is a series of growing neighborhood centers that will all start to merge together in the next 5 years. The strategy has been to take a spot with good building stock, like Film Row, do public investment like a streetscape, and then watch the growth radiate concentrically until it merges with the next center.

This strategy is paying off. It'll be really obvious when the Metropolitan and one or two more developments seamlessly link Auto Alley, Deep Deuce, and Bricktown. Auto Alley radiated from 9th & Broadway, Bricktown from California & Mickey Mantle, DD from 2nd and Walnut, and now they'll all merge. Same thing will happen on west side of downtown from Midtown to Civic Center to Film Row- but we're just now seeing the beginning stages.

When the Park is getting ready to have the ribbon cut, you will see a great deal of interest there. It just will carry that dynamic on the C2S North section. That will most likely be urban district that is amazing. It will have the right "mix" for a central Hip place to live w/ the draw of the park. Midtown & Auto Alley should continue to develop & mature nicely at a solid pace.

I think the market will determine what happens. But as areas get more dense, prices go up and people start looking elsewhere. That has happened in every city I know. I expect C2S to be pricey because of the park. Land in SoSA is already out of reach of the average homebuyer. I fully expect the area around the Plaza to become entry level housing for young people who want to buy and renovate. But it will not surprise me at all to see people looking south, especially if the Airpark goes. I don't think it will hurt existing areas if that happens, personally. Different areas have different personalities and appeal to different types of people. And there are always pioneers. A few years ago the businesses in the Plaza were pioneers.

I think it should be at least 20 years before OKC even starts thinking about south of the river, the exception being if there is an Austin or Charlotte style boom which I personally don't see happening.

Gotcha. Everything south of the river should be written off for the next 20 years. There are actually people who live and work there and that will make them very happy. It's a great way to win friends. You are trying to event a campaign issue for Ed, I think.

Gotcha. Everything south of the river should be written off for the next 20 years. There are actually people who live and work there and that will make them very happy. It's a great way to win friends. You are trying to event a campaign issue for Ed, I think.

I don't mean we should "write off" south of the river. I think if it is developed it should be done by the free market and there shouldn't be major incentives given to develop it in the near term.

I don't mean we should "write off" south of the river. I think if it is developed it should be done by the free market and there shouldn't be major incentives given to develop it in the near term.
What kind of major incentives are you thinking of? If you are talking about the city acquiring land to be redeveloped, I agree. Tax incentives for redevelopment shouldn't be off the table though.
And since I probably won't be around 20 years from now, I don't consider that to be near term. LOL

What kind of major incentives are you thinking of? If you are talking about the city acquiring land to be redeveloped, I agree. Tax incentives for redevelopment shouldn't be off the table though.
And since I probably won't be around 20 years from now, I don't consider that to be near term. LOL

Yeah that is what I am talking about, and I just threw 20 years out there without any reason for that number. As for incentives, I am not sure the city should intentionally steer development south to jump start it too soon. If growth picks up and snowballs, south of the river could be ripe for public investment in 10-15 years.

Yeah that is what I am talking about, and I just threw 20 years out there without any reason for that number. As for incentives, I am not sure the city should intentionally steer development south to jump start it too soon. If growth picks up and snowballs, south of the river could be ripe for public investment in 10-15 years.

I disagree entirely. I see nothing wrong with tax incentives now for someone wanting to do a major investment in the Capitol Hill District. There is no rational reason that area should have to wait for 10 to 15 years for improvements if someone is willing to stick their necks out based on incentives.

Have you driven through the Capitol Hill business area on 25th street recently? The streetscapes now look very nice with wide sidewalks and continued on street parking. It is similar to the Plaza District in that regard but much larger. The amount of potential buildings to be redeveloped is likely higher than even 23rd street and it is much more walkable since it is a two lane street. This doesn't need to necessarily be a gentrified area like Midtown but could be a great draw for middle class families and there is plenty of housing stock that could either be renovated or torn down and replaced.

It's funny…I was in Dallas on Saturday and grabbed lunch with a friend in the Bishop Art's District and thought to myself "We don't have anywhere in OKC that has this kind and amount of old urban infrastructure.

Sometime later that day I was like "Wait…yes we do: Capitol Hill". It's interesting because the Bishop Art's District is also a district with a large hispanic population.

bchris, do you ever go south of the river? there is a lot of investment already happening in infrastructure (thanks MAPS4Kids and bond issues.) It's already ripe for investment in numerous places, has one of the better parks down in sw okc, with numerous well heeled housing areas already well established. Thinking about pulling a plug and waiting for 20, lawdy, even to slow, let alone shut, things down for 5 years, would be plain ol' shortsighted and not at all a good move for the city. Go and take a look around. It might just surprise you what you've been missing.

bchris, do you ever go south of the river? there is a lot of investment already happening in infrastructure (thanks MAPS4Kids and bond issues.) It's already ripe for investment in numerous places, has one of the better parks down in sw okc, with numerous well heeled housing areas already well established. Thinking about pulling a plug and waiting for 20, lawdy, even to slow, let alone shut, things down for 5 years, would be plain ol' shortsighted and not at all a good move for the city. Go and take a look around. It might just surprise you what you've been missing.

I'll have to go down there and check it out sometime. My perception of that area is that its pretty much entirely blight and urban prairie. While a quick Google Streetview search shows that to be partially true, I do see amazing potential in the Capitol Hill area along 25th St. I even see a theater there while currently not as charming as the Tower Theater, could be restored as such. I retract my statement that there is nothing worth redeveloping south of the river. That area has great bones and appears less devastated by the Pei Plan than many of the areas currently being redeveloped. I'll take a drive down there and see it for myself soon.

Be careful if you do. Crime rate is high.... There's definitely been progress in recent years but that area has a lot of stuff working against it and will for some time to come.

Capitol Hill neighborhood in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (OK), 73109, 73129 subdivision profile - real estate, apartments, condos, homes, community, population, jobs, income, streets (http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Capitol-Hill-Oklahoma-City-OK.html)

Questor, there is no doubt that there is crime in that area but I have never felt unsafe when I'm there. There was a bank robbery recently about 1/4 quarter mile from my office in NW OKC. Crime happens and you just have to use normal precautions no matter where you are.

I know, you can be involved in crime anywhere, but just pure numbers your odds are quite a bit higher there. I thought I read Chris wasn't from Oklahoma and so I wasn't sure if he was aware of this. That's all.

I know, you can be involved in crime anywhere, but just pure numbers your odds are quite a bit higher there. I thought I read Chris wasn't from Oklahoma and so I wasn't sure if he was aware of this. That's all.

Maybe, but there is absolutely no reason anyone should be afraid to go to Capitol Hill.

I have not seen one person say this. What has been discussed is that the site 21c chose is riskIER than other options, and that's hardly debatable


This is a sore point of mine where someone sets up a straw man (Steve did so in his article today, calling out "naysayers") by misrepresenting healthy discussion.



Yes Pete I was guilty of straw-manning. This is unfortunate, as the "One True Scotsman" is my favorite argumentative fallacy.

Back on topic any true OKC Fan would see that I am correct.

Yes Pete I was guilty of straw-manning. This is unfortunate, as the "One True Scotsman" is my favorite argumentative fallacy.

Back on topic any true OKC Fan would see that I am correct.

I think you mean "no true Scotsman" :)

Didn't mean to distract from your post, as you always bring an intelligent perspective.