I don't see any indication that this will be section 8 housing. If "low income housing" means you're paying $800 a month rent for a one bedroom instead of $1200 then it's something that is clearly needed. Not every person living downtown needs to be pulling down $80K at Devon. The people who work downtown in normal jobs should be able to live there too.

However I'm also sure people don't want to live right next door to my clients.

Hopefully you are correct. The usage of the phrase "low-income" generally alludes to government-subsidized which is the last thing midtown needs. Hopefully it was just poor wording. I too would like to see more affordable ways to live downtown and think people shouldn't have to make 80k+ to do so.

I'm going to jump in and say that I don't think anyone meant to offend anybody. Their point was that if OKC doesn't develop an area of concentrated wealth, then some of the big-time developments that other posters claim to want to have in OKC will never come to fruition. Take the Plaza in KC for example. I see a lot of posters who have mentioned that in the past as something that OKC doesn't have, and I'll be the first to say that the development of the Plaza did not come about because of a highly diversified income base. Pull out your Zillow app while you drive around that area and try and find any for sale real-estate under a million dollars. (Hint: There's not much.) Of course I wasn't alive when the Plaza was developed, so there may or may not have been a diversified real-estate base at the time, but that is besides the point.

My point is, nobody was trying to offend anybody. We all want the same thing.

This

Great post by catch 22. Personally, I don't want to live in an enclave that is exclusively for the rich and upwardly mobile. I've lived in big cities and have seen first hand that people of different incomes can and do live together harmoniously. It seems people here are equating affordable housing with a Cabrini Green-style project -- an absurd leap of logic.

A lot of bad info on this thread. Will explain later

Wondering if this isn't part of a plan for Villa Teresa since it so closely emulates the building next door. Anyone else thinking this could be part of a bigger plan? That lot is pretty small and wouldn't allow for much parking.

Wondering if this isn't part of a plan for Villa Teresa since it so closely emulates the building next door. Anyone else thinking this could be part of a bigger plan? That lot is pretty small and wouldn't allow for much parking.

That was one of my thoughts as well. With Villa Theresa you don't expect the Church to simply sell to the highest bidder and move on. You have to believe that they might try to advance a social mission with whatever develops there. Affordable housing (NOT section 8, there is a difference) might be one way to advance that mission. I know in Oregon the Catholic charity Society of St. Vincent De Paul (best known for running thrift stores), has begun building mixed-use buidlings with thrift stores on the ground floor and affordable family housing above.

That being said, has anyone besides me (and Steve) noticed that nowhere in this thread is any documentation given that this is to be affordable or Section 8 housing? By my count someone posted a photo of a mock-up and that is it. No documentation. No plan.

A rumor then. A rumor with a nice picture associated with it

Edit: I mean to empahisize that the Section 8 bit is a rumor. Not that the building itself is a rumor.

Just a little more background...

That photo came from a homeowner in Heritage Hills as part of a presentation to the neighborhood by the developer.

Trying to get more information but it seems they were told it would be low income or affordable housing. And since the property in question is owned by a housing authority, all that would make sense.

Again, If you want a apartment priced similarly to the lower cost apartments that will be offered at the steel yard, then great. If you want section 8 housing I would suggest looking at the available options already in place.

Does it trouble you that someone who makes the amount of money I do, spends their free time in Midtown?

Here's what low-income senior housing looks like in downtown Shawnee. The Aldridge developers used low income housing to fully renovate this beautiful building and the senior residents are an incredible asset to the downtown. Like Midtown, downtown Shawnee also has a noticeable homeless population. But the Aldridge is something the town is extremely proud of.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2646/3889021588_d53a73f5d6_b.jpg

Just a little more background...

That photo came from a homeowner in Heritage Hills as part of a presentation to the neighborhood by the developer.

Trying to get more information but it seems they were told it would be low income or affordable housing. And since the property is question is owned by a housing authority, all that would make sense.

With all due respect to the many good folks of Heritage Hills, I would not trust anything someone from that neighborhood says. There was a pretty strong rumor circulating that because the Edge was using some sort of HUD funding or tax credits that it too was section 8 or low income housing. And lets not forget the sex shops that were warned to be coming to Midtown en mass, at least according to those in HH.

At this point nobody really knows what the true details of this project is. Its probably best to just wait until this goes up for review.

I don't make much money. I would actually probably qualify to live in low income housing if I did not still live at home.

I don't go to bail bonds, sex shops. I don't defecate in public or otherwise cause any trouble.

I arrive at work 30 minutes early and leave 15 minutes after my shift. I pick up all available overtime or shifts others don't want to work. I'm putting myself through a trade school in March, finishing up a certification that I dropped out of. With no assistance from family or the state.

Does it trouble you that I actually spend a lot of my free money in midtown... The plaza district... And uptown? Does it bother you that I drive to those districts and would it bother you more that I would like to live there if I could?

How does the amount of money I make classify me as a vagrant?

Like

I don't make much money. I would actually probably qualify to live in low income housing if I did not still live at home.

I don't go to bail bonds, sex shops. I don't defecate in public or otherwise cause any trouble.

I arrive at work 30 minutes early and leave 15 minutes after my shift. I pick up all available overtime or shifts others don't want to work. I'm putting myself through a trade school in March, finishing up a certification that I dropped out of. With no assistance from family or the state.

Does it trouble you that I actually spend a lot of my free money in midtown... The plaza district... And uptown? Does it bother you that I drive to those districts and would it bother you more that I would like to live there if I could?

How does the amount of money I make classify me as a vagrant?

It obviously doesn't. I am amazed how quick some people will stereotype entire groups of people without any nuance or reflection. There's a ridiculously simplistic impression by some here that all "poor" people don't have jobs, morals, or ethics, and even having a housing project for those with less money will immediately ruin an entire area (which by the way was neglected by the same people for the last quarter century). I at no time have mentioned section 8 housing or this project specifically, but even bringing up the issue generally leads to trashing entire groups. You'd think more "Okies" might have learned something from the Grapes of Wrath...

Here's the basic gist, and I'll provide more later. It's senior affordable housing, which is very different than the Section 8 voucher program everyone is concerned about (which historically has been very poorly run). I'm also told the proposal location for this in the thread (there was a google aerial photo showing it as the old Myriad Motor Inn site posted that seems to have disappeared this afternoon) was listed incorrectly. I'm also told by folks who have a say in this matter that is very unlikely to happen.

Does it trouble you that someone who makes the amount of money I do, spends their free time in Midtown?

Absolutely...

No, it doesn't. All I said from the the beginning is that I don't want section 8 housing in midtown. Don't make it more than that.

There's a ridiculously simplistic impression by some here that all "poor" people don't have jobs, morals, or ethics, and even having a housing project for those with less money will immediately ruin an entire area (which by the way was neglected by the same people for the last quarter century).

Unfortunately that stereotype is very common with people who label them as "takers" and worse....so I understand the defensive nature of the reply. I hope that each district will eventually include housing for several income and socioeconomic backgrounds rather than more segregation into areas where it is easily identifiable who "belongs" and who doesn't.

Is it wrong to want to live in an upscale neighborhood without having to live out at 178th and Western? Is it wrong to want OKC to have just one upscale mixed-used district that is able to attract the kind of amenities many wish were here but aren't? Is it immoral to not turn a complete blind eye to the problems that come with section 8 housing and the areas surrounding it for the sake of idealism? Maybe I shouldn't use the term upscale but maybe more like middle income and higher.

In addition it seems like a lot of people are trying to make this out to be a rich vs poor thing. The objection here is specifically against HUD/section 8 housing, nothing more.

Not anymore than everyone freaking out about the stage center tower design or the design of "insert project here" before the renderings are released.

But we have renderings here. If we didn't and just had a thread called "mystery affordable housing" I would be dubious as well.

#mysterytower

Is it wrong to want to live in an upscale neighborhood without having to live out at 178th and Western? Is it wrong to want OKC to have just one upscale mixed-used district that is able to attract the kind of amenities many wish were here but aren't? Is it immoral to not turn a complete blind eye to the problems that come with section 8 housing and the areas surrounding it for the sake of idealism? Maybe I shouldn't use the term upscale but maybe more like middle income and higher.

In addition it seems like a lot of people are trying to make this out to be a rich vs poor thing. The objection here is specifically against HUD/section 8 housing, nothing more.

I'll say it: Yes, it is wrong. I'm so sorry you will have to interact with people from other classes and ethnic groups. It is straight up paranoid bull---- that you even care. If you can't handle living in a city, where people with different ethnic persuasions and income backgrounds live, then enjoy your time in Gallardia. You will never have to worry about interacting with someone different than yourself there.

So is this a government housing project? If so, might it bring an undesirable element to Midtown and increase crime?


Who cares diversity is good.

Have you ever been to midtown? It definitely is not "shut off" to any type of income...it's in fact too heavily saturated in low income.

There is nothing wrong with or disgusting about having an upscale part of town. We currently don't have many of them.+1

I'll say it: Yes, it is wrong. I'm so sorry you will have to interact with people from other classes and ethnic groups. It is straight up paranoid bull---- that you even care. If you can't handle living in a city, where people with different ethnic persuasions and income backgrounds live, then enjoy your time in Gallardia. You will never have to worry about interacting with someone different than yourself there.

It hasn't a damn thing to do with race or ethnicity and you know it. I will say you people are living in a fantasy land if you think that any developer is going to want to build mid-rise luxury condos, retail, or any of the other wishes many people have for downtown if they are surrounded by a slum. Unbelievable, and we wonder why OKC doesn't have the awesome, gentrified urban districts other cities have.

There's good diversity and bad diversity and many of the elements HUD/section 8 projects bring to a community is bad diversity that is going to run people from the middle-income and up away. People aren't going to want to live where they or their belongings aren't safe if they don't have to. Yeah I know, I know, that's stereotyping and there are great people living in HUD projects. That there may be but it doesn't change the fact they also bring in crime, drugs, and prostitution.

I want to ask everyone here a question. Show me ONE example where a government low-income/zero-income housing project has benefited the surrounding neighborhood. I want to see an example of how it is a good thing and why its something everyone should support and want to live next to.

I'll say it: Yes, it is wrong. I'm so sorry you will have to interact with people from other classes and ethnic groups. It is straight up paranoid bull---- that you even care. If you can't handle living in a city, where people with different ethnic persuasions and income backgrounds live, then enjoy your time in Gallardia. You will never have to worry about interacting with someone different than yourself there.Seriously man!? Cities should have places where there are higher income people that can only afford to live there with no lower income housing around or section 8 anywhere nearby and there should also be places where there is a mixed diversity.

bchris02, it is not wrong to want to live in an upscale neighborhood with no lower income housing around. That is just fine, I am the same way. Don't even listen to these people who say you be forced to live in a mixed neighborhood because it is ethical. That is straight up bull.

Every city should have it's own areas of concentrated poor areas and more affluent areas but also having spots where it is mixed so people who like major diversity have the option to live in it and be a part of it. OKC needs an area where it has a high income demographic. HH would be a great place to try and start. Hopefully in the future to the area will really see home prices rise.

Every city should have it's own areas of concentrated poor areas and more affluent areas but also having spots where it is mixed so people who like major diversity have the option to live in it and be a part of it. OKC needs an area where it has a high income demographic. HH would be a great place to try and start. Hopefully in the future to the area will really see home prices rise.

Bingo!

I will say you people are living in a fantasy land if you think that any developer is going to want to build mid-rise luxury condos, retail, or any of the other wishes many people have for downtown if they are surrounded by a slum.
Why do you keep saying that? Like phialpha has pointed out, there are already these types of developments in Midtown, and it clearly hasn't stopped the announcement of multi-million dollar developments in Midtown. I live by many of these places and it clearly isn't driving people away from living here.


Unbelievable, and we wonder why OKC doesn't have the awesome, gentrified urban districts other cities have.

I think you might be the only one that has said that. And you keep saying it over and over and over again.

Seriously man!? Cities should have places where there are higher income people that can only afford to live there with no lower income housing around or section 8 anywhere nearby and there should also be places where there is a mixed diversity.

bchris02, it is not wrong to want to live in an upscale neighborhood with no lower income housing around. That is just fine, I am the same way. Don't even listen to these people who say you be forced to live in a mixed neighborhood because it is ethical. That is straight up bull.

Every city should have it's own areas of concentrated poor areas and more affluent areas but also having spots where it is mixed so people who like major diversity have the option to live in it and be a part of it. OKC needs an area where it has a high income demographic. HH would be a great place to try and start. Hopefully in the future to the area will really see home prices rise.

What do you know about cities? Have you ever lived in a really big city? Dallas suburbs don't count.

It hasn't a damn thing to do with race or ethnicity and you know it. I will say you people are living in a fantasy land if you think that any developer is going to want to build mid-rise luxury condos, retail, or any of the other wishes many people have for downtown if they are surrounded by a slum. Unbelievable, and we wonder why OKC doesn't have the awesome, gentrified urban districts other cities have.

There's good diversity and bad diversity and many of the elements HUD/section 8 projects bring to a community is bad diversity that is going to run people from the middle-income and up away. People aren't going to want to live where they or their belongings aren't safe if they don't have to. Yeah I know, I know, that's stereotyping and there are great people living in HUD projects. That there may be but it doesn't change the fact they also bring in crime, drugs, and prostitution.

I want to ask everyone here a question. Show me ONE example where a government low-income/zero-income housing project has benefited the surrounding neighborhood. I want to see an example of how it is a good thing and why its something everyone should support and want to live next to.

I routinely see residents of the Wesley Retirement Village patronizing Beatnix and Foodies. They include a veteran who is wheelchair bound. I'm sure Sid Burgess knows who I'm talking about. These folks are extra eyes on the street, they are not causing any trouble, and they are part of the Midtown community. Now, this is an answer to your question. I am not arguing for or against this project, which as I stated before, has not exactly been accurately portrayed in this thread.

Is it wrong to want to live in an upscale neighborhood without having to live out at 178th and Western? Is it wrong to want OKC to have just one upscale mixed-used district that is able to attract the kind of amenities many wish were here but aren't? Is it immoral to not turn a complete blind eye to the problems that come with section 8 housing and the areas surrounding it for the sake of idealism? Maybe I shouldn't use the term upscale but maybe more like middle income and higher.

In addition it seems like a lot of people are trying to make this out to be a rich vs poor thing. The objection here is specifically against HUD/section 8 housing, nothing more.

Oh come on. This is very specifically anti-poor. Step back and think about what you are saying. You are saying that people in government subsidized or HUD housing are bad for the nabe. You are anti-poor people living in Midtown and messing up a yuppie utopia. Your position on this is very clear -- whether or not you want to admit it to yourself.

You are suggesting that one apartment complex out of the dozen that have been announced recently (all very high rent) is going to mess up the good things going in Midtown. You are wrong. And if you lived in SF, New York, Boston, Chicago, DC or other big cities you would be embarrassed to read your own crap.

What do you know about cities? Have you ever lived in a really big city? Dallas suburbs don't count.What difference does it make? Dallas is freakin massive city, so why wouldn't it count?

I've been to many big cities and everyone has it's own area of concentrated wealth where the poor have no way of living there. I'm not bashing the poor saying they wouldn't be a good fit and they would cause problems, but there should be areas of upper class only. You have the entire city of OKC, what we're only asking for part of a district here along with HH. Even though NW OKC is coming to be OKC's higher income area, we need an area closer to downtown more centralized and more urban. C2S needs to be diversified and all walks of life there, so it wouldn't work.

What difference does it make? Dallas is freakin massive city, so why wouldn't it count?

I've been to many big cities and everyone has it's own area of concentrated wealth where the poor have no way of living there. I'm not bashing the poor saying they wouldn't be a good fit and they would cause problems, but there should be areas of upper class only. You have the entire city of OKC, what we're only asking for part of a district here along with HH. Even though NW OKC is coming to be OKC's higher income area, we need an area closer to downtown more centralized and more urban. C2S needs to be diversified and all walks of life there, so it wouldn't work.

Because it is a ridiculously economically segregated city. But, that seems like the kind of city you want to live in, so carry on. Your point has been made. I disagree.

Because it is a ridiculously economically segregated city. But, that seems like the kind of city you want to live in, so carry on. Your point has been made. I disagree.I'll agree with you that a bunch of its suburbs are, but have you seen McKinney lately or Uptown? It has really diversified and become a city with all walks of life. . .

I'll agree with you that a bunch of its suburbs are, but have you seen McKinney lately or Uptown? It has really diversified and become a city with all walks of life. . .

It is a suburb. It is not a big city. I don't want to argue about this but I think your views are provincial -- not wrong -- just provincial. But I can assure you that to live in a vibrant city where all walks of life converge and interact is an experience that is foreign in this part of the country -- but very enriching. Nichols Hills and North Edmond are for the rich. Hopefully downtown will be for all citizens.

It is a suburb. It is not a big city. I don't want to argue about this but I think your views are provincial -- not wrong -- just provincial. But I can assure you that to live in a vibrant city where all walks of life converge and interact is an experience that is foreign in this part of the country -- but very enriching. Nichols Hills and North Edmond are for the rich. Hopefully downtown will be for all citizens.Alright, I won't argue anymore. I will say this one last thing, just check out McKinney or Uptown in Dallas when you get a chance.

I will also agree that downtown should a place for all people.

What do you know about cities? Have you ever lived in a really big city? Dallas suburbs don't count.

Dallas proper certainly does...go to Uptown Dallas and the Park Cities area directly north of it and tell me how much Section 8 or even low income housing you find. Same for the vast majority of Midtown Houston.

Alright, I won't argue anymore. I will say this one last thing, just check out McKinney or Uptown in Dallas when you get a chance.

I will also agree that downtown should a place for all people.

Are you referring to McKinney Avenue in Uptown or McKinney the suburb?

The suburb. Have you seen their downtown area? It is pretty cool and has many different walks of life.

Are you referring to McKinney Avenue in Uptown or McKinney the suburb?

I think he's talking about McKinney Avenue in Uptown Dallas. I'm very familiar with it, and like it a great deal. It would be great to have something like it in OKC. However, it is a very faux urban setting, populated almost entirely by yuppies. Compared to Greenwich Village, Adams Morgan, the Mission District, Williamsburg, and other great urban districts in America's best cities, it is a joke.

Why do you keep saying that? Like phialpha has pointed out, there are already these types of developments in Midtown, and it clearly hasn't stopped the announcement of multi-million dollar developments in Midtown. I live by many of these places and it clearly isn't driving people away from living here.



I think you might be the only one that has said that. And you keep saying it over and over and over again.

How do we get "likes" enabled on all threads?

Also, Uptown Dallas actually feels like an isolated Yuppie bubble that seriously lacks diversity. I've never studied the area demographics, but I've been out there quite a few times without seeing a diverse urban environment that I'd like to live in.

Finally, I lived at Claremont across the street from the halfway house. Not once did I have a problem. Talked to people there all time. Loved living in that area (and this was before a lot of the recent development).

Dallas proper certainly does...go to Uptown Dallas and the Park Cities area directly north of it and tell me how much Section 8 or even low income housing you find. Same for the vast majority of Midtown Houston.

Dallas sucks. So does Houston.

Dallas sucks. So does Houston.

They both have great qualities, but I hope OKC doesn't look to them for designing the core. Way better examples out there.

Dallas sucks. So does Houston.

Generally I agree, not because of demographic distribution or districts in general, but I just don't like either very much. Just making a point. Texas wise I prefer Ft. Worth, it's like an OKC that didn't get completely raped by urban renewal in the 70s.

I think some people in this thread are trying to force things a bit too much.

We are rebuilding our core from almost the ground up. As a result, we want to target the highest point we can. Every project should be done as close to "right" as we can get it. The neighborhoods and the city will then develop organically from there. You don't start off trying to build something cheap. If you do that then in 20 years you'll end up with absolute crap. You build as nice as you can to maintain your momentum. Remember we're trying to raise property values to the point that midrise and eventually even highrise residential buildings become viable.

I have no problem with affordable housing for seniors. That could be a quality addition to the area. Like I said earlier, I have no problem with housing that the bartender at McNellie's can afford. That kind of development will rapidly increase the number of people we have in Midtown and will open up downtown life to a much broader, and much larger, population group. But we don't want to aim for Section 8 housing in that area. I am 100% in agreement with Plutonic Panda on that (what do you know, the devil just died of frostbite). It's fine if that type of housing already exists in the area, that is how the diversity you're searching for is achieved -- over the course of time as a neighborhood develops. You don't just instantly build a fully-developed urban neighborhood with an eclectic mix of diverse populations.

I think the best candidate for the type of neighborhood a lot of people here are wanting is Capitol Hill. You've got a large ethnic population in a fairly small area, lots of old cool buildings, and if you connected it to downtown with the streetcar and invested the type of money that Deep Deuce is seeing, you'd have an extremely cool area with a very authentic feel that we don't have anywhere else. But you get that by moving into areas with pre-existing urban poor, not by bringing in Section 8 housing into an area you're trying to market specifically to young yuppies.

I am not arguing that Midtown needs a bunch of new Section 8 housing. That wouldn't make sense for the area. I was just responding to the insulting stereotypes of those with less money that were being propagated (e.g., intense affinity for porn shops, crime) and the idea that parts of the core should aim for economic segregation. Urban cores are strengthened by diversity and the suburbs have always been the place for white flight. As others have pointed out, there are already low income places in midtown and they shouldn't be squeezed out or their residents dehumanized.

I think some people in this thread are trying to force things a bit too much.

We are rebuilding our core from almost the ground up. As a result, we want to target the highest point we can. Every project should be done as close to "right" as we can get it. The neighborhoods and the city will then develop organically from there. You don't start off trying to build something cheap. If you do that then in 20 years you'll end up with absolute crap. You build as nice as you can to maintain your momentum. Remember we're trying to raise property values to the point that midrise and eventually even highrise residential buildings become viable.

I have no problem with affordable housing for seniors. That could be a quality addition to the area. Like I said earlier, I have no problem with housing that the bartender at McNellie's can afford. That kind of development will rapidly increase the number of people we have in Midtown and will open up downtown life to a much broader, and much larger, population group. But we don't want to aim for Section 8 housing in that area. I am 100% in agreement with Plutonic Panda on that (what do you know, the devil just died of frostbite). It's fine if that type of housing already exists in the area, that is how the diversity you're searching for is achieved -- over the course of time as a neighborhood develops. You don't just instantly build a fully-developed urban neighborhood with an eclectic mix of diverse populations.

I think the best candidate for the type of neighborhood a lot of people here are wanting is Capitol Hill. You've got a large ethnic population in a fairly small area, lots of old cool buildings, and if you connected it to downtown with the streetcar and invested the type of money that Deep Deuce is seeing, you'd have an extremely cool area with a very authentic feel that we don't have anywhere else. But you get that by moving into areas with pre-existing urban poor, not by bringing in Section 8 housing into an area you're trying to market specifically to young yuppies.

Completely agree with this.

I've also been thinking of Capitol Hill this entire discussion as the best candidate for the kind of neighborhood many here are wanting.

I think some people in this thread are trying to force things a bit too much.

We are rebuilding our core from almost the ground up. As a result, we want to target the highest point we can. Every project should be done as close to "right" as we can get it. The neighborhoods and the city will then develop organically from there. You don't start off trying to build something cheap. If you do that then in 20 years you'll end up with absolute crap. You build as nice as you can to maintain your momentum. Remember we're trying to raise property values to the point that midrise and eventually even highrise residential buildings become viable.

I have no problem with affordable housing for seniors. That could be a quality addition to the area. Like I said earlier, I have no problem with housing that the bartender at McNellie's can afford. That kind of development will rapidly increase the number of people we have in Midtown and will open up downtown life to a much broader, and much larger, population group. But we don't want to aim for Section 8 housing in that area. I am 100% in agreement with Plutonic Panda on that (what do you know, the devil just died of frostbite). It's fine if that type of housing already exists in the area, that is how the diversity you're searching for is achieved -- over the course of time as a neighborhood develops. You don't just instantly build a fully-developed urban neighborhood with an eclectic mix of diverse populations.

I think the best candidate for the type of neighborhood a lot of people here are wanting is Capitol Hill. You've got a large ethnic population in a fairly small area, lots of old cool buildings, and if you connected it to downtown with the streetcar and invested the type of money that Deep Deuce is seeing, you'd have an extremely cool area with a very authentic feel that we don't have anywhere else. But you get that by moving into areas with pre-existing urban poor, not by bringing in Section 8 housing into an area you're trying to market specifically to young yuppies.

I think you're trying to force things too much. Who here is advocating building a bunch of section 8 housing in Midtown? I haven't seen anyone.

I have seen a lot of folks get their panties in a wad hyperventilating about poor people moving in and wrecking the neighborhood.

Now that we know this is probably housing for the seniors and disabled, can we move on from this ridiculous argument?

More info on this site.

SIRE Public Access (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=87903)

http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/cache/2/0ghyjya1sx1zo1555xyvmg45/214338212182013092203985.PDF

^ Thanks for that!

Here are some new renderings and details...

The plan is actually to demolish the existing office building and construct 48 senior housing units:



http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5503d1387383922-1320-classen-drive-1320b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5508d1387384024-1320-classen-drive-1320f.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5502d1387383921-1320-classen-drive-1320a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5505d1387383923-1320-classen-drive-1320d.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5506d1387383924-1320-classen-drive-1320e.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5504d1387383923-1320-classen-drive-1320c.jpg

Sure is awesome how everyone jumped to conclusions and had a big pissing match about Section 8 housing and gentrification over this.

Let's do one of those under false pretenses at least once a month from here on out. It was so much fun.

I don't mind it at all. I think it'd be a vast improvement over the building that currently occupies that lot.

This is the building they are planning to demolish:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5509d1387384772-1320-classen-drive-1320g.jpg

HH came to the council meeting and were against it. Too big and to use their words, it uses too much of the lot (no green space I suppose).

To me, it is a really nice project and will add some diversity and density to an area that will be able to benefit from it. Especially with the streetcar being so close. HH needs to realize that projects like this are fantastic bookend developments for their neighborhood. In fact, they'd be the luckiest fancy pants neighborhood in the world if there were nothing but beautiful 4 story senior housing buildings surrounding it. No drama. Quiet. Well maintained. It's like a big silent wall protecting them from all the strip clubs and bars that are about to go in Midtown.

Very surprised you are for this given its suburban nature

Senior housing with a playground and splash pad? Huh?

Senior housing with a playground and splash pad? Huh?

For the grandkids, no doubt.

Also, shuffleboard!!

Very surprised you are for this given its suburban nature

I agree on the design, very meh. I'd like to see something less suburban, more cutting edge. Something that lends itself better to the triangular shape of the lot.

I've been in that building a few times to access some of the OKCPS resources located there. Wonder where those functions are moving?

It's like a big silent wall protecting them from all the strip clubs and bars that are about to go in Midtown.

Ha not funny and won't be happening. There is a very tight lid on development in Midtown..

I was being facetious.

Of course. Had you been serious, you would have included Piercings R Us, Grown-Up Toys for Girls/Boys/Etc., RubR Duds, and a massage/comedy club concept named Happy Endings.

I agree on the design, very meh. I'd like to see something less suburban, more cutting edge. Something that lends itself better to the triangular shape of the lot.

Keep in mind this is next door to Villa Theresa, and the designers are clearly trying to evoke those structures. Not that that negates your comment.

I think it is a decently classy building. A modest improvement over the cube-with-a-drive-in-window-occupying-the-center-of-a-parking-lot that is there now, and will bring more life to the area of the sort that people claim to want.

I like this proposed project but I also kind of like the cube-with-drivethru building.

Classic mid-century design.

Sure is awesome how everyone jumped to conclusions and had a big pissing match about Section 8 housing and gentrification over this.

Let's do one of those under false pretenses at least once a month from here on out. It was so much fun.

In my defense, someone else mentioned it before I did, but I'm eating my hat. I like this development, it should fit in well with the surrounding architecture of Villa Teresa and more senior housing should be nice.

I agree on the design, very meh. I'd like to see something less suburban, more cutting edge. Something that lends itself better to the triangular shape of the lot.

I see what you did there...