Plans have been submitted for a new 4-story 120 room Best Western hotel to the east of the proposed MAPS 3 park (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Central+Park) in the area commonly known as Core to Shore.


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

The hotel would be at 101 SW 7th Street on the northwest corner of South Broadway and 7th.

The .93 acre property was purchased last fall for $1.2 million by an LLC that tracks back to local investor and developer Mizra Beg.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/bestwestern1.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/bestwestern3.jpg

The hotel would cost $3.4 million and be constructed of wood siding and stone veneer. 68 on-site parking spaces would be provided.

The Best Western is the second hotel proposed in the area to the east of the MAPS 3 park, joining the Fairfield Inn (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Fairfield+Inn) a few blocks to the north.

The entire area is still being considered as possible site for the MAPS 3 convention center.

Plans for this hotel require the approval of the Downtown Design Review Committee.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/bestwestern2.jpg

This should be good

please NO

That property is too close to the park for a development of this caliber. It's not the place to try to go suburban. This is fit for up on Memorial or maybe out in Yukon or by Tinker in Midwest City. If this gets approved, OKC needs to give up on Core 2 Shore ever being anything special. To reference the old saying, this isn't just "better than crappy," this really is pure crap.

This is just bad.

This should be good

Lol. What's everyone waiting for?!?

Oh lordy, no. Not with that design.

It has to go through the Downtown Design Review Committee and I'm sure there will be changes.

http://www.okctalk.com/announcements-help-desk/40162-please-show-respect-business-owners.html

There will be improvements, I'm sure. We will probably end up with another Hotel in the same template as all the other Bricktown hotels, which I'm fine with. Wish the brand was a little more prestigious, but their money is just as good as anybody's to whoever is selling the property.

It has to go through the Downtown Design Review Committee and I'm sure there will be changes.

Hopefully so. I don't like the idea of what is basically a low-end motel being that close to the park, but if its going to be there it should at least conform to urban standards. If this is going to be the standard, OKC might as well not even waste money on the park and instead invest that money into a better convention center or more streetcar.

So, my question is, do these hotel developers know something we don't? Or is the land right now just cheap?
Because from everything I see, C2S isn't even creeping along, it's just stationary right now in regard to any type of meaningful development or change in the scheduled area(s). I guess we're waiting to see what happens with the convention center, aren't we?

It has to go through the Downtown Design Review Committee and I'm sure there will be changes.

Do you think the DDRC will be stricter on what they accept in these beginning stages as the earlier developments will set a precedent for what is to follow?

Hopefully so. I don't like the idea of what is basically a low-end motel being that close to the park, but if its going to be there it should at least conform to urban standards. If this is going to be the standard, OKC might as well not even waste money on the park and instead invest that money into a better convention center or more streetcar.

Who says it's going to be low end?

Your constant whining is getting really, really old.

Do you think the DDRC will be stricter on what they accept in these beginning stages as the earlier developments will set a precedent for what is to follow?

They apply the standards and guidelines they have been given, and this project doesn't meet several, such as the setback from the street and the proposed exterior materials.

No way does this get approved in it's current state. Virtually all the hotels built or now under construction experienced big changes from the original proposals.

I think this is why people get annoyed. Just do it right the first time and make it easy on yourself.

Many of these developers are new to urban design and have never built in the districts that have established standards.

This is why we have design standards and review committees.

This whole process is meant to be collaborative.

I think this is why people get annoyed. Just do it right the first time and make it easy on yourself.

IMO, it's disrespectful for them to try to propose something like that in the first place. There is no way that if the developer has done any research at all that they would think what they have proposed, at this point, is acceptable..

Interesting. Does this make the east park site more attractive for the convention center, between this and the proposed Fairfield?

Many of these developers are new to urban design and have never built in the districts that have established standards.

This is why we have design standards and review committees.

This whole process is meant to be collaborative.

I know you are trying really hard to be respectful of these business owners, but are saying they don't have access to the standards and guidelines before they put their plans together? How could they be so far off from what is expected?

Hasn't the DDRC already set a precedent of waiving the setback requirement in the C2S area, though? The exact name is escaping me at the moment, but that law firm development.

Also, isn't this the same committee that approved the new downtown Chase Bank branch?

I know you are trying really hard to be respectful of these business owners, but are saying they don't have access to the standards and guidelines before they put their plans together? How could they be so far off from what is expected?

This hasn't even been submitted to the DDRC yet.

Your constant whining is getting really, really old.

I just think the bar should be set a little higher for the Core 2 Shore area given the amount of public investment that is being put into the area. The blocks adjacent to the park are the most important. I don't want to see it turn into another Lower Bricktown where subpar development gets approved simply for the sake of having development. If this gets approved it will set a very bad precedent for future developments. I am sure if it wasn't for my history of negativity on this board you would probably agree with me. I also want to add that there is a difference between criticism of a genuinely bad project and blatant over the top negativity.

While I am hopeful that the DDRC denies this, their approval of the Chase Bank and the law firm in Core 2 Shore has me concerned that they will approve this.

They apply the standards and guidelines they have been given, and this project doesn't meet several, such as the setback from the street and the proposed exterior materials.

No way does this get approved in it's current state. Virtually all the hotels built or now under construction experienced big changes from the original proposals.

Should be another good test for the DDRC, hopefully they heavily scrutinize this. I would be happy if they pushed it to the street, had some type of retail on the first level and made it look less suburban. Otherwise, don't really mind it being a Best Western. They are starting to build some higher end (for them) hotels and it wouldn't hurt to have some other lower price options downtown.

On a positive note, it appears that Core to Shore is starting to generate some tangible interest somewhat ahead of when it was expected (based on more recent estimates).

Sorry for the brevity, but this is ugly and sets a terrible precedent for the area. Demand quality design, OKC. This does not improve the landscape. They need us; we don't "need" them.

This hasn't even been submitted to the DDRC yet.

On some level that's not the point.

None of the regularly active participants on this forum, are spending millions to tens of millions of dollars on development and just about every regularly active participant on this forum can tell you that this does not pass guidelines.

There continue to be these developments which are doing this thing where they start way behind the curve so we can reach a 'compromise' to just the bare minimum. And if they get lucky, they can maybe get a variance because "the site is challenging". All in order to keep costs down.

I can't possibly accept that anybody willing to invest millions of dollars into something hasn't done the market research to know what various changes had to be made to most of the other hotel developments in the downtown area to finally be accepted. These things are well documented here and in other sources, so there's no excuse. You start WITH the guidelines and you develop from there…just like they would have in any other development they've ever done. Anything else is necessarily construed as purposeful disregard of the establishment for personal gain.

Oh no no no no no no no no.

Just to clarify, this was only a preliminary building permit.

At that point, the City staff works with the developer to communicate the various standards.

That's where we are now.

I'm wondering if this is a rushed proposal, just trying to get something started before the convention center picks a site, hoping to increase the value of the land.

I just think the bar should be set a little higher for the Core 2 Shore area given the amount of public investment that is being put into the area. The blocks adjacent to the park are the most important. I don't want to see it turn into another Lower Bricktown where subpar development gets approved simply for the sake of having development. If this gets approved it will set a very bad precedent for future developments. I am sure if it wasn't for my history of negativity on this board you would probably agree with me. I also want to add that there is a difference between criticism of a genuinely bad project and blatant over the top negativity.

While I am hopeful that the DDRC denies this, their approval of the Chase Bank and the law firm in Core 2 Shore has me concerned that they will approve this.


I totally agree with this. This hotel does nothing to add to the vibrancy of downtown or this area. I get that it should change, and hopefully become much better. But why does this keep happening? Why are we only getting 5 story, 130ish room hotels? The designs for the other Canopy Hotels and Ac Hotels are much larger than ours, albeit in larger cities.

I don't understand why downtown OKC gets proposals like this. It's not a bad hotel or design at all. If you put this exact hotel and design in Norman or I-35 and Covell in Edmond it would be great. But in downtown, especially fronting this awesome new Park we are getting, it's just totally underwhelming.

Do hoteliers just not trust downtown OKC enough to build 300 rooms at once? That seems silly with all of these different 130 room places we are getting. Why would a developer not want to stand out and build a say, 7 story 290 room hotel, especially in this location. Face it West, right at the park. Make it a true kick-start to this area.

I just don't get it. Are we competing with Joplin, Amarillo, Springdale or are we competing with San Antonio, Charlotte, Nashville, or Indianapolis? Am I misguided myself? Is it that OKC just can't quite draw a little larger hotel yet? It's awesome that we are getting hotels, it's fantastic! But when do we start to hold ourselves to higher standards?

That would look really great by I-40 in Yukon.

Why are we only getting 5 story, 130ish room hotels?

Because they are super easy to get financed now.

There is no mechanism in the City to stop people from building anything they want as long as the project meets zoning and design regulations.

I'm all for 5 story 130 room hotels, as long as we get a variety of service levels (with a preference for a higher percentage of higher quality hotels than a normal area of the city, since we're talking downtown…but I'm not opposed to even a Best Western downtown if it is done right). Realistically, we have so many undeveloped lots that we'd be better off grabbing as many things to fill in the urban fabric as we can, as long as they aren't just horrific buildings that will hold back a district considerably.

Because they are super easy to get financed now.

There is no mechanism in the City to stop people from building anything they want as long as the project meets zoning and design regulations.


So why isn't it happening? Am I overvaluing downtown? I don't get why we wouldn't be a PRIME location for a nicer midrise hotel. I'm not saying a 26 story tower with 1000 rooms. Just more like what we have on Sheridan by the ballpark. How are those hotels doing? Or the Ambassador? How are they performing? I knew Brian Werkman with the Holiday Inn is saying they are doing fantastic day in, night out. Why wouldn't an Omni or something see this and jump all over a new OKC hotel?

So why isn't it happening? Am I overvaluing downtown? I don't get why we wouldn't be a PRIME location for a nicer midrise hotel. I'm not saying a 26 story tower with 1000 rooms. Just more like what we have on Sheridan by the ballpark. How are those hotels doing? Or the Ambassador? How are they performing? I knew Brian Werkman with the Holiday Inn is saying they are doing fantastic day in, night out. Why wouldn't an Omni or something see this and jump all over a new OKC hotel?

If I am not mistaking, Omni is very interested in potentially being a part of the Convention Center hotel deal.

I agree with those who say the issue with this really isn't the size of the hotel. It's the setback, overall facade, and lack of first-floor activity. I think in Core 2 Shore its important that everything developed not only has street interaction but also retail/restaurants on the first floor to encourage street activity.

You guys should relax. It will be alright.

Best Western is a company, they typically have a standard "style" that all of their hotels follow. They have hundreds of hotels nation wide & they go through the proposal process every single time. Why waste time & money on the initial proposal when they know they will get feedback which will help them make those decisions without having to dig for the standards themselves & spend wasted time developing something. Sure, its lazy but its a decent practice.

99.9% of the population will never know what the original proposal looked like, so why does it matter? Don't be so personally offended just because you pay attention to this sort of thing, I'm sure the final product will turn out alright. It won't knock any of our socks off but I'm confident it will be decent infill.

Small hotels are probably the best bet to get financed in this area right now.

As long as it's built to urban standards (which it will have to be) this is how the development in this area is going to start.

There is room for all sizes of development. this is not a final approval design so I am not going to lose sleep. better a full Best western than a Empty Omni so it has to begin somewhere. the success of these projects will lead to larger development in my opinion. we are always so quick to jump on these. Pete is doing his best to give us the most current information available and in this case a preliminary building permit its not as if this is final approval and breaking ground. Yes there have been previous disappointments but its a bit soon to go crazy on this development.

I don't mean to get too up in arms. Assuming there are corrections to the final design, it's yet another hotel announced, and in a district that doesn't even exist yet. It's awesome. Another plus is that it is a Best Western. Everybody knows that name. I AM excited for it. I'm excited to see the final design. And where there are new hotels being built, there has to be food and entertainment. Again, this can only lead to more, and I am excited for that.

What does the city envision for this area east of the park? Individual properties with individual parking lots that take up space like a suberb or lower bricktown? Or a close-knit series of buildings (hotels, retail, food/bars) with maximum walkability for convention goers and park visitors accompanied by shared garages?

Has their vision for this area been shared other than just space for "development"?

So, my question is, do these hotel developers know something we don't? Or is the land right now just cheap?
Because from everything I see, C2S isn't even creeping along, it's just stationary right now in regard to any type of meaningful development or change in the scheduled area(s). I guess we're waiting to see what happens with the convention center, aren't we?

Just my opinion, but I think it's the proximity to I-40 (and the cheap land, if that's the case). Perhaps the thinking is that, park or no, there will be people staying there simply because it's an affordable hotel chain with a recognizable brand, and it's downtown and very easy to access from the highway.

What does the city envision for this area east of the park? Individual properties with individual parking lots that take up space like a suberb or lower bricktown? Or a close-knit series of buildings (hotels, retail, food/bars) with maximum walkability for convention goers and park visitors accompanied by shared garages?

Has their vision for this area been shared other than just space for "development"?

All the original Core to Shore concept plans showed the convention center taking virtually all the land east of the park and west of Shields.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/wikiphotos/c2s1.jpg

Many of these developers are new to urban design and have never built in the districts that have established standards.

This is why we have design standards and review committees.

This whole process is meant to be collaborative.

Aren't their architects supposed to be aware of the standards? I don't blame the developers as much as the architects who disregard or are ignorant of the standards and then essentially get to charge them for redesigns. Just because the developers are ignorant and inexperienced does not excuse a supposed professional who is charging them fees. If I hired an architect and they missed so many obvious things I would be very upset to the point of challenging their credentials. This shouldn't be a game of "what can I get away with".

If there are any developers out there who need assiatance, I'll be happy to critique their plans for free.

Again, they submitted these plans are preliminary building permits and I'm sure that was to get feedback from the City planning department.

This is exactly the way the process is supposed to work.

I'm sure the plans will look very different when they go to the DDRC.

I see what the orginal concept looks like, but maybe it will turn into the Best Western Vib concept. Any way we can get DDRC to request this?: https://youtu.be/7ZHCnUDqm_k.

This is their prototype plan. Hotel brands use this all the time in order to expidite their process of getting permits and financing in line aka save money. That is how this process works, then down the line the design is brought up to design/code standards of the municipality. Hopefully the DDRC will do their job of setting the bar high in C2S.

here is a link to their prototype (http://www.bestwesterndevelopers.com/portfolio/best-western-classic.php) - the elevation is the exact same as what is submitted.


I wouldnt be suprised if it ended up looking like the Best western Seaport.
10889

However they have a cool new "urban" brand called VIB - would be nice to see the flag upgraded to that
10890

This is their prototype plan. Hotel brands use this all the time in order to expidite their process of getting permits and financing in line aka save money. That is how this process works, then down the line the design is brought up to design/code standards of the municipality. Hopefully the DDRC will do their job of setting the bar high in C2S.

here is a link to their prototype (http://www.bestwesterndevelopers.com/portfolio/best-western-classic.php) - the elevation is the exact same as what is submitted.


I wouldnt be suprised if it ended up looking like the Best western Seaport.
10889

However they have a cool new "urban" brand called VIB - would be nice to see the flag upgraded to that
10890

Thank you. That is what I was trying to say, but you make the point way more clear.

This is their prototype plan. Hotel brands use this all the time in order to expidite their process of getting permits and financing in line aka save money. That is how this process works, then down the line the design is brought up to design/code standards of the municipality. Hopefully the DDRC will do their job of setting the bar high in C2S.

here is a link to their prototype (http://www.bestwesterndevelopers.com/portfolio/best-western-classic.php) - the elevation is the exact same as what is submitted.


I wouldnt be suprised if it ended up looking like the Best western Seaport.
10889

However they have a cool new "urban" brand called VIB - would be nice to see the flag upgraded to that
10890

Either of those designs would be a slam dunk. The DDRC needs to not budge on this.

Did you see what they approved for a Chase branch? I have lost most of my faith in their gun sticking.

This is their prototype plan. Hotel brands use this all the time in order to expidite their process of getting permits and financing in line aka save money. That is how this process works, then down the line the design is brought up to design/code standards of the municipality. Hopefully the DDRC will do their job of setting the bar high in C2S.

here is a link to their prototype (http://www.bestwesterndevelopers.com/portfolio/best-western-classic.php) - the elevation is the exact same as what is submitted.


I wouldnt be suprised if it ended up looking like the Best western Seaport.
10889

However they have a cool new "urban" brand called VIB - would be nice to see the flag upgraded to that
10890

This is a perfect illustration of just how entrenched sprawling auto-centric suburban design is in this country. They don't even have a generic urban template in their arsenal.

Did you see what they approved for a Chase branch? I have lost most of my faith in their gun sticking.

I agree, which is why I am concerned about this.

This is their prototype plan. Hotel brands use this all the time in order to expidite their process of getting permits and financing in line aka save money. That is how this process works, then down the line the design is brought up to design/code standards of the municipality. Hopefully the DDRC will do their job of setting the bar high in C2S.

here is a link to their prototype (http://www.bestwesterndevelopers.com/portfolio/best-western-classic.php) - the elevation is the exact same as what is submitted.

Yes, that literally is exactly what they submitted.

Thanks for finding that.

LOL. I saw the thread title and IMMEDIATELY got a huge smile on my face. I already knew that heads were exploding in this thread even before I clicked. Thankfully you guys didn't disappoint. I mean bchris is ready to COMPLETELY scrap C2S over this Best Western. Bwahahahaha! You guys are a real hoot sometimes.

I'm not concerned about the brand name - I once stayed at a Best Western in the most urban part of London, England . I'm not even THAT concerned about the design because I do feel we're beyond the point of simply approving any design and I bet they'll modify it. What does concern me is that it's yet another limited service hotel of the same size and stature of ten others downtown. I do think that there is ultimately a ceiling to how many rooms downtown OKC can support and I worry that if occupancy rates start to fall, it will make more substantial hotels less likely. What I am even more concerned about is a point that I believe was made earlier, it doesn't appear at this early stage that there's much cohesion to that area. I really had hope that we would see, if not high-rise development of a certain caliber, than at least a plan for something that kept the area tied together with an urban scheme of some type. It's very early days to be sure, but they're not going to be able to easily "fix" something for a long while and I just wish it was starting out with a different feel.

I do think it is easy to lose track of the fact that all of a sudden there is commercial development interest in action by C2S in an area that otherwise has been the land of the lost. Downtown OKC is exploding out of its previous limited area. And, activity begets activity.

I'm not concerned about the brand name - I once stayed at a Best Western in the most urban part of London, England . I'm not even THAT concerned about the design because I do feel we're beyond the point of simply approving any design and I bet they'll modify it. What does concern me is that it's yet another limited service hotel of the same size and stature of ten others downtown. I do think that there is ultimately a ceiling to how many rooms downtown OKC can support and I worry that if occupancy rates start to fall, it will make more substantial hotels less likely. What I am even more concerned about is a point that I believe was made earlier, it doesn't appear at this early stage that there's much cohesion to that area. I really had hope that we would see, if not high-rise development of a certain caliber, than at least a plan for something that kept the area tied together with an urban scheme of some type. It's very early days to be sure, but they're not going to be able to easily "fix" something for a long while and I just wish it was starting out with a different feel.

TBH, everything between Shields and the park is throw-away, because there is no room on any side for expansion. I'm not saying it should be a sea of surface parking, but there simply isn't going to be much of a draw here. Hopefully there are some cool cafes/restaurants/entertainment that front the park, but this will be a harder to place to sell in terms of residential, so the mixed-use aspect is limited. It really should probably be mostly offices.

or…you know…something else that would make a ton of sense…like a convention center...

nm

Please don't Yukon our Core To Shore. Lose the surface parking (or at least most of it), add a couple floors, push the structure out to the street, and this could be a very nice addition to C2S. As proposed, it simply does not fit in. I'd like to see 1st floor restaurant, retail, registration, meeting rooms, and amenities. Parking can go on the 2nd & 3rd floors with perhaps more underground if the water table allows. The rooms should stack up on floors 4-7. I don't think urban design is too much to ask of buildings in an urban environment.

Please don't Yukon our Core To Shore. Lose the surface parking (or at least most of it), add a couple floors, push the structure out to the street, and this could be a very nice addition to C2S. As proposed, it simply does not fit in. I'd like to see 1st floor restaurant, retail, registration, meeting rooms, and amenities. Parking can go on the 2nd & 3rd floors with perhaps more underground if the water table allows. The rooms should stack up on floors 4-7. I don't think urban design is too much to ask of buildings in an urban environment.

Did you read post # 52 ?