He didn't say anyone doesn't want to live near western just that there will be no through street.

I live in a downtown apartment building that requires a keyfob to enter. Is that considered a gated community? Also, last week someone stole the lights off my bike while it was parked in a secure parking garage.

I live in a downtown apartment building that requires a keyfob to enter. Is that considered a gated community? Also, last week someone stole the lights off my bike while it was parked in a secure parking garage.

That's a good point. There's a far cry from the dreaded "gated communities" which at the extreme can include schools, shops, post offices, restaurants, and residential all behind gates, and simply gated neighborhoods or streets. And this talk about "throwing your money" at HOAs? Lots of ungated neighborhoods (mine included) have HOAs with yearly fees and dues. Mine go towards the pool, the parks, common area maintenance, signage, stylistic lighting, street maintenance, and more. I'm good with it. Knew about it when I moved in.

Are folks that live in apartment buildings which require a key or passcode to enter the build merely cutting themselves off from others and living an exclusionary lifestyle too? Are they just "thumping their chest"?

I think there's a bigger question on "who owns the street" in this case. Who paid for the street to be built, and maintained all these years? Closing off one end, and then gating it, doesn't that take city property and essentially grant it to a private group? Will the city continue to maintain it, or does it now have to be maintained by the neighborhood?

He didn't say anyone doesn't want to live near western just that there will be no through street.

What is your point? Of course there will be no through street because they are bulldozing an entire block and closing it off from Western. That's what we're debating.

Wow, ok. this is what you said "If you don't want to live near Western Avenue, you shouldn't build near Western Avenue. It doesn't give me confidence that an intelligent person is developing this property."

My point is you made up something out of thin air about people not wanting to live near western shouldn't build near western. Which is not the case at all. Cutting off access doesn't mean you don't want to live near Western.

Boy, this thread went off the rails quick.

I, too, live in an apartment building downtown with fob access. You don't need a fob to access the retail locations, anyone can do that. You do need fob access for parking and residential areas. This kind of thing would apply to just about any residential building in manhattan, etc. I think this is more related to having a locked gate on your property vs a gate blocking a public street. The residential building is private property with no expectation of public access aside from the street level. A street user would expect to be able to use a public street, unless Cumberland is a private drive, which I didn't think it was.

Wow, ok. this is what you said "If you don't want to live near Western Avenue, you shouldn't build near Western Avenue. It doesn't give me confidence that an intelligent person is developing this property."

My point is you made up something out of thin air about people not wanting to live near western shouldn't build near western. Which is not the case at all. Cutting off access doesn't mean you don't want to live near Western.

Again, what is your point? Then why would you go out of your way to block off Western?

I'm actually not even trying to make a point, I was pointing out that your statement made no sense. The developers want a gated community that is one way in one way out. Maybe they figured out if they have a private gate they could get $50k more per lot. I don't know why they don't have the access off western, maybe the city said they couldn't have a gate there off a pretty busy street. Maybe that's why the only access is off Avondale. All that being said I love that area and I would love to live in this development. Having a gate there wouldn't not interrupt any of the things I would like to do.

How does it not interrupt things? It's a gate and a cul de sac. You do not pass.

Dont claim you're not making a point. You're being a senseless idiot and I have no idea why you're arguing with me. You're clearly making a point.

My point (that elicited your uh reaction) was that if you don't want to live around the hustle and bustle of 63rd and Western, don't move there. That's what this gate is about. The gate and cul de sac belongs out in Edmond, not on the block behind a walkable retail town center in OKC's emerging "uptown" area.

This is the same as that stupid lawsuit against Glimcher. There is an urban / suburban identity crisis under way here. There are actually people who want to keep this area from getting too highly sophisticated. A funny thing about life is some people really just can't have nice things. I'd say that's a good thing and we should embrace a higher level of sophistication. OKC can be better than this.

People living in condos on Avondale will be cut off from Western. Having to go a block (or two bc the Plaza will be congested) out of the way won't affect motorists as much as pedestrians. If you live on Avondale and want to go to a business in Western, it would be nice to be able to walk. You can't just close public streets that serve a purpose in the street grid.

You're being a senseless idiot and I have no idea why you're arguing with me.

Spartan, you are saying some very good things, but please chill.

It was interesting in the fact, that you felt the need to include it at all. I mean, obviously it was not by accident. But It was just something that struck me as a disingenuous and/or backhanded comment. I guess I found it to be more humorous than anything. Clearly it would have been better not to mention it at all, and I apologize for bringing it to your attention.

Again, what is your point? I would say precisely the same thing about downtown living, small town living, rural living. They can all be valid choices, depending on circumstances. If you look through the body of my posts on this board I am very consistent about this. I have never been a hardline urban living only proponent. I rarely pass judgment on people's lifestyle choices. I'm not a fan of poorly-designed suburban environments, but then again I'm no fan of poorly-designed URBAN environments, either.

Seems like you're just looking for an argument. And as long as you're suggesting I'm being disingenuous (translation: liar), I would say that trolling for comments that don't agree with your worldview, then calling people out for making them, and THEN backing out and suggesting you never meant to argue is the DEFINITION of disingenuous.

So I am a senseless idiot now?

I will admit that I am an idiot in one regard. after rereading the article again they aren't even building a gate. the street will be open and they are just capping it off at one end. So no sense even bringing up a gate anymore.

The street will remain open, though, Say said.

“We’re not building a private, gated community,” he said. “We’re improving what’s out there. We’re taking something that’s not pretty and making it really beautiful.”

Now if you want to bring up access to people on Avondale to western I can understand that point. The article in the Oklahoman says there will be a pedestrian access to western on Cumberland as well. Regardless, there are 11 other vehicle access points between Wilshire and 63rd to get there. I would say that is a pretty healthy. I don't know how this guy bought these properties under the radar to effectively but I wouldn't expect that to happen again on any of the other streets.

I understand your point and I am not going to call you names over it, but there is a high interest level for this development. Our office has been getting calls about it already. You might think it is bad design and doom and gloom but I feel that It will be highly successful and add nothing but positives to the area.

So just to wrap that up there will no car access to Cumberland from western, no gate to access Cumberland off Avondale, but there will be pedestrian access to/from western on Cumberland. So what's all the fuss about?

I still bring up my earlier question, which I'm hoping someone will know. At what point is it acceptable for someone to turn a public street private? Does the city get compensated for that? And does the city maintain the street going forward after that, or is it something the HOA then pays for.

I still bring up my earlier question, which I'm hoping someone will know. At what point is it acceptable for someone to turn a public street private? Does the city get compensated for that? And does the city maintain the street going forward after that, or is it something the HOA then pays for.

It's still a public street, right? I would assume that the city of NH will still maintain Cumberland as normal. Just like the residents will still use the trash services, get water, be policed by NH, etc.

It's still a public street, right? I would assume that the city of NH will still maintain Cumberland as normal. Just like the residents will still use the trash services, get water, be policed by NH, etc.

I would say that's right. If they did put up a gate then the residents would have to maintain the street. Probably a smart move, granted they will be the only ones using it. (ducks)

Spartan, you are saying some very good things, but please chill.

I literally have no idea why this guy is arguing with me over incredibly basic points.

It's still a public street, right? I would assume that the city of NH will still maintain Cumberland as normal. Just like the residents will still use the trash services, get water, be policed by NH, etc.

I don't know. The newsOK article says one thing, the journal record another.


This exclusive development will offer residents an urban living experience, with the security of a private neighborhood...

Now, it may be that the plans were originally for a gate, and it changed, which is why the renderings and the newsok article give that impression, and then the journal record article gives another. If there's no gate, then yeah, it's a moot point. It was more curiosity for me. Normally, gated communities are built out by the developer, not taking over existing streets, so I was curious about the "transfer" of ownership that potentially could happen.

I agree, original plans probably called for a gate, but the costs of that on the back end probably changed their minds going forward.

I am assuming that there will be HOA fees for this development from what the articles have been saying. Maybe in that there is a hired security that walks the place at night or something of the sort. Maybe there will be installed cameras on those lamp posts and someone in that "guard hut" can watch on a cctv.

I posted a similar comment on TLO's article on this... The one thing I think is pretty disingenuous on the part of the developers and the Daily Oklahoman is they are calling this neighborhood "Blighted" and "Ramshackle" when a cursory look down the street on Google Maps Street View shows zero houses that fit that description - they all look to be in good condition, with a few of them immaculately kept, despite their age. Honestly, the worst part of this whole street is, well, the street itself - it looks like it needed to be redone like 20 years ago. Sure, the houses are old, but calling this neighborhood “blighted” when these small old houses are worth a quarter million each is nothing short of intellectually dishonest. At the end of the day, you bet it’s his property to do with as he pleases. But wouldn’t it be a whole lot better if he wasn’t lying about his reasoning for wanting to create this little enclave?

Agreed. I just drove this not 10 minutes ago. Blighted is a misleading word to use as an excuse.

Apparently the developer does not read OKCTALK. LOL

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/5477158?embargo_redirect=yes


Some of the post-World War II houses to be cleared out to make room for an upscale addition could be moved for use elsewhere, said the developer, who paid above-market prices for them.

Energy executive Tony Say, who plans to turn rundown Cumberland Drive into upscale Cumberland Court, said "10 or 12" of his 23 rent houses are sound enough to be moved.

Say said he had heard nothing negative about his plans for Cumberland Court, which were approved by the city in December.

sigh, more charming midcentury houses to be razed for a soulless generic development. Another hick oillie that thinks he is a city planner.

sigh, more charming midcentury houses to be razed for a soulless generic development. Another hick oillie that thinks he is a city planner.

Hey! More insightful commentary from Edgar!

The only issue I have with this is that it will be a gated community and they will be closing off Western. If they left the gate off and they connected it with Western, I would be in full support of it. Maybe it's a matter of taste, but I don't consider most of the homes that will be razed to be charming. Some of them are, but a lot of them won't be missed.

Functionally obsolete is excuse de jour in OKC now. Apparently this guy was a slum lord if he was renting these place to people, by his own admission.

I will say this about the legal mechanics - I think that ethically and strategically, the guy should be able to do anything he wants on this street. We don't have design review mechanisms in place. We don't have public investments in the 63rd and Western area, yet. This particular block isn't even in OKC. It's in Nichols Hills, which has been starved for development opportunities lately. NH lets rich people do whatever they want and that's the reasonable expectation based on precedent.

All of that said, closing a public street shouldn't be allowed. Both cities actually have to go out of their way a little in order to make that happen. That shouldn't happen, at a minimum.

12214Here's an aerial view looking to the SSW with Cumberland in the foreground, Nichols Hills Plaza North immediately beyond, then Nichols Hills Plaza South, and so on. I hope this helps give perspective to those who may not be familiar with this area.

Look at all that blight.

Ha! My good work friend lives on one of the streets just north of Cumberland. He has no issues with the proposed development, but was more than a little offended that homes exactly like his (very nice) house were being called "ramshackle" in the paper.

no offense but I personally do not find those homes to be representative nor desirable in Nichols Hills. Again, my theory is if you going to do something then do it right. Go Big or Go Home. The creation of these 'affordable homes' was a mistake in my opinion for the long term but luckily we have someone who is coming in to correct this.

It isn't even about the dollars, it is the design and the way the homes are laid out - I don't call those exclusive nor worthy of a Nichols Hills price point. But the new designs definitely fit what would be found in other major metropolitan area's exclusive suburbs. ...

I agree, Hot Rod. These homes are not very nice and I am glad to see them go. This will be a very welcome development although my one grip is that they are closing off Western, but I can live with that.

no offense but I personally do not find those homes to be representative nor desirable in Nichols Hills. Again, my theory is if you going to do something then do it right. Go Big or Go Home. The creation of these 'affordable homes' was a mistake in my opinion for the long term but luckily we have someone who is coming in to correct this.

It isn't even about the dollars, it is the design and the way the homes are laid out - I don't call those exclusive nor worthy of a Nichols Hills price point. But the new designs definitely fit what would be found in other major metropolitan area's exclusive suburbs. ...

The problem though is if the replacement also lacks sophistication (gate, cul de sac, befitting of Edmond, not Nichols Hills). Someone who is looking for a home in Edmond will just go find a home in Edmond, of which there isn't exactly a shortage. The developer should be intelligent enough to accurately assess the niche that wants to buy in Nichols Hills.

I think you are underestimating the demand for gated development in Nichols Hills. Outabounds sold briskly for big money, the old Fred Jones estate was replaced with a very successful gated development along the golf course (developed by Ron Bradshaw, who was in corporate management for many years at Fred Jones Companies), and Ballastone is directly across Grand Boulevard. The latter two are in the very heart of Nichols Hills, adjacent to Oklahoma City Golf and Country Club. I think there are more; those are just the ones that immediately come to mind.

I had a pledge brother who lived on Outabounds. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but that was fashioned out of residual land the country club no longer needed, right?

This is a street that is currently part of the grid, right behind Nichols Hills Plaza... on Western. Other side of Penn, on the other hand, is definitely not walkable.

I would throw in Glenbrook, which feels gated, but isn't. These were all done before the area started to become North OKC's hub for Class-A neighborhood retail.

I had a pledge brother who lived on Outabounds. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but that was fashioned out of residual land the country club no longer needed, right?

This is a street that is currently part of the grid, right behind Nichols Hills Plaza... on Western. Other side of Penn, on the other hand, is definitely not walkable.

I would throw in Glenbrook, which feels gated, but isn't. These were all done before the area started to become North OKC's hub for Class-A neighborhood retail.

It was similar to Grand Circle where they took land (I believe it was a family estate at one point, possibly sold back to the CC) and developed into a gated community.

^^^^^^^
That is correct. It was a single estate circa 1950s that may or may not been a part of the CC before that. Was redeveloped as gated community in late nineties.

To Spartan's point about it removing a street from the grid, I'm less troubled by it owing to how it backs up to NHP than if it were a random street somewhere between that point and Wilshire. That said I hope for the benefit of Nichols Hills taxpayers (or whoever is responsible for street maintenance there) that the street reverts to private maintenance. Taxpayers shouldn't have to maintain roads in a gated community, ever.

Spartan sez no one will want to buy any of the new homes in the proposed Cumberland development. Guess that all by itself means no one will. Oh well, back to the drawring board.

The homes on the south side back to a shopping center. A higher density development is perfectly suitable for that street and if they want to close the street - then so be it. I doubt anyone is going to be too inconvenienced with the other alternatives available. These homes aren't unique and the new development will be a nice buffer. I wish them well.

That said I hope for the benefit of Nichols Hills taxpayers (or whoever is responsible for street maintenance there) that the street reverts to private maintenance. Taxpayers shouldn't have to maintain roads in a gated community, ever.

I sometimes wonder if we would should make all subdivision roads private maintenance. If they want to put a gate up that is up to them.

It was similar to Grand Circle where they took land (I believe it was a family estate at one point, possibly sold back to the CC) and developed into a gated community.

Don't believe Grand Circle is gated

I sometimes wonder if we would should make all subdivision roads private maintenance. If they want to put a gate up that is up to them.
Aren't they private maintenance is they are closed gates during the day?

Spartan sez no one will want to buy any of the new homes in the proposed Cumberland development. Guess that all by itself means no one will. Oh well, back to the drawring board.

That's not what I said. Are you really that breathtakingly stupid?

The problem though is if the replacement also lacks sophistication (gate, cul de sac, befitting of Edmond, not Nichols Hills). Someone who is looking for a home in Edmond will just go find a home in Edmond, of which there isn't exactly a shortage. The developer should be intelligent enough to accurately assess the niche that wants to buy in Nichols Hills.

No need to be such an a**-hole but I do appologize that my response was a bit snarky, though. You do, however, clearly insinuate that people who find the same thing in Edmond will just go live in Edmond. You are totally wrong. That area is developing its own charm and appeal. I dont think the appeal lies with the 20-40 crowd but with empty nesters of which is a fast-growing market. Unless they go on sale overpriced or our economy is totally imploding that the developer will have a problem selling them. I think he's likely done his research.

No need to be such an a**-hole but I do appologize that my response was a bit snarky, though. You do, however, clearly insinuate that people who find the same thing in Edmond will just go live in Edmond. You are totally wrong. That area is developing its own charm and appeal. I dont think the appeal lies with the 20-40 crowd but with empty nesters of which is a fast-growing market. Unless they go on sale overpriced or our economy is totally imploding that the developer will have a problem selling them. I think he's likely done his research.

We partially agree, actually. I am saying that they should build Nichols Hills, not Edmond. People aren't choosing Nichols Hills for its cul-de-sacs, gates, and security huts, like they are Edmond.

I am sorry, but it's hard to respond seriously when you make me into a straw man without even understanding what I said. I am tired of the 3-4 posters that follow me around and try to troll me in every thread.

I drove down Western this morning. It looks like they are demoing some houses today.

Yep. Saw the same thing and did a double-take until I realized it was for the Cumberland development. It's sure going to be interesting-looking during this phase.

They have started work here (thanks to warreng88 for the photo):

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/nh050616.jpg

When does the gate go in?

I was speaking with a contractor that was approached by the developer about building homes, he told me that perspective lot cost will be in the 400k range and the lots will only be around 40' wide. Zero backyards , talk about a tough sell..

From warreng88:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/cumberland032817.jpg

I was speaking with a contractor that was approached by the developer about building homes, he told me that perspective lot cost will be in the 400k range and the lots will only be around 40' wide. Zero backyards , talk about a tough sell..

That sounds high, but this is the price range of the lots in the new development on the north side of 63rd between Penn and Western....$375,000, I believe. And they are selling...houses going up and are selling.

These will have no problem selling. Nichols Hills will always be a destination.

I still don't understand this project. There was nothing wrong with the houses that were there. But they tore them down and are closing off the road to put up a handful of cookie cutter, zero lot line houses and a little gated neighborhood. Seems like there might have been better places to do this than where they chose.

I predict these will sell quickly, specifically BECAUSE they are zero lot line and because they have no backyards. I further predict that when all is said and done, my parents will know at least 2-3 residents of the street.

There is a huge market of people out there, thousands of people I would guess, in Nichols Hills, Quail Creek, Greens/Val Verde, and Deer Creek/South Edmond that are 60-70 years old and still hanging on to their big family houses. They have ridden the appreciations up for 20-30 years and are ready to downsize. They aren't quite ready to "throw in the towel" and move to a condo. Many of them moved farther out then they really would have preferred because of kids and are looking to be "closer in" but they really aren't downtown people. This literally describes every one of my parents' friends. I think this will go gangbusters.

Now, one could argue about the demolition of that street. I would have maybe preferred a different approach. But the location within walking distance of NH Plaza and Western is exactly what WILL draw people.

Also, the walkability to NH Plaza and ultimately the new development south of 63rd are huge selling points, especially with Trader Joe's being a part of this.

And remember, there have been a bunch of high-priced two-on-a-lot homes built and sold south of Classen Curve for the same reason.

I still don't understand this project. There was nothing wrong with the houses that were there. But they tore them down and are closing off the road to put up a handful of cookie cutter, zero lot line houses and a little gated neighborhood. Seems like there might have been better places to do this than where they chose.

These will not be cookie cutter homes. You sound as if you think they are putting up tract homes.

These will not be cookie cutter homes. You sound as if you think they are putting up tract homes.

Maybe McMansion would be a better term. From the pictures in this thread it looks like they aren't planning anything unique. Same basic design in different colors or finishes.

This will be a dense development of single family homes within easy walking distance of great shopping, including Whole Foods and Trader Joe's, a nice group of locally owned restaurants from casual to fine, walking/biking trails that are beautiful and well maintained, and great access to downtown and most other business areas. It is 15 minutes to the airport ( a relatively cheap Uber ride). These homes will have restricted traffic and be safe and. walkable. Why do so many urbanites hate this lifestyle?

This will be a dense development of single family homes within easy walking distance of great shopping, including Whole Foods and Trader Joe's, a nice group of locally owned restaurants from casual to fine, walking/biking trails that are beautiful and well maintained, and great access to downtown and most other business areas. It is 15 minutes to the airport ( a relatively cheap Uber ride). These homes will have restricted traffic and be safe and. walkable. Why do so many urbanites hate this lifestyle?

Do you see the gate or not? lol

Do you see the gate or not? lol
Sure do.