what is the Centennial on the Canal?

[dismayed]

From what I have heard... airline pilots, executives/business professionals, several retirees....

[metro]

Exactly what flintysooner said. It costs more to build "up" and to make buildings last for decades and hopefully centuries. These aren't the wood frame (except The Hill) cookie cutter homes you're used to in OKC. These are on par or cheaper than homes on the coasts. As flinty said, developers will loose money on more affordable units. I want one as bad as anyone else and perhaps moreso. OKC is not unique in this problem. Look at Manhattan, it's filled with SUPER HIGH END real estate that often 3-4 normal people combined can't afford to share rent. The everyday joes live out in the other boroughs like Brooklyn, Queens, etc. and if it weren't for rent control, most of NYC would be "NICHOLS HILLS".

[solitude]

Exactly what flintysooner said. It costs more to build "up" and to make buildings last for decades and hopefully centuries. These aren't the wood frame (except The Hill) cookie cutter homes you're used to in OKC. These are on par or cheaper than homes on the coasts. As flinty said, developers will loose money on more affordable units. I want one as bad as anyone else and perhaps moreso. OKC is not unique in this problem. Look at Manhattan, it's filled with SUPER HIGH END real estate that often 3-4 normal people combined can't afford to share rent. The everyday joes live out in the other boroughs like Brooklyn, Queens, etc. and if it weren't for rent control, most of NYC would be "NICHOLS HILLS".

Apples. And. Oranges.

We can't compare OKC real estate to New York City! We have to compare it to Oklahoma City. Right now, living in downtown is 'Nichols Hills South'.

You are right in that other cities have this problem, I am right in that other cities also tackle this problem. Oklahoma City and its business leaders, the same bunch who've been running this town for years (only with different last names), will never allow downtown to become anything more than another enclave of wealth of, by and for the rich. They will want to keep out the "riff raff."

The elite of OKC get to "play city."

I'm ashamed I didn't see it coming.

[edcrunk]

sounds like you got some "david glover" type issues with the rich. i just don't get it.

[Blazerfan11]

Ask some of those 18 yr olds at the record scratching parties y'hang at, they'll explain it to you ed. Look for the one in the "Che Lives" shirt. LOL

[solitude]

Well, FYI, I am 48 year old man, I don't know David Glover and the only "issues" I have with the rich are the same ones that millions have - and that's politicians who pander to their every whim, approve developments for their pleasure (using taxpayer grants and taxpayer funded improvements that made their developments worth anything in the first place) and a downtown crowd where cronyism and back-scratching is the rule. By the way, they all tend to be rich and far to the right.

I'm not exactly broke myself; it's not a rich versus poor thing, it's a 'rich as special' versus everyone else thing.

If you were born, raised and educated in Oklahoma - you may not "get it."

[Blazerfan11]

that was a knock on ed for hanging out with teenie-boppers, not you!

[Midtowner]

Sol's right -- if I were to catalog some of the stuff I know about these guys, you'd think I should be wearing a tinfoil hat.

Solitude would know how I know what I know -- my father worked for Jan Eric Cartwright, possibly the last truly honest Attorney General for the state of Oklahoma. Had he continued in office, E.K. Gaylord and company likely would have gone to the pokey.

I'm not sure if things today are quite as bad as they were back in the 70's and 80's, but guys like Randy Hogan make me suspect the worst.

[Blazerfan11]

So are the stories of ol' whats his name breaking into chamber dudes office to see where Tinker would be, and then going out 'n buying all the property etc....true? LOL

[Midtowner]

'Ol what's his name probably wouldn't have had to break into anything because the Chamber is/was an organization which primarily advanced the interests of a select few under an air of legitimacy.

To be fair, I think that what's good for the elites in OKC or anywhere else is generally good for everyone else as well. While Bricktown might be Nichols Hills South, that's what we're going to want to have if we're going to have an upscale entertainment district to lure "creative class" types who will spur economic growth which helps everyone.

Could things be structured a little more fairly for the taxpayer? Sure. At this point, I understand that raging against the machine is basically an exercise in futility.

[metro]

Apples. And. Oranges.

We can't compare OKC real estate to New York City! We have to compare it to Oklahoma City. Right now, living in downtown is 'Nichols Hills South'.

You are right in that other cities have this problem, I am right in that other cities also tackle this problem. Oklahoma City and its business leaders, the same bunch who've been running this town for years (only with different last names), will never allow downtown to become anything more than another enclave of wealth of, by and for the rich. They will want to keep out the "riff raff."

The elite of OKC get to "play city."

I'm ashamed I didn't see it coming.

I still disagree. Yes, unequivocally I know there is a HUGE NEED for more affordable housing downtown. I'm not rich by any means (well I take that back, but most Americans would disagree with me, if you make $35,000 or more a year, you're in the top 4% of wage earners in THE WORLD, if you make $47,000 a year or more, you're in the top 1% of wage earners in the WORLD, based upon this, we're all rich compared to most of the world), perhaps even make less money than you, but I OWN downtown. There are older, more affordable options downtown NOW. You just have to look for them because they aren't highly marketed. You can live downtown right now for less than 100K easily. Again, not a ton of this like we need, but they are out there for ownership. There are also TONS of affordable apartments that are comparable to suburban apartments in monthly lease rates. I'm tired of hearing this argument. I'm one of the BIGGEST downtown advocates I know, sit on the board of downtown residents association known as Urban Neighbors, and other organizations, I don't make a ton of money, and I own downtown, go to city council meetings and get involved. I think most citizens in this town just expect everything handed to them without doing much effort on their own. Bottom line, I wanted to live downtown big time, I found a condo dirt cheap and bought it. Those who want to live/rent/own downtown can do so for under 100K. The Maywood Lofts and Central Ave. Villas also have many units at affordable price points as well. Harvey Lofts sold fairly cheap as well, comparable to a small new construction home in the burbs.

[Blazerfan11]

Midtowner, the real creative class aren't the wealthy folk. The people you are referring to are the ones who leach off of the creative class for financial gain.

[FritterGirl]

As much as I enjoy downtown, home in the burbs is looking better and better every day.

[flintysooner]

I'm not sure if things today are quite as bad as they were back in the 70's and 80's

I started working in the mid 1960's and I can say for certain that things are much more competitive and honest now.

[solitude]

I think most citizens in this town just expect everything handed to them without doing much effort on their own.

Good thing you're not running for office. That kind of statement can haunt a person forever if they have aspirations for public service. On the other hand, if you believe what you said - you probably shouldn't run again. (I read in an old thread where you ran for city council in Bethany or Warr Acres.) Contempt for "most" people in this city is not a good foundation to build good things on.

Do you really believe what you wrote? I know so many people who work very hard and get so very little in return. People that work 50+ hours a week and still can't afford health insurance. People who work so much to afford the basics of raising a family, that 'family time' is less and less as they face recalled mortgages, rising insurance premiums, rising food costs - and children in Iraq to boot. Worry and the costs of just making ends meet consume their days. For others, it's not bleak - but it's not easy, and they work hard and expect nothing handed to them.

Think about what "most" means in your comment. That is such an offensively broad statement about a majority of people in this city.

[Midtowner]

You can live downtown right now for less than 100K easily.

Where? I'm not begrudging the developers their prices. They should sell for whatever the market will bear. I'm just skeptical that they can continue to sell so high above the market. I believe that the market for this sort of housing is finite and I'm hoping that more competition will come in and start to bring down prices.

[mecarr]

I think most citizens in this town just expect everything handed to them without doing much effort on their own.

Metro, while I generally agree with most of your comments, this one seems off base. I don't get the feeling talking with people around here that they expect everything to be handed to them. Quite the opposite. However, we should all expect that most of the residents of OKC should have a shot at decent affordable living in downtown OKC. And when I say downtown, I mean downtown, not something in Midtown. The economic and cultural diversity will make downtown OKC a more interesting place to live.

Living in other cities in the USA, OKC's problem is not unique. In most major US cities, it is very expensive to live in downtown, although there are some affordable options. In reality, the places that did it the right way are cities in Europe. If you want to see urban planning at is best, go visit places in England, Spain & France.

[kevinpate]

Most of it is out of my own range, but if there are folks buying, and the DT residential buildings are going at a rapid clip, how can the prices be above market prices?

[jsenter]

As much as I enjoy downtown, home in the burbs is looking better and better every day.

I don't know why anyone would spend that much money to live downtown. The OKC public schools are horrible! Check out the API scores. At least in the burbs I don't have to worry about being robbed by a homeless bum, or having a homeless bum rape my wife. My family's safety is my top priority. And I want a decent education for my children.

[Midtowner]

Most of it is out of my own range, but if there are folks buying, and the DT residential buildings are going at a rapid clip, how can the prices be above market prices?

That depends on how you define "market." For the rest of the city, home prices are pretty far south of $100/sq. ft. I don't think there's much of a problem justifying paying a little bit of a premium for downtown, I'd say anywhere between $150 to $180 sq.ft. would be acceptable to me, but $225 sq. ft. is the average right now for downtown. $225 is also around what new construction in midtown costs (I just don't get that one). The price should be whatever the market will bear, but as with any product, the early adopters always pay a premium. I don't think $225 to $300 sq.ft. is sustainable -- especially when people start to resell.

Metro, you cite higher costs to build downtown, but how much of that is mitigated by TIF financing?

[metro]

I don't know why anyone would spend that much money to live downtown. The OKC public schools are horrible! Check out the API scores. At least in the burbs I don't have to worry about being robbed by a homeless bum, or having a homeless bum rape my wife. My family's safety is my top priority. And I want a decent education for my children.

So do you propose we just keep things the way they are? There has to be people willing to take these risks and help out the community that has been neglected to turn things around. Yes OKC Public Schools need much improvement but they are getting better, and hopefully MAPS for Kids will help them become even better. FYI, they are working on building a new elementary school downtown, so that should help things out as well.

I've lived in west downtown (where most of the "homeless bum" or "homeless rapers" ) as you state for over two years, I haven't had one problem neither has my wife. We have felt safe the entire time, despite many homeless walking around in the area. Any big city has a problem with tackling the homeless population and trying to get them back on their feet. My church has a homeless ministry in which we help them on a regular basis, if this is something on your heart, I encourage you to help be a part of the solution.

[metro]

Where? I'm not begrudging the developers their prices. They should sell for whatever the market will bear. I'm just skeptical that they can continue to sell so high above the market. I believe that the market for this sort of housing is finite and I'm hoping that more competition will come in and start to bring down prices.

I can name several older developments with prices from $45-85K. Classen Glen, and your own Sycamore Square. There are also several houses/duplexes/multi-plexes owned by private owners (that aren't highly marketed) that are less than $100K.

Newer developments: Harvey Lofts sold for about $140-$190sq. ft. depending on the floorplan purchased. Maywood Lofts are under construction and proposed to start at about $110-$120K on up.

Again folks, I understand just as much or more than everybody for more affordable housing downtown. I'd love to buy a newer unit at a realistic price. I can't afford a $200K+ unit just like most of you. I come from a lower middle class family and decided to get involved and be part of the solution, not a part of the problem. As they say, "if you want something bad enough, you'll find a way to make it happen." That's what I did, I wanted to live downtown hardcore, I searched (pretty easily actually, just get on MLS or look at online listings for sale) and found several properties within the downtown area that were under $80K to own. Bought one.

Again, as someone pointed out we have been told all along for several years now that the downtown housing revolution of OKC would start with the upper end and slowly work its way down to more affordable options. That's just the dynamics usually taken in ANY downtown, not just OKC. You think Lower Manhattan offers cheap living? Currently demand has outstripped supply in OKC for years, we're now playing catch-up. After these developers take their first risk and cash in on the upper end, they can use some of the profits to offer more affordable housing. Just look at Maywood Park vs. Maywood Lofts (same developer and $450K price difference). It will come, just be patient, Rome wasn't built in a day. I'm as anxious as anyone else.

[jsenter]

So do you propose we just keep things the way they are? There has to be people willing to take these risks and help out the community that has been neglected to turn things around. Yes OKC Public Schools need much improvement but they are getting better, and hopefully MAPS for Kids will help them become even better. FYI, they are working on building a new elementary school downtown, so that should help things out as well.

I've lived in west downtown (where most of the "homeless bum" or "homeless rapers" ) as you state for over two years, I haven't had one problem neither has my wife. We have felt safe the entire time, despite many homeless walking around in the area. Any big city has a problem with tackling the homeless population and trying to get them back on their feet. My church has a homeless ministry in which we help them on a regular basis, if this is something on your heart, I encourage you to help be a part of the solution.

I don't think there's any saving the OKC public schools. And, I definitely don't want to "take a risk" with my children. That wouldn't be fair to them, just for the sake of my prideful hopes in the downtown area. metro, do you have kids? If so, don't you want the best for your children? Most good parents would.

Compare the API scores of the OKC public schools to those in Edmond and surrounding burbs. The OKC public schools are absolutely horrible, with a few exceptions, e.g., Classesn SAS, Belle Isle, Quail Creek Elementary, Nichols Hills Elementary, etc. . Most of the wealthier residents in the OKC public schools area send their kids to private schools. That's not going to change.

MAPS for Kids may help building newer and nicer buildings, but new buings won't change the quality of education these children are receiving. That's evidenced by the API scores. A new downtown elementary school won't help the poor quality of education in the OKC public schools. I don't care how many new buildings you build, it's not going to change the obvious.

You're lucky you haven't had any problems in the downtown area. But, if I love my family, and want the best for them, why should I locate in the slums of our city, with the absolute worst schools, when I can offer them the best in better areas in the metro? I want to live around people that have pride in their property and pride in raising their families. I don't see that in inner city Oklahoma City. All I see is decay and broken families. I wouldn't feel comfortable having my children play outside when there are bums high on drugs walking the street. Who knows what they could do to my children and my wife. It only makes sense to offer my family the safest place possible, and that's not in the downtown area. I should be able to feel comfortable in my neighborhood, comfortable leaving my wife at home with the kids, and letting my children play outside.

Like you say, there will always be a homeless population. I can provide a safe haven for my family away from all that, while still ministering to that population at the same time.

So, metro, where do you live now?

[metro]

jsenter, I think that both of us (or both types of lifestyle) can be right. It's not a "right" or "wrong" situation. It's what works best for you. Your situation and beliefs work best for you, mine work best for me. I'm not the type that wants a sheltered life, I'm the type that wants to make a difference. Not saying you're not making a difference in your world, but I want to make a difference in the neglected part of our world, the inner city and downtown. Thankfully, both downtown and the inner city have made a huge comeback the last decade or so. We still have a long ways to go as you noticed. This change didn't come back by everyone running from the problem but tackling it head on, I'm a tackler. I think that's fine and unique and a healthy dynamic for a city to have it's differences. FYI, suburban schools such as Edmond and PC North are starting to have their fair share of drug problems by the way. Often suburban white schools have the worst drug problems because they have access to easy cash. I'm not going to elaborate anymore on this issue. Back to topic of the Centennial on the Canal.

[jsenter]

You can make a difference in your world without lowering your standards, and ruining your children by making poor choices concerning their education.

I have no problems with downtown, and enjoy Bricktown frequently, but that doesn't mean I want to live there. I want to live in a nice neighborhood with good schools, one where parents are actually involved, and where they're actually concerned about the well-being of their children. That's not the case in most of the inner city OKC public schools. And only a select few inner city neighborhoods are actualyl well-maintained, and "nice neighborhoods."

And, choosing better schools, and a better neuighborhood for your children is called "making wide decisions" not "living a sheltered life". There's nothing sheltered about living in the PC North area, or living in the Edmond area.

I live in Edmond, but attend an inner city church, so my work is being done there. I can work in the inner city, while choosing the best neighborhood for my family, one where I can feel they're safe, and offer them a decent education.

Concerning schools, I think the API scores speak for themselves. When you have Deer Creek Elementary scoring a perfect 1500 (and the Edmond Schools scoring well above 1400, with a few scoring a perfect 1500), and Douglass scoring a 400 or something like that, I think the difference in education offered is obvious. The drug problem is a a side issue. It doesn't change the education that the schools are offering. And if you bring up your children right, you usually don't have to worry about it. I want my children to be around other students that actually care about their future and care about their well-being. I went to Northwest Classen, and was often taunted by the lower class students there because I wanted the best for myself, and wanted to succeed academically. I don't want my children to have to go through that. I want them to be challenged to succeed, not discouraged from succeeding.