Level Apartments

[Spartan]

Spartan, that's not elitism; it's reality.
Exhibit A: Lyrewood
Exhibit B: NW 10
Exhibit C: Del City
Exhibit D: Quail Springs?

Now, do I agree with the commenter in regards to the downtown development? It's hard to connect his logic, which applies to the suburbs where we have seen decades of cookie-cutter construction, to what we're seeing downtown with unique designs and better than average construction. It's apples and oranges.

First of all, everyone realizes I wasn't calling betts elitist..she herself said that what she was quoting was over the top. Furthermore, how is it not elitism? I doubt that the person with that point of view is in favor of letting poor people live near them. That seems to sort of be the premise. Regular people housing deteriorates into poor people housing. Housing for the top echelon will at least stay somewhat nice.

But keep in mind this is why downtown housing has FAILED to meet a single aspiration we had for it 5 years ago. If you look at the downtown housing report, which I thought was conservative at the time, we should have had thousands of more units. Yeah, there was a recession, but we realistically wouldn't have gotten any more affordable units out of the 2006-7 boom. All of the canceled projects were, say it with my guys, upscale condos. We would have been stuck with a glut on un-sellable condos worse than we had last year. That seems to be what you guys want.

Look, condos are what they are. I'm not denying that it isn't a plus to have home ownership in a neighborhood. I'm not denying that the Brownstones are the coolest residential built downtown. Not denying that there may be the small chance of deteriorating with LEVEL (though I think McKown is building these to last) that there isn't with the Brownstones. Those are all benefits. There are benefits to apartments as well. You bring in more diversity to the neighborhood. A younger population. More of the artists that you can build a cultural scene around. What kind of cultural scene do you think you can build around people making $200k/year? There's a reason The Paseo is the artist village. So those are very real benefits for Deep Deuce, too.

I'll go a little further and directly address Steve's point: Lyrewood, NW 10th, Del City. Who cares about those places? You're using the most extreme cases which does not make a valid argument. Those are all cases of sprawl. Those are all cases of not building things to last on purpose. And yeah, Quail Springs is going to be a really bad dump here in 10 years, I guarantee it.

There are also nice apartment complexes in the city. Downtown has a few. Anyone want to say that the Deep Deuce Apartments themselves are being bled dry by the new mgmt, on a fast path to become a slumland? How long has Sycamore Square been there? There are apartments in Nichols Hills, used to be even more before Chesapeake went realty-crazy. There are even nice apartment complexes in the metro's wealthiest ZIP code in SW OKC. I can think of one at 104th and Penn that's really nice and has been there for 20 years.

So in summary, I'm not denying that there are benefits to condos. That goes without saying, and you'd have to be a moron to overlook those. They are significant. But it's kind of like betts said earlier, I don't think she's actually against rental downtown, in fact I think she's pretty supportive, I just think she has reservations being a big stakeholder. She said she mostly just wants to confront the people who are ideologically crusading against condos now, and that's also understandable. Now I guess I'm just confronting the people I see ideologically crusading against new rentals downtown.

Steve, I'm not going to go all metro on you, but I disagree when you say that the extreme viewpoint about THESE Deep Deuce apartments in the Oke comment page was anything other than elitism. I also disagree with you when you bring up examples of deteriorated sprawl parts of town. All of them at least 7 miles out from downtown. I'm going to disagree with anyone who thinks that quality-built rental units AREN'T what downtown needs. It is exactly what downtown needs. It is making downtown living accessible and it is going to bring in more diversity. All of these apartments will be well-built, probably won't deteriorate very noticeably (anymore than Sycamore has), rents will be high enough to keep the riff raff out, but in the end, will bring in a lot of interesting people who can't exactly afford the Brownstones or City Place.

[BoulderSooner]

don't disagree with most of what you said .... i wil add that if not for the economic downturn IMHO we would have seen most of the for sale projects sell out .. we would have more brownstones and phase 2/3/4 at the hill would be done/under constructrion. and i think we would have seen new projects that are in a lower starting price range come on line.

[Kerry]

don't disagree with most of what you said .... i wil add that if not for the economic downturn IMHO we would have seen most of the for sale projects sell out .. we would have more brownstones and phase 2/3/4 at the hill would be done/under constructrion. and i think we would have seen new projects that are in a lower starting price range come on line.

LOL - so if the unsustainable had been sustained we would have seen more of the same. That is a pretty bold prediction.

[Spartan]

I agree boulder, the economic situation changed things, but not that much here in OKC. Also--was lending really ever going to be a breeze for urban projects in OKC? I'm just not naive to think everyone in the nation supports the idea that Okie City can have urbanist living. That's a perception problem.

Furthermore, there are some common-sense rules of economics. Generally, start modest, and work your way up. You don't start your way from the top and work your way down. That makes no sense. That was the deliberate plan here in OKC for a while. Obviously it wasn't a good idea.

[betts]

Perhaps "start modest" works for downtown as a whole, but not for one district. When you start modest, unless you've somehow got a gazillionaire who is building for his or her legacy rather than profit, you stay modest. Again, the cities that have seen formerly modest areas become hip are usually older cities that have beautiful old dwellings that fell into disrepair and then were finally affordable for the young and hip. Over time, people still young and hip but with more means purchase them and renovate them and the area becomes vibrant, as the well off young and hip want to eat in nice restaurants and shop in fun stores. By starting modest, as the inevitable happens and modest dwellings fall into disrepair, it becomes less hip and less desirable and people move on to new areas.

I would argue that Block 42, the Maywood Browstones, Central Ave. villas and even the Hill added some diversity of economic means to the neighborhood that ultimately will make it a location with more staying power than if developers had thrown up 10 Quail Ridge Apartment buildings or even more Deep Deuce Apartments. The more upscale developments would never have been built here if we'd started modest. The nicer places to live actually bring the entire neighborhood up to a higher level and give the young and hip with less means places to aspire to within their own neighborhood. It might not have been great for the developers, but I believe that ultimately the Deep Deuce/Maywood/Triangle area will thrive because of those buildings most people are criticizing for their cost and lack of modesty.

You see that in Nichols Hills. The small houses at the periphery sell for far more per square foot than in other neighborhoods with comparable houses. They appeal to young people who like living near the Plaza or Chesapeake or now near Whole Foods, the Curve, etc. Those people like the proximity of more expensive houses as well, as it is what they aspire to.

[Spartan]

I agree that at some point you do want to see a good mix that includes a decent amount of upscale properties, but...the idea that you have to maximize these imaginary "upper tiers" of realty before you can move on and "soil" an area with brick apartments that are so ghetto that they rent for $1100/mo, is completely bunk.

You might be right that first they have to go through a full cycle of despair, repair, and rebirth..and obviously we don't have hundreds of years here, but if that proves to be true as a rule of urban cities, then there's nothing we can do about it in OKC anyway. Unfortunate.

I agree that in order for there to be economic diversity, you have to have both young, hip artists in $1,000/mo apartments and $500,000+ condos/townhomes that coexist and play off of each other. It's a good thing that we have condos and townhomes for everyone who wants one right now. We don't have anywhere near enough urban apartments for everyone who wants one of those, however. I agree that budding young people are attracted to more affluent areas. But I would argue that it works well the other way around, that more affluent people tend to be attracted by hip culture...

[Kerry]

You might be right that first they have to go through a full cycle of despair, repair, and rebirth..and obviously we don't have hundreds of years here, but if that proves to be true as a rule of urban cities, then there's nothing we can do about it in OKC anyway. Unfortunate.

Deep Duece is on the 'rebirth' step of that cycle right now.

[Spartan]

Deep Duece is on the 'rebirth' step of that cycle right now.

Haha... not hardly with original building stock. Unless you count the Haywood Building. And the abandoned little house on 3rd.

[Pete]

It looks like we will finally have a good mix and volume of buy/rent properties downtown. We have everything from small studio condos to large, expensive townhouses and row house.

It will be interesting to see if these two new apartment complexes fulfill the shorter term demand for rentals. It's pretty clear we have enough for-sale units to hold us for a while. And if not, it will be easy to add to the existing developments.

[betts]

I agree that at some point you do want to see a good mix that includes a decent amount of upscale properties, but...the idea that you have to maximize these imaginary "upper tiers" of realty before you can move on and "soil" an area with brick apartments that are so ghetto that they rent for $1100/mo, is completely bunk.

You might be right that first they have to go through a full cycle of despair, repair, and rebirth..and obviously we don't have hundreds of years here, but if that proves to be true as a rule of urban cities, then there's nothing we can do about it in OKC anyway. Unfortunate.

I agree that in order for there to be economic diversity, you have to have both young, hip artists in $1,000/mo apartments and $500,000+ condos/townhomes that coexist and play off of each other. It's a good thing that we have condos and townhomes for everyone who wants one right now. We don't have anywhere near enough urban apartments for everyone who wants one of those, however. I agree that budding young people are attracted to more affluent areas. But I would argue that it works well the other way around, that more affluent people tend to be attracted by hip culture...

What I was saying Spartan was that you likely wouldn't get the upper tier developments later if all you had was brand new modest developments initially. Developers would choose another location for their higher end developments in a setting where there is so much land available. All the higher end housing would end up at the park or somewhere else. And, to have great retail and great restaurants, you have to have people who can spend some money. I'm not sure modest and new is ever really that hip. Modest and old, old and funky....yes. For instance, Legacy is young, but I don't really consider it hip. It hasn't attracted hip shopping or cool restaurants either. I'm not sure, if it was multiplied by 10 if it would either. Midtown has the potential to be hip and funky because it's older.

So, I think it's serendipity that Deep Deuce/Maywood/Triangle has, perhaps by accident, some higher end housing. I think that will make it a more diverse and lasting neighborhood. I don't see that as a bad thing for anyone but the developers who got it wrong.

[Spartan]

Keep in mind what we're talking about for "modest" is still considered fairly pricey most everywhere else in the city, betts, (I'm sure that almost all of LEVEL and Bradshaw's new project will rent for over $1000/mo) so I'm going to have to continue to disagree with you over the perilous plight of letting "new and modest" housing be built in any sequence in a neighborhood, let alone its natural sequence of being the first step.

[Rover]

For the most part the housing developers downtown have done a poor job of providing product that is actually in keeping with the desires/life styles of the people they want to buy them. The amenities are there but the layouts and styles aren't. I have hopes that these apartments will be reflective of the target market and not what the developer thinks they SHOULD like. If they are, then the price point shouldn't be a problem. I assume they have done much market research work BEFORE starting the architectural...at least I hope so.

[betts]

I think it's the price more than the product, Rover. I see people looking at the Brownstones all the time...there's been a particularly large degree of traffic in the last week or so. The flyers for them disappear out of the boxes. Having recently been in Chicago, in most of the more desirable neighborhoods all they're building are townhouses. I simply think that the Oklahoma City residents who are buying houses in their price range want a yard and pool, as well as an upscale neighborhood. They think they can't live downtown without a grocery store, although they probably drive further than I do. There should be enough people in a city of 1.3 million people who can stand the thought of an elevator ride, or who look forward to walking stairs for a little exercise that it shouldn't be design that's responsible.

There is a tremendous amount of fascination with the concept of living downtown and the Brownstones, as we get asked about living downtown all the time, and most of the people who do so sound rather wistful about the possibility of living here. The feeling I get is that they haven't the nerve to move to a neighborhood that has this much diversity of purpose and design. It's too outside the box for Oklahoma Cityans who are in that price range.

So, as I've said, we may have to grow a population of people who will live downtown....the younger downtown residents, as they age, may not have the reluctance that it seems we're seeing in older people.

If the City Place apartments sell out like hotcakes, I'll admit you're right, though. They are true one story flats, and if that's what it takes to get people in a higher price range to move downtown, we'll know soon.

[Rover]

I think it's the price more than the product, Rover. I see people looking at the Brownstones all the time...there's been a particularly large degree of traffic in the last week or so. The flyers for them disappear out of the boxes. Having recently been in Chicago, in most of the more desirable neighborhoods all they're building are townhouses. I simply think that the Oklahoma City residents who are buying houses in their price range want a yard and pool, as well as an upscale neighborhood. They think they can't live downtown without a grocery store, although they probably drive further than I do. There should be enough people in a city of 1.3 million people who can stand the thought of an elevator ride, or who look forward to walking stairs for a little exercise that it shouldn't be design that's responsible.

There is a tremendous amount of fascination with the concept of living downtown and the Brownstones, as we get asked about living downtown all the time, and most of the people who do so sound rather wistful about the possibility of living here. The feeling I get is that they haven't the nerve to move to a neighborhood that has this much diversity of purpose and design. It's too outside the box for Oklahoma Cityans who are in that price range.

So, as I've said, we may have to grow a population of people who will live downtown....the younger downtown residents, as they age, may not have the reluctance that it seems we're seeing in older people.

If the City Place apartments sell out like hotcakes, I'll admit you're right, though. They are true one story flats, and if that's what it takes to get people in a higher price range to move downtown, we'll know soon.

With all due respect, there is an interest to live downtown, but little that is all that desirable for the target market HERE. In places like Chicago there is a huge population that has always lived in two or three story brownstones and so they are not shifting lifestyle with the location. However, the huge explosion of downtown living in Chicago has been with flats in mid and high rise towers. I challenge you to find much being built or having been built there in the last decade where they are constructing new row-houses. I have been personally involved in a great deal of construction of condos there and around the country and the vast preponderance has single level in multiple story building. If we truly want the 50-70 year old couples who have +$500,000 to be part of the fabric of downtown then we need to focus on what THEY want. Of course you can always point to exceptions and out of 1.3 MILLION people there will be a few dozen who will have the money and buy nearly anything, but they are the exception, not the rule. We can continue to try to create momentum with highly niched projects, but they will be small and it will take a lot of them to truly drive urbanization. At some point someone will realize that there is great opportunity to meet a market here if they will just listen.

[betts]

Rover, I think that Deep Deuce resembles areas like Wicker and Lincoln Park more than downtown Chicago. Both of those have very active three and four story townhouse construction. But there are flats in Block 42 and Central Ave villas. The Hill has a very house-like feel once you are inside. I would not have considered living downtown very seriously if a flat were my only option. If a developer wants to build high end flats, though, it would be fine with me. I'm just glad there was an option that appealed to me.

[Spartan]

I think Deep Deuce is more comparable to Streeterville, honestly. The historic districts are our "Lincoln Park."

[redrunner]

I think Deep Deuce is more comparable to Streeterville, honestly. The historic districts are our "Lincoln Park."

Ok this is just stupid, honestly.

[Spartan]

Ok this is just stupid, honestly.

You have absolutely no ability to read in context, honestly. If you really think anyone in this thread (I don't suspect you were actually keeping up with it) meant that OKC is anywhere near Chicago, you are sadly mistaken, and the level of the conversation went way over your head.

But your usual attempt to show unwarranted negativity toward all things OKC is noted, that should make you happy.

[metro]

Took this today:

[Architect2010]

Nice! I'm excited to see some actual construction.

[oakhollow]

Anyone heard any news on what kind of restaurant will be going in here?

[Pete]

On their website (levelokc.com) they have an ad for both the restaurant and grocery spaces, so I'm sure they haven't signed any leases as of yet.

Once they get further along in construction and the development starts to take shape, I'm sure they will be plenty of interest.

[mcca7596]

Nothing new, but good rundown of projects including LEVEL.

"The renewal of downtown Oklahoma City continues with several new building projects in the works."

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/ar...utfitters.html

[Kerry]

Here is one quote and everytime I see it I scratch my head.

“You have record numbers of young people who want to move downtown,” he said. “We feel there is a real strong demand for rental properties downtown.”

Do they have any data to back up the claim that it is only 'young people', or are they just reapeating something that has never been proven becasue everyone assume it to be true. I would love to live downtown in a row home and I am 41. I want minimal yard maintenance, the ability to paint my interior walls without landlord approval, a place to park a car, and the ability to walk to most things I need (doctor, groceries, restaurant, pharmacy, retail). That isn't just the desire of 'young people'. Nearly everyone in all age brackets want that.

While rental units might appeal to the young, downtown living is more than rental units. I also don't want to pay $500K plus for a place.

[betts]

Kerry, your comments support my point that people involved in real estate usually fail to look at the big picture. That's how we get overinflation of home prices and we end up with overbuilding of things they think the public wants. Right now, because downtown for sale real estate wasn't wildly successful, they're all sure rentals are where it's at. Once they've overbuilt rentals and a few of them are either sitting partially empty or prices are falling, we'll all be hearing that everyone now moving downtown wants to buy. And the pendulum will swing.

It's going to swing regardless, because a lot of the young people living downtown now or who will be moving into the new buildings are unmarried and childless. But, they're in their mid to late 20s. They'll be getting married, and since they live downtown, they won't be afraid of staying downtown. They'll be looking for a little more space, perhaps a row house just like you're talking about. They won't be afraid of walking their kids to school or taking their kids to school on a bus or streetcar. They won't necessarily want the big yard. The downtown demographic is going to expand. And space available for just what you're talking about will suddenly be the premium space. So, if you want to stay away from $500k, you have to beat the market a bit.