I don't know. The newsOK article says one thing, the journal record another.
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.This exclusive development will offer residents an urban living experience, with the security of a private neighborhood...
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/547...o_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.
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.
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. ...
Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!
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.
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.
^^^^^^^
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks