Mosaic

[BDP]

I would disagree with lack of upkeep from Level. They're constantly doing work. Did you notice them replacing all of the window and door trim over the last few months? I agree that the stucco isn't terribly pleasing, but that's between the developers and the city.

I would have considered a flat, or something similar. Sorry, the townhouses are above my price range. You seem to take this topic personally. What agreements are you referring to?

Sorry, I have a friend that owns one so I know what's been going on.

Basically, the developers drew up a some covenants for tha HOA to attract buyers when they began selling the properties. Among other things they included restrictions on multi family housing and strict design specifications that would be enforced by an architectural committee. This was to alleviate any concerns with the unknown of what would be developed on the remaining lots as the market went south and they couldn't build any more. Based on those guidelines, some people did choose to invest a lot of money into a house there. It also restricted what they may want to do there, but they agreed and complied, knowing that it would help maintain the value of the properties they invested in.

Now the developers want to undo that out of convenience to them and opportunity. My understanding is that the resistance to multi family is not as strong as the desire for quality development. Level has begun to fix some of the problems that naturally have occurred with the type of material they chose to build with, but that was a result of efforts from the districts HOA, aka the homeowners, and even that was contested by the level operators. The owners have only been trying to preserve the quality of development originally intended and promised by the developers. Why people here have reacted negatively to that, I don't understand. They just want to proactively prevent the neighborhood from being dumbed down while the developments around it are steppong it up. I don't think quality flats would be resisted, but to date the developers want to depart from that and compromise on materials and design. I don't get that.

Deep deuce is becoming an amazing area where there are a multitude of price options and amenities. I understand that not everyone can buy into one of the brownstones. But there are a ton of options in the area that are no where near that kind of investment. There are more lofts, flats, and rental apartments than there are brownstones. So, IMO, it's actually a good thing that the brownstone HOA is trying to make sure that option remains a significant part of the mix. They will be there longer than anyone else down there. So, it seems short sighted to criticize them for approving of development that complies with that vision and the agreements made. Spartan is demonizing a small addition just because it's small, when it will probably be of better quality than any flat that the developers have proposed to date. Meanwhile, the flaws the of much larger developments in the area are overlooked.

[Chadanth]

Sorry, I have a friend that owns one so I know what's been going on.

Basically, the developers drew up a some covenants for tha HOA to attract buyers when they began selling the properties. Among other things they included restrictions on multi family housing and strict design specifications that would be enforced by an architectural committee. This was to alleviate any concerns with the unknown of what would be developed on the remaining lots as the market went south and they couldn't build any more. Based on those guidelines, some people did choose to invest a lot of money into a house there. It also restricted what they may want to do there, but they agreed and complied, knowing that it would help maintain the value of the properties they invested in.

Now the developers want to undo that out of convenience to them and opportunity. My understanding is that the resistance to multi family is not as strong as the desire for quality development. Level has begun to fix some of the problems that naturally have occurred with the type of material they chose to build with, but that was a result of efforts from the districts HOA, aka the homeowners, and even that was contested by the level operators. The owners have only been trying to preserve the quality of development originally intended and promised by the developers. Why people here have reacted negatively to that, I don't understand. They just want to proactively prevent the neighborhood from being dumbed down while the developments around it are steppong it up. I don't think quality flats would be resisted, but to date the developers want to depart from that and compromise on materials and design. I don't get that.

Deep deuce is becoming an amazing area where there are a multitude of price options and amenities. I understand that not everyone can buy into one of the brownstones. But there are a ton of options in the area that are no where near that kind of investment. There are more lofts, flats, and rental apartments than there are brownstones. So, IMO, it's actually a good thing that the brownstone HOA is trying to make sure that option remains a significant part of the mix. They will be there longer than anyone else down there. So, it seems short sighted to criticize them for approving of development that complies with that vision and the agreements made. Spartan is demonizing a small addition just because it's small, when it will probably be of better quality than any flat that the developers have proposed to date. Meanwhile, the flaws the of much larger developments in the area are overlooked.

I'm new to the neighborhood, so excuse me, but is there a design review board like there is in bricktown? And yes, I can appreciate some of the concerns for the first-movers in the area. Those properties weren't cheap.

[Pete]

From shawnw:

[no1cub17]

If the whole area were 3 and 4 story townhouses it would be incredibly monotonous. But now every townhouse with a top floor balcony has been sold or is pending. I doubt the initial developers want to take a chance on building more, but they finally could probably sell them.

I wonder if it'll be hard to sell the 'stones on the south side of 3rd street, the smaller ones. Looks like any view they would've had facing S/SW will be mostly obscured by Mosaic.

[Spartan]

At least that helps their property value. It will probably be one of the most vAluabke owner occupied units on the street. You can't blame the people who actually own property there for wanting development that adds value (and I creases their comps) as opposed to the crap ass stucco rentals like this that the developers have been doing that have already started rotting.

I'm confused, how does a one story addition sucking up street frontage add value over a more significant structure like say...completing the rest of the planned Brownstones?

[Chadanth]

I'm confused, how does a one story addition sucking up street frontage add value over a more significant structure like say...completing the rest of the planned Brownstones?

I guess it depends on your point of view, either from the guy building the addition or everyone else.

[Spartan]

From what I understand, the developers get offers from people wanting to build brownstones all the time. They just don't take them. The demand is there.

That's asinine.

[Chadanth]

That's asinine.

There are at least 3 for sale after how many years? I wouldn't call that overwhelming demand.

[soonerguru]

If "upkeep" is such a big deal to owners of the Brownstones, perhaps they can succeed in convincing their own developer to do something about the most unsightly deterioration in the entire neighborhood: the God-awful styrofoam-looking substance ON THE BROWNSTONES that has been marring views of Deep Deuce for years. Also, the same development group has allowed the ghastly one-story appendage to their otherwise quality development, further detracting from the neighborhood. Currently, Level is in far better condition to the casual observer than the Brownstones are. Also, the Maywood lofts are much more unsightly than Level, and up to now, have failed at providing quality retail interaction with the street, an area in which Level has also succeeded.



(insert throwing stones analogy here).

[shawnw]

I don't have a dog in this fight but the man makes a point...

[Spartan]

There are at least 3 for sale after how many years? I wouldn't call that overwhelming demand.

What are the specs of the ones for sale compared to the ones that Bradshaw has had offers to build? A central concept to the brownstones is that not all are equal.

Nobody called it overwhelming demand. But The Hill, a dinstinctly lesser development to the Brownstones, is rescued from the dead and can't build them fast enough. How does Bradshaw expect to sell the units that remain when he won't even finish them out inside and have the exterior views of the project in a presentable condition?

[BDP]

If "upkeep" is such a big deal to owners of the Brownstones, perhaps they can succeed in convincing their own developer to do something about the most unsightly deterioration in the entire neighborhood: the God-awful styrofoam-looking substance ON THE BROWNSTONES that has been marring views of Deep Deuce for years. Also, the same development group has allowed the ghastly one-story appendage to their otherwise quality development, further detracting from the neighborhood. Currently, Level is in far better condition to the casual observer than the Brownstones are. Also, the Maywood lofts are much more unsightly than Level, and up to now, have failed at providing quality retail interaction with the street, an area in which Level has also succeeded.



(insert throwing stones analogy here).

Again, limited knowledge leads to uninformed opinions. The owners of the Brownstones have tried to get the developers to finish the ends where there is exposed Styrofoam. They have refuse to do it. And I don't know if you have been paying attention, but the owner of the "ghatsly" one story appendage will be bricking up the west facing exposure, at their own expense, and it's finish will match the brownstones with brick, capstones, and iron railings like that of the other brownstones with top floor patios.

Level is only in better condition from a VERY casual observer. Try walk around that thing on the street. The landscaping is non existent. The stucco is full flaws and discoloration and just about every side of it except the east side is pretty desolate. The Maywood lofts and overall design is way more appealing. It doesn't have the street interaction that a very small part of Level does, but the it was built way better and the people that live there actively take action to maintain the neighborhood, as opposed to Level residents who literally crap all over Maywood.

[Chadanth]

Level residents who literally crap all over Maywood[/B].

I take umbrage with that statement, I have seen my share people from every part of DD leave dog crap on the ground. It's not just Level tenants. I won't argue with the part about the stucco, however. Bad finish on an otherwise fine design. I'd also ask what the brownstone owners thought they were getting into, did they think it was never going to be a mixed-residential area?

[HangryHippo]

Again, limited knowledge leads to uninformed opinions. The owners of the Brownstones have tried to get the developers to finish the ends where there is exposed Styrofoam. They have refuse to do it. And I don't know if you have been paying attention, but the owner of the "ghatsly" one story appendage will be bricking up the west facing exposure, at their own expense, and it's finish will match the brownstones with brick, capstones, and iron railings like that of the other brownstones with top floor patios.

Level is only in better condition from a VERY casual observer. Try walk around that thing on the street. The landscaping is non existent. The stucco is full flaws and discoloration and just about every side of it except the east side is pretty desolate. The Maywood lofts and overall design is way more appealing. It doesn't have the street interaction that a very small part of Level does, but the it was built way better and the people that live there actively take action to maintain the neighborhood, as opposed to Level residents who literally crap all over Maywood.

I actually did just that this weekend. And you, my friend, are spot on. Level is deteriorating very quickly.

[Soho]

I'm confused, how does a one story addition sucking up street frontage add value over a more significant structure like say...completing the rest of the planned Brownstones?

Easy! Bradshaw and Garrett have so alienated the owners and prospective buyers, that any lot sold to someone else is a chance to break the stalemate. They have in the past insisted that lots are only sold IF the buyer allows them to build! With the bad blood and horrible management, no one in their right mind will buy with strings attached. It is so bad that one of our owners left the homeowners meeting last month and immediately put their house on the market! They moved out last week.

The area will not live ip to its potential until the original developers are gone completely! By way of example, the landscaping looks like **** because the developers haven't paid their dues.

[BDP]

I'm confused, how does a one story addition sucking up street frontage add value over a more significant structure like say...completing the rest of the planned Brownstones?

Mainly because it increases the square footage of the unit, adds unique amenities to the property, and maintains the integrity of the brownstone aesthetic. This will work to increase per square foot comps. It's also ONE lot, or about 25 feet. The developers have proposed development of lesser quality build and materials across multiple lots for multi family units. So, it makes perfect sense that the HOAs in the area would prefer continued incremental development in line with the brownstone quality of what's there over over wholesale compromised development across several lots.

And it should be noted that no proposals for more brownstones have been submitted by the developers. They have only submitted proposals for flats constructed with lesser quality materials including, in part, stucco facades. So, really, the one story addition is more brownstone than any of the flats they;'ve proposed.

That's asinine.

But it's true.

There are at least 3 for sale after how many years? I wouldn't call that overwhelming demand.

This is in part due to the concerns of prospective buyers that the block will be finished with lesser quality development. Had they finished the street, they'd probably all be gone.

I'm new to the neighborhood, so excuse me, but is there a design review board like there is in bricktown?

The HOA has an architectural design review committee. Any new construction has to pass their review.

What are the specs of the ones for sale compared to the ones that Bradshaw has had offers to build?

It doesn't get that far, because they won't go under contract, so specs aren't presented for review. There have been exceptions recently, but those people are waiting to see what the developers do with the lots they still hold. However, anything proposed would need to pass the design review in accordance with the covenants, which are written to maintain the brownstone aesthetic, so exterior specs would be the same.

[Soho]

If "upkeep" is such a big deal to owners of the Brownstones, perhaps they can succeed in convincing their own developer to do something about the most unsightly deterioration in the entire neighborhood: the God-awful styrofoam-looking substance ON THE BROWNSTONES that has been marring views of Deep Deuce for years. Also, the same development group has allowed the ghastly one-story appendage to their otherwise quality development, further detracting from the neighborhood. Currently, Level is in far better condition to the casual observer than the Brownstones are. Also, the Maywood lofts are much more unsightly than Level, and up to now, have failed at providing quality retail interaction with the street, an area in which Level has also succeeded.



(insert throwing stones analogy here).

We have begged, we have pleaded but short of legal action, the developers refuse to cover the ends. Can't pay for upkeep when the developers don't pay their dues!

[Soho]

What are the specs of the ones for sale compared to the ones that Bradshaw has had offers to build? A central concept to the brownstones is that not all are equal.

Nobody called it overwhelming demand. But The Hill, a dinstinctly lesser development to the Brownstones, is rescued from the dead and can't build them fast enough. How does Bradshaw expect to sell the units that remain when he won't even finish them out inside and have the exterior views of the project in a presentable condition?

The ones Bradshaw finished out will struggle to sell. Mercedes shell with Yugo interior finish. He even ripped off the decorative deck finish (on the rear second floor decks), rather than repair them properly. Without even consulting the architectural committee, as he says the rules don't apply to him.

[soonerguru]

We have begged, we have pleaded but short of legal action, the developers refuse to cover the ends. Can't pay for upkeep when the developers don't pay their dues!

This is sad.

I mostly love the brownstones, and I have no issue with the residents at all. I wish I could afford one. But this proves that the "upkeep" issue is not just a Level problem.

[shawnw]

Lindsey is a lawyer, are there no actions that can be taken?

[betts]

I wonder if it'll be hard to sell the 'stones on the south side of 3rd street, the smaller ones. Looks like any view they would've had facing S/SW will be mostly obscured by Mosaic.

3 of them have sold or are pending in the last several months. All that are left for sale are the ones which don't have a top floor porch w/fireplace. There's one resale on the north side of 3rd with a porch but I would guess it won't be on the market long because of the great view from the top floor porch.

[Spartan]

3 of them have sold or are pending in the last several months. All that are left for sale are the ones which don't have a top floor porch w/fireplace. There's one resale on the north side of 3rd with a porch but I would guess it won't be on the market long because of the great view from the top floor porch.

Sounds like the units are flawed, not the site, not the price point, and not the concept.

After reading the comments from Brownstone owners on this thread (seems like every Brownstone owner either posts here or posts up in the NBA), why would anyone buy such a high-end investment from Ron Bradshaw??

[BDP]

This is sad.

I mostly love the brownstones, and I have no issue with the residents at all. I wish I could afford one. But this proves that the "upkeep" issue is not just a Level problem.

This is partially true. The owners are doing everything they can to maintain the area. It's the developers that don't seem to care. This is why it is frustrating to see uniformed comments that criticize the owners. They have nothing but the best intentions for the area and, if it wasn't for them, who knows what condition the apartment complexes would be in now. Developers have chosen materials that require a lot of maintenance, yet seem disinterested in proactively maintaining their work. The owners are simply trying to avoid that from continuing. That's why they favor a smaller development with good material over a large development using materials that they have shown no interest in maintaining.

Don't get me wrong. I am still of the opinion that the brownstones are the best for sale housing currently downtown and it is in a kick ass district that has more urban life in it than anywhere else in the city. The owners just want to keep it that way and want sustainable development. Honestly, if they just built more of them, focusing on the ones they know sell well, or allowed for the sale of lots to owners that not only are agreeable to the guidelines, but also embrace them, this all would be a non-issue save for the need for natural upkeep of the developments. Given the downtown market as a whole, it doesn't seem like that would be a hard sell for them. They seem unaware that they are shackling themselves by not completing the street with more quality brownstones.

I don't know about Bradshaw, but I do know that some other parties involved have more undeveloped land in the area that could make for cool mixed use development that focuses on for sale flats for housing. In an ideal world we would see something like that along side the completion of the brownstone development. As an observer and lover of the downtown area, I'd love to see that happen as it would maintain a great mix of for sale and rental housing in the area. Diversity is key, imo, but to achieve that there needs to be a commitment to making sure things don't get out of balance and that each concept is completed in a quality manner. I just don't see how it makes sense to abandon the brownstone concept on 3rd at this point for multi family flats built from materials that they don't want to take care of. Some may not like the decision to allow a one story addition, but at least it extends the brownstone concept in a much more faithful way than the flats that were proposed.

To bring it back on topic, I think Mosaic is a nice concept, but it will introduce more need for maintenance and, unfortunately, it will probably continue to fall on the people who own homes there to make sure that maintenance happens. That shouldn't ever have to be the case and I think if those that appreciate the area and are interested in seeing Oklahoma City's urban landscape be one of good quality, whether they live there are not, that should be of a lot more concern to them than an addition that actually complies with the agreements the owners signed when they bought the place.

[BDP]

Sounds like the units are flawed, not the site, not the price point, and not the concept.

After reading the comments from Brownstone owners on this thread (seems like every Brownstone owner either posts here or posts up in the NBA), why would anyone buy such a high-end investment from Ron Bradshaw??

I don't think they're flawed. They're just not done. So, the concern is not so much the actual units, but the intentions of the developers going forward. Trust me, no one wants to see the ends covered and more quality in fill than the owners and there are guidelines in place to ensure that happens. Why the authors of those guidelines are now trying to disavow them is the big question at this point.

[BDP]

I take umbrage with that statement, I have seen my share people from every part of DD leave dog crap on the ground. It's not just Level tenants. I won't argue with the part about the stucco, however. Bad finish on an otherwise fine design. I'd also ask what the brownstone owners thought they were getting into, did they think it was never going to be a mixed-residential area?

Of course not. Certainly the most recent buyers didn't think that. But they did think that the areas that fall under the HOA would comply with the covenants that were handed to them by the developers when they bought their home. I'm sure they want a MIXED-residential area because they bought into it. I think they just want the brownstones and its aesthetic to remain a significant part of the MIX as was promised and agreed upon. It's not only possible to maintain a mixed-residential area with more brownstone development, it's an integral part of it.

Look, this is not about the owners coming in and trying to redefine the area. They're simply trying to enforce the same guidelines that they must comply with. They can't split their homes into multifamily units or put stucco on their home or do anything without approval. So, neither should any new development within the jurisdiction of the HOA. We constantly talk about the need for bricktown to enforce its guidelines to maintain a quality district that is true to its intended aesthetic. This is exactly the same thing.