Alley's End (4th & EK Gaylord)

[Rover]

Out of curiosity (seriously, cause I don't know anything about the development world other than what I read on here) who would hold their feet to the fire and how?

Not sure what you mean by holding their feet to the fire. Anyone can buy property and speculate. They have to maintain it so as not to be a public nuisance or hazard, but they aren’t forced to sell, or build, or do anything with it. However, it is stupid to buy something for a lot of money and not expect some return on it. If there is a bonafide reason for the public’s interest, the city can try to take it for fair market value, but presumably not for a private commercial venture. Given there is so much developable land in downtown OKC, it might be hard to prove the public’s interest in this one.

[Johnb911]

Not sure what you mean by holding their feet to the fire. Anyone can buy property and speculate. They have to maintain it so as not to be a public nuisance or hazard, but they aren’t forced to sell, or build, or do anything with it. However, it is stupid to buy something for a lot of money and not expect some return on it. If there is a bonafide reason for the public’s interest, the city can try to take it for fair market value, but presumably not for a private commercial venture. Given there is so much developable land in downtown OKC, it might be hard to prove the public’s interest in this one.

Not sure if you meant to quote me on this. I was asking about JRod's post where he said that snake oil salesmen developers in this town rarely have their feet held to the fire. I was asking how that would be done. Seems to me the only way to 'punish' someone for buying that land and trying to re-sell it a few years later for double the price would be to....not buy it.

[JRod1980]

Not sure if you meant to quote me on this. I was asking about JRod's post where he said that snake oil salesmen developers in this town rarely have their feet held to the fire. I was asking how that would be done. Seems to me the only way to 'punish' someone for buying that land and trying to re-sell it a few years later for double the price would be to....not buy it.

You're absolutely right, there really isn't anything that can be done besides "Not Buy". I'll be flat out honest about my biased and dislike towards the developers of this project. I just hate seeing good properties sit empty for years because the owners are holding out for a ridiculous amount of money when they've made no improvements to the land itself. Again just my personal opinion...

[Ross MacLochness]

LVT anyone?

[Pete]

OCURA is preparing to reissue the RFP for the portion of the property owned by the city.

The had previously selected Jonathan Russell's group, but they failed to perform and never closed on the property.
Looks like Russell was trying to combine this with the adjacent property that he owns, then flip it.

In any event, this signals the official death of the Times Square project.

Not sure how a developer could make this work without Russell's land. Will be interesting to see what happens.

[GoldFire]

Is there any change the land could still be combined or will they be forced to submit the RFP with just the highlighted land?

[Pete]

Is there any change the land could still be combined or will they be forced to submit the RFP with just the highlighted land?

The RFP is just for the highlighted land, which is all that is owned by the city.

I suspect anyone who applies will also try to option Russell's property, but they would have to do that independent of the RFP.

[shawnw]

https://newsok.com/article/5626159/d...ments-proposed

[Pete]

I'll have both proposals this morning.

[Pete]

Here are renderings for the Rose Rock proposal, the same group that won the right to develop Boulevard Place next to the proposed convention parking garage.

This would be 8 stories with an unidentified bank tenant on the ground floor, 3 levels of structured parking above and then 3 stories of office that would be partially leased by the bank, plus a rooftop structure for a restaurant.
More to come.

[jedicurt]

this might just be me... but that looks really ugly... maybe it's just the color scheme... but i hate

[PhiAlpha]

this might just be me... but that looks really ugly... maybe it's just the color scheme... but i hate

Yeah there just isn't much design too it. Looks like a big rounded block, kinda like a placeholder someone would put in a big overview map...not a rendering of the building itself.

[Ross MacLochness]

^^agree.. also, I like the idea of a bunch of living units over office space. I'd like to see renderings for the second proposal which includes apartments

[Pete]

Give them a lot of credit for incorporating the parking structure into the design.

[HangryHippo]

this might just be me... but that looks really ugly... maybe it's just the color scheme... but i hate

This mirrors my thoughts.

[Sooner.Arch]

Yeah this isnt the best haha.

[warreng88]

I don't... I can't... What?

[warreng88]

That's a lot of copper for someone to steal...

[Ross MacLochness]

Give them a lot of credit for incorporating the parking structure into the design.

truth. However, In this case, I also didn't mind the parking set up in the other proposal, which was right up against the BNSF viaduct. That kept the entrance to the garage back by the viaduct, rather than breaking up EK retail frontage with a drive like in this proposal.

[Pete]

As for the bank, my guess would be Arvest.

The two big boys already are already set downtown; BOK and BancFirst.

Could be MidFirst but unlikely as they have their own campus at I-44 and Grand.

[Pete]

truth. However, In this case, I also didn't mind the parking set up in the other proposal, which was right up against the BNSF viaduct. That kept the entrance to the garage back by the viaduct, rather than breaking up EK retail frontage with a drive like in this proposal.

The Bomasda proposal (apartments) includes the city land and the Jonathon Russell land that fronts the tracks and 4th Street.

The Rose Rock proposal only involves the city land (below), which fronts EKG.

[shawnw]

I actually like it. Incorporated parking, built up to the sidewalk, street retail, rooftop restaurant. So much better than even the tower that was proposed. Not saying it's the prettiest thing, but has all the elements of a winner. Will go a long way in making that part of Gaylord less desert like.

Downside for apartments being there = Window view of the cock ring...

[HangryHippo]

truth. However, In this case, I also didn't mind the parking set up in the other proposal, which was right up against the BNSF viaduct. That kept the entrance to the garage back by the viaduct, rather than breaking up EK retail frontage with a drive like in this proposal.

Which is how it should be, IMO. Put the parking back by the tracks/viaduct and let's leave the street frontage for something better.

[Anonymous.]

The rooftop restaurant is really cool, but this needs to be taller and have apartments for purchase.

[Sooner.Arch]

Are there pictures for the Bomasda proposal?