Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 245

Thread: Fairfield Inn

  1. Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Lol

  2. #27

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Not exactly what I had in mind. I meant more like the exterior MUST look like this (provide a visual example of 'this'), MUST be 3 to 5 stories, and MUST be built to the property line on all sides. The only real decision the developer will need to make is the interior layout and use.

    Haussmann's renovation of Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




    Decide what the OKC style is going to be and build 200 sq. blocks of that.
    Commie.

  3. #28

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    But seriously, the code does require as follows (TABLE 7200.2: DOWNTOWN DESIGN DISTRICTS BULK STANDARDS):

    Yard Setbacks: None, however, for new construction a Build-To-Line along street frontages is established as follows:
    - The first two floors of new construction shall be placed at or within 10 ft of the street right-of-way.
    - Up to forty percent of the building on the primary street-frontage may be recessed to allow for entryways, plazas, or similar design features.
    - Where any setback from the Build-To-Line is not a hardscaped plaza or entryway, a landscaped area shall be installed.

  4. #29

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Not exactly what I had in mind. I meant more like the exterior MUST look like this (provide a visual example of 'this'), MUST be 3 to 5 stories, and MUST be built to the property line on all sides. The only real decision the developer will need to make is the interior layout and use.

    Haussmann's renovation of Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    Decide what the OKC style is going to be and build 200 sq. blocks of that.
    that seems a bit extreme, does it is not?

  5. #30

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    There is a doctor who owns the building to the west of this location who was waiting for the longest time to either sell or redevelop the building, depending on if the city was going to acquire it or someone else intended on redeveloping it. It wouldn't surprise me to see something happen with this building once this project gets off the ground and the Central Park breaks ground.

  6. #31

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by Swake View Post
    No, not Brickhugger. Anish.

    Brickhugger owns the downtown aLoft in the old city hall, along with the Mayo Hotel and is currently converting an old city office building into a Best Western. Anish Hotels owns the south Tulsa aLoft and is building a this new Residence Inn in the parking lot of the old YMCA, interestingly which is currently being converted to lofts by Brickhugger.

    Anish apparently isn’t against preserving buildings either, they own the old Parker Drilling Building and are working on plans to convert it to a hotel.
    Anish sounds alright.

  7. Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    To some extent, I would like to see some sort of façade ordinance on C2S. It probably wouldn't hurt to have some sort of minimum height too. But at the same time, C2S has a lot of land to fill in, and if we put too many restrictions in place, you will find that there aren't any developers coming to the area...gotta find that delicate balance.

    But on the façade thing, C2S doesn't have an identity yet. It's not Bricktown, so should we force a brick face? The south canal sure didn't turn out to meet anyone's hopes for what the façades would look like and was only forced on some projects because of complaints. Maybe we should take a more modern stance? Glass/Metalic? Stone rather than brick? My only point is, we don't really know what we even want it to look like before we start making blanket ordinances on what it has to be. Remember, C2S is expected to take 50 years to fill in completely at full density. That's an awfully long time to stick to one style....major danger of forcing a dated style in 20 years. Would you want to still be enforcing 1950's style in 2000? Brick tends to make the transition between styles a lot more easily, so I'd be inclined to go that path...the sort of timeless look. How you dress-up the brick is what gives it the style of the time. Concrete transitions/caps like with JDM Place for a more long-term look or more metallic elements for what's "modern" today.

  8. #33

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by bombermwc View Post
    To some extent, I would like to see some sort of façade ordinance on C2S. It probably wouldn't hurt to have some sort of minimum height too. But at the same time, C2S has a lot of land to fill in, and if we put too many restrictions in place, you will find that there aren't any developers coming to the area...gotta find that delicate balance.

    But on the façade thing, C2S doesn't have an identity yet. It's not Bricktown, so should we force a brick face? The south canal sure didn't turn out to meet anyone's hopes for what the façades would look like and was only forced on some projects because of complaints. Maybe we should take a more modern stance? Glass/Metalic? Stone rather than brick? My only point is, we don't really know what we even want it to look like before we start making blanket ordinances on what it has to be. Remember, C2S is expected to take 50 years to fill in completely at full density. That's an awfully long time to stick to one style....major danger of forcing a dated style in 20 years. Would you want to still be enforcing 1950's style in 2000? Brick tends to make the transition between styles a lot more easily, so I'd be inclined to go that path...the sort of timeless look. How you dress-up the brick is what gives it the style of the time. Concrete transitions/caps like with JDM Place for a more long-term look or more metallic elements for what's "modern" today.
    http://www.okc.gov/planning/downtown...0corrected.pdf

    The minimum height in Core to Shore is three stories in the north half, two stories in the southern half. (Page 27 from the PDF)

    The current material regulations are as such: (7) Building Materials: Vinyl, aluminum, and sheet metal siding shall not be permitted except as cladding for structures accessory to Single- and Two-family residences and that are not visible from the street. (Page 15 from the PDF)

    The current material and building guidelines are as such:

    (2) Building Materials:

    (a) Exterior cladding of buildings should consist of glass, steel, architectural metals, and/or masonry materials such as brick, stone, or cement stucco.
    (b) Material modules, other than glazing systems, should not exceed either five (5) feet horizontally and three (3) feet vertically without the clear expression of a joint.
    (c) Synthetic stucco materials, such as Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS), should be limited to a maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the total of exterior building materials, not including windows, on a building’s first three (3) floors. Above the third floor, materials such as synthetic stucco should be limited to fifty percent (50%) of the total of exterior building materials, not including windows.
    (d) Exceptions
    1. Architectural cast-in-place concrete may be approved through the design review process, provided specific review of finish specifications indicates high quality of the finished surface.
    2. Ribbed or corrugated metal panel roofing systems may be approved through the design review process, providing specific review of finish specifications indicates high quality of the finished surface.
    3. In single and two-family residential uses, the use of wood siding or cementitious planked siding may be approved through the design review process, providing the finished surface of the product is durable and of high quality.
    4. Additions to an existing building totaling less than 40% of that existing building may be clad with materials consistent with existing materials and exterior finishes of the original structure.
    5. Additional cladding and accent materials may be allowed on a case-by-case basis provided that product warrantees and specifications submitted guarantee that the proposed material is equivalent to any of the materials noted in this section.

    (3) Building Design
    Building design within DBD, DTD-1, and DTD-2 Districts should promote architectural diversity while encouraging design that relates to and reinforces the overall character of the immediate surroundings, creating a strong building-to-pedestrian relationship and supporting a strong urban environment. Building design should be applied as follows:

    (a) Vertical Character
    Ground floor building facades of non-residential uses, and including mixed uses and multi-family housing should create vertical breaks at regular intervals by spacing architectural features no less than every twenty (20) feet and no greater than every forty (40) feet.
    (b) Horizontal Character
    A clear visual division between the second floor line and upper level floors should be established using cornice lines, windows or similar architectural elements. The horizontal line established through the use of such architectural elements should not vary in elevation by more than twenty-four inches from one building to the next.
    (c) Ground Floor Façade
    1. When the ground floor use of a building has a non-residential use and abuts a public street, at least 50 percent of the storefront/building wall should consist of clear or tinted windows and/or doors, and/or display windows set into the building wall.
    2. Any sign or graphic displayed on or affixed to windows within a single structure along street frontage(s) should not exceed 20% of the total of transparent areas at street level.
    3. Pedestrian entries should be oriented toward the street and recessed, covered or otherwise clearly identifiable.

    (Pages 17-19 of the PDF)

  9. #34

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    I don't necessarily agree with all of the downtown related regulations and guidelines, but I don't want people to think that the area has no design control. The entire area has an extensive design review framework already in place.

    I might add that I personally believe the framework failed in the case of the new law offices by the river, but part of the failure is a result of the Board of Adjustment process as well, since they had to seek a variance and were granted such.

  10. #35

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    ^

    Always appreciate your input and perspective!

  11. #36

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Who wouldn't want to build a hotel here?

    I mean you have a great views of the CO-OP and that ever present train horn, especially at night.

  12. Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by _Cramer_ View Post
    Who wouldn't want to build a hotel here?

    I mean you have a great views of the CO-OP and that ever present train horn, especially at night.
    Heard about the quiet zone lately ?

  13. #38

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellaboo View Post
    Heard about the quiet zone lately ?
    The train horn doesn't even blow near here currently... it's last crossing is about a mile north, and then a mile south. That makes the noise considerably less than in Auto Alley, for instance.

  14. #39

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    ^

    Always appreciate your input and perspective!
    You're welcome!

  15. #40

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Would they develop this at the same time as the Bricktown hotel?

  16. #41

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewmperry View Post
    Would they develop this at the same time as the Bricktown hotel?
    I've called Andy Patel a few times and he never calls me back, so I don't know what their plans may be.

  17. #42

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewmperry View Post
    Would they develop this at the same time as the Bricktown hotel?
    It's called land speculation

  18. #43

    Default SW 5th & EK Gaylord Hotel

    http://www.oklahoman.com/article/539...klahoma%20City

    Tulsa hotelier Andy Patel last year purchased property at SW 5 and E.K. Gaylord and is preparing to clear the site for a future hotel.
    I don't remember seeing this mentioned before under new hotels in downtown.

  19. #44

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    We need to remove the word "stucco" from all building codes in Core to Shore. We also need to stop acting like the girl without a prom date the night before the prom with regards to Core to Shore. We're building a park that will have people clamoring to live nearby. Look at Central Park and the Boston Public Garden. This needs to be the area where we have the strictest and most urban building codes to do this right. Great development surrounding it will make it a great park. Cheesy or shoddy early development will affect people's perception of the area. Let's not be in a hurry. Let's do this right.

  20. #45

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by betts View Post
    We need to remove the word "stucco" from all building codes in Core to Shore. We also need to stop acting like the girl without a prom date the night before the prom with regards to Core to Shore. We're building a park that will have people clamoring to live nearby. Look at Central Park and the Boston Public Garden. This needs to be the area where we have the strictest and most urban building codes to do this right. Great development surrounding it will make it a great park. Cheesy or shoddy early development will affect people's perception of the area. Let's not be in a hurry. Let's do this right.
    Agree 100%.

    OKC needs to learn from the mistakes of Lower Bricktown in regards to Core 2 Shore. I fear the city may possibly repeat the same mistakes if there is no vision or no urban design standard. Sometimes doing it right is a lot better than doing it fast and cheap.

  21. #46

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    As things stand now, Core to Shore falls within the purview of the Downtown Design Review Committee and the same standards will be applied as elsewhere.

    Which is to say, more of the same.

  22. #47

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by betts View Post
    We need to remove the word "stucco" from all building codes in Core to Shore. We also need to stop acting like the girl without a prom date the night before the prom with regards to Core to Shore. We're building a park that will have people clamoring to live nearby. Look at Central Park and the Boston Public Garden. This needs to be the area where we have the strictest and most urban building codes to do this right. Great development surrounding it will make it a great park. Cheesy or shoddy early development will affect people's perception of the area. Let's not be in a hurry. Let's do this right.
    I agree. But this development does not directly front the park. So it won't be a total loss.

  23. #48

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Why don't we preserve the market demand that we DO have, so that we can have more good development instead? I think that would be a smart move.

  24. #49

    Default Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    If the city grants variances and doesn't set a good precedent with the first few developments in Core 2 Shore, the entire thing could end up very underwhelming and far from what was originally envisioned. Just look at what the Bass Pro Shop did for Lower Bricktown. I think the entire thing could have turned out differently had a better precedent been set in the beginning.

  25. #50

    NFL Re: Core to Shore Hotel

    Quote Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
    If the city grants variances and doesn't set a good precedent with the first few developments in Core 2 Shore, the entire thing could end up very underwhelming and far from what was originally envisioned. Just look at what the Bass Pro Shop did for Lower Bricktown. I think the entire thing could have turned out differently had a better precedent been set in the beginning.
    This will be a free ride on the tax payers back. 8-13 million hotels are of little risk to the developers and diminishes the ROI for the convention center hotel developer and the surrounding area. I thought the Holiday Inn, Loft and the Hampton are acceptable. Let's not give it away like a cheap date.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Core to Shore
    By warreng88 in forum General Real Estate Topics
    Replies: 560
    Last Post: 10-21-2016, 07:29 AM
  2. Is Core 2 Shore still in the cards?
    By bchris02 in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-23-2012, 11:06 AM
  3. Core to Shore Meeting - April 10th
    By Patrick in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 04-20-2009, 01:01 AM
  4. Core to Shore - I-40
    By Karried in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 04-01-2008, 11:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO