I bring this up because my wife and I were down there checking out the area, was excited about all that is going on. These seem to be doing ok:

Block 42 (at least 15/31 sold)
Brownstones (most sold and being finished off)
Brownstone Lofts (35/54 sold)
Harvey Lofts (11/13 sold) and
The Centennial (Sold out completely)

Carnegie Center doesn't concern me too much because the owner has stated that they need something like 50% presold in order to start construction, but the $300/ sq foot seems a little high.

The ones that concern me are the Central Avenue Villas (9/30 sold) and The Hill (not sure about the amount sold, but the pricing seems very high.)

I just think there is too much construction going on down there right now and there is such thing as too much development where the market becomes too saturated.

Thoughts?

Yeah, we went a long time not having any condos to having a bunch of projects. Now I hear there is a need for apartments downtown again. I have a lot of friends that are looking and there aren't as many options as you would think.

I've been pessimistic about The Hill since the day it was proposed.

Too suburban in style, not mixed use, expensive, etc.

I wouldn't be surprised if they go the rental route.

OKC should be big enough to handle these and more.

Austin, TX is about the same size and has MULTIPLE high rise condo developments just finished and in construction. They are going for between $300 and $600 per foot and are selling quickly. OKC can surely handle what is being finished and more.

Just wish we would do a high rise tower with flats instead of all the multi-floor units. This would encourage the older buyers (50-65) who earn more but don't want to be climbing stairs. Plus, a nice high-rise address would carry more prestige to them than these more yuppie developments.

I love to see the development. But I think that much of the low-rise development is not a wise use of valuable space. It does not provide the density needed for the downtown core. They could possibly lower the price per square foot a little if they'd build a little taller (more units per SF of land). My opinion is that the low-rise stuff belongs in the suburbs.

The Hill when it was opened during the downtown housing tour last spring really came off has having much more liveable floor plans than several of the other properties. No it's not high style urban design... but the floor plans do allow for those "upscale" older market owners to be able to adapt to downtown living. I don't believe they have even really started trying to market the property yet either. My understanding is they have decided to wait to push the marketing till there is a block of finished units.

I bet we see some new rental projects on the table, especially with cost of construction coming down.

Also, I wonder if the Carnegie would be in a position to lower prices since materials costs should be dropping with the plunge in commodities, I would think.

I also think The Hill has totally underutilized its property. Imagine how great a 9-10 story, hell even 6 story building would be on that perch. It would offer commanding views of downtown, towards the river, and all of Bricktown. A taller condo building, sitting on high ground already, would literally and figuratively stand out from the other housing complexes resulting, meaning they probably would sell more units.

OKC should be big enough to handle these and more.

Austin, TX is about the same size and has MULTIPLE high rise condo developments just finished and in construction. They are going for between $300 and $600 per foot and are selling quickly. OKC can surely handle what is being finished and more.
We had a few complete last year, some that were already under construction or had construction financing in place before the credit collapse are still under construction. We have had a bunch of them put "on hold" (the most famous words in architecture/construction in this town right now) and some have given up their development rights on properties so they have quit on those projects completely.

Many of the unoccupied units "pre-sold" quickly but many have had trouble getting their final mortgage financing so they have gone back on the market.

The Milago (http://www.themilago.com/), The Shore (http://www.theshorecondos.com/home/index.html), 360 (http://www.lifesurroundsyou.com/) are the ones that I know of that were condo towers that are finished and occupied. The Monarch (http://www.monarchaustin.com/) is a rental and is completed. The Austonian (http://www.theaustonian.com/) is under construction. A few others have started but I am not sure which ones.

We had a few complete last year, some that were already under construction or had construction financing in place before the credit collapse are still under construction. We have had a bunch of them put "on hold" (the most famous words in architecture/construction in this town right now) and some have given up their development rights on properties so they have quit on those projects completely.

Many of the unoccupied units "pre-sold" quickly but many have had trouble getting their final mortgage financing so they have gone back on the market.

The Milago (http://www.themilago.com/), The Shore (http://www.theshorecondos.com/home/index.html), 360 (http://www.lifesurroundsyou.com/) are the ones that I know of that were condo towers that are finished and occupied. The Monarch (http://www.monarchaustin.com/) is a rental and is completed. The Austonian (http://www.theaustonian.com/) is under construction. A few others have started but I am not sure which ones.

I found this (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/downtown/downloads/emerging_poster_jan09.pdf) on Austinist , I think, how many of these projects are now on hold?

Someone mentioned that they felt that $300 a sq. ft was too expensive for downtown living. It was noted that Austin had several highrise condo;s completed and sold. If you study the figures on the properties listed they all sold for over $300 a sq, ft. Also study construction cost for a high rise property and you will find it cost considerably more per sq. foot to develop than a low rise project. I do agree that I feel the hill did not do the best job of using the resources that where at that location. Why did they in fact remove the hill that was there. It was a prime location that could have taken advantage of the views. But alas our developers take the easy ways....or it is forced on them by the bankers.

I found this (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/downtown/downloads/emerging_poster_jan09.pdf) on Austinist , I think, how many of these projects are now on hold?
I know some have been significantly changed, that poster is dated January 5, 2009 and some news has come out since then. I am pretty sure that AMOA/21C Museum Place has been canceled, Hotel Van Zandt has been and I think the second Novarre project (Ovation) has been. Here's a site that seems fairly current, AustinTowers.net (http://www.austintowers.net/index.html).


But alas our developers take the easy ways....or it is forced on them by the bankers.
I can attest to the fact that it is usually both. Down here (Austin) it depends on the area, the more you head out to the Hill Country there is less tolerance of cleaning all the trees off and making a site as flat as possible, which seemed to be the norm for OKC projects that I worked on. Most of the time it is cheaper to clean/scrape than it is to try and build around "obstacles" like hills and trees :rolleyes:

I went and walked around the Hill a little today. It's a glorified apartment complex or suburban subdivision made to look like brownstones. Even with my limited knowledge on the subject it's painfully obvious that this is terrible urban design.

If sales don't pick up, I wonder if they'll take their lumps and scrap the other phases. Maybe the neighborhood would be better off in that case as others could come in and build some mixed use around it.

To temper this negative sentiment a bit I want to make it clear that I really like the majority of the other downtown housing projects. Seems like a lot of my posts haven't been too positive lately :tiphat:

I went and walked around the Hill a little today. It's a glorified apartment complex or suburban subdivision made to look like brownstones. Even with my limited knowledge on the subject it's painfully obvious that this is terrible urban design.

If sales don't pick up, I wonder if they'll take their lumps and scrap the other phases. Maybe the neighborhood would be better off in that case as others could come in and build some mixed use around it.

To temper this negative sentiment a bit I want to make it clear that I really like the majority of the other downtown housing projects. Seems like a lot of my posts haven't been too positive lately :tiphat:

Wishful dreaming, but unfortunately I doubt that is the case. I know people personally who have already bought in Phases 2 and 3. Now I suppose the developer could refund the deposits, etc., but I've heard Phase I is almost sold out so I imagine Phase 2 will be starting soon. I agree it's poor urban design and was clearly not the best proposal for the site (I was at the Urban Renewal meetings when the decided and were proposed).

Oh and to the poster above who says they didn't market, they did, they even had/have a sales office in Deep Deuce just around the corner. They marketed fairly well before construction for quite some time, sales slacked off (no surprise), so they decided to close their formal sales office until after Phase I. I imagine we'll see it back open as soon as sales pick up or the economy rebounds. I personally wish McDermid's group got picked for this site, they had a much nicer and denser mixed-use development planned.

Are the Brownstones really sold out? I drove by there last night and it doesn't look like any of them are occupied. No cars, no people, and no lights on in any of them. Kind reminded me of an abandoned movie set.

I dont think anyone said they are sold out and I don't think Phase I is finished yet. I heard moveins are slated for around March.

I dont think anyone said they are sold out and I don't think Phase I is finished yet. I heard moveins are slated for around March.

I said at the first post that I think most are sold and being finished off. I maybe wrong in this assumption, but I have heard that the construction is done, most were purchased but the finishing touches (i.e. kitchen, bathrooms, flooring specifics, etc) are being taken care of at this time. I don't have any insider info, that is just what I have gotten from the board and several other people on it.

I'm buying one of the Maywood Park townhouses, and I know some are sold, but not how many. Mine is being finished out right now, as is another one. Some are already finished and are being sold completed, and some are still just framed on the inside and you can customize them. That's how I bought mine, and I added and moved walls, which was a nice thing to be able to do.

I think some people are mixed up with the names of developments. The Brownstones are the Brownstones at Maywood Park, these are not almost sold out from my understanding, only a few of them. Someone else was calling the Hill (Brownstone like), but not true brownstones and these have more buyers from what I understand.

Based on the sold signs, it only looks like 2 of the Brownstones at Maywood Park have sold. There was another sold sign that has been replaced with a for sale sign. Maybe these aren't indicative of the actual sales, but appear to be.

I'm truly amazed that the Hill is selling as well as you say.

I meant to say that the townhomes at Maywood Park, the ones that were completed about 6 months ago, do not seem to have anybody living in them.

OKC should be big enough to handle these and more.

Austin, TX is about the same size and has MULTIPLE high rise condo developments just finished and in construction. They are going for between $300 and $600 per foot and are selling quickly. OKC can surely handle what is being finished and more.

Just wish we would do a high rise tower with flats instead of all the multi-floor units. This would encourage the older buyers (50-65) who earn more but don't want to be climbing stairs. Plus, a nice high-rise address would carry more prestige to them than these more yuppie developments.

I think It's a little premature to compare Austin's downtown with ours. Austin's downtown is fairly dense, we're not htere yet and I do worry about who can afford $300+/sq ft.

Its way premature to compare our DT with Austins. Doesnt matter if we are same size cities either, what matters is the job market and income levels. And we dont come close to Austin in those regards. Im gonna guess the market here for 300/ft condos is very small, probably a tough sell here in OKC.

It would probably be better to look at downtown housing prices in Tulsa, Little Rock, Des Moines, Omaha...

The thread title makes it seem like we're talking about the "projects", OKC doesn't really have any "projects." I'm not concerned about any of the newer downtown developments though.

I'm fairly certain we stack up well to Austin on income comparisons.

Austin
Estimated median household income in 2007: $48,966 (it was $42,689 in 2000)
Estimated median house or condo value in 2007: $195,500 (it was $120,800 in 2000)


Oklahoma City
Estimated median household income in 2007: $41,899 (it was $34,947 in 2000)
Estimated median house or condo value in 2007: $122,700 (it was $78,100 in 2000)




From city data (http://www.city-data.com/city/Oklahoma-City-Oklahoma.html)

Why would you want to be compared to Austin? Our DT/BT area should loook at Ft. Worth.

I found this interesting on realtor.com, many listings of the mentioned downtown housing with prices and lots of pictures.

73104 Real Estate Listings and 73104 Homes for Sale - REALTOR.com® (http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-search/73104)

I wouldnt compare OKC to Little Rock, Des Moines or any of those places. Those markets are smaller and dont compare too well. Austin is probably the best to compare to in the southwest. Also,I think most people would be surprised who can afford those prices. With an estimated 1.2 million people in the metro, im sure there are plenty of people who can afford these. Downtown living will start to flourish when we get rid of all the eyesores down there. Maybe we should stop considering "light rail" to Tinker and use some money for projects that matter. I somewhat have the "if you build it they will come attitude" and I wish more people did.

Agreed Benman. If a fraction of the money being spent on other proposed projects were spent on cleaning up the blight it would jump start the entire downtown living experience. Public and private need to do a better job of working with each other. It is nice now that the state will match nps grants so that essentially receive 40% tax credit; but those programs are restrictive and take WAY TOO LONG to be compliant with the tax credits. If public government would offer zero interest loans for 30-50% of construction cost you would see a great number of new projects and rehabs. Particularly now, when financing projects has virtually dried up. Right now the credit markets are so screwed up that it is a double whammy on developers. It is difficult to get new projects approved, then once they are completed, it is difficult for buyer to qualify for financing. So, even if you throw your own money into the project (like I have recently) you still get hammered on the back side when trying to get buyers qualified. Banking has always had a knee jerk reaction to the markets.

Also,I think most people would be surprised who can afford those prices. With an estimated 1.2 million people in the metro, im sure there are plenty of people who can afford these.

Im still not sure thats true. But if you are right that there are enough people that can afford it, I think they might look elsewhere anyways. There are too many quality housing options around that are way cheaper than bricktown/downtown condos and townhomes.

One thing that has been discovered in the urban living people here in Austin, most spend a higher percentage of their income on housing than those in the burbs. They spend less on transportation, some two income couples may only have one car, especially if one person works within walking distance to their residence. I know of one person who has a scooter and bicycle only. They don't spend as much on insurance, maintenance and gas, instead they spend it towards their residence whether leased or purchased.

I know when we considered moving to Boston (Beacon Hill or Back Bay), we were going to leave my pickup with my sister in OKC and just have my wife's Escape and my motorcycle up there. We had no need for a full-size pickup up there, especially with the cost of parking it.

Those brownstones aren't as cool on the inside as I thought they would be

Im still not sure thats true. But if you are right that there are enough people that can afford it, I think they might look elsewhere anyways. There are too many quality housing options around that are way cheaper than bricktown/downtown condos and townhomes.

People who buy those properties do so for the lifestyle and the convenience of living downtown. As long as the properties are priced so that their exist some marginal utility, they will sell.

People who buy those properties do so for the lifestyle and the convenience of living downtown. As long as the properties are priced so that their exist some marginal utility, they will sell.

I knew someone would bring this arguement up, but to me the lifestyle factor just isnt there yet.
First and foremost, there is no worthwhile retail nearby. Also there is no easy public transportation to get you around this area. Walking from, say Block 42 to the Ford Center or to west downtown is just too far for most peoples comfort. Simply put, we have not developed the offerings of a true urban lifestyle. Until it becomes more like Dallas' uptown for example, those that buy downtown will be getting screwed on the convenient urban lifestyle that they hope to get.

I knew someone would bring this arguement up, but to me the lifestyle factor just isnt there yet.
First and foremost, there is no worthwhile retail nearby. Also there is no easy public transportation to get you around this area. Walking from, say Block 42 to the Ford Center or to west downtown is just too far for most peoples comfort. Simply put, we have not developed the offerings of a true urban lifestyle. Until it becomes more like Dallas' uptown for example, those that buy downtown will be getting screwed on the convenient urban lifestyle that they hope to get.

The lifestyle I was discussing is the ability to wake up at 7:30 to be at your downtown office by 8:00. After work you can head home and relax for a bit prior to hitting the gym and still get your workout in and be back home home by 6:30. Then, you and your friends or wife, etc. can have a plethora of restaurants to choose from for dinner all within a couple minute drive or a good walk, or maybe choose to visit harkins or catch a show at the civic ceter. The lifestyle is the convenience and the ability to not deal with 45 minutes of one way traffic to home or work. Plus, its the chicken and the egg situation, without dwellers there would be no retail and vice versa. The retail is starting to pick up, and in 24 months will look much different than what it does today. I truly believe if the powers that be really took it to task we could have 20K residents downtown by 2020.

The lifestyle I was discussing is the ability to wake up at 7:30 to be at your downtown office by 8:00. After work you can head home and relax for a bit prior to hitting the gym and still get your workout in and be back home home by 6:30. Then, you and your friends or wife, etc. can have a plethora of restaurants to choose from for dinner all within a couple minute drive or a good walk, or maybe choose to visit harkins or catch a show at the civic ceter. The lifestyle is the convenience and the ability to not deal with 45 minutes of one way traffic to home or work. Plus, its the chicken and the egg situation, without dwellers there would be no retail and vice versa. The retail is starting to pick up, and in 24 months will look much different than what it does today. I truly believe if the powers that be really took it to task we could have 20K residents downtown by 2020.


This lifestyle downtown already exists. I've been doing it for 3 years and I live on the west side of downtown where things are much less dense. I agree the retail does need to improve a bunch though.

Its way premature to compare our DT with Austins. Doesnt matter if we are same size cities either, what matters is the job market and income levels. And we dont come close to Austin in those regards. Im gonna guess the market here for 300/ft condos is very small, probably a tough sell here in OKC.
You are correct - I am from OKC and graduated from OCU in 1975. I currently live in Dallas and am looking at residential real estate in the area from Robinson & 23rd west to about May Avenue as well as Lincoln Terrace. My wife and I are retiring - we are going to sell our house here and pay cash for a residence hopefully in OKC. What I saw happen in Oklahoma was that during the oil boom of the seventies and eighties the size of Oklahoma government went thru the roof and taxes along with it. When the boom went bust state and local governments were a huge drag on the economy that was left - Oklahoma has lost population ever since. We are going to see the same things happen in Texas - Houston and Dallas have been flooded with Illegal immigrants which has driven the wage base down and caused a huge rise in the expense of schools, health care , welfare, and crime. I grew up in Houston and have seen a dramatic drop in the quality of life there. Oklahoma City has some of the most incredibly rich and architecturally diverse residential neighborhoods that I have ever seen - why more has not been done to enhance these areas instead of building sterile lofts downtown is beyond me. Shepard Mall is toast and Crossroads is going bye bye - I would think that returning the heart of downtown to its former retail and business glory would be more efficacious. In 1975 the First National Bank building was totally leased out - the low cost of doing business in Oklahoma was at one time one of the main stays of keeping and attracting business to the state which also kept the wage base capable of supporting a strong middle class which seems to have receded over the past 30 years. All those middle and upper middle class neighborhoods that were built from the twenties up thru the end of the sixties didn't get there because of a bunch of tax and spend dilettantes in city and state government. The point is I remember a prosperous and safe Oklahoma City in the fifties and sixties where when I went to the public library I didn't have to worry about being mugged or getting my property stolen by some druggy.

Sounds like you need to revisit OKC and see how much progress we've made. The downtown library is a showpiece and most of the inner city historic neighborhoods are revitalized or undergoing their own renaissance.

"Sounds like you need to revisit OKC and see how much progress we've made. The downtown library is a showpiece and most of the inner city historic neighborhoods are revitalized or undergoing their own renaissance."

I have visited OKC many times as I continue to have friends that live there - my grandfather practiced law there until his death in '79. During college I lived at 438 NW 26th just down the street from Harvey's Uptown Club and was the asst. mgr. of Adairs Tropical @23rd and Drexel. When my wife and I visit we stay at the Skirvin because we believe in supporting a restored architectural gem and yes there has been tremendous progress in revitalizing the Heritage Hills area as well as the area where Berry Spitzer and his partners played S&L flip games down in the Paseo area. During the week downtown is largely empty compared to what it was when I would have lunch with my girlfriend at Anna Maudes in the seventies. As to the downtown library it is truly a wonderful building however, when I went there to do some research I had to guard my briefcase against theft and was warned by a fellow user as well as the officer on duty that I needed to keep my eyes and ears open at all times and never take my eyes off my property. The problem is that since all the bank and business failures during the course of the oil bust there has been a dearth of real economic activity and business creation in order to create real jobs - what there has been is a great deal of money poured into Bricktown , stadiums , and a phony river which created public debt and a few minimum wage service jobs.

When the boom went bust state and local governments were a huge drag on the economy that was left - Oklahoma has lost population ever since.

Wait... What?

When did Oklahoma lose population after the bust? The growth slowed- we're only growing less than half as fast as the almost 20% rate between 1970 and 1980- but the state has grown a little more than 600,000 since 1980, much of it in the late 90s to today. OKC city proper has grown by 150,000 since 1980.

From the Data Center’s latest newsletter:

While the state has not grown enough to recapture that lost 6th Congressional District, we do not appear to be at risk of losing a district either. It’s not easy to plot out every possible scenario, but roughly speaking, if the population in the rest of the nation were held constant, then Oklahoma’s population would have to decline by more than half a million before the state would be at risk of losing another seat. Conversely, if the state wanted to regain its 6th District, the state’s population would need to increase somewhere close to 175,000 while the rest of the U.S. population remained unchanged.

To see more of the Data Center’s population estimates, go here.

You are correct - I am from OKC and graduated from OCU in 1975. I currently live in Dallas and am looking at residential real estate in the area from Robinson & 23rd west to about May Avenue as well as Lincoln Terrace. My wife and I are retiring - we are going to sell our house here and pay cash for a residence hopefully in OKC. What I saw happen in Oklahoma was that during the oil boom of the seventies and eighties the size of Oklahoma government went thru the roof and taxes along with it. When the boom went bust state and local governments were a huge drag on the economy that was left - Oklahoma has lost population ever since. We are going to see the same things happen in Texas - Houston and Dallas have been flooded with Illegal immigrants which has driven the wage base down and caused a huge rise in the expense of schools, health care , welfare, and crime. I grew up in Houston and have seen a dramatic drop in the quality of life there. Oklahoma City has some of the most incredibly rich and architecturally diverse residential neighborhoods that I have ever seen - why more has not been done to enhance these areas instead of building sterile lofts downtown is beyond me. Shepard Mall is toast and Crossroads is going bye bye - I would think that returning the heart of downtown to its former retail and business glory would be more efficacious. In 1975 the First National Bank building was totally leased out - the low cost of doing business in Oklahoma was at one time one of the main stays of keeping and attracting business to the state which also kept the wage base capable of supporting a strong middle class which seems to have receded over the past 30 years. All those middle and upper middle class neighborhoods that were built from the twenties up thru the end of the sixties didn't get there because of a bunch of tax and spend dilettantes in city and state government. The point is I remember a prosperous and safe Oklahoma City in the fifties and sixties where when I went to the public library I didn't have to worry about being mugged or getting my property stolen by some druggy.

Have you been to OKC recently? OKC is dramatically different then what you just described.

kaiserbill5711,

I, like many others, have been here thru that period of time you mention and I have not seen any of that. Population has grown here just like most other places--it has not gone down. Being an oil state, the bust had it's share of impact here, but it didn't cause the population to go down. And the 'pleasantville' of the '50s you mention is not a change limited to OKC. Every city now is way different than it was in the '50s. However, I still don't feel like I'm in any danger when I walk in downtown okc at any time of day or night.

FYI-you might want to scale down that profile pic a bit.

I'm trying to get rid of the picture completely.

I noticed today that 2 new sold signs have been posted at the Brownstones at Maywood Park. Based solely on the signs, 4 have sold.

kasierbill the city did not go into debt building the library, Ford Center, "fake river", and baseball field. It was a one sales cent tax. The money was there before we built anything. That is not debt!

And I do believe the people that built the baseball field, Ford Center, and library were not making minimum wage. I also don't the Thunder that came to town because we have the Ford Center make minimum wage.

So stop being a Debbie Downer if you don't know what you are talking about.

Developer of The Hill in Deep Duece in Bricktown Oklahoma City must climb financing hill
BY STEVE LACKMEYER
Published: February 7, 2009
Buzz up!

Bill Canfield, developer of The Hill in Deep Deuce, said Friday he’s hoping to wrap up new financing that will allow construction to resume on the housing project.

Developer Bill Canfield is hoping contractors can resume work on unfinished foundations and townhomes at The Hill in Deep Deuce this spring. Canfield said Friday work was shut down to allow time to obtain new financing. PHOTO BY Steve Lackmeyer, THE OKLAHOMAN

Smith and Pickel Construction left the job site earlier this month after completing the first six homes; several more units are three to six months away from completion.

With a total of 157 homes planned, The Hill is the largest for-sale downtown housing project to date.

Canfield confirmed that he has self-financed the project.

He said another investor, Chesapeake Energy chief executive officer Aubrey McClendon, completed his commitment to the project last year and was "an exceptional investment partner.”

"Although the current residential market is challenging, we are encouraged by the level of interest in The Hill and our marketing team continues to assist several strong prospects,” Canfield wrote in a response to an inquiry from The Oklahoman.

James Pickel, executive vice president of Smith and Pickel Construction, said the project is current with bills to contractors and subcontractors.

He said any subcontractors’ bills not yet paid are due to unfinished work and not lack of funding.

"This was a mutual decision between our firm and Bill Canfield,” Pickel said. "We knew he was self-financing on the front end.

He told us he was going to finance the project and there might be a period of time where he wouldn’t be paying us. So rather than continuing working, we said let’s stop until financing is in place and he said ‘great.’”

We are very pleased with the favorable response

from the community

to The Hill

and what it means to providing

a high-quality urban neighborhood in the Bricktown

and Downtown districts.”

Bill Canfield
developer of The Hill in Deep Deuce

the thing that bothers me is that all the housing is for the people who have lots of money. when they going to build housing thay normal people can offord. on the hill there building all kinds of stuff there .its on a public street but just watch thoses people will find a way to gate it off and then there be a gated private comunitty were us poor folks wont even be alowed to walk by and look at the houses.:053:

the thing that bothers me is that all the housing is for the people who have lots of money. when they going to build housing thay normal people can offord. on the hill there building all kinds of stuff there .its on a public street but just watch thoses people will find a way to gate it off and then there be a gated private comunitty were us poor folks wont even be alowed to walk by and look at the houses.:053:

I agree, Adrian. What price points there are for entry-level buyers are still high when you price out what you are paying for. Downtown OKC can't justify high prices for a closet sized apartment (like Manhattan can) when there are so few amenities in the area to walk to. No large pharmacy, no large grocery store, the list is long. I know it's the chicken and egg thing and one can't be there without the other, but right now I think the asking prices are way too high on the new developments to bring a critical mass downtown.

Downtown OKC can't justify high prices for a closet sized apartment (like Manhattan can) when there are so few amenities in the area to walk to.

you are right but the asking prices downtown are still 20-30 percent of prices in manhattan. its also not really fair to use comps in moore,yukon, north okc to compare to downtown. they will always be significantly cheaper just like in every city.

i would love to have more options for affordable housing downtown but i dont really see any project meeting peoples' expectations of 'affordable' as compared to suburan prices. sycamore square is affordable but everyone ridicules that place. you cant get a project like block 42 for $100 sq ft.

When the boom went bust state and local governments were a huge drag on the economy that was left - Oklahoma has lost population ever since..

Oklahoma began gaining in population ever since 1992. Heck, since 2000 we've gained in both immigrant population and migration population from other states.

Oklahoma didn't lose a seat because we lost population, Oklahoma lost a seat because we didn't grow as fast as some other states.

You have to look at building costs when considering what's a fair price too. For example, at Maywood Park they've got build-block construction with concrete walls, which is more expensive than wood framing. The townhouses have slate roofs, are completely brick and have copper guttering and a fair amount of cast stone and wrought iron railing. Inside there are primarily wood floors and all counterrops throughout the house are granite. All of that costs a lot more money than is spent on many of the standard houses out in the suburbs, and land out there isn't so expensive that it drives to price up enough to make them comparable.

In most of these cases though, don't downtown developers get the land either for free or at a highly subsidized price?

Only the OCURA projects.

OKC doesn't really have any "housing projects"

I suppose that would depend on how one define 'projects' No high rise type I'm aware of, but there are multiple assisted housing locations administered through a housing authority

True, but I wouldn't define the expensive new condos downtown as "projects."

Nor would I. However, projects is just another word for developments absent a separate contextual layer which isn't really present in the thread.