Fitzsimmons sets sights on south OKC neighborhood, draws up plan
by Kelley Chambers
The Journal Record May 29, 2009

OKLAHOMA CITY – In about four months one south Oklahoma City neighborhood will look quite different.

Construction is set to begin within the next month on the first six of 13 homes between SW 17th and SW 18th streets near S. McKinley Avenue.
Architect Brian Fitzsimmons is drawing up plans for the homes, which will have modern flair, plenty of windows for natural light, and sloped roofs that when seen side-by-side will resemble the shape of a butterfly’s wings. The addition is called Mi Tierra.

Despite their modern design, the homes will be targeted toward first-time buyers who earn 80 percent of the median household income.

The homes are being built by the nonprofit Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma City Inc. The group works on the city, state and national level to secure funding to offer counseling and education programs to get low- to moderate-income families into new homes.

Roland Chupik, executive director for Neighborhood Housing, said this year the organization will build 25 homes in the metro area, 13 of those at Mi Tierra.

The homes will be built for certification by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council.

“We are getting into the green building arena,” Chupik said. “This will be our first 100-percent green building project.”

The Mi Tierra homes will range from 1,200 square feet to 1,500 square feet and will be priced from $90,000 to $110,000.

Fitzsimmons said he was given a blank canvas for the design; that allowed him to be creative and have some fun.

“This is an opportunity to see if we can accomplish quality architecture at a reasonable budget,” he said. “I think we’re going to get there.”

Mi Tierra homes will have garages that are set back so that living spaces will have views of the street.

“We didn’t want a typical suburban development dominated by the garages,” Fitzsimmons said. “The visual character on the street will be greatly varied.”
Neighborhood Housing acquired the land this year from the Latino Development Agency, which built and sold five homes on the block in 2006.

Chupik said that organization offered them the land to build affordable homes.

“They asked if we would take over their existing projects,” he said. “We’re going to finish it out with those 13 units.”

County records show many of the homes on the neighboring blocks were built in the 1950s. Chupik said he has seen renewed interest and revitalization in other neighborhoods where his organization has built homes and expects to see the same near Mi Tierra.

The project is in the permitting process, which is supposed to wrap up in the next month. At that time construction will begin and Chupik said the first homes should be completed in about four months.

Fitzsimmons said he was intrigued by the chance to design LEED-certified homes in the development.

“They called me and I jumped at the chance,” he said.

http://journalrecord.com/article.cfm?recid=99114

This is extremely cool.

This is the area just west of the Downtown Airpark. If the Grant humphrey's project is still a go and this Fitzsimmons project plays out, this area will develop very rapidly.

Very Cool!!!

This is great!! Hopefully more LEED-certified homes will start popping up! I just bought a house but would jump at the chance for one that is LEED-certified!

Here's the pic that went with the article.

http://www.journalrecord.com/_images/articles/t_labskc-neighborhood%20housing%2005-29-09.jpg
Brian Fitzsimmons with Fitzsimmons Architects is designing 13 homes for Neighborhood Housing Services of Oklahoma City. (Photo by Maike Sabolich)

http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg

http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_2.jpg

http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_3.jpg

Do want.

[QUOTE=metro;229313]http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg[QUOTE]

What I am confused about it that it said the garages would be set back so there would be views of the street. I took this to mean they would maybe be on the side or set further back. I guess I was thinking it would look different.

same here warren, doesn't look like a big setback on the garages, 6 ft maybe. I understand what he's saying, in most suburban cookie cutter developments, the garage is set up more and you have to walk about 6-10 ft in on the side of the garage to the door. Looks like he's just switching the two, so in that regard, I suppose it does make sense in making the door more of the focal point and less-so the garage as in most of suburbia.

I love modern/contemporary designs... but I look at that roof line and think LEAKS. I would be interested to see that in more detail.

GREAT project, however. Wonderful to see a blighted area close to downtown renewed in a way that is inclusive of current residents.

I want one.

Update:

Sustainable, attainable

Group building green houses for low- to moderate-income families
By Brianna Bailey
The Journal Record
Posted: 09:53 PM Thursday, June 17, 2010

OKLAHOMA CITY – A local nonprofit group is building 13 eco-friendly homes for low- to moderate-income families in southwest Oklahoma City with the help of a $550,000 grant from the city.

The first two green homes in the development, called Mi Tierra, are already near completion. Sponsored by the nonprofit housing organization Neighborhood Housing Services, the development is in the area around SW 18th Street and S. McKinley Avenue, near Rotary Park.

“Our economy has changed somewhat and the need in particular for low- to moderate-income housing is very strong in Oklahoma,” said Roland Chupik, executive director of Neighborhood Housing Services.

The homes will range in size from 1,200 to 1,800 square feet. Neighborhood Housing Services expects all 13 homes in the development to be completed by August 2011.

Mi Tierra homes will have energy-saving features, including walls with spray-foam insulation to reduce heat and cooling costs and heating and cooling systems that use geothermal technology. The systems work by using circulating water from the earth to heat and cool the homes. The houses also will have energy-efficient windows and roofing.

The green features will save their future homeowners up to 50 percent on their monthly energy bills, Chupik said.

There is a huge need for affordable housing in Oklahoma City, particularly in the southwestern part of the inner city area where Mi Tierra is being built, said Russell Claus, director of city planning.

“We will never have adequate capacity,” Claus said. “We are trying to do something more than just baseline housing and providing something that is going to be sustainable in the long term.”

Neighborhood Housing Services hopes Mi Tierra’s green, energy-saving features will eventually earn the development a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) gold or platinum rating for energy efficiency.

Neighborhood Housing Services acquired Mi Tierra from the Latino Community Development Agency in 2006.

The community development agency had already built and sold five homes in the development when Neighborhood Housing Services took over the project.

Potential buyers in Mi Tierra must be first-time homeowners and make below 80 percent of the median household income of $58,500 for a family of four. Neighborhood Housing Services is also offering up to $10,000 in down-payment assistance to qualified applicants.

It's a tract home with the roof upside down.

Does anyone know what these are going to sell for?

Does anyone know what these are going to sell for?

The top article stated $90-$110K depending on size.

How a family of four making $46,800 or less can afford $90-$110K is amazing to me.

I probably shouldnt have skimmed the article so quick...
and i agree that im not sure how a family of 4 will be able to afford that on a 46k income..

Assuming a payment of about $700 a month, PIE, thats < 19% pmt.-to-income. That's within acceptible lending norms. However, any lender will want to also see the rest of the family bills and debts. Plus, the family may have some savings to use as a down payment or principal reduction.

I am so glad someone is making something out of the southside finally. This will be HUGE.

I'll post a rational response later, I'm just glad this is finally going forward.

Assuming a payment of about $700 a month, PIE, thats < 19% pmt.-to-income. That's within acceptible lending norms. However, any lender will want to also see the rest of the family bills and debts. Plus, the family may have some savings to use as a down payment or principal reduction.

Hmmm.... My salary isn't far from that and $700 a month in mortgage/rent is not affordable... and I'm single. I couldn't imagine having 3 other mouths to feed, a reliable car (or two), AND manage to save.

Sounds like a recipe for foreclosure.

I drove by the houses down there that have been built and theres 2 more going up. Needless to say, they are less than impressive. The sloped roofs and more "contemporary" architecture doesnt look as good as it does in the renderings. They look very cheap and theres no way I would pay $100,000+ for one. If someone is going to buy a 100k house im not sure why they wouldnt head north for a house in an established neighborhood with more amenities near by.
On a lighter note, they are much better looking than most of the houses down there that are falling apart, so thats a good thing.

Hmmm.... My salary isn't far from that and $700 a month in mortgage/rent is not affordable... and I'm single. I couldn't imagine having 3 other mouths to feed, a reliable car (or two), AND manage to save.

Sounds like a recipe for foreclosure.

It all depends on what all you have going on besides the house payment.

It all depends on what all you have going on besides the house payment.

Exactly, my income is certainly less than the amount mentioned and that sounds very affordable to me.

I drove by the houses down there that have been built and theres 2 more going up. Needless to say, they are less than impressive. The sloped roofs and more "contemporary" architecture doesnt look as good as it does in the renderings. They look very cheap and theres no way I would pay $100,000+ for one. If someone is going to buy a 100k house im not sure why they wouldnt head north for a house in an established neighborhood with more amenities near by.
On a lighter note, they are much better looking than most of the houses down there that are falling apart, so thats a good thing.

This is another example of North Side snobbery. Nothing on the South Side is worth fixing up or redeveloping. We should just bulldoze everything and everyone should move North.

Even Spartan likes this and he's always a North Side advocate.

Benman is actually spot on. I drove by on my way to dinner tonight and was appalled. These things are hideous, and I was actually excited about them. I like the potential for something unique and interesting that has been squandered by using the cheapest and least tactile exterior systems possible. They look cheaper and crappier in person. I think Fitzsimmons needs to stick to high design, for the sake of his reputation. This is no different than anything in Del City, hardly an improvement for the area (although it is in one of the southside's roughest areas).

Here is a picture I snapped for you guys:
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/9817/img01286.jpg

As opposed to:
http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg

As for being a north side advocate..well, there is a lot more that interests me on the north side, although I myself am actually a southsider. That's why I post pics of projects on the southside when I drive by them, like this, or the new Crest. I hope though that my comments don't actually offend anyone on the southside, I would just like to see better. The southside is at least still way more interesting than Del City..

Benman is actually spot on. I drove by on my way to dinner tonight and was appalled. These things are hideous, and I was actually excited about them. I like the potential for something unique and interesting that has been squandered by using the cheapest and least tactile exterior systems possible. They look cheaper and crappier in person. I think Fitzsimmons needs to stick to high design, for the sake of his reputation. This is no different than anything in Del City, hardly an improvement for the area (although it is in one of the southside's roughest areas).

Here is a picture I snapped for you guys:
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/9817/img01286.jpg

As opposed to:
http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg

As for being a north side advocate..well, there is a lot more that interests me on the north side, although I myself am actually a southsider. That's why I post pics of projects on the southside when I drive by them, like this, or the new Crest. I hope though that my comments don't actually offend anyone on the southside, I would just like to see better. The southside is at least still way more interesting than Del City..


I agree that the design is lacking. Even using inexpensive materials could have produced something more attractive. Maybe it will at least be a start for something better for that area though.

I can agree to that. Really though, you can buy higher quality tract homes very close to Capitol Hill. Along SW 25th between the river and the "Top of the Town" area are two or three new housing additions, there are others. It's not at all uncommon for a lot to be purchased and cleared, replaced with a smaller new house. The lots on the southside are very small so the new houses are usually small and don't have much of a yard, but it works. There are a lot of people who also make bizarre expansions to houses on the south side (because they want more space but don't want to leave their community) by adding a floor in weird places or basically building a connected adjacent structure or whatever. I probably see more of that on the southside than anywhere else in OKC.

Exactly, my income is certainly less than the amount mentioned and that sounds very affordable to me.

My income is quite a bit less than the posted $46K too, yet $700/month is out of reach. Granted the sf is 200-500 more than what I have with my 2 bed/bath but I am paying $550/month. For a two-income family of four, might be entirely reasonable (but if not mistaken, the household income = $46K so there ya go, back to the previous post wondering about it.)

If the energy savings are accurate, that could make a difference (but in my case, would amount to $60/month)

I think when the Airpark redevelopment is finally started that will be the best encouragement to other developers to do something of a better quality. It doesn't have to be Mesta Park or Heritage Hills and it will begin to attract at least a middle class to lower middle class population who want a nice semi-urban lifestyle.

My income is quite a bit less than the posted $46K too, yet $700/month is out of reach. Granted the sf is 200-500 more than what I have with my 2 bed/bath but I am paying $550/month. For a two-income family of four, might be entirely reasonable (but if not mistaken, the household income = $46K so there ya go, back to the previous post wondering about it.)

If the energy savings are accurate, that could make a difference (but in my case, would amount to $60/month)

You pay about the same that I do. If was bringing home $46k I guarantee I would have no worries about finances. It all depends on what your other obligations are.

You pay about the same that I do. If was bringing home $46k I guarantee I would have no worries about finances. It all depends on what your other obligations are.

I agree, if I was bringing in the $46K it wouldn't be a concern either (but that $46K is for a family of 4) which goes back to the "other obligations" part.

Benman is actually spot on. I drove by on my way to dinner tonight and was appalled. These things are hideous, and I was actually excited about them. I like the potential for something unique and interesting that has been squandered by using the cheapest and least tactile exterior systems possible. They look cheaper and crappier in person. I think Fitzsimmons needs to stick to high design, for the sake of his reputation. This is no different than anything in Del City, hardly an improvement for the area (although it is in one of the southside's roughest areas).

Here is a picture I snapped for you guys:
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/9817/img01286.jpg

As opposed to:
http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg

As for being a north side advocate..well, there is a lot more that interests me on the north side, although I myself am actually a southsider. That's why I post pics of projects on the southside when I drive by them, like this, or the new Crest. I hope though that my comments don't actually offend anyone on the southside, I would just like to see better. The southside is at least still way more interesting than Del City..

Thanks for the pics/comparison. While there are some similarities, not exactly what I was expecting from the rendering. Looks much less modern. The pic reminded me of a double or triple wide mobile home that is split in 2 (or 3), transported and just looks someone put the parts back together wrong.

Not that there is anything wrong with that if you like that style. LOL

I agree, if I was bringing in the $46K it wouldn't be a concern either (but that $46K is for a family of 4) which goes back to the "other obligations" part.

I wasn't referring to $46k for just me. I actually have a family, believe it or not. lol

Thanks for the pics/comparison. While there are some similarities, not exactly what I was expecting from the rendering. Looks much less modern. The pic reminded me of a double or triple wide mobile home that is split in 2 (or 3), transported and just looks someone put the parts back together wrong.

Not that there is anything wrong with that if you like that style. LOL

Some landscaping and driveways could help considerably. And where are the sidewalks?????

And I understand that these aren't McMansions, they are intended to basically be starter homes. If you can afford it, there are some pluses. They are new (shouldn't have to deal with costly repairs for a few years). They are "green" which should help with utilities.

And to clarify my previous post, the "double wide" wasn't meant to be a slam. I have been there and done that. Have lived in a mobile home (on private property) and the equivalent of a trailer park (campground with mostly RV's, pull-out trailers), apartments, single family homes (not dis-similar to the ones here), old stately 2 story home (former Mayor's house) etc.

Some landscaping and driveways could help considerably. And where are the sidewalks?????

Way to premature for such a question, these items are always the last built/installed on new home construction.

That's a selling price of $75 per square foot for LEED certified, green construction and it includes the land.

I am very impressed that someone can do this for that price period much make a little money at it.

It isn't something I'd want to do personally and it does raise the issue for me of just how big a new house can be justified on its own lot.

Another thing that irritates me a bit is the prominence of the 2 car garage on a small home that's striving for affordability but then the prominent garages on most houses irritates me, too.

The front-facing garages are a big turn-off, and the materials are cheap-looking. More contemporary materials/colors would go a long way toward making these more attractive, something like the lofts below:
http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/1444/cherrylofts4awebwv0.jpg
http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/167/cherrylofts2webyq7.jpg
http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/4967/cherrylofts6webds8.jpg

^ Those are the ones in Tulsa correct? Very nice!

I drove by the houses down there that have been built and theres 2 more going up. Needless to say, they are less than impressive. The sloped roofs and more "contemporary" architecture doesnt look as good as it does in the renderings.

It's very likely that the builder had to forego many of Fitzsimmons' suggested design elements as a matter of cost control. Facade materials play a big role in pulling off the modern look, as does commercial glass versus traditional windows. Both can get expensive fast. That's unfortunate, but a reality that often comes into play when lower price points are being targeted.

Cool and daring designs though, especially at that price point. There's a definite thirst for more modern design on OKC.

I drove by the houses down there that have been built and theres 2 more going up. Needless to say, they are less than impressive. The sloped roofs and more "contemporary" architecture doesnt look as good as it does in the renderings.

It's very likely that the builder had to forego many of Fitzsimmons' suggested design elements as a matter of cost control. Facade materials play a big role in pulling off the modern look, as does commercial glass versus traditional windows. Both can get expensive fast. That's unfortunate, but a reality that often comes into play when lower price points are being targeted.

Cool and daring designs though, especially at that price point. There's a definite thirst for more modern design on OKC.

There are several categories of LEED certifications. Many common sense construction techniques can be counted toward earning a silver, gold or platinum rating. I equate LEEDs to being like an Energy Star rated appliance. That said, the design of the homes is nothing new. Having an inverted roof might be unusual in OKC, but there are homes built on the reservations in Az. that are the same design. The reason? The roofs channel water to a catch basin for irrigation of gardens. We also don't have to design roofs for snow loads around here. The wing design as depicted directs the water either to the rear of the house or the front. In both cases, it creates a huge mess after a rain.

As for front facing garages, when you plat a property for development, the maximization of cost of land to return on investment usually indicates a developer's greed index. Do you go wide/shallow or narrow/deep lots? Z-shape or zero lot line? The architect must accept the shape of the lot and design the amenities accordingly. I doubt that Mr. Fitzsimmons was allowed the opportunity to be involved in the platting procedure. What else can you do on a 50 foot wide lot with a requirement of a 2 car garage and an entry (to say nothing about setback requirements)? I'll give him a pass in that respect. In cases such as first time home buyers, the garage is just an on-site storage unit (unless the homeowner's assoc. disallows parking in the driveway).

My final comment regarding the design...the materials used do not match the style of architecture. It could be due to budget, technical comfort level of builder, or (hoped-for) naivete of the target market. Again, I can't fault the architect for his valiant attempt to provide an alternative to Habitat for Humanity, but then, the market will always define success or failure.

The one article specified $550,000 subsidy for 13 homes so that's about $42,000 per home or somewhere between $25 to $42 per sf. I'm sure all of the money did not go into raw cost of the houses but still that helps me understand a little bit more about how the builder was able to get this price point.

As for front facing garages, when you plat a property for development, the maximization of cost of land to return on investment usually indicates a developer's greed index. Do you go wide/shallow or narrow/deep lots? Z-shape or zero lot line? The architect must accept the shape of the lot and design the amenities accordingly. I doubt that Mr. Fitzsimmons was allowed the opportunity to be involved in the platting procedure. What else can you do on a 50 foot wide lot with a requirement of a 2 car garage and an entry (to say nothing about setback requirements)? I'll give him a pass in that respect. In cases such as first time home buyers, the garage is just an on-site storage unit (unless the homeowner's assoc. disallows parking in the driveway).I agree. But I'd really like to explore alternatives to single family garages. One idea I've thought about is maybe preserving the single family home on a small lot but build a separate garage structure in the rear with loft apartments above them.

Not everyone that wants a small home wants or needs a 2 car garage and the garage apartment could be used for both extra density and additional income. And the financing for the rental piggybacks off the single family financing - maybe.

The need for elevators makes it a bit more expensive but the elevators have really gotten much cheaper in recent years.


My final comment regarding the design...the materials used do not match the style of architecture. It could be due to budget, technical comfort level of builder, or (hoped-for) naivete of the target market. Again, I can't fault the architect for his valiant attempt to provide an alternative to Habitat for Humanity, but then, the market will always define success or failure.Agree again.

As stated above, I am sure the materials were changed to meet a price point.

I doubt those pics from Tulsa are anywhere near the desired price point for the ones built here even as condo/attached housing which they are when this project is detached single family. The garage is a right in front on the four-plex in the last picture but the massing and darker, monochromatic coloring makes them blend in when the stucco portion pops being a lighter color to draw attention away from the door. The Mi Tierra project are single level homes and much smaller lots, it is really a completely different type of project than those others.

The houses pictured here could not be built in similar proximity to downtown Austin for under 125K in East Austin or under 150K west of I-35 even with assistance (my wife works in the affordable housing world).

I will reserve judgment on them until they are finished as a "progress photo" doesn't do the project justice at this point.


Hmmm.... My salary isn't far from that and $700 a month in mortgage/rent is not affordable... and I'm single. I couldn't imagine having 3 other mouths to feed, a reliable car (or two), AND manage to save.

Sounds like a recipe for foreclosure.
Then how do people afford rent? Even what are considered "crappy apartments" here are $600 a month and salaries for the average working person here are not any higher than in OKC. There are also other types of assistance available to reduce the contribution of the person beyond just the down payment assistance, some of those might come into play for these properties, especially if you have children.

I don't believe that the market will always define success or failure because I think these will get gobbled up despite how craptacular they are. I believe that it was an opportunity wasted, but I'm not worried about that because I didn't even know about this until yesterday.

The only thing that was damaged was my opinion of Fitzsimmons, although I'm still intrigued by the LEED Gold status. The homes are awfully close together, and I actually like that, but it is a fact that increases the environmental footprint of the building, will cause more erosion, and increase problems with water runoff onto the street, among other things. The exterior systems look like the usual paneling and brick masonry, the garage door, the prominent focal point, is also just very... blah.

They should have used more tactile and more attractive materials in the exterior systems as I mentioned in my earlier post. Now when it comes to the NoChe lofts in Tulsa, which I posted a ton of pics of in the Tulsa thread, I recognize that those are not cost feasible. The materials are not either. But you can use cheaper versions of those materials, they do exist. Some kind of combination of EIFS (fake stucco), real wood, some sheet metal, etc. For $145,000 that is doable.

I agree about the point that the real catalyst for the area will be the airpark redevelopment, which is like 3 blocks from this site. Hey bluedog, tell us about some of the nicer new projects occurring in older areas of South Austin--I think we have the potential for that here some day.

I work in construction, you can get those materials (except the cedar siding) for not much more than what they have on there now. The siding looks about the same. Painting a different color and the overall massing of the houses could be changed to make them a lot more attractive and still meet the price points. Notice how none of the contemporary homes in the pics I posted have brick but rather are a mix of wood/alum. siding or EIFS/stucco. And especially not the same kind of brick used in seemingly every new Home Creations/Ideal Homes subdivision.

I agree. But I'd really like to explore alternatives to single family garages. One idea I've thought about is maybe preserving the single family home on a small lot but build a separate garage structure in the rear with loft apartments above them.

Not everyone that wants a small home wants or needs a 2 car garage and the garage apartment could be used for both extra density and additional income. And the financing for the rental piggybacks off the single family financing - maybe.
For most assistance programs rental property would pretty be an automatic exclusion from the program because it could push the income levels out of the assistance zone. A two story home is difficult to do when receiving assistance since to get the assistance they have to meet Federal Fair Housing Guidelines and in some places Visitablity Ordinances like we have here which require access for persons with disabilities.

Also when it comes to resale, single car garage homes are a much harder sell than a two-car garage. Most narrow lots would make it more difficult to put the garage in the back and also create a potential "damage" problem since it seems many car drive forward very well let alone back up down a longer driveway. Making it narrow enough to allow a decent size single floor plan would be a recipe for disaster since we are at the point of having to "idiot proof" the world.


The need for elevators makes it a bit more expensive but the elevators have really gotten much cheaper in recent years.

Actually they haven't, they have gone up in price as well. Non-accessible residential elevators have come down a little bit but they can still add 10,000 or so to the price of a house adding in installation and structural assessment costs. Wheelchair lifts are a little cheaper but still add to cost significantly.

I know about this too well, my wife is working on affordable housing proposals for a Galveston project and I have helped her some with the design. They have the very narrow "shotgun" lots and want the "living level" of the homes 9-12 feet above grade for hurricane flooding. Well that is about 108-144 lineal feet of ramp on a lot that doesn't have the space for it so a lift of some kind is a necessity which again affects the cost of the home.


The one article specified $550,000 subsidy for 13 homes so that's about $42,000 per home or somewhere between $25 to $42 per sf. I'm sure all of the money did not go into raw cost of the houses but still that helps me understand a little bit more about how the builder was able to get this price point.
Not all that money is going to the builder, there are quite a few hands in the pie. The bulk of it will still end up with the builder.


I agree about the point that the real catalyst for the area will be the airpark redevelopment, which is like 3 blocks from this site. Hey bluedog, tell us about some of the nicer new projects occurring in older areas of South Austin--I think we have the potential for that here some day.
Most of it it starts around 400K and goes upwards of 1,000,000 in areas like Travis Heights. Houses like in my grandparents old neighborhood of NW 22nd & McKinley sell for a 250-350/SF, this is for homes that have been updated. We looked at one 1940's era home that hadn't been updated, 1,200 sf for 450K. There are some very nice "green homes" in the area and in Bouldin Creek but everything is around 400K. A little further south (near us) there is a new neighborhood going in and they start at 200K (Treaty Oak Homes - Central Park (http://www.treatyoakhomes.com/index.php/central_park/)) but they are not in the modern style at all. There is quite a bit of modern going up all over the place, most of it is just not in the "affordable" market segment. Most of the affordable modern type development has been small condos and not single family detached.

Austin Home Listings - Travis Heights (http://www.austinhomelistings.com/search/travis-heights.html)
Austin Home Listings - Bouldin Creek (http://www.austinhomelistings.com/search/bouldin-creek.html)

Here is the website of the Austin Modern Home Tour (http://www.modernhometouraustin.com/) that took place last January. Again, mostly high end stuff.

Here is a company doing some modern style homes 9modernaustin (http://www.modernaustin.net/home.html)), we have looked at some of their properties out in Apache Shores (between Lake Travis and Lake Austin). The designer of most of their homes is an OU grad, Chioco Design (http://www.chiocodesign.com/).

^ Those are the ones in Tulsa correct? Very nice!

Yes, some are very nice and others are not. It's a mixed bag. They are located between Peoria and Utica just north of Cherry Street (15th).

Thanks bluedogok,

I definitely understand there are problems with ADUs but I still really like the idea as a way to afford moving garages and carports to the rear, add some density, add some more affordable living spaces, and take advantage of owner occupied financing.

But just in the brief time I've been researching I've been surprised at how unpopular it really is with the regulators.

Thanks bluedogok,

I definitely understand there are problems with ADUs but I still really like the idea as a way to afford moving garages and carports to the rear, add some density, add some more affordable living spaces, and take advantage of owner occupied financing.

But just in the brief time I've been researching I've been surprised at how unpopular it really is with the regulators.
I prefer garages set back as well, I try to put them as far back as I can in most designs whether attached or detached.

Most of it it starts around 400K and goes upwards of 1,000,000 in areas like Travis Heights. Houses like in my grandparents old neighborhood of NW 22nd & McKinley sell for a 250-350/SF, this is for homes that have been updated. We looked at one 1940's era home that hadn't been updated, 1,200 sf for 450K. There are some very nice "green homes" in the area and in Bouldin Creek but everything is around 400K. A little further south (near us) there is a new neighborhood going in and they start at 200K (Treaty Oak Homes - Central Park (http://www.treatyoakhomes.com/index.php/central_park/)) but they are not in the modern style at all. There is quite a bit of modern going up all over the place, most of it is just not in the "affordable" market segment. Most of the affordable modern type development has been small condos and not single family detached.

Austin Home Listings - Travis Heights (http://www.austinhomelistings.com/search/travis-heights.html)
Austin Home Listings - Bouldin Creek (http://www.austinhomelistings.com/search/bouldin-creek.html)

Here is the website of the Austin Modern Home Tour (http://www.modernhometouraustin.com/) that took place last January. Again, mostly high end stuff.

Here is a company doing some modern style homes 9modernaustin (http://www.modernaustin.net/home.html)), we have looked at some of their properties out in Apache Shores (between Lake Travis and Lake Austin). The designer of most of their homes is an OU grad, Chioco Design (http://www.chiocodesign.com/).

Yeah I also noticed quite a few loft/condo developments going on, too. So how do you think they did this in Austin? Is it just the way things are when you have an Austin address, is it proximity to downtown and the rough commutes further out, or something else? My understanding is that the area of South Austin was relatively similar to South OKC before it got hot for redevelopment. Hell, even East Austin has redevelopment..their airpark redevelopment project is a lot further along than ours (although ours will be a step ahead I think).

Back on cost I was looking at Prospect New Town in Longmont, CO as one example of a New Urbanist development. I noticed a 450 sf unit was $900 per month including utilities. New construction appeared to be in the $300 per sf range. That's just totally out of the market for anything I know about here that might work.

Yeah I also noticed quite a few loft/condo developments going on, too. So how do you think they did this in Austin? Is it just the way things are when you have an Austin address, is it proximity to downtown and the rough commutes further out, or something else? My understanding is that the area of South Austin was relatively similar to South OKC before it got hot for redevelopment. Hell, even East Austin has redevelopment..their airpark redevelopment project is a lot further along than ours (although ours will be a step ahead I think).
I think the influx of Californians from the tech industry had a lot to do with it, their experience with housing costs made them think Austin was a bargain. I think one of the biggest catalysts was the downtown rental properties which got people living in downtown before the majority of the condo development. Before that there were a few high end condos like the Nokonah over by Whole Foods. AMLI built apartments in the Second Street District and they have remained full. The Monarch was another that was built during the tower construction boom but is rental, I know a few who are living there trying out downtown living before buying elsewhere. Quite a few of the near downtown areas are a mix of rental/owned. There have also been projects that were started but never moved forward because they were late to the game.

As far as traffic, it isn't that bad here, worse than OKC but I have to laugh when people try to claim that it is worse than DFW or Houston. I lived in Dallas 17 years ago and it was worse then than Austin is now. Going every month to Houston for projects scattered from NW to SE proved to me that is worse. I think part of it is perceived costs, it is so easy to build cheap out there, it still isn't as easy to do that here so housing cost perceptions are a bit different.

Mueller has been a disappointment for most, the retail is typical big box mall and the housing has been a mixed bag as well. Seems like it has been an opportunity wasted.

[/COLOR]

Way to premature for such a question, these items are always the last built/installed on new home construction.

I understand that driveways and landscaping are at the end of the building phase but the original drawings don't even show any sidewalks. Do we know if they are required or will be built?

http://www.fitzsimmons-arch.com/images/mitierra_1.jpg


I understand that driveways and landscaping are at the end of the building phase but the original drawings don't even show any sidewalks. Do we know if they are required or will be built?

Think the rendering is incomplete (doesn't show to the curb/street) so the perpendicular sidewalk may be there, just not in the shot. Unless you are talking about a sidewalk from the house to the street, in which case, one isn't really needed, as the driveway serves the same functionality.

The way I am looking at the rendering, the sidewalk may just be incorporated as part of the driveway (the thinner looking strip between the two figures. But not sure, because I think it is supposed to be a 2 car garage and unless the cars are sharing the middle concrete strip, it doesn't look that way.

Unimpressed. Looks like cheap, tribal housing. $100 grand? No thanks.

As far as traffic, it isn't that bad here, worse than OKC but I have to laugh when people try to claim that it is worse than DFW or Houston. I lived in Dallas 17 years ago and it was worse then than Austin is now. Going every month to Houston for projects scattered from NW to SE proved to me that is worse.


I'm still puzzled as to how you've convinced yourself of this idea that Austin traffic isn't "that bad." As I've pointed out to you before, I-35 through Austin--particularly through central Austin, with 240,000 vehicles per day on six lanes and its heavy truck traffic--is almost certainly among the most congested freeways in the country. Mopac certainly isn't as bad but it's still stop-and-go through central Austin for several hours of the day. It's not just the freeways, either--ever driven down Guadalupe at 5:30 pm? Granted, I don't know what Dallas was like 17 years ago, but do I know what it's like today and it's not at all a stretch to say Austin has it just as bad.

Dallas traffic is a breeze, as I have never known any other major city that has as overdeveloped of a freeway system as DFW. Houston traffic, on the other hand...you're going to have nightmares. ATL traffic also sucks. Austin is well beneath both Houston and ATL. But it's enough in my opinion to make anything with proximity to DT Austin have skyrocketing land values as a short commute becomes an amenity at that point (a short commute is not a desired amenity in OKC, yet).