http://newsok.com/the-right-developer-retailers-could-succeed-with-a-lifestyle-center-in-oklahoma-city-firm-says/article/3929377


Could Oklahoma City support a retail lifestyle center? Price Edwards & Co. thinks so, with caveats.

Jim Parrack, senior vice president and retail specialist, makes a good case for it in the firm's year-end retail market report. He argues that the apparent obstacles could be overcome. It's worthy of a look as a whole.


Parrack: We firmly believe that Oklahoma City could support a more upscale shopping center; we have the incomes equal to or greater than many of our competitive cities, our challenge being that our higher-income households tend to be scattered throughout the city. It will take a developer and retailers who understand that we'll drive further and spend more than their typical formulas suggest.


But with retail in general getting healthy and Oklahoma City looking better than the rest of the country, now is the time for developers and retailers to be engaged here. They'll need some help looking beyond their traditional models — our shoppers have proved that they'll drive farther for the right development; and, our low cost of living gives Oklahoma City consumers more disposable income than our demographics suggest.

The article is spot on.

It really is hard to believe cities half the size of OKC beat it when it comes to retail/shopping centers. I think this city could definitely support an upscale shopping center. It's been proven time and time again, such as with Whole Foods, that the typical 1, 5, 10 mile formula rely on doesn't work in OKC, yet this city continues to get passed up for places like Tulsa, Omaha, Birmingham, etc. I found another article on this the other day that I posted in another thread.

A Downtown ontheRange: Buyer's Remorse in OKC (http://downtownontherange.blogspot.com/2010/05/buyers-remorse-in-okc.html)

OKC has covered some ground since that article was printed in 2010 but the premise is still true. When you look at the retail smaller cities like Omaha have that are just barely ahead of OKC compared to what places like Birmingham and Richmond can support, with them both being the same size as OKC, its quite eye opening. It's going to take a developer with vision and who's willing to take risk. I firmly believe that if the recession would have held off for a year and at least one of the proposed projects actually came to pass, we would be in much better shape.

I've always thought something like The Summit in Birmingham would be a great addition to Oklahoma City.

With Chesapeake selling off all their superfluous properties, I would think the SW corner of 63rd and Western might work on a small scale.

Unfortunately, Classen Curve and the Triangle -- not to mention Nichols Hills Plaza -- aren't laid out in a way that will allow them to be easily incorporated into a larger development.

The entire OKC metro is accustomed to a 45 min. commute, it is engrained in our ( OKC ) DNA. This would be great if it was at 63rd & I-235, as it could be reached from all $100K + income hshlds.

If it was placed in the DT district, it would have the same advantages. ..but it must be "High End" w/ an amazing design, Dynamic in attraction, an anchor mixed-use, it would always be "The Spot". Historically, we drive miles to spend money. ( Bass Pro ) is busy everyday from people driving to 30+ mi...???

OKC is primed for this today.

The entire OKC metro is accustomed to a 45 min. commute, it is engrained in our ( OKC ) DNA. This would be great if it was at 63rd & I-235, as it could be reached from all $100K + income hshlds.

If it was placed in the DT district, it would have the same advantages. ..but it must be "High End" w/ an amazing design, Dynamic in attraction, an anchor mixed-use, it would always be "The Spot". Historically, we drive miles to spend money. ( Bass Pro ) is busy everyday from people driving to 30+ mi...???

OKC is primed for this today.

There's no land available off of Broadway Extension here that would allow for that off highway viewing advertising. There's a substantial amount of land just east of Santa Fe north of a neighborhood north of 63rd but the place would be hidden.

There's no land available off of Broadway Extension here that would allow for that off highway viewing advertising. There's a substantial amount of land just east of Santa Fe north of a neighborhood north of 63rd but the place would be hidden.

Why would it need to have highway visibility anyways? In Charlotte, the highest-end retail developments are nowhere near the Interstates. In Little Rock, the Promenade at Chenal, which is probably their nicest lifestyle center, is far away from a highways as well. There was concern when it opened that it would be a failure due to its location but it has turned out to be a huge success. Tuscana would have been what the doctor ordered in OKC but unfortunately it fell through.

It doesn't need to be near highway, but is usually in affluent and populous area.

The problem is that we have more highway frontage than affluent, populous areas.

The problem is that we have more highway frontage than affluent, populous areas.

True. I wonder why OKC developed the way it did in that there is little concentration of wealth. It's not like this is an impoverished city, but in other cities, including Tulsa, the wealthy areas are clustered. OKC is the only city I can think of that developed like this.

As for highway frontage, an upscale lifestyle center can exist near a highway, I was just stating that it doesn't have to. For OKC, I think the new Chisolm Creek development is an excellent opportunity if done right, and that is with or without the mythical Costco.

The problem is that we have more highway frontage than affluent, populous areas.yeah, THAT must be the problem

The problem is that we have more highway frontage than affluent, populous areas.

Meaning what?

It seems the urbanists want neighborhoods of totally mixed demographics and this is what we have. But, in having mixed areas it seems we are penalized.

Meaning what?

It seems the urbanists want neighborhoods of totally mixed demographics and this is what we have. But, in having mixed areas it seems we are penalized.

I agree. I am all for mixed neighborhoods but think OKC should also have neighborhoods that are targeted towards the affluent. Without more concentrated wealth, there is just some retail that a city this size should have that is never going to come here, no matter what incentives are given. I am not talking about things like Costco or others like Urban Outfitters that are simply lacking a good development, but truly upscale retailers of the ilk of Louis Vuitton and Tiffany & Co.

The entire OKC metro is accustomed to a 45 min. commute, it is engrained in our ( OKC ) DNA.

Every shopping center in OKC with a surface parking lot larger than 5 acres IS an OKC Lifestyle Center.

True. I wonder why OKC developed the way it did in that there is little concentration of wealth. It's not like this is an impoverished city, but in other cities, including Tulsa, the wealthy areas are clustered. OKC is the only city I can think of that developed like this.

As for highway frontage, an upscale lifestyle center can exist near a highway, I was just stating that it doesn't have to. For OKC, I think the new Chisolm Creek development is an excellent opportunity if done right, and that is with or without the mythical Costco.

I have to agree with you guys. It seems here, it is all about sprawling out to build a McMansion and then at the same time it destroys any density.


Meaning what?

It seems the urbanists want neighborhoods of totally mixed demographics and this is what we have. But, in having mixed areas it seems we are penalized.

Yet we really don't have a perfectly mixed demographic. Yes there is some mixing, but in many cases everyone is still separated. The problem is, the affluent neighborhoods aren't close together. You get many small ones peppered about but nothing is concentrated near anything.

I have to agree with you guys. It seems here, it is all about sprawling out to build a McMansion and then at the same time it destroys any density.


McMansions aren't unique to OKC though. It's also not about actual population density but about concentrated wealth. A perfect example of what I am talking about is with Nichols Hills. Once you leave Nichols Hills, it gets real ghetto real fast. Nichols Hills is the OKC metro's largest cluster of high-income rooftops but its pretty small compared to the high-income areas of other cities. OKC does however, have other smaller concentrations of high wealth in Edmond, SW OKC, and far NW OKC. If all of those areas moved to the immediate area surrounding Nichols Hills, it's quite likely we would have a Nordstrom, Tiffany's, and Louis Vuitton in OKC right now. Costco would be opening in OKC first rather than Tulsa. It's quite likely that our grocery store situation and upscale restaurant situation would be better as well.

The growth of the city and improvement of areas of wealth are already changing and expanding those areas. For instance, frame homes in west Nichols Hills (not the same as Nichols Hills) which have been run down and weed infested, are now being sold for the lots. And they are selling for $250-500,000 for small (1200-1500 sq ft) homes which will be torn down. NH demographics will soon increase nearly 1/4 mile west. At the same time, homes on the fringes to the North, and even East are being rehabbed and becoming valuable. Younger upwardly mobile families are now moving in and cleaning it up. Several surrounding neighborhoods are seeing lots of improvements.

Meaning what?

It seems the urbanists want neighborhoods of totally mixed demographics and this is what we have. But, in having mixed areas it seems we are penalized.

But in OKC it's the wealthy that are the most sprawled all over the metro from Piedmont/Deer Creek all the way to Lake Thunderbird. Most cities that are more prevalently mixed income still can accumulate the requisite number of high income households within certain radius bubbles.

The problem is that we have more highway frontage than affluent, populous areas.

You use that word like you live here and know what's best for our state.

Once you leave Nichols Hills, it gets real ghetto real fast.

The northeast side of Houston has real ghetto. What is around Nichols Hills are small cottage homes and a cluster of old homes in what was the town of Britton. Run down? Yes. Ghetto? Hardly.


Nichols Hills is the OKC metro's largest cluster of high-income rooftops but its pretty small compared to the high-income areas of other cities. OKC does however, have other smaller concentrations of high wealth in Edmond, SW OKC, and far NW OKC. If all of those areas moved to the immediate area surrounding Nichols Hills, it's quite likely we would have a Nordstrom, Tiffany's, and Louis Vuitton in OKC right now. Costco would be opening in OKC first rather than Tulsa. It's quite likely that our grocery store situation and upscale restaurant situation would be better as well.

I see where you are coming from, however what is transforming along the Kilpatrick Turnpike corridor is quickly becoming the largest high-income cluster in Oklahoma City. The area is really getting overlooked. Even older neighborhoods still have relatively high-income households, such as The Greens and Quail Creek. Now with the presence of Gaillardia, Rose Creek, etc. along Kilpatrick and newer subdivisions currently under development, connecting to Edmond, I would call this Oklahoma City's future for the retail we would like to see.

The only barriers between Nichols Hills and the Kilpatrick corridor is The Village and the old Britton area. If Oklahoma City would introduce a redevelopment plan for Britton and partner with The Village for a master plan, you would see this area quickly emerge. Until then...

While I agree that most of our affluence is in the Nichols Hills area and the Kilpatrick corridor, as you say, this thread has completely dismissed the affluent corridor in central OKC (Deep Deuce-Heritage Hills-Edgemere Park-Crown Heights). But this, again, is low density and intermingled with lower-end housing.

While I agree that most of our affluence is in the Nichols Hills area and the Kilpatrick corridor, as you say, this thread has completely dismissed the affluent corridor in central OKC (Deep Deuce-Heritage Hills-Edgemere Park-Crown Heights). But this, again, is low density and intermingled with lower-end housing.

Agreed. However, there is so much Section 8 intermixed with the higher income rooftops that it brings down the numbers. All national retailers care about is numbers on a spreadsheet and that's where OKC doesn't look good.

A facebook friend posted this today.

Nichols Hills Plaza and Classen Curve are under contract to be sold to this company. Check out their shopping center properties across the country - they call them lifestyle centers. This is extremely exciting to those of us watching our little town grow up.

Glimcher Realty Trust
glimcher.com

A facebook friend posted this today.

Nichols Hills Plaza and Classen Curve are under contract to be sold to this company. Check out their shopping center properties across the country - they call them lifestyle centers. This is extremely exciting to those of us watching our little town grow up.

Glimcher Realty Trust
glimcher.com

I actually think Nichols Hills Plaza has some serious potential. Not to be a full-fledged lifestyle center or anything of the sort, but its one of the most aesthetically attractive suburban shopping centers in the Metro. I am hoping some other big names follow Trader Joe's into it.