6/2/14:
A large hotel group out of Tulsa has purchased 5 SW 5th, a small warehouse to the east of the proposed upper Central Park. They paid $1.25 million for the .7 acres.

3/12/15:
http://www.okctalk.com/content/128-fairfield.html

As we were first to report in June of last year, a large hotel developer based in Tulsa bought a .7 acre lot and warehouse in the Core to Shore area east of the MAPS 3 Central Park (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Central+Park).

The company had the property for sale for several months but recently filed an application to demolish the structure.

As a part of that filing, it was revealed the building would be replaced by a 5-story Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/5sw5041515.jpg

Anish Hotels Group and its CEO Andy Patel have developed a number of hotels in the Tulsa area, including a planned Residence Inn downtown. Anish also recently announced plans to build a 9-story Canopy Hotel (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Canopy+by+Hilton)in Bricktown.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/fairfieldwiki1.jpg

The news of this latest project comes as the MAPS 3 Convention Center (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Convention+Center) Committee considers it's options after plans to acquire a parcel directly south of the Myriad Gardens fell through just last week.

One of the three sites the committee and paid consultants had identified as finalists was the “Core to Shore South” area, which is directly west of the proposed Fairfield Inn.

Although no other development has been announced for the area around the park other than law offices near the Oklahoma River (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=GPHG+Law+Offices), there has been a considerable number of property sales by a variety of investors and developers.

The Fairfield Inn would add to the fast-growing list of 21 hotels completed or planned for the downtown area. See our comprehensive Downtown Hotel Summary (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Downtown+Hotel+Summary)for much more information.



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/5sw5031215b.jpg

On first read, I thought it said Amish Hotel Group. Would the rooms in the new hotel be lighted by gas lanterns? Would the area shuttle be a 19th Century buggy? This would be an interesting stab at a convention center hotel.

Not going to get too excited, probably just going to be another 4 story, stucco/brick hotel, with a lot of parking spaces, like all their other hotels.

Let's hope they're going to go for a little higher end than their existing brands.

They are getting ready to start on a Residence Inn in downtown Tulsa:

http://www.anishhotelsgroup.com/media/TulDTResidenceInn/Tulsa%20Downtown%20Residence%20Inn.jpg

They are getting ready to start on a Residence Inn in downtown Tulsa:

http://www.anishhotelsgroup.com/media/TulDTResidenceInn/Tulsa%20Downtown%20Residence%20Inn.jpg

If it looks anything like that, I would be pretty happy with it especially considering that it will be one of the first big private investments in the core to shore area.

So the plan is then to clear the site of the warehouse building that's currently there?

So the plan is then to clear the site of the warehouse building that's currently there?

I would think so.

This group only does hotels and only new construction.

If it looks anything like that, I would be pretty happy with it especially considering that it will be one of the first big private investments in the core to shore area.

exactly. Not much is down there so hopefully they can set the bar high for future investments in the area.

Let's hope they're going to go for a little higher end than their existing brands.

That's for sure. PLEASE Oklahoma City don't sell this area short. This park should have the best of the best development adjacent. Don't Lower Bricktown my park!

Hope this is promising for the International Harvester Building next door. I truly hope this isn't another casualty like the Film Exchange Building

I was thinking the same thing. Could be great news for the future of that building, or terrible. Remains to be seen. Also, the fact that those properties are in play definitely says something about the confidence in the currently-identified CC location.

Not going to get too excited, probably just going to be another 4 story, stucco/brick hotel, with a lot of parking spaces, like all their other hotels.

Its only .7 acres unless their hoping to acquire more adjacent to it.

Brickhugger?

I hope they retain the existing structure as a base.

I drive by this every day and always think its such an eyesore. Can't wait to see something done with it. I really like the taller building to the west of it.

I would love to see a Lumber Yard type project in this area, either West or East of the new park South of the new Blvd., or is that just a pipe dream?

I was thinking the same thing. Could be great news for the future of that building, or terrible. Remains to be seen. Also, the fact that those properties are in play definitely says something about the confidence in the currently-identified CC location.

My exact thoughts


I would love to see a Lumber Yard type project in this area, either West or East of the new park South of the new Blvd., or is that just a pipe dream?

Considering the Lumber Yard is still a pipe dream at this point, I'd bet that that type of project is even more so here. Plus there's nowhere near the space for something on that scale. But it would be nice to see a 8 to 12 story hotel on this site, and I think that's a realistic dream. A realistic expectation is probably 4 to 8, with good urban principles. Let's just hope they exceed expectations rather than work against them.

It's a pretty tough spot to put a hotel, like Spartan said. The foot print is really small, but they're going to have a hard time buying up the rest of the block. OG&E has the surface lot because their large surface lot across the street gets full. Now if they can get that 4 story brick structure next door, maybe they'll have something (although it would be a shame to toss a multistory brick building down there...and one that doesn't seem to be in bad structural shape (can anyone confirm that?) with tight frontage too.

The stickler here is parking. Between the two building footprints, you could get something going...IF you have the parking lot too. Remember, this is OKC after all and not NYC, you can't build a hotel without somewhere to put the cars.

I'm not expecting this to be some bit major thing, but more like the cookie-cutter 4-6 floor suburban hotels. But I'm not really complaining either. It's the first private purchase we've seen to try and work off of C2S (which still has a long way to go). It COULD be the start of something here. I imagine once the park is done, we'll see a lot happen.

Something else to consider is, are they simply purchasing it in anticipation of the land being valued higher in another 10-15 years? They could just sit on it (or even raze the building and put in a surface lot [or grass] and collect event parking dollars). I'm hoping it turns into an actual building, but we should consider all the possibilities. Putting a cautiously optimistic about SOMETHING happening!

The four story building next door is the International Harvester Building.

I really wish OKC would adopt development guidelines and exterior façade standards for Core to Shore - and do it quickly.

Haussmann's renovation of Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris)

OKC needs to define the "OKC style" and make it mandatory in Core to Shore.

Also, I would bring a shovel and help them tear down the old 1 story structure, but if they try to do anything negative to the International Harvester Building I'll beat them in the head with the same shovel. :)

It's a pretty tough spot to put a hotel, like Spartan said. The foot print is really small, but they're going to have a hard time buying up the rest of the block. OG&E has the surface lot because their large surface lot across the street gets full. Now if they can get that 4 story brick structure next door, maybe they'll have something (although it would be a shame to toss a multistory brick building down there...and one that doesn't seem to be in bad structural shape (can anyone confirm that?) with tight frontage too.

The stickler here is parking. Between the two building footprints, you could get something going...IF you have the parking lot too. Remember, this is OKC after all and not NYC, you can't build a hotel without somewhere to put the cars.

I'm not expecting this to be some bit major thing, but more like the cookie-cutter 4-6 floor suburban hotels. But I'm not really complaining either. It's the first private purchase we've seen to try and work off of C2S (which still has a long way to go). It COULD be the start of something here. I imagine once the park is done, we'll see a lot happen.

Something else to consider is, are they simply purchasing it in anticipation of the land being valued higher in another 10-15 years? They could just sit on it (or even raze the building and put in a surface lot [or grass] and collect event parking dollars). I'm hoping it turns into an actual building, but we should consider all the possibilities. Putting a cautiously optimistic about SOMETHING happening!Well, if the site is small, that isn't a bad thing. That ultimately it be taller, right?

I really wish OKC would adopt development guidelines and exterior façade standards for Core to Shore - and do it quickly.

Haussmann's renovation of Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris)

OKC needs to define the "OKC style" and make it mandatory in Core to Shore.

Also, I would bring a shovel and help them tear down the old 1 story structure, but if they try to do anything negative to the International Harvester Building I'll beat them in the head with the same shovel. :)*like*

Brickhugger?

I hope they retain the existing structure as a base.

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.

I really wish OKC would adopt development guidelines and exterior façade standards for Core to Shore - and do it quickly.

Haussmann's renovation of Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris)

OKC needs to define the "OKC style" and make it mandatory in Core to Shore.

Also, I would bring a shovel and help them tear down the old 1 story structure, but if they try to do anything negative to the International Harvester Building I'll beat them in the head with the same shovel. :)

They have design guidelines and regulations in place...

http://www.okc.gov/planning/hp/districtmaps/Downtown.pdf

DBD and DTD-2 base regulations apply depending on the location in Core to Shore.

They have design guidelines and regulations in place...

http://www.okc.gov/planning/hp/districtmaps/Downtown.pdf

DBD and DTD-2 base regulations apply depending on the location in Core to Shore.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris#The_Haussmann_buil ding


The most famous and recognizable feature of Haussmann's renovation of Paris are the Haussmann apartment buildings which line the boulevards of Paris. Street blocks were designed as homogeneous architectural wholes. He treated buildings not as independent structures, but as pieces of a unified urban landscape.

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

Lol

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris#The_Haussmann_buil ding)




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

Commie.

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.

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann's_renovation_of_Paris#The_Haussmann_buil ding)



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?

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.

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.

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.

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_review/documents/New%202013%20Handout%20corrected.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)

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.

^

Always appreciate your input and perspective!

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.

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 ?

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.

^

Always appreciate your input and perspective!

You're welcome!

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

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.

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

It's called land speculation

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/5395943&headline=Dramatic%20transformation%20set%20for%20s outh%20downtown%20Oklahoma%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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

This is the real problem. It's not that we don't have guidelines, it's that they are so often compromised by the process. Often I think the guidelines could be better, but it doesn't matter if they don't have the marbles to enforce the ones we do have.

I actually emailed the review board about the law offices and the response I got was pretty illogical. It basically said that the developer can't build according to the guidelines, but they could always change it in the future to comply. To which I asked what will be different in the future that would enable them to do then what they can't do now. No response.

Basically, our review boards have historically been easily romanced by the developers to give them variances. It's gotten better in some places and I don't remember many instances where requiring a developer to comply has killed a development, but it's still pretty prevalent and, like lower bricktown, these variances can often stunt an area to a point where major changes (and investment) would be needed to fully realize an area's potential and bring it in line with the original vision that informed the guidelines in the first place. And, as pointed out above, no one would want to locate a development in some of these areas without the major investment made by the public. So, IMO, if there were ever examples for justification of strict design and development oversight by local government entities, bricktown and C2S are it.

Maybe Devon and its proxies have earned the right to turn historic city blocks into urban dead zones dominated by parking, but I don't think any developer should think they are above city guidelines if they want to build within close proximity to a more than $130 million investment by the people of OKC to create an inciting new park district for the community.

OKCTalk - 5-story Fairfield Inn planned for Core to Shore (http://www.okctalk.com/content/128-fairfield.html)

Whats the timeline for demolition and construction?

Whats the timeline for demolition and construction?

The demolition request will be reviewed by the DDRC next week.

No timeline was given for the hotel construction but I'm sure that will come out in the meeting.

If it ends up like their Residence Inn in Tulsa I'm all for this.

There will be no legitimate way for the city to slow this down for the CC project without a regulatory taking that would be an inverse condemnation...

But if the design is lacking in any way, this could be a good instance for DDRC to set some precedent for a few weeks.

I said this elsewhere but remember that they are also group behind the Canopy project at Sheridan & Oklahoma.

And as the Holiday Inn Express has demonstrated, how a property turns out has much more to do with the developer than the hotel flag.

What timing!
They sure had good insight.

I said this elsewhere but remember that they are also group behind the Canopy project at Sheridan & Oklahoma.

And as the Holiday Inn Express has demonstrated, how a property turns out has much more to do with the developer than the hotel flag.

Pete,

Were you able to find out if this will be an all brick structure? Or when we will see design plans?

Pete,

Were you able to find out if this will be an all brick structure? Or when we will see design plans?

You mean for the Canopy?

No, no design has been revealed and now they even have another group competing for the Canopy flag on the Bodyworks site.

So, I have no idea where that project stands right now.