Hey All...

I live just around the corner from NW 192nd & N May. At the SE corner there sure is a lot of activity...several bulldozers and other earth moving equipment. Anyone know whats going on???!!!

Thanks!!

On the immediate southeast corner, from the Oklahoma County Assessor:
Account Number: R186692075
Physical Address:
Owner Name1: OK DEER CREEK APARTMENTS LLC
Owner Name2: ATTN MICHAEL SCOTT

Appears to be an apartment complex.

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/64586509_10106883723719452_7829651648904429568_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_oc=AQnlNs-tmtVvGuAXBTmwRtZudkEpCyyRIt2hRl1hPSIRE9hffKPuXaj6c fDUQ8Zw7UyuRePdtMtdim026gJOf8Yi&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=7be9e5c7b11f1fa34c668af203728430&oe=5E12B889

Well there goes the neighborhood.

If it follows the pattern for apartments along May north of Memorial it’s gonna be pretty pricey to live there.

On the immediate southeast corner, from the Oklahoma County Assessor:
Account Number: R186692075
Physical Address:
Owner Name1: OK DEER CREEK APARTMENTS LLC
Owner Name2: ATTN MICHAEL SCOTT

Appears to be an apartment complex.

Or possibly a Paper Company.

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/64586509_10106883723719452_7829651648904429568_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_oc=AQnlNs-tmtVvGuAXBTmwRtZudkEpCyyRIt2hRl1hPSIRE9hffKPuXaj6c fDUQ8Zw7UyuRePdtMtdim026gJOf8Yi&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=7be9e5c7b11f1fa34c668af203728430&oe=5E12B889

What is the small square in the upper right corner of this image? Is it owned by someone else?

What is the small square in the upper right corner of this image? Is it owned by someone else?

Not a fan whatsoever of the complex going in; but would take an OnCue or new style 7-Eleven on that square spot if it’s large enough for that kind of development.

Oh no, apartments in Edmond! Better move to Jones or Piedmont now!

Oh no, apartments in Edmond! Better move to Jones or Piedmont now!

Don't you dare Edmond my Jones!

Oh no, apartments in Edmond! Better move to Jones or Piedmont now!

192nd/May isn't in Edmond. It may have an Edmond address, but it's in OKC.

192nd/May isn't in Edmond. It may have an Edmond address, but it's in OKC.

Was curious how long it'd take for that to be mentioned lol.

Not a fan whatsoever of the complex going in; but would take an OnCue or new style 7-Eleven on that square spot if it’s large enough for that kind of development.

At one time, there was a grocery type store development that was suppose to occupy the opposite corner at 192nd and May. Not sure what ever came of it...

https://agenda.okc.gov/sirepub/cache/2/nvp4c2u4ui2smq3oad2sno55/303570709042019084506865.PDF

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/64586509_10106883723719452_7829651648904429568_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_oc=AQnlNs-tmtVvGuAXBTmwRtZudkEpCyyRIt2hRl1hPSIRE9hffKPuXaj6c fDUQ8Zw7UyuRePdtMtdim026gJOf8Yi&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=7be9e5c7b11f1fa34c668af203728430&oe=5E12B889

I don't see any record anywhere that the PUD-1028 was modified or otherwise rezone to allow for those apartments, nor do I see any record of any public notification, etc. in front of the planning & zoning folks or to residents directly. Even the homeowners whose property will directly border the apartments were not notified whatsoever.

It would seem that an apartment complex goes entirely against the comprehensive plan for the area and it's odd that it got approved without so much as a whisper from anybody.

Any thoughts on what's going on with that?

Nobody can find any approvals anywhere that PUD-1028 (Valencia's PUD) was ever modified or otherwise rezoned to allow apartments. It would also appear to be entirely against the comprehensive plan for the area for these to be allowed, and none of the residents were ever notified that this was going on.

What's the deal?

Nobody can find any approvals anywhere that PUD-1028 (Valencia's PUD) was ever modified or otherwise rezoned to allow apartments. It would also appear to be entirely against the comprehensive plan for the area for these to be allowed, and none of the residents were ever notified that this was going on.

What's the deal?

It is zoned R-4. So it would be allowed.

The R-4 District is a higher density residential district which encourages multiple-family and group residential developments, and represents a broad variety of housing types and densities. The regulations are designed to facilitate infill residential development and development close to non-residential uses.

Nobody can find any approvals anywhere that PUD-1028 (Valencia's PUD) was ever modified or otherwise rezoned to allow apartments.

The Valencia PUD Exhibit E appears to be apartments and in Section 7.5 Building Restrictions 7.5.2 states the buildings shall be a maximum height of 3 stories or 2 stories adjacent to R1 or R2 zoning.

Section 5 of the PUD also states that Multifamily residential use is anticipated for a tract at the northwest corner of the site.

That sounds like apartments were the plan for that tract from the beginning.

i'm surprised to see that so many of the neighbors have come out against this development. if it is built, you could end up seeing a very nice nail salon and donut shoppe installed in the vicinity.

and let's not kid ourselves, Valencia is a far cry from Coffee Creek, which had apartments built on an adjacent parcel.

this should go forward.

In 2009 we purchased a home in Valencia. The sales office had a big poster of the master plan hanging on the wall, and even 10 years ago the master plan had that corner marked for apartments.

With how many houses are packed in there as well as the Grove, these apts will probably have less density :)

Hopefully is doesn't turn out like Lyrewood Apartments. Fun times over their back in the early 90s.

Hopefully is doesn't turn out like Lyrewood Apartments. Fun times over their back in the early 90s.

Lyrewood is in a class of its own. That's like comparing apples to hand grenades. :D

I assume there are lots of "we are not against apartments, but just not here." and "this will harm the investment we've made into our house and what about the traffic!" Wouldnt be surprised if there have been actual tears over this too.

Hopefully is doesn't turn out like Lyrewood Apartments. Fun times over their back in the early 90s.

lol

This Change.org page is something else, especially the description.

We are attending the formal planning commission meeting on Thursday September 12, 2019 at 1:30pm and we are hoping our local News media will bring the attention to the public and seek help in fighting the corruption that involves all of these LLC’s and the responsibility they have to our community to do the right thing and not overcrowd our schools that are already highly sought out and help us fight the conglomerates that will overcrowd our children’s schools and potentially hurt their educations because we only have a certain amount of funding from our bonds as it stands!

Nice run on sentence. Fight the "conglomerates" and this will "hurt their educations"? Huh? Who are these conglomerates messing with educations? :rolleyes:
https://www.change.org/p/oklahoma-city-councilman-protect-our-communities-future-and-our-kids-schools

I wonder what came of it since the meeting was Sept 13.

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

Side rant, it always makes me laugh when someone moves to a certain area to have their children attend a certain school. However, when an apt complex is built and maybe someone who can't afford a home wants to give their children the same opportunity, they basically get looked down upon. C'mon people.

I had occasion to drive by it the other day.

Looks like they broke ground, and there is tons of pipe and construction materials stacked on the location. I'm guessing they got some sort of green light.

It's called 35° North @ Deer Creek.

Side rant, it always makes me laugh when someone moves to a certain area to have their children attend a certain school. However, when an apt complex is built and maybe someone who can't afford a home wants to give their children the same opportunity, they basically get looked down upon. C'mon people.

They don't want the apartment dwellers there, but they don't want to come out and say it. Instead they blame over burdening Deer Creek school system instead, the whole time ignoring the fact that all those housing additions that keep sprouting up out there put far more load on the system than that apartment complex will.

Exactly. Like I said before the density of Valencia and the Grove is probably greater than these apt complexes lol

It is zoned R-4. So it would be allowed.

The R-4 District is a higher density residential district which encourages multiple-family and group residential developments, and represents a broad variety of housing types and densities. The regulations are designed to facilitate infill residential development and development close to non-residential uses.

Yep. You're right. Shortly after I posted I was able to dig up the rest of the documentation I was looking for on this and it wouldn't let me go back and edit for some reason.

It appears that the complex was part of the design from the get-go. In my professional life I deal with a lot of infrastructure planning and analytics and, based on what I can see from the initial information, the apartment complex would actually result in less overall population increase compared to if it was developed to the same lot and home size standards as the rest of the subdivision. While I certainly feel bad for the immediately adjacent property owners, I'm not sure that the arguments about strain on infrastructure, etc. will have much merit if there's anybody in the room that has any planning/development background at all.

Yep. You're right. Shortly after I posted I was able to dig up the rest of the documentation I was looking for on this and it wouldn't let me go back and edit for some reason.

It appears that the complex was part of the design from the get-go. In my professional life I deal with a lot of infrastructure planning and analytics and, based on what I can see from the initial information, the apartment complex would actually result in less overall population increase compared to if it was developed to the same lot and home size standards as the rest of the subdivision. While I certainly feel bad for the immediately adjacent property owners, I'm not sure that the arguments about strain on infrastructure, etc. will have much merit if there's anybody in the room that has any planning/development background at all.

Lol, why feel bad for the immediately adjacent property owners when it's clearly stated in Post #19 that plans for apartments at this intersection have been known since at least 2009? Good grief.