The Bower

[Urbanized]

Whenever a development is proposed with large balconies, like Broadway Park, it usually gets considerable NIMBY opposition. Any idea why?

Boradway Park’s originally-proposed balconies hung out over the public right-of-way. This is a critical difference that most people didn’t seem to understand when criticizing the criticism. This is almost always frowned upon in an urban area, especially when said balconies are affixed to the façade or cantilevered with no support from below. I honestly can’t even remember how it all ended up. I personally got super-frustrated by the messaging from all parties involved and just stopped caring.

You’ll note that the balconies at The Bower don’t extend past the property line, at least on the sidewalk frontage shown in the rendering.

[dankrutka]

Urbanized, can you explain why balconies extending past the public right of way is a problem?

[bradh]

Public ROW typically exists for a reason, whether it be for safety, or infrastructure, or some other potential need. Seems like I guess you could extend balconies into the ROW, but if government needs it or damages it you have zero recourse.

[Urbanized]

Urbanized, can you explain why balconies extending past the public right of way is a problem?

Brad explains it pretty well, but encroachment over public ROW is usually frowned upon for reasons public safety, drainage, ongoing maintenance and air rights. If allowed, who is responsible for maintaining the balconies? Seems cut and dried, but this has been disputed in some communities. If not properly maintained, they can become a safety issue for pedestrians. If the community believes a balcony has become unsafe, can they force a property owner to do so? What if the building becomes derelict? Obviously not a concern today, but what about 20 years from now? If the City allows a balcony encroachment and a collapse occurs, is the City liable?

How does the balcony drain? Is it going to retain water and pour it onto pedestrians when the wind kicks up? Will it sheet rain onto the sidewalk below during a rain event? What about items falling/rolling off of the balcony onto pedestrians walking below?

What if the City needs to do utilities work? What if the balcony obstructs required equipment? Who is financially responsible for taking the balcony down and restoring it?

Finally, if a property owner is building the balcony as an amenity, why should taxpayers give up air rights just so that the property owner can maximize leaseable square footage? Is this good stewardship of public assets on the part of the City?

Of course, there are examples of balconies over public ROW, the best probably being New Orleans, especially in the French Quarter. Key West is another example. But generally these are grandfathered in historic applications, the are almost always supported from below (posts anchored into sidewalk), and usually they function more like a canopy, running the full length of the façade. Short, unsupported balconies are more likely to lead to the problems pointed out above.

[dankrutka]

Thank you to you both. Very informative.

[streettree]

Things such as overhangs and even balconies can be allowed to project into the public right-of-way. In order to do this, you must file for a revocable permit with the city. This process includes providing details of the proposed construction and also requires signatures from all of the local utilities prior to applying for review by the city, so there are some hoops to jump through. If at some point the city determines that it is necessary, they can require the owner to remove the portion of the building that extends over the property line, thus making a portion of the building permit revocable.

[Pete]

[Urbanized]

Things such as overhangs and even balconies can be allowed to project into the public right-of-way. In order to do this, you must file for a revocable permit with the city. This process includes providing details of the proposed construction and also requires signatures from all of the local utilities prior to applying for review by the city, so there are some hoops to jump through. If at some point the city determines that it is necessary, they can require the owner to remove the portion of the building that extends over the property line, thus making a portion of the building permit revocable.

Yes, this is absolutely correct. That said, there are plenty of valid reasons to discourage this and instead encourage balconies to remain within the property lines. Unfortunately when that discussion was taking place regarding Broadway Park, many casual observers wrongly interpreted the line of questioning as a general anti-balcony bias.

[Pete]

They aren't messing around...

Have already filed for their building permits.

[KayneMo]

They aren't messing around...

Have already filed for their building permits.

Wow! Awesome. Looking forward to seeing more infill.

[warreng88]

Downtown OKC condo, town home development gets design approval

By: Molly M. Fleming The Journal Record January 18, 2018

OKLAHOMA CITY – Downtown’s western side is getting for-sale housing in 2019.

The Downtown Design Review Committee approved developer Richard McKown’s plan to build 32 residences at NW Fourth Street and N. Lee Avenue. He’s with City Center Development LLC. Allford Hall Monaghan Morris architect Dan Govin designed the development.

The project, being called The Bower at 4th & Lee, received few questions from the DDRC. Committee member Connie Scothorn asked after Govin’s presentation when she could buy one of the homes.

City Center Development LLC Real Estate Manager Kara Bundren said the homes are not for sale yet, but people can be put on a waiting list. She said she and McKown still have to get construction bids. They are hoping to sell the homes in the low $300,000s.

This is Govin and McKown’s sixth project together. They also worked together on McKown’s multifamily developments such as Level and Mosaic.

“This is a higher-end unit that we’re proposing here,” Govin said. “We’ve done a lot of market research to try and get this product right. What we feel the community needs in this area (of the city) is high-quality owner-occupied housing.”

The development has three main buildings. The tall building on the property’s north side has 24 condominiums. The two buildings closer to the street hold eight town homes in total. The town homes range from two bedrooms to four bedrooms. Each town home has a private, enclosed garage.

Govin said it was difficult to get the mix of unit sizes on the site because of the anticipated cost of construction.

“We’re seeing a lot of new residential development in this area,” Govin said. “We see this new density as a positive thing in Oklahoma City. “The mixed uses and mixed density, all of these are keys to a vital downtown. We see these units as appealing to young, growing families, people who want to take advantage of all the culture and opportunities that downtown has to offer.”

Downtown resident Brett Price spoke in favor of the development at Thursday’s meeting. He said he appreciated the thoughtfulness that went into engaging the street and putting the city’s new streetscape plan into place.

DDRC member and architect Anthony Blatt commended Govin on his work, though he offered some critical thoughts on the materials that were being used.

“I think it’s an excellent project,” Blatt said. “The way you treated this is exactly what you wanted to see in a mixed-use urban environment.”

[Urban Pioneer]

I used to own the property directly east of this site. From personal experience, convincing the city to narrow the street width would go a long way to making the area more initimate and more residential feelinging. 4th Street is excessively wide for the traffc volume it handles. It is actually unnecessairly difficult to cross as a pedestrian.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
I’ve heard this openly discussed in some influential circles. Hope it comes to pass.

[Pete]

Here is what they are doing on N. Western between NW 18th & NW 23rd; took this Saturday.

They really need to do something similar for NW 4th, 5th and 6th to the west of downtown.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
After resurfacing that will be re-striped with a bicycle lane too. This is a great retrofit of a street that was being utilized as a fast cut-trough. Brings the lane number down to the same as the rest of Western. My only gripe is the lollipop lights in the middle. We are so married to a visibile-by-daylight old-timey aesthetic that we install streetlights with terrible glare, which is dangerous for autos and cyclists/pedestrians. This is a huge part of the problem on Broadway also. We need to be installing lighting with a configuration like the Project 180 lights, that is, the light source should be shielded and pooled onto the pavement instead of hitting you in the retina as you drive down the street, giving you the same relative effect as oncoming headlights. Light needs to be pointed at the things you're trying to watch out for.

Drive down Sheridan in Film Row and contrast that light with the light on Broadway, paying attention to how easy/difficult it is to see people on the sidewalks or in the crosswalks in each place. It's a no-brainer.

[HOT ROD]

Here is what they are doing on N. Western between NW 18th & NW 23rd; took this Saturday.

They really need to do something similar for NW 4th, 5th and 6th to the west of downtown.

^ And ditch the telephone poles. ..

[HangryHippo]

^^^^^^^
After resurfacing that will be re-striped with a bicycle lane too. This is a great retrofit of a street that was being utilized as a fast cut-trough. Brings the lane number down to the same as the rest of Western. My only gripe is the lollipop lights in the middle. We are so married to a visibile-by-daylight old-timey aesthetic that we install streetlights with terrible glare, which is dangerous for autos and cyclists/pedestrians. This is a huge part of the problem on Broadway also. We need to be installing lighting with a configuration like the Project 180 lights, that is, the light source should be shielded and pooled onto the pavement instead of hitting you in the retina as you drive down the street, giving you the same relative effect as oncoming headlights. Light needs to be pointed at the things you're trying to watch out for.

Drive down Sheridan in Film Row and contrast that light with the light on Broadway, paying attention to how easy/difficult it is to see people on the sidewalks or in the crosswalks in each place. It's a no-brainer.

This was my issue. The lights are all wrong.

[Plutonic Panda]

^ And ditch the telephone poles. ..

UGGGH! Don’t even get ma started about that. When will OKC start burying its lines!

[TheTravellers]

UGGGH! Don’t even get ma started about that. When will OKC start burying its lines!

Never, ever, ever. It would cost too much money for anybody (OG&E, city/county/state government) to do.

[bradh]

What are you talking about? New areas everything is buried.

[TheTravellers]

What are you talking about? New areas everything is buried.

Yeah, I know that, and pretty sure PluPan does too, and I suspect he was asking when existing lines will be buried (but maybe not). I can pretty much guarantee you that anything existing will not have their poles pulled out and the lines buried in the same place, that just ain't gonna happen.

[bradh]

Well yeah, you're talking rewiring the electric to half the cities homes...you're right no one is going to pay for that. Best you can do on this case is just use best practices available at this point and move on.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah, I know that, and pretty sure PluPan does too, and I suspect he was asking when existing lines will be buried (but maybe not). I can pretty much guarantee you that anything existing will not have their poles pulled out and the lines buried in the same place, that just ain't gonna happen.

You’re right. I am talking about that. You’re probably right again most places won’t opt to do that as it is pretty expensive but the aesthetic reward is worth the Che coss. I know in several places around Dallas and Florida they have buried existing utility lines when they reconstruct or widen a road.

[TheTravellers]

You’re right. I am talking about that. You’re probably right again most places won’t opt to do that as it is pretty expensive but the aesthetic reward is worth the Che coss. I know in several places around Dallas and Florida they have buried existing utility lines when they reconstruct or widen a road.

That might be do-able, and would be nice to see, but again, I doubt it'll happen here, not enough money or will to do it, IMO.

[Pete]

Even though I live in a 1960's neighborhood near Penn Square, all the utilities on my street are buried.

And someone actually had the forethought to put the a/c condenser way on the other side of the garage, away from the main part of the backyard. You would never see or hear unless you went looking for it.

It's two little things that make a big difference and one of the reasons I bought this house.