More Intrigue on the MidTown Mercy Hospital Property
The Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority is taking its third shot at trying to find the right development mix for the old Mercy Hospital site at NW 13 and Walker in MidTown.
On the second go-around I noted the following bit of intrigue:
Urban Renewal commissioners have as a guide a citizen’s review report that recommends Overholser Greens, praising it for complementing Heritage Hills neighborhood to the north and criticizing Mercy Park because it includes apartments and retail.
But a look at the membership of the citizen’s committee shows that while it includes a longtime resident of Heritage Hills, it doesn’t include anyone from MidTown.
The Mercy site is in MidTown — not Heritage Hills.
Greg Banta, who is developing more than 30 properties in MidTown and is one of the district’s most influential voices, isn’t taking sides and was not invited to participate in the review.
But he questions the citizen group’s comments against retail. He wonders — isn’t mixed retail what urban development is all about?
What followed the next four years shows such concerns were well-placed. Chuck Wiggin won the development bid even as Urban Renewal commissioners were being warned that his model of high dollar condos – the one favored by the Heritage Hills crowd – was about to crash. The mix of apartments and retail pitched by his unsuccessful competitor, Marva Ellard, is now being sought out as the goal with this latest effort to redevelop the site.
So now the Urban Renewal Authority will be meeting at 10:30 a.m. Wednesday to possibly decide which of the five current proposals they will want to hear – essentially by doing so they will be narrowing the list down to a group of finalists no matter how much they might deny it.
So the the report that was sent to commissioners on Friday will weigh quite a bit on who they might choose to advance to the final round.
I’m calling this report out. I am questioning whether this report was either badly written or written with the purpose of steering selection to one developer over the others.
Consider what some might say are blatant contradictions:
- The proposal by Marva Ellard is cited for being “suburban” in its footprint, and yet the proposal by Chuck Wiggin, which is almost identical to Ellard’s, is praised for being “urban.”
- Wiggin and yet another team, Mike Henderson and Gary Brooks, are given credit for their experience with Urban Renewal on previous projects, and yet there is no mention of how either team failed to meet deadlines on their previous projects, and Ellard is not given credit for her experience as part of the original team with The Hill in Deep Deuce.
- The exterior elevation on Wiggin’s proposal is knocked for looking “institutional.” Yet it features a retail mix on the first floor, and from my view, it was remarkably similar in scale to the much praised exterior elevation for the Henderson/Brooks proposal. There is also no mention in the report about how drawings submitted by Henderson and Brooks for their last Urban Renewal project, Legacy at Arts Quarter, were dramatically altered by the time the project was actually built. Did the committee not discuss this at all? If it wasn’t, why not? And if it was, why not include that in the evaluation of the Henderson/Brooks proposal?
- Another “huh” moment occurs with the following critical comment on Ellard: “redeveloper’s availability to timely execute.” Really? Really? From what I saw, there is no difference in the scheduling and financing of these projects between Ellard, Henderson/Brooks and Wiggin. They all rely on HUD financing, which they all will have to apply for and go through the red tape of waiting for approval. Ellard and Henderson/Brooks have experience working with HUD (there is no indication of any experience for Wiggin). If any of the developers have an advantage in this category, it’s Tanenbaum, who has $20 million in financing READY and is most likely of any of this group to start construction this year.
- Ellard’s inclusion of retail space is listed as a “con” in the report, and yet it’s listed as a “pro” for Wiggin. Yet another “HUH?”
There’s more contradictions, I’m sure. I asked Urban Renewal director JoeVan Bullard to let me attend the committee discussion. I was denied the request on the basis of the old excuse of needing to foster a “free and open discussion” and that I’d get in the way of that. I’ve known Bullard for many years, I’ve known him to be an honest and hard-working civil servant. But this report makes me question – are there other reasons for not wanting “Lackmeyer in the room”?
Does this report really reflect the discussions of the committee, which consisted of Assistant City Manager Cathy O’Connor, Downtown Oklahoma City Inc. President Jane Jenkins, University of Oklahoma architecture professor Bob Goines, Oklahoma City Planning Director Russell Claus, Greater Oklahoma City Chamber economic development Vice President Robin Roberts-Kreiger, former Urban Renewal executive Dave Jones, St. Anthony Hospital President Joe Hodges, and Heritage Hills Association President Steve Jacobi.
Read the “committee report” and ask – is this written as an honest, fair evaluation of all proposals, or is it skewed toward one developer?
OCURA MERCY RFP REVIEW
Review Committee: 01 April 2011
Terry Taylor Joe Hodges Russell Claus
Catherine O’Connor Robert Goins David Jones
Robin Roberts-Krieger Jane Jenkins Steve Jacobi
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Committee member’s advocated principles, observations, and considerations to be applied for the potential redevelopment of the Mercy site are;
The important key elements in the redevelopment of the OCURA Mercy site should be accomplished through thoughtful negotiations that focus on an original, attractive, unique quality project of urban durability and sustainability which enhances and compliments the adjacent neighborhoods and becomes a “cornerstone” for additional Midtown redevelopment.
Architectural design integrity is essential for this “special” site.
A “back door” appearance on any side of the project should be avoided.
The project should have a residential quality appearance, establishing a defined and recognizable image that contributes to the protection of the Heritage Hills and Mesta Park neighborhoods.
Establishing a theme corner at NW 12th and Walker to encourage the continued retail\commercial redevelopment of Walker from the existing retail node concentrated at Walker and NW 10th needs to be explored.
Project design\layout should encourage and promote the continued redevelopment of NW 12th.
“Green” features and amenities should be incorporated throughout the entire project including “rooftop” venues adjacent to NW 12th.
Vehicular access from NW 13th is not desirable and should not be permitted.
Use of HUD financing (221(d)4) can be tedious and lengthy, which could slow the commencement of construction. Unfortunately, based on current market conditions HUD assisted funding appears to be the only source available other than private equity. However, founding a successful sustainable exclusive urban development should be the foremost consideration for this exclusive site.
OCURA MERCY SITE
Review Committee
April 01, 2011 Page 2
The Committee’s following general observations were derived from the Redeveloper’s proposal.
Connection at Midtown (Tanenbaum)
Unit sizes; 475 sf to 980 sf
Monthly rental; $1.18/sf to $1.38/sf
CONS
Suburban apartment appearance
Setback from property line
Compacted common area\space close to units
Parking access from NW 13th
Low equity investment
Durability and quality concerns due to low construction costs
No “character” on NW 12th
No commercial component on Walker
PROS
Good density of 268 units (97 units/acre)
Multi floor plans
Good access from parking structure levels to units
Good green landscape usage
Short construction period
Experienced developer with proven success record
The Marquette on Walker Option (Ellard)
Unit sizes; 697 sf to 1,553 sf
Monthly rental; $1.33/sf to $1.40/sf
CONS
Suburban appearance with divided structures
Low density of 150 units (54 units/acre)
Vehicle access from NW 13th, NW 12th, Walker and Dewey
Large commercial component on NW 13th, Walker and NW 12th
Large Commercial space: 49,450 sf
Redeveloper’s availability to timely execute
PROS
Good “green” elements (LEED)
Pedestrian entrances on all streets
Quality and durable project experience
Recognizes historical importance
Available parking for neighbors; church and school
OCURA MERCY SITE
Review Committee
April 01, 2011 Page 3
Edge at Midtown (Brooks-Henderson)
Unit sizes; 683 sf to 1,442 sf
Monthly rental; $.97/sf to $1.12/sf
CONS
Setback from property line
No commercial component on Walker
Visitor vehicle access from Walker not compatible with pedestrian usage
PROS
Good site plan
Good density of 250 units (91units/acre)
Good exterior elevation variances for historic appearances
Roof top amenities of dog park and community patio
Good parking structure aesthetics
Good location of parking structure with Dewey access
Direct access from parking structure levels to units
Good landscaping
Interacts with NW 12th
Flexible open living floor plans
Attractive street level unit entrances
Available parking for neighbors; church and school
Experienced with OCURA procedures and established success record
Mercy Site Redevelopment (Wiggin-Huffman)
Unit sizes; 500 sf to 1,500 sf)
Monthly rental; $1.25/sf
CONS
Exterior elevation lacks urban character, very “institutional”.
3 bedroom units; 56
Expensive project: construction, A&E, marketing, etc.
PROS
Good site plan
Quality and urban durability reflected in high project costs
Acceptable density of 200 units (73 units/acre)
Street level interaction on NW 12th
Direct access from parking structure levels to units
Parking not visible from streets, NW 12th access
Interacts with pedestrians
Focal point established at Walker/NW 12th
Good building heights at NW 13th and increased at NW 12th
Familiar with OCURA procedures, successful developer
Commercial component on Walker and NW 12th
Commercial space: 24,000 sf
OCURA MERCY SITE
Review Committee
April 01, 2011 Page 4
Old Mercy Site (J&M Farzaneh)
Unit size; 1,200 sf
Monthly rental; unknown
CONS
Suburban appearance
Low density of 80 to 160 units (29 to 58 units/acre)
Phased development
Garage &/or surface parking, Dewey access
Incomplete proposal
Large commercial component on NW 13th, NW 12th, Dewey and Walker
Commercial space: 36,000 sf to 68,000 sf
Summary
The Committee thought none of the submittals were “perfect” and encourages the Authority to exercise rigorous supervision and control over the final design of the project and subsequent development.
The Committee acknowledges is it difficult to determine the “true numbers and design quality characteristics” based on preliminary concepts. The overall strength of the proposal, related experience of the developer, general vision of the redevelopment project, ability to perform in a reasonable time frame, and preliminary fiscal resources described in the proposal can be important criteria in arriving at conclusions.
The Committee members would also like to acknowledge their appreciation and opportunity for being invited to serve on the OCURA review committee. Should any additional information or assistance be desired, the Committee will be happy to respond.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
This makes me ill. This is the kind of crap THE ALLIANCE will do.
A Henderson/Brooks’s developement would kill Midtown. … The Henderson/Brooks projects should stay on Memorial like the other three big projects just like this he has in developement. They’re just trying to make another big flip (like the Legacy sale)to a out of state Reit or Pension.
Midtown NEEDS to stay local.
Before Wiggin is considered AGAIN his Mayo Building residential project should be looked at more closely. Is it at optimal occupancy and financially viable? I’ve heard that it is not.
As far as I know that is the only multi family project he has done.
He’s had over FOUR years to come up with a viable plan.. what’s different now? Obviously, he didn’t have the financing to do the first or any other residential alternative.
The report states that HUD is the most likely financing vehicle. Wiggin has never done a HUD project. Does anyone actually think HUD would let him learn on a $40 million project?
Mike I’m not able to find any reports on the Mayo 420′s performance. As for the risk of selling to an out-of-state group, to be fair that can occur with any of these developers – “flipping” to another buyer is, after all, a routine way for real estate professionals to make money.
From the tone of this article I hear a Ellard mentioned as someone that is being overlooked. I have met Marva and she is a wonderful person. But let us look at the Sieber. The ground floors are still vacant. The rent is very high and there is not much parking. I can see the board being reluctant. Saying that some of the other plans do sound much too urban.This IS Midtown, not Heritage Hills. Retail should include dry cleaners, beauty/barber shops and other service merchants. But to do this there must be a bit of thought. This is all new to OKC and it is going to take a thought or two. Good luck to all involved.
You’re making a mistake if you suggest that I’m saying Ellard is being overlooked. Indeed, one could argue that if density and achieving a high number of units is the goal with this site, she clearly fares poorly in this category (but I didn’t see that in the RFP).
Instead, what I’m questioning is whether this report was written to UNFAIRLY SLANT IN FAVOR of one party over the others.
As minister of the church across the street from the old Mercy Site, I am following this process closely particularly as it reflects parking and traffic flow. I question the suggestion (which was not in the design requirement of the RFP) that no entrance to the project be planned from 13th Street and the suggestion that the 12th street renovation not be detrimentally effected. Does that mean all the access off Dewey and Walker? If the highest density project 270 units–which could easily be 350 resident cars is all funneled onto Dewey and Walker it will severely harm our access and I believe endanger possible pedestrian traffic from the development to Villa Teresa. I wonder if 250 plus units will generate more vehicular traffic than the area can support. Do we have comparable urban transition projects to use as models to understand the traffic flow?
Mark, I can tell you that the Park Harvey and Legacy projects both have similar density and I’ve not seen any major traffic issues with either.
Shelly, one other note: during a recent visit with Ellard I was told the Sieber is fully leased and that a deal is in the works for the first floor restaurant space.
Looks like we have an answer on the Mayo 420 Apartments, thanks to Michael Bates, host of http://www.batesline.com in Tulsa (a site that features some of the best urban planning discussions to be found online in Oklahoma).
He provides a link to a story that appeared earlier this year in the Tulsa Business Journal. Here’s an outtake:
“Owned by the Mayo 420 LLC and managed by Wiggin Properties LLC, the building offers 34 one-bedroom units and 33 two-bedroom units ranging in size from 600 to 2,000 SF on floors 2 through 10. Wiggin Properties Vice President Emily Rohleder said she began leasing properties in June. Today, all of the one-bedroom units are leased, and the remaining finished units are going quickly.”
Read the whole story at http://tulsabusiness.com/main.asp?SectionID=24&SubSectionID=90&ArticleID=52159
Thanks for your call for more transparency in the decision-making process Steve. I’m a Mesta Park resident and member of First Unitarian (the church facing the property on Dewey). I, along with a number of people affiliated with the Oklahoma Sponsoring Committee (OSC) went to view the proposals down at Urban Renewal over the past month. OSC is a coalition of about 23 congregations and nonprofits that have come together to work towards making OKC a better place to live for ordinary families. Part of what we were looking for is how friendly some of these proposals would be toward seniors, since there are no Mid-Town options for many people in our congregations who have lived in Mid-Town for decades, and thus their lives are here. Currently, many feel like they have to be uprooted and moved outside of where everything happens, including their neighbors and church. We would have liked to see more universal access features on at least some of the units proposed. But I know I felt, as I learned more about how these processes work, that above all the decision-making needs to be open (transparent to citizens), especially so because we’re talking about public institutions and public money involved. We’re happy to see more reasonable rental price ranges, and the green aspects highlighted well in several proposals. Parking is something we are very concerned with, and for that reason are worried about a few and like that aspect of Cornerstone’s proposal (40 spaces open to general public). As that’s a property bordering historic neighborhoods (and yes, MESTA PARK is right there too) – the height of the Wiggins proposal at 5 stories is a worry. To us, there are many issues to consider thorough, and I agree with everything that is at stake, every developer needs to be heard by the committee. And I agree with you again, that this should not be closed door. Open decision-making should allow for you and other citizens to respectfully hear the process and understand how the decision is reached.
If anyone is concerned about the height of a structure in Midtown then they should open their eyes a bit. Midtown is an urban environment. I’d bring on all the midrises in the world if we could.
Wow! That is truly ridiculous and infuriating.
Thanks, Steve, for keeping an eye on this and writing about it. Please do all you can to keep exposing this kind of stuff and keep pressuring those in charge. Stuff like this will quickly lead to a loss of faith in the people who run our city and its constituent parts.