Emily Fitzsimmons
The Commons EN D-3893-001, Fall 2018
Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………..2 Background Summary…………………………………………….3 Planning & Zoning………………………………………………….6 Site Context………………………………………………………....9 Market Conditions & Finance………………...………………..12 Public & Private Partnerships…………………………………...15 Design & Critique………………………………..………………..18 Marketing & Management…………………………………..…22
Final Thoughts……………………………………………………...24 Works Cited…………………………………………………...…...26
Design Review Proposal (“Application for”)
1
Executive Summary In December of 2016, the apartment complex titled The Commons opened for business as affordable senior living in downtown Oklahoma City. The Commons offers a wide variety of floorplans for both handicapped and non-handicapped residents as well as many amenities, from an outdoor courtyard to a craft room to in-unit laundry and much more. Ever since the project was a mere thought in someone’s head at the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma (NHSO), the organization that instigated the development, The Commons was meant to be completely low-income housing. In particular, the NHSO wished to build homes downtown for elderly Oklahomans in the low-income brackets to help meet the everincreasing need for affordable housing. As a result, this project cultivated a strong public relationship through the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). So long as the development meets certain criteria regarding the percentage of units reserved for low-income
residents, which The Commons does, the LIHTC pays the developer back a certain amount of the costs each year. This allows the rent to be low for quality living spaces. However, when The Commons was first seeking approval from the Planning Commission, City Council, and the Design
Review Committee, there was dissent from the community in the area and online. Some opposed the project for aesthetic reasons, while many disputed the development because of prejudices against government-
2
funded housing. In response to this, The Commons hosted meetings with the public as well as released videos showcasing the building and people involved to improve community opinion. The project developer, Belmont Management Company, also chose design elements that would satisfy the goals of the city, the NHSO, and senior living best practices. More could have been regarding design and publicity, but, still, The Commons successfully adds income and age diversity to the downtown area, thus strengthening Oklahoma City’s core.
Background Summary The story of The Commons at 1320 Classen Drive began, incidentally, at 1320 Classen Drive. From 1911 to 2001, the lot passed hands between a variety of hospital organizations; from 2001 to 2015, the existing building served as the headquarters for the non-profit Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma, or NHSO (Sullivan). At that time, the NHSO was
seeking property downtown to develop affordable homes in order to help address the housing crisis, but the group could only find cheap land on the peripheries of Oklahoma City and beyond. As a result, the organization ruled to renovate their current building into an apartment building. However, along the development process, that plan was deemed unfeasible, so, instead, on August 18, 2015, the old headquarters were demolished to make way for the “first
Previous Structure (Sullivan)
Current Structure (Sullivan)
3
new affordable housing built downtown in decades” on the same lot where the idea was born (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). The NHSO did not achieve this feat by themselves, however. Other key contributors in the process included Belmont Management Company, Hixon Construction Company, and Structure Floorplan (Sullivan)
local citizens. Belmont Management Company,
led and founded by Ryan Hudspeth in 2007, specializes in developing affordable housing through the Low-Income Housing Credit program; thus far, the company has completed thirtyone enterprises throughout Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma. Belmont came into play as the developers of The Commons (Belmont Development). Hixon Construction Company aided in design and built the complex, and the three groups together
analyzed the budget, loan possibilities, city comprehensive plan, and neighborhood fit (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). In addition to the professionals, the local citizens and neighborhood organizations participated in public discussions about the development to ensure that the end result would fit in with the area (Anderson). Completed at the end of 2016, The Commons on Classen stands on a 1.06-acre lot with 40,254 sq. feet of building. The location type is infill because the previous building – except for its basement, which now serves as a storm shelter for the complex – was demolished so that
The Commons could be constructed. Despite the reutilization of the basement, The Commons’ build type is still considered new development, and the use type is residential (Sullivan). The complex consists of forty-eight units, which includes four studio apartments, four two-bedroom apartments, and forty one-bedroom apartments; there are eight different floorplans to choose from, including multiple handicap accessible options. The apartments include bathroom grab
4
bars, ceiling fans, central heat and air, kitchen appliances, in-unit washers and dryers, and balconies in select units. Additionally, the developers purposely included energy efficient components, such as windows with high R-values, energy star appliances, foam insulation, and programmable thermostats, in order to keep the residents’ utility bills low. Water, sewer, and trash are also included with rent, and all apartments are cable and internet ready. As for the general property, amenities include an indoor gym, multiple community rooms, a computer lab, and an outdoor area with a grill, playground, and splash pad. The development location is also ideal because it is near both public transit and shops (Belmont).
Belmont Staff (“About”)
Through the combined forces of the Belmont Management Company, Hixon Construction Company, NHSO, and local residents, Midtown now has a new addition to combat the housing crisis. The developers successfully created a comfortable, enjoyable home available and affordable to those who need it. From handicap accessibility and energy efficiency to a splash pad and library, The Commons on 1320 Classen Drive is a rare gem of
affordability and quality of life that enhances the affordable housing movement. Design Review Proposal (“Applications for”)
5
Planning & Zoning In December of 2013, the infant project of 1320 Classen Dr. was loathed by the neighboring residents. According to reporter Steve Lackmeyer, the opposition attempted to persuade City Council to deny the project Affordable Housing Tax Credits, arguing that the building was too bulky and too tall to fit in the surrounding area (“Midtown”). The project skimmed by 5-to-4 with the Mayor’s vote against approval (“Journal”). Likewise, the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma
Landscaping Plan (“Minutes” 8)
(NHSO) held a public forum the month before in which only two citizens attended, though neither exhibited hostility towards the project (“Memorandum” 2). Fortunately, opinion improved as time progressed and as
the developer hosted more discussions with community organizations about how to design The Commons to better suit the area (Anderson). One year after the 5-to-4 vote from City Council, The Commons was approved unanimously by the Design Review Committee and continued to be approved for the various changes and permits they applied for (“Minutes”). The development is fairly new, but the priorities of the developer already shine through the design. Even better, these principles match many of the general and specific goals
in Oklahoma City’s comprehensive plan, PlanOKC, particularly for the site’s zoning. So, though not supported by the community initially, the project would come to be supported by the city’s agenda. Located at the northern edge of Midtown, Oklahoma City, The Commons’ zoning is Downtown Transitional District Limited (DTD-1) (“Zoning”). As indicated in the 2014
6
Zoning Map (“Zoning”)
application to the Design Review Board, DTD-1 was also the zoning of the site prior to the complex’s development, so a zoning change was not required (“Application DTCA”). However, because the lot is in the DTD-1 zone, the company was required to undergo the scrutiny of the Downtown Design Committee Review in addition to the Planning Commission and City Council; this additional step ensured that the project followed the exterior design themes of downtown (“Downtown”). Through the input of citizens as well as designers, the project met the construction and design standards provided by the city. Prior to development into the apartment complex the building is today, the plot was the headquarters for the NHSO. Therefore, the Oklahoma City comprehensive plan still labels the site’s land use as “Office” (PlanOKC 137). The previous office building did not meet the comprehensive plan’s ideals extremely well; The Commons, on the other hand, is supported
in several ways by the comprehensive plan’s requirements and policies. First, the comprehensive plan labels the property’s Land Use Typology Area, or LUTA, as “UrbanHigh Density,” meaning there must be forty to one-hundred dwelling units per acre (59). The old structure was smaller than the current one and was surrounded by a disproportionate amount of open space, creating low density; meanwhile, the current complex meets the density requirement at forty-eight apartments on 1.06 acres (Sullivan). As for exterior design, the comprehensive plan demands that buildings
include “facades, storefront windows, and attractive signage and lighting to create pedestrian-scale visual interest” while avoiding long, blank walls (PlanOKC 59). The Commons achieves this through a curved, windowed front with a pleasant green space and sign to draw the
Design Proposal (“Minutes” 14)
7
eye; moreover, apartment entries face the street on the first floor while the parking lot hides in the back, creating a more appealing sight for pedestrians. PlanOKC also encourages designers to practice innovative architecture in order to best take advantage of a site; The Commons is a prime example of this because of its triangular shape that fits snugly into the oddly shaped lot (148). On a broader level, The Commons distinctly follows three of the seven general values in the city’s comprehensive plan. The first main idea is to “increase housing choice and diversity for all lifestyles”; this goal includes building a variety of homes, from
single-family houses to
LUTA Map (“Land”)
condominiums, so that any household can have many choices and opportunities (46). The Commons answers this need because it is an apartment complex for low-income elderly, thus catering to people with a range of ability and resource availability. The second value is to “develop efficiently to achieve fiscal sustainability and improve quality of life,” meaning that the city is encouraging population density in order to better conserve and distribute resources. Oklahoma City wants to do this through infill projects, smaller lots, and higher building density
(47). The Commons has furthered this goal by constructing high density residencies on an infill site; they even preserved and reused the old building’s basement for a storm shelter, saving money and materials. The third goal is to “develop a transportation system that works for everyone.” This objective strives to improve connection throughout the city with access to major arterial roads and quality alternative transportation infrastructure (46, 148). Incidentally,
8
The Commons is directly along a major arterial road, NW 13th St., as well as several bus stops. Not to mention, what better way to be connected to the city than to live in its downtown? Though The Commons had a rough start in gaining approval, the project eventually morphed into an excellent example of the principles of PlanOKC in addition to meeting the requirements for its zoning of DTD-1 and LUTA of Urban-High Density. The design is dense, aesthetically appealing to pedestrians, and creative in achieving both. The developer also aligned with multiple themes of the comprehensive plan, including expansion of housing opportunity for diverse lifestyles, efficient development, and access to the rest of the city. Because of these design decisions, The Commons contributes to and is supported by the comprehensive plan’s picture for an improved Oklahoma City.
Site Context Neighborhood Demographics: Top 5 Tapestry Segments 4. Social Security Set, 14.2% — This is the demographic who lives at The Commons (“Tapestry” 1) • Median income: $17,900 • 25% 65+; 13% are 75+ • Many are “dependent on low, fixed incomes, primarily Social Security” • Prefer high-rise apartments with low rent • Like to be near the lively parts of the city, like downtown • Need access to doctors, public transit, and community centers (“Social” 1) • 86.2% rent (3) 5. Young and Restless, 12.6% (“Tapestry” 1) • Median income: $40,500 • Educated/in college (“Young” 1) • 86.9% rent (3)
1. Hardscrabble Road, 17.2% (“Tapestry” 1) • Median income: $28,200 • Families or couples • 3/5 are renters • 19% have no vehicle (“Hardscrabble” 1) 2. Set to Impress, 16.7% (“Tapestry” 1) • Median income: $32,800 • ¾ are renters • Typically live in “large multiunit apartments with lower than average rents” • Prefer to bike or walk to work (“Set” 1) 3. Emerald City, 16.4% (“Tapestry” 1) • Median income: $59,200 • Well-employed and well-educated • Live in single-family homes, but half are renters (“Emerald” 1) 9
Top 5 Tapestry Segments (“Tapestry” 1)
Top Reasons Why This Site Was Chosen: 1. High population of low-income renters in the area •
This area would have been attractive to the developer because, as of 2010, 54.4% of homes within 5 minutes of the property were being rented, and that number is projected to grow to 59.9% by 2023 (“Community” 1).
•
Median income consistently stays around $36,000 in the 5, 10, and 15 minute areas around the site. In fact, the highest percentage of people in the 5, 10, 15 minute ranges make less than $15,000 (2).
•
As a complex that rents to senior citizens under a designated income, this would appeal to the developer because those already in the neighborhood are more likely to welcome federally-funded housing rather than shunning them for being less wealthy.
2. Appealing environment for the Social Security Set demographic that The Commons caters to •
The Commons is located in Midtown, right next to Downtown, and research shows that the senior citizens in the Social Security Set prefer to be where the city is liveliest (Google Maps; “Social” 1).
•
Within just 1/2 mile of The Commons, there are about 2 community/senior centers, 4 venues of entertainment, 5 green spaces, and 13 churches (Google Maps). As seniors age, they work less or not at all and must have access to activities with which to fill their time. Particularly relevant are ones that require little or no money, such as walking through parks or volunteering at their church.
3. Adequate resources and services to support the demographic •
Again, those in the Social Security Set consist of “an aging population that is often limited by medical conditions”; additionally, “vehicle ownership is low” amongst those who would rent at The Commons. Therefore, they must have access to public transit and medical services as well as discount stores, law firms, banks, and other services (“Social” 1). The area around The Commons has a plethora of all of these and more. Most relevant to the Social Security Set would be the 11 medical centers and the 18 bus stops within a 1/2 mile radius (Google Maps).
10
•
According to Esri, the area carries a high daytime population, 52,739 of which are workers within 5 minutes of The Commons. That number triples once expanded to the 10 minute area and doubles again for the 15 minute area. This means that there are plenty of stores and amenities very close to support this demographic’s needs (“Community” 1). In fact, 57.3% of workers within 5 minutes of The Commons are employed in the services industry (5).
4. Several overlapping neighborhood associations over the site •
•
Church Food Medical Retail (grocery, clothes, etc) Community/senior center Green spaces Public transit Entertainment Services (law firms, banks, hotels, accountants, etc)
The Medical Business District, the Urban Neighbors Neighborhood Association, the Downtown Oklahoma City, Inc., and the Midtown Redevelopment Corp. all overlap on The Commons’ lot (“Neighborhood”).
1/2 mile radius (Google Maps)
Though I foresee possible competition between 4 neighborhood associations, this means that there are several organizations looking out for the well-being of the area and seeking to improve it. 5. Walkability
5, 10, &15 Minute Travel Radii (“Site” 1)
Those who would live at The Commons have several reasons to limit car use or not own one at all, including lack of funds, saving gas money, and walking for exercise as well as transportation. •
The streets surrounding The Commons are somewhat wide with 2 lanes going each way. However, NW 13th St. has a speed limit of 35 while Classen Dr. has a speed limit of 25, which are both fairly low speeds. •
There is also an extensive sidewalk system throughout the entire area as well as crosswalks with crossing buttons and lights. •
11
•
Furthermore, the area has many street trees, which calm traffic, cast shade over the sidewalks, and help beautify the pedestrian experience (Google Maps).
6. Inexpensive land •
Lastly and most importantly, in order to make The Commons available at such low rates, the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma, the organization responsible for the apartment complex, needed cheaper land than they could find in downtown OKC. Therefore, they donated their own office building’s lot for the project, so there could be more affordable housing in the downtown area (Lackmeyer, “Developers”).
Market Conditions & Finance Inevitably, the market decides the fate of a development project; the cyclical booms and busts can make or break entire towns, even. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for a developer to analyze the past, present, and future financial conditions outside and within the proposed project. This includes residency rates, rent trends, supply, demand, building costs, and more. For low-income housing, such as The Commons, this process is slightly different but just as prevalent. For instance, rather than devoting time and resources in advertising to lenders, and, in turn raising the rent to meet the needs of the investors’ returns, the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma (NHSO) gained Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. This, in
Efficiency Apt. (Belmont)
addition to donating their own land to the development, allowed The Commons to place rent at relatively low prices. For their efficiency apartments, the rent is $500 while the 2-bedroom 12
apartments are $750; the rent for the 1-bedroom homes were not provided (Asemio). Participating in this program does limit the demographics that can live at The Commons: Half of the residents must receive an income 60% or below the average median income, and half must have an income 50% or lower of the average median income (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). However, as there is no shortage of low-income citizens, this only creates a high demand for The Commons, especially because most of Midtown and Downtown Oklahoma City has appreciated 62.46% since 2000 with an average annual rate of 2.66% (“Oklahoma City, OK”). This appreciation has caused many of the surrounding properties to have extremely high rents. For example, a large apartment complex named Lift debuted the summer before The Commons. Lift consists of 339 units, ranging from studios costing $915/month to 3-bedroom apartments costing $2,610/month (“Oklahoma City, Oklahoma” 12-13). Another example of downtown living is The Edge at Midtown. Their floorplans are each named after a unique natural wonder to convey their grandeur, and their rent prices match that luxury. The cheapest 1-bedroom
apartment, “Yosemite,” costs $1,197/month; the 1,711 ft² “Vesuvius” costs $2,699/month (“Oklahoma City Apartments”). These, of course, are not the only options downtown. In fact, there is another lowincome, senior living complex a few blocks east of The Commons called Wesley Village. They, too, accept the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit; however, a 1-
bedroom apartment there is more expensive than The Commons at $726/month (“Oklahoma City, OK, Low Accessible 2-Bedroom Apt. (Belmont)
Income”).
Before going forward with the project, the NHSO and Belmont Development not only would have examined surrounding housing but also the costs of their own project and the rents they would potentially charge in order to see if the enterprise was feasible. The Commons was a 13
$4.2 million project with $91,480 in demolition costs for the previous building (Asemio; Sullivan). According to the valuation history on the County Assessor’s page, The Commons’ 2016 market value was $139,050; however, this number is most likely so low because the complex was in the middle of construction. In 2017, the market value rose to $1,500,000. Additionally, because some of the residents are veterans, the Department of Veteran Affairs have also contributed Notices of Value, which match the 2016 value but not the 2017 one. Instead, the Notice of Value states that The Commons’ market value was $2,381,378 in 2017 (Sullivan). Though the rent is low, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit is enough to compensate and make the development a feasible one, especially for those
in the NHSO, who genuinely wanted to see affordable housing in the Downtown. Furthermore, the developers would have considered past and present financial conditions in the market to predict the best time to build The Commons. When the fledgling project was still wading through the approval processes with the Downtown Design Review and City Council in 2013, investments in small, multi-family homes, such as The Commons, consisted of a little over $8 million. At its construction a couple of years later, investment in small, multi-family housing had grown to almost $12 million (CBRE). Also around the time of
construction, rental vacancy in Oklahoma City was down from 10.4% in 2010 to just 7%. Furthermore, demand had increased to an estimated 6,875 rental units (“Oklahoma City, Oklahoma” 1). All these factors plus others would have contributed to the developers beginning construction of The Commons when they did. Without an examination of financial conditions, a development can go terribly awry, but with a market analysis of the past and present economy, a project can sustain a positive future. 14
For example, the developers for The Commons saw the demand for affordable housing, waited until the market seemed most promising, and lowered costs through government aid and infill construction. Almost two years after opening, transactions for small, multi-family homes have grown 4.5% since last year, and construction for multi-family housing is at an all-time high (CBRE). Senior housing is also projected to increase because of rising interest from investors as well as demand from the aging baby boomer generation (Senior 5). However, affordable housing is predicted to decrease due to lower corporate taxes, which could cause companies to seek fewer tax credits associated with low-income housing financing (Oklahoma City: 2017 1). Already, permit activity has dropped 9.4%, indicating a slowdown in construction for 2019 (CBRE). Even so, this trend would still be financially beneficial to The Commons because demand for their complex would increase further. There are and always will be booms and busts in the economy, but so long as a company is patient and thorough in analyzing market activity before and during their project, the future will be much more valuable and promising.
Public & Private Relationships According to reporter Steve Lackmeyer, The Commons on Classen is the first new, affordable housing in Oklahoma City in decades. This is not due to lack of demand for lowincome targeted homes; rather, there is an extremely high demand that is not being met. Though some view Oklahoma City as having an abundance of affordable housing, 53% of residents in the “very low income” category spend at least 30% of their pay on housing costs, and 18.9% uses 50% or more of their earnings on housing. Of those in the “extremely low income” bracket, 72.2% pay over 50% of their income on housing. Despite this distinct need, the city only “built five affordable units for every 100 households paying 50 percent or more of their income toward housing” between 2010 and 2014 (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). In order to 15
stimulate the market for affordable urban
Construction (Lackmeyer, “Developers”)
housing, the public sector must often provide incentives for developers through grants and tax credits so that income diversity can thrive in all residential sectors. It is through this government intervention in the economy that The Commons was able to pencil out. In Oklahoma City, the Housing and Community Development Division manages over fifty local, state, and federal housing and development tax credits and grants. These include the Home Investment Partnerships Program, the Community Development Block Grant, the Emergency Solutions Grant, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS, as well as the LowIncome Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). The main foci of the Housing and Community
Development Division consist of “acquisition, rehabilitation, and new construction, emergency home repair, home exterior maintenance program, and down payment/closing cost assistance.” In addition to the Housing and Community Development Division, other public departments and organizations function to attract affordable housing development to the Oklahoma City area. They achieve this through various strategies, such as selling land at discounted prices, managing the labyrinth of public grants and tax credits for developers, as well as improving communities. These entities include the Oklahoma Finance Agency, Positively Paseo, the
Alliance for Economic Development, the Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority, the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma, and more (“Housing”). Belmont Development, the developer executing The Commons project, did, in fact, cooperate with these groups as well as take advantage of the available financial assistance to make The Commons as affordable as possible to the elderly. The idea for a new, low-income
16
apartment complex downtown for the elderly originated with the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma. To accomplish this, the organization donated their own headquarters’ plot to Belmont Development (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). In 2014, the company applied for and received the LIHTC to ensure The Commons could be rented out at reduced rates (LIHTC). Established in the 1986 Tax Reform Act, this policy allows the state government $8 million in tax credits annually for construction and rehabilitation of affordable, rental housing (“LowIncome”). To receive the LIHTC, at least 40% of a project’s units must be reserved for tenants who earn 60% or less of the Area Median Income, and 20% or more must be reserved for residents who make 50% or less of the
Courtyard Construction (Lackmeyer, “Developers”)
Area Median Income (Hampton, Slide 13). However, The Commons exceeds these requirements, reserving half the apartments for those with an income of
60% or lower and half for those who earn 50% or lower than the Area Median Income. On that note, The Commons also employs a 62+ age restriction (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). The LIHTC can either account for 30% or 70% of a project’s present value, depending on whether the project is a renovation or new development (Keightley 1). Because it is new development, The Commons received the 70% present value subsidy, meaning that the developer will regain 9% of the construction costs
in tax credit each year for a decade (LIHTC; Keightley 1). Now, with the assistance of the LIHTC as well as the donated land from the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma, The Commons can rent out residencies at low prices, ranging from the efficiency for $500 per month to the two-bedroom apartments at $750 per month (Asemio). Oklahoma City is a growing community, but a great deal of that
17
development is being funneled into amenities and luxury living for the wealthy. In just four years, the city’s “rent grew at a rate of 18%” (Lackmeyer, “Developers”). This movement is manifested by the high-end housing appearing in the area, such as the Steelyard Apartments and the First National Center Hotel and Apartments. With the housing crises low-income renters are facing, resources should be spread more evenly, if not more heavily, towards services for poorer inhabitants; their need is greater. Many groups and programs are already working to accomplish this goal, such as the aid The Commons received in the form of tax credits and property. However, further public and private interrelations should be encouraged and maintained so that the city can have more income diversity, better living conditions for
low-income residents, and more choices for those limited by earnings, age, or ability.
Design & Critique Like all projects, The Commons went through several stages of the design process
before and even during development. But, in the end, I think the design achieved their goals of walkability and accessibility as well as fulfilled some best practices for senior living. I especially found the exterior design to be successful in creating a welcoming space. However, I do think that the developers could have done more regarding the number of apartments, nature accessibility, and environmentally sustainable practices.
18
Belmont Development designed The Commons so that the complex would cater to the needs of seniors while still adhering to city plans. According to the magazine Multifamily Executive, the best practices for senior living consist of amenities, transportation, and liveliness. Senior living should include amenities that help elderly people maintain their social lives, which is a necessary component of mental health (Shaver). The Commons fulfills this with resident events as well as many community spaces, such as a library, art room, gym, and outdoor patio (Belmont). Another best practice for senior living is access to transportation and proximity to businesses. Many senior citizens can’t drive anymore, so they need to either have available public transportation or be within reasonable walking distance of businesses (Shaver). Not only is The Commons surrounded by an arterial road and several bus stops, but it is also near churches, shops, restaurants, health services,
senior centers, and more (Google Maps). Thirdly, this article asserts that the principle of aging in place should not be utilized. Instead, seniors should have the opportunity to thrive in a lively environment (Shaver). Likewise, The Commons is located at the edge of Midtown, a corner of the downtown neighborhood, so the residents live comfortably and affordably in a bustling, active urban space (Google Maps).
Furthermore, because many senior citizens have disabilities, one of the main design goals was accessibility. Outside, the parking lot has several handicap parking spaces directly in front of the main entrance, and the sidewalks are smooth and easy to Art Room (Belmont)
19
navigate in a wheelchair. Inside, there is an elevator as well as apartments specifically tailored for those with disabilities so that they can function independently; these apartments include large showers, bathroom grab bars, and reachable counters (Belmont). In addition to providing for residents’ needs, the developer also sought to advance the goals of the city’s comprehensive plan, particularly in creating a walkable environment. There are sidewalks lined with benches, trees, and other, colorful vegetation that circumvent The Commons. The design also hides the parking lot in the back so that pedestrians see an interesting and unique façade with accessible entrances instead. Combined, these create an appealing place for pedestrians to rest or pass. On that note, I, personally, think that the exterior design works well for The Commons.
For one, the entire building is brick, which is a sturdy material that is preserves well against the elements. Secondly, the shape of the structure is a very creative response to the acute angle of the plot; they used the space to its full potential. Also, the designers placed the parking lot in the back so that the parking lot shape isn’t as awkward or wasteful as it would have been if it were crammed into the sharp corner at the opposite end. This also makes adds an element of safety by keeping the residents’ cars out of sight from the major street. Lastly, I liked the
subtle, aesthetic details. Such features include square motifs that echo throughout in the awnings, decorative masonry, and detailing on the parapet as well as a warm color palette used in the
20
red doors and brick, tan parapet and stones, and deciduous plants. This makes The Commons a more attractive and welcoming property. 1st Level Floor Plan (“Minutes”)
However, there is still room for improvement. First, if possible, I would have added at least one more floor of apartments. There will always be a growing need for affordable housing, and, despite citizens’ concerns, I don’t think a taller structure would look out of place. Several of the buildings surrounding The Commons are about the same height, so I think adding
one or two taller buildings would add a positive variety to the neighborhood. Also, the designers already included some environmentally friendly amenities, such as Energy Star
appliances and foam insulation. I would have augmented the sustainability of the building in order to save costs in the long run. In particular, I think there should be a roof garden for the residents. The inner courtyard is nice as a safe outdoor space; however, a rooftop garden would be open and sunny. Furthermore, gardening is healthy pastime that lowers grocery and utility bills. Lastly, I would also add solar panels to the roof. Google Project Sunroof still has the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma building in their system, but even that building has good potential for solar panels with 1,650 hours of usable sunlight each year and 2,185 ft² of
usable space (Google Project). The Commons is much bigger, so it has even more potential.
Design Review Proposal (“Application for”)
21
Marketing & Management Surprisingly, The Commons has not marketed their apartments to their full potential. Belmont did arrange video advertisements; however, The Commons has barely promoted itself on the open internet, which could make a significant difference in who and how many people become renters. Therefore, The Commons should take further steps in attracting renters by expanding to real estate websites as well as personalizing means of advertisement to senior citizens and their families. Though the managerial staff does not seem very big, The Commons does have some significant advantages over its competition, which is a component they specially emphasize in appealing to potential residents. Since the project’s construction, Belmont has utilized only a couple of marketing strategies. The most prominent of these are some video advertisements associated with the Oklahoma Housing Finance Agency (OHFA) and NewsOK. The latter was made during late
construction to attract potential residents before the opening (Lackmeyer, “Developers�). The video made with the OHFA was filmed a few months after the complex launched and features interviews with a resident and the executive director of the Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma (Belmont). Advertising through both private and public organizations was an intelligent decision because this captures the attention of those who are seeking help in housing from
the government as well as spreads the word through the news. However, a major mistake on their part has been their failure to utilize real estate sites, such as Zillow and
22
Realtor.com. Many people search for potential homes on such sites, but there is barely any information about The Commons and no pictures on any of them. In order to continue marketing the space and attracting renters, The Commons should advertise not only to low-income senior citizens, the demographic of the residents, but also to family members of those seniors. Most elderly people have adverse emotions towards electronics, so The Commons should inform potential renters via paper means, such as flyers in the mail or advertisements in the newspaper. In order to notify low-income citizens, The Commons should make sure that the property is entered in all housing databases, whether in the government system or the open internet. Therefore, when those in the low-income bracket are seeking help from a government agency or searching the internet for an affordable place to live, The Commons will be listed. However, many senior citizens let their families choose their home, so The Commons should also appeal to that group. In fact, at a panel of senior living CEOs, one panelist described how her company purposely seeks to persuade the women in their
renters’ families because they often make the final decision. Their housing includes salons, dance classes, and decorations that traditionally appeal to women so that those decision-makers will judge it as a great place to live (Owens). The Commons shouldn’t delve quite that far into manipulation, but meeting the values of the families will increase occupancy. Because The Commons caters to a fairly narrow demographic, there is not much competition in the area. In fact, Wesley Village Apartments is the only housing in the area that is similar enough to truly be competition. However, The Commons still stands out because it
offers more for about the same price. For one, The Commons is a brand new development, so it is likely to last longer and be more updated than older housing. Secondly, The Commons is more handicap accessible, partly because it is newly built and follows modern accessibility guidelines. Additionally, The Commons includes more options and amenities, such as many floorplan choices, Energy Star appliances, a craft room, in-unit laundry, and more (Belmont).
23
Marketing is important to the success of a development, but proper management is even more necessary. Based on my research, The Commons does not require a large staff to maintain the site. Office hours are very short, 10:30 -3:30 only on the weekdays; this indicates that the property likely has just one parttime secretary and one manager in the office (Belmont). Even so, these employees would need to be trained to handle the special needs of senior citizens and emergency situations regarding their health. There must also be a custodial and maintenance staff to clean the common spaces as well as fix anything that breaks within the apartments. Additionally, as per the website promise, residents don’t have to take care of the landscaping, so, like many apartment
complexes, The Commons most likely hires an outside landscaping company to care for the plants and lawn (Belmont).
Final Thoughts In conclusion, I think that The Commons has successfully realized the vision of the
Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma (NHSO). Despite initial opposition and financial struggles, the development eventually produced affordable housing for seniors downtown. But, not only is it affordable, The Commons’ design is also welcoming and accommodating to residents and their families. This is why The Commons stands out to the competition: There are a variety of amenities, plenty of spaces, proximity to urban activities, and accessibility options
24
to meet the needs and wants of the renters. When assessing The Commons, developers should perceive three key lessons from the project to keep in mind for their own enterprises. First, be able to adapt to unexpected issues. When the NHSO couldn’t find inexpensive land downtown, the organization adjusted the plan and donated its own office building to the project. Once Belmont Development recognized that renovating the old building was unfeasible, they reacted by building anew but reusing the basement. Also, in order to make full use of the lot space, the structure design follows the triangular shape of the plot. This innovation was my favorite portion of the development. Secondly, reuse resources when possible. In this case, The Commons has reused the land and the basement from the
NHSO’s building, but renovating the entire office building did not pencil out. Sometimes it will work out, saving time, money, and materials; other times this is simply not feasible. Lastly, with lowincome housing, there will always
be opposition rooted in prejudice. Though one should listen to the
Main Entrance (Belmont)
voices of the community, ignore the opinions based on ignorance. Instead, focus on the legitimate concerns to make the project better.
25
Works Cited Anderson, Bobby. “Commons on Classen Not So Common.” Senior News and Living OK, Senior News and Living, 6 June 2017, http://seniornewsandliving.com/031215/commonson-classen-not-so-common/. Accessed 18 Sept. 2018. “Application DTCA-14-00083: Special Zoning CA-Downtown.” Citizen Access. The City of
Oklahoma City, 16 Sept. 2014, https://access.okc.gov/aca/Default.aspx. Accessed 27 Sept. 2018. “Application for Certificate of Approval.” Downtown Design Review Committee December 18, 2014 Meeting Attachments. The City of Oklahoma City, 18 Dec. 2014. PDF. Asemio. Neighborhood Housing Services Oklahoma. 2016, https://www.nhsokla.org/. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018. Belmont. Belmont Management Company, Inc., 2018, http://www.commonsonclassen.com/ #propertyInfoContainer. Accessed 15 Nov. 22. “Belmont Development: About.” Belmont. Belmont Management Company, 2018, https:// www.belmontmgt.com/belmont-development/. Accessed 15 Sept. 2018. CBRE. n. d., https://www.cbre.us/. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018. “Community Profile: Commons on Classen.” esri, Esri, 24 Sept. 2018. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. “Downtown Design District.” Planning Department. The City of Oklahoma City, 2018, https:// www.okc.gov/departments/planning/design-review-and-historic-preservation/ downtown-design-district. Accessed 26 Sept. 2018. “Emerald City.” Tapestry Segmentation, Esri, 2018, http://downloads.esri.com/ esri_content_doc/dbl/us/tapestry/segment34.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018.
26
Google Maps, Google, 2018, https://www.google.com/maps/place/Commons+on+Classen/ @35.4791686,-97.5431869,13z/data=!4m8!1m2!2m1!1scommons+okc!3m4! 1s0x87b217352cfd9b21:0xbcd947c17f88f63c!8m2!3d35.4820835!4d-97.5245849. Accessed 15 2018. Google Project Sunroof. Google, 2018, https://www.google.com/get/sunroof#a=1320% 20Classen%20Dr,%20Oklahoma%20City,%20OK%2073103,% 20USA&b=100&f=buy&lat=35.4820599147761&lng=97.52461258497237&np=26&p=1. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018. Hampton, Shane. “Urban Development Theory & Practice: Public/Private Partnerships.” Intro to Urban Development, the University of Oklahoma, 1 Nov. 2018, Norman, OK, Lecture. “Hardscrabble Road.” Tapestry Segmentation, Esri, 2018, http://downloads.esri.com/ esri_content_doc/dbl/us/tapestry/segment39.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018.
“Housing & Neighborhood Housing.” The City of Oklahoma City, n.d. https://www.okc.gov/ departments/planning/programs/housing-neighborhood-programs. Accessed 6 Nov. 2018. “Journal of Council Proceedings.” Agenda Management. The City of Oklahoma City, 17 Dec. 2013, https://agenda.okc.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx? meetid=2114&doctype=MINUTES. Accessed 27 Sept. 2018. Keightley, Mark P., “An Introduction to the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.” Congressional
Research Service, 28 March 2018, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22389.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov. 2018. Lackmeyer, Steve. “Developers, City Ramp Up Affordable Housing to Address Rising Demand.” NewsOK, NewsOK.com, 22 Nov. 2016, https://newsok.com/article/5527605/ developers-city-ramp-up-affordable-housing-to-address-rising-demand. Accessed 15 Sept. 2018. 27
---. “Midtown Senior Housing Project Proceeds.” NewsOK. NewsOK.com, 19 Dec. 2013, https://newsok.com/article/3915834/midtown-senior-housing-project-proceeds. Accessed 26 Sept. 2018. “Land Use Typology.” PlanOKC. City of Oklahoma City, 2015, http://planokc.org/ development-guide/land-use-plan/land-use-typology/. Accessed 11 Dec. 2018. LIHTC Database Access. HUD, 2016, https://lihtc.huduser.gov/. Accessed 6 Nov. 2018. “Low-Income Housing Tax Credits.” HUD User, US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 6 July 2018, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/lihtc.html. Accessed 6 Nov. 2018. “Memorandum: The City of Oklahoma City.” Council Agenda. The City of Oklahoma City, 17 Dec. 2018, https://agenda.okc.gov/sirepub/ cache/2/43pr304522xcaznznj4fe5fk/327634210022018033629357.PDF. Accessed 27 Sept. 2018.
“Neighborhood Associations Map.” The City of Oklahoma City, Data.okc.com, n. d., https:// www.okc.gov/residents/action-center/neighborhood-resources/neighborhoodassociations-map. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. “Oklahoma City Apartments for Rent.” Apartments.com. CoStar Group, Inc., 2018, https:// www.apartments.com/oklahoma-city-ok/?bb=_9s2m627hKomj3Q. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018. “Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.” Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis. U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development & Office of Policy Development and Research, 1 April 2016, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/pdf/OklahomaCity-comp16.pdf. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018. “Oklahoma City, OK, Low Income Housing.” LowIncomeHousing.us. 2007-2018, https:// www.lowincomehousing.us/OK/oklahoma_city.html. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018.
28
“Oklahoma City, OK.” Neighborhood Scout. Location, Inc., 2008-2018, https:// www.neighborhoodscout.com/ok/oklahoma-city/real-estate. Accessed 29 Oct. 2018. Oklahoma City: 2017 Year-End Multifamily Market Summary. Price Edwards & Company Commercial Real Estate Services, 2017, PDF. Owens, Michael P. “Senior Living CEOs Share Best Practices for Changing Industry.” Senior Living Innovation Forum. Influence Group, 15 July 2016, https:// info.seniorlivinginnovationforum.com/blog/it-takes-more-than-a-paycheck-3techniques-for-recruiting-senior-living-staff. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018. Senior Housing and Care Market Insight. CBRE. 2018, PDF. “Set to Impress.” Tapestry Segmentation, Esri, 2018, http://downloads.esri.com/ esri_content_doc/dbl/us/tapestry/segment54.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. Shaver, Les. “Best Practices for Senior Living.” Multifamily Executive. Hanley Wood Media, Inc., 5 Oct. 2016, https://www.multifamilyexecutive.com/design-development/design/
best-practices-for-senior-living_o. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018. “Site Details Map: Commons on Classen.” esri, Esri, 24 Sept. 2018. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. “Social Security Set.” Tapestry Segmentation, Esri, 2018, http://downloads.esri.com/ esri_content_doc/dbl/us/tapestry/segment45.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. Sullivan, Leonard. Oklahoma County Assessor’s Public Access System. Oklahoma County Assessor, 2018, https://ariisp1.oklahomacounty.org/AssessorWP5/AN-R.asp? PropertyID=151058. Accessed 15 Sept. 2018.
“Tapestry Segmentation Area Profile: Commons on Classen.” esri, Esri, 24 Sept. 2018. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018. “Young and Restless.” Tapestry Segmentation, Esri, 2018, http://downloads.esri.com/ esri_content_doc/dbl/us/tapestry/segment52.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2018.
29