Urban 8

[Red Arrow]

Typical townhouses and rowhouses often share at least one wall with another unit, but not always.  In a typical townhouse or rowhouse, the stair is located along a sidewall, not across the front. 

I have always though of a "townhouse" as being at least a duplex with at least one shared wall.

[Conan71]

It probably could be done, but probably wouldn't be worth the effort and expense, given everything that's already in place.  

There are various fire-resistance ratings for different types of wall, floor, and ceiling assemblies.  The City has adopted the International Building Code (IBC) with modifications.  Without going through the IBC, I think anything more than a single-family residence (because it's four stories tall) will be problematic.  With three-story units, the code requirements wouldn't be as strict.  But the Urban 8 development is four stories.

Using an online loan payment calculator, I plugged in $5 million at 3.5% for 30 years.  The calculator says the payment would be $22,453.23 per month.  $22,453.23 divided by eight units is $2,800 per month for each unit (about 82 cents per square foot per month, based on a $625,000 average loan per unit).  

If four people shared a unit, then the "rent" per person would be $700 per month, just to cover debt service as described above.  I don't think it would take much effort to create four bedrooms in each unit, if everyone wanted his or her own bedroom.  Or, a couple could share the master suite:
     

Three options are shown for the third floor build-out, on Urban 8's website.  The plumbing waste and vent lines might be in place already.  If so, I'd leave most or all of the piping as it is, and customize the floor plan to create three or four bedrooms and three bathrooms.

The penthouse could be used as another makeshift "bedroom" by a single person or a couple:
 

That would lower the average monthly "rent" per person to $560 or $467.  The four to six occupants would have to work out the parking situation.

Yvonne might not be able to find people willing to purchase right now, but she might be willing to find some willing to lease.
   

Very well-reasoned math, assuming she could actually get first mortgage type terms on a construction/development loan.  I was going on the assumption of it being a slightly higher rate and shorter term, likely with a balloon payment which would tend to make sense if you were anticipating all these units selling off in x-months before or after completion.

I wish LandArch would weigh in, I think he's the one who does development economics for a living.

[Bamboo World]

I have always thought of a "townhouse" as being at least a duplex with at least one shared wall.

That's how "townhouse" is defined in Tulsa's current zoning code, Section 35.010-C: 

35.010-C Townhouse

A townhouse building is a principal residential building that is occupied by multiple
dwelling units, each located on its own lot with a common or abutting wall along the
dwelling units' shared lot lines. Each dwelling unit has its own external entrance. There
are two types of townhouses: 2-unit townhouses and 3+-unit townhouses.

1. A two-unit townhouse is a townhouse building occupied by only 2 dwelling units.

2. A 3+-unit townhouse is a townhouse building occupied by 3 or more dwelling
units.

In Tulsa's building code, the 2015 International Building Code, a "townhouse" is defined in Chapter 2:

TOWNHOUSE. A single-family dwelling unit constructed in a group of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from the foundation to roof and with open space on at least two sides.

For the sake of discussion, I've called the Urban 8 units "townhouses" on this thread.  So have others.  Urban 8's website describes them as "townhomes."  That's okay, but they wouldn't be considered "townhouses" according to Tulsa's zoning code or building code.

[Bamboo World]

Very well-reasoned math, assuming she could actually get first mortgage type terms on a construction/development loan.  I was going on the assumption of it being a slightly higher rate and shorter term, likely with a balloon payment which would tend to make sense if you were anticipating all these units selling off in x-months before or after completion.

I know, and I think you're correct about the loan terms.  I took your assumption of $5 million, then found a simple calculator online, although I think there are others that will calculate balloon payments.  Just to get the conversation going, I was lazy and put in the basic parameters I have for my own home mortgage, which is significantly less than $5 million.  Also, I didn't consider vacancy rates or any rent escalation.

I think that Yvonne's intent was to sell the units, not own them herself and lease them.  However, with no buyers, I'm wondering if groups of people might be willing to rent them for awhile.

I wish LandArch would weigh in, I think he's the one who does development economics for a living.

I'd like for him to weigh in ... if he wishes -- I always enjoy reading his thoughts/ideas.  But when he does take the time to post on development threads here, he gets ripped to shreds, called arrogant, or whatever, even when he lays out tons of facts, illustrations, and examples to back up his position.  

One particular discussion about dwellings/parking lots/commercial development along M.B. Cherry Street comes to mind.  LandArchPoke was correct.  Houses came first.  Then the dwellings were removed for commercial buildings, usually built right up to the property line along 15th with parking on the street at the curb.  Then more dwellings were removed to satisfy off-street parking "needs" or "requirements" -- a trend that is continuing with developments such a Roosevelt's, for example.  Some posters won't accept facts, however.  They'd rather name-call and argue.

There is much collective knowledge and talent here on the forum, but I wouldn't blame LandArchPoke if he never made another post.  It takes time to weigh in, and perhaps he doesn't want to waste his energies trying to explain the very simplest of urban design and development principles to other posters who are bent on personally attacking him, no matter what.
 

[Red Arrow]

That's how "townhouse" is defined in Tulsa's current zoning code, Section 35.010-C: 

This isn't a biggie for me.  I was just throwing in my 2¢ worth.

[Bamboo World]

It's not a biggie for me either.  The Urban 8 units are similar to true townhouses.  The primary differences are the sidewall windows and the stair positioned across the front windows.
 

[Bamboo World]

For other posters who might not realize there is more than one thread about Urban 8...

See also:

"(Project) Urban 8" started by carltonplace on Apr 12, 2012

TulsaNow's Urban 8 project page, which describes the development as "complete" in March 2016.  However, it didn't appear to be complete when I peeked inside some of the units over Labor Day weekend 2016.

[cannon_fodder]

Well, there was one active thread and one thread about the project that went dormant 3 months ago. Now there are two active threads...

The project is completed. The final build out is at the design of the final purchaser. That was one of the selling points of the project.

[BKDotCom]

That was one of the selling points of the project.

One man's selling-point is another man's turn off

[cannon_fodder]

One man's selling-point is another man's turn off

For sure. I was merely trying to communicate that it was intentional and that the project is "done" from the developers current perspective.

[Bamboo World]

One man's selling-point is another man's turn off.

Someone must have been turned on enough about the southwest unit to purchase it.  Yesterday, I noticed a "SOLD" sign in front.

Several other units have "For Sale" signs.  As far as I know, six or seven of the eight units are not finished as most buyers would understand "finished" homes to be (with completed wiring, drywall, etc.).

[johrasephoenix]

They should be modern triple deckers, but if they're going to be giant homes....

Just spinning my wheels, but I bet they would have sold better if a) they lopped a floor off and used the money saved to make them brick-and-masonry instead of that austere Empire-Strikes-Back black, and b) they were pushed back from the street just a few feet so they didn't feel so imposing (really - I think the first floor is the parking bay?).  You could give them a nice little setback with a porch stoop like a traditional row house in Philadelphia/Brooklyn/Baltimore/Boston.  On the weekends homeowners could chill on their stoop drinking a 40 of Olde English or whatever it is that rich folks do.    

I still think they would have done gangbusters as a series of small apartment buildings.  Same with Davenport Lofts...make those swag apartments instead of $800,000 condos and you have yourself a viable product.  

[johrasephoenix]

Also the product may have been just a few years too early.  I'm betting Blue Dome / East Village will be able to command much higher values as Santa Fe Square, Boxyard, PAC grocery store, etc + sweet stuff in the Brady keep coming online.

[Bamboo World]

... I bet they would have sold better if ... they lopped a floor off and used the money saved to make them brick-and-masonry instead of that austere Empire-Strikes-Back black ...

The Urban 8 buildings don't look black to me.

[cannon_fodder]

Minor update from TDA Executive Report for February, posted today:

A. Tulsa Urban Development Group, LLC, d/b/a Urban8
North side of East 3rd Street South, between South Greenwood Avenue and South
Kenosha Street
8 Single Family Dwellings
TDA Land Disposition
• The Redeveloper continues to work on task to complete the project
• Unit No. 2 is currently undergoing an interior buildout
• The walls are ready to be painted
• Cabinets are being delivered
• All doors and trim are being installed
• Wood floors have also been installed throughout
• The geo-thermo heat exchange equipment has been delivered, installed and
currently operational in units No. 2 and No. 7

http://www.tulsadevelopmentauthority.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Executive-Director-Report-10.pdf