The news reported that the University of Tulsa and TPS were in negotiations on the building, and when it was officially put up for bid TU was the highest (and only) bidder. However, TPS had more invested in the building than anyone was willing to pay so they have decided to keep paying to maintain the building and grounds and allow it to decline more. As they have decided to do with all other TPS buildings to date.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/University-of-Tulsa-withdraws-bid-to-buy-Wilson/aLNpjON2nUGUzyu1ZPYiTA.cspx
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=332&articleid=20111103_19_A13_CUTLIN342790
The grape vine told me that the University of Tulsa had many millions lined up to refurbish the building and make it into the Medical School (as previously announced in conjuncture with OU).
So we know there are no other bidders and TPS has indicated that they have not heard interest from anyone else. And it is hard to think of a better use for the community.
PLEASE, PLEASE TPS don't do what the City did with Old City Hall. Stall any noteworthy project for years while holding and maintaining the property for so long we actually lost money. Unless there is something I don't know, sell sell sell!
If you want more money and TU won't pay more, come up with a creative solution. TU professors as visiting teachers for some lessons. TPS teachers able to survey courses for continuing education. Come up with something!
TU wants has moved on...
It appears now they have interest in the Hartford Bldg downtown.
http://www.cityoftulsa.org/our-city/meeting-agendas/display.aspx?ID=0000B942
Perhaps. It could be the TDA trying to present an alternative or TU trying to persuade TPS to act. I heard just a couple weeks ago they were still hoping to land Wilson. Im not sure if Id prefer to see it go in at Wilson or downtown, I think Wilson because I can't really imagine another good use for that structure (as well as the location next to campus).
I'd hate to think TPS is as dumb as the city - such that when there is only ONE interested and obvious party they so alienate them that said party just walks away. If that is the case I expect most of the schools to sit empty and cost TPS millions in maintenance over the years.
Its not they "want" more money. Its that they won't make a cent on it if they sell it for that price. The repayment of bond proceeds make disposing of school sites very sticky.
Quote from: rdj on November 07, 2011, 09:20:27 AM
Its not they "want" more money. Its that they won't make a cent on it if they sell it for that price. The repayment of bond proceeds make disposing of school sites very sticky.
No, they want "MORE" money. The offer is $1,000,000 or zero. They want more than $1,000,000 so they are accepting zero and will continue to pay to maintain and heat/cool the building as it continues to decline. I confidently predict that by the time they dispose of the facilty they will have even more money into it such that whatever amount they get in excess of the current $1mil offer will be offeset by the expense of continued costs.
I understand they OWE more on the building than that, but that notions is compeltly irrelevant. The money they put into the building is a sunk cost. It is gone. Considering as part of the equation is a mistake only government would make. IIRC they want $4mil to cover the outstanding bonds - well, the offers so far are ZERO and $1mil. I don't see a $4mil offer on the horizon.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on November 07, 2011, 01:15:56 PM
Considering as part of the equation is a mistake only government would make could get away with.
Don't be so hard on them CF. Consider this as one of your investments and the board is trying not to lose 3 million of your dollars. In this case the taxpayers dollars. So they have one offer in 6 months and its a lowball, take it or leave it offer. What that means is the property is slow moving, just like thousands of other properties for sale right now. It will take some marketing and some dedicated effort to sell the property. Saying no to your first offer when its that low isn't incompetence, its prudent.
Someone no doubt will figure just what the breakeven point is for debt service, maintenance, marketing costs etc and come up with a package to maximize the return on what is a very well built, very well placed commercial property. I think its a great property for TU, but they may believe it requires more updating and remodeling for their purposes and can't justify the price but that doesn't mean the price is too high.
Where do you propose they come up with the cash to cover the shortfall? The "lender" is the taxpayer that paid the bonds, that's a lender that can't accept a short fall. See BOKF v City Tulsa in regards to Great Plains Airlines, et al for a similar outcome.
It can't come from new bond funds. I don't think the operating budget has that cash.
Quote from: rdj on November 07, 2011, 04:05:28 PM
Where do you propose they come up with the cash to cover the shortfall? The "lender" is the taxpayer that paid the bonds, that's a lender that can't accept a short fall. See BOKF v City Tulsa in regards to Great Plains Airlines, et al for a similar outcome.
It can't come from new bond funds. I don't think the operating budget as that cash.
Who are you addressing? Cause I pretty much agree with you. If TPS were to accept the low ball offer, the taxpayer will have to make up the difference.
Quote from: AquaMan on November 07, 2011, 04:11:22 PM
Who are you addressing? Cause I pretty much agree with you. If TPS were to accept the low ball offer, the taxpayer will have to make up the difference.
Sorry, it was "cannon fodder".
The city should trade Christ the King on 15th for Wilson and then we'd have us some parking and more land available along Cherie Street for redevelopment....just trying to be creative. ;)
Quote from: AquaMan on November 07, 2011, 03:16:25 PM
Don't be so hard on them CF. Consider this as one of your investments and the board is trying not to lose 3 million of your dollars. In this case the taxpayers dollars.
The $3 million was lost when TPS made a large capital investment in a school building it subsequently mothballed. TPS will continue to bleed money every month it has to pay upkeep.
TU needs to pony up and quit being bottom feeding low-ballers.....
Quote from: Breadburner on November 07, 2011, 06:01:11 PM
TU needs to pony up and quit being bottom feeding low-ballers.....
Bottom feeding low-ballers? I'm pretty sure they are infinitely higher than the next bidder. They are the most generous bidder out there. Well, they were anyway. Why should TU, a prudent institution, "pony up" and bail out an institution that dumped money into an unneeded building? Better yet - why doesn't TPS stop trying to blackmail TU and sell the property at the auction price to the highest bidder (to be used for education nonetheless)?
What we are failing to grasp here is that when there is NO ONE ELSE TO SELL THE BUILDING TO the only bidder is the best bidder. I don't care if TPS had $1,000,000,000 in the building - it is far better off the books for $1mil if there is no realistic possibility on the horizon of getting it off the books for more. I will say it again: no matter how much money they have in the school it is a sunk cost. It doesn't mean that is what the asset is worth. An asset is worth no more than someone is wiling to pay for that asset.
I can put $10k into fixing up my wife's 2001 Taurus, it won't be worth $10k to anyone else. Worse yet, TPS has multiple properties that are the equivalent of a $10k Ford Taurus.
As to the question of how will they pay off the bond: the same way they were planning on paying off those bonds all along. The citizens of Tulsa will be on the hook for the $4mil or the $3mil - whichever it may be. What TPS has is the chance to now get a lump sum towards those bonds plus paying off the remainder less the ongoing cost of maintenance.
If the theory is TPS cannot sell any assets for a loss - I suspect TU will not be selling many structures at all. Sorry, an old school building in need of serious renovation is not worth much to many people. Whoever the real estate agent is that told TPS they should expect bidding wars and full value for those properties should be suspect. Again, they are only worth what people are willing to pay (I apperently cant say that enough).
Quote from: Breadburner on November 07, 2011, 06:01:11 PM
TU needs to pony up and quit being bottom feeding low-ballers.....
It could be that's all the property is worth to TU. If that's not enough money for TPS, regardless of the reason, then TPS needs to find another buyer. If no buyers step forward with a higher offer, then the offer from TU is what it is worth (at least for now) regardless of what TPS has invested.
Ever have more money invested in an object than what you could sell it for?
Edit:
Darn, beat by 60 seconds this time. I need to learn to type faster.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on November 07, 2011, 09:48:36 PM
Bottom feeding low-ballers? I'm pretty sure they are infinitely higher than the next bidder. They are the most generous bidder out there. Well, they were anyway. Why should TU, a prudent institution, "pony up" and bail out an institution that dumped money into an unneeded building? Better yet - why doesn't TPS stop trying to blackmail TU and sell the property at the auction price to the highest bidder (to be used for education nonetheless)?
What we are failing to grasp here is that when there is NO ONE ELSE TO SELL THE BUILDING TO the only bidder is the best bidder. I don't care if TPS had $1,000,000,000 in the building - it is far better off the books for $1mil if there is no realistic possibility on the horizon of getting it off the books for more. I will say it again: no matter how much money they have in the school it is a sunk cost. It doesn't mean that is what the asset is worth. An asset is worth no more than someone is wiling to pay for that asset.
I can put $10k into fixing up my wife's 2001 Taurus, it won't be worth $10k to anyone else. Worse yet, TPS has multiple properties that are the equivalent of a $10k Ford Taurus.
As to the question of how will they pay off the bond: the same way they were planning on paying off those bonds all along. The citizens of Tulsa will be on the hook for the $4mil or the $3mil - whichever it may be. What TPS has is the chance to now get a lump sum towards those bonds plus paying off the remainder less the ongoing cost of maintenance.
If the theory is TPS cannot sell any assets for a loss - I suspect TU will not be selling many structures at all. Sorry, an old school building in need of serious renovation is not worth much to many people. Whoever the real estate agent is that told TPS they should expect bidding wars and full value for those properties should be suspect. Again, they are only worth what people are willing to pay (I apperently cant say that enough).
You make some good points.
Whether TPS had kept the building open or mothballed it, they still had the $4mm sunk cost in it (or whatever it is). It's not like a middle school has a cash flow factor to it to help justify values. If it's worth $1mm to TU and no one else stepped forward with all the development money available in this town, then that's probably the best offer and best logical use. Anyone else who thinks TU is getting a steal can simply step up and make a better offer at any time. Sure it's a great deal for TU. Considering the midtown location adjacent to a good-size university there could be great MUD possibilities, but no one is stepping up.
I tend to agree that TPS's pride on this one could wind up with this building being their own version of old City Hall if they wait around for three more years to do nothing more than draw an additional $100K for the property.
Maybe the school board has future plans for the building...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 08, 2011, 06:56:59 AM
Maybe the school board has future plans for the building...
Hmmmm. Can't wait till you can share.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 08, 2011, 06:56:59 AM
Maybe the school board has future plans for the building...
Please stop being so logical!
Sell! Sell! Sell!
As I recall, money generated from the sale of surplus school buildings was a significant justification behind the consolidation/closure effort (in addition to operation savings). Selling for less than hoped would seem to be better than not selling at all if they were counting on the money for budgetary purposes.
CF, I just don't buy your reasoning. Value is determined by what a seller and a buyer agree upon that is true. You left out some particulars though. Time. Marketing. Financing. Purpose. Market conditions. You also left out that you are a huge TU boozer booster!.
This property has been on the market for a scant 6 months. Not long for commercial property in a down market. So TU wanted the building and was willing to pay a mil for it. That doesn't determine its value just because the use they saw for it only justified that offer or because they were the only offer. At some point a single low offer may simply mean the seller needs to reconsider whether he wants to even sell the property or keep it and re-purpose it. That is prudent. Your argument is starting to sound a bit like Kathy Taylor's pitch for the glass palace rather than the mis-marketing of the old city hall.
I have watched in horror as people misjudged the value of their property and held "firm", only to subsequently see the property deteriorate and eventually be razed. The corner of 21st and Cheyenne comes to mind. Heirs wouldn't sell at market value. Now its an empty lot and still unused. I also see it a lot on cars. This isn't the same thing imo.
Quote from: AquaMan on November 08, 2011, 03:28:25 PM
CF, I just don't buy your reasoning. Value is determined by what a seller and a buyer agree upon that is true. You left out some particulars though. Time. Marketing. Financing. Purpose. Market conditions. You also left out that you are a huge TU boozer booster!.
This property has been on the market for a scant 6 months. Not long for commercial property in a down market. So TU wanted the building and was willing to pay a mil for it.
True, but what if in 6 months TU offers $750K and 6 months after that offers $500K? Negotiation is about leverage and pressure. The seller of a decommissioned middle school in an area without much development (outside of TU) faces a lot of pressure and has no leverage. Unless Bama decides an old middle school cafeteria would be great for baking pies, the offer price is as likely to go down as up. Meanwhile, TPS/tax payers get to keep paying indefinitely to maintain the property.
The real analogy to City Hall is what the city did after it moved - refusing to sell based on an inflated appraisal price. That worked out poorly for the city and will likely work out just as poorly for TPS.
Waterboy:
I agree that a single low offer in 6 months is not necesarily THE signal that the market is weak. However, if there is no interest from other parties AND there is other property that will soon be in the for-sale inventory it is certainly a strong indication. I would not be as put-off if the decision was to hold the proeprty for rebidding in 3 months, or whatever. My problem is the decision was "no, we will just hold it" so far as the public knows.
I also agree that I am a fervent TU supporter. Though I lack the financial resources to be a booster ;D.
I still disagree with your perception of value though. An object is really only worth what the market will pay for it. The seller does not get to set the value except as to himself - that is to say, it's worth more than that to me so I'm not selling. That price is in no way determined by the market and thus cannot be relied upon as an indicator of value. For instance, I have an old quilt my grandmother made that I wouldn't sell for less than $10,000 - but realistically it isn't worth more than $500. I am the (not so proud) owner of stock in McLeod USA which I paid $2.50 a share for (which was a hellova buy since it was down from $20). I was't willing to sell that at $.50 a share because it was worth more than that to me. Now it is delisted and worthless... jsut because it was worth more to me doesn't mean that is the fiar market value - what someone else should pay.
RM: If the school board has other plans for the structure I can't wait to hear them. My criticism is based on the knowledge available to me. I stand to be corrected as time goes on and hope TU, TPS, or someone else finds a good use for theat neat facility, in a good location, that benefits the community.
Quote from: DTowner on November 08, 2011, 05:29:18 PM
True, but what if in 6 months TU offers $750K and 6 months after that offers $500K? Negotiation is about leverage and pressure. The seller of a decommissioned middle school in an area without much development (outside of TU) faces a lot of pressure and has no leverage. Unless Bama decides an old middle school cafeteria would be great for baking pies, the offer price is as likely to go down as up. Meanwhile, TPS/tax payers get to keep paying indefinitely to maintain the property.
The real analogy to City Hall is what the city did after it moved - refusing to sell based on an inflated appraisal price. That worked out poorly for the city and will likely work out just as poorly for TPS.
When "ifs" and "buts" are candy and nuts we'll all be happy at Christmas.
From what I can tell there is no negotiation or pressure. This was a first offer, one much lower than real estate people had estimated and worthy of a tepid or negative response imo. Retrench, re-assess, and be patient. Lots of people think negotiation for anything is like those two morons on American Pickers or the guys on Pawn Stars. They think public buildings should be cheap in the open market place, that dealing with public organizations is just a matter of showing them how its done in the "real" world. Guess not.
TPS is a favorite whipping boy for everyone. No doubt had they sold to the first offer at 1/4 the asking price there would be much criticism. I don't see TU as a bully or cheap. Truth is the building is very well built, very attractive historically, and has newer additions that would suit many businesses. It is also true that it has some mold problems that must be addressed since a boiler failed years ago. If the parties are serious a deal will emerge. If not I don't see any reason to attack either one of them.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on November 08, 2011, 06:11:41 PM
Waterboy:
I agree that a single low offer in 6 months is not necesarily THE signal that the market is weak. However, if there is no interest from other parties AND there is other property that will soon be in the for-sale inventory it is certainly a strong indication. I would not be as put-off if the decision was to hold the proeprty for rebidding in 3 months, or whatever. My problem is the decision was "no, we will just hold it" so far as the public knows.
I also agree that I am a fervent TU supporter. Though I lack the financial resources to be a booster ;D.
I still disagree with your perception of value though. An object is really only worth what the market will pay for it. The seller does not get to set the value except as to himself - that is to say, it's worth more than that to me so I'm not selling. That price is in no way determined by the market and thus cannot be relied upon as an indicator of value. For instance, I have an old quilt my grandmother made that I wouldn't sell for less than $10,000 - but realistically it isn't worth more than $500. I am the (not so proud) owner of stock in McLeod USA which I paid $2.50 a share for (which was a hellova buy since it was down from $20). I was't willing to sell that at $.50 a share because it was worth more than that to me. Now it is delisted and worthless... jsut because it was worth more to me doesn't mean that is the fiar market value - what someone else should pay.
I don't think there is much you posted that I would disagree with. Let me make a real life analogy as well.
My son was given a set of beautiful, barely used polished chrome and aluminum wheels. They were still in the boxes with lugs and valve stems. Turns out he was given them because his friend couldn't sell them. They were 4 lug on 4.25, 7inch wide wheels. Not all wheels fit all cars. In fact these were made for 1980's-early 90's Mustangs. I tried to sell them at the market rate I determined from internet and Craigslist analysis. Problem is there aren't too many owners and rehabbers of those Mustangs. And, 4 lugs are not very common. So, turns out the market value of those wheels was their weight at the recyclers. About $20 at best. My last effort was to sell them to a Pawn Shop. They assure me they couldn't be sold at any price and they had tons of wheels filling their garage too.
So, with no offers and little estimated market I had a choice. Do I like them enough to keep them as decoration in my garage? Do I sell them for scrap or do I hold to my price of $125 till that one person with a 86 Mustang stumbles upon my Craigslist ad. The value at this moment was 0 but I wasn't through. I researched the size and configuration of the wheels to see what else they fit. Strangely, there are guys on the net that like to figure these things. I found out this same wheel configuration was used on a couple dozen cars ranging from Ford Escorts, Merkurs, Peugots, and other European cars up till the early 2000's! Market just got bigger. I rewrote the ad in Craigslist detailing the cars the wheels would fit and included pictures.
Bottom line is that within a week I sold the wheels for a $100 bucks. I would have sold them to the Pawn shop for $25. The fair market value of this set of wheels changed several times and all were accurate based on that moment in time.
Waterboy, I can relate to your story of perceived market value. I deal with it every day in my professional life. I can even think of a recent encounter with that in my Harley collecting hobby, that if there's no demand for a rare item, it's simply a lump of metal which can be recycled for less than a few dollars.
Neither of those are really good comparisons though to the Wilson property. If you were looking to invest in the property, you would take a look at how the basic structure suits your needs and what modifications are necessary to make it fit your needs 100%. Then you need to look at any mechanical and structural deficiencies or code compliance issues which come up with a change in ownership and what those costs will be. Finally, if the building doesn't suit your square footage needs, then there's additional construction costs. Or in the complete alternative, let's assume the building doesn't meet any of TU's needs and they can't do an adaptive re-use. They need to look at what the land is worth after they pay to demolish the structure and do any and all land remediation issues after demolition. It's quite possible they are looking at the land as being worth $1 million after they have the old building hauled off.
TPS does have a fiduciary responsibility to tax payers and bond holders. Are they better to accept a $1mm offer now or wait for a lower bid three years down the road when the building needs serious rehab from neglect?
To bad the economy isn't doing a bit better, maybe we could hope for a smaller version of the reuse on Cherry Street. Some build out to 11th for retail and a restaurant/bar. Parking would be in the back near Delaware. Living (Apartments/Condos) in the second floor of the school and new development.
Is the main concern TPS's responsibility to the tax payers?
If so, the way I see it the tax payers can still benefit from the sale of this building below its appraised value if the purchaser makes such improvements and usage changes that it becomes a contributing part of the community again.
If its new owner and use is something that increases the actual footprint property value and by osmosis increases the adjacent property value the tax payer will see benefit. The new owner will pay ad valorem taxes; TPS did/does not contribute to property tax receipts. If the new use incorporates retail business then the new endeavor will also contribute to sales tax receipts.
If it sits empty for a long time and becomes blighted then the tax payer loses as they continue to fund upkeep and maintenance and see their property values fall by proximity.
Modified punctuation error
QuoteIf so, the way i see it the tax payers can still benefit from the sale of this building below its appraised value if the purchaser makes such improvements and usage changes that it becomes a contributing part of the community again.
+1 I have the same feeling about Roosevelt (I realize it has its own thread) and the school for the performing arts that was shut down by TPS. That would have been a huge boost to a neighbourhood that is on the rise and to the city in general. :(
Does anyone know if TU pays property or ad valorem taxes? If they do, certainly that's a win for the tax base.
Anyone know if churches pay ad valorem or property tax? Nearest neighbor to the south is a church. There's no doubt residential properties could see an uptick in value if a med school is located there. It will help create demand for housing in the immediate area for med students with families for certain.
Quote from: carltonplace on November 09, 2011, 08:15:33 AM
Is the main concern TPS's responsibility to the tax payers?
If so, the way I see it the tax payers can still benefit from the sale of this building below its appraised value if the purchaser makes such improvements and usage changes that it becomes a contributing part of the community again.
If its new owner and use is something that increases the actual footprint property value and by osmosis increases the adjacent property value the tax payer will see benefit. The new owner will pay ad valorem taxes; TPS did/does not contribute to property tax receipts. If the new use incorporates retail business then the new endeavor will also contribute to sales tax receipts.
If it sits empty for a long time and becomes blighted then the tax payer loses as they continue to fund upkeep and maintenance and see their property values fall by proximity.
Modified punctuation error
Its not that I disagree with any of that or that real estate is not substantially different than aftermarket wheels. Though I would argue that negotiation is the same on the school ground over the apple your mom sent you or over real estate that doesn't fit your needs.
There may indeed be overall increased tax revenue or ad valorem revenue by selling it at below appraisal. That is thinking like a business would. Synergy is something every entrepreneur feels instinctively. The city, the state and the school system are not like that. The school board isn't going to get much positive play from critics by noting that the city is going to prosper by the taxpayer taking spent capital out of one account and shifting it to the city's account. They don't share the same boardrooms. The low offer sale in some sense becomes a low cost loan to whoever buys the property at taxpayer expense even though the city politic may benefit eventually.
But from what I can deduce, people here think that the appraisals are in error because the first, and so far only, offer is low. Maybe the appraisals were done prior to the commercial real estate decline? Then the asking price should be re-assessed. Mortgage too high? Then fess up and let people know that the school system makes the same mistakes as private homeowners. And, I believe there is some concept that maintaining a school that is currently unused is quite expensive. I'm not sure it is but I admit to not knowing for sure. Any examples? Is it more expensive than running utilities, janitorial, insurance risk, on an active school? Surely the security would have to be increased but not enough to balance out heat and air for staff and students with our crazy weather.
Look, I think the neighborhood would like to see this sewn up before someone mentions, group home, homeless shelter, rehabilitative services, etc. and before the gang signs start showing up on broken windows. But really it seems a little early to get down on one knee.
This site has an amazing potential for a mixed use village vibe. You could turn the old school building into a more of a market with shops inside and then build lofts and more ground floor retail opportunities along both 11th Street and Delaware. The Bama site is kind of ugly facing 11th Street, not sure if they could be talked into making that side of 11th more walkable and installing some sort of streetscape but that would help turn 11th Street into a more Cherry Street vibe. You have the demographics of all the student housing with in walking distance and the Bama workers during the day. So this area has a better potential as a mixed use development then a medical school... not sure if there's a developer around here with that kind of vision though. Wish I had the money to do it :-\
If TU had bought it would it have been a new site for University School? Something mixed-use would be great, or remaining a school; either way just don't want to see it empty and falling apart.
Blake has mentioned numerous times he wants to see the city focus on revitalizing Route 66. Now that he is our D4 councilor I hope he advocates that at City Hall. This site is a critical part of that since it has a full block of frontage right by TU.
Quote from: AquaMan on November 09, 2011, 04:15:50 PM
Its not that I disagree with any of that or that real estate is not substantially different than aftermarket wheels. Though I would argue that negotiation is the same on the school ground over the apple your mom sent you or over real estate that doesn't fit your needs.
There may indeed be overall increased tax revenue or ad valorem revenue by selling it at below appraisal. That is thinking like a business would. Synergy is something every entrepreneur feels instinctively. The city, the state and the school system are not like that. The school board isn't going to get much positive play from critics by noting that the city is going to prosper by the taxpayer taking spent capital out of one account and shifting it to the city's account. They don't share the same boardrooms. The low offer sale in some sense becomes a low cost loan to whoever buys the property at taxpayer expense even though the city politic may benefit eventually.
But from what I can deduce, people here think that the appraisals are in error because the first, and so far only, offer is low. Maybe the appraisals were done prior to the commercial real estate decline? Then the asking price should be re-assessed. Mortgage too high? Then fess up and let people know that the school system makes the same mistakes as private homeowners. And, I believe there is some concept that maintaining a school that is currently unused is quite expensive. I'm not sure it is but I admit to not knowing for sure. Any examples? Is it more expensive than running utilities, janitorial, insurance risk, on an active school? Surely the security would have to be increased but not enough to balance out heat and air for staff and students with our crazy weather.
Look, I think the neighborhood would like to see this sewn up before someone mentions, group home, homeless shelter, rehabilitative services, etc. and before the gang signs start showing up on broken windows. But really it seems a little early to get down on one knee.
That's the tricky part of an appraisal. For re-use as a secondary or primary school or a combo of both, it might well be worth $4 mil. Even just looking at it from an acreage and useable square footage, it's going to produce a value. But for re-use as an auto dealership, medical clinic, youth shelter or even a medical school, the building simply isn't worth that much as there's going to be anywhere from significant modifications to a complete scrape and re-do.
I hope we've become more imaginative than that. You just described a lot of downtown buildings that now only exist in Beryl Ford's collection. This building could be something special or it could be just another nondescript midtown infill.
I agree. That building IS pretty.
Btw, the Ford collection makes me want to cry every time I look.
Quote from: AquaMan on November 09, 2011, 08:41:23 PM
I hope we've become more imaginative than that. You just described a lot of downtown buildings that now only exist in Beryl Ford's collection. This building could be something special or it could be just another nondescript midtown infill.
Even an adaptive re-use within an existing shell can be more costly than a rape and scrape. I'm not advocating a scrape mind you, just pointing out that unless you have a similar purpose for the property as the current use, reworking it within the existing confines can get insanely expensive. Unfortunatley, at some point economic realities override historical aesthetics. Wilson is a really neat building, and I hope its original character can be preserved.
I know this has been posted before and I'm not advocating this use, but just showing that creative reuse is possible.
This is refurbed school in Portland that is now a hotel.
http://www.mcmenamins.com/427-kennedy-school-home (http://www.mcmenamins.com/427-kennedy-school-home)
(http://www.mcmenamins.com/system/uploads/assets/Big%20Properties/Kennedy/hotel_exterior/_MG_7903.jpg)
I was thinking about the whole issue of TPS selling off its old properties today and realized something: WHY THE HELL is an educational entity getting invovled in real estate bidding?!? When the district no longer needs a property, they should sell it to the city or county (or at least let them handle the real estate end of things). Also, There are some shuttered schools around town (or reused) that are beautiful that should never have been let go. I'm thinking of Lincoln and the one just to the west of the west lg of 244 (I dont know it's name). It's three stories tall and looks like it's being used as a trucking compay or something now.
Quote from: jacobi on November 10, 2011, 08:18:35 PM
I was thinking about the whole issue of TPS selling off its old properties today and realized something: WHY THE HELL is an educational entity getting invovled in real estate bidding?!? When the district no longer needs a property, they should sell it to the city or county (or at least let them handle the real estate end of things). Also, There are some shuttered schools around town (or reused) that are beautiful that should never have been let go. I'm thinking of Lincoln and the one just to the west of the west lg of 244 (I dont know it's name). It's three stories tall and looks like it's being used as a trucking compay or something now.
Lincoln is probably the best adaptive re-use of any TPS property outside of old Central HS.
jacobi, they are separate entities. City, State and Public School Systems. The properties may have been funded through ad valorem taxes collected by the county or state but the title for the properties is held by the school system. I'm sure someone better informed can explain why. Probably the politics of it all.
The Central adaptive use was ok, surely better than tearing it down, Lincoln had the bad luck of being more attractive as a commercial property because of its corner location on emerging Cherry Street. It was a useful school whose closing put pressure on nearby Lee but gave a former Mayor some development opportunities.
The school near 75 and 244 I believe is the old Washington Irving elementary. It had the bad luck to be located near the best route for the highway. At least they didn't tear it down. My dad attended it as a youth. Gorgeous facade. The building seems to be now used for a catering company. They park their food trucks on the interior playground.
TPS is pretty good about using the buildings if they can and selling them off if they can't. McBirney elementary is now one of the school bus depots out southwest.
QuoteThe Central adaptive use was ok
I hate that AEP is there now. At least TCC using the old manual arts building mainatins it as an educational building. I wish that central could be turned back into a school. If we are going to attract families (not just single-in-the-city 20 somethings) Having a school downtown would be fantastic.
The facade on the washington irving is beautiful It makes me think of TU or Harwelden. If I were to start an institute or a small liberal arts college that is a place I would love to have.
You think the city could be a better real estate company than TPS? Three letters for you, T. D. A.
QuoteYou think the city could be a better real estate company than TPS? Three letters for you, T. D. A.
I know. It just sick that our land redistribution agency is so *^%*&^ terrible that we would rather have teachers do it.
Interesting idea...
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=332&articleid=20111202_332_0_TulsaP717997
TPS seeks input on moving Thoreau to closed Wilson Middle School building
By ANDREA EGER World Staff Writer
Published: 12/2/2011
Tulsa Public Schools administrators are considering relocating one of the district's most sought-after magnet schools and weighing a private school's offer to buy its professional development center.
TPS is inviting parents and other concerned patrons to share their input about a possible move of Thoreau Demonstration Academy from its current home near 71st Street and Memorial Drive to the former Wilson Middle School facility on 11th Street.
Superintendent Keith Ballard also told the Tulsa World that he will likely be taking Town and Country School's bid of $1.5 million for the Fulton Teaching and Learning Academy to the school board for consideration.
"For the first time, we got a bid that should deserve strong consideration," Ballard said. "In addition to the $1.5 million bid, we could save $2.5 million on scheduled bond improvements there and reallocate those funds to other sites. We will be going to talk to the Fulton community about this as soon as possible."
Fulton, at 8609 E. 34th St., closed as an elementary school in 1988. It has been used as a professional development and conference center for many years, but school officials have said another district site could accommodate those activities if Fulton were sold.
No date for a meeting with Fulton's neighbors has been set, but a meeting on the topic of Thoreau's possible relocation has been set for 6:30 p.m. Thursday in the cafeteria at Thoreau, 7370 E. 71st St.
"We have absolutely made no decision," Ballard said of the Thoreau relocation. "I do think Wilson is a great piece of property - I always was kind of reluctant to abandon it. There is also much less bond issue obligation at Thoreau, so I think we need to explore the possibility of relocating."
I would be fine with that. It seems like it would amount to a reconcentration of TPS's resources.
Im glad they are looking for constructive uses of their buildings and considering the best use of all their assets. At least LOOKING at what can be done. I hope it finds a good use one way or another.