I caught word that the northwest corner of 15th/Trenton finally sold (sign's gone). The word is multi-story residential with small commercial component. Anyone know anything? If half of what I heard comes to it would be incredible for Cherry St.
I've also heard that either Bumgardners or the Abersons have the northeast corner of the same intersection. I don't know any more than that.
That whole part of Cherry St. is being reinvented. I would say urbanized for the better but if Metro's development on Troost is an indication of how their coming projects will address the street they are certainly ignoring the 'neighborhood' with their orientation. Come on gals give us some presence. In any case in two years that neighborhood will look completely different.
Those folks in their new lofts on Troost are going to have a nice parking lot to stare at.....
Isn't a car wash currently on that spot??
I'm glad to hear residential and commercial in the same building...
Where'd you hear this?
That's the word on the street. Grrrr....
I'll do everyone a favor and keep my tired old rants to myself.
That stinks. I like the car wash...I drive down the alley and can get my car cleaned. Now I have to drive to what...4th and Utica?
I also don't see why you would replace what is at the Northeast corner. It's just a small, quiet shopping area.
I don't know about the car wash. I haven't heard.
The only thing I know of will be the Northwest corner of 15th and Utica all the way to the serice road and back to Troost.....
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
The only thing I know of will be the Northwest corner of 15th and Utica all the way to the serice road and back to Troost.....
What's going there? I can do without the two service stations...the Shell is more of an eyesore though.
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
The only thing I know of will be the Northwest corner of 15th and Utica all the way to the serice road and back to Troost.....
If that's the case, then its got to be Bumgarner--he owns most of the buildings along utica & troost, north of 15th. Get ready for more faux italian, not to mention some cool apartment buildings coming down.
quote:
Originally posted by akupetsky
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
The only thing I know of will be the Northwest corner of 15th and Utica all the way to the serice road and back to Troost.....
If that's the case, then its got to be Bumgarner--he owns most of the buildings along utica & troost, north of 15th. Get ready for more faux italian, not to mention some cool apartment buildings coming down.
What cool apartment buildings are over there? I can only remember houses.
^Corner of Troost & service road (east side)--there's a 1920/30s brick apartment building owned by Bumgarner. East of that is Bumgarner's building as well--kind of an ugly building on Utica & service road. Don't care if he tears that one down. By the way, this is all along troost--the original post involved buildings on Trenton. Is there two developments going on?
quote:
Originally posted by akupetsky
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
The only thing I know of will be the Northwest corner of 15th and Utica all the way to the serice road and back to Troost.....
If that's the case, then its got to be Bumgarner--he owns most of the buildings along utica & troost, north of 15th. Get ready for more faux italian, not to mention some cool apartment buildings coming down.
I would say you are correct.. I was told quite some time ago that Chris had been buying up property in the area of the NE & NW corners of Utica..
In fact when I saw the "For Sale" sign on that large of a parcel..... That was a
must have for these fellows.
[}:)]
They own the whole area I described earlier....
Whoops. Did I say Trenton? I meant Troost! Rewind the discussion and start over with that correction in mind.
Holy hell - Who has seen the car wash today? They painted it bright neon green. I'm all for it going out of the neighborhood now...
[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
Holy hell - Who has seen the car wash today? They painted it bright neon green. I'm all for it going out of the neighborhood now...
[}:)]
I believe new owners took over the spotnot chain. They all have new names and new.. unique.. paint schemes.
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
Holy hell - Who has seen the car wash today? They painted it bright neon green. I'm all for it going out of the neighborhood now...
[}:)]
Saw that today at lunch. At least before it just kind of went away.... Yikes!
I need some of those architectural drawings or Im pretty well lost. Pictures people, we need pictures. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I need some of those architectural drawings or Im pretty well lost. Pictures people, we need pictures. [:P]
If I can get my digital camera I'll walk down the street and get you some photos of the new car wash color scheme.
[B)]
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Whoops. Did I say Trenton? I meant Troost! Rewind the discussion and start over with that correction in mind.
Okay, that
does change it a bit! [:D]
At least with that location, it will add a little more continuity (maybe not architecturally speaking) with the restaurants, storefronts, etc. Really, Cherry Street seems to end (or begin) after you pass Panera, so if this can help lengthen the area with the highest concentration of restaurants and shops, plus add living space, I think it's a great development.
I know people here tend to rant about Bumgarner or comment on the faux-Italian buildings, but what he's doing really is helping the neighborhood. I think it would be nice to have an architecturally contiguous neighborhood in Tulsa (though, once again, I know people will argue about the
type of architecture). Other cities have architecture-themed neighborhoods (albeit authentic ones), so why not here?
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Whoops. Did I say Trenton? I meant Troost! Rewind the discussion and start over with that correction in mind.
Okay, that does change it a bit! [:D]
At least with that location, it will add a little more continuity (maybe not architecturally speaking) with the restaurants, storefronts, etc. Really, Cherry Street seems to end (or begin) after you pass Panera, so if this can help lengthen the area with the highest concentration of restaurants and shops, plus add living space, I think it's a great development.
I know people here tend to rant about Bumgarner or comment on the faux-Italian buildings, but what he's doing really is helping the neighborhood. I think it would be nice to have an architecturally contiguous neighborhood in Tulsa (though, once again, I know people will argue about the type of architecture). Other cities have architecture-themed neighborhoods (albeit authentic ones), so why not here?
If that was really the case then the surrounding neighborhoods would not put up so much resistance. The fact the Bumgarners take a my way or the highway approach(ultimately to their own detriment) doesn't help either. The surrounding neighborhoods already have an established architectural theme, otherwise they wouldn't qualify for Historic Preservation zoning.
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Whoops. Did I say Trenton? I meant Troost! Rewind the discussion and start over with that correction in mind.
Okay, that does change it a bit! [:D]
At least with that location, it will add a little more continuity (maybe not architecturally speaking) with the restaurants, storefronts, etc. Really, Cherry Street seems to end (or begin) after you pass Panera, so if this can help lengthen the area with the highest concentration of restaurants and shops, plus add living space, I think it's a great development.
I know people here tend to rant about Bumgarner or comment on the faux-Italian buildings, but what he's doing really is helping the neighborhood. I think it would be nice to have an architecturally contiguous neighborhood in Tulsa (though, once again, I know people will argue about the type of architecture). Other cities have architecture-themed neighborhoods (albeit authentic ones), so why not here?
I believe that you just answered your own question. If it were authentic, that would be a different story. Instead, Tulsa looks like its trying to copy Kansas City. A cheap knockoff is still a cheap knockoff, even if it is continuous. The point is that Cherry Street is already a desirable location, with a certain amount of architectural consistency. Bumgarner's faux italian detracts from the smaller 1920/30s style buildings that already exist. Why not create more consistence by looking to the buildings that already exist?
quote:
Originally posted by akupetsky
I believe that you just answered your own question. If it were authentic, that would be a different story. Instead, Tulsa looks like its trying to copy Kansas City. A cheap knockoff is still a cheap knockoff, even if it is continuous. The point is that Cherry Street is already a desirable location, with a certain amount of architectural consistency. Bumgarner's faux italian detracts from the smaller 1920/30s style buildings that already exist. Why not create more consistence by looking to the buildings that already exist?
I never said that Cherry Street was undesirable, and just because something isn't authentic doesn't mean that it's a cheap knock-off. Just FYI, Kansas City's Country Club Plaza is anything but original. Also, I doubt these faux-Italian buildings look anything like the Plaza--the Plaza isn't modeled after anything Italian, it's modeled after a Spanish city--Seville. Do you think people complain that the Plaza is "just a cheap knock-off" of Seville?
The buildings on Cherry Street really share no similarities except that they are small. Other than that, the buildings don't really share any architectural elements. There are only two, maybe three buildings that are similar, those being where Kilkenny's is located and one on the south side of the road closer to Utica that houses an art gallery and Bourbon Street.
I agree that builders should try to match existing themes of neighborhoods, but I don't think it's right to continually dismiss a developer's plans not because what they're doing will injure the neighborhood but because you disagree about the exterior styling of the buildings or just dislike the guy.
Yes, there are issues of scale, as well, but John Bumgarner isn't doing anything that will hurt Cherry Street financially or that would make it less desirable.
I'm not an advocate for tearing down the whole of Cherry Street (or any other neighborhood) just to make the buildings fit each other, but I don't consider this Bumgarner project a bad one.
I remember complaining about the look of the urban lofts going in around Cherry Street area because they didnt fit in. I got my head bit off in the forum and people argued that what makes Cherry street unique is its diversity. People complained that not everyone likes, Disneyesque "themed" areas.
Again, are we talking styles? or scale? If Cherry street were to be zoned or form based or something to have an appropriate "look" what would that be?
The topic of diversity was in regards to the socio-economic demographics of the area, not architectural styles. We want infill or redevelopment that is in scale, character, and harmony with existing neighborhoods.
If scale was the only litmus, Bumgarner's developments and metro lofts would still fail miserably. I really resent being told what's best for the neighborhood where I live(for longer than most of these clowns have even been in Tulsa) by YP appletini bourgeoisie elitists that don't even live in the hood.
There have indeed been topics of diversity of income. But the one where I mentioned not liking the style of the lofts for that area, and where I got griped at, was definitely about the different types of building styles.
Diversity of income is the biggest ordeal in my opinion. You've got to avoid gentrification. For example, I can look at two Metro Lofts going up (one completed) and they are paying $200,000-$300,00 for these. Where I live, I pay $385.00/month for a two bedroom after the student discount. This type of income diversity gives the neighborhood the character it needs and allows for both poor college students and successful professionals to live next door with the same general feel of community.
Thank you.
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
Diversity of income is the biggest ordeal in my opinion. You've got to avoid gentrification. For example, I can look at two Metro Lofts going up (one completed) and they are paying $200,000-$300,00 for these. Where I live, I pay $385.00/month for a two bedroom after the student discount. This type of income diversity gives the neighborhood the character it needs and allows for both poor college students and successful professionals to live next door with the same general feel of community.
This is what is hoped for the First Street Lofts. I don't see why the same thing can't be done in a different style building (i.e., faux Italian). Since we don't have access to the plans for whatever
is going in on Cherry Street we can't really say that we approve or disapprove of the design, but we still can hope that it
will have some of the same aspects of mixed-income and mixed-use developments that promote the diversity of its residents.
I went on a walking tour of Cherry Street today to get an idea or feel for the architecture and found that the Italian look has already been there for quite a while. There is more than one building that has terra cotta roofs, both on those original buildings from the 20s and 30s and even on structures like the Albertson's at 15th & Lewis. So perhaps the Bumgarner building at 15th & Utica might be of a much larger scale than the rest of the buildings and is of stucco instead of brick, it doesn't seem out of place to me. The Stillwater Bank building, however, is completely out of touch with the neighborhood.
The rest of the buildings on Cherry Street didn't seem to share
any characteristics except for their low height. We have strange L-shaped strip centers, colonial home-style, some like the Subway building that just look run-down, and actual homes-turned-offices. There's not a real continuous street-front among the buildings, which might have led to me to consider the entire neighborhood as sort of disconnected.
There isn't just one style of architecture--it's a mix of styles and decades, so I think that most things that could be built would fit right into the mix.
I wasn't arguing before that Cherry Street needed to be gutted and turned into a themed district--I merely entertained an idea that a part of town could have its own distinctive style that set it apart from the rest of town. I wasn't advocating gentrification for the privileged. (I took several pictures on my outing today and will post them if anyone is interested.)
No, I don't think that gentrification is a good thing. Look at what's happened to SoHo, Chelsea, Hell's Kitchen and even Harlem in NYC--those once undesirable areas were transformed by the City's artistic and alternative crowd and are now ridiculously expensive places to live. Reinventing a neighborhood, as OurTulsa put it,
is desirable.
I'd really like to see a grocer, library and small park to help Cherry Street gain even more of that community feel.
I wish that developers in Tulsa were more active in
proposing plans to the respective neighborhoods and consider feedback before simply
revealing their plans for what
will be. Setting up a website isn't a difficult thing to do. Setting up a meeting/forum isn't a difficult thing to do. A simple showing of concern for the existing neighbors would certainly make everyone happier and would make for much less controversial, more appropriate developments (though there will always be people who are unhappy with
anything and
everything that comes up).
Not that I'm agreeing with you about the diverse mixture of architecture, but how does cramming as many cookie cutter modern lofts on to as many lots in one area or cramming as many towering, cookie cutter, faux italianate, glamorized suburban strip malls(complete with vast seas of inefficient suburban surface parking) along commercial corridors contribute to and preserve that diverse mixture of architecture you speak of?
One more thing, the commercial developments you cited around Cherry St are renovations of existing buildings, not the out of scale, lot cramming, scrape and rapes that Metro Lofts and the Bumgarners specialize in.
BTW, do you even live in this area?
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
Not that I'm agreeing with you about the diverse mixture of architecture, but how does cramming as many cookie cutter modern lofts on to as many lots in one area or cramming as many towering, cookie cutter, faux italianate, glamorized suburban strip malls(complete with vast seas of inefficient suburban surface parking) along commercial corridors contribute to and preserve that diverse mixture of architecture you speak of?
One more thing, the commercial developments you cited around Cherry St are renovations of existing buildings, not the out of scale, lot cramming, scrape and rapes that Metro Lofts and the Bumgarners specialize in.
BTW, do you even live in this area?
This is ridiculous. I didn't say anything about any type of cookie-cutter buildings, I didn't mention anything about vast seas of inefficient suburban parking lots or tons of lofts and I didn't mention anything about cramming too many buildings into too small lots. I don't think anyone here would advocate any of those things.
The only thing I mentioned was a general architectural theme. That's it, and now I'm being treated as some kind of combatant enemy. I'm here for the same reason most of you are--because I care.
And no, the buildings I'm talking about that have tiled roofs aren't recent remodels--they're original buildings from the 20s or 30s that at least appear as though they've not been touched since then.
Not every aspect of everything that's being built in town is bad. There are good points along with the bad, and unfortunately, I'm starting to get the feeling that no matter what someone proposes to build, it's always going to be met with disapproval by certain people on these forums.
What was announced? "The word is multi-story residential with small commercial component. Anyone know anything? If half of what I heard comes to it would be incredible for Cherry St."
We don't even know what the development is, yet now we've got glamorized strip malls, supposed seas of inefficient parking, and though ground isn't broken, the apartments included are too expensive, and the style is wrong...
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
There have indeed been topics of diversity of income. But the one where I mentioned not liking the style of the lofts for that area, and where I got griped at, was definitely about the different types of building styles.
Although Cherry Street has some "diverse" elements, much of it consists of historic, two-story brick buildings in the 1920s style. Check out the buildings containing The Palace Café, LaDonna's, the (late, great) 15th Street Wok and Panera. To preserve this aspect of Tulsa's history, we must not only maintain these buildings, but also nurture them by ensuring that any new nearby development reflects their architecture and style. For example, buildings that are more than two stories will overshadow and ultimately make it impossible to preserve the historic structures. Now, Mr. Bumgarner appears to be a very smart, creative guy, and hopefully is not a "one-trick pony" that can only fashion buildings in one style. If he can develop his properties along Cherry Street in a way that preserves the character and feel of the existing historic structures (and without creating additional surface parking lots), he will not only minimize neighborhood opposition (resulting in quicker approval of his plans) but also will attract more business to his structures (enabling him to attract a better price). We are talking about a sense of place where commerce can flourish; not a competition of building architectures that disregards the city where they are located.
quote:
Originally posted by akupetsky
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
There have indeed been topics of diversity of income. But the one where I mentioned not liking the style of the lofts for that area, and where I got griped at, was definitely about the different types of building styles.
Although Cherry Street has some �diverse� elements, much of it consists of historic, two-story brick buildings in the 1920s style. Check out the buildings containing The Palace Caf�, LaDonna�s, the (late, great) 15th Street Wok and Panera. To preserve this aspect of Tulsa�s history, we must not only maintain these buildings, but also nurture them by ensuring that any new nearby development reflects their architecture and style. For example, buildings that are more than two stories will overshadow and ultimately make it impossible to preserve the historic structures. Now, Mr. Bumgarner appears to be a very smart, creative guy, and hopefully is not a �one-trick pony� that can only fashion buildings in one style. If he can develop his properties along Cherry Street in a way that preserves the character and feel of the existing historic structures (and without creating additional surface parking lots), he will not only minimize neighborhood opposition (resulting in quicker approval of his plans) but also will attract more business to his structures (enabling him to attract a better price). We are talking about a sense of place where commerce can flourish; not a competition of building architectures that disregards the city where they are located.
Very well said... Indeed...!If only you were a Developer from another part of the Country that had made Mega-Money$$....
In doing just this sort of thing...
The time is ripe for a redirection in building style...
[;)]
Doesnt the price of the land + the price of building materials + the price of labor make a building 2 stories or less unprofitable in desirable areas like Cherry Street? People posting on a forum about their utopia vision of 15th street doesn't change the mathematics of a profitable investment, which is what any developer will build when they redevelop properties.
I mean, I guess developers could build brand new 2 story quad plexes with 600 sq ft. apeice, but they'd have to charge like $1500/month to turn a profit over a reasonable period of time.
Somehow I don't think that would work.
At one of the "maintaining neighborhood character" meetings. I learned about the idea of..
-Wall Plane Lengths,,, this affects perception of scale along the fronts and sides of a building.
-Building Mass... Height at ridge and side wall "plate"
If both of those issues are taken into account when building a new structure, it will fit in scale wise, even if it is taller or bigger. I will try to find some example pics to post so that those can be easily visualized.
As for the diversity of income issue. It may very well be that cherry street becomes more pricey in time. I wouldnt want to stop that. We need an entire area that is more "trendy" so that we can attract those young urban professional types. Having just a few here and there does not create the sense of community of like minded individuals for people of that type. They want to hang out with people of similar interests and such like we all do. This is not to say that there wont be areas of mixed incomes and price ranges. It just may not be immediately around Cherry Street. As Cherry street becomes more desirable, the prices are naturally going to go up. However the edges of this area as it grows will still have mixed income possibilities. This is the way it always is. Many times its seen as an opportunity for people like myself who cant afford those nice places, but I can buy a fixer upper on the edge of a nice area and hope that as the area grows the neighborhood will get better and my investment will grow.
I dont know how we can try and attract young urban professionals and not develop an area that will attract them lol. If they are willing to pay more, people are gonna sell for more.
I thought YP's wanted to live, work, and play downtown. Isn't that what all the Vision 2025 developer pork for downtown luxury housing is for? It seems that everybody wants to live in Foreclosureville (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6214%22) these days, to me. I wonder who will be left holding the bag when this fuzzy lending for overpriced real estate/housing trend and credit co dependency collapses?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
As for the diversity of income issue. It may very well be that cherry street becomes more pricey in time. I wouldnt want to stop that. We need an entire area that is more "trendy" so that we can attract those young urban professional types. Having just a few here and there does not create the sense of community of like minded individuals for people of that type. They want to hang out with people of similar interests and such like we all do. This is not to say that there wont be areas of mixed incomes and price ranges. It just may not be immediately around Cherry Street. As Cherry street becomes more desirable, the prices are naturally going to go up. However the edges of this area as it grows will still have mixed income possibilities. This is the way it always is. Many times its seen as an opportunity for people like myself who cant afford those nice places, but I can buy a fixer upper on the edge of a nice area and hope that as the area grows the neighborhood will get better and my investment will grow.
I dont know how we can try and attract young urban professionals and not develop an area that will attract them lol. If they are willing to pay more, people are gonna sell for more.
Cherry Street is desirable. And it is a community. And I don't want my neighborhood being all 'young professionals'. I want every type of person. I don't want my neighborhood to lose it's character, take your pro-gentrification somewhere else. Thanks.
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
Doesnt the price of the land + the price of building materials + the price of labor make a building 2 stories or less unprofitable in desirable areas like Cherry Street? People posting on a forum about their utopia vision of 15th street doesn't change the mathematics of a profitable investment, which is what any developer will build when they redevelop properties.
I mean, I guess developers could build brand new 2 story quad plexes with 600 sq ft. apeice, but they'd have to charge like $1500/month to turn a profit over a reasonable period of time.
Somehow I don't think that would work.
Do I care about maximizing profit? No. Do you know why Cherry Street is desirable? It sure isn't by realtors and developers coming here to maximize profits, I'll tell you that much. If you don't like the fact the neighborhood prefers a maximum of three story buildings, then go somewhere else.
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
Doesnt the price of the land + the price of building materials + the price of labor make a building 2 stories or less unprofitable in desirable areas like Cherry Street? People posting on a forum about their utopia vision of 15th street doesn't change the mathematics of a profitable investment, which is what any developer will build when they redevelop properties.
I mean, I guess developers could build brand new 2 story quad plexes with 600 sq ft. apeice, but they'd have to charge like $1500/month to turn a profit over a reasonable period of time.
Somehow I don't think that would work.
Do I care about maximizing profit? No. Do you know why Cherry Street is desirable? It sure isn't by realtors and developers coming here to maximize profits, I'll tell you that much. If you don't like the fact the neighborhood prefers a maximum of three story buildings, then go somewhere else.
Actually, it is becoming desirable exactly because developers are coming in, and regardless of how they feel about the neighborhood, their number one priority is to make a profit. When I say developers, I mean anyone that comes to Cherry Street to open a business, not just those who build new developments. No one's talking 10- or 15-story high-rises here. All that was mentioned was the idea that buildings of a certain size aren't profitable in an already desirable area.
"The neighborhood prefers 3 story buildings" ? While it's true that most of the buildings are only one or two, there apparently isn't some type of neighborhood association or code that can (or
has) block taller buildings from being built since the Arvest and Stillwater buildings
are on Cherry Street. I'm not saying that people don't prefer them shorter, but nothing's being done to prevent people from building that way. If the neighborhood does prefer them 3 stories or less, they can do something about it.
You're wrong on two counts.
1. Arvest had a headache building their four story building because of the Yorktown residents.
2. Cherry Street is not desirable because of the Metro Lofts. It's desirable because it's historic, walkable and has a diverse group of people living there.
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
You're wrong on two counts.
1. Arvest had a headache building their four story building because of the Yorktown residents.
2. Cherry Street is not desirable because of the Metro Lofts. It's desirable because it's historic, walkable and has a diverse group of people living there.
1. I didn't say they haven't tried. I don't know if they've tried. Point is, they didn't succeed.
2. I didn't say anything about Metro Lofts or
any specific development or business. Did I say that the Metro Lofts made Cherry Street desirable? No.
1. You said there was nothing done to prevent them, and there was. Yorktown tried.
2. You said developers are making Cherry Street desirable, well..what other developers are currently doing something besides the Metro Lofts?
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
You're wrong on two counts.
1. Arvest had a headache building their four story building because of the Yorktown residents.
2. Cherry Street is not desirable because of the Metro Lofts. It's desirable because it's historic, walkable and has a diverse group of people living there.
While you're right on those two points, what would you prefer to happen on properties such as the car wash, the gas station at 15th and Utica, and the old appliance shop that was where Arvest now stands? Nothing? Let them stand in disrepair? I think the concept the other poster is trying to get across is, a developer is not going to come in and fix these properties up for purely altruistic reasons, he's going to want a profit, and unfortunately with land prices being climbing in those areas, you're going to see more vertical growth.
And of course you don't care about maximizing profits, you're not putting a dime into the project. It's very easy to be idealistic when it's other people's money.
I'm not saying that you're wrong or that I even disagree about what will or won't harm the character of the neighborhood, but when you limit development to "what's already there", then how can we be against sprawl? This is just one of the unfortunate side effects of increasing density and bringing people back to midtown and downtown vs. the suburbs.
Prefer? I'd prefer only one corner mart (Phillips 66) and a mixed use building at the car wash location. I personally have no problem with Arvest and Stillwater National Bank...my problem (retail wise) is with the fry pits on the west side of Peoria.
And I'm all for people profiting, I'm just not for people coming here only thinking about maximizing profits without consideration for the neighborhood.
You say I don't care because it's not my money, I say they don't care because they don't live here.
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
Doesnt the price of the land + the price of building materials + the price of labor make a building 2 stories or less unprofitable in desirable areas like Cherry Street? People posting on a forum about their utopia vision of 15th street doesn't change the mathematics of a profitable investment, which is what any developer will build when they redevelop properties.
I mean, I guess developers could build brand new 2 story quad plexes with 600 sq ft. apeice, but they'd have to charge like $1500/month to turn a profit over a reasonable period of time.
Somehow I don't think that would work.
Do I care about maximizing profit? No. Do you know why Cherry Street is desirable? It sure isn't by realtors and developers coming here to maximize profits, I'll tell you that much. If you don't like the fact the neighborhood prefers a maximum of three story buildings, then go somewhere else.
Actually, it is becoming desirable exactly because developers are coming in, and regardless of how they feel about the neighborhood, their number one priority is to make a profit. When I say developers, I mean anyone that comes to Cherry Street to open a business, not just those who build new developments. No one's talking 10- or 15-story high-rises here. All that was mentioned was the idea that buildings of a certain size aren't profitable in an already desirable area.
"The neighborhood prefers 3 story buildings" ? While it's true that most of the buildings are only one or two, there apparently isn't some type of neighborhood association or code that can (or has) block taller buildings from being built since the Arvest and Stillwater buildings are on Cherry Street. I'm not saying that people don't prefer them shorter, but nothing's being done to prevent people from building that way. If the neighborhood does prefer them 3 stories or less, they can do something about it.
How long have you been in Tulsa? You speak with such expertise on subjects you show such little knowledge about.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
How long have you been in Tulsa? You speak with such expertise on subjects you show such little knowledge about.
I've lived in Tulsa my entire life. I haven't claimed to be an expert in anything, so I don't know what you're talking about.
No, I don't know the whole story behind the Arvest and Stillwater buildings.
I do know, though, that regardless of whatever battle may have taken place with the Arvest and Stillwater buildings, the neighborhood lost and for whatever reason, the buildings were still built, to the pleasure of some and to the obvious disdain of others.
What's to stop other people from building gargantuan buildings if the neighborhood can't or if the people don't care, or if the people that exist outside of this forum and live in the area actually like the developments?
I don't know how saying that or defending OurTulsa is claiming to be an expert.
To me, the developers of a neighborhood aren't just those who
develop lofts, build new structures, etc. The development of a neighborhood occurs also simply when a business is opened, when buildings are renovated, etc.
I don't see how it's so unconscionable to think that buildings of a certain size aren't profitable in an already desirable area with rising land costs. I don't see how any of my statements are so outlandish or that make me appear as an expert. I'm a Tulsan that cares about what's going on who thought that maybe I should become involved in a discussion.
It's no wonder more people in Tulsa refrain from joining in any discussion and subsequently lose interest and don't care, with the people out there who only point fingers, gripe, refute everything but their own ideas and put others down.
Without a spirit of cooperation and collaboration and realizing that ultimately everyone here wants better for Tulsa, nothing is ever going to change or be done.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
I thought YP's wanted to live, work, and play downtown. Isn't that what all the Vision 2025 developer pork for downtown luxury housing is for? It seems that everybody wants to live in Foreclosureville (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6214%22) these days, to me. I wonder who will be left holding the bag when this fuzzy lending for overpriced real estate/housing trend and credit co dependency collapses?
Define "pork". You mean the loans the developers have to pay back, creating a revolving fund for more public-private investment in downtown housing?
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
And I'm all for people profiting, I'm just not for people coming here only thinking about maximizing profits without consideration for the neighborhood.
You say I don't care because it's not my money, I say they don't care because they don't live here.
Good stuff. Pretty much nailed it.
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
I thought YP's wanted to live, work, and play downtown. Isn't that what all the Vision 2025 developer pork for downtown luxury housing is for? It seems that everybody wants to live in Foreclosureville (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6214%22) these days, to me. I wonder who will be left holding the bag when this fuzzy lending for overpriced real estate/housing trend and credit co dependency collapses?
Define "pork". You mean the loans the developers have to pay back, creating a revolving fund for more public-private investment in downtown housing?
Government subsidized luxury housing. I'm glad these historic buildings are being saved and reused, but other than that, I don't see the public benefit in awarding incentives to build housing that I don't think most Tulsans can afford, so developers can maximize their profits. I guess my beef is that the vast amount of V2025 money for downtown housing was primarily used to benefit one specific socioeconomic demographic. To me, this seems like pork.
In other cities they focus on incentives for or require mixed income housing developments when tax dollars or other tax backed incentives are involved. I think this is a better approach that will benefit all taxpayers at all levels, and therefore would not be considered pork.
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
How long have you been in Tulsa? You speak with such expertise on subjects you show such little knowledge about.
I've lived in Tulsa my entire life. I haven't claimed to be an expert in anything, so I don't know what you're talking about.
No, I don't know the whole story behind the Arvest and Stillwater buildings.
I do know, though, that regardless of whatever battle may have taken place with the Arvest and Stillwater buildings, the neighborhood lost and for whatever reason, the buildings were still built, to the pleasure of some and to the obvious disdain of others.
What's to stop other people from building gargantuan buildings if the neighborhood can't or if the people don't care, or if the people that exist outside of this forum and live in the area actually like the developments?
I don't know how saying that or defending OurTulsa is claiming to be an expert.
To me, the developers of a neighborhood aren't just those who develop lofts, build new structures, etc. The development of a neighborhood occurs also simply when a business is opened, when buildings are renovated, etc.
I don't see how it's so unconscionable to think that buildings of a certain size aren't profitable in an already desirable area with rising land costs. I don't see how any of my statements are so outlandish or that make me appear as an expert. I'm a Tulsan that cares about what's going on who thought that maybe I should become involved in a discussion.
It's no wonder more people in Tulsa refrain from joining in any discussion and subsequently lose interest and don't care, with the people out there who only point fingers, gripe, refute everything but their own ideas and put others down.
Without a spirit of cooperation and collaboration and realizing that ultimately everyone here wants better for Tulsa, nothing is ever going to change or be done.
People do get their back up when they constantly hear the same thing - that it is not possible to revitalize neighborhoods without destroying them (whether that destruction is immediate or gradual). There is no example that I am aware of where the developer has come to the neighborhoods to cooperate or collaborate on a project. If he/she did, you can almost certainly figure out a way to make it work for both. The Arvest Bank issue is one example of what happens when the developer insists on doing it his/her way without consultations. Although the bank went in after a long period of time and much contention, it created a significant amount of bad will in the surrounding neighborhoods and throughout the city politic at large. I don't think it would have gone in had the neighborhoods filed an expensive court appeal. And that was the "easy" case of a building on a corner of 15th and Utica that replaced a fenced-in animal grooming shop opposite a large bank building, a run-down gas station and a new cancer clinic (none of which had any real historical significance).
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
I thought YP's wanted to live, work, and play downtown. Isn't that what all the Vision 2025 developer pork for downtown luxury housing is for? It seems that everybody wants to live in Foreclosureville (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6214%22) these days, to me. I wonder who will be left holding the bag when this fuzzy lending for overpriced real estate/housing trend and credit co dependency collapses?
Define "pork". You mean the loans the developers have to pay back, creating a revolving fund for more public-private investment in downtown housing?
Government subsidized luxury housing. I'm glad these historic buildings are being saved and reused, but other than that, I don't see the public benefit in awarding incentives to build housing that I don't think most Tulsans can afford, so developers can maximize their profits. I guess my beef is that the vast amount of V2025 money for downtown housing was primarily used to benefit one specific socioeconomic demographic. To me, this seems like pork.
In other cities they focus on incentives for or require mixed income housing developments when tax dollars or other tax backed incentives are involved. I think this is a better approach that will benefit all taxpayers at all levels, and therefore would not be considered pork.
yeah, I can hear what you're saying. You make a good point.
At least Sager's project has several price points, and the Mayo Hotel will be in the same ballpark per square foot. It's not a perfect strategy, but get a track record of success downtown on the higher end and it's easier to get financing on the mid-priced projects.
I wouldn't be shy about expressing this viewpoint in the manner you did above. Might be a good strategy for reinvestment of the funds that come back in from loan repayments.
Yeah, Sager seems to be the exception to the rule.
quote:
You say I don't care because it's not my money, I say they don't care because they don't live here.
[/quote]
MetroLofts does live in Cherry Street District.
I was talking about developers in general.
Tulsa Investigation Leads to Class Action Suit
HUD reached a $450,000 settlement with Tulsa, Okla., companies McGraw Davisson Stewart Realtors, Closings of Tulsa, Builders Title and several of their affiliates. Now, those companies are finding themselves targeted again, this time by homebuyers who feel that they were shafted by the AfBAs.
The plaintiff who filed the suit is Eric M. Bohne, vice chairman of Security Bank, who purchased a home through McGraw Davisson Stewart and Closings of Tulsa. The suit is seeking class action status and states that those eligible for inclusion in the class are "all persons who purchased real estate and paid closing fees through the defendants, which were in violation of RESPA."
The suit names as defendants Closings of Tulsa, Closing and Escrow Co. of Tulsa, McGraw Davisson Stewart, Residential Sales Associates, Builders Services, Builders Title and Escrow,
Robert Dailey, Helen Dailey,
John Woolman, Joseph McGraw, Peter McGraw, Darrell Jenkins, and other parties not yet named.
In related news:
Lofty expectations: Metro Lofts plans 29 units, possibly more in
Journal Record, The (Oklahoma City), Mar 1, 2006 by Kirby Lee Davis
Metro Lofts LLC has two complexes under construction and three in the permit stage for Tulsa's historic Cherry Street region.
We're constantly trying to get more land, said owner Amanda Dailey
, who hopes to expand her building plans. Particularly in the Cherry Street area.
Formally based in Houston, Dailey's three-person operation will soon relocate its headquarters to Tulsa. Dailey herself has already moved to the Midtown region, overseeing work of the Cherry Street Lofts complex at 14th and Rockford and the Troost Lofts at Cherry Street, just north of 15th Street on Troost Avenue. Contractor Trigon Inc. of Tulsa manages daily construction, slated for May completion, with Metro Lofts serving as its own builder.
Dailey projects November completion for three proposals before the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission: the Quincy Lofts at Cherry Street, the St. Louis Lofts on Cherry Street, and the Trenton Lofts at Cherry Street. Trigon also will supervise these projects, designed by MDGI of Houston and One Architecture of Tulsa.
Advertisement
The four at Cherry Street projects follow the same pattern - packages featuring six or seven lofts on a 0.3-acre block of land, all named for the crossing streets intersecting N. 15th Street. With the three lofts in the original Cherry Street Lofts project, Dailey's company will add 29 lofts to the Tulsa community by November, totaling 52,000 square feet, including garages. She estimated the construction value at $100 a square foot.
Dailey noted that this part of Tulsa's Midtown region, also known as Cherry Street, the historic name for 15th, is already zoned for townhouses, making her loft construction easier to permit. Because storage units connect all the homes, they fit the requirements for townhouses.
The units under construction range from 1,900 to 2,400 square feet, offering two to three bedrooms and bathrooms. Prices will range from $299,000 to $329,000.
Those under planning will focus on three-bedroom offerings, with three-and-a-half baths. Their prices have not been determined.
Dailey, a Tulsa native returned to roost, hopes to build as many as we can in the region. While she admits some parts of the construction area just east of Peoria Avenue are a little seedy, the safety and community feel of the thriving neighborhood makes her renewal projects a personal pleasure. She has lived there herself since starting construction and enjoys the Cherry Street atmosphere.
They don't have any modern lofts here. They have the downtown projects that they're doing, she said, referring to several different proposals for Tulsa's downtown region, but no Midtown lofts. I just think that in Tulsa, there's great potential for Midtown development.
Kirby Lee Davis is Tulsa bureau chief of The Journal Record.
I originally bought my home through Mc Graw, and went through Closings of Tulsa. Whats an AfBA ?
quote:
Originally posted by metro
quote:
You say I don't care because it's not my money, I say they don't care because they don't live here.
MetroLofts does live in Cherry Street District.
"As they would say in my native home town....
What else is rolled into that cigarette you are smoking.... Horse Manure...?"
[}:)]
Double A,
What does a class action lawsuit have to do with development? What is your real name? Does double A stand for double a**hole?
If you are incenuating that Metro is me it is not. I do live in Cherry Street, specifically 1412 S Troost if you would like to come by and discuss Cherry Street at length. I previously lived at 1412 S trenton in unit 2 of a 4 plex. I dont understand why these blogs start to get so angry after about page 1. I would like to say a few things about our progression, our goals etc. We built 13 homes last year in Tulsa, 10 of which had siding exterior - hardie siding which is compressed cement and a lifetime product. I thought it was a great suggestion by my architect, from Houston, who thought that it would stand up best over time to weather elements etc. I was immediately slammed over the looks of siding and realized that this is something tulsans do not like. I have not used siding, nor will use siding on anymore of our Tulsa spec products. We now have 24 homes being built this year. The exteriors will be: Brick and Stucco, Standing seam metal and stucco, Shake and lap board (Bungalow townhomes), all Stucco or some other version. We took your advice and changed what we were doing. Of the 24 homes we are building this year, only 6 are 3 stories and the rest are 2 stories. Only 6 are over 1700 sq ft. Only 6 are over 285k and they have wonderful sweeping views of downtown which is sometimes highly in demand. They are nestled between three different fourplexes and they fit in wisely by being all brick exterior. The styles are: 6 modern all brick, 4 warehouse brick and block with walls of glass, 3 Bungalow townhomes, 10 metal 2 story units with softened stucco accents. 1 SFR Bungalow. All 24 address the street with Balconies directly facing the main street on the street facing units (again thank you for the suggestion).
Again, we took your advice and changed what we were doing. I always eventually read the blogs and always appreciate your comments. We are not trying to come to Cherry Street and change it. If you will look at our recently updated website you will notice that we have just as many remodeled bungalows as we do homes for sale. I love all types of architecture and since Tulsa had no modern housing options, modern seemed a good place to start. I have tried extensively to purchase some of the run down apartments in the area for condo conversions and or fun remodels but have no luck as many of these owners are unrealistic of their proprties value. Because of our lack of housing for people under 200k we have recently agreed to take on a 5 unit new construction project with appx 1100 sq ft each for mid 100s and we should have that plan on the website in the next 4 weeks.
quote:
Originally posted by mlofts
If you are incenuating that Metro is me it is not. I do live in Cherry Street, specifically 1412 S Troost if you would like to come by and discuss Cherry Street at length. I previously lived at 1412 S trenton in unit 2 of a 4 plex. I dont understand why these blogs start to get so angry after about page 1. I would like to say a few things about our progression, our goals etc. We built 13 homes last year in Tulsa, 10 of which had siding exterior - hardie siding which is compressed cement and a lifetime product. I thought it was a great suggestion by my architect, from Houston, who thought that it would stand up best over time to weather elements etc. I was immediately slammed over the looks of siding and realized that this is something tulsans do not like. I have not used siding, nor will use siding on anymore of our Tulsa spec products. We now have 24 homes being built this year. The exteriors will be: Brick and Stucco, Standing seam metal and stucco, Shake and lap board (Bungalow townhomes), all Stucco or some other version. We took your advice and changed what we were doing. Of the 24 homes we are building this year, only 6 are 3 stories and the rest are 2 stories. Only 6 are over 1700 sq ft. Only 6 are over 285k and they have wonderful sweeping views of downtown which is sometimes highly in demand. They are nestled between three different fourplexes and they fit in wisely by being all brick exterior. The styles are: 6 modern all brick, 4 warehouse brick and block with walls of glass, 3 Bungalow townhomes, 10 metal 2 story units with softened stucco accents. 1 SFR Bungalow. All 24 address the street with Balconies directly facing the main street on the street facing units (again thank you for the suggestion).
Again, we took your advice and changed what we were doing. I always eventually read the blogs and always appreciate your comments. We are not trying to come to Cherry Street and change it. If you will look at our recently updated website you will notice that we have just as many remodeled bungalows as we do homes for sale. I love all types of architecture and since Tulsa had no modern housing options, modern seemed a good place to start. I have tried extensively to purchase some of the run down apartments in the area for condo conversions and or fun remodels but have no luck as many of these owners are unrealistic of their proprties value. Because of our lack of housing for people under 200k we have recently agreed to take on a 5 unit new construction project with appx 1100 sq ft each for mid 100s and we should have that plan on the website in the next 4 weeks.
Don't worry so much about what posters on this site say, so many on here are just against everything and ripping people and places for the sake of a zinger is what passes more often than not for conversation these days
quote:
Originally posted by mlofts
I do live in Cherry Street, specifically 1412 S Troost if you would like to come by and discuss Cherry Street at length. I previously lived at 1412 S trenton in unit 2 of a 4 plex.
Hey neighbor!
[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by mlofts
If you are incenuating that Metro is me it is not. I do live in Cherry Street, specifically 1412 S Troost if you would like to come by and discuss Cherry Street at length. I previously lived at 1412 S trenton in unit 2 of a 4 plex. I dont understand why these blogs start to get so angry after about page 1. I would like to say a few things about our progression, our goals etc. We built 13 homes last year in Tulsa, 10 of which had siding exterior - hardie siding which is compressed cement and a lifetime product. I thought it was a great suggestion by my architect, from Houston, who thought that it would stand up best over time to weather elements etc. I was immediately slammed over the looks of siding and realized that this is something tulsans do not like. I have not used siding, nor will use siding on anymore of our Tulsa spec products. We now have 24 homes being built this year. The exteriors will be: Brick and Stucco, Standing seam metal and stucco, Shake and lap board (Bungalow townhomes), all Stucco or some other version. We took your advice and changed what we were doing. Of the 24 homes we are building this year, only 6 are 3 stories and the rest are 2 stories. Only 6 are over 1700 sq ft. Only 6 are over 285k and they have wonderful sweeping views of downtown which is sometimes highly in demand. They are nestled between three different fourplexes and they fit in wisely by being all brick exterior. The styles are: 6 modern all brick, 4 warehouse brick and block with walls of glass, 3 Bungalow townhomes, 10 metal 2 story units with softened stucco accents. 1 SFR Bungalow. All 24 address the street with Balconies directly facing the main street on the street facing units (again thank you for the suggestion).
Again, we took your advice and changed what we were doing. I always eventually read the blogs and always appreciate your comments. We are not trying to come to Cherry Street and change it. If you will look at our recently updated website you will notice that we have just as many remodeled bungalows as we do homes for sale. I love all types of architecture and since Tulsa had no modern housing options, modern seemed a good place to start. I have tried extensively to purchase some of the run down apartments in the area for condo conversions and or fun remodels but have no luck as many of these owners are unrealistic of their proprties value. Because of our lack of housing for people under 200k we have recently agreed to take on a 5 unit new construction project with appx 1100 sq ft each for mid 100s and we should have that plan on the website in the next 4 weeks.
Don't worry so much about what posters on this site say, so many on here are just against everything and ripping people and places for the sake of a zinger is what passes more often than not for conversation these days
I'll second what swake said. These board are very valuable to the city at large and an excellent gathering place for the exchange of ideas, but when reading them, one has to filter out a certain amount of noise.
But without the noise they'd be less valuable. A forum that's too agreeable is almost always a small group of people saying how much they agree with each other. That's not a public forum, that's a dinner party.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
Yeah, Sager seems to be the exception to the rule.
I agree... Sager sold a fellow I know a fine house.. Guess he sells Real Estate as a favor sometimes..
Going back to when he ran Finales... There never was a feeling you were in the middle of a "bait and switch"... He was always a stand up guy...
[;)]
A rising tide that lifts all boats. I am just naive enough to think that if I just keep repeating this mantra, it might actually happen.
Even the smallest boat requires work and upkeep or it will sink no matter what the tide. And you would be amazed at the number of people who punch holes in their own boat. Receding Tides lower all boats.