Down at 600 S Elgin there are two white houses that look like they need to be razed. Just curious as to why there are single family houses of this style in that part of town anyways. That whole block could use some urban renewwal.
That area used to have a great deal of houses like that as it was once a residential neighborhood. There are still some old brick apartment buildings there as well. I agree that their time has long since passed and they need to go.
quote:
Originally posted by breitee
That area used to have a great deal of houses like that as it was once a residential neighborhood. There are still some old brick apartment buildings there as well. I agree that their time has long since passed and they need to go.
I could advocate keeping the brick apartment buildings, but they would first need to kick out all of the residents and gut out both of them and renovate them. Then tear down the houses in between and create a greenspace for the apartments.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
Down at 600 S Elgin there are two white houses that look like they need to be razed. Just curious as to why there are single family houses of this style in that part of town anyways. That whole block could use some urban renewwal.
Across from Avis?
If they are the ones I'm thinking of they sit next to an abandoned luncheonette (good name for an album!) and they have for sale signs on them. They are actually are rented out to tenants and the yards are used for paid parking. Seems like the price was around 175k. They must be circa '07, '08.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
If they are the ones I'm thinking of they sit next to an abandoned luncheonette (good name for an album!) and they have for sale signs on them. They are actually are rented out to tenants and the yards are used for paid parking. Seems like the price was around 175k. They must be circa '07, '08.
175k for both of them? I'll give them $10 and a box of matches.
Just what we need, another parking lot in the downtown area. If your advocating a tear down at least replace it with something besides another parking lot.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
If they are the ones I'm thinking of they sit next to an abandoned luncheonette (good name for an album!) and they have for sale signs on them. They are actually are rented out to tenants and the yards are used for paid parking. Seems like the price was around 175k. They must be circa '07, '08.
175k for both of them? I'll give them $10 and a box of matches.
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe? Do we have so many 100-year-old houses in Tulsa that we can tear them down willy-nilly?
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe? Do we have so many 100-year-old houses in Tulsa that we can tear them down willy-nilly?
Completely agree. I just moved to the "new urbanist" neighborhood of State Thomas (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Thomas,_Dallas,_Texas%22) in Uptown Dallas. Most of the buildings are shiny new townhomes and apartments, but the neighborhood gets its charm from the few remaining single family homes--some of which are historic Victorians, while others are just old houses. They used to be run down homes. Now they are day spas, law offices, or residences. But they help the area keep from seeming too sterile and master-planned.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe? Do we have so many 100-year-old houses in Tulsa that we can tear them down willy-nilly?
Completely agree. I just moved to the "new urbanist" neighborhood of State Thomas (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Thomas,_Dallas,_Texas%22) in Uptown Dallas. Most of the buildings are shiny new townhomes and apartments, but the neighborhood gets its charm from the few remaining single family homes--some of which are historic Victorians, while others are just old houses. They used to be run down homes. Now they are day spas, law offices, or residences. But they help the area keep from seeming too sterile and master-planned.
Are you two familiar with the 2 shacks in question? Rennovating these would amount to razing them and rebuilding.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe? Do we have so many 100-year-old houses in Tulsa that we can tear them down willy-nilly?
Completely agree. I just moved to the "new urbanist" neighborhood of State Thomas (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Thomas,_Dallas,_Texas%22) in Uptown Dallas. Most of the buildings are shiny new townhomes and apartments, but the neighborhood gets its charm from the few remaining single family homes--some of which are historic Victorians, while others are just old houses. They used to be run down homes. Now they are day spas, law offices, or residences. But they help the area keep from seeming too sterile and master-planned.
Are you two familiar with the 2 shacks in question? Rennovating these would amount to razing them and rebuilding.
no, they don't know. They just spout things. Those houses are junk. I'd like to save them too, but it simply isn't going to happen. My idea is for the entire block. Tear that junk down, kick out all the bums in the apartments, renovate them both, create a green space in the middle and keep the parking in the back for good paying tenants.
I drove by there this morning. Those buildings just aren't in any shape to do anything with. They look like you could blow real hard on them and they'd just fall over.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
I drove by there this morning. Those buildings just aren't in any shape to do anything with. They look like you could blow real hard on them and they'd just fall over.
They are held together by termite tubes and scum.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe? Do we have so many 100-year-old houses in Tulsa that we can tear them down willy-nilly?
Completely agree. I just moved to the "new urbanist" neighborhood of State Thomas (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Thomas,_Dallas,_Texas%22) in Uptown Dallas. Most of the buildings are shiny new townhomes and apartments, but the neighborhood gets its charm from the few remaining single family homes--some of which are historic Victorians, while others are just old houses. They used to be run down homes. Now they are day spas, law offices, or residences. But they help the area keep from seeming too sterile and master-planned.
Are you two familiar with the 2 shacks in question? Rennovating these would amount to razing them and rebuilding.
I know the houses in question but haven't taken a close look in a few years. Maybe they should be condemned--I don't know. But it's always worth looking again at older structures in historic districts to see if they can be salvaged--particularly considering that property values in the neighborhood they're in are about to start rising.
This is why I have suggested a demolition committee for downtown. The idea would be, before you can tear down any structure in the IDL, you have to go before the board and show that the building lacks historical significance or is totally beyond repair, and also show what your replacement plans are.
This would, in theory, keep people like the Tulsa World from tearing down Art Deco buildings for parking lots. Not sure these houses qualify, but it's the same thought process anyway.
I looked at the houses two years ago. They are worth saving simply because they are the last two I can find within the core of the downtown and are older than nearby Central High, now PSO. They will require imagination, hard work, time, money and some understanding of those old building materials and techniques. Not something easily found these days. Inteller, if you saw my home when I bought it 25 years ago you would have razed it too as well as most of original Maple Ridge,Morningside, Riverview, Carson and Owen Park.
My plan was to bridge the two structures.
I saw them today. They are not great, but not horrible. I could see them turning into some obscure coffee shop or music store pretty easy.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
I saw them today. They are not great, but not horrible. I could see them turning into some obscure coffee shop or music store pretty easy.
Wanna' fund me and prove Inteller & co. wrong? I'll rehab them on cost plus![:D]
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Wanna' fund me and prove Inteller & co. wrong? I'll rehab them on cost plus![:D]
On cost plus a smile? That sounds reasonable to me. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
I saw them today. They are not great, but not horrible. I could see them turning into some obscure coffee shop or music store pretty easy.
Wanna' fund me and prove Inteller & co. wrong? I'll rehab them on cost plus![:D]
yes, please prove me wrong. they are shacks that need to go.
I took it upon myself to take some photos after work... Here's a panorama I made of them...
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2021/2261851814_711cfbb5e0_b.jpg)
I'll post closeup later...
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
If they are the ones I'm thinking of they sit next to an abandoned luncheonette (good name for an album!) and they have for sale signs on them. They are actually are rented out to tenants and the yards are used for paid parking. Seems like the price was around 175k. They must be circa '07, '08.
175k for both of them? I'll give them $10 and a box of matches.
Why not renovate them into some sort of interesting boutique or cafe?
Have at it.
the big tree next to the catholic bum slum and the first white house needs to have mistletoe eradication done on it or that parasite will kill it.
YES, I drive by those pieces of crap every day. Give me the keys to the bulldozer, they are absolutely falling apart. Build anything but a parking lot and it will be much better than it was before.
You guys write me the check for supplies. I'll start this weekend. [;)] When I spoke to the owner two years ago she was basing its value on the parking spaces available. Typical. Thats why stuff got torn down the last decade. Even so when I put the pen to it, the parking spaces wouldn't make the mortgage. Isn't that a historical district?
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2177/2261380659_a7bce48c01_b.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2335/2261381331_6a68606a9b_b.jpg)
(http://www.imemc.org/attachments/oct2007/caterpillard9bulldozer.jpg)
I'll pitch in $50. [:D] And yeah... that tree looks very sad :(
Grrrrrrr... how does this stuff happen? We need some insanely rich and motivated investor to slather his/her millions around downtown. Paging Mr. Warren! Orrrrr maybe we need T. Boone Pickens Avenue?
BTW, good job on the photodocumentation, DScott. Definitely helps visualize which slums we're talking about [;)]
The house on the right could probably be saved through some MAJOR rehabilitation....but the one next to the catholic bum slum needs to be torn down because it has had modifications to the original roof line done and i'm sure that cape cod shingle look on the top is NOT original. I'm also of the belief that the out building between the catholics and the first house is not authorized/permitted and needs to come down. I bet if I did a survey I'd find that it crosses the lot line.
I'd buy them both for $90k with the understanding that the first house is coming down. And I'd see how far $10k gets me on the second house before I decide to tear it down.
You live at 101st and Memorial. Could there be some cross culturalization going on here? Perhaps the owners of this slum house could chime in on what to do with the development on your corner?
How does the plight of most of downtown any different than these two properties? Most have out of date styling, are more valuable as parking than their original use, sit vacant, for sale but over priced, suffer probable encroachment, are unappreciated by the burbs, and sport out of town owners. One difference is it doesn't have the graffiti that the Tulsa Club building has.
After you invest 90k to buy them, 10k on failed rehab efforts, you have a 100k parking lot that has to offer roadway access to the Catholic widows colony next door diminishing the number of parking spaces to about a dozen. If they go for $40 a month at 100% occupancy thats $480 a month. Will that cover your mortgage, taxes and maintenance?
There is nothing cross cultural about those dumps being dumps. If I owned some absolute garbage property that I was hanging on to while it fell apart and rotted in an effort to try and sell it for parking, at some point I would get tired of waiting..
We don't need more parking, we need HABITABLE and DESIRABLE places for people to live and frequent. Those houses in the condition they are in and the parking lots they would probably become are both NOT what we need. I was also thinking about any historical value of the homes, and you are right the house on the left has definitely been screwed with and ruined.. and the one on the right has gaping holes all over the outside. I bet it smells lovely in there.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
You live at 101st and Memorial. Could there be some cross culturalization going on here? Perhaps the owners of this slum house could chime in on what to do with the development on your corner?
How does the plight of most of downtown any different than these two properties? Most have out of date styling, are more valuable as parking than their original use, sit vacant, for sale but over priced, suffer probable encroachment, are unappreciated by the burbs, and sport out of town owners. One difference is it doesn't have the graffiti that the Tulsa Club building has.
After you invest 90k to buy them, 10k on failed rehab efforts, you have a 100k parking lot that has to offer roadway access to the Catholic widows colony next door diminishing the number of parking spaces to about a dozen. If they go for $40 a month at 100% occupancy thats $480 a month. Will that cover your mortgage, taxes and maintenance?
cross culturization? i dont follow what you are implying.
If I thought it was a good investment I'd snatch it up and rehab it. I love strange houses in downtown areas and I imagine someone would love living in one. However, the sea of pavement that the neighborhood as become do well to take away from any appeal it may have.
I've come to hate surface parking. If anyone wants to buy it to rehab I'd be in for $1000 for fun. Junior partner, anyone? [;)]
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
If I thought it was a good investment I'd snatch it up and rehab it. I love strange houses in downtown areas and I imagine someone would love living in one. However, the sea of pavement that the neighborhood as become do well to take away from any appeal it may have.
I've come to hate surface parking. If anyone wants to buy it to rehab I'd be in for $1000 for fun. Junior partner, anyone? [;)]
I'll junior partner too. Depending on the rehab plan I can spare a few grand. Sparks has to come WAY down on his price though. He is dreaming like all the other old fogies holding on to DT properties thinking they can make out like bandits.
I believe Sparks is a woman. At least that's who i talked to. I may just take you all up on junior partnerships. I think there is more than an old dump there and though the challenge is great it would get tremendous pr and goodwill from downtown supporters.
For some reason, the good Lord put me in a position to amble among disparate classes seamlessly. I go from discussing Dog the Bounty hunter and the maintenance of a '96 Buick to the Puritans having been high on spoiled grain and stupid from lead dinnerware. From how Clemens is lying but Canseco is an donkey to how PSA's are controversial in the medical community. From people who know the difference in brush hogs to those who know the thin line between integrity and fraud. You guys aren't in the same culture as the longtime owner of a downtown property, his tax considerations, his choices, his needs. You take your culture of investment real estate, development savvy and legal knowledge then apply it to people in really different circumstances. They don't care about all the things you have pointed out. Someone they respect told them they're sitting on a "gold mine". They are more scared of losing the mine or selling it too cheap than making it a useful mine. You guys don't think like they do but...its their property and serves their needs. I don't know if Sparks fits that description, he/she may be a real player, but thats what i mean by "cross culturalization". You assume they just don't have the benefit of your superior culture of business. FWIW they do the same to you.
I know CF is a midtown lawyer, and Inteller is a politics 'burbanite. What's your hood 'Ric?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Someone they respect told them they're sitting on a "gold mine".
yes, and that is the problem. That same person tells all of the people downtown the same thing. That person is stupid. I bet I could guess that person off a short list of the stupid old money ****s here in Tulsa.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I know CF is a midtown lawyer, and Inteller is a politics 'burbanite. What's your hood 'Ric?
Assuming that's me.... Broken Arrow livin' downtown code writin' computer nerd :) My problem with these people that wait 20 years trying to find that magical offer while their property falls into disrepair is this:
Can of paint: $15. Paintbrush: $1. Nails: $2. Hammer: $5. Scrap wood: available laying around property. Fix your s***. If you need help, ask.
quote:
Originally posted by EricP
My problem with these people that wait 20 years trying to find that magical offer while their property falls into disrepair is this:
that pretty much sums up all property holders inside the IDL.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by EricP
My problem with these people that wait 20 years trying to find that magical offer while their property falls into disrepair is this:
that pretty much sums up all property holders inside the IDL.
I came across this kind of behavior when i was restoring old cars. Some guy would have a '64 Corvair 4 door rust bucket with oil seeping on the garage floor. Nothing valuable about it except as a repository for parts but no, ITS A CLASSIC! MY DAD BOUGHT IT NEW! Someone would tell him not to let it go cheap cause they're selling for thousands on the West coast. So they'd put an Earl Sheib two tone turquoise paint job on the heap and advertise it for $5500 FIRM! Hard to talk to them once the "gold mine" mentality solidifies.
Maybe the city should consider flipping the tax code.
James Kunstler encouraged the idea of not a property tax, but a land tax. That would encourage the economic response of land owners to intensify land use which would benefit the city. It would also hit all the people who are sitting on land and waiting for it to be worth something with a massive tax bill and encourage them to dump the property onto the market and let people who want to develop the land get their hands on the property or actually develop it themselves.
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2335/2261381331_6a68606a9b_b.jpg)
Last March, I (along with two other TN forum users) looked for these houses on the historic Sanborn maps on the Tulsa City-County Library's website (//%22http://www.tulsalibrary.org/research/SanbornSearchGuide.pdf%22).
We made the following guesses based on what we found on the Sanborn maps:
1. The house on the north (on the left in the photo) was built at (or moved to) the southeast corner of Sixth and Elgin before August 1907. It faced north toward Sixth Street. Sometime between 1907 and 1915, the house was rotated to face Elgin and was moved approximately 50 feet to the south to its current location.
2. The house on the south (on the right in the photo) was built at (or moved to) its current location between August 1907 and May 1911.
$175K? Thanks for the tip!
"Old" isn't enough of a qualification to deem something "historic", IMO. Downtown, even in its hey day was littered with various types of residential...unfortunately the IDL cut off the oxygen for most of the owner occupied type residences, so we are left with a few homes that are old, but have generally been screwed up over the years; either with awkward additions, deferred maintenance issues, or they have been subdivided into individual apartments. It would take a particularly philanthropic type to tackle one of these for rehab, and because in most cases one would be totally redoing these houses, the chances of a true historic rehab is unlikely. More likely these homes would get new drywall, hardyboard siding, MDF casing and trim, cheap kitchen and bathroom cabinets and fixtures, hollow doors, new paint and a cheap roof. Sure, it makes it habitable, but is it really going to inspire new reinvestment on the empty lot next to it? I know it is not popular, but sometimes in these situations wiping the slate clean is necessary for the greater goal, which is to provide vibrancy, opportunity, and new life into our old downtown.
quote:
Originally posted by Kenosha
"Old" isn't enough of a qualification to deem something "historic", IMO. Downtown, even in its hey day was littered with various types of residential...unfortunately the IDL cut off the oxygen for most of the owner occupied type residences, so we are left with a few homes that are old, but have generally been screwed up over the years; either with awkward additions, deferred maintenance issues, or they have been subdivided into individual apartments. It would take a particularly philanthropic type to tackle one of these for rehab, and because in most cases one would be totally redoing these houses, the chances of a true historic rehab is unlikely. More likely these homes would get new drywall, hardyboard siding, MDF casing and trim, cheap kitchen and bathroom cabinets and fixtures, hollow doors, new paint and a cheap roof. Sure, it makes it habitable, but is it really going to inspire new reinvestment on the empty lot next to it? I know it is not popular, but sometimes in these situations wiping the slate clean is necessary for the greater goal, which is to provide vibrancy, opportunity, and new life into our old downtown.
Thats a very thin line you're drawing. Sure if a rehab is done badly it isn't worth the effort. But I think those same arguments can always be made about "old" vs "historical". Brookside is old. How is it historical? For that matter very few homes in Maple Ridge are historical. Most are merely big, old and good examples of the building styles of the period. The terms "craftsman cottage" and "bungalow" seem designed to have justified their continued existence when "cramped" and "functionally obsolete" would be just as accurate. I just like old houses for what they are. Disappearing examples of how life was a century ago. The one on the south is similar to my neighbors home that was moved from the downtown area to the Southside addition by Lee School in the 20's. It is perfect for a young couple or single and has been improved by each successive owner till it now is quite pretty and worth 5 times its 1980 selling price. Odd that many new homes emulate these plain styles and charge extra for the period look.
One also wonders how wiping the slate clean downtown to this point has added to its vibrancy and opportunity. Well, opportunity for more parking anyway.
For the record, I wasn't talking about urban renewal for urban renewal's sake. What I was implying was if some of these structures made way for a specific, larger urban solution (in downtown), I could live with that. As far as our historic districts are concerned, I certainly agree that it is the combined character of the homes as opposed to a single structure that defines the historic designation. It is a clear distinction, and an important one.