The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

It is very pleasant to read Good News associated with the rebirth of Downtown and surrounding areas.
Hopefully the coming year will see much, much more of the same.

---

2/9/2011 2:09:00 PM
The birth of a community
New developments push Pearl District closer to long-term vision



Jamie Jamieson has a theory about progress and popular perception.

“When one person goes into a blighted urban area, they’re a deranged lunatic,” said Jamieson, developer of The Village at Central Park. “With two, they’re still deranged, but not quite so. When there’s three, they’re not deranged anymore; they’re on the front edge of a curve.”

For a decade, the Pearl District advocate has worn the mantle of neighborhood quixote.

Now, with the opening of Lot No. 6 art gallery and bar, as well as the announcement of The Phoenix Cafe, a new coffee bar by City Councilor Blake Ewing; Square Records LLC, a production company and recording studio by Jeremy Grodhaus; and Black Pearl, a Mediterranean restaurant by Khaled Rahall, it seems Jamieson is finally on the forefront of downtown’s newest hot spot.

“Things are really cooking,” said Dave Strader, an area property owner and president of The Pearl District Association. “It took us a long time to get to this point.”

Originally formed to combat gangs, prostitution and drug use, The Pearl District Association is now fighting for federal funds – and form-based codes – to ensure the area’s continued success.

“You have to have a land-use policy that says, ‘Yes, you can built traditional, mixed-use, funky (and) walkable neighborhoods,’” said Jamieson. “For the last 80 years, the U.S. has enacted rules and policies that say you shall separate schools from homes and shopping from apartments. We need a new code to restore what’s already here, not to mention put in new stuff.”

Oklahoma’s first form-based code applies to The Village at Central Park TIF district, from 11th to Fifth streets and the IDL to Peoria Avenue. The Pearl District Association is now pushing to expand form-based codes east of Peoria Avenue. In November, area representatives presented the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission with a rezoning plan.

“The Pearl is at the forefront of economic development strategy,” said Jamieson. “Unfortunately, the city hasn’t noticed. We’re still wasting our money on widening roads to nowhere instead of investing in sustainable, urban neighborhoods.”

Rachel Navarro, of One Architecture LLC and Live Well Properties, owns several properties in the Pearl District with her husband Shelby Navarro, including the One Architecture building at 418 S. Peoria Ave., Lot No. 6 building at 1323 E. Sixth St. and Pearl Place at 1302 E. Sixth St. where The Phoenix Cafe and Square Records will open this spring.

The couple also owns the E House at 1319 E. Sixth St.; it is vacant.

“When we first started thinking about these projects, it was sort of like a pipe dream,” Navarro said. “Now, not only does it seem perfectly reasonable to us, it makes sense to other people, too.”

Strader, who has been working to improve the Pearl District since the late 1970s, said The Village at Central Park was the area’s first “big accomplishment.”

Today, the 60-unit, Georgetown-inspired development at 754 S. Norfolk Ave. is fully occupied, although Jamieson said some local realtors initially urged clients to avoid the urban neighborhood.

“Our concept was for a walkable, healthy neighborhood,” Jamieson said. “We wanted to create a beachhead to say it is possible for serious-minded people to invest their assets and to be happy and live comfortably in the inner city.”

Jamieson said he views The Village at Central Park, combined with the neighboring Centennial Park and Cultural Center, as the “first pearl” of what he hopes will be “a whole string.”

“We’re going to have a canal run down the middle of Sixth Street, which is part of a new, really creative solution to the neighborhood being in a flood basin,” said Jamieson.

The Pearl District Association is also working to secure $8 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to construct a 65 acre-feet detention pond at Fifth Place and Owasso Avenue. Long-term plans call for a 113 acre-feet pond near Eighth Street and Quincy Avenue.

“Places like Amsterdam and Venice have canals running down the streets and tall buildings on either side,” Jamieson said. “That’s what we’re thinking about here — an urban canal and waterway system so when we detain water, it’s not only stormwater detention, but also the context for repopulation, revitalization. It adds value, rather than subtracting value.”

High-density housing is planned around the ponds.

“Whether the canal happens or not — and, frankly, I would be thrilled if it did — I think the addition of the floodwater ponds, especially on the east side are a good thing,” Ewing said. “I think we’ll see a residential renewal following the commercial.”

Khaled Rahall, owner of the recently reopened Eclipse Cultural House, has been invested in the Pearl District for 35 years. He owns about 20 properties and plans to open Black Pearl, a Mediterranean restaurant and rotisserie at 1334 E. Sixth St., in March. He formerly owned Vagabond Restaurant.

“We will serve the same Mediterranean food we served back then,” Rahall said. “We will also have an outdoor facility and possibly a wine bar.”

Rahall said the Pearl District’s continued revitalization depends on the city.

“I have heard this for many, many years,” Rahall said, referring to new plans for the area. “I went to meeting after meeting for the neighborhood — and nothing. We’re still in a flood zone.”

Jamieson admitted progress is slow moving, but said the number of new investors coming into the area are suggestive of its recent successes.

“Leading change in a city that is pretty sclerotic is difficult,” he said. “Tulsa is still populated by a lot of people who don’t want anything to change, who are locked into the way they’ve always done things.

“But if you’re not delivering what the new demographics of people want, if you’re not delivering to the value system of new generations, then you’re going to be history. Tulsa has to realize entire paradigms are changing and that we must think and do things differently if we are to survive, let alone prosper.”

Pearl District zoning informational meeting set


By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer
Published: 12/18/2011  2:23 AM
Last Modified: 12/18/2011  5:33 AM

Planning officials on Monday will hold a public meeting to discuss a proposal to apply the city's newly adopted form-based code to the entire Pearl District.


"It's an informational meeting to introduce the form-based code to the property owners," said Wayne Alberty with the Indian Nations Council of Governments. "The informational meetings are being held before the public hearing before the Planning Commission."

Monday's meeting will be the third of its kind. INCOG officials have given two presentations to business owners in the district. Monday's meeting is open to all residential property owners in the district or anyone else interested in the new code.

In April, the City Council voted to add the form-based code to its zoning regulations and applied it to a pilot area made up of a small section of the district with fewer than 100 properties. Alberty estimated that there are about 1,000 properties within the Pearl District.

The district as it is known today was created in 2006 as the Sixth Street Infill Plan. It covers slightly more than one-half square mile stretching from Interstate 244 to 11th Street and from Utica Avenue to the Inner Dispersal Loop.

The Pearl District Design Team, a citizens group, advocated for the creation of the infill plan with the intent of using a form-based code to implement it.

Unlike the current zoning code, which focuses on the separation of land uses and accommodates the automobile, the form-based code calls for the creation of a dense, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood such as those found in urban communities.

The code addresses issues such as a structure's orientation or placement on a lot, its height, and the use of windows and doors to create an inviting setting for passers-by. It also focuses on the streetscape, including lighting and trees.

The form-based code can, in theory, be applied to any section of town. However, each section of town that adopts the code creates its own regulating plan. The plan sets out in detail what is and is not allowed within the area as well as what is required.

Plans are created by interested parties in cooperation with the city. The plans must be adopted by the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. Only then can a request be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council.

Even as the push to expand the form-based code to the entire Pearl District moves forward, the Planning Commission is working to fine-tune the new code.

Commissioners, at the request of the City Council, are working to address a provision in the new code that has some property owners concerned.

The provision requires property owners to rebuild according to the standards of the new form-based code in the event a structure is destroyed in a natural disaster or fire, even if the structure existed before the form-based code was applied.

I'm very happy to see the expansion of the form based codes... now I'm wondering what all they have in mind for the shape of development in this area.

Flea on the back of the dog.  It's always been this way, since the early 70's.

So, I couldn't get the link to The World article, but the article in today's paper about the form based codes was seriously one-sided.  It was completely omited that existing building are grandfathered in.

is it this one?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20120403_16_A12_TheTul687259

Pearl District zoning plan idea before panel to expand pedestrian-friendly code area appears ripe for controversy

By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer
Published: 4/3/2012  2:23 AM
Last Modified: 4/3/2012  6:09 AM

The Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission on Wednesday will weigh the wisdom of applying the city's newly adopted form-based code to the entire Pearl District.


At present, the code - along with a regulating plan - includes 125 parcels of land covering about 60 acres of the district between Fifth Place and 11th Street west of Peoria Avenue.

The entire Pearl District, meanwhile, includes 1,172 parcels of land covering roughly 300 acres and is bounded by U.S. 75 and Utica Avenue between Interstate 244 and 11th Street.

Commissioners will be asked Wednesday to consider a regulating plan for the portion of the district not covered by the new code.

The plan is the first step in expanding the form-based code to the entire district.

Generally speaking, the form-based code encourages the development of dense, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods and discourages the use of automobiles.

Wednesday's public hearing is sure to be contentious, with some business owners having already voiced their opposition to the new code.

At a February Planning Commission meeting, attorney Malcolm Rosser, representing Sonic Corp., told commissioners that extending the form-based zoning code to the entire district would doom the company's drive-in restaurant at 120 S. Utica Ave.

"The short answer on this from their (Sonic's) standpoint is that if the form-based code is extended out to cover this store, that store will eventually be shut down," Rosser said.

Nancy Keithline and her husband, Charles Keithline, own the Pediatric Dental Group building at 602 S. Utica Ave.

In a letter sent to other property owners in the district last week, Charles Keithline said the new code would limit the design and placement of new buildings while restricting parking and making existing structures nonconforming.

"To expand the code to include all of the Pearl District seems short-sighted at best and possibly disastrous to property values," he wrote.

Of particular concern to some business owners is the new code's requirement that new construction be a minimum of two stories and be built up to the property line.

In addition, vehicle access to properties is limited to alleys, with parking behind buildings.

Mike Thornbrugh, a spokesman for QuikTrip Corp., said those requirements simply won't work for the company as it plans to build its next-generation store on the site of an existing QuikTrip at 11th Street and Utica Avenue.

The Planning Commission recently recommended approval of a Planned Unit Development for the new store. Should the City Council fail to approve that plan, Thornbrugh said, "that particular site will deteriorate because we can't do anything."

Thornbrugh said QuikTrip has tried to work with the Pearl District Association to reach a compromise and that the new store would have sidewalks, bike racks and landscaping - all part of QuikTrip's effort to work in the spirit of the new code.

But, he added, "common sense will tell you a convenience store, you get in quick and you get out. A two-story building, that would not work."

Dave Strader, president of the Pearl District Association, said his group is not trying to push the form-based code down anyone's throat.

He noted, for example, that the code includes "auto-oriented" areas near Interstate 244 and Utica Avenue.

Strader said QuikTrip was presented with several design options for its proposed 11th Street and Utica Avenue store but rejected them all.

"They have not worked with the Pearl District," Strader said. "They are really rigid with their designs."

Strader also took exception to the notion, expressed by some opponents of the new code, that the process was not inclusive.

"They don't seem to have any interest until there is a deadline, and if they had been involved in the planning from the beginning, there might be a different outcome," he said.

Rachel Navarro, who owns property along Sixth Street and Peoria Avenue, is a strong supporter of the new code. She said the parking requirements in the existing zoning code make it necessary for her tenants to get a zoning variance each time they open a business.

"The form-based code will eliminate that requirement," she said.

Her support of the new code is not simply a product of self-interest.

"I support the whole vision of the Pearl District Association for the neighborhood," she said. "The vision for walkable, urban infill that addresses the pedestrian.

"I am behind that. I'm excited about that."
Planning Commission
What: Meeting

When: 1:30 p.m. Wednesday

Where: City Council chambers, City Hall, Second Street and Cincinnati Avenue
Form-based zoning
Under the form-based zoning code approved by the City Council in October, a building's form - as well as its placement on a lot - takes precedence over how the land would be used.

The code aims to create dense, urbanlike environments that are pedestrian-friendly and discourages the use of automobiles. For example, vehicle access is limited to alleys, with parking behind buildings.


Original Print Headline: Panel to address Pearl District zoning

While the article doesn't go into it, I thought the concern was that the new code would apply to any rebuild.    

That is it, but I think I may have read an earlier version or something.  Maybe I didn't read the whole thing (Oops! :o)

...unless, of course, you understood that the second story may be another use besides a convenience store...

+1, sir!

 If not here, then where?

  Tulsa has a lot of great suburban neighborhoods and areas that can match the best of those in many a city even twice our size.  We can be proud of that.  But what we DON'T have are good urban neighborhoods and areas for those people who like that lifestyle.  Just as some couldn't imagine living in a highrise, or walking and taking transit every day, many wouldn't dream of living in a single family, detached house with a yard to mow and a highway commute.  I know of many who would be appaled at the thought of it.  I have friends and family who have left Tulsa because it doesn't offer any good urban living options.  I have heard many a story of people who have either left or chosen not to move here because we don't as a city offer good urban living.  I have also met people who might have moved here, IF they could have found a place to live.  Just as some of you would never dream of living in Manhattan, there are a lot of people who would never want to live in a suburban style neighborhood.  Now we are not going to create Manhattan here, but in the Pearl District and in Downtown, we can start re-creating great "Urban Village" and "urban neighborhood" lifestyle options for the region.  We had it once, we can do it again.

And, you must realize it's not enough to simply live in a "tall building" or a particular style of apartment, when you're an urbanite there are certain things you absolutely expect to go along with that lifestyle.  For example, often your apartment is smaller than a traditional home, but it doesn't matter to the urbanite for the sidewalks become your hallways, the nearby coffee shop your "breakfast nook or study", no need for a home theater for you have a real theater down the way, parks are your yard, the local pub your den, and so on.  It's a different way of living and enjoying the world.  Something we do not offer here, and we lose out as a city because we do not.  

Surveys and statistics are showing that ever more people are wanting that urban lifestyle.  And if we are not going to create good ones in areas like the Pearl District and Downtown, Brookside and Cherry Street, then where?  Those areas by the way, combined, represent a mere ONE percent of the city, surely we can manage it in ONE percent of the city?  Or are we going to say, No, Tulsa is not going to offer that?  

Are we content to continue watching so many young and talented people, and businesses by the way, move to other cities that do offer that lifestyle? If not here, then where?      


Urban neighborhoods.

Just as you wouldn't want certain things in your suburban style neighborhood next to your home, so too there are things that the urbanite does not want in his neighborhood. Also, many a business, farm or other enterprise has been pushed out of some rural areas of our city as suburban neigborhoods and developments begin to grow into them,,, so too a similar thing might also happen in an urban neighborhood.  This scenario actually HAS happened before in this area when the zoning laws were changed from what were once "naturally occuring Form Based Codes" with streets built that way because that was the norm, but then things were changed forcing minimum parking requirements, outlawing mixed use developments, etc.  Basically since times have changed again, what your doing with Form Based Codes is helping to reset the area back to something like the form it once enjoyed.  

The urbanite and urban business need the sidewalk to be active and pedestrian friendly.  A business that doesn't fit in to that "form" can be just as awkward or even harmful as many a thing I could think of going in next to your suburban style home in your neighborhood.  Different neighborhoods with different needs and "forms".  Do we only want suburban neighborhoods in Tulsa, or do we also want at least some small areas to have good urban neighborhoods?  

If not here, then where?

Form Based Codes are a way to help pedestrian friendly fabric become established in a car oriented area.

Once a "form", urban pedestrian friendly, or suburban car oriented, establishes itself, it wants to grow, IF it's allowed, and ONCE it establishes itself.  Otherwise in our situation with some 200 square miles of suburban car oriented development, and urban forms made illegal, the urban form is obviously going to have a rough time of it.  Think about what QT did in Brookside recently as one small example.  The people and many businesses of Brookside came together, worked long and hard, did some difficult give and take negotiatiating, to come up with the "Brookside Plan" which also wanted any new buildings built up to the sidewalk, wanted to protect existing buildings whenever possible, etc. But QT basically said F-you and tore down old buildings, and expanded their car oriented design creating an even larger gap in the pedestrian friendly fabric.  Contiguous pedestrian friendly fabric is important. Go downtown and walk from Boston Ave along 5th to the Mayo Hotel.  It's a wonderful walk that is slowly coming back to life again.  But once you get to the end of that little stretch of street, you look each way and decide to turn back because the pedestrian friendly nature in the area ends.  Go north or south on Boston Ave from around 5th, again, good pedestrian friendly fabric that suddenly comes to an end within short order.  There are great things to see and visit just a little ways away like the Blue Dome District, or the Boston Ave Church, but nobody wants to walk to those places because of the gaps in the pedestrian friendly fabric.  Just as thats true in downtown, its also true in other areas like the Pearl District, Cherry Street and Brookside. Those gaps and "car oriented forms" hurt pedestrian friendly businesses and keep us from being able to create good urban neighborhoods.  

If not in places like the Pearl District, then where?

Transit.  "Pedestrian Friendly" and "Transit Friendly" are the same thing.

  Currently good transit is illegal in Tulsa.  In most parts of the city by far, we have minimum parking requirements, mixed use is illegal, accessory dwelling units are illegal, etc. Transit friendly and Pedestrian friendly are the same thing.   If you make pedestrian friendly spaces difficult, or downright impossible and illegal to build, then any hopes you have for good transit go down the drain which again hurts any effort we may have towards creating good urban living.

If you have any concern for transit and having it be the most efficient and cost effective it can be, one has to realize that your transit is only as good as your pedestrian friendly areas.  Otherwise it's going to cost you a fortune and you will still have people compaining about lousy, ineffective, cumbersome transit. Downtown can't be a sole island of "urbanity" with say a trolley or bus making a little circle within the IDL, though that would certainly help our current so called "parking situation".  There needs to be other pedestrian friendly places to go to, and to come from, for transit to really work and to create a viable, urban living experience.  The nearby Pearl District is a perfectly logical place to do just that.  

 If we want it, and help to get it established with Form Based Codes, even in this tiny part of the city, we CAN again have superb urban living right here in Tulsa.  We have great suburban living options we can brag about and be proud of, lets work to create great urban living options that we can be proud of as well.  The old pedestrian friendly form and businesses here lost out when the times and zoning laws changed, and over the decades we have created some really fine suburban areas.  But times are changing again, now is the time for us to decide if we want to begin to re-offer really good urban areas for the ever growing number of people who want that.  

If not here, then where?  Woodland Hills? Not likely happen there.  It would be absurd to try this there if we couldn't do it here in a far more obvious part of the city.  Here in this neighborhood, near downtown, where all this work to create these Form Based Codes, get them up here to TMAPC, and so on, has happened,,, this is the logical place.

   Do we as a city, as a region, want to be able to offer good, competitive, attractive, urban living options?

If not here in this, comparably speaking, easy and obvious area, then where?

That's putting it mildly.  I'm not against it for those that want it but I have to admit it's foreign to me.

Moving on....

You have talked about nodes connected by transit before.  At least I think it was you.  How much traffic do you think there could be among Cherry Street, Brady/Blue Dome, and Brookside?  I lumped Brady/Blue Dome since they are actually pretty close to each other regarding walking.  If the wasteland was eliminated the whole Brady/Blue Dome area would really only be defined by north or south of the RR.  I have never really been a bar hopper or trinket shopper so the concept of dinner on Cherry St and then going to Brookside for drinks just for something to do is also foreign to me. 

I think the "nodes" idea would be a longer term sort of thing.  The first steps would be start transit downtown which A. Alleviates the need for more parking downtown by better using what exists and also allows developers to cut costs by adding less or no parking to their developments. and B. Instead of spending money on new parking garages the city instead spend it on transit.  C. You start developing a robust, dense, very pedestrian friendly core and urban habits.  The other thing you do is zone for those node areas to develop as pedestrian friendly ones so that when you get to "step 2" extending transit out to the nodes, those nodes are bigger and denser areas to go to than they are now.  So essentially your either going to be spending money dowtown on parking for the Brady/Blue Dome or transit.  Your "traffic" is either going to be the number of people looking for parking in the Blue Dome/Brady districts, or those same people parking elsewhere and using transit. Your going to have to accommodate them one way or another, it's HOW we want our downtown to develop, the path we take, car oriented, or transit oriented, that is the key.

All of this is not just about people going downtown bar hopping or trinket shopping.  Its also about the growing population of people living downtown and hopefully around those "nodes" as well, and the growing number of businesses and visitors/tourists. Again, rather than spending millions on new parking garages, spend it instead on transit to better use the ample parking that already exists in and nearby downtown.  Also, in time as you get more people living and visiting downtown and if they are already on foot, transit to those other nodes really helps expand and greatly enhance the urban living experience.  For example, If I live downtown and don't have, or want to have, a car, or two, being able to easily go to other areas of the city to shop, work, have a meeting, dine, entertainment options, etc. makes it all that much more realistic for me to not have that car.  Downtown all by itself, might feel constraining and limiting.  If we want true urban living in Tulsa, it will be very desirable to have a little more than just downtown.  We alread have some decent starts with nearby Cherry Street and hopefully the Pearl District, and even Brookside.  Then add to that biking, or having a scooter, renting a car whenever you want to take other trips etc.  Your options open up and it becomes more realistic to have that true urban lifestyle.  Then, the reverse is also true in that as those nodes develop and infill, people living near them or visiting them can then easily transit to downtown or the other areas. Step by step "pardon the pun" you build up your high quality, enjoyable, pedestrian friendly infrastructure and also slowly alleviate the necessity to have multiple cars per couple or family, or even one.   And too, all of this really helps your regular transit throughout the city for once people get to downtown or one of those nodes, they are good to go with lots of options.  This would imo, increase ridership there, which would increase ridership on your downtown/node transit.

Jeez, that article illustrates why changing the status quo is so hard in this town. People see things in stark black and white and automatically jump to fear in the face of change. The code change is for new construction, not existing and the opt out/exclusion process will be exactly the same as it is to day (TPA approval process).

Form based code -vs- status quo can be summed up in a few pictures

Form based
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3576/3452722348_01b6f11f49.jpg)

(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKjTSHc1mW9HK_nw63FOLfnC5t7CRqh17wU5wI_0PeIB9s5lsAb2Pc_4XX1A)

Status Quo
(http://cbk1.google.com/cbk?output=thumbnail&cb_client=maps_sv&thumb=2&thumbfov=120&ll=36.137276,-95.922411&cbll=36.137249,-95.922436&thumbpegman=1&w=300&h=118)

I was wondering the same thing (why do people not get the grandfather clause?).  If a form-based-code is adopted, Sonic will close that store?  That makes no sense at all.

When the time comes for a rebuild (20 year spec?) - THEN I might understand the decision.  But by then there will either be a urban development such that Sonic can find a workaround - OR, it will be stalled out and variances will be handed out to "spur development."  Of course, if development does take off in that area Sonic could always sell the land for a massive profit.

Really though - WIlliam hits the nail on the head.  Tulsa has TONS of options for suburban sprawl development with single family homes, large front lawns, and strip malls.  We have very few areas that can be marketed as urban living.  Urban areas draw a premium, which is a good thing for land owners and tax collectors, as well as others who want to havea vibrant and diverse community.

Someone needs to point out that OKC is developing urban neighborhoods around downtown and will soon implement a trolley system.  Once we figure out, five years later, that they have done so successfully we'll be all about it but probably still stuck in our ways.  But what does Sacramento, Nashville, Miami, Baltimore, Denver, OVerland Park, Gulf Port, Flagstaff, Peoria, Ft. Myers, Arlingoton, Cincinatti, NYC, San Francisco, New Orleans, etc. etc. etc. know about development.  What we need is MORE PARKING LOTS.  None of them fangled things with green space, partial walls, or other elements to them.  Hell no!  An open canvas of asphalt is what we need.  And Jenks/Brokwn Arrow/Owasso style subdivisions.  Here, I'll throw out a few random names for the next three:   Timber Mills, Redbud Estates, and Parkside Villas.   Now come up with a few strip malls, 4 archetectual styles, and another 100 miles or roads to maintain.

I hate to reference Fort Worth again, but it is just a city I am somewhat familiar with. Anywho...

I don't know all the specifics of proposed form based codes for the Pearl, so this could already be in there. In the Fort Worth South district, they have a requirement that any new office have residential included in the project. The reason it came about was because the area is surrounded by several major hospitals. So doctors were building small offices fairly regularly. But for the most part it was a neighborhood with a main street (Magnolia). To ensure that it remained a predominantly residential area, the requirement was included. This requirement has not stopped development at all, in fact it has done exactly what it has planned and helped retain the residential feel of the neighborhood. There have been numerous doctor's offices with 1 to 4 apartment units upstairs. This is the kind of development I would see with the Pearl, especially with Hillcrest nearby.

I was under the impression that the form based code would not make existing buildings change anything. If they do, I don't think it should. In time, things will correct themselves as long as you lay a good foundation now.

A company called "nameplates inc."bused in a bunch of employees to the meeting.  Not enough room for everyone else.

Generally, it seems many were not aware of the ongoing planning for the last decade and they don't understand the proposed code.  Common questions talking to the crowd:

Will I have to tear down my building?
Can I still use it for x?
If I add on will I have to conform?
When this reduces my property value will my loans be called in/foreclosed?
What qualifies as "grandfathered?"
If I sell my property does the new owner have to tear down/comply?

Still not up on the agenda.

I'm trying to watch on TGOVonline.com

Make sure not to inhale the pink gas....

Details, people.  :)  How did the meeting go?

OMG, just got back from this 1:30 meeting lol.   As it stands there is going to be another public meeting June 6th I believe.  Before that the TMAPC folk will have a meeting with the interested parties, see a presentation about form based codes, and will get more information on some of the "new" questions and comments that came up.  One TMAPC member did say something to the effect that they had been through so many meetings on this topic already that they were just about "meetinged out" and were sure the people who had worked so long and hard on this project, for over a decade now, were also getting worn out from all the meetings, questions, answers, more meetings, questions, answere, etc. etc.   They do seem to all agree that there must be a time limit on how this will play out, it can't keep going on like this.

But about the actual meeting.  The opposition played their cards well.  I was suprised at some of the opposition actually for there was even a representative from Mc Donalds corporate offices there who was flown in to speak against this.  Really?  Wow.  Then of course QT, Sonic, and the Hospitals were there.  One of the wild cards of the evening was the Home Builders Association.  The representative started by saying he was for Form Based Codes.... but then proceded to ever so cleverly cast doubt about this or that aspect and talked about perhaps scaling it down, making it smaller and then doing studies to see if things worked before enlarging the area to this scale, etc. etc. All the while repeating that he was for it?  I couldn't tell if he was really for or against at first, but in retrospect, I figure he was actually against the plan and was "laying the groundwork" to softly, kill it by making it ineffective. Perhaps they were even coordinating with some of the others who were against it.  It really did appear in some instances that the opposition had gotten together to form a plan of attack.

One thing the hospital person railed about was how they were essentially getting this (my words and notions of what was said...) forced on them, that it was going onto their private property, after the fact,  without their consent,,,  They pointed out that they were property owners and thus interested parties in the Pearl District, but then my immediate thought was... Well why weren't you going to the Pearl District Meetings where discussions and important considerations would be  made that would obviously affect your "interested parties" property?  The meetings are open and held on a regular basis.  One of the TMAPC members pointed that out so someone else, "Were you at your district meetings?".  

My take away was of course some owners and businesses are going to be against this, but those who were for it were far more likely to speak in broader city and even metro/regional terms.   In other words, it MAY cause difficulties for some particular businesses but over all for the good of the city and the region it would present a great opportunity and be a  plus.

Many spoke of this being tried on too big of a scale.  Make it smaller it shouldn't include my property.  I pointed out in my (if I do say so myself) rather empassioned plea that some cities and towns have zoned most of or if not all of their area with Form Based Codes.  We aren't asking for that, or 50% of the city.  We arent even asking for 20% of the city, or even 10 percent, we are not even asking for 5%,,, it's actually less than 1%!   This is not a radical, overreaching proposal but is rather pitiful in scale actually.  And as someone pointed out, If you think this little area is difficult, the TMAPC should consider this minor practice for when the real deal, the BIG new Comprehensive Plan comes down the pike.  It will make the fight here in this tiny area look like a walk in the park.  Other cities, our peer cities are changing and moving forward, but change here is almost a nightmare.  But change is going to happen regardless, this is just a way to manage that change into a direction the majority has said they want.  And again, its only in one small, microscopic area.  Aaaand  in order for Form Based Codes to work and create a fully functioning, diverse in use, pedestrian friendly area, it HAS to have some scale to it which can include enough of that diversity of use "work, play live, shop, etc.) to function.    

  But, we really need to make sure the pro-Form Based Codes folk turn out at the next meeting.

I understand the city owns some of the surface parking lots.  Putting the surface lots out of service with parking garages might also spur transit use. At the same time, the city could put those former surface lots up for sale for some kind of preferred development and use the proceeds for transit. It's a bit of a money shuffle but it might help get us out of the chicken/egg situation.


Businesses and population will have to grow at the same time.  One of the activities you appear to associate with urban living is shopping.  I don't disagree but maybe you envision something other that what I am seeing.  What I am calling trinkets is not limited to cute things you put on a shelf.  I am also thinking of something like the bow tie shop that was mentioned on this forum.  Maybe its my suburban and casual attire mindset but I just don't think along the lines of "What am I going to do today?  I think I go buy a bow tie."  I have visited a few small art galleries on trips.  I think the last ones were on Maui in 2004.  Some of the paintings and sculptures were nice.  Some I didn't "understand".  :)  In all cases the prices were well above what I would be willing to pay.  At the same time I realize that if someone is trying to make a living as an artist that the prices are not unreasonable if the time consumed making the object is considered.  Lucky for you there are still some people around Tulsa with significant quantities of disposable income.   Zipper repair shops, bow tie shops, candy stores, those are the little specialty shops that I think help make up your urban environment and make it different than suburban strip centers.  Will your typical urbanite go out to eat every night?  Buy a book in Meg Ryan's Shoppe on the Corner bookstore twice a week?  They will probably need some support from suburbia since I doubt we will get to both the density and population of NYC.  Density is good for small shops but the population base has to be big enough so a small percentage of the population can support small specialty shops.  Having lived in Navy barracks for a few years, I can identify somewhat with popping over to the neighborhood bar for the evening.  There was nothing else to do and yes, I did meet a few friends there.  I mostly went to my favorite place and stayed there for the evening. 


That abundant and scattered parking also makes transit unnecessary.  A few strategically placed parking garages accompanied by eliminating some of the surface parking would make transit necessary. 



I think I know your situation.  You were just born 100 years too late. What you are describing is pretty much what I've read about the development of the suburbs as aided by public transit, mostly electrified rail, about 100 years ago.  The difference is that you need to rebuild the core first.  I think you have some good ideas for doing that and I hope it becomes available for those who want it.

The short version:  the residents want it.  The business owners do not.  Which makes sense, having a nice neighborhood doesn't really matter to a mechanics shop, a armored car lot, or a small manufacturer.  Let alone a walkable urban neighborhood.  They simply don't care and don't want to change the status quo.The business owners were also illinformed/havent been paying attention.    Some recently bought property there without ever looking at the master plan.

I believe they, as property owners, have a valid point on some grounds.  If I was there for 30 years and some new proposal made it harder or more expensive for me to do business with no real advantage to me... I'd be against it too.   Throw in some misinformation and eighty (80!) employees bused in and things were negative.

The Homebuilders association had some interesting ideas.  They were generally in favor - but feared the overall scale of the project.  If you try to make half a square mile urban - it will look like a failure after a decade.  If you start with 20 blocks focused on 6th and Peoria, you can make it work.  If this form based code is seen as a failure form based codes will be a non-starter in general.

I want to see it happen.  I want to see urban landscapes in Tulsa.  But it won't work if the landowners don't support it and if the initial go 'round is a failure.

I really think the meeting wil prove to be constructive for form based codes with good leadership.

How can people get so upset about a zoning change that only affects new construction. The only "new" construction I've seen in the Pearl in the last 5 years  (besides JJ's condos) is a steel frame house facing I75 and the Dentist office at 6th and Utica.

Every other bit of work done in the pearl has been to existing structures which are both conforming and grandfathered.

Carlton - people are concerned that it will be more difficult to run their businesses.  Small manufacturers are constantly changing their buildings to add air handlers, paint rooms, storage space, etc., they are concerned that this new ordinance will prevent them from doing so efficiently and may cause them to eventually have to redo their entire complex to bring it to the new code.   A valid fear that needs to be addressed somehow.

Frankly, if the Pearl catches on and become the Plaza district of KC or a similar urban landscape, the industry will sell out and move away eventually.

The very same thing is happening in the brady.  It's a good thing IMO.  (as long as they just move in town :/)

  I have a feeling that one of our old buddies (due to the similarity in "modus operandi") that used to go after me on TN is now frequenting Urban Tulsa's comment section.

Story about the Pearl District "Battle". 

 http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A48466

 Now here is an interesting idea to consider.

On the one hand parking inside the core...

Takes away density.
Allows people to go only to where they want to by parking right by where they are going, then leaving without walking by other businesses.
Keeps people off the sidewalks and makes the area feel less vibrant which in turn makes it less attractive and likely others will "join in".
Dampens down as much need for transit, which because there isn't good transit, forces other developments to want parking right by.. and on and on that circle goes.

BUT,  if  you have parking strategically placed just outside your core, potential pedestrian friendly area, that just might indeed help with transit if you have it, and building up your pedestrian friendly density and vibrancy.  

In a way we have both.  We have lots of parking around the periphery of the main core of downtown.  The church parking lots, other parking lots, and streetside parking to the south.  There are oogles of parking garages to the NW side of downtown.  Gobs of parking spaces to the east side of downtown.  And major park-n-ride potential by OSU Tulsa, the Fin Tube Site, etc.    But no transit to circle around the area and bring people to the core from that ample parking.  

We also have lots of parking garages scattered around downtown which do the old, park right next to work or where I need to go thing, then drive out keeping me off the sidewalks.  Which hurts your attempt to then put in transit to the peripheral parking because so many will use the ever more and scattered parking in the core.

It's almost like we have created a worst case scenario thats going to keep wanting to replicate itself unless we buckle down and start changing our usual path.

This kind of actually makes what they are wanting to do in the Pearl District all that more important.  We may not be able to create super good, urban street life in the core of downtown. We may end up with, yes better than what we have now, but still a pale shadow of fake urbanity there.  But with the stricture of the Form Based Codes, you could see that area evolve into some really high quality, world class urbanness.  Which because its nearby, would go a long way to helping downtown be better by becoming a close extension of it and helping to reinforce any transit.

Being a believer (or at least someone who would like to see it tried here), let me say this:

If not the Pearl, where?
If not now, when?

Drove around Tulsa a little bit on Saturday (prior to picking up my wife at an event at TU). I started downtown and then made my way down sixth street. Just thought I'd post some of my thoughts on the area (an outsiders perspective so to speak).

To start, I am not in the least familiar with the 6th street corridor. That being said, I can see the potential. What do they say in real estate, "location, location, location". This place has got it in spades. I understand that it is still an incredibly rough neighborhood. I am in no way in the market with young kids kind of place. But the potential is there to be another Cherry street/Swan Lake type neighborhood, arguably the most walkable neighborhood in the city.

How in the world are these people worried about form based codes? Are they worried that the development they get will be WORSE than what is currently there? And I don't see how the new Kaiser development could be anything but a vast improvement over it's current conditions. I only wish it stretched all the way to 6th street. The roughest part of the whole drive from downtown to TU is the stretch between campus and Lewis. Even the industrial sections around the tracks were better looking and more pleasing to the eye than those last few blocks west of campus.

The only other thing I had to say in particular, is how nice it would be if when buildings were town down downtown (which I'm sure will never end) they would be required to make the parking lot look like the Kendall-Whittier parking lot? The prettiest parking lot in the whole city (that I'm aware of).

Centennial Park is stupid underused.

I was there yesterday and I saw 5 other people.  We were there for a fairly long time.

The water features are great.  Beautiful park.  A few dead trees though.  I really hope it doesn't go to crap.

There is no swing set or slide

There's a bathin' pond.  Should we build a blue whale?

If it had the surrounding neighborhood, it could be similar to Woodward Park. I don't think Woodward Park is any more family friendly than Centennial. When I went by, I saw a wedding party taking pictures. It is a very charming park considering it is brand new. It didn't feel as young as it is, although many of the trees have much growing to do.

Although I know it is more likely that pigs fly, my hope is that they tear down the eastern leg of the IDL (HW 75). Pretty unlikely I know, but I recall seeing a talk a few years back about dropping one of the legs to create more connectivity to downtown (since it is basically an island to pedestrians bound by highways). I think they came to a similar conclusion that the east leg would be not only the most beneficial, but the easiest on traffic re-routing.

Also, how long have they been working on the building @ 6th & Peoria that the Phoenix is going to be in? I remember hearing about that it seemed like ages ago.

Townsend, you should have gone to pride in the park.  There were lots of people there.

At 3rd and Kenosha?  I was there.  Got pics in the parade as well.

I was there for it in Centennial park a couple of years ago.

The single dingle protesting at the park needed a good whipping.

Well they had Pride in the Park on sunday at centenial. Saturday was 3rd and kenosha.  Good times.

Windows are being installed in the Phoenix
6th And Peoria

(http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/599592_450720268291191_1770754859_n.jpg)

...or maybe a two-story McDonald's?

(http://www.thelostogle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/two-story-mcd-450x299.jpg)

Double-decker McDonald’s coming to Oklahoma City
http://newsok.com/double-decker-mcdonalds-planned-for-oklahoma-city/article/3682945

/snark.

Think customers will choose to take the stairs?

Can adults ride the slide down?

I keep seeing fundraisers for Ronald McDonald house. I had no idea it would look so nice.

Did anyone notice that the june meeting just kicked the can down to august?  I'm begining to grow really uncertain about the pearl's future.

Yes, there is a blurb in UT about it.

Attack Plan
Other cities may offer a model for Pearl District property code compromise

BY JAIME ADAME

It took about 25 minutes on June 6 for local planning authorities to merely follow a staff recommendation and postpone discussion until a later meeting.

Such is the routine when the topic involves the ambitious proposal to revamp rules for property development in the Pearl District.

No vote will happen until at least Aug. 1, with two community outreach meetings and a work session scheduled in the meantime to perhaps help resolve what has become a divisive issue.

Like many recent meetings, the June 6 meeting of the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission included comment from a business-owner expressing skepticism about the idea.

From afar, experts in the type of urban plan known as a form-based code express little surprise that the measure has met with some resistance.

"You know, change is hard," said Mary Madden, a principal with Ferrell Madden, the firm that helped draft an early version of Tulsa's code. "Most people are willing to just stick with a system or process that they know and they're familiar with, rather than go to a new system, unless there are clear benefits."


Read More

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A50053 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A50053)

... an oldie but a goodie....

City Councilman Unearths Magical Zoning Amulet

(http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/1782/City-Councilman-Jump-C_jpg_600x1000_q85.jpg)

http://www.theonion.com/articles/city-councilman-unearths-magical-zoning-amulet,1782/

Food truck court soon coming to Pearl District


http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/food-truck-court-coming-to-pearl-district-soon (http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/food-truck-court-coming-to-pearl-district-soon)

I dig this ^

I think it’s a very cool idea and a good way for competent chefs to have a successful business without the high overhead of a fixed spot somewhere.

Plus they will be about 5 blocks from Lola's Airstream trailer.

I've visited the Food Trailer Park in Austin on South Congress.  Great idea for Tulsa and in typical fashion about 4-5 years behind.

I heard that there will be a public education period on Form Based CODES before a final decision is made. I bet they wont reach the audiance that needs the education.

Indeed. I seriously doubt the people who think that form based codes mean they have to move another family into their house, pave over their front lawn, build a second house in their back yard, and run over their dog with their SUV on the way to take it to the junk yard so they can ride the bus from now on will bother to investigate the thing they're upset about.

You are sounding almost as depressing as a lot of Country songs.

Irrational fears are the basis of about half of all the country songs ever written, so I'm not surprised.  :P

Some people I know lead lives about like a country song.  They must be the other half with rational fears.

What happens when you play a country song backwards?

You get your wife back, the trailer home back, your job back, and your dog comes back home to the trailer park.

Last night's education meeting was lively.

How so?

People didn't get educated and much as mad

We're so boned.  The agressively ignorant rednecks in this town are the one's really in charge.  Most of the time they aren't looking, so we get our hopes up that things might change.  Then they swoop in just in time to stop anything from happening.  It's the way this burg works.

I know, I'm just a little ray of sunshine.

  Drats, wish I could have gone.

I'm pretty sure the question has been brought up previously however, I'm not sure there has been a concise answer. Is there a time frame or a funding source for the other storm water retention ponds for the Pearl? I'm starting to think the long term success of the area is increasingly dependent upon them due to the ever shrinking boundaries.

The funding source is part storm water management that you pay on your COT water bill, and part TIF collected from the Downtown Home Depot (at least the TIF funded Centenial Park improvements).

The sticky part is that there are houses/private property where the planned "pearls"/retention ponds will go, where as Centenial Park (ne Central Park) was already COT property.

Where would be the best place to view some of the plans for the Pearl District?  The only thing I have found thus far is on Mr. Bates--line. 

We are soon to be joining the Pearls growing list of tennants and I would like to see what the future will look like... in hard-to-read-2-D-form. 

There was a previous discussion with lots of pictures and proposals: http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=12606.0 (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=12606.0)

(http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4824/pearl6thcanalzi1.jpg)
(http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5602/pearlsixthstam7.jpg)
(http://www.tulsanow.org/images/ElmCreekBasin.jpg)
(http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2415/pearlwestpearlpondwebgl3.jpg)
(http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/1963/pearleastpearlpondwebvg6.jpg)

Thank you!!! didn't even consider searching on the forum.  

From the UTW August 1st

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=51275 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=51275)

The reduced "expanded area" is a bit of a blow to supporters of the district, but it seems like approval in this proposed form is still a step in the right direction. IMO if the other proposed ponds and canal are built this area will thrive and I could see the code expanded even further once people acutally see the benefits. However, I doubt the development can wait 10+ years for the necessary project funding.

I agree, baby steps. Any approval is a step forward.

How often are these meetings held? 

I 've never been to one, but I believe the Pearl District Association meetings are held on the 2nd Tuesday of every month at "the Boathouse" 1028 East 6th, (you may check them out on facebook to confirm that). The meeting referenced in the article was a one time informational meeting to inform interested parties regarding the reduction of the district and to gather further information for the TMAPC to consider.

well thought out

Might as well not even have a new comprehensive plan if that's the case.  And I am sure there are folks who do not want the new comprehensive plan to come into play and see defeating this as the first salvo in that battle. 

One of the critical things when your a developer, especially a small developer, is having some idea of what the future will bring. 

We keep saying we want pedestrian/transit friendly areas to develop, but our zoning defeats that in many ways.  I have been looking at property in the Pearl District, and want to build something that will be pedestrian/transit friendly.  But what I have seen go in there would hurt that vision (dental office and QT expansion).  You can't get high quality, pedestrian/transit friendly development (Cherry Street is not that at all though sadly it's some of the best we have.) going in this city without "protective" zoning of some sort (protecting from the car culture that will want to fight and tear down any transit/pedestrian friendly area).

I would rather our city have little or no zoning at all (like Houston) or more progressive zoning and Form Based Codes like Denver.  But what we have is some halfway in the middle, screwball zoning that is more appropriate for a new suburb than an actual city.

We changed the zoning in the Pearl District area once before to make what once was there illegal and to try and create a new type of "form",,, why can't we do that again?  Especially when we say we want our city to change and have expressed that change in the new Comprehensive Plan?

Its not well thought out. Its not even factually accurate.

TMAPC failed us today.

  Well, sat through hours of emotional talk, then a NO vote, in a very cold room.  Not a nice way to spend a day.  

Sad to see this town so full of negativity and lack of... dreams and inspiration.  

A while back I and some other volunteers put in hours, days, weeks of work designing a place to put the new city centennial time capsule.  We rounded up sponsors and donors to build the structure, donate materials, etc.  Then went to a meeting to get approval for the project.  Though we had many different designs to choose from, they didn't like any of them and sent us packing to come up with something else.

I don't think they understood the concept of "someone picking up the slack and doing what apparently nobody else wanted to do" "Volunteering" their time etc. to try and do something positive.  I was like,  Frack that!  I busted my butt and spent a lot of time and effort on it,,, if they don't like it, they can do it themselves.  

So far nobody else has stepped forward to do the work and Tulsa's Centennial Time Capsule sits in some back lot baking it's contents in the sun, in a metal container in the 100 plus heat.    

Thats kind of what I feel like with the Pearl Districts Form Based Codes and even the Plani-Tulsa New Comprehensive Plan.  Lot's of people putting in tons of work (so much more than my feeble example) trying to make Tulsa better, and then others coming along and saying... Naaaa, we don't like it, do something different.   Take it or leave it folks.  And apparently they left it.  And I doubt that they will do the work to do something as good or better.  So nothing gets done other than same ol same ol.  Any growth is good enough.  We don't care enough to make our city exceptional.  Just truck along teetering on the edge of slow progress and slow decline.  How utterly boring and uninspired.  Sad, mediocre people.  No guts no glory.

    

Friends,

I share the assessment that this was a sad and frustrating day. It is often hard to envision big things in this town as there seems to be so many things working against you. I've watched over the last several months as this process was hijacked by a property owner with a personal vendetta and a hired gun attorney. They systematically rounded up a team of neighborhood business owners, filled them with fear and misinformation and then organized their efforts in opposition. It was a calculated and well executed counter to the years of hard work of The Pearl District Association. They showed up at the final hour and caused enough confusion to knock this thing off the rails. Really disappointing, especially since so many of those in opposition don't even know what they're talking about. It's as if they think they can currently do whatever they want in The Pearl, but that The FBC will make it impossible. Just pure foolishness. Most of that neighborhood is already non-conforming and any new construction is going to require some accommodating and some process. The argument against FBC is presupposing that the current code is acceptable. It's not, especially in a neighborhood like The Pearl that has commercial, residential and industrial. If you're looking for a neighborhood where the FBC makes the most sense, it's The Pearl.

Our undertrained Planning Commission was ill-equipped to respond and appeared overwhelmed by the process. There are some really good guys on that Commission and I know they have the best of intentions, but this process is further exposing the need for some orientation. They are making decisions that shape the future of our city. These are big, important decisions. I've suggested it before and was chastised for it, but I'll say it again. City Councilors and Planning Commissioners need land use training before making these important decisions. . . and the County guys...don't even get me started.

The fact that Bill Leighty is the only one who felt confident to call out the B.S. that was being espoused in that meeting is troubling to me. When someone stands before an appointed body like that and tells blatant lies, we need people who know the truth there to call them on it. I didn't see that today...and I haven't seen it.

As we see things like this in Tulsa, we're going to have to have heart. It's not going to be easy to turn some of these lights on.

Sadly, the status quo has an army of influential supporters and almost everywhere you look lately, the status quo is winning.

I'll continue to hope that the exciting things happening inside the IDL will spread to influence the neighborhoods flanking downtown. We have to embrace and support the visionary actions that are happening in hopes that our community will continue to wake up to the notion that a great Tulsa has something for everyone and that our core and the areas around it are brimming with potential.

We can do better about offering urban amenities and lifestyle, but it will take stubborn and intelligent effort by citizens, as well our elected and appointed people. Thanks to those of you who showed up today. I know it's appreciated.

Keep fighting the good fight. We'll see better days. This isn't over.

I feel so bad about this.  I could have shredded that guy today.  (all that philosophy logic training would have paid off)  I didn't know how or where to sign up to speak today and I should have asked.  His reasoning was VERY deeply flawed but the commision bought it.  I really could have just embarssed westervelt and helped the thing along.  I think I'm going to be guilty about this the rest of my days.

Jacobi, I was referring to folks on the Commission not having the knowledge to dispute the lies, but I sure would have enjoyed your efforts. Would have been fun to watch. Next time.

Driving down 6th this morning and saw a new glass store front on a building to the north side of the street across from the Phoenix cafe site. It made me wonder what was happening with the area. It's at very least nice to see some investment continuing. The city sky line looks amazing along that stretch, the concept designs I've seen look awesome, just wish it would happen.

Sounds like a continuation of the mentality that brought us the loss of so many old buildings downtown and the Williams tower in their place.  The opposers...

Clean out the old styles and put in skyscraper(s)?

A bunch of RWRE Murdochians, no doubt.

No.  But kind of short sighted I think.  Those older buildings had tremendous character.  Even if they were seriously run down....

Urban renewal of the early 70's.

I've also noticed some cosmetic work on the quadplex apartments just east of there on sixth street.  Nothing substantial.  Anyone know what the deal is there?  Are those apartments liveable with cosmetic work or are the current owner prettying them up a bit to try and sell to someone who will do a real renovation.  The place looked abandoned and was boarded up just a few weeks ago.  I can't imagine they can be leased  without substantial renovations.

This is for my Wife's business.  She is opening a co-working space for Artists of all variety.  There will be all types of different stuff available for use, meeting rooms for individuals who want to meet with Clients and don't want to use an informal coffee shop format, a classroom will be available for people who want to teach workshops, about 1500 sf of shared studio space, a messy area for screen printing, eventual semi private studio space, ummm some other stuff.  It will be operated like a gym membership, plus there will be day passes available.

Best of luck to her.  I hope she does well.

Thank you!  So far the response from the people in the [arts] community has been positive, so let's hope it carries over!  This is also another business coming over with us (established business and great people), but they have not announced yet, so there is still more to come!

6th Street between Deleware and Peoria is under going a small revival. Its very exciting to see people moving back into the near core areas of town.

Sounds totally cool JC!

Here's a relatively unknown MIT partnership in the vicinity, the Tulsa Fab Lab at 7th & Lewis.  Similar membership concept and fosters creativity but I think probably a somewhat different clientele than JC's wife's project.

http://www.fablabtulsa.com

Yep, same type of format, just slightly different clientele.  We have been a huge fan of the Fablab and I really want to get a membership there... just have to wait until things have stabilized a bit on our business.

We are really excited to see the direction of this area.  The Lot 6 Art Bar is a great place to grab a "pop" and look at local art, and with the impending  openings of the Phoenix, the Recording Studio, Clean Hands, Creative Room(Wife's shop) and the yet to be named business with us... This place is going to explode with excitement in a relatively short amount of time.   

And I can pass along that the business that will be co-located with the Creative Room will be Made: The Indie Emporium Shop. 

Congrats JC, from the renderings I've seen on TN your location should be truly unique if/when the canal is built. There has been a lot of back and forth regarding this area but ultimately the success of the pearl will come down to folks like JC and others willing to make the investment. Best of luck.

Thank you, but it is all the wife.  I am just the free manual labor... my office working hands have never seen this type of abuse haha.  But I agree, it is going to be the work of people like Blake, the great people at Made, the guys at Clean Hands, the awesome person behind Lot 6 and my wife that are willing to see this area and push it where it needs to be... not to mention the other folks who I know are working to open more and more things along this street.  I believe this is one area where the actions of these people will put the CoT in a position where they have no choice but to do the right thing. 

And hopefully this will force the other property owners into doing something other than letting their places go further and further into disrepair.

Nice press about Indie Emporium.

I look forward to reading the whole story tomorrow morning.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20121103_297_0_ThomCr379696

Thom Crowe and his wife, Christine Sharp-Crowe, considered opening a shop in the Pearl District long before their downtown The Indie Emporium store.

They bided their time while exhibiting at regional art shows for the past seven years as property owners in the area near South Sixth Street and Peoria Avenue organized their efforts to attract tenants in order to turn a neglected district with its Depression-era buildings into the region’s next business success story.

 Then last fall the Crowes participated in the holiday “pop-up shops” concept downtown where property owners host small retailers in high-profile storefront spaces. It was so successful they became a permanent tenant at Fifth Street and Boston Avenue and again put their Pearl District vision on hold.

 But after signing a lease on a new property on Sixth Street recently and following the lead of some ambitious new neighbors, the Crowes hope to open a second store — this one newer and bigger — before the end of the year, selling wares from local crafters and artists and even offering art classes in nearby studio space.

 Their Pearl District vision is back on.

 “We were waiting for the right opportunity, and with this building and the other stuff that’s going in there, it gives us a great opportunity,” Thom Crowe said. “One of the biggest reasons we chose here is the charm and the appeal. It’s a real cool older area that’s been neglected, and we see a lot of potential.”

 Groups have been talking about the Sixth Street corridor for years, and investors have swooped in to purchase many of the most attractive buildings.

 After high-profile turnarounds in the Brady and Blue Dome districts, the Sixth Street corridor is one of the city’s few remaining collections of historic, undeveloped buildings.

 Read more in Sunday's World.

Renovating Tulsa Ice Co.: Architecture firm to move into quirky Pearl District building

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=46&articleid=20121104_46_E4_CUTLIN749102 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=46&articleid=20121104_46_E4_CUTLIN749102)

Techincally this building is not in the Pearl District...it's in Kendall-Whittier two blocks east of Marshall's Brewery.


They have done a phenomenal job on this building...it's beautiful.

What type of development are we going to see on the northern edge of the Pearl along 11th Street?

I have been curious of that myself.  It looks like they are about to start work on one of the buildings.  All the openings have been plywooded, though I haven't been driving that way very often, so it may have been like that for a while.

You may have another chance in a few weeks, from the Whirled:


City planners not done with Pearl District form-based code expansion idea


The new year is expected to bring a new chance at life for the Pearl District form-based code.
After months of discussion, the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission is expected early next year to take up a compromise proposal that reduces the area in which the new code would be applied within the district.

The Planning Commission in September rejected a proposal to expand use of the code to the entire district.
Since then, commission members have worked with Planning Commission personnel and the city to come up with a proposal that would cover a smaller portion of the district.

"In a nutshell, it (the new boundary) is the Sixth Street corridor from Peoria Avenue to Utica Avenue, and then running north-south it is basically the corner of Peoria Avenue to Sixth Street north to Interstate 244," said city Planning Director Dawn Warrick.
The latest proposal also includes properties north and east of the area in which the form-based code now applies, she said.

Unlike the traditional, use-based zoning code, which separates properties by use, the form-based code focuses more on a property's form and placement on a lot.  The intent is to help create more pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods such as one might see in a large city.

Planning Commission members have been generally supportive of the new code but balked at expanding its use to the entire Pearl District.
Among their concerns was that the new code would not work in industrial or automobile-oriented areas of the district; that the proposed expansion plan conflicted with what was envisioned in the Sixth Street Infill Plan; and that residents of the area were not properly notified of the proposed expansion.

"We are revisiting it (the expansion proposal) because it has been reduced down to a manageable size," said Planning Commission Chairman Joshua Walker, "and now what they are going to do is go to every other property owner that this would affect, and they didn't do that the first time around."

Beginning in late January, the city will host a series of workshops on the proposed new boundaries.

I noticed that the apartment buildings on the north side of 6th Street are being rehabbed: New coat of paint and windows. I think this street will be as popular a destination as Cherry Street in a couple of years.

Since I have spent pretty much everyday for the last 3 months hanging out on 6th, I have noticed quite a bit happening... and I have found more stuff going on in the area than I knew about.  Since the opening of the Phoenix, 6th and peoria has stayed pretty active.  I did have the "pleasure" of meeting the infamous landlord that I have heard so much about here.  Seems nice enough, but I have no business dealings with him, so that probably helps.  I am willing to say that this portion of the pearl (6th and peoria and a couple of blocks in any direction) will rival portions of Cherry street before the end 2013... as long as the planned development continues to happen and as long as the city gets the heck out of the way of development (i.e. cut the red tape crap and put small businesses in a position to succeed, not get bogged down).   

The city could also cut out laws that make it illegal to build new pedestrian and transtit friendly developments in the area but instead encourage car oriented developments.  Not even talking about Form Based Codes and the like, simply get rid of minimum parking requirements would be a big start and help.  All the old stuff that's there now and that's being refurbished would be illegal to build today.  At best it would cost lots more and or would require you to rip out half the rest of the neighborhood in the process.  Do the same thing for Cherry Street and Brookside.  Also allow mixed use developments (like living above, shop below), also accessory dwelling units (small rental apartment in back yard or over a garage), etc.  Why in this conservative, get the government off our backs let the free market decide, city and state we don't hear more calls for getting rid of these unfair and restrictive laws I don't know?  I guess most just don't realize that the Idyllic "Mayberry" type places they wish existed (Aunt Bee grabbing her purse to walk down to the corner store to grab some pie makings, Opie and his friends walking to the soda shop and dime store, etc.), can't because we make it illegal to even build those kinds of places.

I remember a while back hearing about a kid being run over and killed in Owasso as he was trying to cross the highway.  I was floored when I heard the Mayor say in a frustrated tone something like " Why was that kid trying to cross the road anyway!".  I and my little sisters lived in Owasso for a time.  If you wanted to go do anything outside of one of those massive, drab neighborhoods... you had to walk a loooong way and cross a large road or two (or white highway fence). Otherwise your stuck there waiting for your parents to drive you places and then rush you to hurry up so they can drive you back.

This has been a huge part of my frustration.  And I am just a bystander.  I am absolutely positive that there is a place for "minimum parking requirements", Malls, 20 screen movie theaters, etc.  Requiring a parking variance to be filed for everything is ridiculous.  Especially when you have absolutely no control over parking...  Now, there has been a little give and take on this in regards to the wifes place (and the places around her), so I can atleast see that they have identified the problem and want to work it out.

I can't agree more about the owasso thing.  Heck, when I was a kid I crossed 169 on foot on several occasions.  When you have a friend that is less than 2 blocks away (as the bird flies) but requires a car to get there.  It isn't feasible.

Here's the problem with having no minimum parking requirements. I live near a few of those Mayberry type businesses designed for walkability and mass trans. Years back a Denturist located in a building that was originally a 1920's walk up retail store a block away. He provided two spaces for his employees which numbered around 8. He took one. The others parked all day in front of our houses and snarled at us if we complained. Said their taxes paid for them. Eventually we secured no parking signs from 8-4 but then even we couldn't park there. The problem was later compounded when local bars became popular without enough spaces. Then we had drunks parking all night and beer cans in our yards. We are long term owners who maintain the property while the businessmen come and go.

I'm rooting for the Pearl to replace what we used to have on Cherry. I like the look so far but the answer to your parking problems isn't likely to be waiving minimum parking requirements. I think the answer is more in the manner of eliminating street parking altogether, promoting mass transportation and availability of nearby lots.

 Trick is, you can't have affordable and workable mass transit without pedestrian/transit friendly development.  

I don't much mind people parking on my street in front of my house, and often they do, and would mind even less if we had sidewalks in my neighborhood.  Sorry about the bar thing, but it's partly a factor of our current state of development.  The few "trendy areas" that are somewhat pedestrian friendly tend to attract the bar and restaurant crowd.  If more areas were to be pedestrian friendly, you would see more of them be "regular" areas of all types, if that makes sense.  Having "nearby lots" just creates a variation of the suburban theme where everyone still uses cars instead of transit.  The cars are parked in back, instead of in front.  Then as things infill and build up, parking garages replace the lots which then costs over all more money than if you would have started using transit (even transit that costs more at first and is not used as much at first).   More a change in appearance and not use and function.  You can look around at many places in the world that have lots of tall buildings and density, but are not at all urban.  People still live isolated lives and have to drive everywhere.  They end up having to pay more for that lifestlye, but don't get the benefit of living in a true, pedestrian friendly, urban environment.

You can promote mass transit all you want.  People who drive are gonna drive... specially if they are coming in from out of town (owasso, BA, Jenks, etc).  I do believe the key is to have designated parking areas that allow people to park and walk.  The 6th/peoria area has the benefit of the area where the Pearl district farmers market is held.  I have seen people more likely to park there rather than back in the neighborhoods... but I also know this is an exception and not the rule.   

Is there enough room to provide parking immediately north and south of 6th with 5th and 7th being an alternate path to the lots? Sort of like 14th is the alternate for Cherry.

JC I think your assessment is correct, safe, secure parking lots behind the 6th st business's is the answer. This will bridge the gap until density grows and sustain those business's if the density never occurs. But who is/should purchase the lots and maintaining them? My guess the property owners/landlords but usually those who spend the money to build such things aren't usually keen on sharing them with those who haven't made the investment. Could their association potentially develop a lot?

Got the parking down and plenty of opportunity to walk.  Now all we need is some shuttle opportunity to "fill in" the blanks.  Have none of the Tulsa 'planners' ever traveled by airplane?  Through an airport that mixes the shuttle/train mover with walking around gate areas? 

Walking from Spaghetti Warehouse to the ball park is great.  Or even Cain's, Brady Theater, etc.  But if near the Courthouse/Library, need some vehicle moving back and forth.  Several of them - between different "zones".  Monorail, even...

Then parking could (should) be a perimeter activity and clear up downtown city streets to become a 'mall' area like Main was for a while.  Get the cars out!  But let's not name it "Bartlett Square"....

I can go more in depth with everything when i get home tonight (maps n stuff).  Getting to the 6th street are from alternate paths is quite easy.  I generally turn on 4th or 5th and drive down to the lot behind E.House/Lot 6/Creative Room.  Unfortunately, I have no idea who owns that lot; however, it would benefit this area for this lot to actually be a finished surface and lined... I did just look at the historical photos from Google Earth and it appears that lot used to be a tree'd lot and was converted to gravel sometime between 2008 and 2010.  As for other locations to park in that area, I am not entirely sure.  I have done a little driving around but not with that intention.  But after looking at the Earth map, it appears there is quite a bit of area that can become parking for the area, even if just temporary. 

Another thing you have to take into consideration is the future plans for the elm creek flood control (?).  If they do come in and buy up property, there is a big opportunity for the city to make this area even more pedestrian friendly... i also know this is a long way down the road. 

I be willing to say that at some point or another, the business owners may get together to discuss some of these things.  If there is some improvements that can be done, it may be easier for a group of 6 biz owners to assist in the investment of additional parking, or at a minimum, talk to some of the land owners to see if they would be open to allowing the use of their land for parking.  Anything that adds to the attractiveness of the Pearl will increase property value, which benefits everyone.  More parking will attract more businesses... which will reduce vacant buildings and "polish" that pearl.

Is there anything currently being done with the Savoy Hotel property?  Anyone heard any plans?

Given the activity at 6th & Peoria, and really all along Peoria between 6th & 15th, it would be nice to see this property's potential get utilized.

Has the Savoy closed?

I thought it was just turned into apartments.  Or it was a couple weeks ago when drove by.

Are you talking about that sign in the window?

Yeah and it looked like someone was living inside... but I guess the sign is for the building itself?

What do we do with all of the awful houses between 6th and 11th? I am a huge fan of renovating old anything, but most of these houses don't stand a chance of being flipped.

I assumed the sign was just for that front studio. That would be an awesome place to crash every night.

There are a couple of houses that have promise, but not many. Most are owner neglected and blighted. There are a few cool old apartment sections and the old Tulsa Boys Home could have a new life.

Hmmm.  I really hope this area doesn't become a "rival" of Cherry Street... let Cherry Street be... well... Cherry Street.
I really hope 6th & Peoria develops its own contrasting identity. 

There's a soccer guy who posts on this forum... I bet he has an idea... or two...  ;D

(http://cmsimg.indystar.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=BG&Date=20130116&Category=SPORTS&ArtNo=130116033&Ref=AR&MaxW=640&Border=0&Indy-officially-lands-12th-North-American-Soccer-League-Franchise)

I don't mean rival as is take business away, I just mean in terms of popularity and stuff to do.  Cherry Street will always be Cherry Street.  The area is already developing its own identity... even if for only 2 blocks.  The people I have encountered are awesome and that is business owners/operators, to those individuals just walking down the street.  Everyone is happy to see what is happening with the area.

Fun thing I found while chatting with a couple ladies.  One of them had moved from NM to tulsa to continue her art.  She chose the Brady Arts District because of the "artist" draw.  She regrets it as the building she is in is mostly lawyers and doctors and after walking around she found the only artistic thing going for the area was the Glass Blowing place.  Now I am not sure if she had visited the Zarrow yet, or even if she knew about AH HA.  She just seemed disappointed in the area. 

Any concern that the Pearl will hurt Cherry St. is misplaced.  Cherry St. is moving into a mature development phase that will likely be dominated in the future by chains and those with heavy financial backing.  Most of the businesses to open in the Cherry St. area the past couple of years fall into this category.  While many of us view chains negatively, they represent an approving stamp that this area has arrived.

While much of its building stock differs from Cherry St., the Pearl represents the lower cost and easier entry point for those with a new business idea (similarly with 11th St.).  As these few new businesses gain a foothold and draw in people, the development of the Pearl is likely to accelerate.

Rather than rivals, these two areas will become complimentary to each other, connected by the developing Peoria corridor.

The area hurt the most by the successes of downtown, the Pearl, Cherry St. and Brookside is the 18th & Boston area.

Pearl= Brady 5-10 years ago.  Hell even before all the new construction started two years ago.

I am not a huge soccer honk, but I like the thought of that. 

More like 15 years ago when the Brady's options consisted of Sp. Warehous, Snooty Fox, Mexicali Border and Caz's (the bar, not the chow house).  Then Hercules Motor Co. opened up and I thought the Brady was about to turn the corner....

For that matter, I remember in the late 80s when there wasn't much on Cherry St. other than Arnie's, Chimi's (in the original location) and 15th Street Grill.  We were excited when Full Moon opened so we didn't have to drive to Outer Urban any more after happer hour at Hoffbrau (and then back to SRO before closing time).

Invoking SRO, Hoffbrau, and OuterUrban in the same post?  Sounds like you and I are from the same era.  Did you ever go to an event at the Open Door Arts Coop that was just west of where Full Moon is now?  They had some real off-beat one act plays and poetry readings.  Smoke up in the car on a side street, take in a six pack and laugh your donkey off.

I was a fan of the loft in the Snooty Fox.

Remember the band Bellevue at Hoffbrau?

That is something with which I'm not familiar - of course, I was supposed to be studying during this period in my life.  I was in Tulsa from 1987 to 1990, but then returned in 1997.

Bellevue, Glass House, Nixons, etc.

Louie's Tavern at the Farm was a great venue for live music as well.

Yup, we rubbed elbows with the same drunken idiots (me).

Did anyone attend the workshop last night? The TW article this morning didn't indicate how productive the meeting was.

Officials explain form-based code for Pearl District
Property owners are given a chance to hear about and debate the merits of the city's proposed code plan.By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer
Published: 1/30/2013  2:15 AM
Last Modified: 1/30/2013  4:09 AM

City officials on Tuesday night took another crack at explaining exactly what property owners within the Pearl District can expect should the form-based zoning code be applied there.

At the end of the hour-and-a-half meeting - held at the Family and Children's Services building at Sixth Street and Peoria Avenue - that goal was accomplished.

Charts were exhibited, experts were made available and questions were answered.

Less clear is whether Pearl District property owners, informed of the code's details, will embrace it.

Planning Director Dawn Warrick, for one, thinks that moment has not yet arrived.

"We're not there yet," she said of finding common ground with opponents of the plan.

The city's form-based code is an alternative to the traditional use-based zoning code that separates properties by use types, such as residential and commercial. It is intended to create pedestrian-friendly environments such as those common in urban settings.

The form-based code focuses less on a building's use and more on its form - including the use of doors and windows, location on the property and height.

But it is just those types of specific regulations that have dogged the new code since it was first established in 2011 and continued to irk some property owners Tuesday night.

"We just want to get something that is flexible enough to accommodate everybody," said Charlie Keithline, who with his wife, Nancy Keithline, owns two dental practices in the Pearl District.

The code is currently applied to a small section of the district. The Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission rejected in September a proposal to expand it to the entire district, which runs from Interstate 244 to 11th Street and from U.S. 75 to Utica Avenue.

The latest proposal calls for the district to run east-west along the Sixth Street corridor from Peoria Avenue to Utica Avenue, then north-south from the corner of Sixth and Peoria north to Interstate 244.

The proposal includes properties north and east of the area in which the form-based code now applies.

Charlie Keithline said the code seems to have been designed to replicate the Sixth and Peoria area, where buildings are multilevel and built up to the street.

"They wanted to make sure that could be repeated throughout the entire Pearl District," Keithline said.

Vic Sherrell's family has owned a paint and auto body shop on Peoria between Fifth and Sixth streets since 1959. He said he is concerned with the new code's requirement that certain expansions of existing structures adhere to the code's standards.

Those standards, including building up to the street line, just won't work with the type of business he operates, Sherrell said.

"In the real world, you never know what you are going to do," he said.

Tuesday's meeting began with a brief explanation of the form- based code. The crowd then sat around tables and peppered city planners with questions and concerns.

Joey Toler, who with his wife, Shannon Toler, owns businesses in the Pearl District, stood back and listened as the conversation got heated at times.

"I'm all for it," he said of the new plan.

If the city wants to grow and make progress, he said, "you have to make some changes."

City officials plan to hold two more public meetings before presenting their findings and recommendations to the Planning Commission, which will then consider recommending to the City Council that the code's use be expanded.



Form-based code meetings slated
The city has two more public meetings scheduled on the latest proposal to expand the use of the form-based code within the Pearl District.

When: 6 p.m. Feb. 6 and Feb. 11

Where: Family and Children's Services, 650 S. Peoria Ave.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20130130_16_A7_Cityof848815

It seemed to be that more people were concerned about what happens if they want to expand their business, than expanding and improving the area itself.  These businesses are the ones that wouldn't necessarily benefit from a revitalized pearl district.  A dentist, an auto body shop, several Disaster restoration companies... these are places that don't care if the Pearl gets shined or gets lost (not to say that the people would, just that their business structure doesn't really point to small, pedestrian friendly area).  But their points are just as valid, even if I don't like the reasoning.   

These are the types of businesses hurt by an improving Pearl District.  They are there for the cheap land that the area offered for years.  Improvement in the area will cause land values to go up along with property taxes with no benefit to their businesses.  While all property owners have a voice, these squeaky wheels are not the only ones with a vested interest in this area or its rehabilitation to its potential.  At some point after everyone's voice is heard, its time to count the votes and let the chips fall where they may.

Oh trust me, I understand!  The only thing they will benefit from is the increasing property value. 

I want to see a thriving Pearl... I have a vested interest and want to see more of what I am starting to see.  I used to drive up to the wifes shop to work and I could park right in front of the door, now I have to find a parking space... and it involves a little walking.  And this is even on the coldest of evenings.  The more people there means the more people that walk in front of the space and the more people who are exposed to Co-working and might be interested.  Of course it just means I have to work faster to get this place completely done! 

Only because a lack of vision, though. An auto body shop would be a fine use until property values come up enough to make it more profitable for the owner to sell and move elsewhere. I'm not really sure why Sherrell thinks it wouldn't be possible for an auto body shop to work in a building that's built out to the street since there are not one, but two, that I know of in buildings not 10 feet from 15th Street. Put the parking/storage in the back rather than the front and bob's your uncle.

Unless the FBC outlaws driveways and alleys?

Yeah, but if you have a business that has been in the same location since '59, I don't think I would be keen to move.  I am trying to remember why Sherrell is making an issue of this.  He doesn't really have room to expand anyway... unless he does away with his parking lot.  He is almost at street side anyway. 

And wow, I just pulled the street view of 6th and Peoria... Not sure how long ago it was shot, but it is amazing the difference.

Pearl District form-based code expansion set for vote

(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2013/20130220_kevinsmap2222220000.jpg)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20130220_11_0_TeTlaM660198 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20130220_11_0_TeTlaM660198)

Expansion of Pearl District's form-based code put on hold

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20130306_11_0_TheTul993916 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20130306_11_0_TheTul993916)

The "regional chamber" members essentially sent form letters outlining their objections to FBC:

http://www.tmapc.org/Agenda/03-06-13/FBC.pdf

This should straighten out all the zoners who think they are above the Chamber all mighty.

As an outsider who doesn't go to any urban-activist meetings, extending the code east to Utica and north to 1st St seems excessive and unnecessary.
IMO, a natural northern boundary for form-based "walkable urbanity" would end at the railroad tracks off 4th St...
And there's maybe 3-5 blocks east of The Phoenix that looks like primo gut-rehab material... past that... meh.

I suppose they were not just thinking rehab potential but long range, generational, redevelopment potential.  Plus I think there is a concern for the number of people living in an area to reach that able to support a true,vibrant, mixed use, pedestrian friendly area of the type desired would need to be of at least a certain size to actually have a decent chance of working.

First off, politics is "the art of the possible."
Secondly, the "true, vibrant, mixed use, pedestrian friendly area" off Blue Dome, Brady, and Cherry Street are mostly rehabbed, only stretch for a few blocks, and have quite a few single story businesses represented....  
And thirdly, most pedestrians will not walk more than 4-6 blocks to go anywhere.  Anything beyond that, and we're talking mass transit that would need to run every 10-20 mins after 7pm... otherwise, you'd either drive or buy a vespa...  ;D

Ok, you do realize that someday and likely within my lifetime, even with Tulsa being a slow growing city, most of the area within the IDL and the Pearl District area all the way to Cherry Street, and more, will be "infilled" with higher density developments.  Unless Tulsa just doesn't grow at all.  What we are talking about is the form that development will take.  I do agree that "the art of the possible" should be the main consideration at this point.  "Perfection" was tried, and tried and tried and at this point, one can see that some leeway, in order to make some positive progress, might be warranted.  I personally would be happy with just allowing mixed use developments outside the IDL, not having them be illegal, for starters.  I would then also like to see certain areas where it's "logical" to begin pedestrian/transit friendly developments begin have even just a couple of rules such as 1. Built up to the sidewalk and 2. Have pedestrian friendly frontages on that sidewalk side.   Height, materials, etc. not a big concern for me.     

You mean east?

The area to the north is because they are building a new large retention pond in that area (like the existing one, but more square)

The area to the east is to make all of that property development material as opposed to highlighting a few property owners. Many of those properties in the planned are owned by people who WANT to develop under this code.

I guess I don't get why this stops at Utica, the area from Utica - Lewis (if you have driven that way) on your way to TU has some art galleries and some properties that are ripe for development as well have sidewalks and wide streets as well as a pretty cozy vibe with the "curve" that adds some uniqueness to the street. There are lots of commercial buildings some dating back to the age where buildings actually looked cool..there is a big warehouse getting some big remodel with lots of money going into it for something(not sure what)...and a few more a little further east...Marshall Brewing, Urban Tulsa Paper and more are also down that way right on the edge of Utica...

Sounds like a job for a trolley!

Because they can't get this half mile approved, there is plenty of opposition on the other side of utica.

Yes.  East is what I meant.  Fixed my post.
I've seen the plans for the retention pond, but understand why business owners north or directly south of the railroad tracks would be worried about how the code could affect what they've had in place for decades.
The question I have is how many of the properties east of 6th & Rockford (or Quincy, for that matter) are owned by people who WANT to develop under this code and how long have they owned the properties?  I'd tend to give more creedence to the views of a business owner who's been there for decades over a trust-fund baby or slumlord or speculator...

I realize that nobody can predict the future... if twenty years ago, in 1993, I'd been asked which is more likely:  Tulsa gets a Major League Soccer team or OKC gets an NBA team, I'd have bet on the former to "likely" happen, and the latter to have a snowball's chance in hell.

Back in 1993, I wouldn't have guessed that from 2000 - 2010, Rogers and Cherokee counties would be the fastest growing in northeast Oklahoma, while the city of Tulsa shrank.
I also wouldn't have guessed that KFF would pour $100mil into a park on Riverside, but hey, maybe Brookside will resemble north Dallas within my lifetime... and then we can start buying "Keep Brookside Pretentious" tshirts...  :P

I do believe that the best way for Tulsa to compete with its suburbs is to offer pedestrian-friendly developments not found in Broken Arrow, Owasso or Claremore.  However, since most Tulsans will still be car-dependent for the foreseeable future, I don't see inherent conflict between a few blocks of pedestrian-friendly development down the street from a car-friendly Sonic or QuikTrip and/or a new downtown Walmart Neighborhood Market next door to the Home Depot... I believe if you're trying to cater to the often fickle tastes of twentysomethings born between 1983 and 1993, it'd be naive to think that the IDL or the new-and-improved Pearl District should be zoned to achieve the same urban density those areas had in the 1950s...  

Well, at the risk of sounding like a broken record (too late!)... I continue to think "best use" of the "superblock" off 4th St between Franklin and Kenosha would be another entertainment facility/stadium that could connect/anchor the Blue Dome and East End to The Pearl... I don't have a problem with an access road to nowhere like Lansing Ave from 3rd to 6th actually being used for parking (even if it's only *gasp* surface parking)... I mean, who wants to build condos or pedestrian friendly buildings literally across the street from the IDL?  And why would Tulsa need a park in that area, when Centennial Park is so close?  I believe TulsaNow posters would do an about-face if it was Victory deciding to build a church downtown rather than All Souls...

REALITY CHECK:  Unless George Kaiser suddenly becomes a big fan of Major League Soccer, the prospects of building a 22,500-seat soccer specific stadium makes little sense for the foreseeable future... however, a smaller facility with a 5k - 10k capacity and a stage on one end, could be used for NASL soccer, high school football, concerts, graduations, etc etc... compare that to the new ballpark which is rarely used for anything other than baseball due to 70 home dates.  The "soccer-specific" facility I described would likely be used for 15-20 home dates for soccer, which would necessitate it be "multi-use" by design and due to economic necessity... if it makes more sense to payoff all the Pearl District businesses opposing form-based development and have them move to those desolate blocks of Nordham-nothingness on Kenosha, Lansing, etc, then maybe it'd make sense to bulldoze rental blight and construct a facility inside The Pearl...

If you didn't notice, when it comes to downtown development, I'm more of a fan of a pedestrian-friendly stadium... as a kid, I would never have known much about Florence Park or Renaissance areas if it hadn't been for all those TU games (and Roughnecks' games) at Skelly Stadium.  IMO, if a stadium is proposed for the West Bank off Jackson or the Evans Fintube site, it is no longer conducive to pedestrian activity and may as well be built in Broken Arrow or Jenks....

/end rant


I wish those Nightline mini-buses ran every 15-30 mins at night and didn't go 'round in circles....
Also wish we had this stopping in downtown... http://us.megabus.com/  ...there are stops in Norman and OKC, then it skips Tulsa to go to Springfield...

...or maybe Michael Bates can start a Jitney service.... (http://www.leftcoastclassics.com/1911-ford-jitney-bus/1911-ford-modelt-jitneybus.jpg)

...I, however, am partial to the "beer bus" concept... (http://m.chicago-fire.com/sites/chicago/files/Beer%20Bus.jpeg)   ;D

Every time bus rapid transit comes up, this is the first thing that pops into my head

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/10/a3e7a8a9.jpg)

Although I may be the only person who saw that movie.

OKC is looking at losing the Red Hawks as the Houston affiliate in about a year and a half.  Then what are they gonna do with their big new stadium...??

Well, Mandalay (owner) probably won't move the team, they will most likely look for a new affiliate agreement.  And of course, they will need several tens of millions if not more - to "enable" the process and "refurbish" the facilities, since they are so run down by now....  Wanna bet on how big a "take" the Astros and Mandalay will get through this little ploy??

Cities "buying" sports is a sucker-bet....unless the city is gonna own it....

http://www.news9.com/story/21550755/redhawks-leaving-oklahoma-city

You're not.  It was a Sunday, I was hungover, the remote was across the room.

Wrong thread?

Only watched it once, that was all that I needed.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPpBGsFddao[/youtube]

Pretty much.  It was an extension of the posts RufNex was making about a soccer stadium not making sense unless someone like Kaiser would pay for it.  With the Red Hawks and OKC being placed in a situation at the 'far end' of that scenario - after the city paid big bucks for a stadium, even something really popular like baseball can have a hard time being justified for a city.  The Astros are starting the propaganda machine to get someone to give them more money.

I don't think the Red Hawks will disappear, but after spending big bucks, either the Astros or Mandalay will be back at the OKC trough. 

The Drillers have been pretty lucky in that their affiliation has really only changed once in "modern times" - last 35 years or so.  And 60 million was reasonable with the combination public/private financing.  Gotta wonder if the team owners will be coming to the trough?  Or "when"....

I did not say bus or trolley bus. Tracks inspire investment, because they imply permanence. A bus with funny bodywork does not.

Love the bus!!  That's the kind of conversion bus I am looking for!!

Perhaps they were mildly inspired by GMC...with their Futurliner....

https://www.google.com/search?q=gmc+futurliner&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=WwG&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=rZs-UcbQBu2DyAGis4CAAQ&ved=0CDsQsAQ&biw=1440&bih=708

I didn't see the movie, at least I don't remember it.

Interesting concept.  Push the front with the trailer part on a vehicle which is not guided by rails.  I think it could lead to some interesting handling characteristics on slippery surfaces.
 
 :D

I meant to say that a 22,500 seat stadium for Major League Soccer (no matter how it's financed) wouldn't make sense unless George Kaiser could be convinced to be lead investor for the local MLS team's ownership group which would, in turn, guarantee Tulsa a team.
Or if Kaiser (or T Boone, for that matter) had a son who loved the sport... not unlike what Hank "Bush bailout" Paulson's son Merritt did in Portland...   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Paulson#Acquisition_of_the_Portland_Timbers_and_the_Portland_Beavers

Not that I thought (or currently think) that a publicly funded stadium would necessarily be a bad idea, in and of itself.
I mean, we seem to have lots of high school football stadiums in the city and suburbs...
As for the Redhawks, I've got plenty of opinions on that subject worthy of another thread in the Sports forum...

Meanwhile, back to The Pearl District...

I was responding to JCnOwasso about a variation on the soccer stadium idea... I wouldn't know the feasability for a particular location within The Pearl at this time, but knowing that Chapman Stadium wasn't always owned by TU and originally had a 14k capacity, and knowing that the "soccer-specific" stadium used by FC Dallas is actually owned by the City of Frisco and is also used by Frisco ISD for high school football... well...

IMHO, a 5k - 10k capacity "soccer-specific" stadium could be constructed with a stage at one end and also be able to accommodate high school football... it could be the home stadium for any two or three of these high schools... Rogers, Central, Edison, Hale... and as long as beer can be served at pro soccer games and outdoor concerts, I think it'd be a nice addition that could spur interest in the neighborhood...


There.  Fixed your post.   ;D

My little jab at Michael Bates was based on the Cato Institute's hatred of transit subsidies and fascination with jitneys... the jitney stuff can be found, I believe, six pages into the link below, on pg. 224....

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Ga7il3bH-5QJ:www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj5n1/cj5n1-12.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjPAylogVEcqUuZUgjzF_Yx-k5xH4cPw62ZnTcqhktLMmcrCRmboObJGW-X6Iiv2bs9NnITe_sbxyQBJbQ3kNBYSnrJxoPA7uMtJKKHDW-sZFLcykrUMMmTCMvkKfL_fr634Qq-&sig=AHIEtbQ_LBA7MA-cWYiC29p-1MiUlVSplA

What they should do is get some groups together... TPS, private schools, TU and the city and work out some type of universal city stadium that could be used by many different groups of people.  For HS football they could have a game of the week that could either be public or private schools and hold play off games.  I am not sure what type of practice facilities TU has, but they could be involved to have some of thier practices there for both football and soccer.  Then there is a feasibility of a Soccer team since the stadium will have already been built.  It does not have to be 22,500, but I think something between14000 and 19500 could be reasonable.  You could also hold a TPS sponsored Marching band competitions (yeah, I went there) since that is a real big thing around here with Union, BA and Owasso.  And, a higher capacity outdoor location for concerts.  It would be a nice fit in the area, especially when you consider the possible expansion of the flood control stuff and the places that will be within a reasonable walking distance once everything is said and done.

Well, I believe if we wait for "they," it'll probably never happen.   ;)
Later today/tonight, check your msgs for more detailed info...

TU already has a small soccer/track&field stadium with limited parking that barely seats 1000.
When I went to a playoff game last fall against San Diego, TU put in some temp stands, and announced attendance was a little over 1600 (which looked like a sellout to me)

Unless there's a feasibility study to justify it, I'm not sure a 14000+ seat stadium would fly... Union-Tuttle Stadium holds approximately 10k... http://www.tulsasports.org/general/909/stadiums

"The Pearl" happens to be situated exactly halfway between Rogers High School and Central High School.
Last I checked, Rogers (or is it College HS now?) had to play their home football games at Webster... Central plays their home games at Booker T... Hale plays home games at East Central... Edison plays home games at LaFortune Stadium...

The Rebooting of Rogers' Football Program
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=227&articleid=20120714_29_B1_CUTLIN518246

OKC once passed a second MAPS project for schools... wouldn't be too big a stretch to see a Vision for Kids project come to fruition after the next poorly constructed Vision referendum is defeated...

Here is the closest thing I have to a "template"... WakeMed's stadium in Cary, NC doesn't host high school football, but I think this will give you an idea or two...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WakeMed_Soccer_Park


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/SASSoccerPark2.jpg/250px-SASSoccerPark2.jpg)

Location    Cary, North Carolina
Broke ground    2001
Opened    May 2002
Owner    Wake County
Operator    Town of Cary
Surface    Natural Grass
Construction cost    $14.5 million
Architect    Envirotek, Inc.
Capacity    7,130

The stadium just recently was expanded to over 10k capacity....  http://www.indyweek.com/triangleoffense/archives/2012/12/31/now-its-built-so-will-they-come-first-look-at-expanded-wakemed-soccer-park-and-other-big-changes-for-carolina-railhawks-in-2013

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTJ2jFbVF-0Tfg_Jeh45lNOaZ5KQDasDcxCzT-GmTkFHIY8Gv_N)

Selser Schaefer Architects moves into renovated Tulsa Ice Co. building

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=32&articleid=20130315_32_E1_CUTLIN512625 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=32&articleid=20130315_32_E1_CUTLIN512625)

Just drove by last night...looks great!

I worked in that building when it was one of AP&S (Automotive Parts & Supplies) around 1997. They had two locations, this one and one on the north side of 41st just east of I-44. I think the one on 41st was originally Hobbs Trailer Service just behind Carpet City I think. Cool to see this building getting a new life and purpose.

They did a nice job.

I was certain that the east boundary for the Pearl was Utica Ave. Why does the Tulsa World want a building that is in Kendall-Whittier to be in the Pearl?

Well I think that whole street to Lewis should be considered Pearl IMO - its a nice wide street and the fancy curve is pretty cool also more toward Lewis :) There only so much open space left before Utica..

One of our soccer fans... (with no prompting on my part)   ;D

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/946289_10151474299857807_1765249467_n.jpg)

"Drillers Stadium is working out pretty well, but I propose "Tulsa Athletics Stadium" at 4th/6th & Elgin! Easy access to the IDL, a short stroll from Fassler Hall and, if you look real close, it's even got the TA Crest in the middle of the field. :) "

Have him shuffle it a bit to the West sidewalk and add ground floor retail all along Elgin, and also shuffle it to the sidewalk with ground floor retail along 6th, and I am in.  Would be really nice if Elgin could become a good, pedestrian friendly connector from the Deco District and 5th street corridor to the Blue Dome and Greenwood areas.

Iraq War veteran's Pearl District mural dedicated in front of Tulsa city councilors, community

http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/iraq-war-veterans-pearl-district-mural-dedicated-in-front-of-tulsa-city-councilors-community (http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/iraq-war-veterans-pearl-district-mural-dedicated-in-front-of-tulsa-city-councilors-community)

(http://media2.kjrh.com//photo/2013/10/23/pearl_district_mural_20131023153945_640_480.JPEG)

I had time to walk around the Pearl District this weekend.  Some great views of the city from around there.  And I withdraw my enthusiasm for the artwork... while it is a nice work, couldn't someone at least take a weed-wacker to the sagebrush growing around the front and sides of the building?  It just really peeves me that if not the owner, the resident could; or even the artist.  ARG

What ever happens to old buildings like that?  Cinderblock walls look worn out, big parking area out back.

I walked around quite a bit and found an empty lot with a big pecan crop on the ground.  I had to pick up a bag.

Not sure if this belongs in this thread, or this forum for that matter. But here it goes...Screw Downtown. People are going to other places such as Tulsa Hills, restaurant row, south Tulsa/Bixby. Spend the money and devote attention where the people are already going--not where certain people want them to go. Ducking, and donning kevlar.

People are also going downtown. Eat Street and the McNellie's Pub run this past Saturday brought thousands (not an over-estimation) to the Blue Dome alone. Growth is growth; there is nothing wrong with a drive and park like Tulsa Hills and there is nothing wrong with the park and walk experience in downtown. Both can exist in one city.

I like to hear about 1000s going downtown for an event. Thousands go to see a show at the arena, too. How many thousands and thousands go to the malls in restaurant row and elsewhere all the time. Truth be told, I view "downtowns" as a dying concept. That's just not where people go on a regular basis anymore--they go elsewhere.

By "people" I think you mean "guido"

Well of course.  Screw the other people!

He was in the military and its veterans day.  So be nice to him today.  He obviously wasn't always like this.

I make it a point to never go south of 51st street (India Palace gets an exception). As do all my friends. IMO, there is nothing south of 51st street worth patronizing (except India Palace) that I can't get north of 51st.

I couldn't disagree more. To give the complete opposite view, most of my friends and I (all 20's and 30's) never leave downtown unless we are going to watch sports somewhere on Brookside or buy groceries. Fix those two needs, and the lot of us may never leave that area. Our money goes to local establishments and time out on the town with friends - not mall stores or chain restaurants. I feel like I've just been though a week of Black Fridays if I go to the "Restaurant Row"/Tulsa Hills area any time of day or week. The malls (Promenade and Woodland) seem to be a dying breed whenever I patronize them 1-2x per year. I always regret having gone and wish I had just ordered online in the first place. Perhaps just my friends' and my opinion but when I read your post, I can't help but feel that you just haven't spent much time downtown in Tulsa or any other city for that matter.

Hence my statement: By "people" I think you mean "guido"

Downtown is where the sales growth can be found. Suburban retail is the dying concept.

I work downtown so I love to play downtown. I have friends who don't work downtown and they don't get it.

Their loss.

He said that somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

Can't help but wonder if you ride a fixie and have an impressive collection of trucker hats.  I'd love to buy you a PBR at Sound Pony some time.  ;D

My wife and I live in mid-town and love everything between our house and downtown. 

]

You think Sound Pony sells PBR?  Tulsa is becoming hipper.  We welcome Marshall's beer.  Hey, who was that playing the Scottish blowfish? Dave?  Saw you there at VFW.

Conan was alluding that TheAnsonian is a hipster since PBR is purportedly their lifeblood, fixies are the mode and SoundPony is the spot. I must be hipsterish since I do enjoy the peebers

There are plenty of people who do want urban living, most of the world actually but I digress, and I think any city worth it's salt and that want's to be competitive in the world should have at least a tiny smattering of urban living/lifestyle available.  I could also give your comment a little more credence if it weren't illegal in the city to build good urban areas. We zone for and give advantage to building places like Tulsa Hills, but do not do the same for urban/pedestrian & transit friendly areas. Can't say it's the "free market at work" in such a situation.

Just spent a month in London working... never touched a car for the whole time and didn't miss it a bit.  Hardly anyone I knew or met there had a car either, nor would they wan't one.  Stayed in a four bedroom flat with a girl from Russia who had also lived in Germany for a long time, a guy from Ireland, a girl from northern Italy, and for a time a girl from India stayed there too.  Worked with people at the job site from Turkey, Belgium, and Portugal.  None of them had a car, and as far as I gather, none ever did.  I would describe to them what Tulsa was like and that you couldn't really get most places without a car and they would give you this puzzled look of incomprehension. Many stats are showing that an ever growing group of young people in the US today do not wan't to "be forced" to have to have a car in order to get around and would prefer to live in pedestrian/transit friendly areas.

 (Also looked at crime statistics while I was there for one of the other guys in my group from Tulsa wondered what the crime was like in London and I said, likely much safer than in Tulsa.  I was right, going off what I remember, the last year stats for homicides for instance were available for both cities, 2012 I think, there were 89 in London and 68 in Tulsa "again just from memory", so 89 in a city of about 8 million and 68 in a city of 400,000.  Your about 20 times safer in London.  Would have to have about 1,000 murders a year in London to be about where Tulsa is. Who would live in a city like that?)

Gonna side step here.  Was reading something someone said the other day about losing the suburban/country living lifestyle in favor of cities and urban living.  Quite the contrary actually. There is no "conspiracy" to take that away.  This sprawl that we get with the current way of doing things isn't some ideal country living... it's sprawl.   

If you were to "allow for" and zone for, more urban living, you would actually have MORE country, closer in for everyone because you then wouldn't have as much sprawl.  Tulsa is, was, just the right size to have the best of both worlds.  Tulsa could have wonderful, attractive, inexpensive, urban and suburban style live/work/play options.  I don't understand why we don't allow for it, and plan for it?  I don't understand why that's such a scary thought?  Is it really so wise for us to put all our eggs in one basket then cross our fingers and hope we are right?  Just doesn't seem very smart no matter how you look at it.   

Dewey Bartlett spoke against the move for urban building in his interview with KWGS a few weeks ago. He is in favor of "growing out" rather than "growing up" and to me that shows how out of touch he is. There is a burgeoning group of urbanites in Tulsa. All of the new and announced downtown and near downtown development proves this, as did the successful "Dwell in the IDL" tour on Sunday.

Some people like to drive wherever they go. Some don't. There is room for both.

I prefer the Yellow Belly Banquet Beers over the PBR and have for years.  Unfortunately, the hipsters are starting to catch on.  What's my next move?

And, suburban retail is not a dying concept.  Just like downtown retail is a concept in revival.

It's pretty interesting the mix of people who always go downtown or never go downtown.  It depends greatly on your social group and what they do for fun.

Just a couple lowly attorneys. Soundpony is way too hip for us most of the time. :)  I prefer Hodge's Bend, Tavern, The Vault, and occasionally Hunt Club.

I couldn't agree more with all of this. My husband lives and works downtown (and I used to work downtown before reluctantly having to move offices), and he has constantly toyed with the idea of just selling his car because he only uses it maybe once every two or three weeks. Growing up in Tulsa, I could never have imagined someone would ever be able to live here without a car. Having lived for a bit in some bigger cities, I would be absolutely thrilled if Tulsa had a number of urban walkable areas. We are slowly creeping there, but we are not getting any help from the current zoning policies.

Walkability breeds a certain safety factor that doesn't exist in areas that require cars. It creates a sense of community when you can walk around and see your neighbors on a regular basis.

We usually try and get out of the Pony before the music starts, as it’s usually a bit far out for my tastes.   About the only time we go there is if there is a post race party there or a friend is celebrating a birthday.  Haven’t been in the Hunt Club in awhile.  We love the cocktail menu at the Vault, but their food menu is full of “meh” with the exception of the pretzels.  I’m sad to say their catering isn’t much better.

I wish Libby would get someone to helm the kitchen at The Vault who understands the concept of adequate seasoning, consistent food temps, and a creative menu.  By far, The Vault has one of the absolute coolest dining environments I’ve ever seen.  There again, I’m a huge Mid-Century Modern fan, so I might be biased.

RDJ, I love Coors yellow belly.  Nothing like it, especially for yard work.

We live in Oklahoma were the law says we can not enjoy Coors beer above the 3.2 level.   Right there.  It be a problem.  And yup, PBR is good at it's 6.+  We live in a kindergarden state.  At least it is one of the cheapest places on the planet

I love hearing how some of you are enthusiastic about downtown being an environment worth living within.  I am trying to go through my last 20-years by never owning another car.  Downtown is going to be cool.

Would you be willing to kiss off those thousands because they don't represent the majority of the city which resides outside the CBD? That would be kind of short sighted. I spend a lot of time downtown and have observed that many of those thousands are obviously from the burbs. Could be they tire of the franchise row restaurant offerings and the tidy shopping. Many more are outsiders staying at hotels downtown. New money, not the local money being passed around.

Even if its only 15% of trade, shall we dismiss them as un-important to our economy?

I think that is one of the things I love most about living downtown: Community. I know the people that live and work there. I know the business owners, servers and bar tenders. It's great to go to an event like Eat Street and see so many people that you know.

Not a "kiss off", just not pour tax money into that area in the hopes of attracting people from other places where they are already going. That's all. In other words, reward those areas with the 85% of trade (using your number) and not hurt/disregard them by trying to take their business away. Those businesses were/are risk takers, and it is paying off for them.

Unless he is the mayor of Tulsa County and the surrounding counties... there isn't much room left in the city limits to "grow out".  The Tulsa Hills area is pretty much a last gasp for that kind of growth, after that, it's slower "growing out" to the north of downtown and the remainder of the east side of Tulsa.  The city paid for studies that had results that showed if we were to zone for,allow, and add urban infill to the growth model of the future, we would grow much faster than if we did not, especially after the Southern Hills area fills out. 

But your request is fraught with contradiction. Tulsa Hills was the result of tax money poured into infrastructure to satisfy the needs of the developer. The develop wasn't going to happen without tax money and city support. It was done in the hopes of attracting people from other places they were already going. Places like the development along south Riverside at 101st and Peoria at 71st. Even Riverwalk. Those business owners were risk takers whose tax dollars were used against them.

Woodland did it to Southland/Southroads, who did it to Utica Square, who did it to downtown and the old Cherry Street of the 30's. Now the cycle reverses on itself and you don't want suburban tax dollars used to attract downtown usage? Even though it likely attracts more new, outside money than southern developments? Doesn't make sense.

I disagree with your characterization that my view is a contradiction. That said, I agree that newer development will seemingly supplant older/established business, my understanding is that Tulsa Hills, etc. were created to meet an existing need. Same goes for the massive development around inteller and my home. Someone felt there was a need, then the risk takers coupled with tax treatment/dollars (presumably) came in. Not sure how reviving downtown in a similar fashion is similar--particularly since this area has seen uber millions already spent on the arena, ball park and other projects and it still isn't enough. Buildings are being razed, and it appears parking lots are the investment du jour. Face it, downtown is a unique place favored by certain folks living nearby or that long for yesteryear. The people I know around me (Jenks, Bixby, and to a slight degree BA) simply do not want to make that trip.

Building primarily big box with many national and regional chains along a major highway is far different than building development with zero to a few nationally-recognized chains along a busy road a few miles removed from a highway.  I really don't see that Tulsa Hills cannibalizes Riverwalk or the 96th & Riverside development.  It actually filled the huge gaps those developments did not satisfy in the first place for southwest Tulsa.  If anything, it cannibalized the big box district on 71st from Memorial eastward.

Do not want downtown Tulsa revitalized "in a similar fashion" all many are asking for is for urban zoning to allow for pedestrian/transit friendly development. Your right in that we have many of the big pieces in place that cost hundreds of millions of dollars...why can't we finish the deal (for practically no cost at all in comparison) and get the zoning thats been needed and fought for for going on almost two decades now?

Good luck dooing that now with Dooey in the chair.

BY "urban zoning", are you referring to buildings being tore down to make parking lots? And so folks know, this is a story that has been the impetus for my views of downtown...http://www.academia.edu/2098742/Santa_Monicas_Third_Street_Promenade_the_failure_and_resurgence_of_a_downtown_pedestrian_mall

So you don't like this?...


 
[Los Angeles], 20 November 1988; McGuigan, 2003b; Zane, 2005).The Third Street Mall was renamed Third Street Promenade. Also, the streetscape was redesigned.Palm and jacaranda trees were planted along the street, lighting was improved, wrought-iron benchesand trash receptacles were placed around, and plazas were built at each end of the three blocks,containing fountains and topiary dinosaurs (Figure 6). Sidewalks were widened to 30 feet, and thestreet was narrowed to 20 feet. Pavilions were placed at intervals along the middle of the street to break up the right-of-way width and avoid the feeling of a vacated space. The street was decoratedwith banners to create a colourful and festive environment and to establish a theme throughout thePromenade. The mall entrance was emphasized with banners as well. It was decided that the citywould rent carts to street vendors to encourage street vending on the Promenade. To be on the safe
 
7
side, Santa Monica tried a hybrid experiment. Removable traffic barriers (bollards) were put in placethat would go down to allow car traffic at 15 mph from 4.30 pm to 10.00 am (Zane, 2005).In September 1989, the revitalized Third Street Mall, renamed Third Street Promenade, was launchedamongst a new round of parades, concerts, and fanfare (Zane, 2005; Rawson, 2005; Kaplan, 2005).Overnight, the project became a community and commercial success. After the first few years, the bollards went up permanently because of the abundant number of pedestrians (Zane, 2005). The rentstook a sharp turn upwards almost immediately. A study showed that the average annual rent per square foot on the Promenade jumped from $59 in 1984 to $122 in 1988. Many of the thrift storesclosed down before the renovation and others unavoidably followed as leases expired (
 Los AngelesTimes
[Los Angeles], 20 November 1988).
The city, the residents, and the property owners along the promenade share a common vision and animplicit agreement that the Promenade is an important community place in Santa Monica (Warfel,2005).

 Through the years the Third Street Promenade has earned several awards for excellence in attractingtourism and economic development, and has played a major role in reviving the larger downtownarea. The initial $13 million investment by the city has attracted private investment estimated at morethan $500 million, far exceeding the initial expectations (Rawson, 2005). In fact, in its beginning, theBayside District Corporation had only projected $100 million in private investment over 15 years (
 Los Angeles Times
[Los Angeles], 20 April 1986)

We are not advocating for anything that drastic, just want an update to the zoning to encourage pedestrian/transit friendly development, and only along certain corridors in downtown and allowing others to "opt in" as they like. What I am advocating for has worked, has been working for decades now actually, in many cities.  The article you link to shows many "lessons learned" what worked what didn't.  We just want to do a little of that "what works" stuff, though this story only shows one aspect of one type of street/history.

As for buildings being torn down for parking lots.  Lets see.... 270 plus square miles of zoning encouraging auto oriented development (including mandated minimum parking requirements).  Vrs. Under 2 square miles of "do as you want'.  Lets see... I see more parking.  No brainer there dude.  What else would anyone expect would happen?

Actually, I really don't get your point with all this?

They made a mistake, just like we did (the exceptions of where this type of mall worked were in cities with urban zoning, that we do not have and are asking for).  Then they made changes, like we have not, and turned it into a success,,, like we have not.

It seems a pointless conversation anyway. Those who don't like downtown won't like it because others do (and vice versa). And no amount of logic or defense of either position is of much consequence. 

I dislike OSU and wouldn't visit unless paid to do so, but I understand those who do and am glad my taxes help pay for them. Why can't it be left at that? Because, those who feel uncomfortable downtown and can't identify with its denizens, object to it on emotional grounds not logical. They think we're trying to resurrect something that they feel is unworthy. I assure you that as someone who has always lived in the midtown/downtown area, this new downtown development is nothing, nothing like the past. Even when we had 100,000 people working downtown in oil companies, banking, retail and food, it wasn't like this. It was busy, but boring. If you think this is a resurrection, you are only looking at the shell of past downtowns.

The business people who have invested in this new Downtown are not light weights. They don't invest in fads.

It's this from that article Artist:


emphasis added

And that was 40-50 years ago, and a different generation (or two) of people.  Living patterns change now just like they did back then.

I'm guessing in 40 or 50 (probably sooner) years we'll be reading about the failure of suburbs. I mean, they are a fairly new concept in terms of city development.

And that's my point. The 60s-70s idea of "going downtown" to shop, dine, etc. is gone. Modern transportation, technology, and businesses  popping up where the people are (and obviously other factors) makes downtowns sort of obsolete. What we are left with is event-driven or gimmicky ideas to lure folks away from what is truly local. Seriously, we have a new arena and ballfield, an engineered "lake", large daily influx of people working, a "how many mile long" park, whatever "Brady" district is calling itself, etc., and we are talking about how that STILL isn't enough. We need mass transit, walkability, bike paths, and whatever else because THAT will change everything.

Guido you and your hand grenade posts crack me up

We truly must just run in different circles.

My parents who live in South Tulsa have tried every downtown restaurant. My kids want to go to Guthrie Green on Sundays and my daughter thinks Dwelling Spaces has the best t-shirts and jewelry. I had a conversation last night with a tow truck driver from Sand Springs (car wouldn't start) who said there ain't no good restaurants in Sand Springs and his family eats at Joe Momma's every Tuesday night.

No question we run in different circles. I have lived in several large cities and have grown to despise "downtown". Tulsa's downtown is in its current shape for a reason. So is South Memorial at 169, Tulsa Hills, and the restaurant row area. You and others can provide anecdotal examples, but the fact remains that despite pouring in millions (which I supported) it is still a destination for those accustomed to it. All I am saying is direct resources towards the current trends and where we all can get the most bang for our buck. Downtown is not that place. Downtown is a place to work, for the homeless to hang out, and a place to occasionally go for an event. Focus on that.

You are welcome.

Ever thought downtown is being rebuilt for those that already live in Tulsa but for those we need to live here?

Cities all over the country are reaping the benefits of downtowns that are revitalizing and serving the needs and desires of the ever growing number of people who want to live, work, shop and play in good urban environments.  Often once stagnant and declining downtowns are in many instances growing faster than other areas of the city. (btw, Tulsa is barely growing at all, over the last 5 years we have lost jobs, and the population growth is stagnant at best, while other cities with good urban areas and better urban zoning are outpacing us, Tulsa Hills is small potatoes compared to the kind of growth and development in many of our competitor cities, especially their downtowns.) There definitely seems to be a desire for growth in downtown Tulsa as it seems that just about every new housing development sells out and many have waiting lists.  More and more retail keeps going in as well.  As recent news has obviously shown, we are also seeing a new influx of hotels lol.  I could go on but the "recent trends" as you put it are obvious. Urban areas are back, whether we like it or not.

 But my concern isn't about whether or not we are going to have more growth downtown, we will and the pace of it will only increase.  My, and others concern is about the type and quality of that growth.  One huge determiner of that will be zoning. Other cities that have put in place good urban zoning rules, (just like you have suburban zoning in those areas you mentioned) we need the right kind of zoning for our urban areas as well.  

Anyway, gotta go. Got customers… in my shop… downtown.  ;D

I don't know how old anybody on here is, but I think most of this is a generational paradigm shift, and there is a good chance that if a person (including me) is not of the right generation (read "too old"), we simply cannot comprehend why that generation would think the way they do.  I just listened to a radio discussion on what Millennials (those born from the early-mid '80's to the early '00s) value and want, and I confess that I could not identify with some of it.  However, a lot of those trends/topics align with this discussion.  They want more urban living, more mass-transit, etc, and (generally) shun suburbia and all it stands for.

Tulsa already has plenty of suburban amenities for any-and-all who want to live here.  We're good there.  That's not the case for urban.  We should not be investing for what is now, but for what is coming.  Or, we can be left behind and continue to lose those people to OKC, KC, Dallas, etc.

My teen years were in suburbia.  Starting my adult life, I lived downtown, then midtown, then did suburbia again and moved back to midtown.  I’ll stay in midtown as long as I’m in Tulsa.  I’m in my late 40’s so perhaps I’m drawn to downtown as in my earlier memories, both parents worked downtown and it was still a place to go shop, as well as Utica Square.  I never really warmed up to mega-malls.  Perhaps I’m just old enough to appreciate the inner city more than the suburbs.  There’s pluses to living either place, I just know where my preferences lie.

I have thought about that. And that basis sounds like gambling to me. I guess a question I have is where is the residential/business growth in the Tulsa area? Are people moving downtown?

Absolutely there are people moving downtown.   One of the tricks about downtown in it's current phase is that a lot of the "growth" is with the rehabilitation of buildings that were empty and often were empty for a long time. (the space where my shop now is was abandoned, except as some storage for a time, for about 30 years) Thus you do not readily see at first glance, a lot of the growth like you would out in the suburbs if a lot of new homes were going in.  If the infill development were happening as suburban style development with say single family detached homes in some vacant field instead of loft or apartment homes going into buildings that already exist (and now several new buildings and apartment complexes), you would have seen several new neighborhoods worth of homes going in. Hundreds of new homes.  Then add to that all the shops, hotels, parks, museums, entertainment venues, cafe's & restaurants, gyms, art galleries, new office tower, church expansions, etc.  if all that had been going into some vacant field out south you would say that area was going gangbusters.

I love it.  The more people that have an opportunity to live in dense conditions downtown, the less housing we need out "here" with houses 5 feet from their neighbor.  We won't need to widen Memorial to 8 lanes.......

I really do want the opportunity for people who want to live in an urban environment to have it.  It's not for me though and folks putting in 5 or more houses per acre out here are driving me nuts(er).  Viva downtown!

No kidding.

I did. 

Crashed with my dad in south Tulsa (92ish and memorial) for a couple months after graduating from TU.  Absolutely hated driving commuting into Downtown.  As soon as I built up some funds, I ended up moving to Westport on the River, staying for around 2.5 years. After that, I moved to the University Club tower, stayed there for another 2.5. For part of it, I actually walked into Downtown for brunch on Sundays,

Now, I live in GreenArch and do not look back.  I fully support being able to walk to places, and look forward to the day when we have even closer grocery options.  I absolutely hated commuting into Downtown for work via the BA Expressway or I-244.

I recently relocated to the Tulsa area.  Part of the decision to do so was based on the promise and potential of the development in downtown.  The collection of art deco buildings here is very special and unique.  The buildings and surrounding areas must be redeveloped and showcased as this can easily set Tulsa apart from any competitively sized cities.  I'm sure most of the members of this forum fully recognize and appreciate Tulsa's architectural assets.  However, I concluded as much after only a 1 1/2 day visit to the area on a job interview. 

What has become 71st street cluster **** can be found anywhere and everywhere.  Moreover, due to poor (almost anything goes) zoning, this area in comparison to similar suburban overdevelopments is among the worst I've experienced in terms of the amount of traffic congestion one has to deal vs. what the area actually offers.  I certainly didn't move to Tulsa for anything the suburbs have to offer, although I am temporarily living in one due to employment logistics.  Not bashing here, Tulsa burbs are fine, just like those found elsewhere.....indistinguishably unremarkable.

BTW, the Pearl urbanism concept definitely represents the type of promise and potential that I'm talking about above!

Welcome to Tulsa and TNF! You are a perfect example of the sort of people we want to attract to Tulsa.  Investing money in the urban core is by no means a fad.  I worked downtown 20 years ago and it's been amazing to see the interest keep growing down there.

Downtown is a hill overlooking a railroad passage that became the early residential and business district.  It is full of history.  I go there because I love it.  I do not love 71st or the Churches of Consumerism malls.  Downtown is close to the river and if I were to work there I could walk everywhere and not have a car once that is my home.

As for the homeless hanging out, I have no answer.  Anyone that does should start a thread.

I too chose to live in Tulsa based on what the Art's District is becoming with Downtown's future.  I'm a downtown type person.  I watched Houston be flattened in the 80's.  I lived in Boston after New Orleans and both were experiencing growth.  Then in Pittsburgh I saw the area around the stadium gain interest.  I like old neighborhoods.  Downtown Tulsa will experience lots of infill, regeneration.  It's a great small town.

Love this headline. My feeling in investing downtown has now changed.  ::)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/sunday-downtown-event-draws-hundreds/article_f2606ba2-5ae1-11e3-8f8b-001a4bcf6878.html

Good.  Don't need a grouch like you down there anyway to yell at all the kids to 'get off the Green'.

 8)

 Considering that the typical Sunday evening has very few people out downtown doing much of anything (heck you can drive around much of Tulsa on a Sunday evening and it looks like the city shuts down lol) but yesterday Boston Ave at least, was hopping.  From almost zilch to hundreds in my shop, definitely one more piece in the upward trend for downtown.  Heard so many people last night saying how nice it was being downtown seeing the lights and bustling streets.  Trolleys were packed too shuffling people from one part of downtown to the next.

Our volume on Sunday evening is literally identical to every other night sans Thursday and Friday which are slightly busier. Last night was great though I agree, we had our second busiest night ever. I picked up some nice post cards from your shop and recommended it to all of my friends.

There is no good answer....the Salvation Army center provides shelter/food/help, but many still choose to stay outside to have the freedom to do the drugs/alcohol/etc that they can't do there.

Every urban core has homeless. They just stick out more in Tulsa because there isn't a community living there yet in downtown.

Downtown revitalization is not a quick process. I know I make comparisons based on living in Phoenix, but there it started in 1992 and is still growing. In '92 the only thing you went there for was a basketball game, or to pick up someone you know from the jail. Portland has been going through the same long process, although way to liberal and greenie, militant bicyclist for me, (I don't want a wheat grass tofu sandwich, I shower every day and don't have enough hair to wear dreads and Patchouli).

I think from what I have read and heard that Tulsa is on the upside of the curve, and relatives that think I should move back to Tulsa think I should be a southie, (reminds me of the description of south Boston, MA) and that if I were to move downtown they wont visit me.

I too have lived in Boston (Wellesley) and Portland (both)...  To say that Portland is dreads, Patchouli and tofu is to equate Tulsa to Meth, trash & corndogs/donuts.

Tulsa downtown is on an upswing but I can't see the bar going too high until we get rid of Meth, trash...  improve transport options.  Obviously Tulsa's dining bar is not just donut shops, but boy, do we have our share.

And your point is....??


I would take exception to the donut section - Portland has Tulsa beat six ways from Sundays on donuts!!  Voo-Doo donuts, that is.... SOOO wish they would have that here!!

Voo-Doo Donuts!  I used to go to Portland a lot, and I had forgotten about that place!  Absolutely the best donut shop.  Donuts are one of my "trigger foods" and so I specifically avoid them, but man, I could go for a Voo-Doo donut right now.

Portland and everything McMenamins I loved.

Transport.

Just came back from road trip to Minn/StPaul and (northern)Wisconsin where I drove on the best built and maintained roads through 6 states, and yet....they also have light rail connecting the metroplex to the surrounding small towns. One small town, Elk River has a fine old restored downtown, 1940's-50's era, that was busy on a Saturday nite in spite of the nearby city.

While Tulsans moan about the impossibility of profitable trains, light rail, bus systems etc., the rest of civilization seems to find them indispensable to growth and an expected part of infrastructure. While we complain about roundabouts, even the rural two lane roads have them there. While we cry about freeze/thaw, they build roads the Romans would be proud of in a more hostile environment. They post signs to warn of a narrow stretch of highway at 14ft 3in while in Okla. that size is a given. After their bridge collapse a few years ago I noticed a large number of new bridges all along 35 starting in Iowa. I never came across a toll road or road construction after leaving OK.  Not a wrinkled, rutted, pothole strewn road....til you hit the Oklahoma border with a loud bump. The road narrows, the drivers throttle up and commence Texas road rules.

And guess what?  My brother in law who lives just outside of StPaul pays half of my real estate tax for a home twice a large. Half my insurance too. Seems insurance companies like the lower claims and government is not politically hamstrung.

I know its not a perfect area. My gawd, the weather! Everyone I spoke to, conservative or liberal, thinks the Wisconsin governor is a boob. But they get over it and keep building, re-building and re-thinking. Lots of problems that all states and cities have. But they seem to have lower property taxes, lower insurance, better government and better roads.

And we can't get a train from OKC, to Tulsa to Kansas City??? We have to start thinking bigger and drop the political rhetoric or we're doomed to (continued) mediocrity.

First thing I noticed in Tulsa is donut shops.  Portland has us beat on quality, not quantity.  My point being, Portland is Not just tree hugging hippies no more than Tulsa is... either you get it or not.

Looks like income tax is higher.  I didn't look into deductions etc.

State sales tax is higher.  Local sales tax maybe not so much.

http://www.revenue.state.mn.us/individuals/individ_income/Pages/Minnesota_Income_Tax_Rates_and_Brackets.aspx

http://www.tax-brackets.org/oklahomataxtable

http://www.revenue.state.mn.us/businesses/sut/Pages/SalesTaxCalculator.aspx

http://www.taxrates.com/state-rates/minnesota/?CampaignID=70140000000VJsx&_kk=mn%20sales%20tax&gclid=CMit78bblLsCFWhxQgodfQcA4A

It's got to be paid for in some way. I was hoping you would chime in. These people seem to take mass transit AND Infrastructure as a basic requirement for growth both city and suburban. We seem to think one or the other and only if taxes aren't affected. What they pay out in added income taxes may be offset in higher income opportunity an lower insurance. Besides a higher quality of life.

I get it...love Portland, but not sure my "Okie" attitudes could survive too long there.  Or Seattle, or many places up  along that coast.  But I really enjoy being there the time I do get to spend in it.

Very much so.  I work closely with a LOT of people in Wis and MN for the last few years.  Other than the snowblowers, the toys they all have to play with are fantastic!  And all winter/snow related!!  Small ice houses for ice fishing!!  In addition to the normal assortment of summer toys found both here and there....

Incomes are somewhat higher.  The big difference I see when looking there as possible short term relocation event is the cost of housing - geez...what a jolt that will be!!


Biggest problem I see is the speed of speech - we talk slower here.  And they tend to get a little 'anxious' for us to speak faster.  Cultural difference.  I think they do that so their jaws will move faster and generate enough heat to keep them from freezing up.

Twin Cities = bike lanes everywhere.....More than bike friendly but bike loving culture, plus those many small but real lakes all throughout the city that add another dimension to urban ambient settings.  Those bike lanes were implemented more than 20 years ago before most cities go with the program.  If not for the arctic cold winters, I can't think of a better area and quality of life.

Water to the river, Water to the Pearl!  Word....

Something deeper is needed in Tulsa than just mass-transit improvements, a full river, better street lights, inner city infill. Reading our posts we seem to love someone else and yet are staying faithful and hopeful to our Tulsa.

Leaves are falling and my neighbors do not rake them out of the street gutter and drains.  Have you rode a bus lately.  I don't drive anymore, I use the bus and walk.  It is a rude, crude, loud, unconcerned trip to ride the bus often.  If a person visits and rides the 203 from the airport I would bet money, the odds are, they will take a taxi to go back home.

Don't get me wrong, I love Tulsa.  I do cheat on her; even with Kansas City.

You mention leaves - I saw the most amazing thing over Thanksgiving in a small town in eastern Appalachia Tennessee.  When someone has many (or just a few) trees in their yard, instead of raking, mulching, bagging, burning, etc, they can have their yard care people come by with the grass blowers and blow the leaves to the curb!  Or they can rake them to the curb themselves.  The city then comes by with a large vacuum truck, sucks up all the leaves and takes them to the city facility to mulch and compost!!  The city then uses the compost on parks, etc. or lets people come get what they want for their gardens/yards!

This is not a rich town, either.  It very much is classic, low income Appalachia!  They just have figured out a way to help the city/citizens and keep the town looking nice in a very cost effective manner.

The only issue I have is the removal of all those leaves from 'my' property, but I would have the option to keep and process the leaves myself.  Or just go get some finished compost later....

This is an example of how city services should work - to the benefit of the citizens!

I can see it now... 8 weeks of wondering when they will come pickup the leaves.

Not at all unusual, I know of some towns in the northeast that do that.   Its no different than street cleaners.

Dates are defined - and there are several.  Day or two before, you have the leaves moved to the curb.  They disappear.  One I saw (staying next door) had a pile about 5 ft tall, 15 ft wide, 150 ft long along the curb.  Lots of big oak trees!

Amazed me.  Have never encountered that before, but have obviously missed the leaf "window"....

That list is an important part of what needs to be done.  We need to tackle Tulsa's stagnant growth and lack of competitiveness on several fronts at the same time.  The other part imho would be better education, not just math, science, etc. but "How to be a good person/parent, creating good life habits and life skills" type education.  I would have rather us take half of that billion dollars for the streets and dumped it into education.  That would have improved our economy/desirability/standard of living, more over the long haul than having slightly better streets over the next few years will.

And that's the key to the whole house. People up there are smart because their parents and grandparents invested in education when ours did not.
Even as a child I remember kids coming from Iowa who were a grade level ahead of us at the same age. That education then enabled them to solve the problems we find insurmountable. The best education here is a careful route planned through TPS or private schools. It seems our legislators want to strangle one child in hopes the other will be more successful.

The whole point of my post was that they have found out how to integrate mass transit, quality road construction and growth in both inner city and suburbs while improving their quality of life. They did it and kept taxes manageable. They have good governance that stems from their good educations. As a contrast, Bartlett could not have been elected without the suburban vote and his first declaration is to put water in the river even though south Tulsa voted against the previous water in the river issues!

I refuse to believe the only reason is that they are simply smarter than us. They transcend their political, racial and religious differences. We don't.

While my car was down, I rode the 117 and 118 for a few weeks till I could save the money for the repairs. Was not bad after you figured out the routes, stops and times. Got to plan more but the riders were simply working class folks. Some dirty, some drinking, most poor and lots of different languages. That puts off some people.

And this. Met a fellow a few years older than me last week. He had just returned from Anchorage and was relating how compact the city is even though its larger than Tulsa and how truly friendly the people were. He said, "You know they were alot like what Tulsans used to be like and still think they are."

I lived in Iowa for a while and after 5th grade returned here.  We got into new material in Tulsa, that I had not already done, just before Christmas break in 8th grade.


Your comment about strangling versus encouraging is absolutely dead on - you cannot have a society of "serfs" without ensuring the serfs are diverted to the correct slot.

When I lived in Wellesley, MA they were noted as having a very progressive recycle system.  I attribute it somewhat to the female influence there.  Anyway, going to the dump was cool.  Recycling everything!  It’s like a giant garage sale, you bring stuff and sometimes you take stuff home.  One friend had 50 or so old chairs that he planned on refinishing in his retirement.  They hung from his basement ceiling and were all brought home from the dump.  And leaves were converted to compost and we all got to take so much.  I loved it… told my wife about it all the time.  Then one Saturday she said she wanted to go and it happened to be an election week.  Well, considering that this is where everyone in town came who was standing along the road in?  People running for office waiting to shake hands.  In suit and tie.  When my wife saw it, and I had told here many stories of how cool this place was, I turned and said: “Should we valet park?”


Yup.  We need more transportation options and all of that stuff but you said it: education and racial / religious harmony!  To bad we can’t foie gras ourselves with forced taxes, smarts, & love & acceptance.

Education is the key.  Always heard it said that when you know better you do better.  Education leads to enlightenment, and enlightenment will allow political, religious, racial and other differences and baggage to be transcended.  We need to overcome all such pettiness to move this city forward. 

People in Tulsa and every other city cite crime as one of the top 1 or 2 overriding problems.  Then there is the outcry for more police as if more would somehow reduce or deter crime.  The best way (perhaps the only way) to reduce crime long term is to educate our citizenry.  Educated communities will improve economically through better paying jobs, allowing for the eradication of poverty.  But more importantly, eradicating the pathology of poverty that sometimes crosses the line into criminal activity as an economic means to an end.

I am not an educator nor a reformer and can't offer quality solutions to bridge the educational gaps pervasive in Tulsa (but I would do what I can).  I wouldn't underestimate Tulsa, there appears to be enough serious brainpower here to address these structural issues from the core.  However, in order to do so, the petty differences and baggage need to be checked at the door.

I also like the earlier suggestion posted in regards to providing good citizenship and life skills training.  Basic respect and civility are sorely lacking in our society.  We can't even come to the table to discuss ideas and proposals in this country without leveling personal attacks.  Thus, I would not want to limit this training to our youth, but would also recommend extending it to adults as well.

But then, an educated populace would make it that much more difficult for the powers that be to skim their 10%  off the top.... they really don't want education.  As can be seen by Fallin's ensuring/continuing 30% cuts to education in the state....

Well said.

The key to better education starts in the home, not the schoolhouse.  People who are brought up surrounded by people who didn't put emphasis on their own education and who don't prioritize their children's education are almost guaranteed certain failure.  This comes along with the gradual erosions of morals in a society.  I'm no fan of organized religion, and that even seems to corrupt some people.  But there is a lack of spirituality and discipline in society today which I think is the root cause of crime and poverty. 

You really need to look no further than the "role models" in reality TV to see how dumbed down we have become as a society.  People look for the easy buck instead of realizing hard work is the key to long term success.

C, I concur with what you've said.  Good education should start in the home. However, but  have witnessed several generations of widespread dysfunctional families, so much so that there isn't even a safety net of grandparents that could fill the voids of "lost and out there" parents because they themselves are just as lost and caught up.  In these situations there is NO foundation from which to start.  But I cannot concede certain failure because there is always some hope (no matter how small) and miracles do happen.  I've worked with some kids who amazingly beat some astronomical odds to get on a successful path.  So I'm always willing to do what I can to support and encourage.

Perhaps the root causes of poverty and crime did start in part with a lack of spirituality and discipline, but that occurred a long time ago.  The sad reality is that so many children (and now several generations of them) are innocently born into stuff for which to them is normal and they've had no other experience for which to judge it by.  In this respect, they are no different than any other children because they are not expected to be anything other than products of their environment.

I don't watch a nanosecond of reality TV.  It is sad when the entitlement culture perpetrated by pseudo celebrities with no redeeming qualities overreaches into the margins of society.  Way too many train wrecks is what you get.  Only in America is it possible to literally market and quite successfully sell a non productive "self." 

I'm not a social engineer by any means.  My original intent was to make the point that it will take a better educated society to overcome the barriers that prevent the city from making the kinds of significant strides forward that many folks here are envisioning.  There is a strong correlation between better educated cities and vibrant urbanism with Mpls-St. Paul, Seattle, Denver, Portland, and numerous Canadian cities as several leading examples.  I know some may not agree, but I believe that Tulsa can get in the mix too....

I agree that Tulsa has the feel of a city that can overcome a list of issues and become a true gem.  We have the largest Community Fund in the nation, bigger than NYC; and it is backed mostly with money that aims at education.  And it somehow funds the Gathering Place as well... which is cool.

Did I get this right?

Anyway.  If we can't do it, the whole of the world is mucked.  Wow, it comes down to that.  Heavy burden Tulsa.

Strangely, the world survives and prospers without ever visiting or even knowing about Tulsa. You may remove that burden. We have this super estimation of ourselves and our potential that is curious to others. We are a city whose politics, racism and religion have held us back because we steadfastly refuse to elect those who are most qualified to represent us. Thus, we have sketchy leadership.

From there it cascades. That leadership appoints authority leadership, decides who is worthy for party support, who is invisible and who is celebrated, mostly based on non performance characteristics. Then we marvel at how wasteful and inefficient government is and blame it on the hourly workers and the unions.

The foundations and uber wealthy (as well as a small core of enlightened attorneys and corporations) are the only real points of light here and its their support for education, paths, downtown development and possible river development that provides the real leadership. Drop Kaisers support for the Gathering Place, drop Zarrow's education support and put it all to a vote of the people. Then you'll see Tulsa's potential in real terms.

Its education, but its more than that. Culture counts.

Very well said.  I’d suspect those who have crawled out of their societal swamp had a role model somewhere that inspired them to work hard to overcome a rough childhood and indifferent or absentee parents.  There certainly are good teachers I can remember who seemed to teach because they really cared and wanted to make a difference.  I also recall some who were doing nothing but collecting a paycheck and holding out for retirement.  Fortunately, those were few.

Lets go with your premises that "better education starts in the home".  How do you get that to happen?  Wag your finger at the person and say "Be a good parent!" and then walk off job done?  That's not going to work.  These parents are sometimes no more than kids themselves, perhaps on drugs, welfare, have bad life habits and skills, drop outs, etc. etc.  What kind of system would it take to change them?  How much time/money bureaucracy (either government or private sector) would it take to help them.  However, those kids in school now (who will be the parents of tomorrow) are a captive audience with a huge infrastructure already set up which could be used with far less effort etc. than setting up a new system for the parents.  People always say it's the parents, but ok, what do you do about that?

Was reading an article yesterday where people were looking at what other countries were doing right to have better educated children (and thus parents).  One thing they noticed than in most countries doing better than us, those children who needed the most, got the most help.  In the US, that's the opposite.  With property taxes funding schools it often happens that those who need the least get the most, and those who need the most get the least.

However, this notion must also be paired with this…

 It's indeed not always about throwing more money at the schools.  Many countries do well with less, on average, than we do.  (Which begs the thought that those who have the best parents and advantages and who already get more under our system,,, well they are getting WAY more than is needed and that shows how much more wasteful and tragic our system is.)   

 I always believe one should first start with, "What needs to be done. What's the best most cost effective way to do it?… then fund that.  Don't automatically start with, we will need more money, right off the bat.  If it actually turns out that some children do need more and that requires more money, then so be it.  Also it must stand to reason that if there are those that need less, then why spend more money than is needed, especially if it turns out there is a need for it elsewhere?

It almost sounds like you are saying that we should intentionally put the presently advantaged kids at a disadvantage to even things out.  Leveling the playing field by lowering the top is not the way to go in my opinion. Who gets to decide what the presently advantaged kids need?  My parents did OK but my brother had a reading disability in his younger years.  Are you saying we should have condemned him to be a high school dropout instead of going on to become a Mechanical Engineer because my parents were not dirt poor?  I certainly hope not.

I recognize the blood and turnip thing but perhaps if the parents of presently disadvantaged kids had a bigger financial stake in their kids' education the parents might care a bit more.  If that means a bigger stretch, so be it.  The fact that it would be a larger percentage of those parents' resources than someone like Guido is fine by me.  It might make them demand that the schools become what they could be rather than just a place to send their kids for a few hours a day.  It's difficult to motivate folks to demand improvements in something that appears to be free.  (I know it's not really free because even property taxes are indirectly paid by renters.  The indirect thing really works though.  Think about "income tax refunds".)

You and I have had that discussion before and it’s probably the most frustrating question of all: Just how do you get someone to become a better parent?

Unfortunately, there is no amount of government or forced spiritual intervention that can force people into becoming responsible parents or citizens.  That comes from within.  Either from a strong desire to change one’s circumstances in life or a role model who finally inspired someone to want to change.

I’ve seen people get their crap together after multiple brushes with the law due to alcohol or drug abuse by simply realizing a life of prison and/or  overdoses isn’t for them.  I’ve seen people who were destitute and hopeless become productive people after getting into and staying with a 12 step program which does involve a spiritual awakening.

As a society we do have mentorship programs such as Big Brothers & Sisters, we offer any number of rehab programs via the state and faith-based organizations.  It’s not like there isn’t any outreach to help people improve themselves.  Unfortunately, some people choose to live a life of mediocrity and dependence rather than one of self-reliance and responsibility.  I’m a big believer in school volunteer programs and mentorship programs which provide a positive role model for children who come from troubled homes or single parent households where the parent may be a great parent, but they work three jobs to keep a roof over their head and can’t spend much time with their child(ren).

For those kids who come from crappy households, the best we can do is try and provide positive role models away from their home who believe in them and will inspire them.

It sounded more to me like he was saying that the people who need help the most ought to get the most help. I tend to agree, especially when we're talking about children who can in no way be held responsible for having a crappy, drug addicted, mentally ill, overworked, or some combination of the above parent.

Personally, I think one of the larger issues that people ignore is undiagnosed mental illness causing people to miss out on the development and maintenance of life skills. Sometimes lazy and ill look an awful lot alike, unfortunately. Rather than listen to them and help them with what they actually need help with (surprisingly, people are pretty good at knowing what their immediate needs are), we point to their self medication or impulse purchases or inability to keep a job and say "oh, that's the problem right there!" No guys, that's called a symptom. Feel free to try to do something about it, but much like taking Tylenol for a fever, it's just going to come back if you don't treat the underlying cause.

Absolutely not what I was saying.

He certainly said that.  It is this part:
I was not sure about, especially who gets to determine "need".

Test scores and drop out rates might be used as part of that consideration (and again, no it's not always about funding).  As has been said before, some students because of their parents, would do well regardless of whether their school had an olympic sized swimming pool or a planetarium on the roof, or not.  Where as some students, say whose parent's don't speak English as a for instance, and who themselves may not have English as a first language, might could use a little extra attention (time is money).  But with our current system of funding, it's often likely that the kids who would do just as well with less funding get the most (far more than other countries whose Children do as well or better), and those who are in situations where they could use more funding (attention), get the least. 

 But, how bout just "egalitarian" spending to start with? 

 I might ask you, Who gets to determine "need" now?  or do you think there is no "need"?

There are certainly students not being properly served by our school system. (The spelling on this forum is proof of that.)  Oklahoma's attempt to grade our schools is evidently flawed but that is a start to find out which schools have more needs.  Testing to determine if students are progressing properly seems to be a social taboo.  Some kids just won't progress as well as others.  Making a kid repeat a year for failure to meet the standard to pass to the next grade needs to be given more consideration than it presently appears to have.  (I don't have any offspring so I don't have a first hand relationship with the schools.)  One thing I don't really have an answer to is how to get parents to put a value on education and pass that along to their kids. Parents who don't speak English and don't want to learn English do a disservice to their kids. Making it easier to live here without speaking English doesn't help that situation.  I think it's wonderful to be able to speak multiple languages.  If you live in the USA, one of them should be English.

Funding isn't everything but it is obviously important.  I don't have a problem with the State or the Feds using some of my tax money to help out the less fortunate school districts.  Of course that money comes with strings and rightly so.  Egalitarian spending would imply that the folks in the Jenks school district should not be allowed to vote themselves a higher tax rate for better schools.  I think they should be allowed to do that and to keep that extra money in their school district.

All the schools should meet a minimum standard which will properly prepare their students for life after graduation.  Who gets to set that standard?  It seems no one wants the Federal Government to do it.  Some folks don't even want the States to set the standards, instead letting some lower level of government set the standards.  I am inclined to have a mix where the Feds set some really basic standards such as English language instruction every year.  States could opt to add things like local history.  Some schools will want to be better than the minimum and they should be allowed to do that.

Compromise offered on Pearl District's 6th Street Infill Plan
Posted: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:00 am | Updated: 7:14 am, Thu Jan 16, 2014.
By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/compromise-offered-on-pearl-district-s-th-street-infill-plan/article_5cc0b663-0021-565c-aa01-edee9f00ae87.html

City Councilor Blake Ewing and the Pearl District Business and Property Owners Association have proposed a compromise on changes to the Pearl District 6th Street Infill Plan.

The agreement calls for 11th Street from Troost to Peoria avenues to remain designated for mixed-use development. The Property and Business Association had proposed — and the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission has adopted — an amendment designating that stretch of 11th Street auto-oriented.

Ewing, who represents the district and owns a business there, said the mixed-use designation — which envisions walkable areas similar to Cherry Street, where structures are built to the sidewalk — makes sense along 11th Street.

"We have building stock, and it's built up to the curb right now," he said. "It would make sense that future development along 11th Street be consistent with the building stock that is already there."

The designation also makes sense because 11th Street is part of historic Route 66, Ewing said.

"If we want that to be a tourist area, it needs to have that kind of Cherry Street feel," he said.

Small-area plans such as the 6th Street Infill Plan are policy documents that lay out the city's vision for the development of a particular area. They are not regulating documents but information for decision-makers — including future planning commissioners — who are charged with considering zoning changes and other land-use regulations.

The 6th Street Infill Plan was initiated by another Pearl District group — the Pearl District Association — nearly 10 years ago and adopted by the City Council in 2006.

The backers of the plan envisioned creating a dense, urban environment that encouraged walkability and focused less on automobile-oriented development.

The Pearl District Business and Property Owners Association — whose members include manufacturers and other auto-oriented businesses — have said they were never included in the original process and responded by proposing amendments to the plan that, among other things, changed 11th Street's designation from mixed-use to auto-oriented.

The amendments were adopted by the Planning Commission and are now before the City Council, where Planning Commission Chairman Michael Covey will appear Thursday to discuss the issue.

Councilors can approve the amendments in whole or in part, or they can send the amendments back in whole or in part for reconsideration by the Planning Commission.

Ewing said he expects that the council will send the map back to the Planning Commission for its approval of the 11th Street compromise and that the council will likely approve the rest of the amendments.

That is bad news as far Pearl District Association President Thom Crowe is concerned.

"This is not a compromise at all," he said. "It is a complete disappointment."

According to Crowe, the amended 6th Street Infill Plan will turn the area into an industrial park.

"We are turning Peoria (Avenue) into something less like Cherry Street and more like 71st Street and Memorial Drive," Crowe said.

Leave it to Tulsa to screw a good thing up.

  This also troubles me…
"Small-area plans such as the 6th Street Infill Plan are policy documents that lay out the city's vision for the development of a particular area. They are not regulating documents but information for decision-makers — including future planning commissioners — who are charged with considering zoning changes and other land-use regulations."

No telling how long it's going to take to get the small-area plans finished up. Years and years likely. Then once they are done, they are still not regulating documents but "information" for future planning commissioners to use when "considering" zoning changes. How long is it really going to take to fully implement the new comprehensive plan and get urban/pedestrian/bike friendly zoning in place?  Did the last one take this long?  Seems like by the time they get this one done a generation will have passed and they will have to start again.

Also, is there something that already qualifies as a small area plan for downtown, or will we have to start one?

Actually just a handful of businesses that pretend to be good neighbors while hoping the process would go away if they ignore it.

Glad to see 11th will stay mixed use, and I see that stretch eventually being completely redeveloped and neighborhoods on both sides much more desirable because of it.  The stretch of Peoria between 11th and 6th is perfect for urban apartments with great skyline views across the cemetery and park.  And there is ongoing revitalization of 6th between Peoria and Trenton. 

If it were my compromise though I would have made sure 6th all the way to the IDL and Peoria to 3rd were included as mixed use, not auto oriented, and expanded the redevelopment area to include the small neighborhood between the IDL and Peoria, 6th to 3rd.  Areas closer to Centennial Park will eventually be more desirable as the area gentrifies.

Glad to see some effort going into the 11th Street corridor.

I do think someday in the not too distant future that 11th could be a perfect route for a streetcar linking TU to downtown.  It has been neglected for decades but remains a corridor with great historical value both locally and nationally.  The streetcar would run in a loop downtown utilizing Boulder and Elgin (once a bridge is built over the tracks) and two couplets: Archer/Brady and 3rd/4th.  On Elgin the streetcar would run to 6th then head east to Peoria, then south to 11th running all the way to near Harvard at TU.  By this time TU would hopefully better enhance the 11th St frontage of its campus and encourage/support private development of sidewalk-fronting shops and restaurants on the south side of the street. 

If people see what can happen via 11th street, it may be easier in future to get a better plan in place.  Also, I want a pony.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Why wouldn’t you take the loop all the way up 6th St. back to the Campus?

Yes, it would be good to see more development along 11th street.

BTW, can someone please explain to this newcomer why/ how 11th St./ historic Rte 66 ended up as such an unsightly several mile used car lot?  It represents such a good opportunity to make it one of the most (if not the most) memorable stretch of this iconic piece of Americana.  I was sort of expecting the urban stretch in Tulsa to be a neat destination strip for residents and tourists alike to flock and enjoy.  I would have envisioned it to be more of a Peoria /Cherry Street walkable type strip but extended for several miles, teeming with diverse restaurants, coffeehouses, galleries, retail and specialty shops.  I could have also envisioned large overhead lit signs that cross the road welcoming visitors to historic rte 66.

The original route 66 was home to reasonably priced "motor hotels," "greasy spoon" restaurants that catered to travelers, speed traps?, gas stations (naturally), and auto mechanics (naturally).
When I was a kid in the 70s at a time when Route 66 had already been effectively replaced by I-244 and I-44, we'd drive by the 11th Street automobile row to one of several nice used car dealerships.  The old 66-era motels were already starting to disappear, replaced by nicer motel chains that were being built on access roads off Skelly Drive.  Eventually, many of those older 11th Street motels (the ones that didn't go out of business altogether) evolved into "no-tell motels" and the nicer used car lots moved to other more desirable parts of town.


Memorable?  Yes.  Historical?  Yes.
Iconic?  Yes, but 11th Street would lose its iconic status IMHO if it were gentrified with "diverse restaurants, coffeehouses, galleries, retail and specialty shops."
Route 66 is an icon of a post-WWII working class America who would take a rare family trip in the family automobile cross country to sunny California.

Even though I've always been in favor of an urban renaissance for that area, it's clear that Talley's and Corner Cafe are iconic Route 66 businesses in ways that Full Moon Cafe and Kilkennys could never be.  So... a dollar store or a retro barbershop like Razor's Edge (ask for Monty or Carlin) can actually make more traditional sense in that area than a high end art gallery or a gourmet cheese shop.

That said, I'd love to see at least a few blocks of 6th Street off Peoria become a "fully walkable type strip" complete with "diverse restaurants, coffeehouses, galleries, retail and specialty shops"..... gentrify away, urban pioneers!   ;D
  

11th offers more mixed use opportunity than 6th which only really has the commercial strip between Peoria and Trenton, which would be served by a stop at 6th & Peoria as it heads downtown.  11th has Hillcrest, a potential TOD on the lots around the tracks near Lewis (should BA commuter rail become a reality) and future development by the TU campus with 5,000 students many of which live in that general vicinity.

Before moving here I had kind of this mental image of Rte 66 in the center of Tulsa as being a more complete and longer version of the evolving "Automobile Alley" strip in OKC.  Perhaps it was shaped by footage from the TV show, but I'm not really certain.

I envisioned a nice diversity of good quality restaurants, microbreweries, and shops tastefully neon lit at night.  Talley's and Corner Café, absolutely.  Gourmet cheese shop - not really, but maybe if the products were from local farms.  How about a few moderately priced newer hotel chains (maybe even designed as retro themed motor lodges) as well as other nice conveniences for travelers.  I'd see more of a local flare on the strip represented by Native American, African-American, and other cultures with indigenous ties to the state and especially to this region showcasing and selling unique art, jewelry, crafts, clothing, cool goods and wares.

I don't necessarily define all redevelopment/ repurposing of certain areas as gentrification.  To me that term infers displacing some (usually poor) folks at the expense of affluence and exclusivity.  To the contrary, I could see 11th St as becoming much more of an area for everyone as opposed to the neglected thoroughfare that most of it is today.

The street in its present state is a big embarrassment that overshadows (but doesn't eliminate) its iconic status.  Any positive changes that generate traffic (vehicle and foot) back to it with a purpose can help reclaim this key asset, perhaps making it more than it ever really was in its past.

I'd love to see a hotel on 11th Street similar to the Hotel San Jose on South Congress Ave in Austin.

http://www.sanjosehotel.com/

Love the San Jose, and always recommend it to Austin visitors.  And don't forget the Austin Motel (http://www.austinmotel.com) just up the street, with it's wonderfully phallic sign.  But SoCo is one of the coolest areas in Austin (which is saying something) and there are tons of good bars and restaurants in walking distance from either.  11th just doesn't have the infrastructure to support either of them, and won't for years, if ever.

*Editing to fix the Austin Motel link, because you really need to see the entry page to appreciate attitude of motel...

So back to the actual topic...

Where does this now stand?  The compromise definitely compromises the Pearl District plan.  What's next?

Disagree.  The Campbell is doing quite well from what I hear.  We attended an event there this weekend and it is being maintained very nicely.  Friends raved about the rooms.  The stretch between downtown and Harvard is seeing a lot of redevelopment.

This stretch would also benefit the most from a streetcar from downtown to TU.  It is most realistic to concentrate on this corridor especially the parts that are already walkable but need more activity (like between Peoria and Utica) and the area by TU which needs a major overhaul to be a walkable 'Campus Corner' environment.  Improving the stretch from Harvard to Yale would be a long term goal.  Once you get past Yale the built environment is too auto-oriented and likely will remain that way, which is a testament to its past life as a highway corridor.

I have not been to the Campbell, but have heard good things.  I think it is a very cool hotel, and am glad to hear they are doing well.  I agree with SXBW in that I do think that the area around TU, with the Campbell on the West and Harvard on the East, is prime for development.  But to really see density, again in line with SXSW's opinion, there is going to need to be major overhaul related to walk ability.

My thoughts in my original comment relate to the density of bars and restaurants withing easy walking distance (about 1/2 mile) to the San Jose along the SOCO area in Austin.  That density is in line with what we have in Tulsa along Cherry Street or Brookside, and I can't see anything along 11th coming anywhere close to that density anytime soon.  Also, the SOCO area is just a long walk over the bridge directly into downtown Austin and all the things there as well.  This is very similar to what's going on in the Brady right now.  But again, the area out around TU isn't walking distance to downtown and so this is a logistical problem.  SXSW's streetcar idea has merit to improve this support piece.  

Don't get me wrong, I think there is definitely a lot of opportunity for development from downtown to the TU area, and in particular right around TU, but a lot needs to happen if/before it can achieve any kind of critical mass.

There are 3 main nodes that would need to be redeveloped for 11th to reach a critical mass similar to Cherry St and Brookside, or Soco in Austin.  The streetcar proposal, funded by the City, along with sidewalk and landscaping improvements done in conjunction with laying tracks, would jump start this effort with private developers and TU actually carrying out the redevelopment.

Node 1: Peoria to Utica
- This stretch has the most intact urban fabric on 11th outside of downtown.  Many of the storefronts are empty but could easily support local businesses similar to what has happened along 6th in the Pearl and Lewis in Kendall-Whittier.  The Meadow Gold sign is a landmark and the building below should be more than just a glorified pedestal. Maybe a Dwelling Spaces-type store that specializes in Tulsa and Rt 66 stuff?  The neighborhoods on either side are ripe for gentrification and are very similar to the neighborhood by Cherry St in the late 90's, with the Pearl area to the north slated for major redevelopment since most of those houses are in bad shape.  You also have Hillcrest here which is a big employer and could help fill in its lots at Utica and Trenton with buildings that open up toward the street/sidewalk.  Unfortunately you also have the new massive QuikTrip at Utica.

Node 2: Utica to Lewis
- This stretch has some urban buildings but also lots of redevelopment/new building potential closer to Lewis on the old car dealership lots.  There is another landmark here in the Tulsa Monument Co building by Victor.  A unique opportunity to eventually have a stop on the commuter rail to BA and into downtown is available west of Lewis.  The area north of this location could eventually support a variety of industrial businesses and someday research facilities for TU.  The neighborhood to the south is pretty stable but the one to the north is transitional.  A larger hotel could be located on the land at the NE corner of Utica across from Hillcrest.

Node 3: Lewis to Harvard
- Keep building on the success of the Campbell Hotel in the area between Lewis and Delaware.  Between Delaware and Harvard begin a long range plan to rebuild this area with new buildings that have sidewalk facing restaurants and stores targeting the TU community.  Think Campus Corner in Norman, Berry St in Ft Worth (TCU) and Guadalupe St in Austin (UT).  TU would need to amend its master plan and general line of thinking to embrace 11th and not wall itself off.  The apartments built around the green are an example of this and eventually should be redeveloped into denser student housing that meets the edge of the surrounding streets and adds more students in this area.  Also tear down the berm seating at the south end zone and replace with an open air plaza that is also the termination point for the streetcar, and provides access to the stadium and Reynolds Center.

SXSW, I appreciate you breaking down the strip like this and describing the facets that distinguish each of these sections.  This really shows the great potential of 11th street (if developed to its potential) to exhibit different character/ flare as one traverses through these separate nodes.  I'm familiar with some of these types of extended streets with different but still cool vibes to be found anywhere along a couple of walkable miles...Columbus, Louisville, & Pittsburgh offer a few good examples.  Brookside and Cherry St. are both nice but much shorter and a bit more homogenous than the examples in these cities, and would represent perhaps what SXSW references as a node or distinct portion on one of the streets such as Bardstown in L'ville or Main in Columbus (a large portion edges up against OSU but there are also large sections on both sides that extend very far away from the campus).   

As a newbie, I don't know if TU and the surrounding community have been more at odds or in step with one another but I really do like the creation or expansion of a TU college town or village area.  There are also apparently plenty of opportunities to take advantage of existing storefronts as well as incorporate some smart infill building along certain sections. 

I'll be venturing down to 11th street and taking a closer look to see what SXSW is talking about.  SXSW sounds like a true champion of that area's potential.

That is one of the frustrating things about Tulsa right now is that there isn't really an area you can go and take a good half day or full day "stroll".  So thankful we have the small spots that we do have like, Brookside, Cherry Street, Brady Arts, Deco District, Blue Dome, and now beginning to get the Pearl, and 11th having some potential.  But what could really take us up a whole new level would be if we could get one or two of those areas to expand at least to the size of one full mile worth of pedestrian friendly development.  But that is where I think you would need to switch out the auto centric zoning for some pedestrian friendly zoning. Or at the very least get rid of the auto centric zoning and make it legal to build pedestrian friendly developments.  I have heard of other developers having to navigate the City Board of Adjustments in order to put in pedestrian friendly developments and was surprised to recently learn that the Phoenix also had to "rally the troops" in order to push for an exemption to things like the minimum parking requirements.  Pedestrian friendly developments should be "by right" in those areas we want to be pedestrian friendly, not an "exception" you have to fight for.

Actually, if you don’t mind getting your feet dirty, Turkey Mountain Urban Wilderness is a fantastic place to spend a day+ strolling.  For that matter Riverparks as well if shopping doesn’t have to be part of the requirement.

 Yea not so much what I am thinking about  ;)   I am thinking about a stroll with lots of people around, interesting architecture, imaginative window displays, unique shops, bookstores, clothing stores, etc. to explore, wonderful dining experiences, have an occasional snack/desert or drink at an outdoor cafe, explore a museum or bunch of galleries, historic points of interest, flea markets, food markets and stalls, the occasional live performance art, outdoor sculptures, fountains, etc.  The kind of thing you typically think of in an urban environment.

If you could get Tulsa to annex further south we could incorporate New Orleans.


...of course the mid-towners would say "Ew, South Tulsa?  Way too jazzy."

Not sure about the flea markets and food markets, but otherwise isn't that what is developing with the combined Brady/Blue Dome/Deco areas?  All that is walkable, and it would be full day (or close) to cover it all.

Being from Tulsa, I thought that’s what Manhattan or London were for.  ;)

Utica Square attempted to capture that feel, all that’s missing is the unique architecture.  Downtown will be there sooner rather than later based on recent development.

I still recall as a young child, riding in my mother’s car to downtown Tulsa and hearing the Petula Clark song “Downtown” on the radio and thinking there was something exciting about hitting the central part of the city.  We would shop at Renbergs, get a coney, and walk amongst others getting from place-to-place on the sidewalks.

It's "walkable" but not all pedestrian friendly. 71st around Memorial is "walkable" but not pedestrian friendly.  Hopefully the Brady/Blue Dome/Deco areas will someday be somewhat connected with pedestrian friendly development.  The great thing that's happening now is that many developers get the "mixed use" ground level interest thing.  But not all do and all it takes is one or two bad developments to put in those gaps and gut any hope of having those areas be truly connected.  Here's keeping our fingers crossed, since we are not likely to put in any pedestrian friendly zoning in our downtown, that's about all we can do.

Btw, one evening last fall I did do the leisure walk to see the sights and such from my shop at 6th and Boston to the Blue Dome, then to the Brady and back.  Still a lot of quite large gaps and some of them already "built in" with parking garages, large blank walls, etc.  Also, still not even a basic concentration of shops anywhere to make it worthwhile to go downtown to shop.  Us shops still rely on events, downtown workers at lunch time, and visitors/sightseers in the evening.  But again we are getting there and fortunately the "in" thing right now is to develop more pedestrian friendly stuff (Unlike the 80's, just about everything you see that was built downtown during that time was a pedestrian disaster, what was up with that? Even the "pedestrian mall" did not have pedestrian zoning?  Those cities that put in pedestrian/urban zoning in their downtown mall type areas saw them flourish, those that did not, saw them fail. A 5 year old could have told you that. Guess there weren't any planners in our city during that time with the intellect of a 5 year old.)

Interesting article from St Louis that touched on several points that I and others often talk about pertaining to development in Tulsa's core.

Investing (with zoning and or transit, infrastructure and "amenities" projects, educational/research projects, etc. ) in certain areas or corridors to encourage high quality urban, pedestrian/transit friendly development with the result that these areas then have a high enough concentration of high quality development to then create a snowball effect of energy and development radiating out from them. Success breeding success.  (Our tendency is to "scattershot" projects over a wide area without much concentration and precious little synergy resulting)

Protecting old building stock which is now attractive to new development.

Urban living is becoming more and more attractive to more and more people. We are on the trailing edge of this trend having a city that still has most, by far, of it's area set up as car oriented zoning along with even a downtown that has NO pedestrian/transit friendly zoning!?



Exerts from the article- my bold

 St. Louis and some inner suburbs lost population during the last decade, but countering that trend is the robust corridor that begins at the Arch and runs eight miles west.

 Yet this is where St. Louisans fill offices, run companies, conduct medical research, visit museums, attend plays and concerts, dine, study, go to court, ride mass transit and launch startups. They live in grand old homes, vintage or modern high-rises, lofts and modest houses.

In short, it’s where St. Louis succeeds as a city. And it’s growing, led by a boom in life-science research and health care. As elsewhere, St. Louis is benefiting from the changing perception that cities are good places to live.

The 2010 census shows that the corridor’s population approached 60,000, an increase of more than 10 percent since 2000.

Sarah Coffin, associate professor of public policy studies at SLU, and other urban experts said the corridor’s growing vitality will continue to attract new residents who prefer to walk more and drive less.

“People’s tastes are changing about how they want to live and where they want to live,” Coffin said.

She and others said the presence of Ikea, which plans to open a store at Forest Park and Vandeventer avenues in 2015, will show that the corridor can lure a retail heavyweight.

“Ikea will change the tenor of the entire area,” Coffin said. “Before Ikea, (city officials) would say yes to any developer for almost anything. Now they can ask developers for streetscape improvements and other amenities. We used to be happy to have table scraps.”  (Sound familiar?)

Zack Boyers, chief executive of St. Louis-based U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corp., said the corridor’s future is bright because its anchor institutions are investing in themselves. A result is a “virtuous cycle” of more residents, workers, commercial activity and investment, he said.

                                                                     PULL OF TRANSIT

Like many older U.S. cities, St. Louis developed along its streetcar lines. The streetcars are gone, but the MetroLink system traverses the east-west corridor with rail transit. The Central West End station, the system’s busiest, serves the BJC and Washington University School of Medicine complex, which is in the midst of a $1 billion construction spree.
The Partnership for Downtown St. Louis is pushing a plan to increase the area’s rail transit options with a streetcar line between downtown and the Central West End. Boyers, chairman of the partnership’s board, said the streetcar would be an important new connector.

“The idea of a streetcar and fixed rail is not only important transit but is also a signal to developers that this is where we’re going to focus,” he said.

Peter Pollock, an urban planner and fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, in Cambridge, Mass., said the presence of mass transit encourages development in the St. Louis corridor.

“As assets of access and transit and all these fantastic activities happen along this corridor, it’s no surprise that additional players would want to be in the corridor,” he said.

He pointed out that a similar corridor exists in Cleveland, where a nearly seven-mile bus rapid transit line on Euclid Avenue links downtown to University Circle, a hub of medical facilities and arts institutions. Cleveland officials have said that since the bus line began service in 2008, the formerly run-down Euclid corridor has experienced $3.3 billion in new construction and $2.5 billion in building rehabs.

CORE10 relocated from Clayton in 2010. Stephens said most of the firm’s clients saw it as merely a move from one side of Forest Park to the other, adding that the rejuvenated park is the linchpin that connects the city to points west.

He said the Central West End’s “fantastic building stock” is a factor in the residential growth, enhanced by the stability of BJC and the St. Louis County government center in Clayton.

Webber, who spent 22 years at the University of Chicago before moving to St. Louis in 2008, said the concentration of business, education and culture centers along St. Louis’ central spine forms the region’s identity and provides much of its employment.

“For many of the major attractions, the last decade has been a time of strength,” he said. “If you compare St. Louis to other cities, they’re quite geographically disparate but they have the effect of driving demand. And the progress of the Cortex development in the past two years has been remarkable.”

‘TERRIFIC BUILDINGS’

Parts of the Central West End provide hard-to-top urban vibes, added Webber, who directs the university’s building projects.
“Walking down Euclid (Avenue) in the Central West End compares very favorably with the urban experiences of about anywhere in the country,” he said.

Successful cities do more than attract couples with kids, Webber added. They are magnets for young, creative, college-educated people who crave a wide variety of things to do.

“What core cities sell to residents and visitors is density — the opportunities and experiences of density,” he said. “Cities can’t compete with backyards and barbecues. What they can compete on is restaurants and music venues.”

And coffee.

Blueprint Coffee, recently opened in the Delmar Loop, draws the crowd that will pay several dollars for lattes and other hand-crafted coffee drinks.

Mazi Razani, 26, who formerly managed a coffee bar near Washington University and is now one of Blueprint’s owners, fits the demographic of young, college-educated businesspeople drawn to city living. He resides in the corridor neighborhood of Skinker-DeBaliviere and says he is a committed urbanist.

“I don’t know if I would have made it out in Chesterfield,” he said. “Seeing the high rises makes me feel like I’m in a city.”

Jeff Winzerling, co-developer of a project to fit 50 apartments in a 1940s factory west of SLU,

In Grand Center, for example, the Centene Center for Arts and Education was an early 20th-century showpiece for the Knights of Columbus. On Lindell Boulevard, the Moolah Temple of the Mystic Shrine, built in 1912, is now a movie theater, a bowling alley and apartments.

“What we’re seeing now is that the terrific buildings left behind are attractive to a new generation of development,” Winzerling said.

Underway now is a burst of new construction or building rehabilitation just south of the park and west of SLU.
Experts said that central corridor development is promoting overdue growth elsewhere, particularly south to the Botanical Heights and Shaw neighborhoods and through the Forest Park Southeast area to the Grove entertainment district.

“We’re finally creating a lot of opportunity in housing choices and job choices for people,” Coffin said.

“The idea of building off success instead of leaving it as an isolated instance is taking shape,” he said.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/anchors-and-transit-spur-growth-of-st-louis-corridor/article_f095688e-11b9-5819-9bc7-14292595c47a.html  

It's not the jazz.  It's too close to Texas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Reminds me of Will Rogers. "Everyone talks about the weather. No one does anything about it."

Its not conservatism per se that holds Tulsa back. That's just an outward manifestation of a city that in large part does not embrace progressive thought. The construct of "thats the way we've always done it and it works just fine" (conservative outlook) by the building/developing/investment community does not harmonize well with the "lets develop in the customized, logical, sustainable way that people want to live in different areas of the city" (progressive outlook).

The former is characterized by dropping old buildings and building new ones that often look old but are designed for suburban, car dominated lifestyles. The latter characterized by mostly failed efforts to adopt different zoning practices, entice mass transit, protect history and catch up with the outside world. So, the local foundations step in to lube the process by taking the taxpayer and developers out of the picture. We don't mind progress so much if someone else is paying for it.

The result fits the community. A very small group of educated, well heeled sophisticated consumers who get their museums, arts and protected lifestyles while the city at large languishes.

My cynicism is raging lately. Forgive me if I offend. :)

Very well put, and could also be used to characterize so many other cities.

Your offensiveness is your most endearing quality, Aqua.  ;D

Well, thank you...I think. It may very well be my dominant quality. :)

It's not cynicism - it's realism.

Very well put.

New entrepreneur/shared workspace office opens next to Topeca's roastery on Admiral, just north of the Pearl District (not sure if still the Pearl area or not):


http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/smallbusiness/savage-space-provides-resources-for-entrepreneurs-freelancers/article_36020b5a-b88f-53bd-8e76-62fdebdf4e34.html

I heard a certain brewery is looking to build in the Pearl District. Would be a great addition to the area. Lots of interesting things in the area but still lots of room for improvement along Peoria. It has been a slow revitalization of the area, but good to see the large amount of development in East Village which should speed up the development of the Pearl.

I think the challenge with the Pearl District is the dead zone between the activity in the Pearl (6th St, KW Main Street, etc) and the activity downtown (starting at say, Hodges Bend).  Peoria, the interstate, and all that industrial space prevent the Pearl and downtown from bleeding together and becoming more than their individual parts.  The area up by Topeca is also totally isolated by the giant highway interchange that separates it from downtown (the same interchange that also kills any activity in the far northeast part of downtown).  Hopefully that will change as downtown keeps getting built out. 

That said, if we got 3-5 more Williams sized corporate citizens with the legions of young professionals they would hire I'm sure we could spruce up the Pearl, Owen Park, Crosbie Heights, etc in no time.  There's not much a little bit of economic juice in the engine can't help.

And when it comes to breaking up the connection between the Pearl/KW/11th and downtown, it has to be said that Oaklawn Cemetery is very inconveniently located. Talk about dead space! (I'm sorry.) But seriously, the raised IDL may created a great big barrier into downtown, but Tracy Park, Oaklawn, and Centennial Park sure don't help either. At least two of those could conceivably be replaced one day. You'll never see a cemetery get dug up and developed.

Oh one more thing. Last week the City Council's Public Works Committee was set to consider naming the old Laura Dester shelter at 7th and Rockford as surplus property, which would allow transfer to the Tulsa Development Authority. Could be a big boost for the Pearl District! Anyone know how this turned out or have any other info?

http://www.newson6.com/story/33824951/possible-pearl-district-development-on-agenda-for-tulsa-public-works-committee

Incorporating old cemeteries back into the city in a respectful way is a big urban planning challenge....

But yeah, whoever thought it was a good idea to put Texas-sized elevated interstate exchanges at all four corners of downtown and surround it with an elevated ring road......... if they were an urban planner I hope they were taken out back like a rabid dog.

I'm still amazed that that the southern leg of the IDL was built in the 1980s????  The highway revolts that stopped urban interstate construction in most places had already happened (Boston's Inner Belt, NYC's Lower Manhattan Expressway, New Orleans' Riverfront Expressway).  I would give a significant portion of my left foot to have those Tulsa neighborhoods back.  

(https://electricshadowsfilmblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/l_84516_d91b4e12.jpg)

Apartments on the east side of Peoria overlooking the cemetery would be cool and you know your downtown view is safe.  I'm surprised there isn't already something there.

Wow that would be cool. It hasn't happened yet because 1) the Pearl District hasn't happened the way we all hoped and possibly 2) the BRT along Peoria will help.

Especially with the popularity of Walking Dead. 

Sorry, couldn’t help it!

Ha, yeah...I'm not a fan of that view.

They could just take the Energy Transfer Partners approach and put a pipeline through it - they are getting plenty of experience with that kind of development in North Dakota.  After they finished burying their pipe, the bulldozers would have cleared a space for further development!!

This moved forward unanimously. TDA should be putting out a request for proposals for a mixed-use development that may include a flood mitigation component. Time to start fantasizing about what we'd like to see there.

http://councildocs.tulsacouncil.org/SuperContainer/RawData//Z1F2K411232016112347/16-902-1.pdf?a=1

It's been developing organically without the canal/streetscape.  If that happens and with the Peoria and 11th BRT then it should start to redevelop at a faster pace. 

I have a friend who closed his businesses in the Pearl and moved out of there. He said that when the neighborhood first hit everyone's radar a few years ago they thought it would be the next big thing, so they set up shop. But then nobody else joined them. I asked him what the problem was and he said everything had stalled out because the same property investor owns almost everything, isn't selling, isn't redeveloping, and it just holding on to everything and waiting. I have no ability to confirm this myself. Just repeating what I heard and passing along the requisite grain of salt.

Interesting I'd like to know more and if true that's unfortunate.  Sounds like some of the greedy parking lot owners in downtown or the person/family that owns the brick warehouse at 1st & Elgin.

I've heard much the same about one of the owners in the Pearl. There was talk about him starting a wine bar development near The Phoenix, but there didn't seem to be any traction

I heard the same.  There is major frustration among some of the owners of other businesses that he is holding up investment in the area.

Go forth and look up who owns what!

http://www.assessor.tulsacounty.org/assessor-map-interactive.php

Another thing that really hurts the Pearl District is that so much of it is in the flood plain.  If you want to build anything, or you're worried about fixing up existing buildings, it sort of puts a damper on investment.  We have never fully implemented the Elm Creek Drainage plan, which if completed, would open up a lot of prime real estate to development. (It would turn some areas into ponds/parkland, but overall, it would open up hundreds of parcels to investment and improvement, as far southwest as 18th and Baltimore and as far east as Zunis Ave.)

I heard a rumor that the feds declined our application that would have funded phase 2 of the Elm Creek plan (to build the west detention pond) because the Indian Health Center had bought up most of the surrounding property.  It seems the feds want their dollars to benefit multiple property owners.  Not just a single entity.

One of the most beautiful views of downtown can be seen as you travel west on 6th street near Peoria.  Plus, it's a short couple minutes by bike into downtown. The Pearl District has enormous potential if we could solve the flood problems.

And given our history with solving flood problems, I'm not sure why it's not already done.  If we're horrible in many other things, we proved that we know our smile when it comes to flood mitigation.  Even if it took 3 100-year flood events to force our hand.

The Elm Creek floodplain doesn't seem to be hurting or hindering this multi-story, mixed-use proposal:  http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/realestate/mixed-used-project-being-proposed-for-pearl-district/article_5007355a-4120-5da1-a113-5979a7806c4d.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/realestate/mixed-used-project-being-proposed-for-pearl-district/article_5007355a-4120-5da1-a113-5979a7806c4d.html)

We'll know when we see a rendering that really shows the sidewalk perspective.  Trader Joes is raised up several feet because of flood plain issues.  It makes it really hard to be an asset to the sidewalk when you're 3-4 feet above it. (Also when you put the entrance in the rear, but that's another story.)

I've experienced great "sidewalks" that incorporate old loading docks as part of the pedestrian path (Denver, Milwaukee, etc have these kinds of places) but that works best when you have a row of raised buildings.  That way, you can go up the stairs (or ramp) and then walk along the raised sidewalk. 

It's not as nice when you have a blank wall along the sidewalk because of flood concerns, and not enough incentive to go up the stairs.  We'll see how they handle this.

Here's what the drawings indicate:  "Ground" floor level raised about 3.5 to 4 feet above the public sidewalk at the north end of Phase 1, and about 1.5 to 2 feet above the public sidewalk at the south end of Phase 1.  A raised "sidewalk" or walkway along the east facade of the building, mostly covered by the projecting living rooms and balconies of the apartments above.

Unless the owner intends to fence and gate off the raised walkway, pedestrians should be able to walk along the lower public sidewalk near the curb or on the raised walkway along front of the building, something akin to a loading dock.  A portion of the street-facing wall is shown as a blank wall (the east wall of the toilets and janitor room), but the drawings indicate windows and doors along most of the street-facing wall.

We'll see if it gets built the way it is drawn...
  

Tulsa Development Authority asks for ideas to redevelop Pearl District.

Proposals are due in October.

http://ktul.com/news/local/tulsa-development-authority-asks-for-ideas-to-redevelop-pearl-district

Never mind.

Something's going on across 6th street from the Phoenix.


https://mobile.twitter.com/ONEArchitecture/status/865625181393264642

The Phoenix closed and the Bramble bought it and closed their downtown location. It is supposed to open within a few weeks:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/blogs/restaurants/table-talk-the-bramble-to-open-sixth-street-store-in/article_55262c14-ac6a-5acc-a41d-3d69fd39f1d9.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/blogs/restaurants/table-talk-the-bramble-to-open-sixth-street-store-in/article_55262c14-ac6a-5acc-a41d-3d69fd39f1d9.html)

I hope they have a good coffee/bar/snack function like the Phoenix did. I hope it's a place where studying students and others are welcome to sit and work rather than just a restaurant. That was a great community coffee shop. Too bad it ended up in the wrong hands at the wrong time and had to close.

All the little bars along 6th add a lot of character without leaning on a franchise look.  You can tell people are putting money back into the area.
I thought the building across the Engine Room was a bar but Im guessing its a motorcycle clubhouse.  Looks almost like it had been a bowling alley.

Does Blake have any remaining restaurant or club interests?

He is said to be back into the Joe Momma's place and at least talking about re-opening something there.  There was a little something around the corner on 1st street that supposedly opened a few months ago that he was involved in.  Haven't been there...don't know if it is still open.  Where S & J Oyster used to be...

To me, S & J will always be on Brookside....awesome Mardi Gras parties down there.

Went a few times long, long ago.

Update: https://www.tulsaworld.com/business/realestate/redevelopers-propose-adaptive-reuse-project-for-former-tulsa-boys-home/article_4ff6dd39-6d79-563d-b3ea-8267c45fac2e.html (https://www.tulsaworld.com/business/realestate/redevelopers-propose-adaptive-reuse-project-for-former-tulsa-boys-home/article_4ff6dd39-6d79-563d-b3ea-8267c45fac2e.html)

That is great news! I hope they wow the board with a great realistic plan. I've seen the potential in remodeling those. It was a shame someone previously wanted to just knock them down and build a huge apartment complex (why not do that in one of the empty lots nearby?).

Group M has done some great work like the Eleventh Street Lofts and Campbell Hotel.

Group M continues to help the Pearl District revitalization with the Meadow Gold Lofts

Also, they went with the larger expansion at the townhomes at Central Park:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=21159.msg329142#msg329142 (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=21159.msg329142#msg329142)

There's also the "Black Pearl" which is right next to there on Peoria:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=21466.0 (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=21466.0)

I saw an invite for a Grand Opening at the "Pearl Building" at 1209 E 3rd Street on Sunday 3/10 from 2-5pm. Looks really nice.

Also, now there are quite a few Breweries with taprooms open in the Pearl like Nothings Left, Willow Families, Dead Armadillo, Marshall (Great new tap room and huge patio about to open), Cabin Boys. Then there's the Distillery and Cidery right by Cabin Boys and Marshall. Heirloom is sort of in the same Whittier/Pearl area too.
American Solera is working on saving the old steel industrial building right at 6th and Utica.

It is neat to see the influx of various investments in the area. Hillcrest is doing its thing which we may not like for walkability, but has eliminated many eye sores and replaced them with a concentration of medical services.

The entire Pearl District, downtown and Cherry Street (north part) are included in the Opportunity Zones, so I expect investment to increase significantly compared to what it would've been otherwise. Savvy investors will buy up places, fix them up and hold on for 10 years to get all that rent and then tax-free gains!

There's a cajun restaurant being put in on 3rd near Trenton by the people who bought Church Studios and many more buildings around there (https://www.tulsaworld.com/business/swamp-house-restaurant-and-live-music-venue-planned-for-pearl/article_d215ef8d-fb33-5749-926e-b459df8ad7ac.html (https://www.tulsaworld.com/business/swamp-house-restaurant-and-live-music-venue-planned-for-pearl/article_d215ef8d-fb33-5749-926e-b459df8ad7ac.html)). They have already renovated several urban buildings right there and it is starting to look really good.

Someone bought the buildings around 3rd and Yorktown including the old Lock Supply building and fixed those up to look very nice.

There are just what I could compile based on memory and what others have posted places. Overall a lot going on in the district!

The Pearl is definitely one of the most rapidly-changing neighborhoods in the city.  It's great to see it finally realizing its potential as the missing link between connecting TU to downtown as well as the Peoria and Utica corridors along Route 66.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/government-and-politics/planned-pearl-district-detention-pond-likely-to-be-subject-to/article_00d56c11-e8a3-5b65-9667-4e4c58d53de6.html

2nd detention pond appears to be gaining some traction with the proposed 3rd pond location also being identified.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/city-puts-hold-on-eminent-domain-for-pearl-district-retention/article_98b7b251-8aa3-5acc-a1a4-3e974559d3e4.html

Has anyone been following these recent developments? What do you think about it?

I saw a post discussing the many areas around downtown facing eminent domain:

https://www.reddit.com/r/tulsa/comments/doay96/tulsa_has_an_eminent_domain_problem/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/tulsa/comments/doay96/tulsa_has_an_eminent_domain_problem/)

(https://i.redd.it/me40fcu63bv31.png)

And another one: https://www.reddit.com/r/tulsa/comments/dlii4e/eminent_domain_update_tulsa_world_swing_and_miss/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/tulsa/comments/dlii4e/eminent_domain_update_tulsa_world_swing_and_miss/)


Specifically, it sounds like the issues are (starting less specific, then going into this most recent case):

• * City shows goals to revitalize certain areas with plans for economic redevelopment
• * The city decides to "condemn" and area unofficially (slowly starting the process of buying/bull-dozing), then the neighborhood follows suit and property values plummet, city speeds up, and only a few houses remain which the city can buy up on the cheap
• * City finally uses eminent domain to condemn last few houses with claim that it is purely for flood control, contrary to all documentation from last 20 years stating it was an economic redevelopment project (which would be illegal per Oklahoma State Constitution).
• *Properties that benefit from west Pearl pond are not in a flood zone and are not even eligible for flood insurance (no history of flooding)
• * Demolishing and purchasing 45 properties to bump the City of Tulsa's own "flood zone" up 1 level for 49 properties (but that "flood zone" conflicts with all other official flood zone maps such as FEMA or the standard National Flood Insurance Program) and almost all of the benefit value claimed will be a single building: Spirit Bank.
• * Down the road, the current homeowners cannot afford an equivalent house with the money provided. The city sells the new water-front properties to the highest bidder for economic redevelopment (or a developer gets them at a discount like 71st and Riverside).

The city has plans for most all of the neighborhoods around downtown. After the community showed strong opposition to the Crutchfield/Crosby Heights and West Pearl Pond plans, they were paused. That is important because that is about where the West Pearl Pond has been for 20 years... Just unknown timeline for a project with plans which are reportedly "60% complete" that offers dubious flood control, but guarantees a large number of prime water-front properties, ripe for economic redevelopment.

I'm wondering what folks on here think of this. Besides the other benefits of the houses (Paul Harvey's childhood home), there's quite a few nice renovated places around there. They claim this is for the "greater good". Why does the city position itself to redevelop at the cost of lower/middle class to benefit larger corporations that can take on this kind of economic redevelopment project. It looks like the "greater good" is helping Spirit Bank and corporations.

I think it's vile. These people took a chance on these neighborhoods that the city left behind and now that their potential is useful to big corporations the city now "cares".

So this isn't really related at all to most of the things, but I hated the reddit thread where people talked about doing the low impact development stuff for decreasing the flooding issue. Either the flooding issue is real, in which case you really can't fix it with LID principals. Or the flooding isn't a real issue in which case LID just makes water quality better.

I do think that they have done a poor job of explaining the benefits or reasons for the project, and love forcing developments that happened because of a flood issues to implement LID. But they aren't as related as I think the redditors assume.

It sounds like that is just yet another alternative idea for dealing with a sudden build up of water in a flash flood, to prevent it in the first place. There's a bunch of much cheaper options for water runoff to go, namely expanding the existing pond (which would be far cheaper than $30 MILLION that the new pond is estimated to cost). City of Tulsa said they assume 100% urbanization and that is the only model in which the properties to gain from this pond would have any (negligible) benefit.

The burden of proof that those properties do in fact flood is on the City of Tulsa (that proof has not been shown). So as far as we know, there is no flood risk. We are talking $30 million of taxpayers' money! Imagine taking the equivalent of about 200 houses' entire value and shredding that up to get this detention pond. This is a massive price for a pond that at best will potentially help 49 properties on extremely rare events, but is guaranteed to destroy 45 properties permanently.

Canals.  Water buffers by definition.