The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

I made this post in a topic on parking garages and I liked it so much I thought I would start a thread to use it. How's that for ego? Anyway, it seems that the area really is active yet still unfinished. Yet, I think its still missing a key ingredient. Anyone else find some parts missing?

Downtown is great. I love it. IMO, it still suffers from fragmentation and lack of a central identifying attraction. You can't say the Arena is it. You can't say the ballpark is it. Both are nice but pretty much expected these days. It certainly isn't an old Blue Domed gas station from the thirties. It isn't the growing number of creative alternate uses of warehouses and structures from early day Tulsa. It isn't the accumulation of artists or yearly art festivals. All of these are the seeds planted for a downtown population that isn't there yet. We went at it backwards (making no judgement there) and the housing is now in process. Probably, like Artist implies, because the money and mentality for development is suburban oriented. Can't blame them for doing what they know how to do.

So, a few years from now it will be a convenient place to live and work. Development downtown has been like the three characters of Wizard of Oz each needing something to be complete. We found the brains. We found the courage. Now, if we want it to be attractive to people outside of the nearby downtown area, we need a heart.

Then, keep this in mind. Of the half million or so souls that reside here, how many are possible customers of downtown goods and services? Has anyone assembled a true profile of who that person is? The demographic attracted to the inner city is much smaller than most would assume I wager. Anyway, why would they visit and spend money, on a continuing basis, downtown when most every need they have can be met within their own residential area?

In short, its time to focus on a central attraction or feature that differentiates our downtown from its suburbs or other downtowns. We have no river running through it and even though there is Deco downtown it is not the central feature nor universally admired. That's what I find missing. An identifying feature that people are drawn to for its sheer uniqueness.

Good idea!


How you going to pay for it? :o

You have to dream it first. Then sell the dream. Then get the taxpayer or local foundations to pony up. Or private investors. But, yes, indeed that is the question.

i think the unique thing about downtown tulsa is that it is "tulsa". it doesnt try to copy anything from other cities. every establishment downtown (for the most part) is unique to tulsa. and i would really love to see it stay that way.

as opposed to bricktown (which i think is absolutely horrid), which doesn't have anything that is unique to OKC (which is why i think it's horrid). it's just a suburban development made to look urban. it's much too forced. i really don't want that to happen to downtown tulsa.

so far, downtown has grown very organically. very grassroots. and i think that's what makes it unique, and thats the way i want to see stay.

Fair enough and pretty accurate. So, slow and smart. But the emphasis is on slow. That implies that downtown development is intended for the transplanted sophisticates and those who choose to reside within the downtown area and are willing to pay alot more to do so.

Do you think the current players/developers are in agreement with that view?

i don't mind it being slow. i'd rather developers/citizens/govt make informed, well thought out desicions about development instead of rushing into something we might regret. slow and steady wins the race!

i think up until very recently the downtown development has been intended for tulsans. i don't really see many transplanted sophisticates (although i don't really know what you mean by that) downtown. just young tulsans, really.

as for the developer's views, i think the retail/restaurant developers have done a very good job catering to normal young tulsans. as for the real estate, i think there should be some more affordable options.

most people i know in tulsa live just outside down (owen park, brady heights, ect.), where rent is substantially cheaper than downtown, and you are only a quarter mile from the action.

The north side of downtown has been in "development" since I was your age. David Sharp was a young man. Long time ago. That's pretty slow. I think that some of the current players may be overestimating how large and affluent the demographic is for what is being offered downtown. That intrigues me because, if true, they may very well be amenable to making it more tourist oriented to attract outside money. I don't foresee that the costs of building are any lower downtown, and therefore the rental/purchase rates, aren't going to be any more affordable to young Tulsans than Cherry Street lofts have been. If true, the areas in Brady, Owen and near South should firm up in pricing. Some say its already started. The transplanted sophisticates I refer to would be those well paid folks who have transferred here from larger cities or cities that already have nurtured an exciting downtown. They have no problem with the cost of living here and have the money to live any way, any where they want. They want arts, entertainment and sophistication that the burbs may not offer. But how many of them are there? 

I'm just not sure of who or what downtown is aiming at. If its entertainment dominant, then expect some large attraction to be proposed. If its slow growing residential then one might expect that the prices would squeeze out "normal" young Tulsan's in favor of those who are cashing in, retiring and learning to live a new lifestyle. Then, there goes the neigborhood....

I wouldn't mind a really cool attraction downtown if it were kept in perspective. Not 20 story Native American statues, but maybe something else cool to really distinguish us.

I love going downtown on Saturday or Sunday morning.  You can stand in the middle of the street taking pictures and there's no traffic to consider.  You could film a post-apocalypse movie without any street closures.  It's deserted.  The only thing missing is Charlton Heston careening around in a convertible, shooting out windows with a sub-machine gun.

It's one of the best kept secrets in Tulsa.  Running, walking, or biking in the downtown area is wonderful on the weekends.  If it's re-developed, that won't last.

Here's my vision of downtown development: a Starbucks next to an Old Navy next to a Radio Shack next to a Pier One next to a Starbucks.  That's only mildly facetious.  When the area begins to develop, probably due to local businesses taking the plunge, those big chains will take over.  Like Willie Sutton said, "That's where the money is!" They have the deep pockets that can buy up properties and preclude competition.

That will happen when there are sufficient numbers of people living downtown. Chicken and egg, I know. There is no reason for "me" to drive downtown to a Radio Shack when there is one a 101st and Memorial.  For downtown to attract suburbanites, there will need to be things unique to downtown that suburbia cannot support by itself.  Once you get "me" downtown, other businesses may benefit by the convenience of "me" already being there.

I think that one of the problems with affordable downtown living is that our early wealthy people moved quickly to areas outside of downtown.  We don't have the huge brownstones like Boston that can be subdivided with a minimal investment. 

Another problem is that the current generations (Including mine, Baby Boomers) expect all the finest granite counters and latest gadgets.  After all, we are entitled to the best.  (Where did our parents go wrong?)  One of my cousins lived in a brownstone apartment in Boston for a while in the 70s. The plumbing was decent and functional but looked more like Ralph Kramden than 2010.  A few doors were sticky......   The woodwork had 20,000 (OK, I exaggerate a bit.) coats of paint and lost all its original definition.  There was a cool personnel elevator that held about 4 people.  It was quicker to take the steps.  I remember it as a somewhat grand staircase. I don't know if that would be rentable in today's Tulsa market.

There were multi unit apartments all around the downtown area. Unfortunately they were razed to make room for expressways and office buildings. Many had just become so dilapidated as to be ready for destruction. That has continued right up to the present day when four plexes were razed to put in lofts in Cherry Street.

I too remember being thrilled to have Formica in my first house. Even if it was orange. Now if you don't have granite you're poor.

Aquaman, you took the thread right out of my mouth.

Artist had a good passionate couple of comments in the Parking Garage thread, and  to me the crux of his argument was, and I quote "Seems like we first think of catering more to the suburbanite than the urbanite in our downtown." 

And your response above, which is to ask about the true market for all things "urban" in Tulsa, is spot spot spot on.  As a once and hopefully future urbanite, my antennae are up constantly for signs of further citification for Tulsa, and I have to say that even with downtown's relative renaissance, we remain a city of primarily suburban families.  There's a moderate upswell of interest in downtown as a playground -- mostly for the young and single, of whom we have precious few in our town -- but that doesn't make it sustainable for truly full on urban infrastructure.  We cater to the suburbanites because we're a city of suburbanites. 

But even more than that, we've been a city of suburbanites for decades now.  Look at the concentric rings of housing stock emanating out from downtown.  It's not hard to see the eras, like tree rings -- 20's in Owen Park, Maple Ridge, the Pearl; pre and post war bungalows all the way east to the fairgrounds and south along the river to 51st; 50's and 60's modern around 41st and 51st from Utica to Sheridan; then the 80's all the way south to the Mall, where we start getting into the 90's and more modern.  I mean, all of that's approximate, but you get the sense, even when you rewind all the way to my hood (just north of Expo Square, circa 1950), no one really cared about walkability, density, or urbanity.  Hell, we don't even have sidewalks, and we've NEVER had sidewalks.  All the way back to 1948 when my house was built. 

I firmly believe that Tulsans aren't city people.  They may have been once, but that envelope of time is long gone.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't grow our city sustainably, smartly, and that we can't have some of the amenities of modern metroplexes.  But there are going to be things that are just going to be beyond our reach.  There will be things that will never be able to generate enough interest to support.  Light rail is one of those things.  A downtown that banishes cars either in part or altogether is another.  This is not to say that there won't be constituencies for these things.  And it's not to say that those constituencies will be right.   But I truly believe there's a stunning number of folks who believe otherwise.   

I want a bakery for downtown. I would settle for something like a Merritt's or Panera but would really like something like Harvest in the Farm Shopping center. There is a Czech bakery in West Texas off 1-35 that makes kolaches  and probably has 3,000 customers a day and makes the most delicious kolaches. That is what I want.

But anyway, rant aside, I think that regarding downtown development, we're at the end of the beginning.  Thanks to a relatively few people and their investments and political will, we have districts set and some solid idea of where the next nodes of development will be.  The next great challenge will be how to bring the suburbanites back downtown, not to live but to visit and to spend their money.  We've got sports, shows, and some basic dining choices already.  Now we need shopping, perceived safety, more physical beauty, and ease of use.  

I know some of these are in the works/proposed, but here's what i'd like to see:

-- a couple more parks, preferably with impressive art and architecture therein

-- some flagship chain restaurants, preferably upscale or hip (yep, chains; nothing legitimizes a commercial district like corporate investment)

-- more high dollar restaurants.  As Mahogany as you can go.  

-- better freakin' street surfaces.

-- fewer one way streets  

-- bike cops, Segway cops, cops parked at major intersections, cops walking around into and out of businesses.  Cops cops cops.  Not arresting anyone just a friendly omnipresence.  I swear that will make the homeless folks more scarce, and of their own volition.

-- Shopping.  Actual shopping.  Like artsy stores but also boutiques.  Wouldn't it be great if we could get Utica Square to loan out its name and brand to a downtown collection of stores?  Talk about instant cred.  

-- more housing just outside the IDL.  The Pearl should be a top priority as should all of the vacant land down the hill towards 18th and Boston.

-- a pretty pretty pony.  

Shopping, for something not available at the malls.  I don't know what that may be at the moment but it won't be another Penneys, Sears, Dillards.....  Eventually, downtown may need them for the local residents but you won't get suburbanites downtown for stores available at the malls.

The Past 1 3/4 generations may not have been city people, but that does not mean that there we cannot be in future (see David Hume; problem of induction)  My generation (I'm 29) does not and mean DOES NOT want to live in suburbs.  The reason that we don't have those young and single people is because we hemorage them to Portland Austin Seattle Denver New York, et al.  We aren't catering to the lifestyle that my generation wants to live.  We generate so much amazing freakin talent it's nuts.  But unless they are like me (and love this place to the point of fealing like I belong to it), they split town.  If we could retain that talent and keep those young people here, watch out.  And those who do want to go live in sprawling awful suburbs can always move to OKC.  They seem to do that pretty well.


As for your list, I agree with everything you said.  Esp. the bit about uptown.  That screams for development.

I am of the same generation (30) and I feel the same way. If there was affordable housing, either rent or purchase, you would see a lot more young professionals living in downtown.

The only place I have seen that has apartments for less than $800+ a month is the Central Park Condos, which are barely in downtown.

Hopefully, someone will considering developing some cheaper housing soon.


PS. If anyone knows of any reasonably priced apts, flats, lofts or condos in downtown, please let me know.

I'm 48, and I would live downtown if there was a job that fits me. I don't need high end attributes, marble counter tops, media rooms, great rooms for entertainment/party room, I'm single, not into the entertainment crowd, just would want a living space, and jeezus cricket, I can f'ing walk further than the three feet required for travel distance from car to door if not in the area I don't live. And I can walk through spaces from building to building, whether it's 110 degrees or -10 degrees, or sea level, or 9,000 above sea level.

My mother used to joke that at sixteen her kids legs quit working, but their mouths continued on.

  All over the country demographers have seen the trend of people wanting to move back to the core and wanting to live an urban lifestyle.  

Just about every single person that was in my "posse" of freinds has moved away to live a more urban lifestyle.  Heck I have had several groups of friends who have done that.  First this person would leave, then the next, then the next and then I would have to find another group of friends and watch as they would leave to a bigger city or one that had offered a more urban lifestlye.

Then add to that the people just I alone have heard about (from business owners looking to recruit, to families talking about other family members) or personally met, that would have moved to Tulsa for work, school, relationship, family, etc. but chose not to live here becase all we have to offer is the suburban lifestlye and not an urban one.

None of us are thinking of changing all 200 sq miles of Tulsa, (then add to that the suburbs) into Manhattan.  All we really need is just a tiny little percentage of that in the core to be urban, and competitive, high quality urban.  Once you get that small start going, and in the right form (fake car centered urban or, true pedestrian friendly/transit friendly urban) it will begin to grow and add to itself.      

Wish list....

1.   A connected "loop" of pedestrian friendly streets that enables you to comfortably, enjoyably walk from one district to another and not isolated chunks that will never be able to create a "critical mass" of urbanity.  Just right off the top of my head I would say..... 5th street to Elgin, Elgin to Brady, Brady to Boulder, Boulder to 5th.   And of course the more pedestrian friendly branches you have off of that the better, but even there if those little branches don't lead anywhere or lead you back to the main "loop" the business on the dead end will not be as successful as one thats on a "loop" whether that loop is just around one block or to another main destination.  Pedestrians at an intersection naturally look down a street and then decide which one looks most interesting to walk down... only a few shops or businesses in one direction versus the other direction goes for blocks, guess where most of the traffic is going to go.  Sucks to be the shop on the dead end next to say a parking garage or some other non-pedestrian friendly structure. They won't get nearly the traffic as the business on a loop or near a main attraction/destination.

How to help create that main connected loop?  

A.  Invest in transit along or nearby some of those main pedestrian friendly strips.  Up and down Boulder for instance.  
B.  Zone or incentivise for pedestrian friendly structures.  Fine grained development, aka narrower buidlings or buildings that are broken up at street level to have lots of shops/restaurants/businesses, etc. not huge mega block developments where there is say one business taking up a whole block with only door leading in and out.    


Running out of time this morning so quickly...

2.  More angled parking.
3.  Less one way streets
4.  Small downtown police force that doubles as parking enforcement (lot of discussion about that at the CORE meeting) There was mention that these police can be paid less for they don't have to be as "highly trained or certified" as the typical officer.  There was also mention of privatizing the parking meters and such, but the catch is that only city employees can write tickets so a police presence with ticket enforcement plays double duty by also helping to create a feeling of security vrs the "meter maid" doesn't add that security factor.
5.  Destination shopping downtown.  Whether a local small business or a larger chain like H&M, Nordstroms, etc. Things that are unique and show that downtown is "fashionable" place to shop for unique and interesting things.  Likely will of course start with a critical mass of smaller, locally owned businesses and mor of thats going to start happening here soon.  
6.  More living.  We are getting there just going to be a long haul. Build it and they will come, but as time goes on if those folks are paying for it they will also want the whole package including those pedestrian friendly, high quality urban, streets.  
7.  Coordinated, easy to see, signage on parking garages noting whether its private or public parking.  (I know I rail against catering to the suburbanite and car culture, but really thats only because it seems thats ALL we go out of our way to cater to.  Give me the urbanite a little attention and some of what I want on occasion and I have no problem helping the suburbanite find parking lol)

I am not a fan of angled parking.  It seems that there is always a huge pickup truck or van that parked next to me obscuring my view of traffic to exit the parking space.

I am pleased to see that I don't live on an isolated island within the metro. All of us have concerns and insights as to what this city is and what we want it to be for ourselves.

I am a native Tulsan. My perspective comes from having watched much of the growth of the city as it morphed from 50's dense inner city walkable to 70's suburban drivable. the  city I knew will never return but that is okay. I probably never saw it as it really was anyway. My purpose in this thread is to try to get people to not make the same mistake. See Tulsa for what it is and stop trying to make it something it just can't be and probably never was.

Wevus makes a strong argument in that direction. Our suburban dominance doesn't mean we can't offer an alternative style of living which is centered in downtown and nearby areas. Nor does it mean that suburbans have to be enticed to come downtown. They are already there every day or else the expressways and Riverside wouldn't be clogged each morning and evening. A Nordstrom's would do well downtown I suspect. It simply means that we need to correctly and frankly assess the potential of the area, then decide if the current path coincides with that potential. If not, how strongly do we feel about increasing that potential by drawing in outsiders to the community.

As you can tell, I believe we have overestimated the demographics from within Tulsa to keep it a viable daily community and that comes from our natural suburban orientation for development. The very people who are attracted to the area find it economically impossible to afford. Because there is demand from that demo to be nearby, they will naturally drive up the price of surrounding resources. Essentially, downtown then becomes an entertainment shopping area and that is what will lead to a push for something dramatic to pull in outside revenue. The Utica Square branding idea is tremendous. I hope they read this forum. The tactics that Artist and others have espoused are good ones, and who could not want a great bakery, but they are not primary in nature.  

Here is an example of what is happening downtown imo. I moved to an old area of town when i was under 30 because I simply loved the nature of old housing, walkable hoods, parks, lack of traffic, relaxed living if you will. It suited our tastes and was affordable. Our block was mediocre at best with only two large, well cared for homes. Lots of rental, out of state owners and old po' folks. Skip forward 30 years and the block was now solid, still attractive to young folks but totally out of their price range. They began to buy the homes that the rest of us had written off and commenced making them solid contributors. Then they sold out and moved when they had kids to escape public schools (the district boundaries needed changed). Plus they could make a killing off their home investments and move to the burbs to live like kings. Sound familiar? Now the people moving in are unhappy with the old homes and have the money to flatten them and re-build. Thus, the characteristics that attracted us 30 yrs ago are disappearing and the money to attract new under 30's of modest means is scarce. So, they move into Owen Park, Brady, etc. and the pattern repeats.

If we have some idea that downtown is for young, cosmopolites only, we are missing the reality. I think it may actually be better suited for empty nesters over 40 who have high disposable income and are anxious for a new, non-suburban lifestyle. That means the plans may not coincide with the reality.

Anyway, what I want for downtown is affordable townhouses parked around an Owen Park setting in walking distance to a transplanted Utica Square next to a huge waterfall cascading down from the hills just north of OSU converging into a small stream that allows kayaks and canoes to end up in the Brady district next to a fine collection of ethnic restaurants, pubs and theatres. And a corral for ponies, of course.

Hell, even parking parallel to each other (not angled) that big-donkey truck always seems to obscure my view trying to back out.  And it never fails at work; they ALWAYS park next to me on at least one side.

My wish for downtown is the growth of existing employers and the addition of new employers.  More people working downtown will drive up demand at existing stores/restaurants and encourage new stores to start up or open locations downtown.  More people working downtown will increase demand for housing in and near downtown, which will help drive demand for stores/retail, restaurants and other entertainment.  More and growing employers will cause more business travelers to stay downtown who will support hotels, restaurants and entertainment venues.

While this is not a central identifying attraction that AquaMan asked about in his original post, I'm not sure we have to have one at this point in time, although I like his waterfall idea.  I prefer to let it happen like so much has in downtown - from the bottom up.

I suppose Bricktown in OKC had its canel, but is that really a central identying attraction?  Now, I would say the OKC Thunder is their central identifying attraction, and they only play 1/2 the year (in a non-strike year).  Like OKC, we are now preparing the ground work today that may create an opportunity for us in the future for a central identifying attraction that few would believe possible today.

Tulsa's downtown development has happend much slower than I would like, but it is really quite amazing what has happened in the past 3-4 years, especially when you consider the economic conditions under which it occurred.  More importantly, I believe the growth in downtown is accelerating and creating its own momentum.  The ranks of the naysayers is shrinking as their predictions of doom are continually disproven by actual events. 

My #1 on wish list would be to grow the university enrollments downtown:

Students have lots of loan money to spend on housing, more willing to ride transit, more willing to walk, more willing to ride a bike, and live urban. Tulsa and Oklahoma is still lacking in pure numbers of college graduates and  from what I've seen a lot of companies say this is the number one reason that don't look into the state as a place to relocate and is the reason we see companies flock to Dallas, Houston, Austin is because they have great LARGE university for companies to pick students right out from when they graduate. There is no hassle of relocation/recruitment to a new city.

By creating a rich environment for students and young professionals you will in turn create a lot of amenities that retirees and empty nesters seek in an urban environment as well.

I think the city should try to integrate the TCC Metro campus with OSU's Tulsa campus and then that the buildings that are left at 10th and Boston and set up a more technology based research university, something that is severely lacking in this state. Something that wouldn't exactly create a direct competition to OU/OSU/NSU/UCO and other state institutions.

(http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/4854/downtownwishlistpage1.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/6/downtownwishlistpage1.jpg/)

Just think if we turned the TCC Metro campus into a urban four year tech university (good example of an urban campus would be Portland State University)

From this connect OSU - the new university - TU with a modern streetcar route with possible future extensions to the north and east.

OSU's main problem right now in Tulsa and generally with the university is that it is really lacking a lot of post graduate degrees. In my opinion this is really what the Tulsa campus needs to heavily focus on. I've seen people complain about the lack of undergraduate degree at the campus here in Tulsa and that will never change because they will directly compete with the Stillwater campus, like it or not that will never change. However getting the university to set up more postgraduate degrees in the Tulsa would bring in a lot of research dollars and allow for employers to better recruit people.

If you look outside of the energy belt, the cities that have done the best in this economy are the one's that have the most educated workforces and best universities: San Fransisco, Boston, NYC, Washington DC

(http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/4455/downtownwishlistpage2.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/209/downtownwishlistpage2.jpg/)

Once the first route is established you can later at a circular route around downtown (heritage line) and another modern route that could connect other neighborhoods outside of downtown.

If we could take our student population from somewhere around 8,000 - 10,000 now with OSU/TCC/TU to over 30,000 just think of what kind of difference this would do to downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.

I really like the way you've laid that out. And your logic and routes make sense. Education has always been key to growth. But how and why would TCC want to change the current strategy? It seems they will be more likely to defend their turf, just like OSU does with post grad programs. TU also has little to gain in watching a new 4 year pop up nearby even if it is technical in nature. If you could somehow quantify for all of them that it is more of an opportunity to increase the size of their potential student bases rather than a potential shrinkage, you have something. Our legislature so far has been immune to logic like that.

The modern streetcar alone running from TU through Pearl, and over to Greenwood has been mentioned before and I think, would be a huge success for all three areas. As the facilities become popular, and they will be, the circulator would be needed.

The 30,000 student base is worth commenting on. When I was at OU we only had about 18,000 students. As the University grew in students and expansion of facilities, so did the city of Norman which was only about 20,000 at that time. Now I'm guessing OU is about 24-25K students and the city is well over 100K. 

Thanks, I'll try to put more information together about the graduate programs and better compare them to other schools. Here's some links to OSU/TU/OU about what they offer graduate school wise and OSU and OU list what is available at the Tulsa campus'

http://www.ou.edu/content/gradweb/aud/current/programs/norman_campus.html

http://gradcollege.okstate.edu/degrees/default.php

http://www.utulsa.edu/academics/colleges/Graduate-School/Graduate-Programs-and-Advisors.aspx

Overall I think especially legislators need to change the thinking that it's competition. We live in a dynamic region that has ample opportunity for recruitment of students. If we can offer an "urban playground" experience for students, the only other place they could get is this is Austin (UT) in this region, we could attract a lot of bright minds in the region. Tulsa sit's within a 2 hour drive of about 6 million people (I believe, last time I looked into it) and that only gets larger when you think a 5 hour drive (you add KC, DFW) and then within a 10-12 hour drive (Houston, STL, Denver and others) that are all recruit able student bases. I'm not so sure if TU would be that worried about a new 4 year university because they are a niche university and recruit to a different demographic than what this would be. This is the key thing the legislator needs to think about because this brings in new people every year student wise that could stay in Oklahoma and brings more research jobs (professors). With the influx of students mean more tax dollars to local business, population growth, research dollars, and eventual local start up businesses, and so on. More universities, with more education opportunities are not a bad thing and they need to be funded better by the state.

Cities that have a major university always ride out dips in the economy better and tend to have some of the best quality of life out of American cities and higher average level of incomes. University's make great partners to cities and encourage growth in the private sectors.

With OSU I would like to see them rebrand the Tulsa campus to Oklahoma State University's Urban Campus. Even as an OSU alum I can say that the idea of going to graduate school in Stillwater is less than appealing. Growing graduate program's in a metropolitan region will only help their enrollment and attracting students that would want to live in an urban environment.

For TCC it would be a bit of a change in the direction that they are thinking but I'd like to see it more integrated with the new four year university and OSU's campus. NOC (the TCC of northern oklahoma) built a new building in conjunction with OSU. Link below:

http://www.dlrgroup.com/?p=3.4.4#/3.4.4/

TCC could have a presence on both universities campus' and this I feel would only help the enrollment of TCC. There is usually a lot of movement back an forth between local community colleges and the local major 4 year universities. So by turning the metro campus into a State tech based university it would only be a positive for TCC overall.

LandArchPoke, I like your idea and visuals and have thought the same things myself.  It would make more sense to have the urban campus of OSU, combined with TCC, at 10th & Boston.  It would serve as a major anchor for the Boston Ave corridor and could be a dynamic place with more buildings, housing and of course students and faculty.  TCC has already done a good job building up the campus and there is a lot of room around it to expand on parking lots that could be consolidated into garages. 

The hard part, obviously, would be convincing OSU to take over TCC's campus though TCC would still have a presence and offer classes/programs there, similar to how Denver's downtown Auraria campus works with Community College of Denver, Metro State and CU-Denver all sharing a campus/buildings but still separate entities. 

This then would free up the Greenwood campus to be used as an urban research campus for OSU.  That is something OSU lacks and it makes more sense for that to be in Tulsa than Stillwater, especially with the Helmerich ATRC already there and long-range plans for another research building across the street on Elgin.  The other buildings could be re-purposed.  Imagine if TU also used the Greenwood campus for some of its research activities in a partnership akin to OU and TU combining to create a medical school at 1st & Greenwood.

 

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but no one who visits OKC seems to care how "authentic" Bricktown is.  Their money still spends and they leave the city with an impression of an energetic and up & coming city.

I was in a meeting recently with several colleagues (who office in OKC) as well as some out of state business guests.  The guests mentioned that it was their first time to Tulsa and they were surprised how little there was to do in downtown, it seemed to be empty at night (they were staying at the Mayo).  I tried to deflect a little, mentioning the Blue Dome area but I really didn't get very far in convinvcing them that Tulsa was on the rise.  

To add insult to injury, they then mentioned to my OKC colleagues how much better and nicer OKC was since the last time they were there, because they had been there just weeks before for the first time in years.  They even mentioned how super clean downtown seemed and how vibrant it was. I'm surprised the conversation wasn't actually more awkward than it was because basically they just insulted "Tulsa" to her  face and then turned around and started flirting with the more "popular" one.

We have to be honest here, downtown is still where the vast majority of our out of town guests end up when they visit due to business meetings, conferences and events.  They leave downtown with an "overall" impression of our city, fair or not.  

In my opinion, we had better start giving Tulsa's downtown more than just some different shades of lipstick if we want to completely recharge her sex life.

I knew I had heard people talk about this idea of turning the Greenwood campus into a research park on here before. The only problem with that is how political OSU is and I have been in the with administration in the AG school and the CEAT school trying to change a few thing and it's like ramming your head into a brick wall. This is one thing I will say about OU is I really like how the school is structured.

While if we could get OSU to truely go into a more research format and turn the Greenwood campus into something like this I feel like it would do essentially the same thing without having to start a new four year tech based university and then combining the ungrad programs to the 10th and Boston campus and expanding it with TCC. From my experience with the OSU admin in the colleges is this would take decades with the thinking a lot of them have at the moment. Expanding the range of degree's and research going on at OSU will take a major restructuring to a lot of the college's and eventually you'll see OSU's structure more resemble OU's which is a good thing.

With that in mind that's why I felt like getting funding to start a new four year university at the 10th and Boston campus would be much easier to accomplish then dealing with the political BS at OSU.

Oklahoma Institute of Technology:

College of Computer Technology
College of Sciences - Biotech, Chemistry, etc
College of Liberal Arts - These programs are really lacking in Oklahoma
College of Business
College of Art, Design and Sustainability
College of Engineering

To avoid derailing this topic to an OKC vs Tulsa thing. Bricktown does wonder's for a visitors impression of OKC however all my friends that live and are from OKC HATE it and never go out there, it's driven a lot on tourists. Tulsa's downtown is still a few years behind equaling the vibrancy of OKC's Bricktown area but when a lot of the Brady and Blue Dome project come online in the next year or two downtown is going to feel even vastly different from where it is now. You should have just challenged them to visit again and also to check out Cherry Street and Brookside (area's that have just as much vibrancy as Bricktown).

The problem is they were staying in the Mayo, and unless there's a concert at the BOk there isn't much on that side of downtown going on. Similar to if they stayed in the Colcord (i think that's the name by the devon tower) they would think downtown OKC was dead. If we plopped a Hampton Inn in the middle of the Blue Dome and that's where they were staying the impression of downtown would have been much different.  

And that's reality. When people visit, and they usually do stay downtown, they don't say,"Hey, we're impressed with your really smart, slow development that seems oriented to a density that doesn't exist. OKC is a lot more fun and interesting to us as visitors but a few years from now you guys are going to rock." No, they react like your guests did. As far as Bricktown not being popular with the locals, well, my friends living in Florida seldom visit the beach. Go figure.

So, are we doing this stuff for ourselves? If so then that's a plan. And that requires defining a slice of our static population.  We then don't much care what visitors think. But if not, then we're missing stuff that visitors, potential newcomers and metro cities have come to expect. "I'm here. Show me something." We need some kind of major identifying feature.

I love the idea of authentic trolleys, expanded education opportunities etc but the truth is those are things we should be working on regardless of what way we want downtown to progress. The day Tulsa makes serious plans for an electric railed trolley we've arrived. I can't see that happening for awhile even though it makes sense.

I may ask this question, because this is something that's important to identify.

What makes Austin, Portland, or whatever other city that people look at as "cool" and fun to visit?

For Austin I would say it's SXSW, the "weird" vibe Austin has, 6th Street.

Vancouver is one of my favorite cities and the reason I loved it was more of the outdoors feeling the entire city had, the walkability of the city, and the amazing transit system it had.

So is one identifying thing going to change Tulsa and help identify it with visitors? That's a tough question but the route we are going with the increase of nightlife and entertainment options in the Blue Dome/Brady which will be our version of Bricktown - 6th Street type place is well in motion in Tulsa. These things just don't happen over night it takes time. If you don't allow them to grow in the right way you have the disaster that is South Bricktown. If we create a vibrant walkable district that in turns becomes our thing to market to people. I think in 3-4 years from now the Blue Dome/Greenwood/Brady will blow the Bricktown area out of the water. Look at the last few years, has much happened in Bricktown? No, it's pretty stagnant because it's not a great place locals like to visit. There isn't a huge demand for residential, retail and other amenities which is why those things are going in to the north in the Deep Deuce and Midtown area. So I think the "stuff we are doing for ourselves" will in turn become something the attracts visitors. Portland and Austin have nothing flashly like Bricktown yet people flock to those places.

Honestly I think the biggest blow to Tulsa in the last 5 years was the death of DFest. That was doing leaps and bounds to change the perception of Tulsa for visitors and the younger generation. We need something like this back in Tulsa ASAP.

It's all a revolving cycle. If we had better educational opportunities we could attract more young professionals that in turn increase the demand for downtown entertainment, housing and so on that attract businesses looking to expand. These people in turn support events like DFest that bring in crowds that go "this place would be fun to live" that then enroll in our colleges, look for jobs here and so on.

I'll say it again I think the loss of DFest was a huge blow to changing Tulsa's image.

Things like D-fest, come and they go. They tend to burn out the operators and the public is pretty fickle about them. The biggest events that have lasted in Tulsa are Mayfest, Oktoberfest and TulsaRun. Hardly differentiates us though. OKC has a funky little Halloween parade that is pretty cool. Can't remember the name. We have BooHaHa. We get some new festivals but those are all events.

What I am looking for is an organic (homegrown), permanent identifier that screams...Tulsa... not the Tulsa of past or the Tulsa that looks like Portland or Austin or the Tulsa that its citizens can't afford. Just something that most Tulsans could look at and say, yeah, that's us. We do that. It doesn't have to be, shouldn't be, a Bricktown.

 

And that is happening. It takes time to develop perfection. If we try to build it quickly it will SUCK and end up a huge disaster. In five years I think we will begin to see the true character of Tulsa really shine.

Anything that is worth having, has to at least be worth waiting for.

I guess I'm trying to understand what you consider something unique to Tulsa that would identify us as a city, are you speaking as in something tangible or intangible? Can you give us an example of another city that you think has an identifying feature that is "unique to ____"

My example was Austin and that would be the music festivals are the first thing that pop into my mind, along with 6th street, the University clock tower at UT, Congress Ave.

Seattle: Space Needle, Pike Place Market

San Fran: Golden Gate    LA: Hollywood Sign


I would strongly agree with your statement ZYX. I feel like it is already in progress.

I think by adding the universities/ student population to downtown we can greatly accelerate more quality design and development downtown by giving the market more demand. This in turn gives more demand for more retail downtown, more clubs/bars, more art gallerias, more housing, a downtown market, or really whatever you could think to put downtown.

With increased development and exposure of downtown you will see things like the Blue Dome even as small as it is, the Cain's, the Brady Theater, Boston Avenue corridor, the BOk Center all become this more national imagine and "identifier" to Tulsa that is unique to us. It just need more time to get to that point. These are all things that you can't find in another city (Bricktown OKC < Riverwalk San Antonio and that won't change) We need to nuture these icons of Tulsa and allow quality development to infill around them to allow it to become something that will be identifiable outside the region. 

I may be confused at what you are trying to get at though AquaMan, do you have an example of what you mean from another city (not that we should copy them) but it would help my thinking process?

Seriously, everyone needs to be focusing on our aerospace jobs which could be shoved over to OKC or worse, terminated.

Keep your eyes on our primary jobs and try not to forget, downtown needs a miracle (you know, like Devon) everyday....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DemCQPQPhy4&feature=related[/youtube]

This should be your picture on here:

(http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/2839/trollfacefgj.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/trollfacefgj.png/)

meh....you don't think I believe in dreamers?

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

"How come the future has to take such a long time?"

More like a troll that I wish wasn't on this site because you add nothing to it

So you don't believe job preservation should be our highest priority?


"Somewhere out there is a land that's cool
          Where peace and balance are the rule
          Working for the future like some kinda mystic jewel

                          And the waiting for a
                          And the waiting for a
                          And the waiting for a miracle~"

You always try to derail topics. Please enlighten everyone to what you can add to this one? Last I checked the AA base and our aerospace jobs aren't downtown and this topic is about a wishlist downtown.

My wish list.

1. Improved Parking Solutions
Our downtown parking situation is a mess. We have all kinds of issues: broken meters, unfriendly enforcement, poorly designed on street parking, unfortunately placed parking structures and ugly and abundant surface parking lots. The whole thing needs an overhaul.  

2. Additional Police Presence
As has been mentioned, the issues we have with visitors feeling safe are easily solved with an increase in uniformed presence. My suggestion to solve the parking enforcement problem with a new class of police officer is a step towards this solution.

3. A developed 5th Street Corridor
The conversation here thus far, if summarized speaks to the reality of our downtown development situation. It is going to have to consider visitors and residents, young and old, suburbanites and urbanites, wealthy and not wealthy, etc. A 5th street retail corridor would do the following things:
a. Connect the civic center plaza with the East Village.
There is a good amount of interest in developing the East Village, which includes a park, new housing, new retail, and even maybe a movie theater. Using the 5th street corridor to connect that activity around Elgin (which is already a growing hot strip) with our city's Convention facilities.
b. Take advantage of our most walkable and visually stunning streets.
5th Street is great. Bartlett Square is cool (even cooler with a real fountain) and of course Boston is our best looking street and home to some cool things already happening in restaurant and retail.
c. Take advantage of the existing real estate situation.
5th street already has a good amount of small (and often empty) storefronts all along it, and is home to residential in the YMCA lofts, Mayo Hotel Lofts, Mayo Lofts, Vandever Lofts, Philtower Lofts, and the new ones planned at 5th and Elgin.
d. Give our convention sellers an arrow in the quiver.
A significant retail district would be a nice attraction for downtown visitors, especially those staying in the Mayo, Aloft, Marriot, Holiday Inn, and Hyatt. It's tough for our CVB to sell Tulsa when similar cities have a much more visitor friendly downtown area. As much as I love what's happening downtown, until we have a more dense retail area, we're not in the same league.
e. Give suburbanites and surrounding rural folks a reason to visit downtown.
Today, downtown's biggest selling point is its local restaurants. The few retail places (especially Dwelling Spaces, Fleet Feet, and Lee's) we have do a great job of pulling people into the IDL, but they can't really do it alone. Suburbanites are not coming downtown for dinner. They're very happy with their food options in South Tulsa and BA. They'll travel to Dallas to shop, though. Putting a unique selection of retailers that don't exist elsewhere in Tulsa would attract folks from all around to shop in the urban environment (think Denver's 16th Street). Picture Nike Town, Lucky Jeans, Urban Outfitters, The Puma Store, Northface, Levi's, Apple, etc. These are the types of stores you typically find in urban shopping districts like Gaslamp in San Diego or at Union Square in San Francisco. Naturally some of our local flavor would exist in the mix. It already does in places like Spexton, which is a great fit. Add in some basics like a Radio Shack, CVS, and a bookstore like Denver's Tattered Cover and you'd have a heck of a shopping destination. Take a drive down 5th next time you're downtown and picture what I'm talking about. Know that it wouldn't just be 5th Street. It would likely go a block in each direction north and south of the main spine on each of the north/south streets. The property owners on the strip want this to happen and the city has folks looking in to it, but it needs my item 1 to happen first...and will need parking structures at each end and maybe a free street car/bus loop from convention center to 5th and Elgin.

4. More diverse housing options
To create a true community, we're going to have to have some more affordable housing for the younger folks. You'll find that the majority of our new downtown housing is full of older folks. The young downtowners live in places like The Blair or Central Park or Gunboat Park or in little apartments above businesses here and there. More of them would live downtown if we had small, simple, affordable units. This could/should include student housing options for our downtown college students.

5. New transit/connectivity solutions
Tulsa's biggest problem is connectivity. Our best districts are just far enough apart to be a problem. Brookside, Cherry St. Utica Square, 18th and Boston, Downtown, and the up and coming Pearl District, Kendall Whittier, The River, and hopefully Rt. 66 are all great and getting better. They just need to be better connected. This same issue exists downtown. Deco District, Blue Dome, Brady/Greenwood, Arena are all great, but just a bit too disconnected. Until those areas have grown into each other (which will make the whole thing more walkable), improved transit will be vital to connecting them to each other. I, like many of you, would like that to be in the form of street car/fixed rail. It's time to start thinking about what all of these things will be in 5-10 years and planning for it now. I don't want us looking back when these districts have really come to life and wish that we had started solving the connectivity problem a decade earlier. This item also includes little things like getting people over the tracks from Blue Dome to Greenwood/Brady in a better way, fixing one way streets, adding and improving signage, etc.

6. More art, streetscaping, trees
It may sound silly, but Tulsa's really lacking in public art in our downtown area. We need more statues, structures, murals, etc. Our surface parking lots at least need landscaping and trees. Part of the whole walkability thing is having nice things to look at. I'd love our reputation as a creative city to grow. Part of that will be putting that type of thing in our downtown so that everywhere a visitor looks, they're seeing the results of our creativity.

7. The return of DFest or the emergence of a new one to replace it
Someone mentioned this. DFest was great for us and had a chance to be even better. It's a real shame that it's gone. It looked great on Tulsa. Perhaps we can get back there. Large music festivals in urban areas aren't that common. Ours showcased our incredible looking downtown and some of our great venues. You want creative young people to want to live in Tulsa? Things like DFest are a part of that allure.

My wildcard
8. A sound stage/miniature studio city
I'd love to see us work to establish Tulsa as a place for filmmaking and creativity in general. The economic impact of filmmaking is tremendous and Tulsa has a great deal to offer in terms of geography, architecture, multiple seasons, etc. We also have a creative talent base here and a history of excellence in film and music. Tulsa has a bit of an arts personality. It would be tremendous if our citizens could recognize this asset and work to exploit it. Tulsa is often considered to be a city without an identity. When we're mentioned, our past is referenced, which is nice, but I'd like to be known for what we are right now...and I'd like for that to be that we're a leader in creativity (film, music, art) and energy (oil, gas, alternative energies). Creative Energy. We can get to the place where people think of us and think nice things, but it will have to be because of bold decisions about where we want to go. Look up how Indianapolis just decided that they were going to be a sports town. They built an NFL stadium with no NFL team. They're hosting this year's Super Bowl. You guys referenced Austin, Portland, etc. Those cities all attract young, creative people (which in turn attract the types of employers that employ them). This should be our primary objective...keeping and attracting creative talent.

Summary. I really like this conversation. You guys have made some great points and shared some really cool ideas. I like the comments about figuring out who we're aiming at and defining our personality. I couldn't agree more. My thoughts there, having profiled my guests at the restaurants over the years, is as follows.
 - Our downtown working crowd has room to grow. There's plenty of office space downtown and we should be working to fill it. Part of that will come from doing things like the 5th street corridor I mentioned earlier. All of those commercial property owners agree that if their bottom floors have cool things going on, their top floors will increase in demand. Regardless, the comments regarding downtown workers are right on. More workers = more housing demand = more entertainment options = more workers.
- Our residents should/will continue to be a mix of newly divorced people, traveling professionals, college students, empty nesters, and young singles or young marrieds with no kids. I know some people want us to be New York and have something for families, etc. That's fine, but that's not our target market. If people want to try to raise kids in downtown with no yard and a smaller floorplan, that's their decision...most Tulsans are not going to do that, and frankly, downtown doesn't need them to. Tulsa has places for those folks. My family is like that. We're not moving downtown. There's nowhere for the trampoline.
- Tulsa can do better with visitors. We've got a top notch facility in the BOK Center, an amazing asset in The Cains Ballroom, and Rt. 66 running right through our city (and our downtown). I think "visitors" is our largest potential area for growth. They're great for the local economy and they use far fewer resources than citizens. The new museums will also help this as people from the area will also come to visit. Back to Rt. 66 for a second. The fact that we've failed to capitalize on the presence of Rt. 66 in our city is more of a shame than people act like it is. Look up some stats on Rt. 66 tourism. We're really missing it. Downtown has a great opportunity to capitalize on it, as does The Pearl District, Red Fork, The River, Kendall Whittier, etc. If this works, it will be the thread that connects all of the significant up and coming areas in Tulsa...with downtown and The River at the center of it.

Forgive the long post, but I couldn't resist. I'm a dork for this stuff.

Bravo, Blake.

(sorry to pull a quote from an older page)

I'm doing this right now.  Grad school in Stilly has its charm.  For about a week and a half.  Then you get sick of stonewall.  It seems that alot people focus on high tech and medical university programs.  Admittedly these are great things that drive employment and help diversify our mix of major industries.  I'd also like to see the humanities options at OSU-Tulsa increase.  I'm a philosophy student and the regents refuse to come through with the money for a position for a prof. at the Tulsa campus.  I realize that having history or english majors it's immediately appealing, but it makes the city more culturally rich.

Ok ok this is kinda thread drift.  sorry.

I want to ask "what part of reality don't you get?"

To the Aggie, is your attack on me really necessary?

I advocate a (Devon) major event (miracle) BEFORE you move ahead with those wish lists...

I do appreciate the dreamers. :) 8)

 My ultimate wish for what the Tulsa Art Deco Museum will do is become part of my original DECOPOLIS (The Deco City) idea.  This would roll in, Route 66 attractions, Movie and Film productions, incredible shopping and entertainment, and help Tulsa become a center for contemporary art and design.  

Bit more about the art and design part.  Often people "poo poo" our past and think we should focus on the future and creating something new.  Well, I believe that is true to a point, BUT....  My personal way about helping Tulsa become known as being a center of high design and contemporary art is to take what we are already known for and sell it for all its worth in order to lend more legitimacy and cache to the new stuff.   If I were to tell someone from elsewhere that Tulsa was a center for cutting edge design (furniture, paintings, sculpture, architecture, etc.) they likely wouldn't buy it, (though we do have some great artist here, who often do well in LA and NYC)... as much as they do when I first remind them of our Art Deco.  Remember Art Deco IS simply the first manifestation of Art Modern or Modern Art.  Pointing that out can instantly give you some great street cred and respectability.  The "insinuation" is that we have a rich history of cutting edge, high design that has carried on right up to today.

I purchased hundreds of small, black and white, rubber duckies that are made to look like they have costumes from the 20s on them, one looks like a flapper, another a gangster and so on, to sell at the museum.  Some on the museum board were looking at me like I was a bit crazy and thinking they wouldn't sell.  And frankly once I got them in they didn't even look as nice as they did in the pictures lol.  But, I had an ace up my sleve that I knew would get people to buy them.  I dumped the lot of them in an antique suitcase, printed up a little sign with a photo of the ducks on them, a deco border and in big lettering put.... DECO DUCKIES!    Those little buggers have sold like hotcakes.  Just about every third or fourth person who has bought something in the gift shop corner have walked by those things then stopped and said "Ooooh look they are Deco Duckies!" and bought some.

Aaaall in the marketing folks. I bet that if I hadn't had put "Deco Duckies" on the sign, people wouldn't have given them much attention.  I would do something similar when I was starting to sell stuff at the Tulsa flea market ages ago. I would fancy up my booth, and could buy something from another booth and put it just so, next to just the right other items and sell it for twice what the other person had been asking, but hadn't been able to sell it for.  

If in peoples minds, you put our contemporary artists works next to our already highly respected Art Deco heritage... you will get the kind of interest, believability and respectability you wouldn't get as easily otherwise.   We may know that Tulsa has some really top notch artists here with some incredible talent (but honestly so do other cities) but we have something that can push us up a notch in peoples eyes.  Take our well respected past and cleverly USE IT, ride those coattails for all they are worth to promote today and make us money.  

Thats part of my plan to help local artists as I move along with the Tulsa Art Deco Museum.  I would like Tulsa to be known as a center of cutting edge, contemporary art and design.  I hope my approach will be one way of helping that become a reality.  I would love to see lots of downtown shops and galleries that have high design furniture, sculpture, paintings, jewelry, clothing, every day items, etc. made or designed by local artists in them.  And us selling our artists work, our chic and respected "Tulsa look" around the world.    Santa Fe is known for its western/indian art, Taos is known for its "Taos" artists, etc.,,, well lets add Tulsa to the list. 

    

Everything I wanted to address, and more, was touched on by Blake. We are definitely on the same rail. I still see some distraction from what should be a narrow focus. Much of the things we all listed would be best described as tactical. The focus at this point should be defining in simplicity what best describes what we're going to end up with. Like Indiannapolis deciding to be a sports town. Simple, believable, attainable and marketable. Then the tactics to accomplish the goal just fill themselves in. I hope you are going to provide strong leadership for the process. Its kinda lacking.

As far as time thats a sore point with anyone around here over 40. We seem so anxious to do things just right, tasteful, intelligently and classy that we end up planning for ever and ever. Two words. The River. Seriously, you can plan for a fight only so long. Then you actually have to get in the ring and throw some punches and see what happens. Its time to do that. We've been sparring. We will make mistakes but waiting another 5 years to get it just right when 5 years from now we won't be the same city, is not working. My lifetime please!

And don't go off on The Clown so fast. He simply makes the point that dreaming is more likely to become reality when you have a Devon around to build headquarters nearby. True enough. And the jobs are great too. Don't see that happening right now but maybe a well executed plan downtown from guys like Blake make the miracle happen.

Blake, I like 1, 2, 5 and 6. I think 8 is awesome. They are tactics that can be accomplished quickly and will fit into any personality that the downtown ends up with.  "Creative Energy" is a great slogan. A little cerebral, but  better than mine, "This Is Not Reality...This is Tulsa".

Blake makes great points about downtown and I hope he (and other stakeholders) are able to move it forward.

A few things to point it and reiterate.

Yes, many people in the late Gen X/Gen Y and older millennials want to live in an urban setting.  However, those raised in this region don't see urban living as a "family" thing to do.  I have multiple friends that swore their allegiance to downtown/midtown until their first child reached school age.  Suddenly, their wish list goes from what they want to what's best for their child.  It's hard to fault them when the overwhelming opinion in our community is the best schools reside in the suburban areas.  It is imperative the city of Tulsa, area stakeholders and TPS work to vastly improve the urban school system.  A great example is moving Thoreau to the former Wilson Middle School.  Once the urban schools are close or on-par with the suburban schools more families will remain in the urban core.  The other piece of this puzzle, is in our region begin married and having children prior to early-30's is the predominant lifestyle.  Until this age creeps older we will have to aim our urban development efforts and younger YP's and we will struggle with retaining singles or "DINKS" as their age creeps into their 30's.

Bricktown was mentioned, and others are very correct in that the urban pioneers of OKC do not touch the area.  It is definitely the destination of the suburban residents and visitors.  That said, Bricktown is seeing a bit of a change.  UCO has located their school of music to the district and if managed correctly it could have a great impact on making Bricktown more of a destination for music and arts.

My wish list for downtown includes most of the things already mentioned but at the top are two things that are somewhat connected. 

1.  The fulfillment of the Ballpark Authorities promise to develop the lands around ONEOK Field.  I'd sure like to know why they continue to sit on approximately $25MM that is earmarked for development of this area.  Is it really national retailers scaling back due to the economy?  Is it waiting on Brady District to finish?  What is it?

2.  UCAT Land - while not technically "downtown" since it's outside the IDL it's still a part of downtown is many people's mind, especially since many consider the OSU-Tulsa campus to be downtown.  It's been how long since the city/TDA/UCAT cleared this land without doing a thing to develop it?  It is an absolute travesty that we've allowed these entities to sit on this land for this long without doing anything to push them.  We talk about making north Tulsa a better place, yet we allow the gateway to north Tulsa sit vacant with trash littered about, untrimmed vegetation in areas and original stoops from homes still in place.  You can call Pine & Peoria the gateway, but it's wrong.  The prosperity of midtown will never leach north via Pine & Peoria.  Pine is way too far north of the Pearl District to see any tangible impact for decades.  Development of the UCAT land will provide an immediate stimulus to the neighborhoods north of downtown.  The only drawback to developing this land with dense, urban housing is the perception it's in north Tulsa.  As The Artist said, that's all about marking.  A resident would be walking/cycling distance from restaurants, entertainment, grocery stores, multitudes of job opportunities, etc.  It could come close to surpassing Cherry St & Brookside in terms of walkability and urban desire.  In addition, you have a neighborhood school and higher education that is adjacent to the land.  I see this area having a a similar feel to Deep Duece in OKC or east 6th St in Austin. 

All that leads me to...I'm happy to see OU/TU taking the Hartford building off the city's hands but why didn't they take the UCAT land that is already allocated for higher ed that's a mile away and develop a building there?  Don't tell me money, those institutions can find the money if the will to complete the project is there.  If they can get a low interest "loan" from the Kaiser Foundation to build a $35MM performing arts center on campus they can figure out to build a med school from scratch.  By buying the Hartford Building they should have to carve out an equal parcel of UCAT land and offer it to private developers.  I would have loved for the med school to be located at the intersection of Boulder, John Hope Franklin & Main St.  With the completion of the Boulder Bridge it would make a great transit route to OSU Med Center & OSU Med School creating a "medical corridor".  It would also provide easy access to Morton Health and the Tisdale Medical Center on Apache.  In addition, great housing options for the students in the Brady District, Brady Heights and even farther north like Reservoir Hill.  Hard to cry over the spilled milk on that project, but OSU Tulsa could certainly do more to develop the area.  With the completion of the Helmerich research facility what is OSU doing to attract professors and students?  I hear classes are meeting in the HRC that have no use for the tech they've invested in for that facility.  Why doesn't OSU build housing across Cincinnati that will help attract grad students that can walk or bike to a world class research facility?  Regardless, the time is now to begin pushing the UCAT trustees to do something with the land or give it back.  It's shameful we've done nothing to stop higher ed from holding this land hostage.

What exactly has Devon done that's a "miracle."  Building a new headquarters building?

Just because Devon is doing something flashy doesn't mean it's a "miracle."  It's a large oil & gas company with its headquarters in downtown OKC.

Tulsa has two large oil & gas companies with their headquarters downtown: Williams and ONEOK.

So help me understand what "miracle" Devon provides for OKC.

I got lost a few years ago driving through the area that Devon is constructing their building and campus on. It was riddled with railroad tracks, dilapidated housing and open unused land. I won't speak for OKC because I only know whats been printed about the development but my understanding is that it was driven by the Devon presence,was controversial and large in scope. Apparently they razed a large part of the area I drove through and are upgrading it.

Having a large activist oil company build headquarters in your downtown may not be a miracle, but it is a good thing.

Ever think of running for public office?  I think you'd make a great councilor for district 4.

Actually that sounds more like you were on the south side of the I-40 corridor. 

It's more than the building.  They received a TIF for the project.  Rather than using the money for themselves they turned around and funded Project 180.  This project is in the midst of completing a major, but not without some controversy (see yesterday's Oklahoman), overhaul of OKC's downtown streets and streetscaping, including the Myriad Gardens.  My ASSumption is this is miracle the clown speaks of.

EDIT:  In addition, by building a massive HQ, they freed thousands of class A sq ft.  Sandridge took most of it, then Continental Resources moved their HQ from Enid because of now available space due to Devon & Kerr McGee moving to HOU.  OKC scored a major win when they attracted Continental.  They are a great company run by a family that is deeply philanthropic.  If they had chosen Tulsa we all would be doing giant somersaults.  

Could be. I was in sight of the skyline and felt some trepidation for my safety. I knew if I just kept driving I'd hit a main thoroughfare eventually.

I understand all of that, but in the context of the discussion I didn't understand the "miracle" part, since his original argument was about employment in downtown.

My point was that Tulsa also has two great companies and corporate citizens downtown (Williams and ONEOK).

I would be remiss if I didn't point out that Williams did 30 years ago what Devon is doing now.  Built a headquarters building, hotel, and other major investments (PAC, Williams Green, etc.)

The difference is that our downtown laid mostly stagnant for three decades after Williams' initial investment.

Most likely correct.  The area where Devon is building their HQ is across from Myriad Gardens and adjacent to a failed shopping mall plan from the 80's.  But, there were some dilapidated buildings to the west of their HQ.  What is now called Film Row was pretty much Skid Row just a few years ago.

Would have been around 2005.

I remember fondly the Williams Forum, Jeff. It was quite popular for awhile but iirc it became a victim of poor economy and declining population downtown. The theatre was top notch, the shopping and dining were good and my kids had birthday parties on the rink. Miss it, I do.

Glad to have OneOk and Williams. We lost a lot of energy companies in the last decade or so. Those activist players I miss as well.

It's great that Tulsa has two major employers downtown.  However, due to Devon building a new a tower (and leaving of Kerr McGee), downtown OKC added two additional employers and corporate citizens that are nearly equal (off the top of my head) to ONEOK & Williams.  Sandridge, which was founded by a former founder of Chesapeake, was set to build a suburban campus similar to Chesapeake prior to the chunk of Kerr McGee & Devon space opening up.

Sure, Williams did do something similar in building Williams Tower & the PAC.  However, they also chose to let it languish until recently and some urban planners and downtowners would assert by shutting off Main St & Boston Ave they retarded the development of the Brady District by essentially cutting if off from the core of downtown employees.

Don't let your love of Tulsa keep you from recognizing and appreciating the success OKC has achieved as a result of political, private and corporate cooperation and investment.  Rather, let it be a model of how the success a community can have if we lay aside our differences and come together for the common good, even if that moment comes as result of our horrible tragedy (Murrah Building boming) and the misfortune of others (New Orleans).  We may disagree with the look or feel of their end result but there is no denying their success and process in which they've created that success.

Chesapeake's ever-growing and sprawling campus seems incredibly impractical and inefficient.  Any idea why they chose this route instead of going vertical?

Mainly hubris.

I've been told for years McClendon wanted a collegial or academic atmosphere.  I doubt they thought it would grow this big when they started the initial construction on the campus.  I will say it is a beautiful campus and is amazing in December when they have the lights on.

What will be interesting is if anything ever happens to Chesapeake how easily can the campus go from single tenant to multi tenant.  It seems in some ways it could weather a downsize or down real estate market easier than a single tenant tower that touches the sky.

To direct it towards downtown Tulsa, I'd love to see a collection of office buildings this size, they are all three-five stores, developed in the east end or on the UCAT land.

 

Chesapeake is stretched.....thin.

 

Many in the oil & gas industry are amazed at the "luck" they've had in being resilient through the various ups & downs of the last decade.  They can thank Tulsa's St Kaiser for bailing their Founder & CEO out following the Semplosion.

Past tense....

I am implying that underlying credit will rule the roost for downtown development. Unfortunately, after the Bush years, there's been a credit degradation among all sectors except the oil and gas industry (with a few exceptions). It's been a good run considering the dismal National economy. Unfortunately, the imbalances in nat gas have driven the price way low which will throw some things out of whack for a while. Thank Obama for saber rattling in Iran or oil would be $70-75 per barrel.

Meanwhile, we could use some positive news out of the AA bankruptcy situation.

Remember, "when life looks like easy street, there is danger at your door...."

Regarding a wish list, I have always wondered about the following:

What is the feasibility of filling in "missing teeth". For example in Bartlesville there are several instances of a single commercial building being torn down, either due to fire or condemning. I'm talking small scale two or three story commercial buildings. It leaves a street wall with "missing teeth", generally a surface parking lot. The lot has the unfortunate side effect of cutting through the sidewalk as well since they are so small that they are only one way (in from the street, out through the alley).

Now I've only seen one instance of in fill like this. Several buildings were recreated in Sundance Square (Fort Worth). I know that the owners of the property own everything in the area, so by no means is this an indication that this would work financially. But I want to know if it is.

It always seems that any development (construction) in urban environments has to be large scale (The Metro, Fairfield & KOTV projects are all 1/2 block or larger). Is small scall infill (new-construction) not financially possible?

I am not sure what your classification is of "major employers" but in my opinion there are more than 2 downtown (maybe not on the Williams [size] level, but how many companies are).  Sure you have Williams and OneOK, but you also have the City (not sure how many they employ), the feds (3 different agencies), Samson and SAIC.  Those are just in the Williams towers.  And truely most of the new business development is in the small sector which is great.  Every business has to start somewhere and I think DownTown has a good mix of big and small.  

My only addition to the list:

A Pony.

Oh, I wasn't saying those are the only major employers.  Hell BOk Financial is a huge employer downtown and they are in the Williams tower.  I was just responding to his assertion of only ONEOK & Williams.

I agree with Blake's idea for a retail corridor that is comprised of outlets that will create a regional draw. But we also need run of the mill retail for the people that live and/or work downtown (Target?).

Many more housing option are needed

A downtown circulator

I completely agree with the need for more art downtown...this is one of the things that will continue to define the "unique Tulsa experience". There are lots of creative people in this city, we need to put a plan together and set them loose.

Request a pony corral. The ponies will come.

The bigger the development, the bigger the developer fees. Economies of scale come into play and taking on risk creates incentives for venture capital.
Most developments are driven by greed. The move away from medical areas by doctors groups was facilitated by the private hospital expansion that Obamacare has now curtailed (seems these independents drove the cost up significantly).

Can I wish for Rev. Expect a Miracle to return? Pony up....

A couple of bits, pieces and clarifications:


It was that, coupled with the fact that Williams (as the building's owner) could fill that whole space with employees/tenants.  IIRC, LLDS/WorldCom employees filled that space before they moved out to Cherokee.

It's now totally filled with Williams employees.


FWIW, SandRidge is much smaller than Williams or ONEOK.

SandRidge is actually roughly the same size (a bit larger) as WPX Energy, the E&P company that Williams just spun off.  They both have a market cap of around $3 billion.

For comparsion's sake, Williams' market cap is around $17 billion, and ONEOK is around $15 billion.

And I'm assuming that the other company you're talking about is Continental Resources. They were absolutly a great "get" for OKC, but again - they are much smaller than either Williams or ONEOK.  They are more akin to Sampson energy or even a company like Magellan Midstream.

And I certainly wish they would have moved here instead of OKC, but I think with their previous HQ being in Enid, it was going to be a tough sell for them to pick Tulsa over OKC.


Oh - I do think what they have done/are doing is great. 


Don't forget Bank of Oklahoma.  They are the largest financial institute in the region with their headquarters downtown.  You also have two companies that used to be part of Williams with their headquarters downtown: the aforementioned WPX Energy and Magellan Midstream, which is a pretty good sized midstream company.

Sandridge may be smaller in market cap, but they have plans to have roughly 1,500 employees (I think they have about 1,000 now) in downtown OKC and own over 1MM sq ft of office and retail space spread over three blocks with plans to pump $100MM into the buildings.  That's not a small employer or small plans.  Williams Tower is what 1.4MM sq ft?  Williams occupies how much of that?

Continental Resources is a huge get.  Sure, they may only bring a few hundred jobs to OKC, but they are absorbing an empty building.  Can you image if the Williams Tower suddenly became vacant what would that do to the downtown vacancy rate?  They immediately solved that problem for OKC.  Additionally, their market cap is $13B.  Smaller than ONEOK & Williams?  Yes.  Significant amount of capital heading for downtown OKC?  Absolutely.  Who is the last $13B company to relocate to Tulsa?

I didn't mention BOk Financial or other top employers (Cimarex and their new building come to mind) because I was only using ONEOK & Williams which is who you mentioned.

I didn't say they were "small" per se, just that they are smaller than Williams and ONEOK.

And their growth plans are great.  All companies plan to grow, especially mid-sized independent E&P companies like SD.  Whether or not that happens is many times out of their control.  Things happen, you know?  Especially in oil and gas, as we've all seen over the past 3 decades.

If they complete all of their plans and become another CHK, that would be great for OKC and great for the state. I'm all on board with that.


I don't know the square footage off the top of my head.

There's the tower and then there's also the Resource Center (the old Williams Forums).

I don't know the exact split up of real estate, but we have right at 1,000 employees in Tulsa post-WPX spinoff.  (We have approx. 4,000 employees total)

The major building tenants outside of Williams are BOK, WPX, Magellan, Newfield Exploration, and Conner & Winters.

I do know that the facility is more or less full, so if and when any of these tenants significantly grow, they'll need to look outside of the tower.


I'm not arguing that they aren't a "huge get." Of course it would be fantastic if a company like CLR moved to Tulsa. Who's arguing against that?

This whole discussion started with me trying to understand what the "Devon miracle" was.

I don't think that CLR decided to move to OKC just because Devon decided to build a new HQ building and some downtown real estate was freed up, if that's what the point was....

I had heard a number of their employees, especially the higher-paid engineers, already lived in Edmond and commuted to Enid.  The CEO, billionaire Harold Hamm, already had bought a house in Nichols Hills before they announced the move.  

A "get" for Tulsa would be a non-energy company like Wichita's Spirit Aerosystems moving its HQ to the city where they already employ thousands by the airport.  

Obviously, we may never know what CLR would have done without Devon building their tower.  BUT, having an existing single tenant class A space that was basically move in ready for an oil & gas tenant sure does help make a decision.  I was told Tulsa could not offer a space similar to what OKC offered and as a result was quickly out of the running.

Just looked at their investor profile and Sandridge's total employees are 2,100.  Not sure what the exact numbers are in downtown OKC at this time.

I think the clown's point is simply how much one company can have impact on the development of a downtown.  The development of Devon tower has created a much greater impact than just a new shiny skyscraper to stare at, its created positive momentum throughout downtown.  I'd love to see a similar impact be made by one of our local corporate giants (H&P maybe??).

Major distraction guys. You're both right. Its no miracle but its good for OKC and would have been good for us.

To attempt to get this back on track, here are my wishes:

1. Would love the big PAC parking lot bound by 2nd, 3rd, Cincinnati and Detroit be developed into something... anything... that logically connects the CBD to Blue Dome.  Walking from the BOK Tower/Hyatt/City Hall area down to Blue Dome is always a little less nice when you reach the barren wasteland of that parking lot.  Heck, even a new streetscape would be great, but ideally that whole thing could be developed into some kind of cool greenspace connector between the CBD and Blue Dome.  You could still incorporate the parking, but just give people something interesting to look at as they make their way down to Blue Dome.

2. On a similar note, I would love to see the south side of 2nd Street overhauled in between the BOK Center and the Blue Dome.  I know there's been lots of talk about making 3rd of 5th street the main connector from that area to Blue Dome, but 2nd Street is the way that most people take. Our main convention hotel is on 2nd street and it's a straight shot from the BOK to Blue Dome.  Thus, after any event at the BOK, there are thousands of people streaming east down 2nd Street.  So let's make a really nice walk instead of what it is now, which is... less than desirable.

As for the rest of my "wishes", I think most of them are actually underway.  I'll probably have some more thoughts once all of the stuff that's under construction right now is up and running, but these two things above are my main "wishes" for now.

I thought they already had plans for structured parking on this lot? 

I always thought this lot made a great venue for DFest.  In fact, I preferred it to the GIANT parking lot in Blue Dome.

Speaking of, that would be pretty damn high on my wish list.  Talk about a super lot that is begging to be developed...

Oh - I didn't know there were any plans.  Would love to hear about them from someone who's in the know.

And - yes - I should have added that as #3.  The giant parking lot in Blue Dome is begging to be developed.  Seems like I read here at some point from Blake that it's pretty unlikely, though... because of the owner of one portion of the lot or something... ???

Yes, the economics at the current ownership's asking price makes the project really tough.  The economics might work if you felt confident in charging a much higher rate for residential than what the market is currently offering and retail lease rates that would approach the highest in the city.  To make those higher rates possible you would need to attract high quality national tenants.  Unfortunately, the current demographics of downtown Tulsa do not meet the criteria of most national tenants or franchises (it's actually laughable what tenants and franchises downtown qualifies for).  From my perspective development of that super block will require a more reasonable sales price and a buyer with significant capital/liquidity combined with a patient developer that would be willing for the lease up period to be longer than a standard investment would allow.  At times you can replace significant capital with creative financing, however, from a national perspective lenders for this type of project have lost most of their creativity.

However, it could happen.  Who knows, maybe Kaiser and crew will get bored once they're done in the Brady Franklin District and saunter over to the Blue Dome.

The lot between 2nd and 3rd, Cincinnati and Detroit makes the most sense out of any downtown for a park/plaza since it's the link between the CBD and Blue Dome and is perfect for festivals/outdoor concerts.  You could get creative and put the parking underneath it, which could be done easier than other places because of the natural slope of the site. 

The pac lot seems to me to be a great setting for a new tower.  And a stable for the pony I'm wishing for.

That site was definitely identified for structured parking in one iteration of the downtown master plan some years back.  It does not seem to be specifically identified as such in the current master planhttp://www.cityoftulsa.org/community-programs/planning/downtown-area-master-plan/the-plan.aspx (http://www.cityoftulsa.org/community-programs/planning/downtown-area-master-plan/the-plan.aspx).   There is a reference to "east" and "south" parking buildings in the capital improvement plan portion of the master plan, but they don't seem to identify the exact locations, as far as I can find.

Now that the giant parking lot outside the front door of the BOK Center is disappearing into Place One, this is my least favorite surface lot in all of downdown.  It's size and ugliness are made worse by the fact that it is nearly surrounding by other surface lots. 

Many good ideas here.  I'd like to see a downtown circulator, either as proposed up and down Boulder, between 21st and Riverside and the Brady District, or as a clock/counter circulator between the core and Brady.  Streetcar would be preferable, but some sort of funky alt energy rubber tire vehicles would do for now.

I'd also like to see Detroit, Denver Sixth Street, and Seventh Street to be transformed into true urban boulevards.  As the major ingress points for downtown I think a treatment such as this:

(http://hugeasscity.com/images/grand-boulevard-barcelona.jpg)

could be transformational for downtown.

Speaking of Detroit Ave.  I see lower Detroit (IDL to 10th) as having perhaps the MOST remaining potential (along with 2nd Street East of Elgin) for redefinement in an urban context.  The street is far too wide, poor on street parking options, and crap sidewalks.  There are some cool buildings there, and plenty of develop-able land.  It could be an awesome retail district.  Excellent regional highway access, no parking requirements, and tons of opportunity. Give the boulevard treatment to Detroit (and Cincinnati South of 10th??) and create a two block wide "boulevard district".  It's safe...close to midtown, close to the churches, great access to Cherry Street and South Boston.  It might result in somebody investing in Gunboat Park on a larger scale as well....

Think about it.

Denver is about 6 lanes wide, including the parking on both sides.  That would take care of the center of your picture but the outer lanes wouldn't fit.  Maybe it would scale down OK.

Well yes....the example is a two way boulevard, for one, while Detroit is not.  However, if you apply treatment to both Cincy and Detroit, leaving the block in between as the "boulevard", then you have an adapted version of the treatment.  Nevertheless, the such as was meant to imply an adaptation of the example.

Add development of the Gunboat Park to the list.  It is currently the only place, 99% sure, you can live in a single family residence with a lawn and be within the IDL.  

I think you're right, "urban renewal" pretty much cleansed all of the houses in downtown that hadn't been converted to office space.

Instead of focusing the effort in residency towards the young what would happen if we turned the focus towards the aging population?

It would seem to me the downsizers, the going solos, and the wealthier would be a much better target group to enhance the restaurants, entertainment venues, and spiritually correct.

We did that already.  They are at 91st and Yale.

I would argue that downtown housing is already focused on older/wealthier residents.

Seething to add to previous wishes: an art institute. 

Isn't that what the Unitarian Church is going to do?  I thought housing geared towards seniors was in their master plan?

I posted this on the other board, but it fits here to since this is on my downtown wishlist.  According to this article, the Pacific Coast League is looking at a Houston suburb for placing a Triple-A team.  Do the Drillers seriously just have zero interest in even trying to make the jump?  If Tulsa is going to continue to grow and prosper, doesn't it make sense to try and fit ourselves at least in this area with bigger cities?  Texas League is fine and I enjoy the history of it, but we are competing against small towns and suburbs.  I'd like to play with teams in Vegas, New Orleans, and Memphis as opposed to Midland and Frisco.  TL just seems much more small time for our city.  Plus the rivalry with OKC is a natural fit. 

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=203&articleid=20120629_203_B1_CUTLIN822968&allcom=1#3046164 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=203&articleid=20120629_203_B1_CUTLIN822968&allcom=1#3046164)

I am not sure there is a huge advantage from going AA to AAA.  I don't think the "product" is better.  If the player is good enough to play in the majors, the second longest stop they will have in the progression is AA (MLB being the longest and final stop).  If they do go AAA, they don't spend much time there.    And after looking at the PCL teams and affiliations, I am not sure what team a Tulsa AAA squad would support, which is a key factor.  You generally want your AAA squad fairly close to the MLB squad for quick call ups (injury support etc.).  And while you are playing the west coast teams on occasion, you are generally playing teams from the middle of the country.  And you can almost guarantee that ticket prices will increase.  It is not about the location of the teams you are playing, it is about the caliber of players on that team. 

I agree that, in reality, the difference between AA and AAA isn't all that much.  If a player makes it to AA, he's generally on his way to the majors.  But I think it would be great for public perception if the Drillers could become a AAA franchise.

There's no question we could support it.  A quick look at average attendance in the PCL shows that the Drillers, even as a AA franchise, would currently rank 8th out of 17 franchises in the PCL if they were included.

We would rank ahead of places like Omaha, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Reno, Nashville and Las Vegas.

As you say, the toughest thing would be to find an affiliation that makes sense. There are a finite number of AAA franchises, so someone would have to be "demoted."

I hate to perpetuate the OKC-Tulsa rivalry, but wouldn't it just be sweet if Houston moved their AAA franchise to Tulsa. I've heard OKC is NOT doing so well anymore. Honestly, I think it would be better to get the Cards to move from Memphis. People in this town seem to have an affinity for the Cards more than any other MLB team.

Fixed

As a huge Cardinals fan myself, I would be in heaven if that happened!  ;D

As for OKC... they are essentially right in the middle of the pack in the PCL in attendance.  They average 5,247 per game, which puts them 10th of 16 teams. But they have fallen off significantly over the past 7 years. If you go back to 2005, they averaged more than 7,700 per game, which was near the top of the PCL.

 

One acronym... NBA.  OKC is not large enough to support all the sports they try to maintain (Bball, Baseball, hockey(?)).  Considering the beginning of the baseball season coincides with the end of the NBA season it is no doubt they are having issues.  The longer the Thunder make it in the playoffs, the more disconnected the fans are with the OKC AAA team.   Not to mention, OneOK would have the smallest capacity of ANY PCL team. 

But honestly, I don't think there is a perception issue.