Brady District

[Townsend]

  What is it with this town and "parking problems"?  Just absurd really. 

Walmart mentality.  If we can't see the front door from where we can park, there's no parking.

[erfalf]

 Most of us couldn't manage in NYC, Paris (France), London (England), Hong Kong...

  That's the way we are.

With all due respect, having lived in NYC and here, I would still argue that it is virtually impossible to live the lifestyle I desire without a vehicle in Tulsa. NYC has all necessities/niceties within walking distance. Not so much here.

I'm not disagreeing that people around here a a bit deranged when it comes to parking, I'm just saying you're not comparing apples to apples.

[TheArtist]

  Most of us couldn't manage in NYC, Paris (France), London (England), Hong Kong...

  That's the way we are.

Bet if I offered to pay for a 2 week stay in Paris or London or NYC, by far most people would jump at the chance and manage quite happily.

 And I bet if I gave them a 2 hour class on "pedestrian friendly/ quality urban design and living" showing them examples, etc.  most would come away from it with an entirely different attitude on parking.  

[erfalf]

Walmart mentality.  If we can't see the front door from where we can park, there's no parking.

It's not just the general citizenry's problem. Developers have the same derangement. They want x amount of parking spaces or its a no go. This should be the focus of the re-education. Plus there are less of them. To get downtown going, it is going to take some developers to drag everyone else along. Fortunately for Tulsa, they have several that are doing some great things.

[TheArtist]

With all due respect, having lived in NYC and here, I would still argue that it is virtually impossible to live the lifestyle I desire without a vehicle in Tulsa. NYC has all necessities/niceties within walking distance. Not so much here.

I'm not disagreeing that people around here a a bit deranged when it comes to parking, I'm just saying you're not comparing apples to apples.

My problem is that people want to shift our urban areas fit a suburban lifestyle/mindset, instead of allowing them to grow into urban ones, and thus end up destroying any chance at having that quality urban space.   We end up with spaces that are neither urban nor suburban but a grotesque, expensive, wasteful mockery of both, which neither the urbanist finds truly attractive, nor the suburbanite.  We focus more on trying to make the suburbanite happy, while ignoring the urbanites who then either leave the city for better urban areas, or who when taking a look at our city, don't choose to even move here to begin with.  200 square miles of suburban lifestlye for those that want it...and we can't manage to make even a teentsy .5% of that be urban for those people who want that?    

[TheArtist]

It's not just the general citizenry's problem. Developers have the same derangement. They want x amount of parking spaces or its a no go. This should be the focus of the re-education. Plus there are less of them. To get downtown going, it is going to take some developers to drag everyone else along. Fortunately for Tulsa, they have several that are doing some great things.

Its illegal in 99% of the city to create urban living, to create pedestrian friendly/transit friendly development (minimum parking requirements, mixed-use not allowed, etc.).  If they can do that, why don't we make it illegal in that other 1% to create suburban style development?  

As one example... Think about it, we have made it illegal in our city to have good, affordable mass transit.  It's not possible because of our zoning laws.

[erfalf]

My problem is that people want to shift our urban areas fit a suburban lifestyle/mindset, instead of allowing them to grow into urban ones, and thus end up destroying any chance at having that quality urban space.   We end up with spaces that are neither urban nor suburban but a grotesque, expensive, wasteful mockery of both, which neither the urbanist finds truly attractive, nor the suburbanite.  We focus more on trying to make the suburbanite happy, while ignoring the urbanites who then either leave the city for better urban areas, or who when taking a look at our city, don't choose to even move here to begin with.  200 square miles of suburban lifestlye for those that want it...and we can't manage to make even a teentsy .5% of that be urban for those people who want that?    

Agreed, Uptown Dallas is an example of this "New Urbanism" that isn't urban at all. I hope Tulsa will just look at what really works.

I still think Fort Worth's Near South Side (Magnolia Ave.) is an area I think we should be studying. The form based codes/overlays they are using are helping create a truly liveable neighborhood. Mixed use neighborhoods are the goal.

The thing everyone needs to realize is that not everyone can afford a $200/s.f. condo downtown. Plus downtown isn't for everyone. This is why I think neighborhoods like the Swan Lake area are so incredibly vibrant and popular. They offer detached & attached housing in a wide spectrum of prices and within walking distance to shopping/dining/parks/religious/medical/school. That is what a neighborhood is. Downtown Tulsa, while they are trying, is no where near a neighborhood.

While you say why can't a small portion of Tulsa be urban, I say it already is. It's just not downtown.

[joiei]

I read the Urban Tulsa article and was wondering which part of town the writer lived in.   Almost everyone they quoted said there was no real parking problem.   I have never had trouble parking,  I might have to walk a block but that is part of the enjoyment of going to the Brady.   

As to surviving in a city atmosphere, when I lived in San Francisco I did not have a car and managed quite well.  I also spent some time in New Orleans without a car and never felt hampered.   

[Hoss]

I read the Urban Tulsa article and was wondering which part of town the writer lived in.   Almost everyone they quoted said there was no real parking problem.   I have never had trouble parking,  I might have to walk a block but that is part of the enjoyment of going to the Brady.   

As to surviving in a city atmosphere, when I lived in San Francisco I did not have a car and managed quite well.  I also spent some time in New Orleans without a car and never felt hampered.

After spending several days in San Francisco I can see how it's easy to survive without a car. I think many here are of the notion that San Francisco is huge. It:s really not, except for having 750k living in a 20 sq mile box. Their transit system (BART)  is tailor made for the Bay Area.

Sent from my Atrix4G with fat fingers

[carltonplace]

Where exactly are these parking problems? The new spots they created on Archer are never anywhere close to full midday when I go by. Nor are they ever close to full at night.

People used to park in a lot on Main between Brady and Archer and now that lot has a slab in it. This is cornfusing to folk who don't realize that the little stripes in the street represent a parking space.

[jacobi]

I used to run the kitchen at lola's.  I lived on north main and walked or rode my bike.  It took me alot of work and good planning to get in a position where I could live without a car.  That said, if you concider the amount of housing that is within a 10-15 min bike ride of the front door of Caz's there really shouldn't be a parking problem; just an issue of promotion a walking/biking culture (that is certainly on the wax).  My point is that, for those of us who want to live this way, we have found ways to do it and will continue to do so.  Dense housing/commercial is important, but until such time as Tulsa will invest in mass transit, the thing that can save us from 'uptown Dallas'  (which is a shopping mall in disguise) is the bicycle.  

/Preachingsessionconcluded

[Red Arrow]

Bet if I offered to pay for a 2 week stay in Paris or London or NYC, by far most people would jump at the chance and manage quite happily.

For a short period, I agree.  Take your average entrenched suburbanite and tell them they are going to live the rest of their live in a big city and there will be less jumpers.  Kind of like Green Acres in reverse.

And I bet if I gave them a 2 hour class on "pedestrian friendly/ quality urban design and living" showing them examples, etc.  most would come away from it with an entirely different attitude on parking.  

Some, I agree.  Most, I disagree.  You are starting with the perspective of loving the urban lifestyle.   I personally have no problem walking a few blocks.  I also park at the uncrowded areas of parking lots.  I can't stand the people blocking traffic just waiting for a spot 10 feet closer to the door.  I usually walk right past them as they wait.

[Conan71]

Aside from needing to ferry large items, work day transportation (i.e. if a client needs me to come to their office in a hurry or out of town), and wanting a roof over my head while commuting in really crappy weather, I could easily survive in Tulsa with a bicycle.  If I were a desk jockey and never needed to leave between 8 & 5, I'd commute 80% of the time.  Granted, I'm willing to ride or walk a lot further than most people as my bike commute works out to about 10-11 miles each way, or roughly an hour of good cardio exercise.  Actually, once FMC finally gets moved up here, I may start leaving my car at work so I can commute more often via the bike.

[AquaMan]

Agreed, Uptown Dallas is an example of this "New Urbanism" that isn't urban at all. I hope Tulsa will just look at what really works.

I still think Fort Worth's Near South Side (Magnolia Ave.) is an area I think we should be studying. The form based codes/overlays they are using are helping create a truly liveable neighborhood. Mixed use neighborhoods are the goal.

The thing everyone needs to realize is that not everyone can afford a $200/s.f. condo downtown. Plus downtown isn't for everyone. This is why I think neighborhoods like the Swan Lake area are so incredibly vibrant and popular. They offer detached & attached housing in a wide spectrum of prices and within walking distance to shopping/dining/parks/religious/medical/school. That is what a neighborhood is. Downtown Tulsa, while they are trying, is no where near a neighborhood.

While you say why can't a small portion of Tulsa be urban, I say it already is. It's just not downtown.

I think you made some keen insights there. Downtown isn't a neighborhood and may never be. Its the nearby areas that are fulfilling an urban urge right now. It gives you a different perspective to realize that not all young people or urban(auts) really want to live in the nucleous of the downtown, they may just like living nearby.

[jacobi]

I think you made some keen insights there. Downtown isn't a neighborhood and may never be. Its the nearby areas that are fulfilling an urban urge right now. It gives you a different perspective to realize that not all young people or urban(auts) really want to live in the nucleous of the downtown, they may just like living nearby.

CBD's are almost never residential areas.  But the Brady, the Pearl, Uptown, Brady heights, (maybe) blue dome should all be residential areas that are "urban' and to some exant already are.  If we want parking lots to disappear they have to be made less valuable as parking and more valuable as potential development options.  To invoke the measure I used above, a ten min bike ride (or $4 cab ride, or 20-25 min walk) from one's front door to one's place of work would be a dream.  Outlying residential areas like the ones listed above feed into CBD's.  They support each other.  What we can do is promote non-car culture.  We already have a great skeleton for a cycling commuter system (riverside and adjacent trails), one of the best bicycle races in the country happens here (if you haven't been to crybaby hill, you haven't really seen Tulsa), we have drivers who are actually not that unaccomodating to cyclists.

I've often thought it would be a great opportunity to challenge Mayor Bartlett to Ride the bus/Cycle for one week to give him a sense of what transit whould be like in Tulsa.