A grassroots organization focused on the intelligent and sustainable development, preservation and revitalization of Tulsa.
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 18, 2017, 12:36:45 am
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Coliseum Apartments to get facelift  (Read 9024 times)
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 601



« Reply #30 on: July 30, 2015, 02:52:12 pm »

My living room is about the size of these apartments. I couldn't even get my furniture in there. I now can see what all those small space furniture models at IKEA are for.

That sounds a bit condescending. Any major urban area in the country has efficiency apartments this size and smaller. Plenty of people love the option of less space in order to be in a higher demand area.

Why do so many people think they need huge homes full of massive ugly furniture adding to urban sprawl? That is the opposite of what most on this forum are advocating. Very few people use their space well around here and don't seem to realize how ugly and cluttered their houses are.
Logged
Markk
Civic Leader
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 269



« Reply #31 on: July 30, 2015, 03:45:18 pm »

damn.... to each his own.
Logged
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10232


WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 30, 2015, 04:39:39 pm »

When I moved back to Tulsa from KC in 1987, I leased a 500 sq. ft. (or so) studio at Center Plaza (now Central Park Condos). 

My rent was $305 a month which I’m guessing would be comparable to the $600 these are renting for in today’s money.

$640, pretty close.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Logged

 
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10232


WWW
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2015, 04:47:25 pm »

Very few people use their space well around here and don't seem to realize how ugly and cluttered their houses are.

I'll admit to cluttered.
Logged

 
heironymouspasparagus
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11111



« Reply #34 on: July 31, 2015, 09:03:14 am »

That sounds a bit condescending. Any major urban area in the country has efficiency apartments this size and smaller. Plenty of people love the option of less space in order to be in a higher demand area.

Why do so many people think they need huge homes full of massive ugly furniture adding to urban sprawl? That is the opposite of what most on this forum are advocating. Very few people use their space well around here and don't seem to realize how ugly and cluttered their houses are.


Volume for volume's sake. 

Bill of goods that has been sold over the last few decades by the cabal formed by builders/developers, real estate companies, and property tax entities.  Bigger volume or square feet, is always better for them when price/cost per sq ft is the basis for profit to all three.

A well appointed 700 to 1,200 sq ft house can be just as comfortable and just as luxurious as a 2,500 ft McMansion.  But an addition of nice 1,000 sq ft homes will never happen now.



Logged

“When you wage war on the public schools, you're attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You're not a conservative, you're a vandal.”    - Garrison Keillor

Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.

What you do speaks so loud, I cannot hear what you say.
rebound
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 694


WWW
« Reply #35 on: July 31, 2015, 09:30:04 am »

Volume for volume's sake. 

Bill of goods that has been sold over the last few decades by the cabal formed by builders/developers, real estate companies, and property tax entities.  Bigger volume or square feet, is always better for them when price/cost per sq ft is the basis for profit to all three.

A well appointed 700 to 1,200 sq ft house can be just as comfortable and just as luxurious as a 2,500 ft McMansion.  But an addition of nice 1,000 sq ft homes will never happen now.

How many people are in that 1,200 sq ft house?  For a single, or couple with no kids, an efficiency apt or 1000 sq ft house might work, but it would still be tight.  Throw in a couple of kids and it would be very tough to make something that small work comfortably.  If I recall,  in the book "The Not So Big House", once you get under 1,700 sq ft it gets tough to be comfortable for a family. 

 
Logged

 
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 601



« Reply #36 on: July 31, 2015, 10:56:33 am »

How many people are in that 1,200 sq ft house?  For a single, or couple with no kids, an efficiency apt or 1000 sq ft house might work, but it would still be tight.  Throw in a couple of kids and it would be very tough to make something that small work comfortably.  If I recall,  in the book "The Not So Big House", once you get under 1,700 sq ft it gets tough to be comfortable for a family. 
 

The market for condos around 1000-1200 is strong in larger urban markets. Tulsa has quite a few homes in that range thanks to relatively good preservation of the old midtown neighborhoods (e.g. Renaissance) and the prices there keep going up (up to $130/ft2 for a fully remodeled cottage & up to $190/ft2 in Florence Park). A couple with 1 child can be completely comfortable in a 2bd/1ba 1000 ft2 house. More young people are waiting longer to have kids or not having kids at all (compared to previous generations) so the market for homes in that range could increase. Tulsa is far behind when it comes to condos downtown but cheap real estate and (up to this point) low density downtown probably hinders that to some extent.

From what I've seen over the years, the interiors of smaller cottages tend to be a lot better utilized than the typical 2000 ft2 3 bed/2 bath in the suburbs. Often couples with a home like that have a room or two full of junk and unused workout equipment or a moth-balled guest room. What a waste of space and energy! Not to mention the extra gas and time used every day to drive a bit further out to where they could afford that extra room or two they never use.
Logged
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 7284



« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2015, 11:35:11 am »

That sounds a bit condescending. Any major urban area in the country has efficiency apartments this size and smaller. Plenty of people love the option of less space in order to be in a higher demand area.

Why do so many people think they need huge homes full of massive ugly furniture adding to urban sprawl? That is the opposite of what most on this forum are advocating. Very few people use their space well around here and don't seem to realize how ugly and cluttered their houses are.

Not condescending at all, just something I noticed. With today's open floor plans a 400-500 square ft living area is going to basically be standard for every home built with more than say 2,000 square feet for the last 20 years. It's not that big a deal or unusual. And the large majority of houses built in the last 20 years are going be above 2000 square feet. I think the average now is 2700-2800 square feet.

Logged
heironymouspasparagus
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11111



« Reply #38 on: July 31, 2015, 01:59:12 pm »

How many people are in that 1,200 sq ft house?  For a single, or couple with no kids, an efficiency apt or 1000 sq ft house might work, but it would still be tight.  Throw in a couple of kids and it would be very tough to make something that small work comfortably.  If I recall,  in the book "The Not So Big House", once you get under 1,700 sq ft it gets tough to be comfortable for a family. 

 


I guess it just depends on what you are brainwashed into believing is "comfortable".  1,200 ft, 3 bed, two bath house is a lot of space - especially if one can find a designer that actually designs rather than just fills volume.

A lot of houses in town are much smaller than that 2,500 ft "minimum required" space and people do just fine with it.  You really don't need all that...nor the stuff that goes with it.

Logged

“When you wage war on the public schools, you're attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You're not a conservative, you're a vandal.”    - Garrison Keillor

Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.

What you do speaks so loud, I cannot hear what you say.
rebound
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 694


WWW
« Reply #39 on: July 31, 2015, 02:51:24 pm »

I guess it just depends on what you are brainwashed into believing is "comfortable".  1,200 ft, 3 bed, two bath house is a lot of space - especially if one can find a designer that actually designs rather than just fills volume.

A lot of houses in town are much smaller than that 2,500 ft "minimum required" space and people do just fine with it.  You really don't need all that...nor the stuff that goes with it.

I wrote my earlier post just before heading out to run an errand, and was pondering the whole thing while driving.  Obviously, efficiency apartments and small condos, etc, are great and I do think we need more of them, especially in the downtown area as that will tend (I think) to lend itself to younger and older ends of the housing spectrum, with no/few kids, etc.

Just to clarify, I'm pretty sure I mentioned 1700 sq ft, not 2500, but I haven't read that book in 15 years and so can't remember exactly what number it uses.  But I do remember that our first house when were just married was just east of Love Field in Dallas, built in the early '40s in an area originally developed for airport workers.  It was originally about 1000 sq ft, and somewhere along the line somebody added a master bed and bath and so it was officially three bedroom, two bath, one car garage.  One living area, one dining, and small kitchen with really no place to sit down and eat in the kitchen.  It was "clean" in the sense that there was no wasted space, quite a few built-ins, and was really very comfortable for the two of us.  It was still good with the first kid, but after the second came along a couple of years later, it was just too small.  Plus, both my wife and I worked from home (still do when we aren't traveling), and we really needed the two extra dedicated work areas/rooms.

So first we moved to the Dallas suburbs, with a pool and not much yard.  And I have to say that while I really liked the house itself there, the whole area lacked any amount of soul and I couldn't stand it.  So then we moved up here and through the "big house on an acre lot" phase for a few years and that was pretty fun for a while, and now are down in mid-town, at a house that is somewhere between the two extremes, with a much (MUCH, thank goodness...) smaller yard.  And when the kids are gone in 4-5 years we'll move again, probably back down to something like what we started with, if not a little smaller.  So it's all cycle, and I think it will benefit Tulsa to have affordable and available housing for all those options as people make their way along life's path.
 
Logged

 
heironymouspasparagus
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11111



« Reply #40 on: August 03, 2015, 10:59:20 am »

I wrote my earlier post just before heading out to run an errand, and was pondering the whole thing while driving.  Obviously, efficiency apartments and small condos, etc, are great and I do think we need more of them, especially in the downtown area as that will tend (I think) to lend itself to younger and older ends of the housing spectrum, with no/few kids, etc.

Just to clarify, I'm pretty sure I mentioned 1700 sq ft, not 2500, but I haven't read that book in 15 years and so can't remember exactly what number it uses.  But I do remember that our first house when were just married was just east of Love Field in Dallas, built in the early '40s in an area originally developed for airport workers.  It was originally about 1000 sq ft, and somewhere along the line somebody added a master bed and bath and so it was officially three bedroom, two bath, one car garage.  One living area, one dining, and small kitchen with really no place to sit down and eat in the kitchen.  It was "clean" in the sense that there was no wasted space, quite a few built-ins, and was really very comfortable for the two of us.  It was still good with the first kid, but after the second came along a couple of years later, it was just too small.  Plus, both my wife and I worked from home (still do when we aren't traveling), and we really needed the two extra dedicated work areas/rooms.

So first we moved to the Dallas suburbs, with a pool and not much yard.  And I have to say that while I really liked the house itself there, the whole area lacked any amount of soul and I couldn't stand it.  So then we moved up here and through the "big house on an acre lot" phase for a few years and that was pretty fun for a while, and now are down in mid-town, at a house that is somewhere between the two extremes, with a much (MUCH, thank goodness...) smaller yard.  And when the kids are gone in 4-5 years we'll move again, probably back down to something like what we started with, if not a little smaller.  So it's all cycle, and I think it will benefit Tulsa to have affordable and available housing for all those options as people make their way along life's path.
 


We have lived in a little 1,050 sq ft "shack" the whole time raising 4 kids, an assortment of grandkids, and even the occasional great grand.  Luckily, except for a missing second bathroom, much of the 3 bedroom layout is decent enough to facilitate easy movement and partitioning of areas well enough to work.  Bunk beds for two or more similar kids works well.  Sometimes it would be nice to be not quite so cozy, but that is what outdoors is for!  Also, the place is "gathering central" for all the family holiday dinners and events.  Average around 15 to 20 show up for these things (Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc) but have had as many as 37 one time.  And that event actually had more attendees, but some left, some arrived through the day....  And this house is bigger than the one we moved from with the herd!

Am currently planning to build something new.  If I can get the design right - which I can - it will be 2 bed, at LEAST 2 bath, living area - possibly combined with dining, and a kitchen "to die for".  Under 1,000 sq ft. (targeting 850 sq ft, just because...)  Not gonna spend as much time as have in the past on maintenance and housekeeping!!    I bet there is NO addition in Tulsa or ANY of the surrounding towns that would let me get away with that!!   Going to a place that doesn't even require building permits!!  Gotta love that!!

We will be working from home, but I am going to built an office/shop building separate from the house - it may be almost as big as the house!  I need small office and electronics lab space, SWMBO needs floral design space.

There is a LOT to be said for the smaller space for raising kids.  It's what all my family's families did until my generation - then a couple of them got the McMansion habit started for their branches, and their kids and grands have turned out to be a real mess for the most part.  Staying crowded makes it easier to keep an eye on the kids!  Yeah, they whine and moan and groan cause their friends all have their own "suites" - tough!!  Get over it!

And I never allowed a video game in the house!  Ever!


I did think about adding a master suite - with that second bathroom! - but the lot is too small for all the gardening SWMBO wants to do, so that was and is the priority.  Suits me - mowing the tiny patch of grass takes about 20 minutes, front AND back!!  Weed eating can take another 20 or so if I mess with it, but most the time, it's no big deal - the mower edges well enough.  Don't really mind that, so will leave it alone.

« Last Edit: August 03, 2015, 11:01:14 am by heironymouspasparagus » Logged

“When you wage war on the public schools, you're attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You're not a conservative, you're a vandal.”    - Garrison Keillor

Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.

What you do speaks so loud, I cannot hear what you say.
cannon_fodder
All around good guy.
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9159



« Reply #41 on: August 04, 2015, 09:21:30 am »

I live in 1100 square feet with one bathroom. My wife, myself, a teenage son, and 3 large dogs. I cook a lot. I entertain a lot. I have a smalls table of bicycles I keep in the house.

It is in a diverse neighborhood (some sketchy, some nice) with high walk ability (restaurants, pet stores, grocery stores, liquor stores, banks, barbers, churches, parks, general stores, office store, bike store, bars... all within ~10 blocks). I paid less than $100k and have added new ceilings, floors, fences, a ~600 sq foot deck, hot tub, siding, and roof.  It is by no means fancy, but my mortgage and insurance is well under $1k on a 15 year note.

If the house had a basement to put the bikes, furnace, hot water heater, washer/dryer, and storage space - it would be perfect. As it stands, it is a bit crowded but perfectly doable.

But I hear from peers that they "need" 1,000 square feet for each person in the household. I totally understanding WANTING more room. But we confuse need with want. I'm not willing to trade location, walk ability, and an interesting neighborhood for more space. And I'm not willing to spend $300-400k to get more space and keep a location I like.

These lofts provide a neat neighborhood (they are essentially creating a neighborhood) in a good location. The amount of space for a single person or a young couple is secondary.
Logged

- - - - - - - - -
I crush grooves.
heironymouspasparagus
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11111



« Reply #42 on: August 04, 2015, 05:41:18 pm »

I live in 1100 square feet with one bathroom. My wife, myself, a teenage son, and 3 large dogs. I cook a lot. I entertain a lot. I have a smalls table of bicycles I keep in the house.

It is in a diverse neighborhood (some sketchy, some nice) with high walk ability (restaurants, pet stores, grocery stores, liquor stores, banks, barbers, churches, parks, general stores, office store, bike store, bars... all within ~10 blocks). I paid less than $100k and have added new ceilings, floors, fences, a ~600 sq foot deck, hot tub, siding, and roof.  It is by no means fancy, but my mortgage and insurance is well under $1k on a 15 year note.

If the house had a basement to put the bikes, furnace, hot water heater, washer/dryer, and storage space - it would be perfect. As it stands, it is a bit crowded but perfectly doable.

But I hear from peers that they "need" 1,000 square feet for each person in the household. I totally understanding WANTING more room. But we confuse need with want. I'm not willing to trade location, walk ability, and an interesting neighborhood for more space. And I'm not willing to spend $300-400k to get more space and keep a location I like.

These lofts provide a neat neighborhood (they are essentially creating a neighborhood) in a good location. The amount of space for a single person or a young couple is secondary.


Sounds like Brookside area...

I built a small shed in the backyard for garden tools (10 x 16) and then figured out I could insulate it, put in electricity and have the lab space, plus floral design area.  If you neighborhood IS that sketchy, you could do 10 x 12 probably without even a permit...seems like I remember that is the largest the city allows... Then all ya gotta worry about is an HOA!  I would never live in a neighborhood that has one of those!  Makes it too boring.

Maybe you could build a small "basement" at back of house for all that stuff, then use as storm shelter, too.  Not sure about Tulsa, but the new place exempts storm shelter space from property tax.  I told them my storm shelter would be almost 1,000 sq ft (new house)....  It got a chuckle!

Logged

“When you wage war on the public schools, you're attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You're not a conservative, you're a vandal.”    - Garrison Keillor

Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.

What you do speaks so loud, I cannot hear what you say.
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
  Hosted by TulsaConnect and Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
 

Mission

 

"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa become the most vibrant, diverse, sustainable and prosperous city of our size. We achieve this by focusing on the development of Tulsa's distinctive identity and economic growth around a dynamic, urban core, complemented by a constellation of livable, thriving communities."
more...

 

Contact

 

2210 S Main St.
Tulsa, OK 74114
(918) 409-2669
info@tulsanow.org