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 22, 2017, 03:24:18 am
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 73   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Downtown Development Overview  (Read 136339 times)
Tulsasaurus Rex
Civic Leader
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 288


« Reply #765 on: August 26, 2016, 07:58:23 am »

Quote
In Indianapolis, they developed a Marsh supermarket on the bottom of hundreds of apartments.

So why are they, here, building the one story Reasor's off to the side? Slide that under the apartment building, make it 13 floors, and still keep that half of the block available for something else.
Logged
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602



« Reply #766 on: August 26, 2016, 08:05:28 am »

Lol, that'll be the day.

If they haven't broken ground on Santa Fe square by this time next year, that will look pretty bad on their part. They have the TIF. Yes, it is a huge complicated project, but they should plan to at least start one of the buildings by then at least for perception of their competence and perceived demand for that much new space. If they still haven't started by then, that would make me think that they don't think it will be leased/profitable any time soon. Similar to the delay on building "The View" until the Edge is ~80% leased (And it still hasn't started).

It seems some of these downtown projects have slowed or been put on the back burner. Probably oil & gas downturn is to blame (and potential Williams merger), but it has been down for 2 years now and if that industry comes back to life in a couple years, building now will put those companies in prime position to profit from all of the new demand to come. Additionally, the overall US economy is still good and the demand for urban life is increasing rapidly across the US and Tulsa is still far far behind in downtown housing options.
Logged
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602



« Reply #767 on: August 26, 2016, 08:30:57 am »

So why are they, here, building the one story Reasor's off to the side? Slide that under the apartment building, make it 13 floors, and still keep that half of the block available for something else.

It looks like in part, it is because the parking garage takes up the entire "1st floor" at the reasors elevation (as shown in photo of presentation slideshow). Looks like there will be retail on 2nd street under the parking garage (or or the parking garage ends before then).

Mostly, I am guessing it is the economics of it. They want to make it mixed use, with a parking garage and retail, but the cost of making the Reasors part more than 2 stories and having the 12-story tower probably exceeds the budget the Tulsa PAC wanted.

Which would you rather have: 6-story building around the whole block or 12-story for half and 2 story for the other half? It was probably more economical to design it like this, where the steel high-rise structure is limited to less than half the block as opposed to a steel structure for the entire block that is half as tall.
Logged
Vision 2025
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 767


WWW
« Reply #768 on: August 26, 2016, 09:00:25 am »

So why are they, here, building the one story Reasor's off to the side? Slide that under the apartment building, make it 13 floors, and still keep that half of the block available for something else.
My guess would be that this is driven by mechanical load issues, since grocery stores require HUGE amounts of cooling for the store and the plethora of refrigerators and freezers that roof top cooling is viewed as the efficient way.
Logged

Vision 2025 Program Director - know the facts, www.Vision2025.info
SXSW
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3416


WWW
« Reply #769 on: August 26, 2016, 09:42:02 am »

My guess would be that this is driven by mechanical load issues, since grocery stores require HUGE amounts of cooling for the store and the plethora of refrigerators and freezers that roof top cooling is viewed as the efficient way.

It would be awesome to see some kind of green roof on top of Reasor's. 

I think they consider the Brookside location their "flagship" store.  I wonder if this takes that title when it's finished.  If done right it can be a true downtown destination like the Whole Foods in downtown Austin or Cosentino's in downtown KC.

Cosentino's in KC
Logged

 
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602



« Reply #770 on: August 26, 2016, 09:55:26 am »

An as an update on what I would call "affordable" downtown housing you can buy, Urban 8 are still listed at $580k-$690k. The Davenport Lofts are now listed on the MLS from $525k to $868. i.e. not even close to affordable for ~95% of people. According to zillow, if you have basically zero other debts, you can afford a $580k place if you make $150k/yr. Realistically, you probably need to be making $230+ to afford that. That is the top 5% of income earners and cuts out most young professionals, even with both spouses working relatively lucrative jobs, and that's at the low end of the listings!

I know wealthy retirees and upper class is what they are aiming for but do you think many in that category will be ok with the downsides of living in these areas? Late-night bar crowd, concerts and noise, homeless, living in multi-unit places, extremely tough to resell, parking is tough for friends/parties, not the best environment for children, no yard, neighboring buildings that can see in (The Edge), both places still feel a bit dark/creepy at night (especially for old/wealthy people with misconceptions of scary downtown).

Urban 8:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/613-E-3rd-St-Tulsa-OK-74120/2098764906_zpid/
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/605-E-3rd-St-Tulsa-OK-74120/2098764905_zpid/

Davenport:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/405-N-Main-St-5B-Tulsa-OK-74103/2097466338_zpid/
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/405-N-Main-St-5D-Tulsa-OK-74103/2097469187_zpid/

Check out this 2154 sqare foot place which sold for $300k recently right off of Cherry St which has much higher walkability ratings than downtown:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1405-S-Quincy-Ave-Tulsa-OK-74120/22102120_zpid/

Another one by there that is much nicer with 2000 sq feet and garage apartment just for $400k after being up for a couple days:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1411-S-Rockford-Ave-Tulsa-OK-74120/89358526_zpid/

Either of these is better urban living now and at a price point the downtown condos can't compete with and these are both better at just about every disadvantage I listed above (private parking garage with 3+ spaces, quiet, private, more established resale market, great yards). If I was looking to buy something like that, I would look at walk ability scores and overall amenities nearby along with what you get for the price. Cherry St is rated much better right now and more consistently lively overall. Downtown to cherry st is the minimum cab fare (~$3.5-$5), will be connected via rapid transit and only a few minute drive or 10-minute bike ride.

If I were buying urban now, I would be happier living in Cherry St a couple years and moving to downtown after a lot of the big items are completed and the urban 8s are being foreclosed on. Seriously though, downtown has a major shortage of affordable condos in the $100-$350k range (there are zero in the IDL besides Central Park condos which are bad). Why can't any developer build a condo building with housing people working normal great jobs can afford to buy? There would certainly be a market for that.

If you developed a 100-unit place at an average of $200k/listing and at a price of $150/ft2, you could have each unit average 1,333 ft2 (3  bed/2  bath). That would be a much more reasonable price point and amount of space, even $200/ft2 and you'd have 1000ft2 places which is absolutely doable for many young professionals wanting to live in an urban area (2 bed/1 bath) along with retirees wanting to live a simple urban life. Davenport is charging $336-$380/ft2 (ridiculous!). Urban 8 is about $215/ft2.

Does anyone know why no one has plans for affordable condos downtown? Seems like an untapped niche market.
Logged
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602



« Reply #771 on: August 26, 2016, 09:58:40 am »

It would be awesome to see some kind of green roof on top of Reasor's. 


The plans show rooftop patios over Reasors. Although those might be for restaurants. Would be cool if you could get a quick lunch at Reasors deli and eat on the roof. Would be pretty unique for downtown (Lots of quick ready takeout options and a roof terrace).
Logged
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602



« Reply #772 on: August 26, 2016, 10:18:55 am »


Davenport:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/405-N-Main-St-5B-Tulsa-OK-74103/2097466338_zpid/
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/405-N-Main-St-5D-Tulsa-OK-74103/2097469187_zpid/

If you developed a 100-unit place at an average of $200k/listing and at a price of $150/ft2, you could have each unit average 1,333 ft2 (3  bed/2  bath). That would be a much more reasonable price point and amount of space, even $200/ft2 and you'd have 1000ft2 places which is absolutely doable for many young professionals wanting to live in an urban area (2 bed/1 bath) along with retirees wanting to live a simple urban life. Davenport is charging $336-$380/ft2 (ridiculous!). Urban 8 is about $215/ft2.


Davenport has all the prices and availability listed (note the sq footage includes balconies):
http://davenportlofts.com/index.php/availability

That is 24 units at a total price of $17 million for 48,000 square feet of living space (including balconies but excluding retail space and parking/common areas). Obviously the parking garage is very expensive and adds a lot of cost. Also, common areas and a rooftop terrace are expensive, especially when divided by just 24 units.

Only 7 are reserved after marketing for for well over a year with a dedicated sales office. They were originally going to be $400k+ but they changed it up to $525k+, going the wrong direction to appease a richer clientele. Doesn't seem to have worked for them thus far. I bet the rent on that office is pricey!

I was hopeful for this place despite the proximity to music venues, but this is frustrating to see. Even with midtown property demand strong, reaching new highs all the time  (largely with people wanting to be closer to downtown/urban areas), they can't get a clue on designing a marketable condo that people can/will actually buy.
Logged
SXSW
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3416


WWW
« Reply #773 on: August 26, 2016, 10:50:24 am »

The plans show rooftop patios over Reasors. Although those might be for restaurants. Would be cool if you could get a quick lunch at Reasors deli and eat on the roof. Would be pretty unique for downtown (Lots of quick ready takeout options and a roof terrace).

Green roof and outdoor patio for an in-store cafe would be awesome.  The view will be great up there.
Logged

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

Posts: 11117



« Reply #774 on: August 26, 2016, 10:51:53 am »

My guess would be that this is driven by mechanical load issues, since grocery stores require HUGE amounts of cooling for the store and the plethora of refrigerators and freezers that roof top cooling is viewed as the efficient way.


Another approach is to have dedicated mechanical equipment floors.  Probably not so great for only 12 or 13 floors, but works well for space constrained places.  Even 13 floors makes the rooftop stuff nonviable for the grocery.  

Maybe they could use a corner of the store...but then they have to do something with all that air flow going in/out of the place.  And chillers are painful for that size installation....
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.
johrasephoenix
Guest
« Reply #775 on: August 26, 2016, 11:55:38 am »

It does indeed suck.  I really want to live downtown when I get back to Tulsa but it's hard to justify paying 200% - 300% of the rent if you live just a few blocks outside the IDL.

It's just hard to build new, mid-priced construction without it looking cheap/crappy, especially in an urban setting (that's why most new mid-priced condos/apartments are that garden cheap construction stuff).  Also, existing downtown landowners sell land to developers priced for highest and best use.  The guys who own the vacant land are selling it priced for a luxury condo tower to go on top.  It's why so much land remains undeveloped despite huge demand for downtown living.  I've seen some cities like Atlanta intentionally downzone entire core districts like Midtown to reduce the value of land so landowners will actually sell to developers, instead of all of them holding out for the next Williams Tower.  

In just about every city your mid-priced urban core apartments are formerly expensive apartments that got old and worn down.  In 30 years all today's expensive places will be tomorrow's mid-priced places.  Unfortunately, downtown Tulsa has almost no old apartment buildings still standing in the cool/sweet/awesome parts of downtown in the CBD/Blue Dome/Brady.

I know Urban 8 is seriously struggling but I suspect in 2030 we'll be kicking ourselves for not getting in on the ground floor (it's a shame they're so ugly because the location is incredible).  That area could be completely transformed 10-20 years from now and you would have a no-sh*t single family house right in the middle of apartment towers and nightlife.  It would be incredible.  
Logged
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10232


WWW
« Reply #776 on: August 26, 2016, 07:03:03 pm »

In just about every city your mid-priced urban core apartments are formerly expensive apartments that got old and worn down.  In 30 years all today's expensive places will be tomorrow's mid-priced places.  Unfortunately, downtown Tulsa has almost no old apartment buildings still standing in the cool/sweet/awesome parts of downtown in the CBD/Blue Dome/Brady.

I do believe you have figured it out.

High property values, high taxes and building costs make building new "affordable" places with all the goodies a bit of an oxymoron.
Logged

 
TheArtist
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6593



WWW
« Reply #777 on: August 27, 2016, 07:30:16 am »

It does indeed suck.  I really want to live downtown when I get back to Tulsa but it's hard to justify paying 200% - 300% of the rent if you live just a few blocks outside the IDL.

It's just hard to build new, mid-priced construction without it looking cheap/crappy, especially in an urban setting (that's why most new mid-priced condos/apartments are that garden cheap construction stuff).  Also, existing downtown landowners sell land to developers priced for highest and best use.  The guys who own the vacant land are selling it priced for a luxury condo tower to go on top.  It's why so much land remains undeveloped despite huge demand for downtown living.  I've seen some cities like Atlanta intentionally downzone entire core districts like Midtown to reduce the value of land so landowners will actually sell to developers, instead of all of them holding out for the next Williams Tower.  

In just about every city your mid-priced urban core apartments are formerly expensive apartments that got old and worn down.  In 30 years all today's expensive places will be tomorrow's mid-priced places.  Unfortunately, downtown Tulsa has almost no old apartment buildings still standing in the cool/sweet/awesome parts of downtown in the CBD/Blue Dome/Brady.

I know Urban 8 is seriously struggling but I suspect in 2030 we'll be kicking ourselves for not getting in on the ground floor (it's a shame they're so ugly because the location is incredible).  That area could be completely transformed 10-20 years from now and you would have a no-sh*t single family house right in the middle of apartment towers and nightlife.  It would be incredible.  

Actually I think the location is part of the problem.  With no zoning to speak of downtown you have no idea whats going to go in across from you.  Just look at what is nearby Urban 8 and you see parking garages, blank walls, ugly.  (it is interesting to note that on their website they say the design fits the character of the neighborhood)  Who wants to invest in a home only to risk stepping outside one day and your view be an ugly wall or parking garage? And the guy who fought hardest against having pedestrian/transit friendly zoning is the one who built Urban 8.   
Logged

"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h
cannon_fodder
All around good guy.
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9160



« Reply #778 on: August 29, 2016, 07:27:27 am »

I do believe you have figured it out.

High property values, high taxes and building costs make building new "affordable" places with all the goodies a bit of an oxymoron.

The mil rate for an apartment complex downtown is often lower than for apartments out south. But the cost is so much higher they pay nearly twice as much per square foot in taxes. But that's like complaining about the cost of midtown, it isn't the taxes that make it more expensive.

A good comparison:

GreenArch: 1 acre, 80K square feet of building, valued at $7.7mil, taxes $7,115, goes up to $21k when abatements run out. 64 units + 6 commercial spaces.
http://www.assessor.tulsacounty.org/assessor-property.php?account=R00500920131010&return=close

Springs at Woodland South (~75th and Mingo): 19.3 acres, 286k square feet ofbuilding, valued at $9.2mil, taxes $45k, goes up to $138k when abatements run out.  288 units.
http://www.assessor.tulsacounty.org/assessor-property.php?account=R77140840728730&return=close
Logged

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

Posts: 7285



« Reply #779 on: August 29, 2016, 09:44:18 am »

The mil rate for an apartment complex downtown is often lower than for apartments out south. But the cost is so much higher they pay nearly twice as much per square foot in taxes. But that's like complaining about the cost of midtown, it isn't the taxes that make it more expensive.

A good comparison:

GreenArch: 1 acre, 80K square feet of building, valued at $7.7mil, taxes $7,115, goes up to $21k when abatements run out. 64 units + 6 commercial spaces.
http://www.assessor.tulsacounty.org/assessor-property.php?account=R00500920131010&return=close

Springs at Woodland South (~75th and Mingo): 19.3 acres, 286k square feet ofbuilding, valued at $9.2mil, taxes $45k, goes up to $138k when abatements run out.  288 units.
http://www.assessor.tulsacounty.org/assessor-property.php?account=R77140840728730&return=close

Why is there a tax abatement for an apartment complex at 75th and Mingo?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 73   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