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 19, 2017, 12:48:00 am
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Jackson Technical HQ  (Read 7575 times)
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 7284



« Reply #45 on: June 30, 2016, 08:31:14 am »

Push the Planning Commission?  How so?

The Jackson Technical architect/project manager is a planning commissioner.

Seriously?

That is way too frustrating.
Logged
dsjeffries
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2300



WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 30, 2016, 09:40:29 am »

Seriously?

That is way too frustrating.

Yes, but I don't think it matters - in Tim's post, he said the decision was not unanimous and that in the end, Tim made the call to put the building where it is. My guess is that Ted, who really understands all these concepts, tried to persuade Jackson Technical to move the building up to the sidewalk, and lost.

In Tim's post, he called bringing the building up to the sidewalk a subjective decision. Thing is, it's not.
It is objectively true that setbacks in urban settings reduce walkability.
It is objectively true that driveways increase danger to all users of sidewalks.
It is objectively true that parking lots devalue the land and buildings around them.
It is objectively true that form and placement affect activity.
It is objectively true that shared parking is an option available to all property owners in Tulsa.
It is objectively true that Jackson Technical could make a shared parking agreement with the owners of any of the dozens of parking lots that abut and surround this property.
It is objectively true that this business has succeeded in downtown for years without its own dedicated surface parking lot.
It is objectively true that this building is located within a 5 minute walk of more than 1,700 parking spaces.
It is objectively true that the same number of parking spaces would be available if parking was placed behind the new building.
It is objectively true that there are tens of thousands of available parking spaces downtown.
It is objectively true that downtown is different than the suburbs.
It is objectively true that Jackson Technical has the right to do whatever they want on this property.
But it is also objectively true that this building is a bad fit, does not contribute in any way to the (developing) urban fabric, will hurt the (developing) neighborhood more than it helps, will reduce walkability, and will serve as an example of what not to do. It very well may be the thing that finally gets downtown the overlay it needs and deserves.

Whether Jackson Technical believes it or not, there's more science to walkable urbanism than just warm fuzzy feelings and pie-in-the-sky ideals. And honestly, it's not that hard to get it right.
Logged

Change never happened because people were happy with the status quo.
BKDotCom
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2281



WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 30, 2016, 09:53:00 am »

It is objectively true that...

It is objectively true that all the things you mentioned are true for downtown as a whole.    But what about from a Jackson Technical centered perspective?  How does walkability help his business?

Why should I get my child vaccinated if everyone else gets their child vaccinated?

Quote
It is objectively true that this building is located within a 5 minute walk of more than 1,700 parking spaces.

How many of those spaces are available for an hour or less?   vs all-day / require a permit?

« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 10:06:56 am by BKDotCom » Logged
Bamboo World
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


« Reply #48 on: June 30, 2016, 11:16:25 am »


It is objectively true that this building is located within a 5 minute walk of more than 1,700 parking spaces.



How many of those spaces are available for an hour or less?   vs all-day / require a permit?


The answer, of course, depends on how far one can walk within 5 minutes.  With curb cuts and driveways every 50 feet*, trying to amble along public sidewalks (subject to vehicular traffic crossing them) can be perilous and especially slow for even the most able-bodied, mixed-multi-modal-traffic-savvy, and long-legged pedestrians... a precise number of parking spaces is difficult to determine.

The exact quantity of parking spots available is, therefore, subjective.

*A spacing of 50 feet was used merely as an broad brush illustrative example.  Driveway width, as well as whether driveway traffic across a sidewalk is free to flow in both directions or only one; time of day; weather conditions; pavement cross slopes; street closings; special events; construction areas; artificial and natural lighting conditions; the possibility of barbershop quartets or demonstrators blocking free passage of normally free and open pedestrian paths; the purpose and nature of any such demonstrations, protests, or quasi-organized congregations; the quantity and various locations of true brick and brick-like concrete unit pavers missing from crosswalks**; the presence or absence of street trees, along with species, season of the year, the sex of all dioecious specimens; along with many, MANY other variables must be factored into a true, objective calculation.

**This particular variable (because it is so variable at any given moment within a typical 5 minute period in downtown Tulsa) makes a true, objective calculation of parking spaces nearly impossible.
Logged
dsjeffries
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2300



WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 30, 2016, 11:33:40 am »

The answer, of course, depends on how far one can walk within 5 minutes.  With curb cuts and driveways every 50 feet*, trying to amble along public sidewalks (subject to vehicular traffic crossing them) can be perilous and especially slow for even the most able-bodied, mixed-multi-modal-traffic-savvy, and long-legged pedestrians... a precise number of parking spaces is difficult to determine.

The exact quantity of parking spots available is, therefore, subjective.

**This particular variable (because it is so variable at any given moment within a typical 5 minute period in downtown Tulsa) makes a true, objective calculation of parking spaces nearly impossible.

A 5-minute walk is a standard measurement, defined generally as 1/4 mile based on average human walking speeds of around 3 miles per hour. 1,700 parking spaces isn't subjective. You can count the spaces.
Logged

Change never happened because people were happy with the status quo.
dsjeffries
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2300



WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 30, 2016, 11:51:39 am »

It is objectively true that all the things you mentioned are true for downtown as a whole.    But what about from a Jackson Technical centered perspective?  How does walkability help his business?

Bringing the building to the sidewalk helps the business by increasing the value of its largest assets (the building and the lot it sits on) (walkability increases property values). Bringing the building to the sidewalk provides safer access to their business. Bringing the building to the sidewalk would make the building and the business more visible from all users of sidewalks and the street. Placing the building next the sidewalk also means that when a building is constructed across the street, there's a better chance of this building being protected from the heat of the western sun. Since this is a mostly glass building, bringing it to the sidewalk could save the business thousands of dollars a year in utility charges, especially if it contains servers and other computer components that require consistent temperature control.

Quote
How many of those spaces are available for an hour or less?   vs all-day / require a permit?

As mentioned above, businesses have the ability to work out shared parking agreements, and lots of companies already do this. Even then, moving the building to street would not reduce the number of parking spaces they could build. They would just be behind the building instead of in front.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 11:53:54 am by dsjeffries » Logged

Change never happened because people were happy with the status quo.
PonderInc
City Dweller
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2459


« Reply #51 on: June 30, 2016, 11:51:54 am »

I think Ewing has pushed really hard for it but the property owners and developers are strongly pushing back (big surprise).  I don't know what the solution is if the requisite amount of property owners won't agree.  Change the law or push the planning commission and city hall to reject proposals that don't fit what an overlay would entail.  I don't think either is very likely to be honest.  We just have to hope that people developing the surrounding area do it organically without needing a law or planning commission to require them to do things right.
What's interesting about the downtown overlay debate (during the zoning code update) was that the main opponent to it was Chris Bumgarner.  In typical fashion, he bullied a lot of people to vote his way, without actually understanding what it is that he was opposing.  (Mostly, he was fighting for his "god given property rights" to do whatever dumbass thing he wants to do.  Hey, great job with those "aparkments" over by the west garage!  Got any buyers yet?) By his habitual method of alternating misinformation with intimidation, he was able to get some folks to oppose the overlay, including the DCC.  

Most of the TMAPC (aside from Ted) are so inadequately educated / equipped to consider actual urban planning issues, they just went along with the tactics of Bumgarner and Joe Westervelt. So it was the blind leading the blind. The debate was hilarious as some of the most outspoken commissioners failed to grasp that an overlay can only be initiated by the property owners or the city council.  (This after multiple meetings with staff that clearly explained how this works.) And they continued to fear that someone would tell them what color paint to use on their shutters.  So sad.

Oh, one of Bumgarner's other arguments was that property owners downtown don't need an overlay: they will do everything right because it's in their best interests.  Yeah.  How's that working out so far? Some folks just need a handful of simple guidelines so they don't make ridiculous mistakes. Downtown definitely needs the option of an urban overlay.  And after the DCC works with Jeff Speck, they will agree.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 11:53:26 am by PonderInc » Logged
Bamboo World
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


« Reply #52 on: June 30, 2016, 07:30:06 pm »


Downtown definitely needs the option of an urban overlay.  And after the DCC works with Jeff Speck, they will agree.


Perhaps the DCC with agree with Jeff Speck's recommendations, perhaps...

But for many years, some Tulsans have been pushing for the same things Jeff Speck advocates.  I think you mentioned in another post that we could save the City $70,000  -- and gave a short list of suggestions.  But if Jeff Speck or whoever else comes up with the same basic pointers and techniques, will the City Council ever put them into action?  We'll see.

Councilor Bynumm [sic] might actually put some suggestions into action.  We'll see.  I'm somewhat hopeful of the promise of his leadership.

But when he leaves the Council, what happens with the direction of the Council itself?  The Council amends the zoning code text and map, not the Mayor's Office, not the DCC, not the TMAPC.

I admire your stamina, PonderInc.  But I'm being worn down by the anti-urban, car-centric attitudes.  I remember sitting next to you during a City Council meeting, listening to Tulsans talk at length about some of the same things that Jeff Speck writes about, talks about, and recommends.  Then, I remember the councilors talking at length, also:  tales of harlots and babies being chopped in half; Councilor Bynumm's [sic] mocking remarks about his own personal appearance; questions about conflicts of interest, business and personal connections, ethics, and the obligation of recusal; etc.  And then I remember the vote.

We'll see.

And I agree with you -- that it is hard to fathom an urban, walkable environment along Elgin Avenue right now.  But at one time, Elgin was lined with trees, houses, apartments, and commercial buildings.  In the middle of Elgin, streetcars carried passengers from the downtown core to the fairgrounds.  There were pedestrians and cyclists, for sure.  There might have been some decorative acorn lights, too.

Elgin had all those things in the past, and more.  Elgin can have those things again, and more (sans the acorn lights, I hope).  But will it?  And if so, will we be alive to see it happen?

Currently, it is difficult to fathom an urban environment on South Elgin, but as erfalf pointed out, we can walk a few blocks (or drive, if we must  Angry ) and see the relatively fast changes in the Mathew B. Reconciliation Way Arts District.  South Elgin can become an urban, walkable environment.

With the new mayor, I'm confident that there will be some progress.  We'll see.

And finally, although I've been disappointed many times with Mayor Bartlet [sic], appointing Ted Reeds to the Planning Commission is one of best decisions that our current mayor made (or that any mayor could ever make).

Hugs...        


« Last Edit: June 30, 2016, 08:15:18 pm by Bamboo World » Logged
TheArtist
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6593



WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 30, 2016, 08:28:32 pm »

I will try and bring this development up at the DCC as yet another negative example.  I don't think I can do much more than that but say "Look, here is another one!"
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
Bamboo World
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


« Reply #54 on: June 30, 2016, 08:32:07 pm »


I will try and bring this development up at the DCC as yet another negative example.  I don't think I can do much more than that but say "Look, here is another one!"
 

Be ready for an evil eye or two.  Or maybe some hugs.  Who knows?
Logged
MyDogHunts
Activist
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 97


I was once a great beauty !


« Reply #55 on: June 30, 2016, 10:04:09 pm »

Perhaps the DCC with agree with Jeff Speck's recommendations, perhaps...

But for many years, some Tulsans have been pushing for the same things Jeff Speck advocates.  I think you mentioned in another post that we could save the City $70,000  -- and gave a short list of suggestions.  But if Jeff Speck or whoever else comes up with the same basic pointers and techniques, will the City Council ever put them into action?  We'll see.

Councilor Bynumm [sic] might actually put some suggestions into action.  We'll see.  I'm somewhat hopeful of the promise of his leadership.

But when he leaves the Council, what happens with the direction of the Council itself?  The Council amends the zoning code text and map, not the Mayor's Office, not the DCC, not the TMAPC.

I admire your stamina, PonderInc.  But I'm being worn down by the anti-urban, car-centric attitudes.  I remember sitting next to you during a City Council meeting, listening to Tulsans talk at length about some of the same things that Jeff Speck writes about, talks about, and recommends.  Then, I remember the councilors talking at length, also:  tales of harlots and babies being chopped in half; Councilor Bynumm's [sic] mocking remarks about his own personal appearance; questions about conflicts of interest, business and personal connections, ethics, and the obligation of recusal; etc.  And then I remember the vote.

We'll see.

And I agree with you -- that it is hard to fathom an urban, walkable environment along Elgin Avenue right now.  But at one time, Elgin was lined with trees, houses, apartments, and commercial buildings.  In the middle of Elgin, streetcars carried passengers from the downtown core to the fairgrounds.  There were pedestrians and cyclists, for sure.  There might have been some decorative acorn lights, too.

Elgin had all those things in the past, and more.  Elgin can have those things again, and more (sans the acorn lights, I hope).  But will it?  And if so, will we be alive to see it happen?

Currently, it is difficult to fathom an urban environment on South Elgin, but as erfalf pointed out, we can walk a few blocks (or drive, if we must  Angry ) and see the relatively fast changes in the Mathew B. Reconciliation Way Arts District.  South Elgin can become an urban, walkable environment.

With the new mayor, I'm confident that there will be some progress.  We'll see.

And finally, although I've been disappointed many times with Mayor Bartlet [sic], appointing Ted Reeds to the Planning Commission is one of best decisions that our current mayor made (or that any mayor could ever make).

Hugs...        




I took a post graduate Urban Planning class in Stillwater taught by a wonderful Civil Engineering professor.  The thing was, he was a civil engineering prof. & Urban Planning does not fit a pure civil engineering approach; this was in the 80's... I was 30.  If I had a better experience I might have stayed in school and nursed that.

I love downtowns.  I've enjoyed living in the French Quarter more than once; Portland, OR, at the Roosevelt; Houston... sort of, at the Galleria (early 90's); Pittsburgh, near the old stadium; Boston where I worked, but I lived in Wellesley.

Thing is, Urban Renewal chopped down the natural, old growth neighborhood south of downtown.  I came back and saw these parking lots, saw the Phoenix of Tulsa rising in the Arts District, Brady, everywhere... and I imagined the area along Elgin & West becoming a mixed use neighborhood.

That's where I want to live, dine, be entertained.
Logged

Left OK over 40-yrs. ago with Williams Bro. Passing through 4-yrs. ago I saw downtown's potential. I've lived in 200 places & love good citiies.  Tulsa's phoenix rise is reason enough to stick around.  Besides,myou can't fully be an Okie except in Oklahoma.
PonderInc
City Dweller
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2459


« Reply #56 on: July 29, 2016, 12:44:00 pm »

It's hard to tell from this pic, but the building is definitely going to be set back from the street.  There's a lot of room in front of the big dig.

Logged
johrasephoenix
Guest
« Reply #57 on: July 29, 2016, 12:58:54 pm »

I always just want to point to the Trader Joe's on Brookside.  They are a grocery store that lives and dies by automobile traffic with thousands of people accessing their store by car every week.

The parking lot is behind the building.  It is a great place to walk in front of.  It is also super easy to park - it makes no difference to most people what side of the building the parking lot is on.  Trader Joe's is doing fine and I'm sure making money hand over fist from schmucks like me. 

Same thing with the Fairfield Hotel in the Brady...lots of automobile traffic with the lot tucked behind the building.  Not a problem. 

There are easy fixes that make a building car friendly AND people friendly, especially in a place like Tulsa with cheap land.
Logged
johrasephoenix
Guest
« Reply #58 on: July 29, 2016, 01:02:59 pm »

Also not to keep piling on the hate BUT the architect for this project is the architect for Pizza Hut Wing Street, Wendy's, and FedEx Kinkos.  That should say something.
Logged
Conan71
Recovering Republican
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 28709



« Reply #59 on: July 29, 2016, 01:03:42 pm »

I originally thought there was not good access to the back of that lot, but it does appear there is an alleyway extending north off 7th.  Now if they were concerned about the speed of people firing off the IDL onto 7th and that’s why they put the parking on Elgin, that might be one thing.  There is a restricted right turn onto Frankfurt on 7th as well at least during peak business hours (i.e. forbidden).
Logged

"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first” -Ronald Reagan
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   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