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, 08:09:19 pm
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Neighborhood Conservation Districts - Thoughts?  (Read 21756 times)
Kenosha
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 815


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 29, 2007, 02:13:08 pm »

And who is doing this?
Logged

 
Rico
Guest
« Reply #16 on: November 29, 2007, 05:49:56 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Kenosha

And who is doing this?



I think it may be the "Associated Home Builders of Tulsa".....


[}:)]  Tell me was I close...?
Logged
izmophonik
Guest
« Reply #17 on: November 30, 2007, 04:26:41 pm »

You need to talk to the Tulsa Preservation Commission.  They regulate these kinds of building issues for 5 neighborhoods currently.  Unfortunately, if your neighborhood isn't old then you'll likely have a tough time trying to legislate 'decent' home design.

Brady Heights
Gilette
North Maple Ridge
Swan Lake
Yorktown

http://tulsapreservationcommission.org
Logged
izmophonik
Guest
« Reply #18 on: November 30, 2007, 04:49:34 pm »

Exerpt from the TPC site:

HP Zoned Neighborhoods
 Did you know that Tulsa neighborhoods are given HP Zoning only at the request of the neighborhood residents?

To date, five historic Tulsa neighborhoods have requested historic preservation zoning. The process includes a great deal of citizen involvement — the neighborhood residents themselves develop the design guidelines that the TPC uses to make decisions within their particular neighborhood. Guidelines are written with the help of the TPC and adopted by the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and Tulsa City Council.

The following neighborhoods have requested and received Historic Preservation Zoning, which was approved by the Mayor of Tulsa on the date listed:

Brady Heights December 20, 1999
Council Oak Tree Site January 31, 1992
Gillette March 24, 1989
North Maple Ridge April 12, 1993
Swan Lake February 14, 1994
Yorktown August 14, 1995
Logged
Double A
Sofa King Banned
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2718


WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 30, 2007, 08:11:35 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by izmophonik

Exerpt from the TPC site:

HP Zoned Neighborhoods
 Did you know that Tulsa neighborhoods are given HP Zoning only at the request of the neighborhood residents?

To date, five historic Tulsa neighborhoods have requested historic preservation zoning. The process includes a great deal of citizen involvement � the neighborhood residents themselves develop the design guidelines that the TPC uses to make decisions within their particular neighborhood. Guidelines are written with the help of the TPC and adopted by the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and Tulsa City Council.

The following neighborhoods have requested and received Historic Preservation Zoning, which was approved by the Mayor of Tulsa on the date listed:

Brady Heights December 20, 1999
Council Oak Tree Site January 31, 1992
Gillette March 24, 1989
North Maple Ridge April 12, 1993
Swan Lake February 14, 1994
Yorktown August 14, 1995




These are the neighborhoods who saved the goose that laid the golden egg from the slaughter.

It is because of these neighborhoods, we can hold our heads high despite the recent disturbing infill development trends in town, when the National Trust for Historic Preservation holds their upcoming convention in Tulsa. We owe a great debt of gratitude to the wisdom and vision of these neighbors who decided preserving  Tulsa's treasures was worth a small self imposed sacrifice.

Recently our uniqueness has been overshadowed by our inability to preserve what makes us unique, but that has not always been the case. Let's get back to where once belonged, wearing the crown of America's most beautiful city. If it takes a moratorium, or conservation districts to preserve, promote, and protect Tulsa's greatest assets, I welcome them with open arms.
Logged

<center>
</center>
The clash of ideas is the sound of freedom. Ars Longa, Vita Brevis!
si_uk_lon_ok
Guest
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2007, 01:29:06 am »

I think its important to conserve and reuse existing buildings, especially significant buildings, buildings of character and those of historical merit. It makes me mad when I think of what is going on and has gone on in the downtown, the mere mention of the Tulsa Club building, for instance, makes my blood boil. I also think though that many neighborhoods lack density. If people want walkable neighborhoods with local shops, nearby schools and a decent public transport system in many areas with the current density this isn't possible. I'd like to see buildings worth saving saved, either by preserving them or where that isn't possible moving them and sympathetic and well designed developments that add density and provide more homes.

I’m not so pro development I want to see neighborhoods change beyond recognition, but I do thing there is the possibility of good development that benefits the neighborhood. I also think that there is a danger with any form of development control, that the more middle class, political and better mobilized areas always have the ability to block development in their own backyards and push it onto other areas.
Logged
booWorld
Guest
« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2008, 12:32:41 pm »

quote:
Posted January 24, 2008 on BatesLine

Tulsa City Councilor Maria Barnes, who represents an area that could greatly benefit from conservation districts, is hosting a neighborhood leader meeting on the topic on Monday, January 28. It will be held at the Central Community Center in Centennial Park, 1028 E. 6th, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. TMAPC member and Yorktown neighborhood resident Michelle Cantrell, Susan McKee from the Coalition of Historic Neighborhoods, and Steve Novick of Preserve Midtown will be among the speakers. It's a good opportunity to learn about how the concept is used in other cities and how it might be applied in Tulsa.

Logged
booWorld
Guest
« Reply #22 on: January 28, 2008, 08:55:32 pm »

I'm not a neighborhood leader, but I attended tonight's meeting anyway -- to listen.

Some quick impressions:

1.  Conservation Districts (CDs) will work the best in more homogeneous residential areas.

2.  Property owners near the center of CDs will be better protected, in general, than those on the fringe.

3.  CDs will provide an overlay to the underlying zoning regulations.  When the CD requirements are in conflict with the zoning requirements for the district, the CD requirements will govern.

4.  Each CD can establish its own requirements from a "menu" of possible categories, such as setbacks, lot coverage, etc.

District 4 Councilor Maria Barnes is planning another meeting about Conservation Districts in about a month.  I hope there is a better definition of what the "menu" items might be.  As a point of departure, I'm guessing that the menu will allow modification of any of the residential district requirements.
Logged
Floyd
City Barber
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1356



« Reply #23 on: January 28, 2008, 09:02:03 pm »

Thanks for the report.  Any word on a tentative timeline for passage of an ordinance?
Logged
carltonplace
Historic Artifact
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4565



WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 28, 2008, 09:38:49 pm »

I like the idea of CD, but I'm worried that it's one size fits all. A single CD would work great in say Florence Park or White City, but neighborhoods like South Maple Ridge, Swan Lake, Riverview and Brady Heights are already fairly diverse in set backs, hight, and form. The only thing they realy have in common is footprint. In order to regulate appropriate infill in these areas you'd have to break the neighborhood into smaller pieces.

Example, my street is filled with 80 to 98 year old craftsman style homes with front porches and rear separate garage structures. I'd hate to see one torn down to be replaced with a snout house of any style; it simply wouldn't fit. But all around us are plenty of spaces to build either new single family or multi-family homes and I wouldn't want a neighborhood CP to prevent appropriate infill growth in those areas. Move down two streets however and you can see very clearly how infill development can disrupt the charm of a neighborhood with hodge-podge building styles, sizes and uses all on a single block. It feels disjointed. There have to be smart rules in place that give developers an idea or blue print of what fits or belongs in an area. It's not an attempt to dictate taste as much as a tool to ease tension between homeowners (to protect their investment/the place they call home) and builders (make money and avoid contention).
Logged
booWorld
Guest
« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2008, 10:02:46 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Floyd

Thanks for the report.  Any word on a tentative timeline for passage of an ordinance?



I think I heard something about Maria Barnes wanting to propose a revision to the zoning code within six months.  Limiting CDs to residential districts at least initially was mentioned as a way to streamline and speed the process of getting CDs established in Tulsa.
Logged
booWorld
Guest
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2008, 10:48:43 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by carltonplace

I like the idea of CD, but I'm worried that it's one size fits all. A single CD would work great in say Florence Park or White City, but neighborhoods like South Maple Ridge, Swan Lake, Riverview and Brady Heights are already fairly diverse in set backs, hight, and form. The only thing they realy have in common is footprint. In order to regulate appropriate infill in these areas you'd have to break the neighborhood into smaller pieces.



This subject was discussed tonight, and Florence Park was cited as an example where a single homogenous CD would not work because there is variation within the neighborhood.  To me, Florence Park seems very cohesive and homogenous compared to neighborhoods such as Riverview and Forest Orchard, but the representative from Florence Park seemed to think that one standard wouldn't be appropriate for her entire neighborhood.  The question of minimum size for a CD was raised, but that is still being studied.  CDs were mentioned as a method of quickly stopping the teardowns and McMansions, even before the new comprehensive plan is completed.  Historic Preservation overlay zoning, in general, was considered to be better than CDs for maintaining design character in historic neighborhoods.  But HP districts take more time and effort to set up than do CDs.

Jamie Jamieson was there to speak about the Form Based Code trial which Mayor Taylor has approved for the Pearl District.  It seemed to me that the most likely candidates for CDs would be exclusively single family neighborhoods with relatively large lots.  In some neighborhoods, a modestly sized house on a single lot can be demolished, then its single lot can be split (because the resulting two lots each meet the minimum size for the zoning district), and then two relatively huge houses can be built on the smaller lots.  This is one of the concerns of PreserveMidtown.

Personally, I think form based codes would work much better for Tulsa than CDs.  But I wanted to attend tonight's meeting to see what was being considered.  CDs would allow older neighborhoods to tailor the existing zoning code to better fit their needs and goals without a complete overhaul of the entire zoning code itself.
Logged
pmcalk
City Mother
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2645


WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 29, 2008, 09:19:56 am »

I think you might have misunderstood the discussion about Florence Park.  I distinctly heard them say that Florence Park would be a great neighborhood for conservation district.  However, the president of Florence Park was asking if it could prevent property from being rezoned to office, which a CD district would not do.  

Riverview is a very difficult neighborhood because of all of the infill that has already occurred.  That is why the TPC broke the neighborhood up for placement on the National Register--it was the only way to comply.  However, you could look to those same neighborhoods and try to find unifying features.  If the set backs are not the same, then is it really necessary to regulate the setbacks anyway?  You need to focus on what would look out of place--if there are a variety of different setbacks, then wouldn't a variety actually fit?  You could control other things, perhaps garage placement, roof pitch etc...., without any restrictions on set backs.

Form based codes has some very good components to it, but it will take a real change in neighborhood mind sets before they will move towards FBC.  As the Pearl District moves forward with its pilot program, more neighborhoods may eventually see its benefits.
Logged

 
booWorld
Guest
« Reply #28 on: January 29, 2008, 10:38:15 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk

I think you might have misunderstood the discussion about Florence Park.  I distinctly heard them say that Florence Park would be a great neighborhood for conservation district.  However, the president of Florence Park was asking if it could prevent property from being rezoned to office, which a CD district would not do.



I definitely could have misunderstood or mis-heard the discussion about Florence Park.  I thought that some variations were mentioned.  At some points in the meeting, it was very difficult for me to hear and understand what was being discussed because the representative from Swan Lake found it necessary to continue talking long after his turn at the microphone.  For the most part, it was an orderly meeting, but all neighborhood leaders need to learn the common courtesy of shutting their mouths when someone else has the floor.


"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a commuter rail system & downtown baseball stadium & hundreds of miles of streets & umpteen thousand acorn lights with the other..."


Logged
Steve
Guest
« Reply #29 on: January 31, 2008, 02:33:17 am »

My subdivision Lortondale, between 26th St. & 27th Pl., Yale to Darlington, would be a prime candidate for a conservation district. All homes were built in the ultra-modern 1950's style by a single Tulsa builder, Howard Grubb.  Grubb also expanded into Lortondale 2, west of Darlington to Hudson, but those homes have suffered some major bad revisions over the years, while the majority of houses in the original Lortondale still remain structurally original, a prime conservation district candidate or NHR candidate.

It amazes me that Ranch Acres in Tulsa recently obtained National Historic Registry listing, while my neigborhood Lortondale is still waiting for such designation.  Lortondale has much more architectural and historic significance than Ranch Acres, was the very first subdivision in the entire U.S. built with entirely centrally A/C homes, featured in multiple national magazines such as Better Homes & Gardens, Parents, etc., awarded with over 10 national design awards to builder Howard Grubb and architect Donald Honn, the very first neighborhood in Tulsa with a private developer-built swimming pool, and the list goes on and on.  The reason for Ranch Acres preference for NHR listing over Lortondale totally escapes me; I guess money talks.
   
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7   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