This is appalling that this building is being shoved down our throats with what seems to be "no say so" about it. This is too close to our home and to the University of Tulsa who has spent millions trying to clean up the surrounding areas. It needs to go in a less populated area of Tulsa. I doubt people spending thousands of dollars on home renovations and TU tuitions really want the mentally ill wandering the neighborhoods endangering others. Better re-think this one.
The mentally ill not only walk but drive all over this town. What say those of you who so strongly champion the rights of land owners? BooWorld? You're constantly telling us that its your land and you can do what what you want with it. Stand up now and console these folks that its all going to be alright.
And Ttowndad, where have you been when social services have routinely been set up within the downtown, uptown, midtown area? Is it just because now it hits your hood and your investment? And what bonafide, identifiable harm is being done other than unsightly, muttering beggars roaming around looking for a handout? Is it any different than the robo calls for carpet cleaning, refinancing and satellite TV that assault me each evening? The harsh WalGreen signs flashing red messages?
The only thing wrong in this scenario is that no one was previewed what might be coming to their neighborhood. At least not real visibly. But if you believe in property rights, its moot. Do people warn you when they decide to paint their home pink? Add a garage or plant a freaking Sycamore tree?
Fight it for heavens sake but don't act so appalled because you've made investments. Everyone does including those downtown.
Oh, yeah, welcome to the forum.[:D]
quote:
Originally posted by Ttowndad
This is appalling that this building is being shoved down our throats with what seems to be "no say so" about it. This is too close to our home and to the University of Tulsa who has spent millions trying to clean up the surrounding areas. It needs to go in a less populated area of Tulsa. I doubt people spending thousands of dollars on home renovations and TU tuitions really want the mentally ill wandering the neighborhoods endangering others. Better re-think this one.
From your entire post... and Avatar...
I would say you
just might have a few "Freudian Issues" that you are yet unwilling to confront....
Possibly the interaction with persons seeking help for problems they own up to will have a positive effect on you...?
Think of it as an opportunity.
NIMBY... it's not just for South Tulsa anymore.
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
NIMBY... it's not just for South Tulsa anymore.
oh **** off. If it were in your neighborhood you'd be screaming too. ****.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
NIMBY... it's not just for South Tulsa anymore.
oh **** off. If it were in your neighborhood you'd be screaming too. ****.
Actually, I wouldn't.
Thanks for the "spot analysis". I feel so liberated now that I have been diagnosed. (LOL)And by the way I have been helping people all of my life, how bout you?.
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
quote:
Originally posted by Ttowndad
This is appalling that this building is being shoved down our throats with what seems to be "no say so" about it. This is too close to our home and to the University of Tulsa who has spent millions trying to clean up the surrounding areas. It needs to go in a less populated area of Tulsa. I doubt people spending thousands of dollars on home renovations and TU tuitions really want the mentally ill wandering the neighborhoods endangering others. Better re-think this one.
From your entire post... and Avatar...
I would say you just might have a few "Freudian Issues" that you are yet unwilling to confront....
Possibly the interaction with persons seeking help for problems they own up to will have a positive effect on you...?
Think of it as an opportunity.
The major thing that pisses me off about this issue is that the city has a history of doing things just like this and saying that they "made it a public notice". Well according to a large number of folks that live and operate businesses in the area they were not told about any planning meetings or public forums so the "public notice" couldn't have been too prominent. It was slipped by. My point is that the homeowners/business owners should ALL have the right to voice their concerns before the city makes its decisions.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The mentally ill not only walk but drive all over this town. What say those of you who so strongly champion the rights of land owners? BooWorld? You're constantly telling us that its your land and you can do what what you want with it. Stand up now and console these folks that its all going to be alright.
And Ttowndad, where have you been when social services have routinely been set up within the downtown, uptown, midtown area? Is it just because now it hits your hood and your investment? And what bonafide, identifiable harm is being done other than unsightly, muttering beggars roaming around looking for a handout? Is it any different than the robo calls for carpet cleaning, refinancing and satellite TV that assault me each evening? The harsh WalGreen signs flashing red messages?
The only thing wrong in this scenario is that no one was previewed what might be coming to their neighborhood. At least not real visibly. But if you believe in property rights, its moot. Do people warn you when they decide to paint their home pink? Add a garage or plant a freaking Sycamore tree?
Fight it for heavens sake but don't act so appalled because you've made investments. Everyone does including those downtown.
Oh, yeah, welcome to the forum.[:D]
And by the way check out some other Tulsa views posted on this forum. Look up "Homeless Hi-Rise at Admiral and Yale". Apparently I am not the only person who felt side swiped by this phantom vote.[:(!]
quote:
Originally posted by Ttowndad
The major thing that pisses me off about this issue is that the city has a history of doing things just like this and saying that they "made it a public notice". Well according to a large number of folks that live and operate businesses in the area they were not told about any planning meetings or public forums so the "public notice" couldn't have been too prominent. It was slipped by. My point is that the homeowners/business owners should ALL have the right to voice their concerns before the city makes its decisions. quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The mentally ill not only walk but drive all over this town. What say those of you who so strongly champion the rights of land owners? BooWorld? You're constantly telling us that its your land and you can do what what you want with it. Stand up now and console these folks that its all going to be alright.
And Ttowndad, where have you been when social services have routinely been set up within the downtown, uptown, midtown area? Is it just because now it hits your hood and your investment? And what bonafide, identifiable harm is being done other than unsightly, muttering beggars roaming around looking for a handout? Is it any different than the robo calls for carpet cleaning, refinancing and satellite TV that assault me each evening? The harsh WalGreen signs flashing red messages?
The only thing wrong in this scenario is that no one was previewed what might be coming to their neighborhood. At least not real visibly. But if you believe in property rights, its moot. Do people warn you when they decide to paint their home pink? Add a garage or plant a freaking Sycamore tree?
Fight it for heavens sake but don't act so appalled because you've made investments. Everyone does including those downtown.
Oh, yeah, welcome to the forum.[:D]
But T-town, not being aware of the rules for legal notice is not a good reason to attack city leaders. There is only so much they have to do. You may be right that they took advantage by not announcing it in a more public manner and the councilors certainly owed you more, but it is you, your homeowners assn. and local businesses' responsibility to learn how stuff is done in the city.
Make sure you have someone in your assn. who understands zoning, variances, notices etc. then spend time keeping up with issues that affect your area and stay in contact with your councilors. Its good citizenship and makes sure you don't accidentally elect some idealogue that doesn't know any more about government than you do.
Not preaching, just recognizing that MapleRidge Homeowners Assn. has done just that. We are seldom surprised. Screwed? Yes, but surprised, seldom. Maria Barnes sounds pretty good about now, eh?
Ttowndad, I'm sensitive to why you neighbors are upset about the project and that there was not clearer dialogue. However, don't let that translate into fear over what kind of people this project will bring into the area. I'm not aware of there being abnormally higher crime rates around Murdoch Villa, Hewgley Towers, or subsidized housing projects specifically for those with mental or physical illness.
This is not the same type of people in public housing at places like Apache Manor or out at 61st & Peoria.
I think everyone needs to relax and realize they are providing homes, not a shelter for these people. Based on that, I don't think there's going to be a problem of people sifting through neighbors garbage cans looking for food. Aside from that, it's nearly 1 1/2 miles from the TU campus, so I see far less impact on TU than the lower income housing still to the west of the campus.
If anything, maybe this will be a catalyst to start knocking down and cleaning up the whole Admiral corridor north of 244. It's a dump.
YES!
Admiral was Tulsa's retail corridor 60 years ago....
"goes to show you don't ever know! watch each card you play and play it slow! waitin' til that deal comes down...." Garcia/Hunter
Should have put it in Turley...
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
Should have put it in Turley...
The devil thinks down the road there may be a need for more in the pipeline.....
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
NIMBY... it's not just for South Tulsa anymore.
oh **** off. If it were in your neighborhood you'd be screaming too. ****.
Actually, I wouldn't.
+1
This is a lite version of Laureate and Shadow Mountain and neither is far from my house now. You don't hear anyone complaining about those or any of the other mental health facilities including the one at 23rd and Harvard who have people in a much worse state than the people who would be staying here.
Plus blindsided? The location was only recently chosen but the plans were not. And the city councilors voted to accept a donation.. what else would they do? Say no and get sued? They didn't pick the location.
I wouldnt mind it being near my house either. There is actually a vacant lot just a bit east of Petsmart right before the highway. There is a lot of stuff in this area, great opportunity for peple to get back on their feet since so much is within walking/biking distance. I am guessing that the city owns that property too. Not sure if it is quite large enough though. They could probably buy that little Cingular place next to it and it would be large enough.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
I wouldnt mind it being near my house either. There is actually a vacant lot just a bit east of Petsmart right before the highway. There is a lot of stuff in this area, great opportunity for peple to get back on their feet since so much is within walking/biking distance. I am guessing that the city owns that property too. Not sure if it is quite large enough though. They could probably buy that little Cingular place next to it and it would be large enough.
That location may fail because of the "clustering" that it would create.(There is a treatment facility at 6333 E Skelly Drive)
Everyone is aware, in this matter, that all of the centers at Archer and Denver.... including the jail, required a variance... And created a "cluster"...
So much for the enforcement of the "Master Plan".
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
I wouldnt mind it being near my house either. There is actually a vacant lot just a bit east of Petsmart right before the highway. There is a lot of stuff in this area, great opportunity for peple to get back on their feet since so much is within walking/biking distance. I am guessing that the city owns that property too. Not sure if it is quite large enough though. They could probably buy that little Cingular place next to it and it would be large enough.
lets get real...the type of people housed in these places are not going to "get back on their feet" maybe cut some feet off, or pis on some feet....but not get back up on theirs. These are chronic cases.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
Quote
lets get real...the type of people housed in these places are not going to "get back on their feet" maybe cut some feet off, or pis on some feet....but not get back up on theirs. These are chronic cases.
Are you speaking from experience?
That might explain a lot of your posts.
[}:)]
Very interesting story on Fox tonight. Here is a snippet
quote:
Here's where it gets complicated. The Tulsa Housing Authority is calling this project an "apartment building." However, Duane Casperson, a zoning department official with INCOG, told me off-camera, that if a building is classified as a "homeless center," neighboring residents would need to be notified. So who determines if it's a "homeless center" or an "apartment building?" That's the job of the Zoning Board, which makes the decision based on blueprints and a description of how it is going to be used, all coming from the applicant. According to Casperson, the distinction between an apartment and a homeless center is simply the level of service residents receive.
Link (//%22http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=652071a1-71aa-4f30-91a2-3a9a69751d87&page=2%22)
quote:
Originally posted by MDepr2007
Very interesting story on Fox tonight. Here is a snippet
quote:
Here's where it gets complicated. The Tulsa Housing Authority is calling this project an "apartment building." However, Duane Casperson, a zoning department official with INCOG, told me off-camera, that if a building is classified as a "homeless center," neighboring residents would need to be notified. So who determines if it's a "homeless center" or an "apartment building?" That's the job of the Zoning Board, which makes the decision based on blueprints and a description of how it is going to be used, all coming from the applicant. According to Casperson, the distinction between an apartment and a homeless center is simply the level of service residents receive.
Link (//%22http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=652071a1-71aa-4f30-91a2-3a9a69751d87&page=2%22)
As always Rupert's team Fax gets part of the story correct.
The INCOG employee's name is Duane Cuthbertson.
not Casperson...
(I think he was a ghost")If the property at 10 N Yale is going to be an apartment building or treatment facility... They can do so by "Right". In other words... The Rights attached to the particular piece of property.
If... however it were going to be a flop house/homeless day center it would need a variance and require public notice.
The "Good News". if it is built and not used according to the description in the "Code"... then you can have the City enforce the code upon them.
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
If the property at 10 N Yale is going to be an apartment building or treatment facility... They can do so by "Right".
It's listed as 10 S. Yale, FYI. If we're gonna get it right, let's get it right or is that just another one of those pesky scrivener's errors.[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
If the property at 10 N Yale is going to be an apartment building or treatment facility... They can do so by "Right".
It's listed as 10 S. Yale, FYI. If we're gonna get it right, let's get it right or is that just another one of those pesky scrivener's errors.[;)]
It is listed as 10 S. Yale, and although it's south of Admiral Place, it's north of Admiral Blvd., which is the dividing line between north and south addresses, and which serves as a service road to I-244 west of Yale. It should be a N. Yale address.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
If the property at 10 N Yale is going to be an apartment building or treatment facility... They can do so by "Right".
It's listed as 10 S. Yale, FYI. If we're gonna get it right, let's get it right or is that just another one of those pesky scrivener's errors.[;)]
It is listed as 10 S. Yale, and although it's south of Admiral Place, it's north of Admiral Blvd., which is the dividing line between north and south addresses, and which serves as a service road to I-244 west of Yale. It should be a N. Yale address.
Well then.... That places the proposed development in South Tulsa[;)]
Whole separate set of rules and conditions.
[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
If the property at 10 N Yale is going to be an apartment building or treatment facility... They can do so by "Right".
It's listed as 10 S. Yale, FYI. If we're gonna get it right, let's get it right or is that just another one of those pesky scrivener's errors.[;)]
It is listed as 10 S. Yale, and although it's south of Admiral Place, it's north of Admiral Blvd., which is the dividing line between north and south addresses, and which serves as a service road to I-244 west of Yale. It should be a N. Yale address.
Well then.... That places the proposed development in South Tulsa[;)]
Whole separate set of rules and conditions.
[}:)]
It makes me question the validity of the vote if the Council was voting on the wrong address.
I don't get the big deal regarding this issue from the tinfoil hat crowd on this board. Many of them are mentally ill and might stand to benefit under this plan. Heck, FB might get some career skills out of it.
Why are we afraid of the mentally ill given the quality of some comments on here?[?]
I don't see tinfoil hats... watching tgov right now... what I see are people who are justifiably worried about this who didn't find out any info until it's too late... and the people living in that area already feel like the city shortchanges them... on just about everything.
Properly medicated, many if not most mentally ill can function perfectly normal in society. These are not dangerous people.
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
I don't see tinfoil hats... watching tgov right now... what I see are people who are justifiably worried about this who didn't find out any info until it's too late... and the people living in that area already feel like the city shortchanges them... on just about everything.
Bates and FB each sleep with a teddy bear wearing a tinfoil hat, I hear. (Actually I didn't, but I figure that's just as supported as pretty much everything FB says on here.)
It's one thing to be the neighborhood affected by this; like I said in the other thread on this issue, the impact is debateable. It's the masive conspiracy, oligarchy talk with the bizarre reference to Jane Wiseman that generally distinguishes the tinfoil hat.