Developer demands Planning Commission chairwoman's recusal
By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer
Published: 12/4/2010
Local developer Chris Bumgarner has sent a letter to Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission Chairwoman Michelle Cantrell in which he accuses her of having a conflict of interest and improperly communicating with commission staff members and demands that she recuse herself from a matter before the commission. In a separate letter, Bumgarner asks the Planning Commission to defer action on the issue, which involves a proposed ordinance change that would prevent developers from using planned unit developments to do projects not otherwise permitted in historic preservation neighborhoods.
The city's zoning code now allows developers to use planned unit developments to reallocate land uses - such as commercial - into historic preservation neighborhoods whose zoning would not normally allow the use. The proposed ordinance change could potentially affect commercial development along the city's "medical corridor" on Utica Avenue, where Bumgarner owns property. The proposal has drawn interest from homeowners and developers alike because the medical corridor borders two historic preservation neighborhoods, Yorktown and Swan Lake.
In his letter to Cantrell, Bumgarner states that it has come to his attention that Cantrell called Planning Commission staff member Wayne Alberty to ask him to remove the first of two issues he raised in a memorandum he prepared for the commissioners. "The first item basically requests a conversation and negotiation be started on how best to develop along one of Tulsa's most vital corridors," Bumgarner said Friday. "The second item removes from the discussion one of the most critical parts of that negotiation - the boundary 'edge' where residential and commercial interests meet."
Cantrell said commission members routinely discuss items with staff members but would not say whether she had asked Alberty to alter the memorandum. "I don't believe it is professional or appropriate for me to disclose conversations between staff and me to third parties," she said. She added: "I will say, in general, I recognize that staff reports are their own work products, and I don't recall ever directing them to exclude or include any information."
Cantrell said she will not recuse herself from the case. "I have spoken with the commission attorney about Mr. Bumgarner's request, and he assured me that there is no reason for me not to participate in our discussion next week," she said.
The proposed ordinance change is a response to a request made by the Tulsa Preservation Commission that the Planning Commission look into ways the city can better protect the borders of historic preservation neighborhoods from incompatible development. The Preservation Commission also has asked the City Council to direct the city's Planning Department to come up with a small area plan for Utica Avenue from 11th to 21st streets, also known as the medical corridor.
Bob Sober, chairman of the Preservation Commission, has said repeatedly that the commission's requests are not intended to stifle development in the area. He has acknowledged, however, that recent applications by Bumgarner to demolish homes in the York-town neighborhood are what prompted him to ask the Planning Commission to study the border issue. The homes are on the same block as the Arvest Bank that was constructed by Bumgarner on the southeast corner of 15th Street and Utica Avenue in 2008.
Bumgarner noted that history in his letter to Cantrell. "Not only was that improper ex-parte communication by you intended to alter Mr. Alberty's recommendation," he wrote, "but it also was further evidence of your personal interest in the outcome of these issues, reflected in part by your public opposition, in your capacity as a private citizen, to our Arvest Bank project."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public meeting
The Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at 4 p.m. Tuesday in City Council Chambers, Second Street and Cincinnati Avenue.
Among the items on the agenda is a proposed modification of the zoning code as it relates to protecting the boundaries of historic preservation districts.
The commission also is scheduled to take public comments on a proposed form-based code for a section of the Pearl District.
Having a personal interest in Tulsa's development is a disqualifier?
The developer is remembering that years and years ago someone protested one of his developments. That same person years later was appointed to the planning board. He now thinks that they are prejudiced in all cases that he is involved.
I think the citizen volunteer serving on the planning commission has been very good in their role and has been able to both be supportive of development and protective of neighbor's rights. It is a very difficult task.
I watch these meetings on television, but don't know all the rules, players, etc. If anything, I feel the commission has been overly welcoming to the development side of the equation when they have been controversial. Many of the other planning commissioners do work in the development business. The Planning Commission should hear both sides. This is prime property for redevelopment but it is surrounded by historic neighborhoods. The Preservation Commission has asked for a hearing to protect these neighborhoods. Neighbors have rights too.
All that being said, you would have to agree that this particular developer has really fumbled the ball this time. Why would you write a letter attacking communication between a commissioner and staff? Shouldn't the two groups communicate?
Quote from: patric on December 04, 2010, 11:57:57 AM
Having a personal interest in Tulsa's development is a disqualifier?
No kidding. She just talked to the preservation commission. I wonder if any of them have communicated with Bumgarner?
Although honestly, most of his developments are good projects that do a lot for Midtown, but that's just my opinion. I like the Arvest Bank and look forward to whatever he is going to build at Utica/BA.
I look forward to it too, just because I'm tired of seeing a vacant lot there. Hopefully whatever the plans are for that development also include the gas station at the corner of 15th & Utica. There is already a gas station at the NE corner, they should demo the one at the NW corner (next to the vacant lot) and build to the corner like they have done at the other two corners (Stillwater and Arvest banks). That would better define that important midtown/Cherry Street intersection.
Is he wanting to develop that whole block, from 15th to the BA along the west side of the street? It seems like they cleared the far north side of that block not very long ago.
Quote from: spartanokc on December 06, 2010, 04:40:44 PM
Is he wanting to develop that whole block, from 15th to the BA along the west side of the street? It seems like they cleared the far north side of that block not very long ago.
I believe he owns the cleared land from 14th from Troost to Utica to the back of the property line of the gas station and retail building that line 15th. I was saying it would be great to see the gas station redeveloped as well to better define that corner of 15th & Utica, especially since there is already a gas station across the street.
Quote from: patric on December 04, 2010, 11:57:57 AM
Having a personal interest in Tulsa's development is a disqualifier?
Paying taxes disqualifies you from being US Treasurer.. so yeah.
I'm going to stick my foot into this discussion because I looked at google earth to see the area being discussed, and as a former long time resident, I don't care for the buildings built on the SE and SW corners of 15th & Utica. To me, they just don't fit the area to begin with. But I also think that the whole area was changed when they built the BA to the SE corner of the IDL. It changed it for forever, and now everyone is trying to preserve what has alreadey been damaged. From the overhead view as it is now, to what was on the land in question before, it will be hard to get something that resembles what was there. The old brick building at 14th and Utica was Mercury Mortgage that held the deed to my last home in Tulsa. The other thing I find interesting, and it may have changed since the ArVest building was built and the last Google Streets photo was taken, is you have a nice new building, but the actual street and sidewalk corner look like crap. It just saddens me that this east/west corridor was forever altered, and continues to be altered. As A kid growing up in Tulsa, the corridor from 21st to 11th along Utica was a medical area, the surgeons and doctors that worked at St. Johns and Hillcrest, lived in the area.
Just my thoughts.
Well it's not a very ped-friendly corner. I've walked Cherry Street taking pictures and once you get passed the new Genghis Grill you start to feel really awkward as a person walking along the street. Standing at the Utica/15th corner trying to take photos of the Stillwater and Arvest bank bldgs is a very awkward experience, though I do think the sidewalk may have been replaced--howerver the street is in about the same crappy condition as a few blocks to the west or any other street in Midtown (save Peoria between 31st and 41st) for that matter.
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs523.snc3/29764_1506773354168_1379330057_1368433_5697823_n.jpg)
Maybe the gas stations would be developed if the city would invest in a streetscape of some sort. There's a lot more potential to be realized, especially now that Cherry Street comes with a lot of new young professional residents.
(P.S. Has anyone ever faxed a Subway order before? lol)
Gas stations on two corners is just asinine.
I preferred it when they were on three of the corners:
(http://www.tulsalibrary.org/JPG/A3025.jpg)
courtesy the Beryl Ford Coll/Tulsa Historical Society
/ I keed, I keed.
We sent someone from our office to Subway once (not the one in the picture) to place an order for about 6 people. When he got there to place the order, the manager chastised him (in front of the other guests) for not faxing the order in (as if he should've just known that). Yep, chewed 'em up a little for having the audacity to come in and order lots of food all at once.
At Joe Momma's, we prefer those type of customers....Not that we're biased, we'll take all kinds....but seriously, when someone wants to order lots of food, we try to accommodate...sometimes we're even friendly to them (depends on if they've been in 200+ times or not).
Anyway, it was then that I learned that Subway accepts fax orders. Convenient. Sadly, it hasn't occurred to me to patronize that particular Subway again.
I have a new proposal, anyone with the last name Bumgarner should be prohibited from developing in Tulsa. Go look down through history, every shitty and controversial development in this town has that name attached to it.
Quote from: spartanokc on December 06, 2010, 04:40:44 PM
Is he wanting to develop that whole block, from 15th to the BA along the west side of the street? It seems like they cleared the far north side of that block not very long ago.
let me guess, it will be something "Italianate" with EIFS and some clay tile roof.....or maybe some EIFS, with stacked stone trim and a low pitch prairie style roof?....maybe mix it up a little and throw it some exposed beams?
I'll be waiting in line for my "punch in the mouth" with the rest of the sane people.
Quote from: inteller on December 08, 2010, 08:05:38 AM
Go look down through history, every shitty and controversial development in this town has that name attached to it.
I didn't realize he built Target stores.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 08, 2010, 08:28:04 AM
I didn't realize he built Target stores.
did I say just target stores? Or even target stores? Is that the best comment you can come up with? Well actually, for an INCOG sympathizer, it probably is.
Fact of the matter is INCOG are enablers for bad development...in particular bad development from this developer. This developer is pissed because of the unfettered access he usually has to the rubber stampers is hampered by someone who has equal attention with them. This is the same cabal who tried to ursurp the public comment process for Plantitulsa after all the meetings. Backroom dealings are modi operandi. If you try to insert yourself in that process, you will get figuratively "punched in the mouth"
But that's ok, because the fix is in. The Working In Neighborhoods (to destroy them) ringleader is in the back pocket and making sure these historic neighborhood measures get tabled indefinitely.
Quote from: tulsabug on December 08, 2010, 01:28:32 AM
Gas stations on two corners is just asinine.
If you were re-designing the corner and could only keep one, which one would you choose?
Quote from: patric on December 08, 2010, 11:47:00 AM
If you were re-designing the corner and could only keep one, which one would you choose?
unfortunately, market research has shown that people are too lazy to cross the street/change directions which is why many intersections sport multiple gas stations. crap yes, but promoted in a car centric planning regime.
also, back in the day, gas stations courted brand loyalty by advertising their gas formulation was superior, so you'd have multiple stations on a corner because people had brand loyalty to gas...so if you used phillips 66, it would be as if those other stations didn't even exist. Such claims still exist these days (Shell V-power) but regulations make most formulations close to one another so a moot point.
Quote from: spartanokc on December 08, 2010, 01:17:15 AM
Maybe the gas stations would be developed if the city would invest in a streetscape of some sort. There's a lot more potential to be realized, especially now that Cherry Street comes with a lot of new young professional residents.
I've always said Cherry Street needs a streetscape, and I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Nothing too elaborate, just redone sidewalks, street trees with planters, new lighting, and maybe brick paver crosswalks. PSO didn't bury any of the overhead lines during the Brookside streetscape project but maybe that could be done here. Not sure where the funding would come from, how was Brookside funded?
And yes, you're right about the pedestrian-friendliness of Cherry Street ending at Troost. I'd rather see the 15th & Utica intersection look more like 15th & Peoria removing the turn lanes and having on-street parallel parking begin just west of Utica. Losing the Phillips station and gaining a building at the NW corner would be a big improvement.
Quote from: SXSW on December 08, 2010, 12:36:52 PM
I've always said Cherry Street needs a streetscape, and I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Nothing too elaborate, just redone sidewalks, street trees with planters, new lighting, and maybe brick paver crosswalks. PSO didn't bury any of the overhead lines during the Brookside streetscape project but maybe that could be done here. Not sure where the funding would come from, how was Brookside funded?
And yes, you're right about the pedestrian-friendliness of Cherry Street ending at Troost. I'd rather see the 15th & Utica intersection look more like 15th & Peoria removing the turn lanes and having on-street parallel parking begin just west of Utica. Losing the Phillips station and gaining a building at the NW corner would be a big improvement.
Possibly because heavier traffic routes like Harvard between 21st & 51st resemble the Ho Chi Minh Trail still.
Cherry Street most definitely is one of the more "pedestrian" districts in Tulsa. It's simply not been a priority for one reason or another yet. I suspect since the corridor of Utica between 11th & 21st becoming designated as somewhat of a "medical district" turn lanes make sense. Also remember that Cherry St. essentially becomes two lanes west of Utica and can create a bottle neck at peak hours.
Quote from: inteller on December 08, 2010, 12:12:19 PM
unfortunately, market research has shown that people are too lazy to cross the street/change directions which is why many intersections sport multiple gas stations. crap yes, but promoted in a car centric planning regime.
eh - I think it's more of the fact that its crossing the street in an intersection, especially in a car, is no easy task. If you're headed in one direction, why would you want to make a left into a gas station, then either make a left out of there across traffic or make a right out and then a left to get back on your original path? Making two rights is always the best move.
Quote from: inteller on December 08, 2010, 12:12:19 PM
also, back in the day, gas stations courted brand loyalty by advertising their gas formulation was superior, so you'd have multiple stations on a corner because people had brand loyalty to gas...so if you used phillips 66, it would be as if those other stations didn't even exist. Such claims still exist these days (Shell V-power) but regulations make most formulations close to one another so a moot point.
The formulation will be the same, but that's separate from any additives. Shell gas is superior to QT (unless you like water as an additive) and of course pure gas is always a win over any ethanol-blend.
Since my cars are old and high mileage (I never put a full tank of gas in cause the vehicle could go at any time and I would have to drain the fuel out!) they sometimes break down and I have to walk Cherry to work. I cross 15th & Peoria, 15th and Utica and at lunch have occasion to negotiate 15th and Lewis. The worst is Lewis. People will kill you if you aren't paying attention. Many near misses there. They turn on red, green, yellow after a short pause and don't bother to look for pedestrians because that would mean using a turn signal, dropping the fries, putting the cell phone down and yielding to your presence. Not going to happen.
Second worst is 15th & Peoria. Very small corner sidewalk that shares telephone poles, signage, no operating walk buttons, and landscaping that blinds views for drivers. Add in the propensity for drivers to ignore the no left turn sign and you have a tricky corner for walkers.
The best is 15th & Utica. The buttons work, you can make eye contact with drivers (who show some measure of conscience) and the views are unobstructed. Crossing anywhere else on Cherry is foolish (if you're over 35 anyway).
Quote from: tulsabug on December 09, 2010, 04:26:06 AM
Making two rights is always the best move.
Two wrongs don't make a right but three rights make a left. :)
crossing an intersection in a car isn't so bad these days, but back in the day before left turn lanes and turn lanes in general it was bad. oklahoma isn't too bad either in that you can make more legal u turns than other states. still, thats why they call them convienence stores...if you had to cross to get to the only one at an intersection it wouldnt be very convienent.
Quote from: inteller on December 08, 2010, 08:05:38 AM
I have a new proposal, anyone with the last name Bumgarner should be prohibited from developing in Tulsa. Go look down through history, every shitty and controversial development in this town has that name attached to it.
That's not true.
Quote from: inteller on December 09, 2010, 09:55:32 AM
crossing an intersection in a car isn't so bad these days, but back in the day before left turn lanes and turn lanes in general it was bad. oklahoma isn't too bad either in that you can make more legal u turns than other states. still, thats why they call them convienence stores...if you had to cross to get to the only one at an intersection it wouldnt be very convienent.
+ for U Turns. I had to make 5 today just to get across town with all the G*) D@mn construction. How do you even use I44, Sheridan, Yale, Harvard, or Lewis any more?
Quote from: Gaspar on December 09, 2010, 01:58:11 PM
+ for U Turns. I had to make 5 today just to get across town with all the G*) D@mn construction. How do you even use I44, Sheridan, Yale, Harvard, or Lewis any more?
With a loaded stagecoach gun and all-terrain tires.
But wait. I thought Tulsans wanted the city to fix the streets...
If you gripe about potholes, narrow streets, or traffic jams, you're not allowed to gripe about road repair or street widening projects and construction. Make up your mind. I get tired of people who b!tch about both the problem AND the solution.
Quote from: PonderInc on December 10, 2010, 02:34:49 PM
But wait. I thought Tulsans wanted the city to fix the streets...
If you gripe about potholes, narrow streets, or traffic jams, you're not allowed to gripe about road repair or street widening projects and construction. Make up your mind. I get tired of people who b!tch about both the problem AND the solution.
I don't mind finding another route during construction. Unfortunately, many times there is construction on intersecting and adjacent arterials. I really don't like driving through someone's neighborhood but maybe we need some alternate routes (small vehicles only) through the neighborhoods during construction. 20 to 25 mph is better than hpm (hours per mile). Either that or plan the construction a little better.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 10, 2010, 05:06:57 PM
I don't mind finding another route during construction. Unfortunately, many times there is construction on intersecting and adjacent arterials. I really don't like driving through someone's neighborhood but maybe we need some alternate routes (small vehicles only) through the neighborhoods during construction. 20 to 25 mph is better than hpm (hours per mile). Either that or plan the construction a little better.
While this doesn't help for arterials much, I use it pretty exclusively before I take off on the Tulsa highways. Helps me a ton.
http://www.oktraffic.org
And usually I just deal with the traffic. Lived in Houston for three years. Tulsa's a cakewalk compared to that hellhole.
Quote from: Hoss on December 10, 2010, 05:24:21 PM
While this doesn't help for arterials much, I use it pretty exclusively before I take off on the Tulsa highways. Helps me a ton.
http://www.oktraffic.org
And usually I just deal with the traffic. Lived in Houston for three years. Tulsa's a cakewalk compared to that hellhole.
Mostly I just deal with it too. There are some times/places to avoid but traffic here is relatively light compared to many others. Boston, Phila, LA.....
Must be a traffic jam at www.oktraffic.org I just tried to access it and it wouldn't come up.
Quote from: Red Arrow on December 10, 2010, 05:38:40 PM
Must be a traffic jam at www.oktraffic.org I just tried to access it and it wouldn't come up.
Stop using IE 2.0
;D
For info's purpose, I got right in, IE, Chrome and Firefox.
Quote from: Hoss on December 10, 2010, 05:57:41 PM
Stop using IE 2.0
;D
For info's purpose, I got right in, IE, Chrome and Firefox.
I think I never used IE 2.0 regularly. I used Netscape until it wouldn't work anymore. Then I used IE 5.x and maybe 6.x. Now I'm on Safari 4.0.4. All those old computers with the pictures won't work on the DSL connection. I keep the laptop for some specific aviation software that runs on DOS.
Quote from: Hoss on December 10, 2010, 05:57:41 PM
Stop using IE 2.0
For info's purpose, I got right in, IE, Chrome and Firefox.
I just tried it again 10:55 PM and got right in using Safari, same computer and browser as earlier today. Most of the cameras are farther north than I usually get.
Ever notice that their "live" picture is just the same five still photos looped over and over?
You can revisit a camera and get a new set of five, but it's far from live video.
wow, never seen this site until now.....how awful.
Quote from: SXSW on December 08, 2010, 12:36:52 PM
I've always said Cherry Street needs a streetscape, and I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Nothing too elaborate, just redone sidewalks, street trees with planters, new lighting, and maybe brick paver crosswalks. PSO didn't bury any of the overhead lines during the Brookside streetscape project but maybe that could be done here. Not sure where the funding would come from, how was Brookside funded?
And yes, you're right about the pedestrian-friendliness of Cherry Street ending at Troost. I'd rather see the 15th & Utica intersection look more like 15th & Peoria removing the turn lanes and having on-street parallel parking begin just west of Utica. Losing the Phillips station and gaining a building at the NW corner would be a big improvement.
Cherry Street really just needs the works..just give it any generic streetscape as long as it features some of the primary urbanist ideas that are currently out there. Skinnier lanes (which is ironic because midtown Tulsa has some really skinny lanes, yet Cherry St has the widest lanes in all of Tulsa probably), lower the speed limit, add a traffic light/ped crossing at St Louis or wherever is mid-way, consistent street parking, have a
consistent sidewalk, and encourage parking lots to either be developed or put up a wall or landscaping that continues the streetwall so that the street doesn't lose its definition of space.
There are some positives though: Rapidly-developed residential density (which most urban districts in Oklahoma just can't muster), excellent neighborhood identification (though I'd argue if 3rd can be renamed Leon Russell Rd, why can't 15th actually be Cherry St??), and probably Oklahoma's best collection of oddball and unique businesses.
Businesses will suffer temporary business losses and motorists will grumble and moan about construction, just like they did with Brookside, but the end result was fabulous there and could be fabulous on Cherry, which doesn't even need as elaborate a streetscape as Brookside got.