The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

There's a Theme Here Somewhere....
Posted by slackmeyer on June 19, 2011M at 9:04 pm

Let me start this post by stating the obvious: by simply commenting on downtown Tulsa, there are those up in our sister city who will assume the worst of me, that I'm out to trash them to the benefit of Oklahoma City, etc.

That's not true, and fortunately there are also many rational voices up in Tulsa who see beyond the childish and petty "us vs. them" cliche that has plagued the two cities for decades (dear Tulsa – OKC doesn't like the turnpikes anymore than you do).

So let's get that out of the way; I love downtown Tulsa. I love its architecture. I love its proximity to the Arkansas River. I have unlimited jealousy of the Tulsa Press Club, its location downtown, and its proximity to Arnie's (a downtown dive bar unrivaled in downtown OKC).
With that aside, I am struck by a story posted by Michael Bates, an insightful Tulsa blogger who has done a great job informing his readers, including myself, on various matters including urban planning. Maurice Kanbar might not be a household name here in Oklahoma City, but in Tulsa he IS downtown, having bought about a third of the properties in the central business district a few years back.

Now it looks like he may be bailing out.

Tulsa, it seems, gets so close, so often, to celebrating something huge only to see their hopes dashed.  While Oklahoma City goes in slower, incremental steps on its urban revival that  take years to complete, Tulsa goes after one big quick roll of the dice after another.

A giant Indian statue called "The American" (something to rival the St. Louis Arch) was announced to great fanfare – and went no where. Oklahoma City, meanwhile, went with a heroic size recreation of the Land Run, and while it's taking a few years to get done, one small piece at a time, it's quietly becoming a significant tourist attraction (though it will never be the St. Louis Arch).
Tulsa then sought to create urban entertainment districts to rival Bricktown. At first glance, with incredible assets like Cain's Ballroom and the Brady Theater, this should have been a slam dunk. But again, Tulsa went for something bigger than just one district, and the result until recently has been two detached district, each with great qualities, but still falling short of the sort of place people will travel to from across the region. I have high hopes that may soon change with the latest announced developments – if they come to pass.
So now we come to Maurice Kanbar. In January, 2006, I was quite proud of having scooped the Tulsa World in scoring the first interview with Kanbar's then-business partner, Henry Kaufman:

QuoteIn downtown Tulsa, they're wondering, "How did we get so lucky?"

Two San Francisco investors, Maurice Kanbar and Henry Kaufman, were virtual unknowns when they hit Oklahoma's second-largest city back in August, buying five prominent downtown Tulsa office buildings.

Unlike typical developers, they skipped doing any interviews with reporters and quietly went about buying even more properties. With their latest purchase last week of Tulsa's Atlas Life Building, their total investment exceeds $100 million.

Kanbar and Kaufman, in business together for 42 years, now own 19 buildings, representing about 28 percent of all downtown Tulsa office properties.

So who are they? What are their plans? And why Tulsa?

"We had a long-standing interest in Tulsa," Kaufman told The Oklahoman this week. "We had a publishing company there. It's a beautiful city. The universities that surround it are turning out excellent graduates, and the architecture is superb. ... There are no negatives."
Downtown Tulsa, Kaufman said, "is an undiscovered gem."

Well, at least it was until Kanbar and Kaufman came to town.

Kanbar made his fortune as the founder of Skky Vodka. A biography provided by the San Francisco mayor's office shows he also opened the first multiplex theater in New York and holds several inventor's patents.

Kaufman said he and Kanbar think Tulsa has the chance to be the country's next big arts magnet. And their investments will reflect that hunch with a drive to lure some satellite university branches, museums and galleries to their buildings. They also are planning to convert some of their buildings into artists' lofts.

"I see a need for art galleries, artists' lofts, the kind of things that made Soho what it is today," Kaufman said. "We want to price them to be affordable for artists — it's interesting to note that the
artists have abandoned Soho and have moved to Chelsea — because they were out priced by Soho."

Wow. How could you not get excited about such a development? Imagine if a millionaire angel investor came into Oklahoma City, bought First National Center, all of Nick Preftakes' buildings along Main Street and Sheridan Avenue, and every undeveloped building along Automobile Alley, and made similar promises. Believe it or not, Kanbar and Kaufman's arrival in Tulsa was double that scenario.
Kaufman, however, eventually disappeared from the equation. And while one building, the wonderful Atlas Building (where I first visited the Tulsa Press Club) was converted into a nice hotel, that was the result of a sale to new owners. The rest of the story, as told by Bates, isn't so great.

What's potentially worrisome is that the Kanbar is emptying some of the older buildings of their few remaining tenants. Such moves can lead to regret later if the buildings go dark, and lose their "grandfather" status under code requirements for renovations.

I'm curious as to what all of you might think, Tulsans and Oklahoma Citians alike. Is there something to learn in all this? In the meantime, let's hope for the best for Tulsa; and just know that there are a lot of Oklahoma City folks making treks to Cain's and loving their stay in T-Town.

UPDATE:
As an aside to all this, not sure I ever read about the outcome of the Kanbar/Kaufman lawsuit, but a search of court transcripts shows the matter went to the 9th Circuit Court, where it affirmed a decision by a lower court that went Kanbar's way, but financially pretty much favored Kaufman. Confused? Apparently Kanbar doesn't like paying bonuses. And the relationship between the two men was pretty informal. So when Kaufman paid finder's fees, etc., to affluent Tulsans including John and Tori Snyder (who restored the Mayo Hotel) and attorney Raymond Feldman, Kanbar, according to the court documents, was none too happy.

That said, if I understand the 2010 ruling correctly, the courts determined the money paid to these individuals didn't exceed what they would have been due. There may still be some filings, court actions not showing up in my search, so I'm not entirely sure this is the end of the story.

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2011/06/19/theres-a-theme-here-somewhere/ (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2011/06/19/theres-a-theme-here-somewhere/)


Bates' Blog Post:  http://www.batesline.com/archives/2011/06/kanbar-bailing-out-of-tulsa.html

I've had several friends in OKC send this to me.  I've read and re-read several times.  I still can't figure out what point he is aiming to make.  Can anyone here help me understand?

I was just about to post this. You may have noticed I left a couple comments on there. Like you, I'm a bit confused about what his point is, but I interpreted it as now that there is a rumor that Kanbar is pulling out the future of Downtown Tulsa is in question. I think most of all he's just trying to start a discussion.

What's Bates' point?  He sure seems to want Tulsa to fail or he's the chicken staring at the sky all the time.

Quote from: Townsend on June 20, 2011, 11:12:04 AM
What's Bates' point?  He sure seems to want Tulsa to fail or he's the chicken staring at the sky all the time.

You mean Skyy?  ;)

Michael still logs in from time to time but won't post here ever since I offered to buy his share of seats at the BOK Center when he wouldn't quit going on about what a bad deal it was for Tulsa a year or two after it was open.  I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

Quote from: Conan71 on June 20, 2011, 11:44:50 AM
snipped...

I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

You realize who you're talking about, right?  He's like a bad incarnation of MDG.

Quote from: Conan71 on June 20, 2011, 11:44:50 AM
I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

Quote from: Townsend on June 20, 2011, 12:16:34 PM
I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

Essentially because he wrote an article claiming that the Tulsa World inflated their subscription/circulation numbers without having a valid source to back him up.  The Lortons then sued UT and Bates; UT forced Bates to make a retraction and he went fairly silently after that.  If my recollection is correct.

Quote from: Hoss on June 20, 2011, 12:18:32 PM
he went fairly silently after that. 

Ah right, thanks.

After the screaming mimi's he had at the televised meeting with Kathy Taylor.  That was poor form.

Glad someone posted this; I saw it too and didn't know what it meant.  I think the main premise -- that Kanbar's getting out of Tulsa en masse -- is kinda silly.  Dumping your whole portfolio as a single deal just as business is starting to (slowly) pick up downtown seems farfetched.  I'd think he'd want to wait another year or two till all of the things in the downtown pipeline are completed, and have coincidentally driven his value up, before selling. Anyway, it just struck me as a dumb business decision.  I thought it sounded more plausible that individual properties were changing hands or underperforming tenants were being shown the door.

Quote from: Townsend on June 20, 2011, 12:16:34 PM
I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

He didn't get fired.  It was the result of a new "frelancer's agreement" UTW wanted all their contributors to sign. 

"Recently UTW established a "freelancer's agreement," a standard contract for all freelance contributors, including writers and photographers. The agreement includes a "work made for hire" provision, which means that UTW would own all rights, including the copyright, to anything I submit for publication during the term of the agreement.

For many freelancers, that won't be a cause for concern, but to borrow a phrase from Roscoe Turner, "I've got a problem with that." By giving up all my rights, I could be setting up problems down the road should I want to incorporate into future projects any of the material I would write under the agreement."

http://www.batesline.com/archives/2009/05/urban-tulsa-weekly-last-columnhtml.html

Here's a funny exchange between Karen Keith and Michael during the county commish campaign a few years back I came across while trying to find the column he wrote about his departure from UTW.

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A25205

I don't get the point of the article, either. It seems like a couple paragraphs are missing. If Lackmeyer and Bates are referring to tenants being forced out of the Oil Capitol Building, that's because it has been sold to the Snyders and is being converted to apartments, not because Kanbar Properties is packing its bags. I don't even know if Kanbar owned that building (anyone?). To me, that would indicate that they're getting more money out of the building than they paid for it, which would be a positive indicator, not a negative one. That's the only thing I can think of.

Add me in as another one who doesn't understand the point of the Lackmeyer blog post.

The point of the post seems to be cherry picking a situation or two to support his broad generalizations about development in Tulsa.

Our downtown development trajectory is actually very similar to OKC... we just started about 10 years later.

And he completely ignores the amazing organic development that has been happening in Blue Dome despite the worst economic conditions in 70 years.

His point appears to be that Tulsa seems to keep "missing" on its large-scale development attempts.  I think that's a fair point on one level--witness the failure of the Stadium Trust to even begin to deliver improvements in the immediate vicinity of the ballpark.  But it misses the more important aspects of what's happening in Tulsa.  Despite it all, Tulsa's smaller-scale entrepreneurs and visionaries are remaking the city's core into a place with character and life, from the Pearl streetscape to Tulsa Tough.  That's the real story here, and Lackmeyer should pop over to Tulsa to see it and write about it.  

Re: the former K&K partnership, my understanding is that the grand vision went away when the relationship dissolved in 2007.  But it's not like he's been an irresponsible property owner.  Obviously,the entry of Kanbar into the downtown real estate market had much less impact than originally promised.  But I still think his presence as an activist property owner had a positive effect on downtown (everything from the Snyders to the Decopolis space at 5th and Boston).

QuoteHis point appears to be that Tulsa seems to keep "missing" on its large-scale development attempts.  I think that's a fair point on one level--witness the failure of the Stadium Trust to even begin to deliver improvements in the immediate vicinity of the ballpark.  But it misses the more important aspects of what's happening in Tulsa.

I guess.

But I'd call Vision 2025 and also just getting the ballpark downtown as some pretty large-scale developments.

As for the fill in around those areas, it's easier to do those sorts of things when you're not handicapped by a global financial crisis and the tightest lending market in decades.

The fact that we're just now seeing large-scale development start around the wildly successful BOK Center is testament to that.

And, as you say, Tulsa is doing it's own "step-by-step" or "slow and steady" or whatever Lackmeyer wants to call it version of development.

You've got the amazing organic development in Blue Dome, led by Elliot Nelson and Blake Ewing, and then you have the public/private cooperation in totally transforming the Brady District.

Those are are directly comparable to what went on in downtown OKC from the mid-1990s through the early 2000s.  The difference is that you can see the full result of that "slow and steady" development pace in OKC.  You'll see it more fully in downtown Tulsa by around 2015, when all of the big developments that are either underway or about to get underway will be complete.

Which brings me back to my point in that Lackmeyer is cherry-picking events to support his point, which doesn't hold much water, IMO.

He said he hasn't been downtown in three years, so honestly, I think he needs to get down there and experience it before he writes something like this about Tulsa. I don't think he was neccesarily trying to be negative towards Tulsa but it sorta came off that way.

He did leave this comment in response to mine and someone elses. (My real name is Kyle)

Slackmeyer

Thanks Reggie. I really, really love downtown Tulsa, and it wouldn't take much for me to get as "obsessive" about its prospects as some say I am about downtown OKC.
Kyle, I will want to visit that Art Deco museum!

Quote from: Jeff P on June 20, 2011, 02:29:53 PM
Those are are directly comparable to what went on in downtown OKC from the mid-1990s through the early 2000s.  The difference is that you can see the full result of that "slow and steady" development pace in OKC.  You'll see it more fully in downtown Tulsa by around 2015, when all of the big developments that are either underway or about to get underway will be complete.

Also, OKC doesn't have the same dynamics that Tulsa has with midtown and our urban districts like Brookside and Cherry Street, or Utica Square.  Tulsan's were coming into the city but were going to midtown to shop/eat/drink, and not until the past several years was downtown squarely in that mix.  OKC was able to build up, and continue to build up, its downtown because that was the only option plus it is more centrally-located in their metro while Tulsa's downtown is not. 

Steve needs to come pay downtown a visit and I imagine he will be impressed by how far it has come along even in 3 years. 

It's interesting, outside of Bricktown, OKC really doesn't have any other well-defined or at least well developed entertainment districts other than new dreck.  The Paseo is somewhat of an arts and, well, sort of dining.  There's the area in the NW corner of downtown where McNellie's is with about three or four other restaurants.  It just doesn't seem quite so well defined like Blue Dome, Brady, Cherry St., Brookside as far as downtown/midtown.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I simply cannot think of any other really pedestrian areas of OKC outside Bricktown/Ford/Cox until you get out into the surrounding communities like Norman.

Deep Deuce, Automobile Alley

   His perspective is interesting actually.  I would have thought that Tulsa was the one doing the small, steady, organic developments and OKC was the one trying to do the large "big splash" ones. Core to Shore anyone?

 One thing that caught my eye right off was the mention of the American statue.  Tulsa didn't propose it, some artist did.  Tulsa didn't fail at pulling it off, the artist did.  Its interesting his perspective again in that most of us, I believe, never thought the statue would come to fruition anyway, and many didn't like it, and I think all of us had forgotten about it long ago.  Interesting that someone in OKC remembered it and brought it up.  Meanwhile there are all kinds of smaller park/ sculptural projects underway or done in Tulsa like the John Hope Franklin Reconcilliation Park (and its numerous sculptures), the park and fountain right on Boston, the neat park thats currently underway in the Brady Arts District with the Geothermal wells, and then there is the park that Land Legacy will be doing in the East End area, and you could add the Route 66 park with its bronze sculptures that will be going in by downtown near the river.

 And I too agree with the previous posters who mentioned our Cherry Street and Brookside, and now the up and coming Pearl District.  I wouldn't trade Bricktown for Brookside and Cherry Street, no way. Again, we are just different cities with different development timing and patterns.  

 As for Kanbar properties leaving all at once. I am not sure they are.  I went downtown this last Saturday and walked down 5th and was actually struck by the number of new things that had gone in along there.  2, 3 years ago almost all of the windows were dark and vacant.  Now quite a number of them sport new businesses.  Its really nice to be on Boston Ave in the evenings now with Elote's open on the west side and Mods open on the east and seeing all the people sitting at the sidewalk cafe areas.  If the Philtower does a restaurant or bar in that space facing Boston it could be just the thing to tip that street into something quite lively.  There is no other street in this region of the country that can match that strip on Boston Ave for its striking Urban Canyon view.  When it and 5th street comes back alive again, WOW, it will be just like a little bit of NYC got plopped down in the middle of the midwest.

As for the Brady Arts, Greenwood and Blue Dome districts being separate and us not having a "critical mass" entertainment district downtown... I agree.  But each one is still growing, even in this tough recession, and when they do finally connect its going to be fantastic.  You will have block after block after block of great, mostly organically grown, pedestrian friendly streets full of; music venues,  museums, parks, shopping, dining, entertainment venues, art galleries and studios, living, etc.  

 Sure we have seen big plans come and go and have wished some of them would have happened.  But I haven't dwelled much on them for its been quite enjoyable watching the "little guys" slowly, steadily, piece by piece, building up our downtown again.

 I have said it for years now, 2014 is going to be downtown Tulsa's year.  Thats when enough of the current projects will be done or underway such that downtown will finally, really, feel like its alive again.  We were behind OKC getting started, (though again mid-towns districts were well underway) but 2014 isn't that far off.

 One last thing, someone mentioned the Paseo and other areas in OKC,  if we were to compare apples to apples enlarging Tulsas land area to be the size of OKCs, we would suddenly have even more wonderful, pedestrian friendly spots in our city.  Jenks and its downtown full of antique shops, the Riverwalk and Aquarium, Sand Springs and its neat downtown, Broken Arrows downtown, and you could even lump in the impressive downtown that Sapulpa has.  Imagine if those areas were all within Tulsas city limits (and we could still be smaller in area than OKC) and we called them "districts".   We have a lot going for us and a lot of great potential.

I'd love to know the amount of private investment which has been a result of the V-2025 public investment.  And what sort of growth we have seen in sales tax receipts in recent years as a result.  Undoubtedly there are projects which probably would have happened whether or not we passed V-2025, but I can't help but think that program has helped bring about new development ideas which would not have happened without the new sense of vitality all across Tulsa County.

Hey guys!
I think a lot of you have some good points.
There are many in Oklahoma City who would agree that Core to Shore does not fit into the organic, small approach to urban development, and it will be interesting to see how that will play out.
Please know I'm sincere in my praise and appreciation of downtown Tulsa, and obviously nothing in this world is black and white - there is a LOT of gray.
That said, I thought the American, Kanbar and something else I didn't mention - the river idea proposed a few years back - represent "big sweep" approaches (like Core to Shore and OKC's earlier, now much maligned Pei Plan) that don't seem to work out as well as one might hope.
The question is, do we get all caught up by the "big sweep" folks when often it's the smaller, quieter, more organic developments that have the bigger impact on a downtown?
And if so, what, if anything can be learned from all that in both cities?
One other matter - I was in Tulsa about a year ago, and was wowed by how nicely the ballpark fit into everything. I love Brady and Blue Dome, and wish OKC hadn't torn down similar iconic assets during our urban renewal days. The confusion over me not having been there for three years was that I wrote I had not been to Arnie's in three years (god, I love that place).
Cold beer to all! - Steve

Steve - thanks for coming in to discuss!

Just one comment:

QuoteThat said, I thought the American, Kanbar and something else I didn't mention - the river idea proposed a few years back - represent "big sweep" approaches (like Core to Shore and OKC's earlier, now much maligned Pei Plan) that don't seem to work out as well as one might hope.

As previously noted, The American wasn't really something that was a proposed development from the "powers that be" in Tulsa.  It was brought forth by the artist who was proposing to design/build it, and to say it had "mixed" support within Tulsa would be generous.

As for the river vote a few years ago... well, all I can say about that is that it was a good idea with poor execution and worse timing.

The BOK Center was still under construction when that was put to the voters and Blue Dome was just emerging as a viable draw downtown.  We were also years away from having the ballpark downtown.  The general public basically had no reason to support another big public development project when the jury was still out (so to speak) on the impact of Vision 2025.

It was also roundly confused with a public/private proposal ("The Channels") that had circulated within the media several months before the vote.

At the end of the day, that thing failed because of poor timing and poor marketing.

It's really too bad, because I really believe that had they just waited a few years for the general public to see the impact of Vision 2025, it probably would have passed easily.  We'll see here in a few years what happens...

Yep, I understand. It seems a lot of these "big sweep" approaches are pushed by "the powers that be." And perhaps that's a topic in and of itself. Curious; would you say then that the smaller, quieter organic developments (Elliott Nelson, Michael Seager come to mind) tend to create more or less actual momentum than the "big sweeps"?

Quote from: Steve L on June 21, 2011, 10:15:14 AM
Yep, I understand. It seems a lot of these "big sweep" approaches are pushed by "the powers that be." And perhaps that's a topic in and of itself. Curious; would you say then that the smaller, quieter organic developments (Elliott Nelson, Michael Seager come to mind) tend to create more or less actual momentum than the "big sweeps"?

That really is a chicken V. egg issue there.  I suspect they each feed on each other, though I think it takes one landmark development like a college, arena, ballpark, or office complex for organic development to take hold and spread.  When people see organic development happening hand-in-hand with a nice public investment like the ball park, it gets them more excited and more willing to go along with more sweep projects.

The Greenwood District was rehabbed over 20 years ago, yet it was somewhat of an oasis and completely disconnected from downtown.  As I recall, that was a TDA project, and funded with public money.  If not for UCAT/OSU and loyal followers of a few businesses which were there, it would have died on the vine a long time ago.  Now it actually feels connected to the Brady and Blue Dome via the ball park area.

Going back even further, I think a lot of that development may have been near impossible without the construction of UCAT.  That whole area just north of the IDL and west to the country club was about as blighted as an area could get.

Elliot gets on here from time to time as does Blake Ewing.  I wish one or the other would weigh in on how much V-2025 made their developments more viable.  As I recall before construction started on the BOK Center, other than Arnies, 1974, the Blue Dome Diner & McNellies, the only other thing going on in the Blue Dome were a bunch of transient beer bars and Kitchell's usual thug hang-outs. 

I'm not sure if the rents finally forced Kitchell and his poor/temporary development out or simply other's jumped in line ahead of him to get the good spots and truly rehab them into something more permanent.

QuoteThat really is a chicken V. egg issue there.  I suspect they each feed on each other, though I think it takes one landmark development like a college, arena, ballpark, or office complex for organic development to take hold and spread.  When people see organic development happening hand-in-hand with a nice public investment like the ball park, it gets them more excited and more willing to go along with more sweep projects.

This is probably about right on.

I think it takes both.

Without the BOK Center and the ballpark, I think Blue Dome would have probably continued to slowly develop, because there was already some organic growth going on.

But I don't think you would have seen a transformation of the Brady Arts district and certainly not things like the One Place development.

The "big sweep" projects help accelerate and sustain development momentum.

As Conan said, it would be very interesting to get Blake's take on this topic.

Elliot opened McNellie's in 2004, after a downtown arena was approved but still three years before it opened.

I've heard Blake say to a group that the public sector investment in downtown makes his ability to attract private investors infinitely easier.  Without the BOK Center he would have never been able to open Joe Momma's Pizza.

Steve, be wary about holding up Michael Seger as a bastion of organic development.  Have he and his mother done good things for the Blue Dome?  Possibly, but his inability to finish a loft project that was partially funded by taxpayer dollars (in the form of a loan) has certainly tainted any positive projects he has completed.  Personally, I would love for one of your counterparts at the Tulsa World to do an investigation as to why he has not finished that project.

If the vision of the Tulsa Stadium Trust founders comes to fruition the Brady District & Blue Dome District will be connected in a big way.  I feel confident in saying the delay in not expending the other ~$30MM in money on development around the ballpark is directly related to recessionary factors.  Many of the donors and leads on the project envisioned the ballpark being surrounded by a district akin to Kansas City's Power & Light District, Louisville's Fourth Street Live and Baltimore's Power Plant Live.  It is no coincidence all of those developments were completed and are operated by the Cordish Companies. (http://www.cordish.com)  Cordish has visited Tulsa and has expressed at least a passing interest in partnering on a project of that style & scale.  Once the general economy picks up and national restaurant/bar concepts and retail are willing to expand you will see the "Ballpark District" begin to flourish.

Those of us that prefer to spend our time and dollars in local owned "organically" developed districts find that vision revolting.  Personally, I don't want anyone to "Jenks my Downtown".  However, one of the points I agree with in Steve's blog post is the attraction of regional visitors.  A large scale development that includes nationally recognized tenants will provide a much greater hook for pleasure and convention travel than the Blue Dome & Brady will on their current development arcs.

Private development "big sweep" projects have certainly caused one letdown after another for Tulsa. I can name at least 5 proposals in east downtown that were announced and then faded away.

Movie Studio
Frankfort Place
East End soccer stadium/hotel The East End will offer over 1.9 million square feet of mixed-use development including over 450,000 square feet of retail and dining experiences; 800 units of unparalleled urban living; three high quality hotels; 150,000 square feet of modern office space; and -- as a centerpiece -- an 8,000 seat state-of-the-art baseball stadium.
Walmart
Mark Larson of Larson Development LLC purchased a total of five buildings in Tulsa's business district from Bill White Co


Talaas Local developers behind the project — called Talaas, a derivative of the Creek Indian word for Tulsa — say they believe the estimated $400 million, mixed-use redevelopment could become another critical link in the efforts to revitalize downtown.

Talaas would encompass about 49 acres bounded by U.S. 75 to the east, the Blue Dome District to the west, Sixth Street to the south, and the Greenwood District to the north

From what I have read Talass is not dead, but I doubt it will ever happen. Anyways, I would rather focus more on connecting the Brady, Blue Dome, Greenwood, CBD, and BOK Districts before we create a new one.

Quote from: carltonplace on June 21, 2011, 12:13:25 PM
Private development "big sweep" projects have certainly caused one letdown after another for Tulsa. I can name at least 5 proposals in east downtown that were announced and then faded away.

Movie Studio
Frankfort Place
East End soccer stadium/hotel The East End will offer over 1.9 million square feet of mixed-use development including over 450,000 square feet of retail and dining experiences; 800 units of unparalleled urban living; three high quality hotels; 150,000 square feet of modern office space; and -- as a centerpiece -- an 8,000 seat state-of-the-art baseball stadium.
Walmart
Mark Larson of Larson Development LLC purchased a total of five buildings in Tulsa's business district from Bill White Co


Talaas Local developers behind the project — called Talaas, a derivative of the Creek Indian word for Tulsa — say they believe the estimated $400 million, mixed-use redevelopment could become another critical link in the efforts to revitalize downtown.

Talaas would encompass about 49 acres bounded by U.S. 75 to the east, the Blue Dome District to the west, Sixth Street to the south, and the Greenwood District to the north

Larson is an OKC guy.  Maybe he was an operative to ruin our downtown?!?

Quote from: ZYX on June 21, 2011, 12:35:10 PM
From what I have read Talass is not dead, but I doubt it will ever happen. Anyways, I would rather focus more on connecting the Brady, Blue Dome, Greenwood, CBD, and BOK Districts before we create a new one.

I think the right ground up development in the east end could tip downtown into a regional draw like KC

  I think I was a little more eager/desperate lol, for one of those east end developments to happen a few years ago.  But since then, the steady progression of things from the Brady to Greenwood to the Blue Dome has given me a lot of comfort so to speak.  I agree, if something big were to happen in the east end, Bravo, and yes that could indeed make us a regional draw.    It almost boggles the mind for a native like me to imagine all of those areas, including the core of downtown, filled in and bustling.

I think the observation about Tulsa's experience with grandiose announcements of large-scale projects that never come to fruition is fair as it relates to the series of announced projects in the East End and the river (Channels and then the county backed river project).  To some extent, under Mayor Savage in the late 1990s the Brady District was hyped as the next Bricktown, but the city wasn't really putting in any money (other than a TIF that wasn't generating much) to make much of anything happen.  Mayor Savage also talked repeatedly about landing a micro chip manufacturing plant, but instead got a factory that builds school buses.

In contrast, starting in the mid 1990s OKC passed a series of MAPS projects that built the canal through Bricktown, built a baseball stadium and arena, and made numerous improvements to the area.  Private development in OKC followed the public investments.

In Tulsa in the late 1990s, CFS was booming, WorldCom was hiring people by the truckload, Williams Communications was coming on like gangbusters and spending money like it was on fire, and the William's energy trading division was making it billions in profits.  And Tulsa voters were rejecting a half-cocked plan that was supposed to turn Tulsa into the amateur sports capitol of the world, with a velodrome, Olympic swimming pool, and soccer stadium among other venues spread out all over downtown.  In a few years, CFS, WorldCom and Williams Communications were all gone, Williams almost went under, energy trading was a dirty word, and CITGO had moved to Houston.  In essence, this was the civic "great awakening" Tulsans needed (and that OKC had previously had it own version of a decade earlier) to spur it to do something.  That something was Vision 2025 and then later Oneok Field.  After these large public investments in downtown, I think Tulsa is developing in a similar fashion as OKC, just a decade behind and in a uniquely Tulsa way.

As for Kanbar, I would be surprised if at some point he doesn't cash in his Tulsa chips and bank a nice profit.  He bought in at the low point for downtown and has no doubt seen the value of his Tulsa holdings go up – mostly due to efforts by others – but I suspect the real increase in property values is still a few years away.

Quote from: TheArtist on June 21, 2011, 08:15:00 AM
One last thing, someone mentioned the Paseo and other areas in OKC,  if we were to compare apples to apples enlarging Tulsas land area to be the size of OKCs, we would suddenly have even more wonderful, pedestrian friendly spots in our city.  Jenks and its downtown full of antique shops, the Riverwalk and Aquarium, Sand Springs and its neat downtown, Broken Arrows downtown, and you could even lump in the impressive downtown that Sapulpa has.  Imagine if those areas were all within Tulsas city limits (and we could still be smaller in area than OKC) and we called them "districts".   We have a lot going for us and a lot of great potential.

I do not understand what you meant by this post, TheArtist.  Paseo is just 2.5 miles north of dowtown near NW 30th and Walker.  The heart of Western Avenue is 3.5 miles north of downtown.  And MidTown, which is in its infancy but catching on, is downtown.  The up and coming Classen Curve area (which will soon include Whole Foods) is 4.5 miles.  The Paseo and Western aren't fringe areas.

Now, I can agree if East Wharf at Lake Hefner applies, but not even OKC considers that a district.  Just a small group of eateries on Lake Hefner that have a decent view of the sunset over the water. 

Many Oklahomans often forget that up until 1956, Oklahoma City was only 85 square miles in land area with 250,000 residents.  Western Avenue and The Paseo are both within that historic footprint. 

Quote from: okcpulse on June 22, 2011, 12:34:55 PM
I do not understand what you meant by this post, TheArtist.  Paseo is just 2.5 miles north of dowtown near NW 30th and Walker.  The heart of Western Avenue is 3.5 miles north of downtown.  And MidTown, which is in its infancy but catching on, is downtown.  The up and coming Classen Curve area (which will soon include Whole Foods) is 4.5 miles.  The Paseo and Western aren't fringe areas.

Now, I can agree if East Wharf at Lake Hefner applies, but not even OKC considers that a district.  Just a small group of eateries on Lake Hefner that have a decent view of the sunset over the water.  

Many Oklahomans often forget that up until 1956, Oklahoma City was only 85 square miles in land area with 250,000 residents.  Western Avenue and The Paseo are both within that historic footprint.  

Wasn't meaning to equate an equal distance from downtown with say the Paseo and Sand Springs, but was pointing out that if we were to imagine Tulsa's boundaries be similar to that of OKC's our perspective of "what we have" in comparison to OKC, might be different than it is now.  Tulsa's historic footprint was much smaller at one time too and we swallowed up some small towns (like Dawson and you can still see where their main street was and its buildings).  You can call any area in your town a "district", or area, if you want as easily as we can, and boy are we proficient at that lol.

 We compare OKC to Tulsa all the time, and there is no perfect way to do that.  As Tulsa's population spread south for instance, the developable land started filling up and population flowed over into other nearby towns like Jenks and Bixby. In many areas out south I can look to my left and see new houses going up, then to the right and see new houses going up and then look at the line on the map and realize that some of those houses are in Bixby, then others in Tulsa.  In some areas east of the river in Tulsa you can have a Tulsa address and be in a Jenks school district. Some of Tulsa is on the west side of the River by Jenks.  People aren't moving there because its a different city, its just the development pattern continually spreading out, and if the lines on the map were any different and those areas were still in Tulsa, they would still be moving there and they could still say they were moving there because of the better schools just like my family moved to an area with better Tulsa schools when the new neighborhoods, new shopping, and new schools were still within the boundaries of Tulsa.

Historic or no, it can be helpful to make the comparison more equal if you equate, the people who were in or moved into the area thats now in OKC, with the people who were in or moved into an equal area for Tulsa.

 Because to me, what your saying when you compare or brag about what OKC has done with what Tulsa has done is... this many people in OKC, in this area, have achieved this.... WE have done this with this place or this district, together the people in this sized area have built this, done that, etc.  In order to make it a somewhat more equitable comparison, it can occasionally be useful to compare the achievements of a similar number of people in a similar sized area, for Tulsa. You all still have the advantages of a bigger metro and being the capital so its still hard to compare perfectly, but a more equitable comparison.. would be like what I stated above, so that WE can say, we have done this, built that, etc.     Get my drift?

Even with all the amenities, Kevin Durant is saying there's nothing to do in OKC.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Quote from: Conan71 on June 23, 2011, 09:27:16 AM
Even with all the amenities, Kevin Durant is saying there's nothing to do in OKC.

Saw that.  He back pedaled as quickly as he could but some damage was done.

At least they're the Oklahoma City Thunder.  If they were the Oklahoma Thunder then Tulsa would be blamed for his boredom.

Which begs the question... what is it people want to do?  No matter if it's OKC, Tulsa, Dallas or Houston... no one ever goes into specifics.  I even hear it in Houston.  "There's not a whole lot to do around here."

So I ask, "what do you like to do for fun?"  Here is the common answer.  "Well, .... I don't know."  When people come back with that answer I just want to smack them.

Now, for a guy like Kevin Durant, who is a 22 year-old millionaire, there probably isn't much to do for a young guy like him.  And he likes Oklahoma City that way.  He doesn't like to go out all the time.  But even if he was trying to avoid TMZ by saying "nothing" and then walking away from their tabloid mentality, TMZ's behavior still illustrates a problem with this country's defaulted culture.  America has a syndrome that the only way for celebrities and athletes to live in this country is to take up residence in LA, NYC or Miami.  Every place else is taboo.

I can think of plenty of fun things to do in OKC that I personally enjoy, but someone else may not.  My all-time favorite thing to do for fun is spend time with kids.  As an adult, my idea of fun is rollerblading at Lake Hefner, or going to the Arts Festival.  Or going out for a night on the town to one of my favorite restaurants.  I enjoy places like McNellies in MidTown. But that's me.  

In Tulsa, I would enjoy the river, or dining on Brookside or hitting Hard Rock Casino.  I love going to the Wichitas and Little Sahara State Park.  They are ancient geological wonders.  But for someone else, there idea of fun might be completely different.  So when someone complains of there being nothing to do, it's completely subjective.

Honestly, I think America went and got bored with itself much to the chagrin brought on by Hollywood.  It could explain the country's sky-rockting obesity rate in Oklahoma and every place else.

We Tulsans thank residents of "The City" for supporting Tulsa owned establishments like McNellie's.

OKC, I think it's resident myopia.  There's never been more options for entertainment in Tulsa and I still hear people saying: "There's nothing to do.  Tulsa is sooooo boring".

QuoteWhich begs the question... what is it people want to do?  No matter if it's OKC, Tulsa, Dallas or Houston... no one ever goes into specifics.  I even hear it in Houston.  "There's not a whole lot to do around here."

So I ask, "what do you like to do for fun?"  Here is the common answer.  "Well, .... I don't know."  When people come back with that answer I just want to smack them.

Right on, okcpulse.

One of my biggest pet peeves is the "there's nothing to do here" garbage.

There is plenty to do, in both OKC and Tulsa.  

I actually had this very discussion with a co-worker who moved to Tulsa from Houston.  She was complaining about how there's "not much to do in Tulsa."  When she said she didn't really care about professional sports and I pressed her on what she could do in Houston that she couldn't do here, all I got was some stammering and blank stares.

People that say there is nothing to do are like ants marching to and from the colony.  They drive to the office the same way everyday, pull their car into the same parking spot, eat the same lunch at their desk, go home the same way, pull their car in the garage and their world closes just as the garage door hits the pavement.  Throughout their day they never have meaningful conversation with anyone around them to discover the great things that exist wherever they call home.

I pity them fools.

Quote from: rdj on June 24, 2011, 10:09:03 AM
People that say there is nothing to do are like ants marching to and from the colony.  They drive to the office the same way everyday, pull their car into the same parking spot, eat the same lunch at their desk, go home the same way, pull their car in the garage and their world closes just as the garage door hits the pavement.  Throughout their day they never have meaningful conversation with anyone around them to discover the great things that exist wherever they call home.

I pity them fools.

Reminds me of this scene from the Jack Lemmon classic: "Good Neighbor Sam".  Watch the clip to at least 1:12, the sheep appear again close to the end of the clip as well.  Great flick!

http://www.tcm.com/mediaroom/video/415507/Good-Neighbor-Sam-Movie-Clip-It-s-Like-Sheep.html

 Nothing to do.....

I have thought about this a lot and recently I have come up with one idea of what it really is.

On the one hand you can have lots of actual "things to do" like go to a museum, shop, dine, movie, show, park, clubs, sidewalk cafes, etc.  

But if they are all spread out and you have to drive everywhere you can and can generally only "do" one or two things at a time before you have decide to drive somewhere else to do say one more thing.  Boooring.

Buuut.  If you can go to one area and walk for blocks and blocks and do ALL of those things and more, while being with friends, enjoying people watching, good scenery, etc. in a superb, pedestrian friendly area.  Then it really feels like you have "something to do".

It just feels so different when your with a group of friends or family walking, with lots of other people around, going from place to place. And no a mall wont cut it, its a small, limited, shadow of the real thing.  Whether its downtown Disney, Santa Fe, or NYC, one of the things people really enjoy is both the scenery, the "things to do", people watching, and the walking while chatting with friends and family. 

Its not so much having this and that thing to do, its the experience of the journey along with it.  We don't have that yet.

I could even be more philisophical and say that what people really want is, being with lots of other people.  Driving around in a car and not seeing anyone but other cars, is depressing.  Everything here is so wastefully spread out.   I was driving to BA to work in a home there this week and its like... there is this huge highway, then swaths of grass on either side, then another road, then parking lots, then a business. Then from that business to the next is another parking lot, a ditch or green strip, a road, then another parking lot.  And you don't see any people. Just cars. Its so depressing.   Compare that to a good, pedestrian friendly urban space, whether its large or small, you have comparative miles worth of shops and buildings in just a block or two.  Lots of stuff to see. Then there are lots of people out and about. Its sooo much nicer and more enjoyable.  Its almost like we have forgotten how to be human beings.

Not that this is a perfect analogy for everyone and in every case. But I think there is a LOT of truth in it.