Why is the Bluedome area a "district"? Same for Brady, Riverwalk, etc. And are Cherry Street and Brookside "districts"? Where I hail from, I do not remember "The Hill" being "The Hill District" or "The Landing District", etc.
it's all about branding, tying an area together under a common name.
dis·trict
Function: noun
a territorial division (as of a nation, state, county, or city) for administrative, judicial, electoral, or other purposes: as a : an administrative unit esp. of a town or city established for the performance of a special governmental function.
Quote from: guido911 on July 10, 2011, 04:19:39 PM
Why is the Bluedome area a "district"? Same for Brady, Riverwalk, etc. And are Cherry Street and Brookside "districts"? Where I hail from, I do not remember "The Hill" being "The Hill District" or "The Landing District", etc.
Honestly G, its just a marketing trick. "District" sounds like there is a lot of activity with many different locations. Think about the districts in big cities...industrial district, commercial district, refinery district, redlight district etc. That designation of "district" hopefully attracts people who want to be part of something big happening. The Blue Dome gas station is the most notable structure in that area so it can more easily locate the area in peoples minds. Most locals had at least some idea of where it was (though we called it skid row as a youth).
Same reason so many apartments are now called "Lofts" when they are in fact just modern apartments. Lofts in my day were the upstairs of abandoned manufacturing businesses or in one case the top floor of a parking garage downtown that were converted to living space. Zoning prohibited most of them.
Quote from: custosnox on July 10, 2011, 04:26:03 PM
it's all about branding, tying an area together under a common name.
Thanks. I can tell you that South Tulsa County's "Pain in the @SS District" is between 91st & 111th on Memorial. Tulsa's "Clusterfark District" is rather expansive since it covers both the I-44 and 244 construction projects.
Easier to promote.
That section of downtown just north of the CBD, Williams Tower, etc.
OR
The Brady District.
Obviously the term Brady District is easier to remember, and the name ditinguishes it from other areas of downtown.
Just an upscale word for neighborhood. So my first impression that using "district" instead was wrong in that I thought it sounded a little snobby.
Quote from: ZYX on July 10, 2011, 04:35:43 PM
Easier to promote.
That section of downtown just north of the CBD, Williams Tower, etc.
OR
The Brady District.
Obviously the term Brady District is easier to remember, and the name ditinguishes it from other areas of downtown.
I get that. But again, I am from a much larger city than Tulsa, and people knew where The Hill, The Landing, Central West End (that one is snobby) and Soulard is and what is there without adding anything more.
Thanks for the info.
Quote from: guido911 on July 10, 2011, 04:42:44 PM
I get that. But again, I am from a much larger city than Tulsa, and people knew where The Hill, The Landing, Central West End (that one is snobby) and Soulard is and what is there without adding anything more.
Thanks for the info.
Didn't realize you were from the Lou?
I don't say "district". I just call it Blue Dome, Brady, Cherry St, etc.
Quote from: rdj on July 11, 2011, 08:41:30 AM
I don't say "district". I just call it Blue Dome, Brady, Cherry St, etc.
How far away is Blue Dome from Brady?
About 4 blocks?
I think the distance depends on who you talk to. Some people consider ONEOK Field to be within the Brady District. It is actually in Greenwood.
My only criticism, if that's what this is, of this "district" concept is that it leaves the impression that these places are so far apart from one another that you need a landmark to locate them. Four blocks apart and we need landmarks to distinguish Brady from Blue Dome from now Greenwood? It's almost like, "don't get the arts district confused with downtown".
To be clear Gaspar, I lived in St. Louis proper for a short time. I lived across the river about 10 miles away, near the Belleville, IL district. ;D
Quote from: guido911 on July 11, 2011, 03:55:45 PM
My only criticism, if that's what this is, of this "district" concept is that it leaves the impression that these places are so far apart from one another that you need a landmark to locate them. Four blocks apart and we need landmarks to distinguish Brady from Blue Dome from now Greenwood? It's almost like, "don't get the arts district confused with downtown".
To be clear Gaspar, I lived in St. Louis proper for a short time. I lived across the river about 10 miles away, near the Belleville, IL district. ;D
CWE for about 6 years until 2000 when I moved back to Tulsa.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 11, 2011, 04:04:13 PM
CWE for about 6 years until 2000 when I moved back to Tulsa.
Wow, then sorry about calling your area snobbish (unless you agree).
Quote from: guido911 on July 11, 2011, 03:55:45 PM
My only criticism, if that's what this is, of this "district" concept is that it leaves the impression that these places are so far apart from one another that you need a landmark to locate them. Four blocks apart and we need landmarks to distinguish Brady from Blue Dome from now Greenwood? It's almost like, "don't get the arts district confused with downtown".
To be clear Gaspar, I lived in St. Louis proper for a short time. I lived across the river about 10 miles away, near the Belleville, IL district. ;D
There is an odd thread to my life which keeps running through Belleville. One of my best friends lives there and I found out one of my old classmates moved back here after living in Belleville for six years. I've known several others who have come from the B'Ville area.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 14, 2011, 08:09:10 PM
There is an odd thread to my life which keeps running through Belleville. One of my best friends lives there and I found out one of my old classmates moved back here after living in Belleville for six years. I've known several others who have come from the B'Ville area.
I actually have a pretty good friend that lives there; anytime I'm in the St Louis area I try and meet up with him. Haven't been in ages thought, and the last time I did go up to St. Louis, he was out of town...I also have friends from Alton, but really no friends in St Louis.
Quote from: guido911 on July 11, 2011, 04:13:13 PM
Wow, then sorry about calling your area snobbish (unless you agree).
Oh hell yeah it is! It's the elite hotbed of St. Louis. Made for some great bar discussions!!
I used to play on a darts league with a couple of priests, and a couple of drunks (interchangeable). We hung out at a little bar called the 34 Club. Some strange regulars there. Circuit Court Judge Evelyn Baker, Leon Spinks (and his brother Michael), an astronaut, a cop who would give you his gun when he got drunk, and two old mob bosses turned union bosses.
Okay. Now what is this Pearl District, and what is it in relation to midtown? And at what point does all of this become pretentious bullsh!t... ::)
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 02:05:54 AM
And at what point does all of this become pretentious bullsh!t... ::)
Why would you consider development becoming pretentious?
If a city's progress can only be done bit by bit, you do what you can. You do what you can with those who will support it.
Quote from: Townsend on March 22, 2013, 09:54:34 AM
Why would you consider development becoming pretentious?
If a city's progress can only be done bit by bit, you do what you can. You do what you can with those who will support it.
It's not development, its "district" business to me. I have lived in mucho bigger cities with much longer histories of existence and find what Tulsa does approaches "wannabeism" of those cities that do have cultural, racial, ethnic communities. Seriously, is going to Blue Dome that big of deal apart from Brady, or the East Village, or SoBo? Its within freakin walking distance, right?
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 11:27:01 AM
Its within freakin walking distance, right?
"Everything's within walking distance if you've got the time."
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 11:27:01 AM
It's not development, its "district" business to me. I have lived in mucho bigger cities with much longer histories of existence and find what Tulsa does approaches "wannabeism" of those cities that do have cultural, racial, ethnic communities. Seriously, is going to Blue Dome that big of deal apart from Brady, or the East Village, or SoBo? Its within freakin walking distance, right?
Tulsa had to be cut into smaller sections because if you try to change larger than a few blocks then the builders and city/county governments will block any attempt.
Look at the Pearl. An attempt was made to change just a tiny area to test the effects of a style of zoning. Some powerful forces/loud voices screamed "too big" so they had to shrink the area and try again.
The districts have to be small to get anything done.
I live in a neighborhood within a neighborhood within a district within a district within a city within a county within a state, etc. I don't consider it "wannabeism". Gotta start small to get anything done.
Quote from: Townsend on March 22, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
Tulsa had to be cut into smaller sections because if you try to change larger than a few blocks then the builders and city/county governments will block any attempt.
Look at the Pearl. An attempt was made to change just a tiny area to test the effects of a style of zoning. Some powerful forces/loud voices screamed "too big" so they had to shrink the area and try again.
The districts have to be small to get anything done.
I live in a neighborhood within a neighborhood within a district within a district within a city within a county within a state, etc. I don't consider it "wannabeism". Gotta start small to get anything done.
I think we are talking right passed each other on this. I understand growth/development. To me, it's this: "Ooooh, I'm going to Brady District" [pinky raised holding martini glass] "so I can't make it across the street to Blue Dome". Again, where I hail, going to Soulard or the "Hill" or the "Central West End" or even "The Landing" actually means something. Not only is there economic development in those areas (along with political forces at work), which is apparently the reason for these "districts" in your view, but also ethnic , cultural, and social significance as well.
Maybe its just the mentality that some have, like being a midtowner versus a southie. I have heard from those in midtown say, "I would never live in South Tulsa because I am a midtown sort of a person". Really? Tell me how different the people are on the other side of 41st street. That's the pretentiousness or "I'm special" I am getting at.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 12:18:16 PM
Maybe its just the mentality that some have, like being a midtowner versus a southie. I have heard from those in midtown say, "I would never live in South Tulsa because I am a midtown sort of a person". Really? Tell me how different the people are on the other side of 41st street. That's the pretentiousness or "I'm special" I am getting at.
Oh that. Yeah, not really wanting to smell like a mid-towner.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 12:18:16 PM
I think we are talking right passed each other on this. I understand growth/development. To me, it's this: "Ooooh, I'm going to Brady District" [pinky raised holding martini glass] "so I can't make it across the street to Blue Dome". Again, where I hail, going to Soulard or the "Hill" or the "Central West End" or even "The Landing" actually means something. Not only is there economic development in those areas (along with political forces at work), which is apparently the reason for these "districts" in your view, but also ethnic , cultural, and social significance as well.
Maybe its just the mentality that some have, like being a midtowner versus a southie. I have heard from those in midtown say, "I would never live in South Tulsa because I am a midtown sort of a person". Really? Tell me how different the people are on the other side of 41st street. That's the pretentiousness or "I'm special" I am getting at.
I cover a lot of ground. I have no favorite, but I do abhor government subsidization of private enterprise because it's never fair and almost always reckless. If I drank and drove then I'd be downtown more often....
Quote from: Townsend on March 22, 2013, 12:23:05 PM
Oh that. Yeah, not really wanting to smell like a mid-towner.
Well, that's the obvious answer.
Quote from: Teatownclown on March 22, 2013, 12:24:52 PM
I cover a lot of ground. I have no favorite, but I do abhor government subsidization of private enterprise because it's never fair and almost always reckless. If I drank and drove then I'd be downtown more often....
(http://jpd.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451cd8169e20167666aae17970b-320wi)
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 12:38:05 PM
(http://jpd.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451cd8169e20167666aae17970b-320wi)
And all this time I thought it was socialism you hated...not surprised you hate our leader.
Upscale.
(http://www.gerritsenbeach.net/wp-content/upload/2012/08/district-9-affiche_208824_5343.jpg)
I don't see any pretentiousness, especially when you know the businesses and areas/customers.
I think these names are very helpful because you immediately can picture the area being talked about versus saying "Let's go hang out in the area on the north side of downtown", or "the area just to the east of downtown". Say Blue Dome, and I can immediately picture all that is there, Brady Arts District, and I can see all of that too.
Now, if all these areas had been connected together better from the get go, this division may not have happened. But you don't at this point, walk from say the Brady Arts to Greenwood to the Blue Dome. The "gaps" in the fabric had a lot to do with how the different names have come about. If the fabric had been more consistent like they often are in larger cities, then yes, one could see how it would be absurd to pick apart such small "land size wise" areas and make them distinct. But they are separate now, and they have been labeled so. You can walk for block after block after block in say NYC and it's all one "area", but thats just it.. its all one relatively distinct area, there aren't the gaps like here. These separate, small places in Tulsa aren't one area yet lol. Hopefully someday.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 12:18:16 PM
I think we are talking right passed each other on this. I understand growth/development. To me, it's this: "Ooooh, I'm going to Brady District" [pinky raised holding martini glass] "so I can't make it across the street to Blue Dome". Again, where I hail, going to Soulard or the "Hill" or the "Central West End" or even "The Landing" actually means something. Not only is there economic development in those areas (along with political forces at work), which is apparently the reason for these "districts" in your view, but also ethnic , cultural, and social significance as well.
Maybe its just the mentality that some have, like being a midtowner versus a southie. I have heard from those in midtown say, "I would never live in South Tulsa because I am a midtown sort of a person". Really? Tell me how different the people are on the other side of 41st street. That's the pretentiousness or "I'm special" I am getting at.
It's not an identity thing for me per se. I live in mid-town but don't really consider myself as a "mid-towner". I'm a Tulsan without a sub-set, I guess.
I used to live at 105th & Yale. When I lived out there, I usually ate and did recreational things out south rather than mid-town due to convenience more than anything.
Now that I live about 80 blocks north of there, downtown and midtown destinations are more convenient for my needs. There are quite a few places I like to eat or shop out south, but the idea of commuting that way becomes somewhat of a disincentive when I've got other options closer to where I live or at least it takes less traffic asspain on surface streets. I do admit I like the urban feel and look of Cherry St. or the various developing downtown districts than I do all the relatively new construction out south.
I can honestly say if I were to move from where I live now, it would likely be closer in to downtown rather than much further south simply because I'm used to the offerings and conveniences of mid-town.
Quote from: TheArtist on March 22, 2013, 02:16:43 PM
I think these names are very helpful because you immediately can picture the area being talked about versus saying "Let's go hang out in the area on the north side of downtown", or "the area just to the east of downtown". Say Blue Dome, and I can immediately picture all that is there, Brady Arts District, and I can see all of that too.
That's kinda my point about pretentiousness. How really far apart is Blue Dome from Brady? And seriously, how different are the people? And how different is the mental picture--one has a blue domed building? Does the other still have a bunch of run-down looking warehouse buildings nearby with a damned jail nearby?
Head towards T, RA, and myself (inteller too, but he's in a more prime spot and too busy loving it to check in much). We manage just fine without calling 105st & Memorial "Spirit Bank Hell Hole", despite being able to picture what it looks like. But kidding aside, same goes for the booming economic activity at 71st, from memorial to garnett. I bet mucho more dollars are exchanged there than in the "blue dome", yet it manages to get by with that sexy nickname "restaurant row". Just food for thought from someone that avoids downtown like the plague, and midtown because those people smell. T said so.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 07:43:04 PM
That's kinda my point about pretentiousness. How really far apart is Blue Dome from Brady?
It's on the other side of the tracks... literally... not a bad walk from the new ballpark to McNellies or JoeMammas across one set of railroad tracks, but not all that walkable (for most Tulsans) from Caz's Chowhouse to Blue Dome-- and I've made the walk.
Ten years ago, the area around the Blue Dome was sparse and not a place you'd want to walk around at night.
Five years ago, if I ate at McNellies, I wouldn't have considered the option to walk from there to Cain's or The Old Lady on Brady... just drive and park. repeat as needed.
These days, there's more "urban density" which translates into more night time foot traffic which means "safety in numbers."
Pretentiousness has little to do with it. These districts are two isolated areas that have both improved alot over the past couple of years... it wouldn't surprise me at all to start hearing real estate professionals refer to the area as Brady/Blue Dome in the coming years... and, unless someone else remembers differently, "Blue Dome" is a relatively new nickname for that area...
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 07:43:04 PMAnd seriously, how different are the people? And how different is the mental picture--one has a blue domed building? Does the other still have a bunch of run-down looking warehouse buildings nearby with a damned jail nearby?
No difference in mental picture. Several of the run-down looking warehouse buildings in Brady have either been rehabbed or replaced with new construction.
Both Brady and Blue Dome have a mixture of upscale and dive bars, but Blue Dome is primarily restaurant/bar focused. Brady has the Brady Theatre, Tribune lofts and now alot more residential and a hotel, and has historically been considered an
arts district (there's that pesky word again). But Blue Dome doesn't have the Borden plant and David L Moss/Salvation Army sitting next door on Denver... I'm dumbfounded to understand why anyone thought it'd be a good idea to have a dairy plant and county jail locate directly across the street from a historic Tulsa theater.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 07:43:04 PMBut kidding aside, same goes for the booming economic activity at 71st, from memorial to garnett. I bet mucho more dollars are exchanged there than in the "blue dome", yet it manages to get by with that sexy nickname "restaurant row". Just food for thought from someone that avoids downtown like the plague, and midtown because those people smell. T said so.
Well, there's certainly booming retail activity at 71st between Memorial and Garnett, but I find it ironic that the same people who hate the "hustle and bustle" of downtown fail to concede that this is a traffic-ridden, unwalkable area. Suburban-style big box shopping has its place, but I really enjoy "restaurant row." Especially because it didn't exist when I moved here in 2006.
Although there's never been a shortage of pretentiousness in this city IMHO, I also get frustrated at the "let downtown die" people. There's plenty of economic activity going on downtown during the day, yet after 5 or 6pm, it had become a ghost town. And there are real residential neighborhoods that border downtown. Neighborhoods that are ill-served when the "invisible" market (combined with city zoning) dictates that "best use" for downtown property is surface parking.
And urban snobbery is certainly not endemic to Tulsa... you can hear the refrain, "bomb the suburbs" in urban areas all across the country. But to me, what really takes the cake is the suburban "aginers" in Tulsa who consistently vote NO on anything that benefits downtown or urban transit, yet will consistently SUPPORT costly road construction that only serves to perpetuate the parking lot known as 71st Street.
The soccer man scores with an informative post. And 71st street does suck--as does Memorial between 91st & 111th, and soon will 91st & Yale. My feelings about downtown are one-sided, mainly because I perceive those that push for development either live nearby, are self-interested, or want to go back in time. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the majority of Tulsa's money spending population lives near there, and that's where the focus of development should be. I don't know. But I will stick to my guns on what I consider pretentiousness of the many districts all within a square mile or so of one another, which MW online defines in part as "an exaggerated sense of one's importance", synonymous with "haughtiness". If that does not describe at least the "Brady arts district" or "The Pearl", I do not know what is.
Quote from: guido911 on March 24, 2013, 03:37:33 PM
The soccer man scores with an informative post. And 71st street does suck--as does Memorial between 91st & 111th, and soon will 91st & Yale. My feelings about downtown are one-sided, mainly because I perceive those that push for development either live nearby, are self-interested, or want to go back in time. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the majority of Tulsa's money spending population lives near there, and that's where the focus of development should be. I don't know. But I will stick to my guns on what I consider pretentiousness of the many districts all within a square mile or so of one another, which MW online defines in part as "an exaggerated sense of one's importance", synonymous with "haughtiness". If that does not describe at least the "Brady arts district" or "The Pearl", I do not know what is.
Different strokes. I get the same "haughtiness" from suburban folks when they speak of the perceived superiority of their public schools, or their "more for the money" snout houses. I don't see the Blue Dome as haughty...I see a place that has come a long way in five years still needs a ton of development.
I like living downtown because I can get around on my bike and leave my car at home...I dislike going to southeast Tulsa because I can't stand sitting still in my car (but I have to get to High Gravity anyway). I get that most people prefer their cars, I get that people from the burbs see downtown and surrounding areas as run down, scary or maybe too diverse. They should take a good look at 71st and Memorial and see how run down it looks.
Quote from: guido911 on March 22, 2013, 07:43:04 PM
That's kinda my point about pretentiousness. How really far apart is Blue Dome from Brady? And seriously, how different are the people? And how different is the mental picture--one has a blue domed building? Does the other still have a bunch of run-down looking warehouse buildings nearby with a damned jail nearby?
Does it really matter how far apart they are? Has anyone ever implied that there is any difference between the people in one area or another? The difference in the mental picture is that I see this set of businesses/entertainment options/ events/ living options, etc, in one area then a different set in another lol.
If my neighborhood is small and has one name and the next ones nearby are larger and called by other names, doesn't mean that any of them are trying to be pretentious or that the people are any different. They are just descriptors that you can use to visualize one from the other.
When I and others thought of the name Deco District for that area of downtown, none of us in any way shape or form was trying to be pretentious. It was more about advertising, promoting, creating a positive distinction. The people who live in this area and who run and own this group of businesses, restaurants, and shops wanted to get together and see what we could do to make our little neighborhood/area/district better, keeping in mind that by doing so we will also hopefully help all of downtown and even all of Tulsa by doing so. We also try to coordinate with the other areas like the Blue Dome and Brady, like the "Trolley" for instance. We have all chipped in to help get it going and we think it will help us all out. We are working to create new events in our area that will, by bringing more people and attention to our area, will help our businesses, and of course help the whole city by having more "fun things to see and do".
Who have you heard, in one of these downtown districts, be pretentious about their area anyway? And of those examples, if you have any, should their opinions blanketly be thrown on everyone in those areas? From what I know we all know that it's best we get along and work to help each other. We are happy when any area, aaaanywhere in Tulsa, or district improves. How is that pretentious?
Quote from: TheArtist on March 25, 2013, 10:19:08 AM
Who have you heard, in one of these downtown districts, be pretentious about their area anyway?
I've heard many.
I'm frustrated at those of the "new urbanist" activist mindset teaming up with the moneyed "Children of the Oil" to propose taxpayers assistance in funding development ideas that resemble an SE Hinton novel on steroids. Do "man-made islands in the Arkansas River" or the summer Olympics in Tulsa ring a bell?
God forbid I be able to shop at a downtown WalMart or Target... guess my money is better spent in Sand Springs or Tulsa Hills...
If/when All Souls Unitarian moves downtown, I guess that's totally acceptable for the urban politically correct (surface parking and all)... but if another big box retailer moves downtown... OMG, it's going to ruin that "district's" fragile eco-system and, most importantly, the utopian plans we've made for a new urbanist "neighborhood" that doesn't exist (and never did, as far as I can tell)...
But I enjoy watching from the sidelines when the usual suspects pay $10mil for Bing Thom to tell us that the IDL is a noose that strangles downtown Tulsa...
Oi!
That's an interesting mixed bag of thought there. Do you also feel frustrated when "children of the oil" (that's very good btw) team up with a casino to spend taxpayer money to put water into a south Tulsa stretch of the river? Bartlett says its a good idea and can be done in 5 years.
I'm an old urbanist and I really don't relish having a big box locating downtown unless its a grocer or Costco. Its bad enough to have QT's everywhere. Must everything be so homogenized? I like the old neighborhoods, the old buildings because I grew up around them. I llike their style even when recreated with modern materials. Its a style preference, not a pretension. It bothers me when more current suburban lifestyles invade this area and bring their suburban preferences for food and shopping with them. If I'm pretentious, then they are bullies.
The whole discussion seems silly. You don't think pretension exists in south Tulsa gate communities, that snooty little shopping center off Yale and the Creek expressway? Or the original Riverwalk advertising that proclaimed it the Utica Square of the South? Or even restaurant row on 71st?
People just like what they live in and around. Leave it at that.
Interesting to see how people have very different interpretations of a word. "District" to me is an antiquated term with very negative connotations. I nether see it as pretentious or positive in a branding sense.
District literally means to divide, hinder or distrain. It was an identifier used historically to denote areas or neighborhoods that "contained" a specific dominant culture, race, economic activity, or other group characteristic. In the new-hipster lexicon it is used frequently, and ineffectively for the same purpose. Some feel that the term sounds definitive and established. Marketers like it because if you call something "The Art District" for example, people will naturally assume that is where all of the art is supposed to be.
In our attempt to identify ourselves with larger more complex cities we like to adopt these terms without fully exploring their history and purpose. "Districts" are typically not an organic free grouping of individuals. Most (but not all) of the time they were established as an administrative division, created by some form of government action designed to segregate a population, group, or economic activity. In most cities the term "District" has been dropped or replaced by other more inclusive terms like "Center" that still establishes the idea of concentration without the concept of exclusion or division.
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on March 25, 2013, 01:03:26 PM
I've heard many.
I'm frustrated at those of the "new urbanist" activist mindset teaming up with the moneyed "Children of the Oil" to propose taxpayers assistance in funding development ideas that resemble an SE Hinton novel on steroids. Do "man-made islands in the Arkansas River" or the summer Olympics in Tulsa ring a bell?
God forbid I be able to shop at a downtown WalMart or Target... guess my money is better spent in Sand Springs or Tulsa Hills...
I have been to many "downtowns" across the country and I have yet to see one that includes a Target or Walmart. It is not a feasible location for a business like that. Now I have seen a CVS on many corners and the occasional trader joes or safeway. And if you want to put those downtown, I am all for it.
As for Bartlett and the idea of water in the river... What happens when the drought continues and water in the river is no longer a smart decision? What happens when the a low level dam just creates a giant pool of stagnant disease filled water?
But in regards to districts? We are not looking at The Hunger Games... We are not selected a person from each district to battle royal (though... great idea). I use district as nothing more than a way to describe an area of town. Greenwood, Brady, Deco, Blue Dome, Pearl... remove the district don't remove the district, it is merely a way to identify one part from another to people who are new to town. You can't say "The Brady" because there is a The Brady, You can't just say the "Blue Dome" because there is a Blue Dome.
I don't even know what the heck I am trying to say.
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on March 25, 2013, 01:03:26 PM
I've heard many.
I'm frustrated at those of the "new urbanist" activist mindset teaming up with the moneyed "Children of the Oil" to propose taxpayers assistance in funding development ideas that resemble an SE Hinton novel on steroids. Do "man-made islands in the Arkansas River" or the summer Olympics in Tulsa ring a bell?
God forbid I be able to shop at a downtown WalMart or Target... guess my money is better spent in Sand Springs or Tulsa Hills...
If/when All Souls Unitarian moves downtown, I guess that's totally acceptable for the urban politically correct (surface parking and all)... but if another big box retailer moves downtown... OMG, it's going to ruin that "district's" fragile eco-system and, most importantly, the utopian plans we've made for a new urbanist "neighborhood" that doesn't exist (and never did, as far as I can tell)...
But I enjoy watching from the sidelines when the usual suspects pay $10mil for Bing Thom to tell us that the IDL is a noose that strangles downtown Tulsa...
Oi!
Why do we have to accept a big box suburban style Wal*Mart or Target in our Downtown when these two companies have examples of urban friendly design? I would not be against a Target that melted into the urban landscape.
Check out this Seattle Target: (http://i.bnet.com/blogs/city-target-seattle-artist-rendering.jpg)
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on March 25, 2013, 01:03:26 PM
I've heard many.
I'm frustrated at those of the "new urbanist" activist mindset teaming up with the moneyed "Children of the Oil" to propose taxpayers assistance in funding development ideas that resemble an SE Hinton novel on steroids. Do "man-made islands in the Arkansas River" or the summer Olympics in Tulsa ring a bell?
God forbid I be able to shop at a downtown WalMart or Target... guess my money is better spent in Sand Springs or Tulsa Hills...
If/when All Souls Unitarian moves downtown, I guess that's totally acceptable for the urban politically correct (surface parking and all)... but if another big box retailer moves downtown... OMG, it's going to ruin that "district's" fragile eco-system and, most importantly, the utopian plans we've made for a new urbanist "neighborhood" that doesn't exist (and never did, as far as I can tell)...
But I enjoy watching from the sidelines when the usual suspects pay $10mil for Bing Thom to tell us that the IDL is a noose that strangles downtown Tulsa...
Oi!
Your welcome to come as my guest to one of the Deco District meetings. You won't hear anyone talking about islands in the river or the Olympics coming to Tulsa and doubt that if there were a show of hands that anyone there would have wanted them or voted for either. Most of us aren't new urban activists or "monied oil" either.
I don't mind big box stores at all and wouldn't at all mind more downtown. I am however more focused on encouraging small local businesses to grow and expandand... to perhaps become big chains themselves some day. I would also like the same consideration be taken into account when zoning for good urban pedestrian/transit friendly design as we do for good suburban car friendly design. Each has a different set of "best pratices" and I think it would be helpful to us all if we could be a city that offers some of both versus being a city that makes it illegal in most of the city to do good urban design while actively promoting car centric desisn, and then only have one small island where we say "if good urban design happens it happens, let the free market decide". Either let it be "free market" everywhere. or give as much consideration to good urban design zoning laws in at least some small areas, as you do good suburban design zoning laws in the rest of the city.
Three pages to complain about adding the word "district" to neighborhood branding efforts? It is an easy way to signify a location and either the things affiliated with it or the things you want associated (not necessarily from the name itself). Add "district" or not... it is like adding "ville" or "new" to a city name. "I'm going to Art Deco" just sounds odd, but "I'm going to the Blue Dome" sounds fine to me.
Men.
Pacific Heights
French Quarter
The Garden District
Uptown
The Financial District
Height Ashbury
SoHo
The pearl District (Portland)
Wrigleyville
Power and Light District
The River walk
Quote from: cannon_fodder on March 25, 2013, 03:33:17 PM
Pacific Heights
French Quarter
The Garden District
Uptown
The Financial District
Height Ashbury
SoHo
The pearl District (Portland)
Wrigleyville
Power and Light District
The River walk
That about sums up my point about wannabeism. I just see this when I read about districts: "'Scuse me, I need to go to the Brady arts district tonight".
(http://www.straighterline.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/image-archive/snooty.jpg)
It's a marketing propaganda thing. Caters to our inborn desires to gather into "social groups" - be part of something bigger than themselves.
Who could argue with a straight face that the Blue Dome District is pretenscious? And I'd say the garden district isn't very pretenscious when you get down to it. Let's kill "avenue" from street signs because it sounds upity.
Move along...
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 25, 2013, 10:03:27 PM
It's a marketing propaganda thing. Caters to our inborn desires to gather into "social groups" - be part of something bigger than themselves.
I am sure there are numerous reasons for it, all of them fine. It's just funny to me that these places are mostly in a one square mile area, that's all. With that said, and in the spirit of inclusiveness so that each of us can have a sense of belonging and we can enjoy living in/supporting districts, let's name some new ones.
21st & Yale area-- "Bell's Was Once Here" District
15th Street between Utica and Lewis--"Too many damned law offices in older buildings" district
Quote from: TheArtist on March 25, 2013, 03:19:39 PM
Your welcome to come as my guest to one of the Deco District meetings. You won't hear anyone talking about islands in the river or the Olympics coming to Tulsa and doubt that if there were a show of hands that anyone there would have wanted them or voted for either. Most of us aren't new urban activists or "monied oil" either.
I don't mind big box stores at all and wouldn't at all mind more downtown.
I don't want to come, and I shouldn't need to be there. Say the word "WalMart" at one of your meetings, then count all the turned up noses.
Propose a soccer stadium inside the IDL, and watch how many people act like NIMBYs for an area in which they don't live.
I've been a WalMart customer for decades, but wouldn't threaten to move to another city just because a downtown Target or Costco is built next door to the big box Home Depot.
Yet that is what I heard from many Tulsans when it looked like a WalMart would be built downtown.
I've always considered WalMart as the home team-- Bentonville is closer to Tulsa than it is to Little Rock.
And I've heard people in Tulsa talk about Wallyworld as if a dingo would steal their baby if they ever shopped there.
Quote from: guido911 on March 25, 2013, 11:18:09 PM
I am sure there are numerous reasons for it, all of them fine. It's just funny to me that these places are mostly in a one square mile area, that's all. With that said, and in the spirit of inclusiveness so that each of us can have a sense of belonging and we can enjoy living in/supporting districts, let's name some new ones.
21st & Yale area-- "Bell's Was Once Here" District
15th Street between Utica and Lewis--"Too many damned law offices in older buildings" district
I'm not sure I follow your singular fascination with the word
district.
21st & Yale and 15th between Utica and Lewis have existing residential neighborhoods directly around them, all with their own names, thus no reason to proclaim either area a "district."
I call it "The Brady District" mainly to differentiate it from a residential neighborhood a few blocks north of there called Brady Heights-- they are very different.
I guess I could say "I'm going to Brady Street" but many of the businesses in that area are not actually located on Brady St.
If I say "I'm going to The Brady," I could be referring to the Brady Theater or... well... maybe we should just change its nickname to Bradyville to suit you? 8)
And it's not all that uncommon to call a traditional arts area a district... this is OKC's: http://www.thepaseo.com/ ...and it's been referred to as an "arts district" for about as long as I can remember...
These days, I find it ironic that the "Brady Arts District" is, in reality, the home of lawyers and young professionals who buy art, not the creative types who make it.
Quote from: guido911 on March 25, 2013, 07:33:20 PM
That about sums up my point about wannabeism. I just see this when I read about districts: "'Scuse me, I need to go to the Brady arts district tonight".
(http://www.straighterline.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/image-archive/snooty.jpg)
Sums up my growing assumption that you must be insecure, insular, and a mean person who wants to gripe about things that don't exist anywhere but in your own deranged mind lol. So fine, you don't like "districts" and won't go to them lol. Thank Goodness!
Jenks America District
(https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/2120700066/bender_top_hat.jpg)
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on March 26, 2013, 12:44:03 AM
I don't want to come, and I shouldn't need to be there. Say the word "WalMart" at one of your meetings, then count all the turned up noses.
Propose a soccer stadium inside the IDL, and watch how many people act like NIMBYs for an area in which they don't live.
I've been a WalMart customer for decades, but wouldn't threaten to move to another city just because a downtown Target or Costco is built next door to the big box Home Depot.
Yet that is what I heard from many Tulsans when it looked like a WalMart would be built downtown.
I've always considered WalMart as the home team-- Bentonville is closer to Tulsa than it is to Little Rock.
And I've heard people in Tulsa talk about Wallyworld as if a dingo would steal their baby if they ever shopped there.
You definitely have no idea of the kind of people who are at our meetings. There would not be any turned up noses or opposition to a soccer stadium (especially if it were one that was designed to fit into an urban area).
"Yet that is what I heard from many Tulsans when it looked like a WalMart would be built downtown."
So what!? lol
Compare that to the endless, non stop barrage of people who say they hate downtown, or even Tulsa itself, etc. and what your talking about becomes minuscule to the point of being non existent.
But you do bring up a good point and I think I understand where a lot of your frustration comes from.
I was thinking about this the other day and it occurred to me that a lot of our problems in relation to this subject come from... Fear.
The Wal-Mart thing and Soccer Stadium both have the same problem for many people.
Here is the deal, here is the context for many. A lot of people would really like for there to be some good quality urban living in our city for they and their friends, family etc. to live in if they so choose. We have good suburban living for people that want that, but no good urban living for people who want that.
AND
We also do not have good zoning that would help create good urban areas.
This then leads to the fear.
A. We want something desperately that we do not have.
B. There is no zoning to help create it.
C. An idea like a soccer stadium or Wal-Mart comes along and is seen as yet another likely impediment to creating that good urban environment.
IF we already had a decent amount of good "urbanity", I very seriously doubt there would be nearly the opposition you now see.
We would have something of what we want, we would be more secure, and it wouldn't be as big a deal if this or that area, became something different. We got it, it's solid and growing, we are doing well. But when we DONT have it ANYWHERE and it only looks like there are a few possible areas where it "might" happen and on top of all of that we constantly see those areas chipped away with non urban developments going in.... well panic sneaks in at every turn.
IF we had good urban zoning in place, I very seriously doubt there would be nearly the opposition you now see.
We would then know with some assuredness that whatever went in wherever, it would meet at least some basic pedestrian/transit/urban friendly guidelines.
Again. We desperately want something we do not have, and we don't have zoning protection to ensure that we get it (quite the contrary, it's illegal in most areas), so everything in every likely area becomes a flashpoint of fear.
Once we get a good smattering of pedestrian/transit friendly urbanity, those fears will subside considerably. If we ever get some good urban zoning in place, those fears will subside considerably. But until then us poor urbanites in Tulsa are scampering around like rats out in the open, afraid for our lives, without a nest to go hide in lol. And YES, until we get a place to call our own or some zoning in place to ensure that in the future, we will lash out at anything that gets anywhere near any place that we can have some glimmer of hope in creating a little nest for ourselves. What other choice is there from our perspective?
People weren't opposed to Wal*Mart as much as they were opposed to the traditional sprawling suburban design that was proposed. We should be able to expect better and we shouldn't need to settle just for development's sake. Wal*Mart already has urban friendly stores in their portfolio...if Chicago can expect this, why can't Tulsa?
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7039/6858535588_84f27f81ca_b.jpg)
Yeah, but its in an old building. Got to be too pretentious for Wind River southies.
I think an urban friendly target would be accepted... but I think they would rather see something with a small footprint that can adapt to an existing building. Heck I would love to see something go into the old Renbergs that had an abbreviated selection of groceries and home needs. As for home depot, it was put in there when nothing else was downtown, they took a chance. Had wal-mart or target jumped in at the same time, I am sure that people would look differently at them. But they didn't. Wanting to come in after the fact and when downtown has been building for close to a decade, I feel people have the right to stand up and say they wouldn't want it... after all, are they not the desired customers?
A lot of people I know were not opposed to the Wal-Mart and had only proposed minor changes be made to the exterior design along the front and along 6th street, and traffic flow layout at the front of the building and parking lot. But the answer seemed "take it as we have presented it or not at all". That's one reason I would like to see zoning for downtown that greatly encourage companies to come in with appropriate designs in the first place and also greatly lessen peoples opposition. If you knew that "this area or these connected streets" of downtown are zoned for this type of development and these others can be for another... then the "urbanites" feel more secure that the future will hold something for them and developers of all sorts will know where they can build what type of structure where. Denver does that in it's downtown, you can build whatever you want here, but along these streets you have to build pedestrian/transit friendly stuff. Everyone knows they will get something of what they want in a far more orderly, much less fear and animosity enviroment. If you could zone Elgin and 6th street for example to have pedestrian friendly frontage, I bet most people would then say "Do whatever you want with the rest of the "East End" I know we are going to get some good stuff here, we are ok now". As it is you know nothing.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 26, 2013, 09:47:42 AM
Yeah, but its in an old building. Got to be too pretentious for Wind River southies.
Then they have "new" buildings in their portfolio that are urban design.
Fort Totten:
(http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Wal-MartNJAve.jpg)
Proposed Washington DC
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5208/5303960113_86b3c39d67.jpg)
Why the focus on WalMart?
Quote from: Teatownclown on March 26, 2013, 11:39:54 AM
Why the focus on WalMart?
I think, a while back, there was a rumored chance at a DT Wal-Mart.
Quote from: Townsend on March 26, 2013, 11:41:41 AM
I think, a while back, there was a rumored chance at a DT Wal-Mart.
It's not WalMart.....
Here is the TW Story on the subject:
the "urbanized" ended up meaning that it would have a brick facade, not actually fit an urban footprint.
A Supercenter will anchor an east-end redevelopment project.
An urban-designed Wal-Mart Supercenter is coming downtown as the anchor tenant to a proposed East Village mixed-use redevelopment project, developers confirmed Thursday.
Real estate developers John Williams of Claremore and Tom Seay of Arkansas have teamed on the project.
Williams, sole principal of Downtown Tulsa Developers LLC, has purchase options on about 15 acres of land owned by Bill White, owner of a former car dealership, and the Nordam Group, an aerospace component manufacturer.
The property sits roughly between Frankfort Avenue and U.S. 75 between Fourth and Sixth streets.
"Once the public understands the project and what it will do to the whole east end, I can't possibly imagine why they wouldn't come on board," Williams said.
Seay, a former Wal-Mart executive vice president for real estate construction, now owns the Seayco Group, which has developed many "big box" retail centers, including several in Tulsa and one in Owasso.
In addition to Wal-Mart, the tenants that Seay works closely with include Target or Super Target, Kohls, Belk, Lowe's
and Home Depot.
"Not only is Wal-Mart going to bring the goods and the services and all the low prices they're known for, they also are going to build a quality product so that they have something to be proud of," Seay said.
"This is very exciting for downtown," he said. "It represents the first step toward redeveloping downtown by taking what is a blighted area and transforming it into a place where people can shop and live in an urban environment."
Williams said the development will be the first in nearly 50 years to occur in east downtown.
The project also includes about 150 apartments "that fit into the streetscape fronting on Fourth and Fifth streets with a parking deck," Seay said.
Surface parking also would be screened with landscaping and metal fencing, he said.
Seay said the Supercenter would be slightly smaller, at 150,000 square feet, to fit the downtown site, and will have a different exterior.
"It will be urbanized," he said.
The single-story store will have a red brick facade with some stucco and will back up to Lansing Avenue near U.S. 75.
Seay said the final design plans are not complete for the project.
Both men acknowledge they still have a lot of bridges to cross and they are working closely with the city.
"We also know we need to go meet with various downtown groups that are interested in downtown redevelopment and the City Council," he said.
Williams said another positive for the project is that a downtown Wal-Mart "would create a great service to north Tulsa because it's so close."
Seay said any effort by the city's administration to get a Wal-Mart into the vacant Albertsons store at 1601 N. Peoria Ave. will not affect the downtown project.
"We have a commitment," he said about Wal-Mart going downtown.
Wal-Mart officials plan to join Seay and Williams when they begin the public education process.
Seay and Williams said they hope to have some activity on the project within the next year to 18 months.
Link and date of story? Outdated don't count.... :-X
Quote from: Teatownclown on March 26, 2013, 12:06:36 PM
Link and date of story? Outdated don't count....
You asked "why the focus on Walmart?". That was your answer.
Quote from: Teatownclown on March 26, 2013, 12:06:36 PM
Link and date of story? Outdated don't count.... :-X
Seems like '06 or '07, that's all I got.
Debating whether places aka "districts" aka "neighborhoods" for this length has to be the dumbest thing I've ever come across. It's a freaking name that allows someone to identify an area. Jeebus.
Quote from: rdj on March 26, 2013, 03:12:08 PM
Debating whether places aka "districts" aka "neighborhoods" for this length has to be the dumbest thing I've ever come across. It's a freaking name that allows someone to identify an area. Jeebus.
triple like, double stampy.
Though it has morphed into a conversation about big box stores downtown...
Quote from: rdj on March 26, 2013, 03:12:08 PM
Debating whether places aka "districts" aka "neighborhoods" for this length has to be the dumbest thing I've ever come across.
It's what happens when we stop supporting the arts.
This was a new level of hyperbole......
In our attempt to identify ourselves with larger more complex cities we like to adopt these terms without fully exploring their history and purpose. "Districts" are typically not an organic free grouping of individuals. Most (but not all) of the time they were established as an administrative division, created by some form of government action designed to segregate a population, group, or economic activity. In most cities the term "District" has been dropped or replaced by other more inclusive terms like "Center" that still establishes the idea of concentration without the concept of exclusion or division.
So, to be politically correct this poster would have us change the "financial district" to "the money changers center"
The "red light district" to "the love center"
And "the commercial/industrial district" to "that area where people wear bandannas and work with their hands".
Quote from: AquaMan on March 27, 2013, 01:41:21 PM
This was a new level of hyperbole......
In our attempt to identify ourselves with larger more complex cities we like to adopt these terms without fully exploring their history and purpose. "Districts" are typically not an organic free grouping of individuals. Most (but not all) of the time they were established as an administrative division, created by some form of government action designed to segregate a population, group, or economic activity. In most cities the term "District" has been dropped or replaced by other more inclusive terms like "Center" that still establishes the idea of concentration without the concept of exclusion or division.
So, to be politically correct this poster would have us change the "financial district" to "the money changers center"
The "red light district" to "the love center"
And "the commercial/industrial district" to "that area where people wear bandannas and work with their hands".
Sounds kinda like District 12.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 27, 2013, 01:41:21 PM
The "red light district" to "the love center"
So an area of 11th street could be 66 Love Center.
Quote from: Townsend on March 27, 2013, 02:14:06 PM
So an area of 11th street could be 66 Love Center.
69 Love Service Center would be more accurate? Am I channeling BreadBurner for some reason?