http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=46&articleid=20120105_46_0_Tulsas364171
Tulsa's iconic Coney Island Hot Weiner Shop restaurant, located at 123 W. Fourth St. downtown, will have to vacate its space by the middle of February.
Owner Jim Economou said he is looking for a new home for the business.
"We want to stay downtown because we believe it is important to us and the community," Economou said.
Coney Island's lease on the site, which is on the bottom floor of a vacant former hotel, expired in November. Economou said the property's owners want to raze the building.
Although Economou said he is looking for a new restaurant site in the downtown Tulsa area, he also has considered the Brady District.
The razing cannot happen soon enough for that eyesore.
Also: good luck to you, Coney Island.
My first preference would have been for a moderate or discount hotel chain to take it over like Sleep or Comfort Inn and restore it to a respectable hotel. I would expect, however, that the restoration costs would be too high. This is one building I won't necessarily mind seeing demolished. I just hope that they would build something there as opposed to creating another parking lot. If the Coney Island has a strong enough following, it shouldn't be hard to find a new spot downtown. I don't understand why the article seems to imply that the Brady District is not "downtown." I think they meant to say that he would prefer to stay in the central business district but would consider the Brady District.
I am actually shocked that some of you don't think the hotel could be something really neat. I would have loved to have seen it refurbished to how it looked when it was new or even hammed it up a little with the cheesy garish colors of the era. It's such a neat looking, retro building. I would have put period furniture in the lobby, old magazines on the tables, had an old tv playing period shows, fun poster art on the walls, had period music playing, the people at the front desk wear period uniforms, etc. and made it a fun tribute to that wacky retro style. Young people would absolutely love it and I think the Route 66 tourists would have loved it too. What a shame that such a unique and iconic downtown building will be lost.
Quote from: TheArtist on January 05, 2012, 05:24:29 PM
What a shame that such a unique and iconic downtown building will be lost.
OK, OK, I'll do it...
It's Tulsa by gum. We don't cotton to thinking like that.
I would like to see it updated but its sat empty for a long time. One problem it has as a hotel is the parking lot may have been sold off. It at least is reserved for someone. Hard to imagine someone taking the risk to do it.
When I worked in the World building downtown in the 80's, occasionally some adventurous couple would open the curtains on those sliding glass doors and wave to the office workers across the street....buck naked. I don't think that needs to be recreated.
The place has potential, but the cost of meeting that potential will likely be far beyond what any intrinsic value might be. While I hate to see the building razed, it might be the best thing for it. This is, of course, as long as they plan on building something there and not just turn it into another parking lot
My grandfather owned the building across the street (now a parking lot next to the Mayo Parking garage). As a teenager, I hung out on the two blocks between the YMCA and that hotel. It was a very cool place in it's day. There was always somebody hanging out on the different floor balconies just watching the street scene.
I used to tell myself that if I won the lottery, I would restore it. I am a little sad it will be gone, just because I remember it fondly. But it has been worthless and a sign of decay for two decades or more.
I have my own little list of things I wanted to see happen before I felt downtown was really back to the days I remember 40 years ago. The first one was reopening the Mayo and it happened. Second was a bowling alley or movie theater (happened). Third was a big downtown retailer like Skaggs or Renbergs (not yet). Fourth was that this hotel would reopen (I guess I now need to drop this one) .
Quote from: AquaMan on January 05, 2012, 06:09:38 PM
occasionally some adventurous couple would open the curtains on those sliding glass doors and wave to the office workers across the street....buck naked. I don't think that needs to be recreated.
Reminds me of a drunken night in Tunica many moons ago, but I digress.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 06, 2012, 12:18:56 AM
Reminds me of a drunken night in Tunica many moons ago, but I digress.
Oh Lord...Mississippi. I can remember some nights in Tunica years ago...well, partially remember anyway.
;D
Quote from: we vs us on January 05, 2012, 03:55:20 PM
The razing cannot happen soon enough for that eyesore.
Also: good luck to you, Coney Island.
Fort Worth has a hotel just like this one in their downtown...only fixed up. Its a Doowop style and it looks great. I think this building could be fixed, but whatever.
Here is a representative picture I found on the intrawebs:
(http://www.doowopusa.org/photos/vintage/aaheart1.jpg)
Quote from: carltonplace on January 06, 2012, 08:29:24 AM
Fort Worth has a hotel just like this one in their downtown...only fixed up. Its a Doowop style and it looks great. I think this building could be fixed, but whatever.
Here is a representative picture I found on the intrawebs:
(http://www.doowopusa.org/photos/vintage/aaheart1.jpg)
Here's the thing: I agree, it COULD be fixed up, but the possibility of that happening is practically nil. The investment would be massive, the return would be small . . . and IMO we're not viable enough of a destination yet to make a novelty motel work reliably. Fort Worth, by contrast, is. I guess I just don't see much return on something like that. Much better to take a chance and see if we can fill in that space with street level retail and some new office space.
I envisioned a hotel like the Hotel San Jose in Austin.
https://www.sanjosehotel.com/index2.php
If you had the power to influence the outcome, would you rather (1) this hotel remain as is for a while longer with the hope that a remodel/repurpose might become viable within 5 years, or (2) see it razed and, most likely, made a surface parking lot with the hope that a new building would be built at some point in the future (within 5 years)?
They should move to the vacated Ike's Chili spot on 5th.
I seem to remember Kevin Stephens having an interest in buying and renovating that motel, back in 2008-09. That was at the same time he was proposing turning Temple Israel into a Sustainability Center and building townhomes on the parking lot at 14th & Cheyenne.
Quote from: DTowner on January 06, 2012, 10:15:45 AM
If you had the power to influence the outcome, would you rather (1) this hotel remain as is for a while longer with the hope that a remodel/repurpose might become viable within 5 years, or (2) see it razed and, most likely, made a surface parking lot with the hope that a new building would be built at some point in the future (within 5 years)?
I would go with (1). I suspect were the economy a bit stronger this would generate interest because of its mid century modern style. But I still think it would need to be repurposed for a less intensive use than a hotel.
They should move to the vacated Ike's Chili spot on 5th.
I seem to remember Kevin Stephens having an interest in buying and renovating that motel, back in 2008-09. That was at the same time he was proposing turning Temple Israel into a Sustainability Center and building townhomes on the parking lot at 14th & Cheyenne.
Quote from: SXSW on January 06, 2012, 11:00:04 AM
They should move to the vacated Ike's Chili spot on 5th.
I seem to remember Kevin Stephens having an interest in buying and renovating that motel, back in 2008-09. That was at the same time he was proposing turning Temple Israel into a Sustainability Center and building townhomes on the parking lot at 14th & Cheyenne.
IIRC, Ikes old location was in the old Masonic Temple building along with Boston Deli across from First Presbyterian. That's now all FPC space.
I believe he is talking about the SE corner of 5th & Main. That is FPC office space?
Quote from: rdj on January 06, 2012, 11:22:09 AM
I believe he is talking about the SE corner of 5th & Main. That is FPC office space?
The Sinclair Building which is currently being neglected to death by Mr Moroney..the same one that neglected the Tulsa Club into the burnt out shell it is today.
Quote from: carltonplace on January 06, 2012, 08:29:24 AM
Fort Worth has a hotel just like this one in their downtown...only fixed up. Its a Doowop style and it looks great. I think this building could be fixed, but whatever.
Here is a representative picture I found on the intrawebs:
(http://www.doowopusa.org/photos/vintage/aaheart1.jpg)
I was curious about this building, so I went downtown to photograph it this morning.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-kkQ0w8Wm2Ig/TwoWhZJWS-I/AAAAAAAAFqI/uWBU80sVM2Q/s640/tmpEB27.jpg)
While it does have potential, I'm not a fan of the style. But I did get a good HDR shot of the Coney Island shop.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Nb6Tr9n4n2A/TwoWfiLiAII/AAAAAAAAFpY/Dirfsijkb04/s640/tmpCC9D.jpg)
The state of the Sinclair buliding makes me sad.
The Coney Hotel (Prostitute Inn) needs to be redone or torn down. I'm totally OK with it coming down but would prefer a 3 story parking garage over a crappy eyesore surface lot.
Quote from: Weatherdemon on January 09, 2012, 03:42:14 PM
The state of the Sinclair buliding makes me sad.
The Coney Hotel (Prostitute Inn) needs to be redone or torn down. I'm totally OK with it coming down but would prefer a 3 story parking garage over a crappy eyesore surface lot.
A parking lot doesnt make a lot of sense, the way this hotel is built you'ld only gain about 10 spaces once the hotel is gone.
Quote from: carltonplace on January 10, 2012, 08:59:16 AM
A parking lot doesnt make a lot of sense, the way this hotel is built you'ld only gain about 10 spaces once the hotel is gone.
yeah, but those 10 spaces could be making American Parking a good $20 - $50 a day
My wife talked to Jim Economou last night and next week Coney Island is moving back across the street to their old location next to Orpha's.
Quote from: swake on February 02, 2012, 02:18:29 PM
My wife talked to Jim Economou last night and next week Coney Island is moving back across the street to their old location next to Orpha's.
Looks like prime Tulsa Now happy hour location then. Is Orpha's still dreamy?
Quote from: Townsend on February 02, 2012, 02:21:23 PM
Looks like prime Tulsa Now happy hour location then. Is Orpha's still dreamy?
Probably a good place to get Old Style on tap. Or was that Olde English?
Quote from: Townsend on February 02, 2012, 02:21:23 PM
Looks like prime Tulsa Now happy hour location then. Is Orpha's still dreamy?
I have never ventured into Orpha's, just peered in the open door a few times. It was busy last night. Must have been the before concert crowd in there for the They Might be Giants show at The Cain's.
When I worked in the loan business many moons ago, we had a customer who worked at Steak Finger House and he ended up not having a home address to find him after awhile. You couldn't bother him at work during lunch rush, so one of our collectors would meet him at Orpha's after work to collect his payment every so often. True story.
Concidering that the mayo is just down the alley from Orphas and that the YMCA residential elements shut down, it's a wonder they don't revamp themselves. They will never be a fancy p=lace. But they could be every yuppies favorite local dive. Also, I would love to see them renovate the apartments above.
Quote from: Townsend on February 02, 2012, 02:21:23 PM
Looks like prime Tulsa Now happy hour location then. Is Orpha's still dreamy?
It sure is...Lots of rules though....
You know Tulsa is a Capricorn and one of the sayings associated with Capricorn is "tear it down to build it up." I've been meditating on this to try and come to terms with the fact that my beautiful old Tulsa has been largely torn down. Back in 2000, my lover and I spent a weekend in Palm Springs with another gay couple at a wonderful old motel from the 60s that was a favorite haunt of the Rat Pack. It had been faithfully restored to its Mid-Century Modern glory. The place had a Tiki Hut club and a great big kidney shaped pool in the center. The owners put a Los Angeles Times at your door every morning. The trendy shelled out a stack of clams to stay there. Then much later, I had a day dream of doing something similar with the hotel in question. I was going to have to ask Coney Island to move out so that I could open a 60s Go Go Girl-kind of bar in its space. You know, polka dots and strobe lights and Motown. When I asked a local attorney about purchasing it he went on and on about asbestos and asbestos remediation. Anyway, I love Tulsa for what she is, not what she isn't. So we'll trade in Go Go Bars for the Texas Two Step and Hot Country Folks. We're just a bunch of hillbillies and that's alright with me. If I want sophistication I have a car and I can drive far from here. And I won't be headed to Ft. Worth.
Wow.
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on February 03, 2012, 01:17:33 PM
You know Tulsa is a Capricorn and one of the sayings associated with Capricorn is "tear it down to build it up." I've been meditating on this to try and come to terms with the fact that my beautiful old Tulsa has been largely torn down. Back in 2000, my lover and I spent a weekend in Palm Springs with another gay couple at a wonderful old motel from the 60s that was a favorite haunt of the Rat Pack. It had been faithfully restored to its Mid-Century Modern glory. The place had a Tiki Hut club and a great big kidney shaped pool in the center. The owners put a Los Angeles Times at your door every morning. The trendy shelled out a stack of clams to stay there. Then much later, I had a day dream of doing something similar with the hotel in question. I was going to have to ask Coney Island to move out so that I could open a 60s Go Go Girl-kind of bar in its space. You know, polka dots and strobe lights and Motown. When I asked a local attorney about purchasing it he went on and on about asbestos and asbestos remediation. Anyway, I love Tulsa for what she is, not what she isn't. So we'll trade in Go Go Bars for the Texas Two Step and Hot Country Folks. We're just a bunch of hillbillies and that's alright with me. If I want sophistication I have a car and I can drive far from here. And I won't be headed to Ft. Worth.
That's what happens when you have lunch with the Clown at his place....
Quote from: Ronnie Lowe on February 03, 2012, 01:17:33 PM
....a wonderful old motel from the 60s that was a favorite haunt of the Rat Pack. It had been faithfully restored to its Mid-Century Modern glory. The place had a Tiki Hut club and a great big kidney shaped pool in the center..... The trendy shelled out a stack of clams to stay there.
We donts needs no trendy folk of any sort nor any o their clams herebouts. Trendy people and their money is strictly forbidden...
(due to our complacent contentment with mediocrity and lack of vision :-[ ).
You would have loved the Et Cetera House when it was downstairs in Utica Square.
Coney Island moving back into old downtown space
The property is managed by American Parking.
"I guess they are just going to tear it down,"http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=371&articleid=20120206_371_0_Maybey23805 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=371&articleid=20120206_371_0_Maybey23805)
QuoteMaybe you can go home again. The Coney Island Hot Weiner Shop is betting on it.
Owner Jim Economou said Monday the iconic eatery is moving to 108 W. Fourth St. in a narrow space where it operated from 1946 to 1995.
Economou said he will close the current location at 123 W. Fourth St. "whenever we run out of food on Wednesday."
The restaurant's lease expired last November, he said, and he was told he had to vacate the building by mid-February.
"I expect to be back in our old place at the latest March 1, maybe a week earlier if we get the OK from the health department," Economou said.
"The place is getting fixed up right now. They are putting in a new floor and painting. We will move all of the kitchen equipment there over the weekend."
Also going back to their old spots are the 32 school desk chairs, the all-wooden ones dating to the 1920s. The ones with the ceramic tops were acquired about 1940, Economou said.
"We will lose the 10 chairs we have at the window counter in this place, but the 32 are going back," Economou said. "We will lose the parking we have now, and that's a drawback."
The Coney Island also will lose the extra space that has allowed diners waiting in line to be inside. Expect the lunch line to wind out on the sidewalk, where customers can watch coneys cooking on the grill just inside the front window, just as they did for 49 years.
"It will be virtually the same as it was," Economou said. "The only difference is that instead of having all of our old pictures hanging on the wall, they will be flashed on a TV screen."
The restaurant was called Coney Island 5-Cent Weiners when Jim's father, Greek immigrant Christ Economou, opened it at 311 S. Boulder Ave. in 1926. It moved to 108 W. Fourth St. in 1946.
Due to lease issues at that location, Economou said, he acquired the motel at 123 W. Fourth St. in 1995 and put the Coney Island Hot Weiner Shop on the bottom floor. He sold the structure, now vacant, in 2006 to a California developer. The property is managed by American Parking.
"I guess they are just going to tear it down," Economou said. "The taxes on it were getting pretty high."
Economou took over the Coney Island when his father died in 1973. Today his sister, Georgia Tsilekas, her husband, Costa, and their son, John, handle the day-to-day operations. Caitlin Economou, Jim Economou's granddaughter, also works there.
The Coney Island Hot Weiner Shop is the second-oldest continuously operated restaurant in Tulsa, next to Ike's Chili, which opened in 1908.
Keep track of all of Tulsa's restaurant news on Scott Cherry's blog at tulsaworld.com/tabletalk and find his restaurant guide at tulsaworld.com/cherrypicks.
By SCOTT CHERRY World Scene Writer
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=371&articleid=20120206_371_0_Maybey23805
oh goody, right next to orpha's
Have they re-opened?
Well look who's back!
Quote from: Conan71 on March 13, 2012, 11:40:56 AM
Well look who's back!
Been busy. However, I have moved downtown. So instead of talking about downtown - I've been enjoying walking to Convention Center and BOK Center for concerts, etc. LOVE being downtown. Hope you've been doing OK!
My office is next door, I was walking by and there was a lady on the phone yelling "we can't do anything until the gas is on...blah blah blah" I just kept walking..looks ALOT like the old RON's hamburgers...guess it will be a bit more of a take out place....
The demo work is going on right now. Go say goodbye, if you can.
Quote from: jacobi on March 24, 2012, 04:02:13 PM
The demo work is going on right now. Go say goodbye, if you can.
Is the plan to turn this into a parking lot? As soon as we fill in one surface parking lot another takes its place.
Quote from: restored2x on March 13, 2012, 11:55:19 AM
Been busy. However, I have moved downtown. So instead of talking about downtown - I've been enjoying walking to Convention Center and BOK Center for concerts, etc. LOVE being downtown. Hope you've been doing OK!
GOSH ! Lucky......Napoleon Dynamite voice.
Saw this on FB
(http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/527282_10150764139252526_368726047525_11641498_280352927_n.jpg)
Quote from: carltonplace on March 26, 2012, 11:46:33 AM
Is the plan to turn this into a parking lot? As soon as we fill in one surface parking lot another takes its place.
It's a shame because it had the potential to be something retro cool, but given its state of disrepair and seemingly no hope of fulfilling its potential, a surface lot is better than what the old moter inn had become. This is probably another unintended consequence of the downtown stadium assessment - non-revenue producing empty building cost its owner a lot of money. Knock it down and the cost goes down and gain revenue as a parking lot.
From Tulsa deco district's FB:
(http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/543406_278747655533719_100001954601141_641523_1494823246_n.jpg)
Quote from: Townsend on March 26, 2012, 02:14:34 PM
From Tulsa deco district's FB:
(http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/543406_278747655533719_100001954601141_641523_1494823246_n.jpg)
Hope the demolitioners are wearing at least level 2 decon suits.
:o
I got about 50 pictures of it before I had to head home and plant the trees I had just got from Up With Trees...
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6872433318_e480667e41_z.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7215/6872432252_1645b73fc0_z.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7238/7018539877_6984f27740_z.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7061/6872427844_868395c2de.jpg)
More photos at: flickr.com/dscott28604 (http://www.flickr.com/dscott28604)
Good thing someone let you know it was going on, dsjeffries ;). There was a man who came over and talked to us who leases space in the beacon building. He said that this build went down because of the baseball assement district. The owner was paying on squarefootnage that he wasn't earning profit off of. Men who think this way should be publicly shamed. We have a lot of people here who deserve this shame.
QuoteHope the demolitioners are wearing at least level 2 decon suits.
They weren't. They disn't even bother to take anything out of the rooms. The drapes were still hanging up. The thermostats were still on the wall (mercury!).
In other news I, I rode around downtown on my bike and I have to say that boston really is doin so much better for itself these days. There were people out and about. It helped calm the anger in my heart for soulless property owners.
That could have been a really cool destination hotel in a place like Palm Springs with a very deep and well-appreciated Mid-Century Modern heritage. Unfortunately, Tulsa's romance with MCM seems to be the oddballs like myself who live in MCM communities such as Lortondale.
I really have to say that I support swiping properties like these out of property owners hands. I would support a measure that says if you are going to demo a building, it will be eminant domained right out from underneath you. If they get pissed off and decide to leave downtown, GREAT! I would rather have these buildings sitting vacant and on the unending TDA rolls than knocked down to save some @#%hole money.
Sorry, I'm just venting.
Quote from: jacobi on March 26, 2012, 10:38:51 PM
I would rather have these buildings sitting vacant and on the unending TDA rolls than knocked down to save some @#%hole money.
Are you trying to save all buildings regardless of whether they are worth saving or are you just trying to make some @#%hole pay more tax?
From a property rights standpoint, which devalues the neighboring property more? A parking lot or a building that is getting run down. Having no professional experience in real estate I would be curious as to what the answer would be.
Generally, I don't think the government or a controlling body should be able to dictate what you do with your property, UNLESS it affects neighboring properties. That's why I do agree with the idea of zoning laws. For example, putting a gas station smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood in the burbs would be very detrimental to the neighbors property values. Downtown is just so complicated because their are so many property owners in such close proximity to each other.
Quote from: erfalf on March 27, 2012, 08:01:45 AM
From a property rights standpoint, which devalues the neighboring property more? A parking lot or a building that is getting run down. Having no professional experience in real estate I would be curious as to what the answer would be.
Generally, I don't think the government or a controlling body should be able to dictate what you do with your property, UNLESS it affects neighboring properties. That's why I do agree with the idea of zoning laws. For example, putting a gas station smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood in the burbs would be very detrimental to the neighbors property values. Downtown is just so complicated because their are so many property owners in such close proximity to each other.
See, now I would say that in a downtown that your wanting to be pedestrian/transit friendly, a parking lot for cars would be the about the same as the gas station in the residential neighborhood. As a new member of the downtown community, I need people walking by my place and able to take transit from one part of downtown to the next. I don't want someone coming in, parking, going to a place right near where they park, then going back to their car and heading out or worse yet, driving to the next place downtown, parking and going in, etc. I need the sidewalks to be busy.
Again I will use the example of the tourists who were at the museum at 5th and Boston and wanting to go to either the Blue Dome and Boston Ave Church, just a few blocks away. In both cases if there had not been parking lots, they would have walked. But since there were parking lots, they did not walk and were not walking by, say new businesses trying to make a go of it in some older building, but were instead getting back in their car and driving past those businesses in the few buildings that remained and driving right past them.
We are never going to create a real downtown if its car oriented. We have got to break that cycle.
Yea the coney island may have been run down looking, but I guarantee you people will more likely walk past that than another parking lot. You have just created another gap that people already on foot will look at and decide not to go that way. A few more parking spots won't make up for the loss of pedestrians for any nearby business that already exists or is thinking about building and moving in. Again, there is already pleeeenty of parking in and around downtown, what we are lacking is coherent, pedestrian friendly "streetwall" and transit.
You know, I have thought about where I may like to put a new business downtown, or perhaps move the museum to next to get a larger spot. One great building would be the ONG building. Problem is, nobody really walks over there. It's kind of at the "end" or edge of the core and beginning of the "parking lot zone" and has other pedestrian unfriendly gaps around it. 5th street is great for a block or two, Boston is great for a few blocks,,, then you hit gaps in the streetwall and people turn back and don't venture further. You need a contiguous streetwall and you don't really want to be near the end of it either for people look that direction and don't see much and turn around. You can't put parking next to eeevery building. Not that we haven't tried lol.
If the city wanted a successful downtown, you know what I would want them to do... all the property they own instead of spending millions on new parking garages, put in a row of 1story shops and put in a downtown circulator transit system. Enhance the streetwall, enhance the pedestrian experience, allow businesses to get started and then in time sell and let developers build taller buildings with living and offices above. Use the cities influence to get the streetwall going and transit going, the sidewalks going. Enhance the pedestrian experience from place to place downtown, not force people to keep using their cars.
QuoteSee, now I would say that in a downtown that your wanting to be pedestrian/transit friendly, a parking lot for cars would be the about the same as the gas station in the residential neighborhood.
Bravo!
Downtown will always have enough parking for evening and weekend shopping and events based solely on the downtown workforce. Most downtown workers don't live downtown and drive in and park to get to their office. This parking opens up in the evenings and weekends for events and shopping. Increasing downtown residential is important if downtown is going to thrive, but it is impossible to pretend that it can sustain itself without consumers who will drive in and park. At that point, they can walk around downtown, or use trollys, etc., especially if you have to pay to park. If you park near the BOK Center, but want to eat at McNellies, you aren't likely to pay to park twice. Park at one end or the other and make the walk, or if light rail or trolleys are available, use that to get around.
As nice as it would be, there just is zero chance that any part of Tulsa can be successful without accounting for the use of cars. It's just not going to happen. That's not to say that downtown needs to emulate 71st and Memorial because that just won't work. My point being that the focus right now should be on residential and density. There does not need to be any new parking opened up. There is tons of parking and garages available for shopping and events. I don't think this particular spot is going to be parking for long. The article I read said there are no immediate plans, but I expect someone will step up and build. With all of the new parking going into OnePlace, I just don't see it being lucrative to use the relatively small hotel space solely for parking. Someone will step up and build.
Quote from: DowntownDan on March 27, 2012, 10:55:20 AM
Downtown will always have enough parking for evening and weekend shopping and events based solely on the downtown workforce. Most downtown workers don't live downtown and drive in and park to get to their office. This parking opens up in the evenings and weekends for events and shopping. Increasing downtown residential is important if downtown is going to thrive, but it is impossible to pretend that it can sustain itself without consumers who will drive in and park. At that point, they can walk around downtown, or use trollys, etc., especially if you have to pay to park. If you park near the BOK Center, but want to eat at McNellies, you aren't likely to pay to park twice. Park at one end or the other and make the walk, or if light rail or trolleys are available, use that to get around.
As nice as it would be, there just is zero chance that any part of Tulsa can be successful without accounting for the use of cars. It's just not going to happen. That's not to say that downtown needs to emulate 71st and Memorial because that just won't work. My point being that the focus right now should be on residential and density. There does not need to be any new parking opened up. There is tons of parking and garages available for shopping and events. I don't think this particular spot is going to be parking for long. The article I read said there are no immediate plans, but I expect someone will step up and build. With all of the new parking going into OnePlace, I just don't see it being lucrative to use the relatively small hotel space solely for parking. Someone will step up and build.
I agree that they will have to account for the use of cars, and I agree that there is already plenty of parking. It's how the city is choosing to work with those things that bugs me. Their solution is to build more parking garages. They just spent what, 8mill on new parking? That could have gone a long way to having that downtown dedicated, bus/trolley circulator route. Then now that more stuff is going in the Brady Arts district there is the push for more parking garages to serve that, then if the East End starts to develop they will want to spend millions on parking there, then in another place, etc. etc. Instead of funding transit, they are funding parking. Thats the route they want to take. And then developers, without transit in downtown also feel like they have to build plenty of parking which starts that vicious cycle going. If you were to start transit that would help developers feel like they could not have to build as much parking with their developments, and or it would allow people to park in garages or lots further out.
You know, you can make it work with the way they are going. Downtown can still be better. But with this current route your not going to create exceptional. Your not going to be better than our competitor cities, we will just be "following" them, from behind as usual and still wondering what we can do break out of our usual slower growth than everyone else mediocrity. Few simple choices and we could create superb. We could be the small city with the NYC quality, knock em out, urban lifestyle. That would appeal to a LOT of people and give us the edge that always seems to so frustratingly elude us. We are always playing catch up. And thats exactly what the city is planning to have us do once again. Ten, twenty years from now, we will find ourselves better than where we are now, no doubt, but in relation to our competitors, we will be in exactly the same spot, behind,,, when we could be exceptional, and not finding ourselves again just like everyone else was ten or twenty years ago.
I hadn't heard of any plans to build any parking garages in the Brady District. The Central Parking expansion is more for the BOK Tower/City Hall complex workers to park. It is more than enough parking to serve the Brady, Blue Dome, BOK Center, Deco District--pretty much all of downtown. But, as far as I'm aware, it still closes at 9 pm. I'm hoping that downtown businesses find a way to utilize existing parking. A trolly service to get around from the garage would be nice. Park at any of the existing parking structures and take a ride anywhere you want to go downtown.
At this point, my biggest question is what the Brady hotel plans to do for parking. A hotel, by definition, serves out of town visitors, many of whom will get here by car. I would assume some sort of valet service, but where would they take the cars? The Central Parking garage again seems to be a good fit. I really hope there are no plans to create additional parking in the Brady District. We are finally filling up parking areas with density. Utilize whatever parking already exists. Lets not go backwards.
There's a sign up on the newly expanded garage, main street side by the overpass over the tracks, offering $2 parking Thursday-Saturday evenings, aimed at Brady District visitors.
So I'd hope it's open past 9pm. But given the way we roll up the sidewalks, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close at 9.
Quote from: TheArtist on March 27, 2012, 10:20:30 AM
See, now I would say that in a downtown that your wanting to be pedestrian/transit friendly, a parking lot for cars would be the about the same as the gas station in the residential neighborhood.
I agree with you, but I don't think everyone will. Obviously or we wouldn't have to convince anyone. The train of thought is not accepted as conventional wisdom yet.
I am still a huge believer in mass rail transit. Not the Dallas DART kind either, but close in mass transit. It has been done on small scales to start and worked in other places. Tulsa has an incredible Urban center (except at the vary center, but they're working on that) that is extremely compact. We spend a boat load on roads and parking, why not spend a boat load on transit?
And seriously, no bike lanes yet? Insanity. This has got to be the most inexpensive thing the city could do to get people out of their cars (and maybe loosing some weight).
;D
For those interested - you can get your coney fix tomorrow. They officially re-open!
Quote from: gam1monkey on March 29, 2012, 10:51:54 AM
;D
For those interested - you can get your coney fix tomorrow. They officially re-open!
Same M-F lunch-7pm hours?
I saw elsewhere on the internet that the Atlas Grill is gonna be open weekends until 2pm starting in a month or so.
Quote from: TheTed on March 29, 2012, 11:41:58 AM
Same M-F lunch-7pm hours?
I saw elsewhere on the internet that the Atlas Grill is gonna be open weekends until 2pm starting in a month or so.
Just went by, still closed. Did get a shot of the destruction though
(http://i556.photobucket.com/albums/ss9/custosnox/2012-03-29114127.jpg)
Quote from: gam1monkey on March 29, 2012, 10:51:54 AM
;D
For those interested - you can get your coney fix tomorrow. They officially re-open!
ahhh I missed the tomorrow when I read that. Doh!!
The bldg was never ever going to be anything more than a run down eyesore. If I owned it and had to pay the taxes I would demo it too. You would too.
Quote from: TheTed on March 27, 2012, 03:07:21 PM
There's a sign up on the newly expanded garage, main street side by the overpass over the tracks, offering $2 parking Thursday-Saturday evenings, aimed at Brady District visitors.
So I'd hope it's open past 9pm. But given the way we roll up the sidewalks, I wouldn't be surprised if it did close at 9.
I used that "$2" parking last week.. I approached from the south and it was $5 BOK event parking.
As I walked to the Brady theater I turned back to confirm that there's a big banner advertising $2 Brady event parking..
It's either bait-n-switch or the pricing depends on the direction you approach from. I think I should have asked for the Brady discount.
I'm not sure this fits perfectly in this thread, although all downtown threads eventually turn into a discussion about parking, so here is as good as anywhere.
Article in today's T.World about Councilman Ewing's idea of a moratorium on razing buidlings to build surface lots while the city looks at zoning changes. Have I mentioned lately how glad I am he is my city councilor? It also reads as if they interviewed Artist.
Tulsa councilor fears downtown getting too many parking lots; wants zoning policy
By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
Published: 3/29/2012 2:33 AM
Last Modified: 3/29/2012 8:26 AM
Read continuing coverage of Tulsa's City Council.
Planning experts across the country agree that a sea of surface parking lots can kill the vibrancy of any downtown.
Surface lots repel pedestrians, create heat islands and are ugly dead spaces, urban planners say.
Downtown Tulsa is not immune - large parts of the urban landscape are dominated by asphalt.
"We need to figure out how to turn surface parking lots into structures, not how to turn structures into surface parking lots," said City Councilor Blake Ewing, whose district includes downtown.
The councilor plans to "float the idea" on Thursday of a temporary moratorium on the demolition of structures for the creation of surface parking lots until a zoning policy is in place.
"When you look at downtown, it has been stated over and over again that the surface parking lots are breaking up the flow," he said.
Ewing said now is the time to have a discussion about surface parking with all of the current development activity along with zoning code updates, the hiring of a planning director and the establishment of PlaniTulsa.
City Planning Director Dawn Warrick said a moratorium should have a specific purpose and timeline, "because you don't want it to take on a life of its own and last for an extended period of time."
She agrees that surface parking lots are an issue, "but I think it is a resolvable one."
"We need to understand exactly what the expectation is from the council and how quickly we can we get something in place to address the issue," she said.
Ewing said he doesn't intend to ban demolitions but wants "to ensure that what comes in its place must be a structure. It can be a parking structure. We don't want one level of asphalt."
He said a moratorium would prevent people from pre-empting the enforcement of a new parking policy by demolishing structures for surface parking while a policy is being developed.
The councilor said it "is well-established that a plan for a vibrant urban area is increased density and that surface parking lots are actually counter to that plan."
"Walking past nothing is the biggest thing to kill walkability," Ewing said. "People will walk for days if they are walking past activity. But as soon as you're walking past nothing, it seems like a burden."
The councilor said he is not targeting parking companies, because "we couldn't have what we have downtown without them."
But "the government must consider the good of the entire community, and there is a point in which the parking business can extend beyond its value," he said. "I think we're getting to that point."
Ewing, who owns businesses in the Blue Dome District, said one parking structure on one lot "would change everything as it relates to the core of the downtown."
Warrick said PlaniTulsa calls for preservation and revitalization of structures as the first choice.
"A lot of the architecture downtown is very usable unless there is some safety concern," she said.
"I think it is in our best interest to understand what is going to go in its place before we take it down."
The zoning code that establishes the Central Business District, which is located within the Inner Dispersal Loop, "does not respond to a sea of asphalt because it's about having an active and vital economy thriving within downtown," Warrick said.
Ewing said he is just trying to reverse what he thinks has been a negative trend downtown.
"We have not been as judicious as we should be as it comes to demolishing great buildings," he said. "Compare Tulsa's skyline from 1960 and now. We had a better skyline then, and that's not OK."
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=689&articleid=20120329_16_A11_CUTLIN464767#
Thankyou Blake. I've had this discussion with your three predecessors (Baker, Barnes, Gomez, Barnes) and nothing was ever done even though they all agreed with me.
Can't do what you want with your own property? Sounds like communism to me.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on March 30, 2012, 08:46:24 AM
Can't do what you want with your own property? Sounds like communism to me.
Elected officials putting forth legislation that their constituents want? Sounds like democracy to me.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on March 30, 2012, 08:46:24 AM
Can't do what you want with your own property? Sounds like communism to me.
It's called zoning.
Say I already own a parking lot/garage downtown. Would I not be psyched about this? I mean, keeping the supply down only guarantees a steady income to those that already have spaces to rent. Or does more supply not effect prices that much?
Purely an economic question.
Quote from: erfalf on March 30, 2012, 09:11:51 AM
Say I already own a parking lot/garage downtown. Would I not be psyched about this? I mean, keeping the supply down only guarantees a steady income to those that already have spaces to rent. Or does more supply not effect prices that much?
Purely an economic question.
You would have a higher probability in getting people to park there. You would also have the ability in the future to charge more as traffick increases. Currently, the lots aren't priced with supply vs demand. The best evidence of this is the massive $5 empty parking lot in blue dome.
Ah the old rights of the individual vs rights of the state question. To my mind, it is the basic question of political science. One's rights extend only so far as they do dont hurt others or the public good in general. This is the js mill anwser to this question and one that i am a fan of. IMO, the demolition of a building downtown when so much public effort and seed money has been spent to enourage new development and higher density constitutes an act that damages the public good. By that, the state should be able to step in and put a stop to this activity.
There were many people who said that the mayo was a run down heap and an eyesore. What's more of an eyesore a building that is run down or a surface parking lot? IMO a lot is worse.
Now we get into the area where the city can go condemning your business because, while it's been there for 100 years in the same place and you keep it up, it doesn't generate enough revenue like a new Applebee's.
If you want it to be something else BUY IT.
Quote from: jacobi on March 30, 2012, 09:21:32 AM
Ah the old rights of the individual vs rights of the state question. To my mind, it is the basic question of political science. One's rights extend only so far as they do dont hurt others or the public good in general. This is the js mill anwser to this question and one that i am a fan of. IMO, the demolition of a building downtown when so much public effort and seed money has been spent to enourage new development and higher density constitutes an act that damages the public good. By that, the state should be able to step in and put a stop to this activity.
There were many people who said that the mayo was a run down heap and an eyesore. What's more of an eyesore a building that is run down or a surface parking lot? IMO a lot is worse.
Let's look at this with a different lens if you were the owner or developer of a bold new development in the area. Do you want to be surrounded with neglected and run-down buildings which are an eyesore or a vacant, paved lot which is less of an eyesore? Neither would be my preference but if those were the only choices, I'd pick the lot. The other side of the coin is the demo work is already done if someone wanted to step up and put a new building on the lot where this motel once stood.
Being the fan of Mid-Century Modern that I am, I'm still deeply disappointed this building was wrecked, but it's not like it could have been made into quite the tourist destination it could be in a place like Palm Springs, Austin, Dallas or some other place where their appreciation for their MCM heritage is much more mature than it is here. It's only been 15-20 years ago when that style of design was considered "dated". I used to drive past Lortondale, see the deplorable condition of so many of the homes and wonder how long it would be before someone finally came in, leveled the neighborhood and started over. The gentrification there is nothing short of amazing. Most of the renters and squatters have left and people who choose to buy a home there aren't doing it for the relative cheap price, it's for the design and heritage.
QuoteNow we get into the area where the city can go condemning your business because, while it's been there for 100 years in the same place and you keep it up, it doesn't generate enough revenue like a new Applebee's.
If you want it to be something else BUY IT.
Businesses aren't condemmed; buildings are. I would love to haave bought that buidling for redevelopement and repurposing. I have not the fundage.
QuoteLet's look at this with a different lens if you were the owner or developer of a bold new development in the area. Do you want to be surrounded with neglected and run-down buildings which are an eyesore or a vacant, paved lot which is less of an eyesore? Neither would be my preference but if those were the only choices, I'd pick the lot. The other side of the coin is the demo work is already done if someone wanted to step up and put a new building on the lot where this motel once stood.
How much impetus is there to convert a parking lot into a building? Almost none. I mean, you can make a decent amount of money with much lower taxes. Why spend the money on a new building when you can make money without having to spend anything else? Why sell it to someone else, when it's a golden goose? Someone would have to offer more money that a property is worth OVER THEIR ENTIRE LIFETIME to motivate the owner to sell now. I won't hold my breath for some visionary to come along and develop that lot. I think it's perma-flatened.
Quote from: jacobi on March 30, 2012, 11:36:57 AM
Businesses aren't condemmed; buildings are. I would love to haave bought that buidling for redevelopement and repurposing. I have not the fundage.
How much impetus is there to convert a parking lot into a building? Almost none. I mean, you can make a decent amount of money with much lower taxes. Why spend the money on a new building when you can make money without having to spend anything else? Why sell it to someone else, when it's a golden goose? Someone would have to offer more money that a property is worth OVER THEIR ENTIRE LIFETIME to motivate the owner to sell now. I won't hold my breath for some visionary to come along and develop that lot. I think it's perma-flatened.
I get your point and agree it's going to take big bucks to interest someone in taking this out of the surface parking inventory.
The alternative was to allow that building to sit fallow, encase it in fence and make it look like a Soviet-era prison. Though I hate surface parking lots, they are a lesser evil than run-down buildings on the cityscape. Believe me, I hate choosing between two evils.
I would hope at some point a downtown master plan would dictate an end to a sea of surface parking in favor of multi-story parkades to make room for more commercial and residential development. Even if it meant a subsidy of some sort to the property owners to make it happen.
Quote from: Floyd on March 30, 2012, 09:36:07 AM
My two cents: we're letting the people who designed the ballpark assessment off WAY too easily. These buildings are getting torn down because city officials and ballpark "stakeholders" did the politically easy thing, which was to put in the downtown assessment instead of a citywide tax or, preferably, paying for it themselves. Let's not act sad, or high and mighty, because the entirely foreseeable and predicted outcome of a surcharge on downtown square footage came to pass. Every tax creates economic incentives, and it's obvious what happened here. You either get profitable or you tear down.
I agree that the ballpark assessment has had unitended consequences by incentivizing owners to knock down empty buildings that do not have sufficient revenue to pay the assessment (not that those consequences shouldn't have been anticipated). I think focusing solely on sq. footage and ignoring the use of the property was a mistake. The moratorium Councilman Ewing is talking about, however, is for a limited duration to give the city time to enact some zoning requirements on this issue and to prevent pre-emptive demos during that time. It may or may not be a good idea, but it is worth discussing.
Ultimately, zoning laws, just like building codes for that matter, rub up against the freedom of a land owner to do as she pleases with her property. Balancing the needs/interest of both the land owners and th public at large is no easy task and we all draw the line in a slightly different location. I believe Councilman Ewing appreciates that balancing act and has shown in his short time in office that he will ask the difficult questions in search of the best answer and outcomes.
It does make me wonder though, why did the owner of this old motor inn buy the buidling in the first place? Did he have a plan for it, or was he simply hoping to sit on it for years in hopes that land owners around him would develop their properties and this property's value would go up allowing the owner to cash in for doing nothing but letting the property deteriorate into an eye sore?
From Tulsa Deco Districts FB page
Quote
Tulsa Deco District The opening was scheduled for today but there were unforeseen delays, expected to open on Monday.,
Quote from: jacobi on March 30, 2012, 11:36:57 AM
Businesses aren't condemmed; buildings are. I would love to haave bought that buidling for redevelopement and repurposing. I have not the fundage.
So buildings/locations don't matter and it doesn't matter that the downtown Coney is no longer in that building. Ok.. Yes, you condemn a building. But you basically have to start a new business in a new location with the same name. Sure, you MIGHT be able to take your equipment with you if it isn't cost prohibitive for you to do that. You take a business out of its location it doesn't do the same business.
I think blaming the assessment is a cop out (there has been a downtown fee for a long time before the ball park assessment: DTU). These owners look to the west and they see an entire block of BOK parking gone and they own a lot nearby that can fill what they perceive is a niche. But, The structure on the lot in its former state of disrepair was not an inviting place to park...so the solution is to get this building out of the way...they had no plans or vision to fix the structure any way.
I'll bet Monthly parking spots will be $80+ per month and they will ask $10 for event parking.
Quote from: carltonplace on March 30, 2012, 01:45:08 PM
I think blaming the assessment is a cop out (there has been a downtown fee for a long time before the ball park assessment: DTU). These owners look to the west and they see an entire block of BOK parking gone and they own a lot nearby that can fill what they perceive is a niche. But, The structure on the lot in its former state of disrepair was not an inviting place to park...so the solution is to get this building out of the way...they had no plans or vision to fix the structure any way.
I think that is part of it, although a large chunck of this particular property was used for parking even with the motor inn rusting away above it.
While there was an assessment before, the new assessment is much higher.
QuoteSo buildings/locations don't matter and it doesn't matter that the downtown Coney is no longer in that building. Ok.. Yes, you condemn a building. But you basically have to start a new business in a new location with the same name. Sure, you MIGHT be able to take your equipment with you if it isn't cost prohibitive for you to do that. You take a business out of its location it doesn't do the same business.
I see what you meant. I misinterpreted. The god news is that I think alot of the original equipment is still in their new location across the street. GO figure.
Quote from: jacobi on March 30, 2012, 03:43:45 PM
I see what you meant. I misinterpreted. The god news is that I think alot of the original equipment is still in their new location across the street. GO figure.
It's actually an old location that they moved back too. it's not the original, but they previously spent 50 years in this "new" location.
This is cool. I hope that I am not double posting. Wes Studi at Coney Island.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRpUFqSdv5I&feature=player_embedded
As sad as it was to see go, how most businesses run these days with short term outlooks there was no way to justify the expense to renovate, even with mid term outlooks I am sure it might have been hard to justify with its size. Would have taken 10+ years to recoup costs and make a pretty penny. The assessment was a good excuse to do what has been planned for a looong time, nothing better then a scapegoat.
I loved the building and hated to see it go. If the Golden Driller were on land downtown the owners would undoubtedly come to the same conclusion and drop him for parking. That is the real problem here to me. Its not that economically it wasn't defendable and certainly within the owners rights. Its that the ownership of such icons is in the hands of unimaginative, single minded entities. That is what held up downtown for so long was buildings sitting fallow while owners waited for them to become more valuable. When they became more of a burden than they could justify they dropped them and made parking lots.
It seems that people only saw the building as a hotel or a parking lot and that was an easy choice given the economics. And don't ask me what my idea would have been for the building. Owners have the wealth, creatives have the imagination. Owners by and large listen to accountants, not creatives. Suffice it to say, there was a much better use for that building and there are still a lot of short sighted people willing to flatten buildings all over town.
I went to a Tulsa Preservation Commission Presentation last year that brought in preservation-minded professionals from around the country who broke up into teams to come up with redevelopment plans for abandoned downtown buildings. A few of the teams did the Downtowner and one of the ideas that I can remember was converting it into small apartment living directed at artists who couldn't afford $800+ rents and were more interested in living downtown than in the size of their living unit. I thought it was really a viable option and would add some good affordable living downtown. Unfortunately, this did not happen.
And why do these building owners decide that they have to renovate the whole building all at once? I am sure there is a good reason I don't know about, but I also think there are likely solutions. Why not do one floor at a time? A few units at a time. Charge lesser rents at first just to get things going and pay the taxes and insurance, then more later as you continue to build out. etc. etc.
Quote from: TheArtist on March 31, 2012, 12:41:50 PM
And why do these building owners decide that they have to renovate the whole building all at once? I am sure there is a good reason I don't know about, but I also think there are likely solutions. Why not do one floor at a time? A few units at a time. Charge lesser rents at first just to get things going and pay the taxes and insurance, then more later as you continue to build out. etc. etc.
I'm sure its the economies of scale. Doing them a few at a time makes sense to a smaller owner but means nothing but duplicative headaches for a multiple property owner. One contract, one permit, etc. Nonetheless I appreciate your philosophy that redeveloping a property incrementally allows it to pay for itself and allows a learning curve to take effect.
I really like the idea the preservationist teams came up with. Was the owner made aware of these other options?
AM, as one of the previous owners of The Downtowner, I can tell you the City of Tulsa is better off without....
TPD and Lynn Jones Pierce (Tulsa's first woman cop) set up shop there to entrap "customers" and "clients".... long time ago.
The only historical significance of this property is it had the highest hourly rentals of any establishment in TeaTown....
Yeah, well, Guapos is next to the Mays rooms too. :D I was mostly enamored of its modern architecture which was at odds with the surrounding buildings. It was in my eyes garish and outlandish which is what the 60's was all about. As Conan noted there is a following for that style now and my tastes are irrelevant. It was surely iconic for those of us who saw it during our work tenure downtown in the 70's-80's.
I once saw a couple standing nude behind one of the sliding glass doors on the east side and waving at office workers nearby. Most of the Tulsa World employees had seen other couples there as well so I figure it had become a bit sketchy. But I also figured it was pretty well built.
There are some old airplanes, boats, cars, and other things that are rebuilt at pretty much any cost. Others not so much. I think old buildings may fall into that category. If a building cannot be profitably repurposed, it's just going to require someone with deeeeeeep pockets to say I want to do this because (fill in whatever non-economic reason fits here).
AquaMan I believe the building's owner was there but I cant say that with certainty. Other teams presented on a Sager building and he was definitely there.
I speculate that owners play a lot of follow the leader in the commercial real estate industry just like oil and gas. They all want to build lofts, restaurants, bars etc. At some point some of them have to realize that those new downtown inhabitants need things that folks in the outlying areas don't. For instance, the downtown lifestyle probably won't be as car centric as the burbs. That implies that many of these buildings should be re-purposed for something other than what enticed the new patrons to come downtown in the first place.
Does that make sense? So, when I see a building that is saveable, but not as its intended purpose and unsuitable for lofts, bars,etc, it seems a total waste of energy and resources to just flatten it.
I was in Dallas last weekend, 7-11 had a 600sf store setup at the corner of an condo development, it was about half the size of a regular store with some food options, drinks, etc....nice little store and it was very busy...if QT would do something like this or someone would...I think it might be a winner downtown...he if Supercuts can make it in Downtown Tulsa ...I would think they could!
Quote from: zstyles on April 02, 2012, 12:38:34 PM
I was in Dallas last weekend, 7-11 had a 600sf store setup at the corner of an condo development, it was about half the size of a regular store with some food options, drinks, etc....nice little store and it was very busy...if QT would do something like this or someone would...I think it might be a winner downtown...he if Supercuts can make it in Downtown Tulsa ...I would think they could!
A downtown QT would be awesome. Even Wichita has one in their Old Town. It's a regular, car-centric one, but still. Beggars can't be choosers. And being realistic, downtown Tulsa's never gonna be anything but car-centric.
Oklahoma=Texas lite. We look to Texas and OKC for everything. There's not much urbanity in Texas.
The existence of Supercuts, given their current hours, doesn't prove much about downtown to me. They're only open M-F until 6pm and Saturday 'til 1pm. Closed Sundays. If they were open somewhere close to the same hours other Supercuts around town are open, you'd have a point.
The Coney Island downtown is still open. The building they were in was bought out for new construction so Coney Island moved to their original location which is right down the street and next to Orpha's Lounge. The building they are now in, was their original location when first opened! Make sure to check out the new building, lot's of history and still, same delicious food!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIAroofing.com
918-398-6595
Quote from: ttown9 on April 17, 2012, 12:56:21 PM
The Coney Island downtown is still open. The building they were in was bought out for new construction so Coney Island moved to their original location which is right down the street and next to Orpha's Lounge. The building they are now in, was their original location when first opened! Make sure to check out the new building, lot's of history and still, same delicious food!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIAroofing.com
918-398-6595
This was already discussed
Quote from: Townsend on February 06, 2012, 03:22:16 PM
Coney Island moving back into old downtown space
The property is managed by American Parking.
"I guess they are just going to tear it down,"
http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=371&articleid=20120206_371_0_Maybey23805 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=371&articleid=20120206_371_0_Maybey23805)
And it's a parking lot. $85 per month.
It doesn't look like they intend to pave it, or screen it or prettify it in any way.
Shouldn't the City of Tulsa have an ordinance for surface level parking inside the IDL?
At a minimum there should be rules for screening, landscaping, pavement, curb cuts, sidewalks, signage, and lighting. Maybe if COT regulates the crap out of them they would be less attractive to create?
Found this on the Tulsa Preservation site:
Looking north on Boston in 1978
(http://tulsapreservationcommission.org/images/assets/bostonave1978.jpg)
Looking north on Boston in 2005
(http://tulsapreservationcommission.org/images/assets/bostonave2005.jpg)
Tulsa's new slogan:
"TULSA! WE LOVE OUR SURFACE PARKING! MMMM, MMMM MMMM!"
Quote from: carltonplace on April 18, 2012, 08:22:56 AM
And it's a parking lot. $85 per month.
It doesn't look like they intend to pave it, or screen it or prettify it in any way.
Shouldn't the City of Tulsa have an ordinance for surface level parking inside the IDL?
At a minimum there should be rules for screening, landscaping, pavement, curb cuts, sidewalks, signage, and lighting. Maybe if COT regulates the crap out of them they would be less attractive to create?
Blake?
I drove by today and they were paving, so it will at least be a paved lot. Will probably remain that way for a long time until someone decides they can make use of it with a building.
Own a piece of history: http://tulsa.craigslist.org/clt/2937109492.html
Maybe Sager will buy it and hang it next to the Ridgeways sign across from his loft "project."
Quote from: rdj on April 23, 2012, 09:32:30 AM
Maybe Sager will buy it and hang it next to the Ridgeways sign across from his loft "project."
Only if he can fit "S-a-g-e-r" in it and send the bill to v2025
Quote from: carltonplace on April 23, 2012, 10:34:21 AM
Only if he can fit "S-a-g-e-r" in it and send the bill to v2025
Sager's Hot Weiners 5c
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 24, 2012, 01:44:21 PM
Sager's Hot Weiners 5c
I thought getting getting "the business" from Sager's hot weiner cost closer to $2 million?
Quote from: swake on April 24, 2012, 01:49:55 PM
I thought getting getting "the business" from Sager's hot weiner cost closer to $2 million?
Beat me to it and yet I still need a new keyboard.
Quote from: rdj on April 24, 2012, 04:18:31 PM
Beat me to it and yet I still need a new keyboard.
Probably not the best use of that phrase...
:o