http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120929_11_A15_CUTLIN529700
A developer is buying a Tulsa Development Authority property to build the $3.5 million downtown residential project "100 Boulder" between First and Second streets on the west side of Boulder Avenue.
Joe Westervelt of Mapleview Associates Inc. has a $100,000 contract with the Development Authority - the city's real estate arm - on the small parcel of land adjacent to the 100 West Parking Garage where he is planning an 18-flat development.
The one-bedroom, high-end units - nine on each of the two floors - will retail for just less than $200,000 each. Current mortgage rates indicate monthly rates between $1,300 and $1,400 per month.
First-floor units at 100 Boulder will measure 807 square feet, while those on the second floor will have an extra 50 square feet of space because of their individual, indoor staircases.
The outside of the building will have a sleek stainless steel and glass appearance, Westervelt said.
"I think it needs to look crisp and urban in that particular area," he said, adding that he wants to tap into the younger-than-35 market looking to live in the revitalized downtown.
The burgeoning Brady Arts District is just across the new Boulder Avenue bridge, and the BOK Center, One Place development and the Blue Dome District are short walks away.
Although the downtown housing market is strong, Westervelt said, "there certainly aren't very many options for buyers who are looking for new, open, contemporary spaces."
Westervelt has a year before the closing with the Tulsa Development Authority to get the project shovel ready, but he hopes to speed that along.
The plan calls for construction to begin in 2013.
The Development Authority's initial request for proposals for the property last year didn't have any respondents.
Even Westervelt, who has built many homes in Tulsa, including the Mapleview on Cherry Street enclave, said he didn't know at first what he'd do with the narrow piece of land.
But the more he thought about it, Westervelt said, he thought he'd be missing out on an opportunity if he didn't make an offer.
"It is both dimensionally and topographically challenged," he said. "It looks like a little leftover area."
Westervelt said it has taken him nearly a year to figure out what could be done with the property that makes economic sense and how to do it.
The site plan for 100 Boulder is 58 feet wide by 230 feet long. Residents will enter their units from a gated path on the west side of the building between the parking garage, with their patios and balconies facing east toward Boulder Avenue.
"It's a really small footprint," Westervelt said. "What really makes this housing opportunity viable is the ability to work out a relationship with the parking garage."
Westervelt is in discussions with the Tulsa Parking Authority, which owns the garage, to have spaces in a restricted section available to the residents at an expected cost of $95 for one, with a second spot available for half price.
There also will be a homeowner's association fee, he said.
The architecture and design of the building's concept is by Brian Freese of Freese Architecture.
Each flat will have 10-foot-high ceilings and feature pony walls between areas to maintain a feeling of openness.
The units will be individually fire suppressed and have hardwood floors, modern kitchens, stacked washers and dryers, and Murphy beds to allow the bedroom areas to provide multiple functions.
There's enough flexibility in the plans for a buyer to choose two vertical flats to join together, Westervelt said.
As word is getting out about the 100 Boulder development, he said, he's already had inquiries about presales.
Anyone interested should call 918-583-8808 or email jwestervelt@mapleviewassociates.com.
"There seems to be a real appetite out there," he said.
Cherry Street is not a great urban example for what we should build downtown. It's a great neighborhood and I'm glad to see it become more dense with row house style development but it's not an urban center like Downtown should be. To think that we could be building single family homes in the heart of Downtown along a Streetcar route..
We really need to think about an ordinance that states with any new residential development inside the IDL, there has to be street level retail space.
You could easily take the piece of land, put retail on the first level and have residential areas above.. I've seen plenty of creative ideas generated by small pieces of land in urban centers.
This is a tiny sliver of land between a parking garage and the street currently occupied by grass and a piece of "art." Not sure how it could realistically be developed more dense than this project. Retail along this stretch of Boulder would be tough without anyone living there.
Were it not for our gaggle of pets, I'd be all over this. ;)
I recall this stretch being purposefully set aside with the hopes for retail?
I understand the frustration expressed, especially when this is on a future streetcar route and in a spot that I thought would have retail at ground level,,, but, it will be an improvement, and as it's a small development if downtown keeps growing can be redone in time. Hopefully the development will be pedestrian friendly (thats a BIG concern if we want this route to be a connector from the core of downtown and the Brady Arts district), and hopefully we will see other, higher density developments along this route.
Couple second thoughts... why not add ground floor retail? You can make good rent off the spaces, and if I were wanting urban living in a downtown, I wouldn't really want to live on a ground floor space on a major street, but would want to live at least on a second floor in that environment.
Keep in mind this is the same guy who spoke for almost half an hour, while shaking and flop-sweating, to stop the form-based codes in the pearl district.
The developer indicated in earlier discussion the property was going to be retail/restaurant mixed use.
I was wondering how he got the land under contract without a sealed bid process. Only an insider would detect this as developable property.
Well, this should put the nail in the coffin of the old landscape ordinance. The city often fails to obey it's own regs.
Quote from: sgrizzle on September 30, 2012, 07:41:24 PM
Keep in mind this is the same guy who spoke for almost half an hour, while shaking and flop-sweating, to stop the form-based codes in the pearl district.
Funny, since form over function and shared parking will need to be considered when trying to build on this tiny parcel.
Quote from: carltonplace on October 01, 2012, 09:12:58 AM
Funny, since form over function and shared parking will need to be considered when trying to build on this tiny parcel.
*cough*
Horrid horrid horrid idea. Why not utilize the massive surface lot accross the street and do something a little more feasible for residence and utilize this space for retail. Are they 800sf ($250 per sf) or 1650sf ($121 per sf)? I wouldn't want to drop 200K on on these either way, and I would literally have a 30 second walk across the street to go to work. And an additional 95 for parking and a HOA? You could easily top 1700 a month.
Quote from: JCnOwasso on October 01, 2012, 10:46:33 AM
Horrid horrid horrid idea. Why not utilize the massive surface lot accross the street and do something a little more feasible for residence and utilize this space for retail. Are they 800sf ($250 per sf) or 1650sf ($121 per sf)? I wouldn't want to drop 200K on on these either way, and I would literally have a 30 second walk across the street to go to work. And an additional 95 for parking and a HOA? You could easily top 1700 a month.
Or better yet, why not leave it as a green space and develop the half block across the street, as you have proposed, and incorporate street level retail into that development. I'm all for development, but I'm not sure what the benefit is of removing green space to insert a sliver of overpriced townhomes while leaving a large surface parking lot as is.
I think the TDA pricing for this sliver is priced to sell. The giant surface lot across the street has a much higher price tag.
Who wants to pay $250 a foot to live in a shoe box?
I think I'd wait until the bank repos the project and buy one for 1/2 price if I were interested in living in something that small.
Who really is the demographic for this? It's out of the question for anyone with kids and I really don't see what the attraction would be for retirees to live in the middle of the CBD. Hipsters can't afford this and I'd think anyone with $200K to spend is going to want more space.
Re the giant surface parking lot on the east side of Boulder: a new skyscraper would fit nicely in that block if anyone has one laying around.
Quote from: LandArchPoke on September 30, 2012, 02:00:09 PM
Cherry Street is not a great urban example for what we should build downtown. It's a great neighborhood and I'm glad to see it become more dense with row house style development but it's not an urban center like Downtown should be. To think that we could be building single family homes in the heart of Downtown along a Streetcar route..
We really need to think about an ordinance that states with any new residential development inside the IDL, there has to be street level retail space.
You could easily take the piece of land, put retail on the first level and have residential areas above.. I've seen plenty of creative ideas generated by small pieces of land in urban centers.
I don't think government should be able to put demands on a developer that go outside the zoning code. Also, JW has parking dedicated adjacent to the housing as indicated in the TW article.
I think this may be a red herring or a trial balloon with the end result being retail. The rendering I think I saw indicated outdoor seating, umbrella tables, and a more flexible land use.
Bok and/or Williams will not let that empty lot go cheap... if at all. They need more space as it is. Both have shown a hesitation or unwillingness to rehab old. That is the logical expansion site.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on October 01, 2012, 01:11:31 PM
Bok and/or Williams will not let that empty lot go cheap... if at all. They need more space as it is. Both have shown a hesitation or unwillingness to rehab old. That is the logical expansion site.
Heir Kaiser...it's in good hands.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on October 01, 2012, 01:11:31 PM
Bok and/or Williams will not let that empty lot go cheap... if at all. They need more space as it is. Both have shown a hesitation or unwillingness to rehab old. That is the logical expansion site.
If that is the case, then build a garage there with street level retail. I really don't understand why our parking garages do not have that.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on October 01, 2012, 01:11:31 PM
Bok and/or Williams will not let that empty lot go cheap... if at all. They need more space as it is. Both have shown a hesitation or unwillingness to rehab old. That is the logical expansion site.
Mirror the One Place development. Retail, parking, then residential (in lieu of offices). Let's get creative, and I don't mean let's force something in an area where it shouldn't be forced. If TPA is trying to sell off this property, lets get them to throw in couple parking passes. And what, exactly, is a HOA going to do for this location? I really don't see them tossing in a pool or have a common space, ala Metro at Brady.
Quote from: JCnOwasso on October 01, 2012, 02:20:00 PM
And what, exactly, is a HOA going to do for this location?
It's like a fundraiser. For every dollar, Joe Westervelt gets to be cranky for another minute.
The lack of included parking spaces was striking to me. We have this undesirable strip of land next to a garage that's totally full, what, five times a year (and you have to go all the way to the roof deck to tell me it's full). I've never seen it full on a big event night.
So why can't we throw in a half dozen parking spots. The cost to the city is basically nothing. The lack of manned hours at the pay booth, allowing lots of free parking, tells me the city doesn't care that much about collecting the parking money anyway.
Think this is a great idea! Can't wait to see them break ground on this. This reminds me, whats the latest on Greenarch? How about Brady flats? Hope they are both coming along!
Quote from: JCnOwasso on October 01, 2012, 02:20:00 PMAnd what, exactly, is a HOA going to do for this location? I really don't see them tossing in a pool or have a common space, ala Metro at Brady.
It creates a psuedo-govt entity that depending on the laws in Oklahoma, can file a lien against the property for nonpayment of dues, and foreclose on the property and evict the owner.
Have been a homeowner with an HOA, and will never do it again. Too many people have too much time to look for CCR infractions, and exact fines that can escalate into expensive court costs, and paying for things that you may not use or have access to, HOA's are little totalitarian fifedoms.
Quote from: tulsasooner on October 01, 2012, 08:46:53 PM
Think this is a great idea! Can't wait to see them break ground on this. This reminds me, whats the latest on Greenarch? How about Brady flats? Hope they are both coming along!
Green Arch has slabs down.
Brady Flats has not started.
Quote from: dbacks fan on October 02, 2012, 02:57:18 AM
It creates a psuedo-govt entity that depending on the laws in Oklahoma, can file a lien against the property for nonpayment of dues, and foreclose on the property and evict the owner.
Have been a homeowner with an HOA, and will never do it again. Too many people have too much time to look for CCR infractions, and exact fines that can escalate into expensive court costs, and paying for things that you may not use or have access to, HOA's are little totalitarian fifedoms.
Completely understandable and I completely agree about never wanting to be apart of one again, but generally a HOA is there "for the greater good" (shameless Hot Fuzz quote). There is something that the funds go towards. Ours takes care of common area grounds maintenance, the swimming pool and clubhouse, the ponds, and the play grounds. This area is barely big enough to support the suggested "flats". Is there going to be a roof top common area or something like that? If I am paying a HOA, there has to be an exchange of consideration. In this case, paying a HOA to merely pay a HOA is not exceptable and I am willing to say that these "young professionals" they are aiming at are a little smarter than to except it.
At 125 per SF, I would rather go find a nice historical house in mid town where I have a garage, a yard, some trees, and where my views are not of a parking garage and a surface lot. Perhaps I am not young professional enough for this area, but it is my demographic they are aiming towards. But the wife and I have considered moving downtown and if we didn't have a small zoo, we would have already done so. As much as I would love to own a place downtown, rather than rent, I am not going to pay what they are saying this will cost.
Quote from: JCnOwasso on October 02, 2012, 10:46:38 AM
At 125 per SF, I would rather go find a nice historical house in mid town where I have a garage, a yard, some trees, and where my views are not of a parking garage and a surface lot. Perhaps I am not young professional enough for this area, but it is my demographic they are aiming towards. But the wife and I have considered moving downtown and if we didn't have a small zoo, we would have already done so. As much as I would love to own a place downtown, rather than rent, I am not going to pay what they are saying this will cost.
If you want to live downtown but want the amenities of midtown you should look into the Owen Park, Brady Heights, Crosby Heights, Reservoir Hill areas. Lots of great older homes at great prices. Very, very few houses over $100/ft. I paid $35/ft for my house. I'll have $75-80/ft in it once I'm done remodeling, but that is much cheaper than midtown and I'm 15 blocks from Cains Ballroom.
Quote from: rdj on October 03, 2012, 09:24:55 AM
If you want to live downtown but want the amenities of midtown you should look into the Owen Park, Brady Heights, Crosby Heights, Reservoir Hill areas. Lots of great older homes at great prices. Very, very few houses over $100/ft. I paid $35/ft for my house. I'll have $75-80/ft in it once I'm done remodeling, but that is much cheaper than midtown and I'm 15 blocks from Cains Ballroom.
Yep, I'm in Riverview just south of downtown and spent $52/sqft for a century old craftsman jewel. Downtown is my backyard.
Whether as retail or residential, it seems odd that this small parcel would be the first thing on this block to get developed. It really seems like it would be the last development to happen on the block. I get that it is less expensive than other areas downtown, but retail here at this time would be a stretch because there is nothing to create much foot traffic to this fringe of the business district during the day - you don't walk by this spot to go to anything else. Once the bridge is open, there might be some foot traffic from the Brady District to the BOK during events, but I question how many people will walk from the Brady to the BOK. Plus, traffic only on event nights isn't going to sustain a business. Residential seems a stretch because it is a big risk to buy in this location when you don't know what's going to happen across the street in the long run - could stay a large surface lot or could become a high rise office buidling. Neither one makes these few houses much of a draw when the first buyers seek to sell down the road. Like so many things involving the TDA and any announced development, time will tell if anything ever comes of it.
Quote from: carltonplace on October 03, 2012, 10:46:27 AM
Yep, I'm in Riverview just south of downtown and spent $52/sqft for a century old craftsman jewel. Downtown is my backyard.
I bought a house in Sungate (56th and Sheridan) for $35/sqft and remodeled it for another $18/sqft.
I can walk to four shopping centers and 30 restaurants in my square mile.
I hate the traffic, however.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 03, 2012, 01:15:28 PM
I bought a house in Sungate (56th and Sheridan) for $35/sqft and remodeled it for another $18/sqft.
I can walk to four shopping centers and 30 restaurants in my square mile.
I hate the traffic, however.
So you did move from the house behind Sutherland's?
Quote from: DTowner on October 03, 2012, 12:31:15 PM
Whether as retail or residential, it seems odd that this small parcel would be the first thing on this block to get developed.
Not really. probably the cheapest per sq ft.
Quote from: Hoss on October 03, 2012, 01:25:32 PM
So you did move from the house behind Sutherland's?
Yes. I am going to list it for sale in a couple of weeks.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 03, 2012, 01:15:28 PM
I bought a house in Sungate (56th and Sheridan) for $35/sqft and remodeled it for another $18/sqft.
I can walk to four shopping centers and 30 restaurants in my square mile.
I hate the traffic, however.
Are you living there now or was this before the house near 21st & Mingo? I lived there from '93 to '99. I loved that house and that neighborhood! We were about a block north of the schools on 74th E. Ave. IIRC, I think it was around $40 a foot when we bought in '93 move in ready.
edit: well I should have checked for further comments. PM me which street you are on.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 03, 2012, 01:15:28 PM
I bought a house in Sungate (56th and Sheridan) for $35/sqft and remodeled it for another $18/sqft.
The downtown library has a brochure produced by the developers of Sungate in their neighborhood files on the top floor. It's a mid-century advertising jewel. Right out of Mad Men. Sungate was one of the most progressive neighborhoods in its time. Lots of "firsts" for the Tulsa area.
Quote from: carltonplace on October 02, 2012, 08:46:36 AM
Green Arch has slabs down.
Brady Flats has not started.
Green Arch has about 50% of its first floor framing done.
Quote from: rdj on October 04, 2012, 08:48:20 AM
The downtown library has a brochure produced by the developers of Sungate in their neighborhood files on the top floor. It's a mid-century advertising jewel. Right out of Mad Men. Sungate was one of the most progressive neighborhoods in its time. Lots of "firsts" for the Tulsa area.
IIRC, first neighborhood with all underground utilities which lessened the amount of power outages in storms, community pools had already been done so I can't think of the other firsts, any idea what they were? The people I bought my house from had some of the original brochures as well as some Tulsa Trib and World articles on Sungate. I don't remember if I passed those on to the next owner or kept them. Might be cool to pass on to RM if I still have them.
Thanks rdj and conan for the information. I will check out the library and would love to see any stuff from the history of the hood.
Every street has sidewalks and all underground utilities was one of the big selling points for me. All my years with Up with Trees has me really believe in Down with Poles.
The neighborhood really has a good feel to it. There is a nice mix of one and two story houses and I have never lived in a neighborhood with as much diversity. Sunday night we had a bunch of family over and all went to the neighborhood built and maintained park to play soccer. The retired people are everywhere in the evening with most of them manicuring their lawns or power walking the streets. Almost everybody on my block stopped and introduced themselves to me when I was working in the yard.
It is five hundred yards to walk to the Farm shopping center which is filled with restaurants including Margaret's German, Billy Sims BBQ, and Villa Ravena Italian. There is also a Mazio's, a Subway, Ron's hamburgers, Furr's Buffet, Billy and Ike's and reopening this week, Great Harvest Bread Co. On the connecting intersection with this center is almost everything else I need including grocery, liquor, dry cleaners, a Quik-trip, and five drive-through restaurants.
Our lot is small (the main reason I moved is because my old house was too much for me to maintain), but we have two nice sized trees and nice garden areas. There will still be pressure is on me to make the small front yard as beautiful because my neighbor's front yards could win beautification awards. This week the Yard of the Month is on the corner of 56th and 68th east Avenue. It is stunning for a small corner yard.
Earth is being moved on this site.
Are these condos happening?
Quote from: BKDotCom on January 15, 2014, 01:18:46 PM
Earth is being moved on this site.
Are these condos happening?
Looks like it.
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=18940.0
Urban 8 is a separate project @ 3rd & Greenwood.
100 Boulder is happening at 1st & Boulder
http://www.randygasswint.com/Blog/Downtown-Tulsa-New-High-End-Development-100-Boulder
Quote from: carltonplace on October 01, 2012, 11:15:32 AM
Re the giant surface parking lot on the east side of Boulder: a new skyscraper would fit nicely in that block if anyone has one laying around.
This was exactly what I thought. I assume that parking is bundled with the Williams buildings. If the scraper we've been waiting for is built there joes properties are going to soar. Do you think he knows something that the public doesn't?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Wow, that would be huge.
Got to see my brother last week while doing the family vacation thing in Florida. He invited me to come up and stay with him in Denver sometime and let him and his wife show me around. Was looking at some websites about downtown Denver and noticed that they are averaging about 2,000 new housing units per year in their downtown. Tried finding the rundown I saw on here about what we have had residential wise over the last few years and going on now but can't find it?
Quote from: TheArtist on January 28, 2014, 08:59:38 AM
Got to see my brother last week while doing the family vacation thing in Florida. He invited me to come up and stay with him in Denver sometime and let him and his wife show me around. Was looking at some websites about downtown Denver and noticed that they are averaging about 2,000 new housing units per year in their downtown. Tried finding the rundown I saw on here about what we have had residential wise over the last few years and going on now but can't find it?
Nowhere close to 2,000, probably more like a couple hundred either planned or under construction for the next year with a couple hundred more into 2015-16. A lot of those are in residential conversions and proposed but not construction ready projects in the East End and Brady. Denver is on a different level being a much larger city and one that is rapidly urbanizing its downtown. There is also a massive influx of young people there who want to live in downtown apartments, and housing in the inner neighborhoods is very expensive approaching coastal levels ( so is rent). Downtown Denver also has over 150,000 daytime workers, and traffic is gridlocked in all directions making long commutes undesirable.
Housing in Tulsa, even in a nice midtown neighborhood within a couple miles of downtown, is still pretty affordable so there are less renters or they rent houses by Cherry St and Brookside. And people can live 20 miles away and still have a relatively easy commute. There is demand though for more urban apartments but developers and builders are more cautious here. More employment downtown would drive even more growth in urban housing, both for sale and rental.
Overview today in the Tulsa World of downtown housing under construction or planned through 2015.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/realestate/downtown-tulsa-living-options-grow-as-units-planned-in-projects/article_66a9f956-e7af-553d-a201-3f34ecec6528.html
Downtown Tulsa living options grow as 313 units planned in 2014 projects
313 new units being developed in 2014 projects
Posted: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 12:00 am | Updated: 4:51 am, Wed Jan 29, 2014.
By ROBERT EVATT World Business Writer | 3 comments
Over the past decade, living options in downtown Tulsa have gone from nearly nonexistent to abundant.
And even that's not enough to keep up with the demand, said Brian Donahue, a broker with CB Richard Ellis/Oklahoma, during a Tuesday forum on downtown living development sponsored by the Tulsa Regional Chamber.
"It's an extremely tight market downtown with the current housing in place," he said.
Fortunately, plenty more is coming.
Steve Ganzkow of American Residential Group said he knows of 313 apartment units planned or underway among six downtown projects this year, and an additional 381 units in five projects in 2015.
The 2014 projects include:
•83 units at East End Village, a mixed-use development in the former Bill White Chevrolet site;
•The Denver Y Lofts, which will have 82 units in the former YMCA building via the Snyder family and other investors;
•40 units in the former Vandever building, again from the Snyder family and its investors;
•61 units at the Flats on Archer development at Archer Street and Boston Avenue, which is in the preliminary stages of planning, according to Tulsa Development Authority Executive Director O.C. Walker;
•24 units in the Harrington building at Eighth and Main streets from developer Stuart Rains, and
•23 units at the First Street Lofts, a long-gestating project at First Street and Detroit Avenue from Michael Sager.
Developments slated for 2015 include potential redevelopments from KPM, formerly Kanbar Properties, with 90 units at 111 W. Fifth St., 56 units in the Adams Building and 37 units in the TransOK Building. Calls to KPM for further information were not returned Tuesday.
Other 2015 developments include 162 units at Hartford Commons in East Village from Elliot Nelson and a redevelopment of the Coliseum Apartments at 635 S. Elgin Ave., which will bring 36 units.
Ganzkow said he expects more development to occur in East Village as time goes on.
"That's where the land is, so that's where the market's going," he said.
Donahue said downtown living has become so popular that waiting lists are common. A CB Richard Ellis/Oklahoma survey indicates downtown apartments are now 97.5 percent full, compared to an average of 92 percent in the overall metro area.
Despite the number of developers focusing on downtown, Ganzkow said issues such as foundations and parking structures make downtown development more expensive than construction in other parts of the city.
He believes incentives have been a critical factor in encouraging developers to come, including TIF districts, low-income tax credits and, most importantly, credits for rehabilitating historic buildings in a way that retains their original architecture.
"This is a huge incentive to redo these historic buildings, and most buildings that are now standing qualify," Ganzkow said.
Robert Leikam, vice president of commercial real estate at BOK Financial Corp., said developers will be more likely to incorporate retail spaces in their construction.
"The next new products will be mixed-use like they have in Dallas," he said.
Donahue said it's still not clear when someone will be able to bring a grocery store to the area to serve residents.
"You need a certain number of people living downtown, and that's a moving target," he said.
Robert Evatt 918-581-8447
robert.evatt@tulsaworld.com
Quote from: SXSW on January 29, 2014, 01:15:47 PM
Nowhere close to 2,000, probably more like a couple hundred either planned or under construction for the next year with a couple hundred more into 2015-16. A lot of those are in residential conversions and proposed but not construction ready projects in the East End and Brady. Denver is on a different level being a much larger city and one that is rapidly urbanizing its downtown. There is also a massive influx of young people there who want to live in downtown apartments, and housing in the inner neighborhoods is very expensive approaching coastal levels ( so is rent). Downtown Denver also has over 150,000 daytime workers, and traffic is gridlocked in all directions making long commutes undesirable.
Housing in Tulsa, even in a nice midtown neighborhood within a couple miles of downtown, is still pretty affordable so there are less renters or they rent houses by Cherry St and Brookside. And people can live 20 miles away and still have a relatively easy commute. There is demand though for more urban apartments but developers and builders are more cautious here. More employment downtown would drive even more growth in urban housing, both for sale and rental.
I think the age of the downtown workforce has a lot of power to dictate what gets built and where. If we see significant growth in businesses that hire young single or non-family folks, we will probably see a higher demand for upscale but affordable urban living. If businesses that rely on an experienced professional workforce, we will continue to see urban business growth spur more suburban residential growth and the congestion that comes with that commute. There is a component of support businesses that will thrive (like restaurants and bars) but they will and do struggle with a workforce that vacates at 5pm.
We have to realize that we live in Tulsa and part of our Okie nature is that families with children pine for the suburbs where they can run, frolic, and enjoy what is at least the perception of better schools and safer neighborhoods. The moment that first child arrives, they start shopping for real estate in Jenks or Bixby.
If we want Urban growth and increased density we need to attract the businesses that offer a higher demand for young professionals, at least until Tulsa urban life matures to the point where it is more supportive or at least better perceived as family friendly.
Interesting that the TW article does not reference the Urban 8 development at Hartford and 3rd (dirt is moving now) or the Lofts at 1st and Boulder (dirt is moving now).
Quote from: carltonplace on January 30, 2014, 02:06:17 PM
Interesting that the TW article does not reference the Urban 8 development at Hartford and 3rd (dirt is moving now) or the Lofts at 1st and Boulder (dirt is moving now).
But Sager made the list.
Quote from: swake on January 30, 2014, 04:34:03 PM
But Sager made the list.
the tarp over the skylights is torn to bits
Quote from: Gaspar on January 30, 2014, 01:55:18 PM
We have to realize that we live in Tulsa and part of our Okie nature is that families with children pine for the suburbs where they can run, frolic, and enjoy what is at least the perception of better schools and safer neighborhoods. The moment that first child arrives, they start shopping for real estate in Jenks or Bixby.
While I think that is true for downtown proper, there are many families in central neighborhoods. Most people I know in my age group (late 20's/early 30's) live in midtown and plan on staying indefinitely, even those with kids. I do think that is change that has evolved in the past 10 years since people more in their 30's/40's want south Tulsa or suburbs. Downtown, on the other hand, is almost exclusively young professionals who also work downtown and retirees who want an urban lifestyle and/or downsized. If you are to grow the young professional demographic there needs to be more urban living options, and options for couples starting families that still want to live downtown or adjacent. I think the Riverview and Pearl areas eventually will be good for higher density urban living (townhomes, brownstones) that is not an apartment.
Quote from: SXSW on January 30, 2014, 06:57:22 PM
While I think that is true for downtown proper, there are many families in central neighborhoods. Most people I know in my age group (late 20's/early 30's) live in midtown and plan on staying indefinitely, even those with kids. I do think that is change that has evolved in the past 10 years since people more in their 30's/40's want south Tulsa or suburbs. Downtown, on the other hand, is almost exclusively young professionals who also work downtown and retirees who want an urban lifestyle and/or downsized. If you are to grow the young professional demographic there needs to be more urban living options, and options for couples starting families that still want to live downtown or adjacent. I think the Riverview and Pearl areas eventually will be good for higher density urban living (townhomes, brownstones) that is not an apartment.
Depends, do they plan on their kids going to private schools or magnet schools (I think that's the proper term for schools like Carver and BTW)?
Those that don't tend to gravitate toward the burbs.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 30, 2014, 07:42:22 PM
Depends, do they plan on their kids going to private schools or magnet schools (I think that's the proper term for schools like Carver and BTW)?
Those that don't tend to gravitate toward the burbs.
Both. Marquette, Monte Cassino, Lee and Eliot are popular elementary choices, along with the magnets. Monte Cassino or Edison for middle school. The overall choices for schools public and private in midtown are better than in the suburbs.
Though downtown and the Pearl do not have the same options with generally poor TPS schools in those areas (Emerson and Kendall-Whittier). It is intriguing that OKC is building a downtown elementary school to help with this issue. Could the same work in Tulsa?
Quote from: SXSW on January 30, 2014, 08:37:49 PM
Both. Marquette, Monte Cassino, Lee and Eliot are popular elementary choices, along with the magnets. Monte Cassino or Edison for middle school. The overall choices for schools public and private in midtown are better than in the suburbs.
Though downtown and the Pearl do not have the same options with generally poor TPS schools in those areas (Emerson and Kendall-Whittier). It is intriguing that OKC is building a downtown elementary school to help with this issue. Could the same work in Tulsa?
Not a bad idea. If someone were to build a Riverview (but less expensive) type option downtown, I think it would have a remarkable affect on everything in the area!
Emerson used to be a very good magnet school. Does anyone know what happened to it? Was the magnet program there moved?
Quote from: swake on January 31, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Emerson used to be a very good magnet school. Does anyone know what happened to it? Was the magnet program there moved?
Emerson is no longer a magnet. It was the first magnet in TPS. I don't recall specifically why it was moved back to a neighborhood school. I want to say it had to do with the surrounding neighborhood not having access.
The TPS magnet program is outstanding.
From the "if I had ungodly amounts of money" file: I would start an independent school district within the idl that would provide private school quality of education. It would only serve those people that lived in the idl. It would heavily incentivize living downtown for young families. Also, per Gaspar's idea that this is Tulsa and people want a yard to play in: that lifestyle is really the only option we offer to young families. People who want to live differently either move or live the only way they can in Tulsa and assume that it can't be any different.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Quote from: jacobi on January 31, 2014, 09:54:21 AM
From the "if I had ungodly amounts of money" file: I would start an independent school district within the idl that would provide private school quality of education. It would only serve those people that lived in the idl. It would heavily incentivize living downtown for young families. Also, per Gaspar's idea that this is Tulsa and people want a yard to play in: that lifestyle is really the only option we offer to young families. People who want to live differently either move or live the only way they can in Tulsa and assume that it can't be any different.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Might not be a very far out idea, think "Kaiser Family Foundation". KFF has invested plenty in the area so far and puts money into head-start programs. Education is a big deal to Kaiser and KFF.
Quote from: jacobi on January 31, 2014, 09:54:21 AM
From the "if I had ungodly amounts of money" file: I would start an independent school district within the idl that would provide private school quality of education. It would only serve those people that lived in the idl. It would heavily incentivize living downtown for young families. Also, per Gaspar's idea that this is Tulsa and people want a yard to play in: that lifestyle is really the only option we offer to young families. People who want to live differently either move or live the only way they can in Tulsa and assume that it can't be any different.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Or you could change the school boundaries so that Lee/Edison serves downtown instead of Emerson/Central.
With the TPS transfer rules, I think the line about moving to the suburbs for the schools is often a cover story for fact they wanted a bigger/newer house than they could afford in mid-town. No matter where you live within TPS, you can get your kid(s) into a good school.
Everyone I know living downtown is single, young married couple with no children and empty nesters. While there will be exceptions, these are always going to be the most likely candidates to live downtown. That is not unique to Tulsa.
The projected 300+ units to be completed in 2014 is really not bad compared to the 2,000 in Denver, given where we are comparatively in total size and on the time-line in our downtown rejuvenation. The fact that we have a 97% occupancy rate indicates the supply has most definitely not gotten ahead of demand and the demand is likely to continue to increase as more residents will make it even more attractive to live downtown.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 31, 2014, 10:46:50 AM
Might not be a very far out idea, think "Kaiser Family Foundation". KFF has invested plenty in the area so far and puts money into head-start programs. Education is a big deal to Kaiser and KFF.
Good thing. Our fearless state leaders sure seem to hate education.
Do the prison lobbyists oppose education in Oklahoma?
Quote from: swake on January 31, 2014, 08:39:23 AM
Emerson used to be a very good magnet school. Does anyone know what happened to it? Was the magnet program there moved?
Maybe the solution is to improve Emerson, which serves downtown, Brady Heights and the neighborhoods east of there to Peoria and up to Pine, I believe. With Roosevelt closed part of that area west of downtown may be included as well. Or you build a new school closer to the Pearl (or in the Pearl) that serves that neighborhood and adjacent areas (north of 15th to I-244 to Utica, carved out of Kendall-Whittier's large boundary area. Most families would be living in the more residential Pearl anyway but it would be convenient for downtown along with Tracy Park, Forest Orchard and Cherry Street north of 15th. There may even be an old building that could be repurposed. OKC is doing this with their new downtown school carving out a new boundary. http://www.johnrexschool.com/ (http://www.johnrexschool.com/)
Riverview is already in the Lee/Edison/Edison boundary so that puts that area at an advantage. I think this area is Tulsa's next popular neighborhood because of its location and it could develop into a fairly dense mostly residential neighborhood in between Boulder and Boston, with an office core north of 15th. There is so much surface parking there currently that could be redeveloped.
Jacobi, there is something sort of similar to what you're talking about in the works. The Oklahoma School for the Visual & Performing Arts is planning a move to the former Roosevelt Elem building just west of downtown. I don't know the latest on their progress but maybe someone else does. http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/oklahoma-school-for-the-visual-performing-arts-eyes-old-tulsa-public-schools-roosevelt-elementary (http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/oklahoma-school-for-the-visual-performing-arts-eyes-old-tulsa-public-schools-roosevelt-elementary)
I've always thought Tulsa School of Arts & Sciences should move downtown and build a new building or two on the surface lots by TCC and partner for classes and shared facilities. Plus it would get rid of another parking lot. Maybe GKFF could involved in that?
Quote from: SXSW on January 31, 2014, 01:06:25 PM
Jacobi, there is something sort of similar to what you're talking about in the works. The Oklahoma School for the Visual & Performing Arts is planning a move to the former Roosevelt Elem building just west of downtown. I don't know the latest on their progress but maybe someone else does. http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/oklahoma-school-for-the-visual-performing-arts-eyes-old-tulsa-public-schools-roosevelt-elementary (http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/oklahoma-school-for-the-visual-performing-arts-eyes-old-tulsa-public-schools-roosevelt-elementary)
I've always thought Tulsa School of Arts & Sciences should move downtown and build a new building or two on the surface lots by TCC and partner for classes and shared facilities. Plus it would get rid of another parking lot. Maybe GKFF could involved in that?
I thought the arts school had been shut down for picking up Roosevelt? Couldn't agree more about TSAS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
A school already operates within the IDL. On Elgin between Brady Distric/Greenwood/Blue Dome. It is a TPS charter school called Deborah Brown Community School.
http://www.dbcschool.org/
There are plenty of great elementary schools around. It's middle schools and high schools where things start getting more difficult to find really good ones if your in or around downtown.
They are pouring concrete already.
Are there any other current for-sale residential projects planned downtown other than this one and the ones on Boulder? If these do well hopefully there will be more of these types of modern rowhomes built especially on the vacant lots of the East End.
Hopefully someday the empty lots west of OSU-Tulsa and the parking lots south of downtown between 15th-18th could see similar development.
I think some of Brickhuggers project is supposed to be condo, but I'm not sure (YMCA, Vandever?).
I recently heard downtown has a residential occupancy rate above 95%. So by all rights, there should be a building/renovation boom. I hope that spills over to more standard amenities downtown (grocery stores, busiens open longer, walgreens, etc.).