The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not sure if this is news, but the McBirney mansion is for sale and the potential buyers intend to build a hotel on the property.

The specifics are: The mansion would be "restored" and the parking moved to the back of the property. A skywalk would be added to the house that would connect to five new structures built down on the lawn facing the river. The existing spring and grotto would remain, with a hot tub and pool added next to the spring. More parking would be built under the new addition with access from Riverside Drive.

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

Not sure if this is news, but the McBirney mansion is for sale and the potential buyers intend to build a hotel on the property.

The specifics are: The mansion would be "restored" and the parking moved to the back of the property. A skywalk would be added to the house that would connect to five new structures built down on the lawn facing the river. The existing spring and grotto would remain, with a hot tub and pool added next to the spring. More parking would be built under the new addition with access from Riverside Drive.

---

eww...i can picture it already.  A cheap hotel addition to a fine old oil money house.  While the house does need some work, I hate to see it f-ed up with some add-on hotel thing.

Lol...Good luck on getting that through....

I'm not happy about it, but the city and the Tulsa Preservation Commission have signed off. The developers are going to ask for a PUD to cover the zoning changes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsa1603

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

Not sure if this is news, but the McBirney mansion is for sale and the potential buyers intend to build a hotel on the property.

The specifics are: The mansion would be "restored" and the parking moved to the back of the property. A skywalk would be added to the house that would connect to five new structures built down on the lawn facing the river. The existing spring and grotto would remain, with a hot tub and pool added next to the spring. More parking would be built under the new addition with access from Riverside Drive.

---

eww...i can picture it already.  A cheap hotel addition to a fine old oil money house.  While the house does need some work, I hate to see it f-ed up with some add-on hotel thing.

---

Well, it could end up being "cheap" and "f-ed up."  But when I think of a mansion being made into a hotel, the first thing that comes to mind is Dallas's Mansion at Turtle Creek.  It is far and away the nicest place to stay in Dallas, at least until the Ritz and the Mandarin open.  

http://www.mansiononturtlecreek.com/

I'll be interested to see just how upscale this thing ends up.  It seems like the sky is the limit, with Tulsa lacking a true luxury hotel and the combination of relative seclusion from the business district and easy access via Riverside Drive.  This could be a very exciting river development project.

I hope to goodness the new part matches the old.  Now if they would only demolish that ugly thing from the 70s across the street.

I bought my parents a night at the Mc Birney mansion bed and breakfast the Friday before X mas. There was only one room left and none for the weekend.

My parents love to travel and I remember going to many a mansion back east and and staying the night as a kid.  The Mc Birney mansion is right up there with the best of them in beaty and grandure.  I think they will be pleasantly suprised that we have something like this in Tulsa.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Floyd

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsa1603

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

Not sure if this is news, but the McBirney mansion is for sale and the potential buyers intend to build a hotel on the property.

The specifics are: The mansion would be "restored" and the parking moved to the back of the property. A skywalk would be added to the house that would connect to five new structures built down on the lawn facing the river. The existing spring and grotto would remain, with a hot tub and pool added next to the spring. More parking would be built under the new addition with access from Riverside Drive.

---

eww...i can picture it already.  A cheap hotel addition to a fine old oil money house.  While the house does need some work, I hate to see it f-ed up with some add-on hotel thing.

---

Well, it could end up being "cheap" and "f-ed up."  But when I think of a mansion being made into a hotel, the first thing that comes to mind is Dallas's Mansion at Turtle Creek.  It is far and away the nicest place to stay in Dallas, at least until the Ritz and the Mandarin open.  

http://www.mansiononturtlecreek.com/

I'll be interested to see just how upscale this thing ends up.  It seems like the sky is the limit, with Tulsa lacking a true luxury hotel and the combination of relative seclusion from the business district and easy access via Riverside Drive.  This could be a very exciting river development project.

---

I agree that it could be....I guess I felt like making that assumption, since generally that's what we're faced with in this town.  Must remain positive....must remain positive....it WILL be good [:D]

Here is a link to the McBirney mansion.

http://www.mcbirneymansion.com/

It has always been one of my favorite Tulsa buildings. Let's hope that the development complements this place.

I would love to have guests stay at a classy, small hotel overlooking the river and have events at the mansion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

I hope to goodness the new part matches the old.  Now if they would only demolish that ugly thing from the 70s across the street.

---

Are you speaking of the Olympian on Galveston? The Olympian is not that bad in my opinion...No, its not a pretty building but the owners take good care of it and the landscaping is always nice. I know you're not talking about the Spotlight Theater which is on the National Register of Historic Places like the McBirney.

(http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/6500/mcbirneyfall031awebkd4.jpg)

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

I'm not happy about it, but the city and the Tulsa Preservation Commission have signed off. The developers are going to ask for a PUD to cover the zoning changes.

---

I don't recall the Tulsa Preservation Commission ever discussing this during one of their meetings. Are you sure they've "signed off" on this?

^ No I'm not certain, that is what the developer told me.

(http://www.riverviewtulsa.org/images/mcbspring.jpg)

Here is the proposal. This is the view from Riverside Drive with the mansion on the far right

(http://www.riverviewtulsa.org/images/mcbirneyplan1.bmp)

Hmmm, looks good so far.  Will be interesting to see what kind of amenities it has.  Any large interior spaces?  Will they have a restaurant, commons area,lobby/front desk, etc. other than what is in the mansion?  Reminds me of some of the old grand hotels they used to build in the national parks.  Especially the Canadian ones.

I am having a hard time seeing from the picture, but will there be any changes to the actual mansion itself?  The addition--is it attached or unattached to the mansion?

Since the McBirney Mansion isn't HP zoned, will the TPC have any say anyway (other than perhaps expressing their opinion)?

OK, i will clarify my concern:  Think of Boston Avenue Methodist Church, then think of the additions that have been made to the east side over the last few years...Close but no cigar.  I can't tell much from that drawing, so I will keep my mind open until hearing more...I just know that usually, when I hear that a great house or building is going to recieve an addition and "renovation", it's not usually a good thing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

Here is the proposal. This is the view from Riverside Drive with the mansion on the far right

(http://www.riverviewtulsa.org/images/mcbirneyplan1.bmp)

---

Can you tell us the name of the developer?  Have they undertaken a project like this before?

What I have been told is that the mansion will be restored and updated. It has what they consider to be major problems (to them problems, to me old house) that must be corrected to continue to operate as a B&B.

Their plan as I understand it.
Remove the slate roof, and disperse the slate accross the entire project with new slate that is as close a match as possible.
Remove the old boiler and update
Internalize the exposed electrical conduit.
Combine some rooms in the mansion into bigger meeting rooms
A small dining room will be in the mansion
Add a Skywalk to the mansion that will connect to the new construction
Find clinker brick for the new construction that closely matches the mansion exterior
Build underground parking with ingress and egress from Riverside, and a hot tub and pool next to the existing grotto.

No zoning concerns other than the existing residential zoning, and you're right there is no HP overlay. The mansion itself is registered, but not protected. They could certainly tear it down if it suited them.

Something that concerns me in that list is the "combine some rooms in the mansion into bigger meeting rooms"

1. I would hope they would keep the historic integrity of the mansion as much as possible, reconfiguring rooms seems rather drastic.  Isnt this home considered "historic"?  Changing the floor plan and ripping out walls doesn't seem at all right.  If its the basement they are talking about, I dont think thats so important.  But the rest of the house should remain in the layout it is with perhaps historically accurate remodel and repair as needed. I like it beeing an old mansion, that means old feeling rooms, not clean, antiseptic, meeting rooms.

2.  I like being able to tour the old home. Meeting rooms don't sound like something that anyone would want to, or be able to, tour. What kind of lighting, walls, trim, furniture would be in these meeting rooms? Would they fit the feel of the mansion or be like modern meeting rooms essentially gutting those parts of the home? If they are going to have meeting rooms in the home, that makes it seem as if its not really going to BE as a home anymore.  It makes it seem as if the rooms will not be for people to stay in or even tour.  They will just be using the home as a shell, stripping it of its character, charm, and historical value.

I remember working in the home while it was being spruced up and remodeled for the home tour.  It was so interesting to see the quality of construction. To see how people lived back then and how the home was made. I remember the twisting, quirky, little stairwell that was for the servants.  Hearing one of the carpenters hollering at his buddies to come look at a door he was working on, on the third floor.  He was all agasp at the fact that the whole door was one solid piece of wood, said it would be practically impossible to even find a tree that you could get a piece of wood that big from anymore. I remember looking out the attic window and marveling at the size of the pieces of slate on that roof. If they are planning on using that size and weight of slate on the new building it may have to be cusom cut, they were probably double the size and thickness of the slate you find today. It was close to an inch thick, thats STONE covering that roof.  

This was taken from the US Department of Interiors National Historic Registry website on which the Mc Birney Mansion is listed.

"Lastly, a property is evaluated for its integrity: the authenticity of physical characteristics from which properties obtain their significance. When properties retain historic material and form, they are able to convey their association with events, people, and designs from the past. All buildings change over time. Changes do not necessarily mean that a building is not eligible; but, if it has radical changes, it may no longer retain enough historic fabric, and may not be eligible for the National Register. Historic integrity is the composite of seven qualities: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association."

As I have mentioned before.  I have toured many historic homes around the country.  It was always a horrible shame when you ran into one that had had some drastic changes or bad remodel done to them.  Many times it was extremely costly to bring the home back to its original state. You would hear the tour guide tell the story of how something was destroyed or so changed and everyone would gasp and comment at how horrible it was, how could someone be so short sighted and stupid to do such a thing.  

I hope that some day our children aren't shaking their heads and wondering how we could let something go wrong with this historic home.

This is one of the biggest and most significant of the old mansions in Tulsa.  I can only think of two or three other homes of this scale, including Philbrook.  When are we going to relize that these things are important.  Especially one thats a leading example of a particular period in the history of our city.

Tomorrow, at 11am, the Tulsa Preservation Commission will be hearing a presentation regarding the McBirney Mansion.

Ugh, and I have to work.

quote:

---

No zoning concerns other than the existing residential zoning, and you're right there is no HP overlay. The mansion itself is registered, but not protected. They could certainly tear it down if it suited them.

---

None of that is true...it's just not.


1. the TPC won't approve this, and the city has the power to deny because they have a Preservation Easement on the property, including the exterior and grounds.

2. the Preservation Easement is held both by the city (TPC) and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), meaning they would have to satisfy Melvena Heisch and Catherine Montgomery's concerns as well as the TPC's.  Good luck with that.

3. Basically, even if the TPC did approve it...there is no way in HELL SHPO will.

4. Not enough room for additional parking.

5. Did I mention no freaking way?

6. The use is limited to a Bed and Breakfast which is defined as a residential use with fewer than x number of guest quarters.  There can be no full service restaurant on site with this use.  Again, there is no place for additional parking without disturbing the grounds, which as I said before, is for all intents and purposes, off limits.

Wow--I didn't know there was a preservation easement.  You're right--that's a whole different ball game.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kenosha

quote:

---

No zoning concerns other than the existing residential zoning, and you're right there is no HP overlay. The mansion itself is registered, but not protected. They could certainly tear it down if it suited them.

---

None of that is true...it's just not.


1. the TPC won't approve this, and the city has the power to deny because they have a Preservation Easement on the property, including the exterior and grounds.

2. the Preservation Easement is held both by the city (TPC) and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), meaning they would have to satisfy Melvena Heisch and Catherine Montgomery's concerns as well as the TPC's.  Good luck with that.

3. Basically, even if the TPC did approve it...there is no way in HELL SHPO will.

4. Not enough room for additional parking.

5. Did I mention no freaking way?

6. The use is limited to a Bed and Breakfast which is defined as a residential use with fewer than x number of guest quarters.  There can be no full service restaurant on site with this use.  Again, there is no place for additional parking without disturbing the grounds, which as I said before, is for all intents and purposes, off limits.

---

I had no idea about the preservation easement.

The developer's parking plan is to bury the main parking under the hotel, with overflow parking behind the mansion. No telling what digging a huge hole would do to the spring.

Update...apparently, while the city does hold a preservation easement, it is ultimately up to the mayor how that is enforced...so while the TPC is the body that exists to further the causes of preservation in Tulsa by ordinance, it does not necessarily have a say in this case because the easement does not specifically mention the Tulsa Preservation Commission, just the City of Tulsa.

The rest holds true. The State (shpo) must still sign off on the proposal.

I don't mind the hotel part, especially if the parking is mostly underneath. The roofing tile matter, I am wary of. Would depend on how well the new tile matches the old in size and quality. The reconfiguring of the rooms in the mansion, I don't like at all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

I don't mind the hotel part, especially if the parking is mostly underneath. The roofing tile matter, I am wary of. Would depend on how well the new tile matches the old in size and quality. The reconfiguring of the rooms in the mansion, I don't like at all.

---

The roofing material is thick slate.  Still very much available, though quite expensive.

I figured it would cost them a pretty penny or two if they were going to do it right. And if thats so it leads me to believe they are willing to spend money on other details as well helping to make the hotel a quality match for the mansion.

I'm afraid that if they start digging around on the property they could disrupt the natural spring which has historic significance to Tulsa.

Urban Tulsa Article: Read the Article (//%22http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A15498%22)

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

Urban Tulsa Article: Read the Article (//%22http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A15498%22)

---

Here's an article in today's (Dec. 27) Tulsa World:

Mansion to Change (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/BusinessStory.asp?ID=061227_Bu_E1_Mansi29282%22)

This project has great potential for Tulsa.  It should provide a very positive boost for Tulsa's Arkansas River development, downtown revitalization, the preservation of the McBirney Mansion itself and enhancement of the Riverview neighborhood.  Now they just need to scrape or remodel the rest of the run down properties down there (including the hideous modernist hunk of junk 'opera house' designed by Bruce Goff) and the place would really be special. Let's get on board with this project and help make Riverview shine again.

I have to disagree with you on the Spotlight theater citizen. The structure is not modern; it's Deco and it's an important piece of Tulsa's history. First as a home/music studio and now as the host of the longest running Vaudevillian show in the US.

Please see the Riverview Website walking tour for details: Riverview West Walking Tour (//%22http://riverviewtulsa.com/tour2_2.htm%22)

I'm also not certain which other rundown structures you are referring to. The area to the northwest of 15th St on Riverside Drive has some great old brownstones and some very attractive homes. Corner of Denver and Riverside is a different story.

KTUL interviewed interested parties today. Should be a segment on tonight's news

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

I have to disagree with you on the Spotlight theater citizen. The structure is not modern; it's Deco and it's an important piece of Tulsa's history. First as a home/music studio and now as the host of the longest running Vaudevillian show in the US.

---

Ditto ^

Don't be talkin' bout bulldozing a Deco landmark.

After reflecting on this matter all day, I have come to the conclusion that this is a stake in the heart of a historic neighborhood.  This is a commercial development in the heart of a residential area- plain and simple.  It will permanently destroy the residential character of the area and will accelerate that tearing down of historic homes for commercial activity.  It is classic "spot" zoning.  At the time when the near downtown neighborhoods have limited desirable residential areas--this 80 suite hotel with restaurant is in the wrong place in every way.  It will also potentially cause the wrong kind of commerical development on the east bank on Riverside Dr.--a bad bad bad idea for people who love the park with the exception of the Bates promenade plan.

With acres of commerically zoned land only a few hundred yards away--why not there?   From an historical persepctive--it also appears to nearly destory the Washington Irving Camp site.  I though this was protected from the State and as a condition for granting the B&B status for the original zoning change for the mansion.

If it were residential condos, I might have a different opinion.  There is a cry for people to live in and near downtown.  This will likely destroy the one near-town neighborhood that still has potenital.

You have to look at the larger pciture--not the development itself, but what will happen to nearby property.  Would you want to live next door to a full  service "boutique" hotel--with all the parking and traffic.  There also appears to be no street infrastructure to handle this intense development.

If they do this right a hotel could be a great asset to that neighborhood and our City.  Sure it will be a more intense use but if automobile access is primarily limited to Riverside Dr. I don't see how this use will significantly increase traffic.  The proposed additions do not appear to tower over neighbors.  While this is a commercial use of the property it's not one that would destroy the residential integrity of the existing neighborhood, they've committed to extending the architectural quality and it appears to a large extend the scale as well.  

It may be spot zoning but so what some of the more pleasant neighborhoods that I've visited in other enjoyable cities would be crucified by our current zoning ordinance for spot zoning, parking shortages, setback violations,...  

I'm sure that property values are going to plummet next to a 5-star boutique hotel, I'm sure housing demand will die around this site...in the same manner that it did around our world class art museum - Philbrook.  Isn't there an empty lot on the corner of 27th/Peoria on the market right now for ohhh... $430K? - and that is the primary vehicle entrance to the Philbrook on an arterial.  Yea, property values sure are hurting there.  

As with many things, it's all in how it's done.  If the hotel's orientation and relation to the surrounding hood is offensive, if it's grounds are bleak, if it over accommodates the auto then it will fail as a facility in the long run and be a blight on the area however if it is done in such a manner as to demote the automobile's dominance over the site and build complementary to the hood I have no doubt in my mind this hotel will be an asset.

I look for the establishment of a complimentary Riverside Promenade in front of a grand street entrance to compliment the river park on the east side of the street.  Would love to see a > 10' sidewalk aligned with occassional trees and 'patric' street lighting to set the standard for future development or enhancement north and south of the site.

I don't see this hotel necessarily paving the way for future large scale commercial development.  Traffic counts don't support that type of development.  This is a special property that appears to be well suited for what the group proposes.

^ I agree.  Plus I like the Spotlight Theater and wish it the best. Perhaps having a hotel next door will give it a bit of new life.  If there is anything that I would like to see removed in the area its that 50s style building adjacent to the McBirney Manison, that IMO has done more harm to the feel and integrity of the neighborhood than this hotel will.  I have been to many old mansions that are bed and breakfasts and old historic neighborhoods where there are small botique hotels like the one they are wanting to put in here.  They fit in fine with the neighborhood if they are done with the right look and scale. I think this development will be the start of something great for the whole area. ( I am still worried though about what their plans are for the inside of the mansion. I hope that people will still be able to go through it like they do Philbrook, Harwelden, Tulsa Historical Society, etc.)

Originally posted by the Artist.

quote:

---

I hope that people will still be able to go through it like they do Philbrook, Harwelden, Tulsa Historical Society, etc.)

---

Going through it may be a different kind of feel if this gains approval....... Imagine Harwelden if they knocked out a few walls and changed some of the woodwork....!

To me; "If it is done right" means.. Hands Off The Interior... You need different shaped rooms...? Place them in the add on..

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

After reflecting on this matter all day, I have come to the conclusion that this is a stake in the heart of a historic neighborhood.  This is a commercial development in the heart of a residential area- plain and simple.

With acres of commerically zoned land only a few hundred yards away--why not there?.

---

This tired notion that commerce can never be an integral part of a "neighborhood" (which Boomers seem to think can only consist of isolated - even gated - residential enclaves), is what has created the car culture you seem so worried about.

I'm not saying there aren't legitimate concerns about scale and traffic, but perpetuating the car culture of segregated "zones" will only make the problem worse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kiah

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

After reflecting on this matter all day, I have come to the conclusion that this is a stake in the heart of a historic neighborhood.  This is a commercial development in the heart of a residential area- plain and simple.

With acres of commerically zoned land only a few hundred yards away--why not there?.

---

This tired notion that commerce can never be an integral part of a "neighborhood" (which Boomers seem to think can only consist of isolated - even gated - residential enclaves), is what has created the car culture you seem so worried about.

I'm not saying there aren't legitimate concerns about scale and traffic, but perpetuating the car culture of segregated "zones" will only make the problem worse.

---

^ Right On!  Perhaps its because there aren't really any good examples of that mixture of living and commerce in Tulsa anymore, especially of the neighborhood looking type. Its a joy to walk through and live in an area that looks like, and is, a neighborhood but has businesses, shops, galleries, cafes, etc. mixed in. Look and you will notice you often find those types of areas in those "Most desirable places to live" places and places where you vacation. Hmmm... Get a clue Tulsa?

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

^ I agree.  Plus I like the Spotlight Theater and wish it the best. Perhaps having a hotel next door will give it a bit of new life.  If there is anything that I would like to see removed in the area its that 50s style building adjacent to the McBirney Manison, that IMO has done more harm to the feel and integrity of the neighborhood than this hotel will.  I have been to many old mansions that are bed and breakfasts and old historic neighborhoods where there are small botique hotels like the one they are wanting to put in here.  They fit in fine with the neighborhood if they are done with the right look and scale. I think this development will be the start of something great for the whole area. ( I am still worried though about what their plans are for the inside of the mansion. I hope that people will still be able to go through it like they do Philbrook, Harwelden, Tulsa Historical Society, etc.)

---

Forgive me, but I find it odd that you would be concerned with the interior, but dismiss the fact that they are adding 100,000 square feet to the building--almost a 10X increase in size, virutally elimination the entire grounds, adding parking, restaurants, spas, etc....  That's kind of like giving someone a sex change operation, but keeping the haircut the same.  This was once the home; with these additions, it will no longer look anything like that.

I don't believe the arguments against segregated uses is apt in this circumstance.  We want mixed uses to allow residents to walk to stores, schools, restaurants, etc..., and be less dependent on cars.  Why would a resident walk to a hotel?  What would they need with a hotel?  All this will bring is 80 out-of-towners, with their cars, parking in the neighborhood.

I am not sure what my bottom line position is on this.  But lets be realistic about the arguments:  It will completely transform a historic building into something entirely different, and it will bring a hotel to an otherwize residential neighborhood.

The analogy to Philbrook doesn't hold much water, either.  Who wouldn't want to live next to a museum, operating during the day only, with beautiful gardens, landscaped lawns, and waterfountains for all to enjoy?  Compare that to a 80-room hotel.  Big difference.

I say leave the McBirney Mansion the way it is, but remodel the interior and make it a nicer bed & breakfast.  A small addition is fine but not what they're proposing.  That great lawn that slopes down toward the river is great for wedding receptions and events, it would be a shame to lose that.  And I agree, anything large would ruin the residential character of Riverview.  There are other places in that area closer to Uptown with better river views that they could build a nice new boutique hotel.

Did not know Starlight Theater was 'Deco' or significant historically.  It IS ugly and in need of repair.  And there's insufficient parking at the Starlight - patrons park all over the neighborhood.  The hotel will be required to have sufficient onsite parking so the guests (or valet drivers) won't be parking any cars on the neighborhood streets.  

But the Starlight isn't the worst thing in Riverview.  Look at the 1940's run-down cinder block apartment houses or even the clapboard townhouses that stand about 30 yards to the north of the mansion on the same city block!

It would be nice if the mansion could support itself financially but it's apparently not feasible.  A luxury boutique hotel should help the neighborhood and much more beyond that.  I might even move to Riverview if the hotel is approved.  Anyone thinking of selling?

Riverview admitedly has been the victim of bad planning and lack of neighbor participation in the past. It's proximity to downtown has made it a target for many developers with plans both good and bad. Oral Roberts ripped out several of the old oil mansions on Boulder and Cheyenne and nearly took the Council Oak Tree (thankfully the Girl Scouts stopped him).

But I think you need to take another look. Just in the last two years many old homes have been restored, the neighbors are active and proud of the Tulsa heritage that surrounds them, and even the cinderblock apartments have had a facelift and look great. Yes, the Spotlight Theater needs a coat of paint and some landscaping, but that does not detract from its significance.

I welcome you to come buy a piece of Tulsa history, sit on the front porch and jaw with your new neighbors. I hear the McBirney mansion is for sale.

Perhaps slight design modifications could make this a win-win for everyone.  Instead of a large 80-room hotel building adjacent to the mansion, why not build two or three individual buildings resembling the mansion?  Individual buildings would allow the neighborhood to maintian its residential feel a little bit better.  A ground level enclosed walkway could be constructed between each building for accessibility.  I do like the underground parking- let's keep that a must.

I think a well managed and marketed McBirney Mansion would add to the neighborhood, riverfront, and all of downtown.  Perhaps some potential design modifications could be reviewed before the Historical Society is asked to approve the project.

I continue to be amazed at this discussion.  It seems some cannot see the forest for the trees.  Please look at the presidential impact that spot zoning of this intense commercial development will have on a key residential neighborhood and Riverparks.

This part of Riverview has only two commercial areas, both of which in theory are OK--the NW of 15th and Denver and the SE corner of 11th and Houston.  There is no commercial development or zoning from 11th to 71st along Riverside and there is no interior commerical develoment from Denver to Riverside (except as discussed above).  Everything else is residential or light office.  This part of the Riverview neighborhood with its mix of multi-family, smaller homes and historic mansions is one of Tulsa's only mixed socio-economic areas.  It also has a lot of sidewalks.  With commercial and office on the perimeters--the walkablity is setup in a good way with decent pedestrian and traffic links to the SW 1/4 of downtown and to Riverparks.

This hotel project will destroy the entire context of this area.  It is also exactly the wrong kind of development for our urban jewel of a park along the river.  Did everyone miss the   graphic for this area when the Channels was announced?  The Sophian Plaza was missing as were the historic homes.  What is needed and compatiabled is residential development.  Why is this not economically viable to preserve this historic mansion and this historic area as nearby (within walking distance) downtown is about to start developing?  

Yes property values could go up and this would likely cause more tears-downs of historic homes  and apartment buildings and gentrification of the area with the possibility of more extremely incompatible commercial infill.  How about a Gap next to the Spotlight?  Based on the way our current zoning code works there is almost no stopping this kind of effect once it starts.


Would someone really want live at 28th and Rockford if Philbrook was a 24 hour 80 suite hotel--with not buffer?

Again there is also not a  street in the area that can take this kind of commercial use-including the two-lane part of Riverside Dr.  Restrictions prevent any part of the park land from being used to widen Riverside. Remember Riverside Drive is supposed to be a PARKWAY.  
Have you ever been to a wedding at McBirney?--what a parking nightmare. The scale and location of this project is totally out of whack--even for from-based zoning

The developers should look at the 22nd and Main Harwelden model--high quality residential-historically compatible.

Has everyone become so desprate for development that we are willing to sell our history and unique quality of life?

I think a development here will also have a damper on the commercial development in near downtown and the Brady--where we really need a development of this type and the infrastructure is in place.

Please please slow down and think about the slippery slope that this could cause, not only in West Riverview but all up and down Riverside Dr.

quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen of the world

Did not know Starlight Theater was 'Deco' or significant historically.  It IS ugly and in need of repair.  And there's insufficient parking at the Starlight - patrons park all over the neighborhood.  The hotel will be required to have sufficient onsite parking so the guests (or valet drivers) won't be parking any cars on the neighborhood streets.  

But the Starlight isn't the worst thing in Riverview.  Look at the 1940's run-down cinder block apartment houses or even the clapboard townhouses that stand about 30 yards to the north of the mansion on the same city block!

It would be nice if the mansion could support itself financially but it's apparently not feasible.  A luxury boutique hotel should help the neighborhood and much more beyond that.  I might even move to Riverview if the hotel is approved.  Anyone thinking of selling?

---

Hey citizen easy on the brownstones north of the theater.  I'll have you know I pay rent to one of the finest slum lords in this city to live there!  LOL.

We're talking about an 80 room hotel, not the next DoubleTree tower, they are not planning a retail component to line Houston.  This project is going to be planned in a PUD so that some control can be gained on its impact toward the neighborhood.  They are not building a glass tower nor a concrete bunker.  The addition will be compatible with the existing home and I think a nice contribution to the River Corridor.  They are proposing to orient the hotel to Riverside and I would assume limit most if not all service and customer vehicle access to Riverside.  I don't see this project as the introduction of a new development pattern in that area.  I see it as highly compatible with the current mix of homes and apartment buildings; and on the edge of that facing a regional attraction.  If they were attempting to stick this at the corner of 31st/Utica I would agree with you that it might not be appropriate.  

I do see some commonalities between this a the Philbrook.  The museum brings sometimes large amounts of traffic INTO the secluded neighborhood onto neighborhood streets.  They have special events that draw serious numbers they have a restaurant inside that brings additional traffic.  They have two large exposed parking lots in front of them.  Those are some of the parallels and it doesn't appear that housing demand is down around it.  And while I'm thinking of it they added on significantly to the original Phillips home.  Was that tragic?  Have it lost the historic relevance?  I don't think so.  Maybe the historic integrity or completeness to some degree but the Phillips home is still there.  

And while I'm at it, sure the Riverview neighborhood is historic and there are some wonderful homes existing in there but it's also in my mind part of the Core and part of an area that many seem to want to intensify so as to establish downtowns connection to the river.  Houston Ave. I think it would be selfish to not permit some organic intensification in that area.  While I would love to keep some of the historic homes I would also love to see some compatible 'urban' development solidifying the link.

quote:

---

Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

^ I agree.  Plus I like the Spotlight Theater and wish it the best. Perhaps having a hotel next door will give it a bit of new life.  If there is anything that I would like to see removed in the area its that 50s style building adjacent to the McBirney Manison, that IMO has done more harm to the feel and integrity of the neighborhood than this hotel will.  I have been to many old mansions that are bed and breakfasts and old historic neighborhoods where there are small botique hotels like the one they are wanting to put in here.  They fit in fine with the neighborhood if they are done with the right look and scale. I think this development will be the start of something great for the whole area. ( I am still worried though about what their plans are for the inside of the mansion. I hope that people will still be able to go through it like they do Philbrook, Harwelden, Tulsa Historical Society, etc.)

---

Forgive me, but I find it odd that you would be concerned with the interior, but dismiss the fact that they are adding 100,000 square feet to the building--almost a 10X increase in size, virutally elimination the entire grounds, adding parking, restaurants, spas, etc....  That's kind of like giving someone a sex change operation, but keeping the haircut the same.  This was once the home; with these additions, it will no longer look anything like that.

I don't believe the arguments against segregated uses is apt in this circumstance.  We want mixed uses to allow residents to walk to stores, schools, restaurants, etc..., and be less dependent on cars.  Why would a resident walk to a hotel?  What would they need with a hotel?  All this will bring is 80 out-of-towners, with their cars, parking in the neighborhood.

I am not sure what my bottom line position is on this.  But lets be realistic about the arguments:  It will completely transform a historic building into something entirely different, and it will bring a hotel to an otherwize residential neighborhood.

---

Perhaps my perspective is from being in other cities where there are old mansions that have been built around and seeing what great places they are. In many cities back east like Boston and Philadelphia,you will find large mansions that don't have much of a yard at all anymore and have buildings or row houses on either side. The historic home is still there to enjoy, to see its historic rooms, furnishings, see and hear how the people lived there, get a feel for the time and place, etc. The buildings around it often are of an older style as well, on tree lined streets, and bustling with activity.

(http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/1102/streetwbuildingwn0.jpg)

(http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/1868/streetwbuildingjd3.png)

(http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9641/streetwhistoricbuildingdw6.jpg)

Now I am not saying the Mc Birney Mansion will look like this someday, just couldnt find pics on my lunch break that were like what I am talking about lol. Hopefully it will be more like some of the "quieter" parts of some of those older cities where the buildings look more like large homes or row houses, and yes often times with small botique hotels like the one the McBirney mansion will have by it, and still have more yard than most of those others do. In many older cities you will find historic buildings and homes that were once considered out in the suburbs, now in the central part of the city. The McBirney Mansion is basically downtown if you look at how cities throughout history, naturally progress. Its just the way the march of time goes.  I have always assumed that someday that whole area will become denser and more developed, who knows, in a hundred years or so all the river from downtown to jenks could be larger buildings, condos, etc. I just wonder what people expect to happen in time? The thing I hope for is for that development to have a walkable, liveable feel to it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

I continue to be amazed at this discussion.  It seems some cannot see the forest for the trees.  Please look at the presidential impact that spot zoning of this intense commercial development will have on a key residential neighborhood and Riverparks.

This part of Riverview has only two commercial areas, both of which in theory are OK--the NW of 15th and Denver and the SE corner of 11th and Houston.  There is no commercial development or zoning from 11th to 71st along Riverside and there is no interior commerical develoment from Denver to Riverside (except as discussed above).  Everything else is residential or light office.  This part of the Riverview neighborhood with its mix of multi-family, smaller homes and historic mansions is one of Tulsa's only mixed socio-economic areas.  It also has a lot of sidewalks.  With commercial and office on the perimeters--the walkablity is setup in a good way with decent pedestrian and traffic links to the SW 1/4 of downtown and to Riverparks.

This hotel project will destroy the entire context of this area.  It is also exactly the wrong kind of development for our urban jewel of a park along the river.  Did everyone miss the   graphic for this area when the Channels was announced?  The Sophian Plaza was missing as were the historic homes.  What is needed and compatiabled is residential development.  Why is this not economically viable to preserve this historic mansion and this historic area as nearby (within walking distance) downtown is about to start developing?  

Yes property values could go up and this would likely cause more tears-downs of historic homes  and apartment buildings and gentrification of the area with the possibility of more extremely incompatible commercial infill.  How about a Gap next to the Spotlight?  Based on the way our current zoning code works there is almost no stopping this kind of effect once it starts.


Would someone really want live at 28th and Rockford if Philbrook was a 24 hour 80 suite hotel--with not buffer?

Again there is also not a  street in the area that can take this kind of commercial use-including the two-lane part of Riverside Dr.  Restrictions prevent any part of the park land from being used to widen Riverside. Remember Riverside Drive is supposed to be a PARKWAY.  
Have you ever been to a wedding at McBirney?--what a parking nightmare. The scale and location of this project is totally out of whack--even for from-based zoning

The developers should look at the 22nd and Main Harwelden model--high quality residential-historically compatible.

Has everyone become so desprate for development that we are willing to sell our history and unique quality of life?

I think a development here will also have a damper on the commercial development in near downtown and the Brady--where we really need a development of this type and the infrastructure is in place.

Please please slow down and think about the slippery slope that this could cause, not only in West Riverview but all up and down Riverside Dr.

---

Hey Bledsoe,

Your comments reflect an intelligent understanding of the benefits of having both a walkable community and a blend of socio-economic groups.  Those two points are straight out of New Urbanism.  However, your assertion that an adaptive re-use of the historical McBirney Mansion into a luxury boutique hotel is inappropriate, is dead wrong; you need to go to school on New Urbanism.  

To learn about New Urbanism, please read Andres Duany's book, Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream, which will explain volumes about good urban planning.  It will also explain how Tulsa got into the urban mess it's now in (in short, everyone drove out to the suburbs for a bigger yard and better schools to raise their families).  It's also about something called 'form-based' development code - don't give a damn about a building's use, just the way it looks in the context of the neighborhood.  Let Adam Smith's invisible hand (the free market) determine what's feasible.  New Urbanists would call your insistence that Riverview be precluded from commercial uses an 'elitist' position, something that the rest of your post obviously disagrees with.  

You refer to potential parking problems but you are ignoring the two levels of subterranean parking that will take it all off Riverview streets (but you still have Starlight parking problems to solve - perhaps the hotel could 'share' underground parking during Starlight events).  

And please don't mention The Channels in the same sentence as this luxury boutique hotel - they are completely unrelated and anyway The Channels are DEAD (it ain't neva gonna happen, baby).  (Sorry about that Warrens, you gave a valiant effort, but you selected the wrong architect.)  

Seriously, please read Suburban Nation, it will open your eyes.  In fact, it's my gift to this forum to invite you all to please borrow this book from the library or buy it at Barnes & Noble or Amazon and read it.    

And if by some miracle this luxury boutique hotel eventually does get built, let's all WALK OVER THERE and meet for a drink and discuss how much better off we are with the McBirney Mansion restored and an island of understated luxury pleasantly in our midst.

(If I'm going to be able to WALK to the mansion hotel then I still need to buy or rent a residence in Riverview, so like I asked before, "anyone want to sell?")

quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen of the world

You refer to potential parking problems but you are ignoring the two levels of subterranean parking that will take it all off Riverview streets (but you still have Starlight parking problems to solve - perhaps the hotel could 'share' underground parking during Starlight events).

---

A potential problem with underground parking at the McBirney is the historic on site spring. This spring must be protected, and all due diligence undertaken to ensure that excavation in its proximity does not divert or harm it.  

quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen of the world
 

And if by some miracle this luxury boutique hotel eventually does get built, let's all WALK OVER THERE and meet for a drink and discuss how much better off we are with the McBirney Mansion restored and an island of understated luxury pleasantly in our midst.

(If I'm going to be able to WALK to the mansion hotel then I still need to buy or rent a residence in Riverview, so like I asked before, "anyone want to sell?")

---

I'm not selling but there is a nice home for sale on Houston. There are also a few "fixer-uppers" left. I'll take you up on that drink.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:

---

Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

^ I agree.  Plus I like the Spotlight Theater and wish it the best. Perhaps having a hotel next door will give it a bit of new life.  If there is anything that I would like to see removed in the area its that 50s style building adjacent to the McBirney Manison, that IMO has done more harm to the feel and integrity of the neighborhood than this hotel will.  I have been to many old mansions that are bed and breakfasts and old historic neighborhoods where there are small botique hotels like the one they are wanting to put in here.  They fit in fine with the neighborhood if they are done with the right look and scale. I think this development will be the start of something great for the whole area. ( I am still worried though about what their plans are for the inside of the mansion. I hope that people will still be able to go through it like they do Philbrook, Harwelden, Tulsa Historical Society, etc.)

---

Forgive me, but I find it odd that you would be concerned with the interior, but dismiss the fact that they are adding 100,000 square feet to the building--almost a 10X increase in size, virutally elimination the entire grounds, adding parking, restaurants, spas, etc....  That's kind of like giving someone a sex change operation, but keeping the haircut the same.  This was once the home; with these additions, it will no longer look anything like that.

I don't believe the arguments against segregated uses is apt in this circumstance.  We want mixed uses to allow residents to walk to stores, schools, restaurants, etc..., and be less dependent on cars.  Why would a resident walk to a hotel?  What would they need with a hotel?  All this will bring is 80 out-of-towners, with their cars, parking in the neighborhood.

I am not sure what my bottom line position is on this.  But lets be realistic about the arguments:  It will completely transform a historic building into something entirely different, and it will bring a hotel to an otherwize residential neighborhood.

---

Perhaps my perspective is from being in other cities where there are old mansions that have been built around and seeing what great places they are. In many cities back east like Boston and Philadelphia,you will find large mansions that don't have much of a yard at all anymore and have buildings or row houses on either side. The historic home is still there to enjoy, to see its historic rooms, furnishings, see and hear how the people lived there, get a feel for the time and place, etc. The buildings around it often are of an older style as well, on tree lined streets, and bustling with activity.

(http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/1102/streetwbuildingwn0.jpg)

(http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/1868/streetwbuildingjd3.png)

(http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9641/streetwhistoricbuildingdw6.jpg)

Now I am not saying the Mc Birney Mansion will look like this someday, just couldnt find pics on my lunch break that were like what I am talking about lol. Hopefully it will be more like some of the "quieter" parts of some of those older cities where the buildings look more like large homes or row houses, and yes often times with small botique hotels like the one the McBirney mansion will have by it, and still have more yard than most of those others do. In many older cities you will find historic buildings and homes that were once considered out in the suburbs, now in the central part of the city. The McBirney Mansion is basically downtown if you look at how cities throughout history, naturally progress. Its just the way the march of time goes.  I have always assumed that someday that whole area will become denser and more developed, who knows, in a hundred years or so all the river from downtown to jenks could be larger buildings, condos, etc. I just wonder what people expect to happen in time? The thing I hope for is for that development to have a walkable, liveable feel to it.

---

I like the analogy you present with this post.. The "spring" that Carltonplace mentions gives me concern for the subterranean parking...That is one of many..

That being said... for the life of me I can't understand why they just would not buy the slum lord apartment building on the corner of 15th and Denver and build there..?

More exposure.. Less construction cost.. Less infrastructure needed.. and what could be a wonderful view of the River...

I know people that would help them tear that down...

(just a little note... I have rarely seen more variety in the spelling of the word boutique than on this thread...  [}:)]Raise your prices and take a longer lunch.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

How about a Gap next to the Spotlight?

---

God forbid.

That depends, I suppose.  Do you mean this GAP store. . . .

(http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/economy/holiday_shopping/hamilton_place_parking2.jpg)

Or this one?

(http://www.magicparis.com/Photos/Shop/Gap-CE/Gap.jpg)

(Spoken in my best optometrist voice) Or maybe this one?

(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7860/dsc006419xk.jpg)

This one?

(http://www.marciajedd.com/images/gap.jpg)

(Now cover the left eye.)  How about this one?

(http://www.uta.edu/huma/agger/fastcapitalism/gapwide.jpg)

I just get so tired of the same old reflexive, conditioned response – (in the voice of either Frankenstein's monster, Tarzan, or Tonto) COMMERCE . . . BAD!

Like Pavlov's NIMBY, every time anyone raises the notion of (gasp) money changing hands in proximity to people sleeping in their beds, "neighborhood leaders" invoke the worst images of strip mall big boxes.

Do you realize that a Riverview resident has to drive to 15th & Lewis to the nearest grocery store or corner drugstore?  Now, who's creating the auto traffic in the Riverview  neighborhood?  I would venture to say it's not "out-of-towners" intruding on our domestic tranquility, but locals driving to and from the basic necessities of life.

Again, though, all that said, I am not disputing that there are legitimate concerns about the scale of this project, traffic, parking, etc.  I'm just saying, objecting to this, out-of-hand, simply on the basis that commerce might be transacted on the premises is kind of a mindless perpetuation of 50 years of bad planning.

I agree with you, Kiah, which is why I object not to the mixed use, but this kind of mixed use.  This is not a neighborhood-reliant type of use; it is for people NOT living in the neighborhood, so by definition it must bring in cars and traffic.  My main concern is the scale--80 units is fairly large (keep in mind that the Ambassador only has 55).  A small, B&B fits in perfectly with Riverview.  This is a bit large.

Artist, I have lived in many older US cities (is that DC?), and I would love to see some neighborhoods in Tulsa like that.  The difference is that the neighborhoods you have presented were, for the most part, developed in whole as dense areas.  They may have been suburbs in a sense, but they were still built on an urban design--not singly family homes, like Riverview.  If you plop a 80-unit hotel in the middle of the mix, it won't make much difference.  In Riverview, it will.  Yes, time marches forward.  Perhaps Riverview will one day be the beautiful, dense urban environment we desire.  My concern is how we proceed, and making sure we don't destroy the neighborhood in the process.

Also, it appears that those buildings which you show were all originally quite large--I don't know of many examples of historic structures (here or on the east coast) that were multiplied in area 10 fold.

quote:

---

Originally posted by akupetsky

I agree with you, Kiah, which is why I object not to the mixed use, but this kind of mixed use.  This is not a neighborhood-reliant type of use; it is for people NOT living in the neighborhood, so by definition it must bring in cars and traffic.  My main concern is the scale--80 units is fairly large (keep in mind that the Ambassador only has 55).  A small, B&B fits in perfectly with Riverview.  This is a bit large.

Artist, I have lived in many older US cities (is that DC?), and I would love to see some neighborhoods in Tulsa like that.  The difference is that the neighborhoods you have presented were, for the most part, developed in whole as dense areas.  They may have been suburbs in a sense, but they were still built on an urban design--not singly family homes, like Riverview.  If you plop a 80-unit hotel in the middle of the mix, it won't make much difference.  In Riverview, it will.  Yes, time marches forward.  Perhaps Riverview will one day be the beautiful, dense urban environment we desire.  My concern is how we proceed, and making sure we don't destroy the neighborhood in the process.

Also, it appears that those buildings which you show were all originally quite large--I don't know of many examples of historic structures (here or on the east coast) that were multiplied in area 10 fold.

---

You know, I drive by the Ambassador a lot, and with 55 rooms I don't know that I have ever seen more than two cars entering or leaving at once, the traffic created is less than minimal. Usually I see no cars entering or leaving.

quote:

---

Originally posted by akupetsky

This is a bit large.

---

Then it seems to me the appropriate response would be 'Could the design be modified to be more compatible?' not 'Oh hell no, no commercial development in a residential neighborhood.'

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kiah
Could the design be modified to be more compatible?

---

I posted earlier about potential design modifications also.  I think that should be the focus for this issue.  Instead of damned-if-we-do and damned-if-we-don't, why not seek a middle ground?  Why can't the Riverview neighborhood, TulsaNow, the Historical Society, and the developer create a dialogue concerning the possibility of making the project more attractive for all parties involved?

It seems to me that the project could possibly be too large, but I (as well as probably everyone on this forum) do not have a very informed opinion.  Kiah- you made a good point when you brought up the kind of blind decision making that we see all too frequently in Tulsa.  A lot of people just hear: "commercial hotel in my neighborhood," and immediately disapprove.  But maybe the design specs showcase a highly intellegent design that does not interfere with the residential environment of the neighborhood.  
How would anyone know?

This project is a private river development and I think we need to take the time to make an informed decision here.

I do not oppose commerce.  There was a grocery store at 11th and Denver--it closed.  There was a decent liquor store at 11th and Houston--it closed too.  There is plenty of CH zoing within a short walk/drive from Riverview and with downtown revitalization just getting started there is now hope that retail will develop where it already has the zoning and the infrastructure.  The Route 66 Museum will be on 11th further stimulating nearby retail on a major arterial street that was made to handle the traffic.

Bate's article on why Cherry Street works is an example of commerce and residential areas working well together.  The area around 15th and Denver and 11th and Houston could be similar areas.  

See:  http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A15542

There was even a boutique hotel there at one time--The Colonial Inn at 15th and Quaker.  But this McBirney proposal would be like moving a larger version of it to Swan Lake.  

The Ambassador is in the core CH area--lots of parking wide streets (Boulder and Main)--high rise buildings all around- next to e-way. Lots of traffic when wedding receptions occur.  Will McBirney have receptions too? How about a H.S. prom?

The Spotlight is a prexisitng non-conforming use.  It has become historic. I think it was originally a private home. I would have the same concerns if it were to be expanded under the "new"  post-1970 code.

I say again, (no one seems to be responding to this issue), you cannot just look at this project with blinders own.  You must look at the precedent it will set.  Future commerical development proposals in this neighborhood will point to the 80 room hotel with meeting rooms and a resturant --in effect CH zoning in the heart (not perimeter) of a residential neighborhood and next to a park--and say to the TMAPC why not "me too."  If they say NO--then a court will probably say YES because of the precedent and the tear downs will begin.  When the mansion got B&B status in the 1980s the owners promised they would never develop the ground, never change the look of the manison and that the use of it as a B&B would have minimal impact.  Under these condtions was a B&B exception granted.  Is not your "word" good for something--guess not  (see 71st and Harvard).

The Channels is or "was" proposing to spend about $300 per s.f. for land for residential HRs just a stones throw from this project.  Why are not condos (with the McBirney architecture) funding the mansion's restoration not economically viable here?  This will bring more people to live downtown--something everyone says must happen for retail to re-start nearby.  

This 80 suit hotel runs in the exact opposite direction--folks from out of town with their cars.

If this is approved we should perhaps just junk the whole zoning code--become the Houston of the mid-west-with a QT right across from Philbrook.  Let the market rule.

How about a concrete plant in Maple Ridge?  If its good enough for East Tulsa--its good enough for Mid-Town.

I cannot beleive that New-Urbaninsm would support the McBirney type of development with all the "negative" implications.  If it really does, then it is just plain wrong!!!!

From the renderings I have seen, I like the look of this hotel.  The scale is decent, the style is perfect.  When I hear some say that perhaps a compromise could be made to have less rooms, I again look at the rendering and it doesn't look "overly huge".  

I also think its a fine place for the hotel.  There are large apartment complexes near there along riverside. My feel is that the hotel is on the Riverside Drive side of things where the "traffic" would be and where it would be nice to have other structures of that scale, possibly have some with restaurants or shops on the street level floors. And the Mansion itself is on the neighborhood side.  

A QT by Philbrook, a concrete plant in Maple Ridge?  If the QT looked like an Italian villa or large home, had unobtrusive signage, sure, why not?  Same with the concrete plant, though not sure if the dust or noise issues could be worked out.[:P] But even both of these examples aren't the best comparisons.  The hotel will be on an arterial main street not on the inside of the neighborhood.  To me Riverside Drive is a great place for a structure of the size, look, and use this hotel will be. Sure we could wish it were on another part of Riverside. But hey its their idea and their dream and their penny.

Guess its my artist bias coming through. I don't care what it is as long as it looks good.[8D]

I remember walking along the Champs Elysees in Paris.  Recognized as one of the most beautiful streets in the world. I remember being suprised as I walked by one beautiful old building made of carved stone and realizing it was a car dealership.  You could see cars in each of the windows several stories up. Right next door was a large outdoor restaurant, nearby was gay club, a Virgin Mega Store you walked in to a large foyer several stories high with marble floors, staircase that spiraled up on both sides large chandeliers, there were offices, living quarters, clothes stores, grocery stores, you name it, it was there.  But looking down the street the buildings were all similar height and beautiful.  

Again here is what that area of the River could look like some day. Just imagine that large building on the lower left, as the McBirney Mansion Hotel. [;)]

(http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/5849/seinexz4.jpg)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

I say again, (no one seems to be responding to this issue), you cannot just look at this project with blinders own. (sic)

---

Honestly, I think you're the one looking at it with blinders on.  You're only talking about worst-case scenarios and slippery slopes.  This is a real opportunity for world-class riverfront (not interior neighborhood) development.  Just what do you want for the riverfront, if not some variation on this?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

If this is approved we should perhaps just junk the whole zoning code....

---

Finally, an area of agreement.

That's really my point, the current zoning code (and the auto-centric, one-size-fits-all, strict segregation of uses on which it's based, and which you seem to be promoting) has very little relevance in an infill scenario, for a city that just turned 100 and has built out its cheap and easy greenfields.  I hope the comprehensive plan update will tackle these tough issues head-on.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bledsoe

with a QT right across from Philbrook

---

Have you ever lived in a real city, where a corner convenience store or neighborhood market is an actual amenity?  Just because we've done such a poor job of integrating business into our neighborhoods (because of the prevailing attitude you're expressing -- "keep them driving distance away from me"), doesn't mean we're doomed to continue doing it that way.  It's only inevitable if we concede that it's so.

I don't concede it.  Here's a new business venture -- The Philbrook QT:

(http://www.brendasemanick.com/reproductions/cm1tn.jpg)

Oops.  It seems there's a residence above that store.  Two "uses" in one "zone."  Sorry, can't have that.  Our zoning code strictly forbids it.  If we allow it here, what's next?  Dancing?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kiah

quote:

---

Originally posted by akupetsky

This is a bit large.

---

Then it seems to me the appropriate response would be 'Could the design be modified to be more compatible?' not 'Oh hell no, no commercial development in a residential neighborhood.'

---

As I said before, I am not saying no commercial.  Yes, there are NIMBY's, but in my experience, there are just as many developers who say, it's my property, I'll do whatever I want.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for this developer--he/she knew when they bought the property it had a preservation easement.  If they don't know what that means, they have no business developing a hotel.  Again, they are increasing the size of this building almost 10 fold.  If you read the National Park Services criteria for rehabilitation, this simply does not fit.

I am not a Riverview resident, but I would certainly recommend that the developer come back with a modest proposal, a small addition that is seperate from the main building, does not dwarf the original historic structure (something along the same scale as the original 12,000 square feet--nothing near the 100,000), and preserves a substantial portion of the grounds (which are historic in themselves).  I would think in terms of a larger B&B, and less in terms of a small hotel.

(http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/5849/seinexz4.jpg)

I would love for that to be the view from, say, the top of Tulsa Regional Medical Center in 50 years (when I'll probably be a permanent resident of the hospital).

[:o)]who cares what they do with it it doesnt make me rich!!!

There seems to be a lot of debate over whether the developers can "do this right" or not, but not much discussion on who the developers are. The three partners in this endeavor are George Warde, Jim Seawright, and Jack Lee. All three are 70+ years of age, but I only seem to be able to find past information on George Warde who was once president and COO of American Airlines.

Who are the other developers? Are they Tulsa natives? Do they even live in Tulsa now (I think Warde lives out in Vinita)?

I think a lot can be learned if we look at the businessmen involved. If they live in neighborhoods like Riverview, then they might have more empathy for the residents. If we know more about them then we may have a better idea if they want to make this place "better than the Mayo" or just better for their wallets.

Awaiting your responses.

There seems to be a lot of crying out for a more "moderate" project.  It's worth pointing out that the scale of this project is actually pretty modest.  80 rooms is not huge by any stretch.  It's just enough for a large wedding, or for a couple of smaller ones.  Again, I'll point out the Mansion at Turtle Creek in Dallas as a perfect example of what this could be.  It's is a converted mansion in the Turtle Creek neighborhood, has 143 rooms, and is the nicest restaraunt in town.  I lived three blocks away during one summer in Dallas and I can tell you for certain that the traffic was not a problem and it did not bring congestion or noise to the area.  In fact, it brough upscale visitors to a somewhat hidden upscale part of Dallas.  We might like that for Riverview, hm?

My point is, they're not plopping down a Doubletree.  They're filling in empty space with a small development that will barely be noticeable but will very much benefit the neighborhood.

This thread gets fairly strange when you drive by the McBirney and Peter Walters has "FOR SALE" signs all around....

Could this whole thing be a method to proffer a postulation of the Peter Walters version of a Trout line.?

Or has Peter found a niche in a slowing market to move a sizable property for profit..?

Well Pete for someone short in stature if you can make people believe this may be a Giant... More Power to You..!

Of course mentioning the Channels in your sales pitch would have helped....

my bad... the Channels were the ones that postulated earlier in the season..



Disclaimer:
The above may or may not have any basis in the truth.. The U.S. Customs placed a HOLD on all imports from Canada around December the 18th....
The American version of the Medicine, I take, is clearly inferior and geared more towards someone that enjoys drugs.
any day now my shipment will come in.... [}:)]

I received the following invitation via email:

McBirney Mansion Open House

Please join Jim Seawright and George Warde for an open house presentation of their plans for the McBirney Mansion

Thursday, February 8, 2007
5:30 & 7:00 pm

McBirney Mansion
1414 S. Galveston
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74127

I like the idea but don't look for it to spur more commercial development close by. It is up against the river....

quote:

---

Originally posted by PonderInc

I received the following invitation via email:

McBirney Mansion Open House

Please join Jim Seawright and George Warde for an open house presentation of their plans for the McBirney Mansion

Thursday, February 8, 2007
5:30 & 7:00 pm

McBirney Mansion
1414 S. Galveston
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74127

---

Let us know how this went... and your opinion of what they have.....

[}:)]

Went to the meeting and met the owners.  They apparently closed on the property last Wednesday.  Originally I had liked the proposal over all, but had voiced serious reservations about a few things.  My main concern was with the layout and preservation of the mansion and that the rooms not be "reconfigured".  I had also not really liked the skyway that connected the hotel with the mansion.  Others had voiced concern about the spring.  Before the meeting one of the speakers representing the owners came up to me and mentioned that they had read what I had said on the TN forum.

During the presentation I noticed the skywalk was no longer there on the updated rendering and one of the first things mentioned was that the mansion was to be maintained and refurbished as authentically as possible and that no rooms were to be reconfigured, they would remain the same size and with as much of the authentic details as possible.  [:)] It does appear that they are flexible and very willing to work to address peoples concerns as much as they can and still get the project built.

They showed how the spring was now deteriorated, was over grown and had stagnant pools, and how they hoped to clean it up so that when the drout was over it would once again flow as it used to.  In the pics they showed you could see that the spring had been "enhanced" in the past with decorative stones and such.  In the new plans it appeared that they would take what had been done before, upgrade it and extend that up to the source of the spring as well.

What most impressed me was how the described what they were trying to create for Tulsa.  They wanted to create for Tulsa a high quality, high end, hotel and 2 restaurants. One restaurant in the basement level of the mansion itself and one restaurant in the hotel with a patio area looking out over the river. They want both the hotel and restaurant in the mansion to be able to attain a 5 star rating.  The style and materials would try to be equal to that of the original mansion as much as possible.  They mentioned that the mansion was definitely a rarity in its quality. I got the impression that they were really wanting to do this FOR Tulsa, and hoped that it would be an asset to the city. They mentioned that Tulsa was missing the type of development they were wanting to create and spoke of how many businessmen and people from Europe expected and wanted to stay in high end hotels with the kind of amenities and style that was going to be provided.  The rooms would go for around 500 a night and up (if I remember correctly)and would start at 600sq ft and go up to 1200 sq ft. or 1600 don't remember exactly lol.  It was hoped that this hotel would have synergies with the new arena and whatever river development would happen.  They seemed very upbeat and positive that things were going to really start to change in Tulsa. They hoped that this would be one more positive piece, with each helping the other make Tulsa a quality destination.  

The general feel of the audience seemed to be quite positive.  There were a few people that you could definitely tell had some pointed questions.  The guy behind me apparently lived just across the street from the mansion, asked about half the questions and didn't seem too happy. lol But all in all a lot of people seemed very excited about it and said Tulsa needed something like what was being described.

I wish I could describe more, but I think this will be a good thing for Tulsa if it comes about.

It sounds like this was a meeting open to the public and neighborhood, but I live down the street from McBirney and have yet to receive any communication from the neighborhood association (or developers).  In fact, I first learned of the plans on this thread.  The only person who has been by our house is the across the street neighbor you mention who tried to get us to sign a petition against it.  Supposedly the developers are going to attend the next neighborhood association meeting with an update on the the latest details (which we also learned about from said neighbor), so hopefully we will see the same presentation there.

From what we know about the project, we are in support of it, but are disappointed in the lack of communication from such an active neighborhood association as Riverview's.  We can't make every meeting, but for something this important to our neighborhood, not to mention our street, and such an historic landmark we would have rearranged schedules to attend.

If there is a way to sign up for email communications on this project, please share what it is.  Thank you for the update from this evening's meeting.

At the end of the meeting a lady in the audience stood up and I think she said she was the president of the neighborhood association and that they were indeed having a meeting and was urging everyone to come.  I am sorry that I don't remember when she said it was. The developers also said that if you went to the McBirney Mansion website that they would like to hear from people and would welcome comments and suggestions.  It sounds like the plans are still preliminary, all the details have not been worked out of course, they have only actually owned the place for a week now lol. I was suprised at how much work and study they had already done though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by southerngirl

It sounds like this was a meeting open to the public and neighborhood, but I live down the street from McBirney and have yet to receive any communication from the neighborhood association (or developers).  In fact, I first learned of the plans on this thread.  The only person who has been by our house is the across the street neighbor you mention who tried to get us to sign a petition against it.  Supposedly the developers are going to attend the next neighborhood association meeting with an update on the the latest details (which we also learned about from said neighbor), so hopefully we will see the same presentation there.

From what we know about the project, we are in support of it, but are disappointed in the lack of communication from such an active neighborhood association as Riverview's.  We can't make every meeting, but for something this important to our neighborhood, not to mention our street, and such an historic landmark we would have rearranged schedules to attend.

If there is a way to sign up for email communications on this project, please share what it is.  Thank you for the update from this evening's meeting.

---

I'm sorry that you've been left out of the communication loop for this project and other neighborhood news. I have personally walked door to door in our neighborhood to hang flyers (that is more than 1,000 doors from Cincinnati to Lawton). We also have monthly meetings for which we post yellow signs every month. These signs advertise our/your website: www.riverviewtulsa.com (//%22http://www.riverviewtulsa.org%22) where you can see news about our meetings, officers and their contact information, projects underway by the neighborhood association and projects that will affect us.

My neighborhood sent out an invitation to to an open house at the mansion last night. Did anyone go?

My neighborhood sent out an invitation to an open house last night at the mansion.
Did any of you get one? Did you go?

Guess I need to learn where to look.  Too much coffee .

I am from Memphis, Tennessee and our family home is a boutique hotel on Beale Street. The way it has been done only adds to the beauty of the area and has really boosted the restoration of the community. If you want to see one that has been tastefully and successfully done check out the Hunt Phelan Inn in Memphis.

What eventually became of this issue?

The Mansion has changed hands and the development is still planned but scaled back.

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

The Mansion has changed hands and the development is still planned but scaled back.

---

Do you have scaled back plans?

I hope the plans are scaled back to respect the conservation easement.  Otherwise, it will be interesting to see how the City of Tulsa and the State Historic Preservation Office respond.

My property, which is 3 blocks from the McBirney Mansion, was re-zoned against my wishes to a much lesser exclusively residential density.  So it would be very disappointing and very unfair if the City decides to drop the conservation easement and to allow a McBirney McMansion hotel to be built in a residential district.

quote:

---

Originally posted by carltonplace

The Mansion has changed hands and the development is still planned but scaled back.

---

Aaah very interesting. I was wondering what happened with all of that. I liked the way the old plan looked but am glad they were able to consider making it smaller. I think that could help with a lot of the neighbors concerns.  This will give people visiting Tulsa yet another quality, unique, option stay at.

The feeling I get from the developer is that they are genuinely concerned about the mansion, the preservation of it and the springs, and with being a good neighbor. I've actually changed my mind from being staunchly opposed to laissez faire.

Toying with the conservation easement is not being a good neighbor.  The residents of Riverview have counted on that conservation easement to be enforced.  They haven't counted on a hotel development in a residential district which is not zoned for commercial infill.

The developers knew about the easement before they purchased the property.  It's not fair for them to expect the neighborhood to readily accept a change in the rules.  The word "perpetuity" means something.  It does not mean thirty years.

Riverview deserves predictable planning and zoning.

The McBirney Mansion is again a private residence
A Tulsa estate known for its stunning views of the Arkansas River and a natural spring on site has new owners.
Tulsans Gentner and Wendy Drummond plan to restore the McBirney Mansion to its original grandeur. The historic residence will become the setting for local philanthropic parties and events.
Commissioned by Tulsa banker James H.
McBirney in 1927, architect John Long modeled the famous mansion in the Gothic Tudor style, popular in the United Kingdom in the mid- to late 19th century. When the home was complete, it served as a private residence for the McBirney family. The McBirneys hosted such notable figures as the famous aviator Amelia Earhart, who was a family friend.
The property falls under a preservation easement overseen by the Tulsa Preservation Commission and the State Historic Preservation Review Board. That means any changes must be reviewed and approved by the organizations, and the home can't be torn down and new buildings erected without approval, says Amanda DeCort, preservation planner for the City of Tulsa.
"The McBirney House is such an iconic structure," DeCort says. "The preservation easement ensures that future generations of Tulsans will continue to be able to enjoy a view of the historic property from Riverside Drive."
DeCort adds that she hopes the new owners will recognize the significance of the property and keep it in fine repair. It seems they plan to do so.
Renovations have started at the property, which will be the Drummonds' primary Tulsa residence, according to Wendy Drummond. Updates will include new air conditioning, a new roof and transforming the residence from a commercial property into a family home. The nearly 3-acre grounds also will receive a facelift with restoration to the spring-fed ponds and a terraced rose garden.
"Once we are finished, we look forward to hosting many events in our home for our family and friends and to benefit Tulsa's many wonderful nonprofits," Wendy says. "We anticipate many future generations of Drummonds enjoying one of Oklahoma's treasures."
Born in Ireland, the home's original owner, James McBirney, traveled from Kansas to Tulsa to work as a bookkeeper for the Tulsa Banking Co., eventually becoming the bank's vice president.
He was an avid sportsman and was a pitcher for Tulsa's first baseball team, known simply as "Tulsa." He traveled frequently across the Arkansas River to court Miss Vera Clinton of Red Fork. The two married in 1901.
The McBirney family owned the home until 1975, when it was purchased by local philanthropists Roger and Donna Hardesty, who in turn sold the mansion to the law firm of Doyle, Holmes, Gasaway and Green. The historic estate also served as a bed and breakfast inn during the late 1990s and in recent years, when it became a popular event venue.
Located in the Childers Heights addition, the McBirney Mansion was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1976.

Quote from: carltonplace on September 11, 2014, 09:55:13 AM
The McBirney Mansion is again a private residence

That's great.  I hope it all goes smoothly for them.

Resurrecting a topic dormant for more than 7 years.
Well done!