I haven't heard much discussion recently on the NoChe (North Cherry neighborhood) revival? Here's what I know:
Mlofts has completed their triplex at the corner of 14th and Rockford (all three sold) as well as a seven unit development on Troost (almost all sold). They are finishing a duplex right beside the 7-plex and starting on a 6 unit townhome development on Quincy. I know that they also have cleared other lots in the hood.
Another group is joining in on the effort. the 'Tulsa Loft Project' is getting ready to begin construction on two contemporary loft-like townhomes just up from the corner of 14th/Rockford at 1409 (their design looks great and they are going for LEED certification). The Colonial building restoration (wonderful job) is nearing total completion with the hopeful addition of a restaurant in the old Wok space. Josh Walker and his dad have done a great job at filling the building with good tenants. DingBats is very cool as is Boulevards clothier. CB-Urban realtors has opened up a shop on the side of the building sharing a space with these amazing caterers. Also the Coffee House on Cherry St. has done a nice job renovating the old book store at 15th/Rockford.
Anything I'm missing? Henry Aberson has some Cherry St. frontage over around Troost however he is focussed on his current projects at 35th/Peoria for now. He has eventual plans to do some retail/restaurant redevelopment there that would extend the Cherry St. corridor.
Would love to see some streetscaping in this district eventually.
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Would love to see some streetscaping in this district eventually.
Thanks to folks like the Tulsa Urban Development Department, "streetscaping" seems to mean lots of cutesy (and very expensive) "acorn" streetlights (see: Downtown Tulsa Unlimited's "Downtown Street Furniture Standards"), and that could help loose you your LEED Green Building rating because of their poor design and the waste they represent.
When you consider many "acorns" only put 30% of their light on the ground at angles useful to human vision, you can see one reason why the DTU streetscaping standards are holding us back:
LEED for New Construction Version 2.2, Credit 8
https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=1095
FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Only light areas as required for safety and comfort. Do not exceed 80% of the lighting power densities for exterior areas and 50% for building facades and landscape features as defined in ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004, Exterior Lighting Section, without amendments.
All projects shall be classified under one of the following zones, as defined in IESNA RP-33-99, and shall follow all of the requirements for that specific lighting zone:
LZ1 — Dark (Park and Rural Settings)
Design exterior lighting so that all site and building mounted luminaires produce a maximum initial illuminance value no greater than 0.01 horizontal and vertical footcandles at the site boundary and beyond. Document that 0% of the total initial designed fixture lumens are emitted at an angle of 90 degrees or higher from nadir (straight down).
LZ2 — Low (Residential areas)
Design exterior lighting so that all site and building mounted luminaires produce a maximum initial illuminance value no greater than 0.10 horizontal and vertical footcandles at the site boundary and no greater than 0.01 horizontal footcandles 10 feet beyond the site boundary. Document that no more than 2% of the total initial designed fixture lumens are emitted at an angle of 90 degrees or higher from nadir (straight down). For site boundaries that abut public rights-of-way, light trespass requirements may be met relative to the curb line instead of the site boundary.
LZ3 — Medium (Commercial/Industrial, High-Density Residential)
Design exterior lighting so that all site and building mounted luminaires produce a maximum initial illuminance value no greater than 0.20 horizontal and vertical footcandles at the site boundary and no greater than 0.01 horizontal footcandles 15 feet beyond the site. Document that no more than 5% of the total initial designed fixture lumens are emitted at an angle of 90 degrees or higher from nadir (straight down). For site boundaries that abut public rights-of-way, light trespass requirements may be met relative to the curb line instead of the site boundary.
LZ4 — High (Major City Centers, Entertainment Districts)
Design exterior lighting so that all site and building mounted luminaires produce a maximum initial illuminance value no greater than 0.60 horizontal and vertical footcandles at the site boundary and no greater than 0.01 horizontal footcandles 15 feet beyond the site. Document that no more than 10% of the total initial designed site lumens are emitted at an angle of 90 degrees or higher from nadir (straight down). For site boundaries that abut public rights-of-way, light trespass requirements may be met relative to the curb line instead of the site boundary.
Thanks for the update OurTulsa. It would be great to see more of those contemporary lofts in that neighborhood. Do they actually call it NoChe? Interesting name. Does the neighborhood extend up across the BA to 11th Street west of Hillcrest?
And does the coffee shop at 15th and Rockford keep late hours, like after midnight? That seems to be what killed Cafe Milano, and one of the reasons Shades of Brown in Brookside is so popular.
The last remaining parking lots/eye sores in Cherry Street remain the Long John Silvers/A&W at Peoria, the parking lots in front of Jason's Deli/Chimi's, and the car wash at Trenton. That LJS/A&W irks me the most, anything there could have a rooftop terrace with an AMAZING view of the skyline.
quote:
Originally posted by SXSW
Thanks for the update OurTulsa. It would be great to see more of those contemporary lofts in that neighborhood. Do they actually call it NoChe? Interesting name. Does the neighborhood extend up across the BA to 11th Street west of Hillcrest?
And does the coffee shop at 15th and Rockford keep late hours, like after midnight? That seems to be what killed Cafe Milano, and one of the reasons Shades of Brown in Brookside is so popular.
The last remaining parking lots/eye sores in Cherry Street remain the Long John Silvers/A&W at Peoria, the parking lots in front of Jason's Deli/Chimi's, and the car wash at Trenton. That LJS/A&W irks me the most, anything there could have a rooftop terrace with an AMAZING view of the skyline.
The Coffee House is open til midnight on the weekends. Not sure what their hours are during weekdays.
NoChe has become the unofficial name for the hood north of 15th, south of the BA btwn Peoria and Utica. I think the Metro girls coined it. I like it.
quote:
Thanks to folks like the Tulsa Urban Development Department
Why say this? ^^^
What does it accomplish? Does it make you feel better to slam folks, whom 1) you don't know, 2)whom don't actually make these decisions by themselves, if at all, and 3) whom probably agree with the point you are
trying to make?
What do you do for a living Patric? Can I come down to your office and pick apart your daily activities?
Here's a tip. Don't be an a**hole, and people might actually listen to you.
quote:
Originally posted by Kenosha
Why say this? ^^^
For that matter, why scrutinize the parties behind the Channels, Jenks toll bridge, v2025 or Great Plains Airlines?
Wouldnt knowing more about the nuts-and-bolts of what and how decisions are being made for our community tend to encourage better decisions in the long run?
Hey Patric, screw em'. Their glass houses shatter when truth is spoken to power. I doubt anyone who has posted lives in this area, anyway. FYI, we don't call it "NoChe". Why am I not suprised that this "NoChe" district is a media marketing tool devised by Metro Lofts to sell their gentrified overpriced economically segregated enclaves. The Appletini YP Elitists jump down the throats of anyone who expresses less than glorious opinions of Metro Lofts.
On a positive note, I'm glad to learn the development at 1409 Rockford will be LEED certified.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
Hey Patric, screw em'.
Im humbled by that endorsement [;)]
But seriously, if Kenosha were to make the case to the Urban Development folks that Norton and DTU arent the only voices that count, I'd be there in support.
LEED certification for newer development would send a very progressive message about Tulsa. If something keeps holding us back, we need to take a good look at what it might be.
With Susan Neal running the Comp plan update and the Mayor's office on neighborhoods(or whatever they are calling it this week), I wouldn't hold out much hope for any progressive reforms.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
With Susan Neal running the Comp plan update and the Mayor's office on neighborhoods(or whatever they are calling it this week), I wouldn't hold out much hope for any progressive reforms.
Susan Neal is not necessarily driving the Bus on the Comp. Plan update. While she may be one of the Mayors points to the Comp. Plan Pat Treadway, Don Himelfarb, and others will have far more influence over the Comp. Plan outcome. I do hope that you plan to attend as many meetings as humanly possible and contribute to the public discourse as well as support the final outcome (provided that it is somewhat reflective of your input) in front of our crap/weak/non-visionary Council.
I may be naive but I think we have an opportunity to accomplish some serious first steps with the update. Our Mayor is not some home-grown good ole gal. While she is well connected in this community (money will do that for most people) I get the impression that she understands that this City has got to experience some paradigm shifts that lead to a better quality of life and more efficient format for living and providing services. Her range of urban experience extends far beyond neat little shopping trips to Dallas or Country Club Plaza or lobbying trips to D.C. I get the feeling that she's experienced what other national and world level cities have and are doing and gets it (although she's hasn't necessarily done a great job of articulating it yet).
I have high expectations for this Comp. Plan update and plan on participating as much as possible and encouraging many a like mind to participate as well. I am also like a lot of my contemporaries here giving this City roughly 4 or so years to make some relative mind shifts in how we develop our City and promote the urban, cultural and educative experiences. We see the Comp. Plan and recent and forthcoming development(s) announcements as the keys to helping us determine our place of permanent residency. For most of us, we want to be part of creating (or in Tulsa's case, recreating) a class City. If we can't then we'll move to one.
According to the USGBC (US Green Building Council) these two homes will be the first registered LEED certified residences in this state. I talked to one of the partners from TLP and got a small list of their green elements:
GeoThermal heating and cooling
Rain water catchment system
Green roof
Low E windows
SIP framing
Recycled content flooring
Bamboo flooring
Low to No VOC finishes
Energy Star appliances
two flush toilets
tankless water heater (they weren't positive yet on this)
Wiring for solar panels so if and when the huge tree to the south of the lot dies a system could be installed if desired
http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/RegisteredProjectList.aspx?CMSPageID=243&CategoryID=19&
http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/CertifiedProjectList.aspx?CategoryID=19&CMSPageID=244
You could have input in these matters Patric, as did the Brookside associations during that planning process. If faux historic lighting sticks in your craw, then thats the time to express your opinion. Public Works also holds public input meetings on most major projects.
My point is this: Urban Development are the GOOD guys.
I thought AEP was the problem with the obnoxious acorn lights. I had heard when the downtown lights went in that these were the only "decorative" streetlight that they would maintain.
Regardless, Kenosha's got a good point, if there needs to be a better standard, the city plan would be the way to get there, wouldn't it?
I think its pretty safe to assume that nobody round here care's about this issue as much as Patric, so why don't you "go shopping" online and find this town some better alternatives.
Start us a thread, better yet, a wiki (Rex?), where we can help you work on a new set of rules. Or, you could just keep complaining...that might fix it, too. Which do you think would be more satisfying, Patric?
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
I thought AEP was the problem with the obnoxious acorn lights. I had heard when the downtown lights went in that these were the only "decorative" streetlight that they would maintain.
When they triple the amount of electricity they sell to the city (taxpayers) each time they "improve" an area with the bad fixtures they push, then sit back and say "we just do what the city tells us to do" then they do represent a problem -- but they share the blame with those in authority who use their position to perpetuate it.
quote:
Regardless, Kenosha's got a good point, if there needs to be a better standard, the city plan would be the way to get there, wouldn't it?
Start us a thread, better yet, a wiki (Rex?), where we can help you work on a new set of rules.
Kenosha is probably right in that Urban Development is for the most part the good guys, but they bought into something every small town Beautification Committee was suckered into when they forgot the purpose of streetlighting was to light streets.
Fixing that should be well within our collective powers, and I look to groups like this for the informed and genuine input that comes from people caring for their community. On the Wiki, I would welcome a little more education on how that might work (but maybe on another thread so this one can get back on course).
^Clarify that. You are being snarky about how the stupid acorn fixtures shine in all directions instead of downward, right? Because, read a different way, your post might seem to say that you would prefer not lighting the sidewalks at all.
I'm all for dark skies, but dark streets and sidewalks aren't the only way to get there, as you have already taught us. Thanks to your previous posts I know that full cutoff (//%22http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/NLPIP/lightinganswers/lightpollution/cutoffShielded.asp%22) fixtures can cut down on glare. So, where ya at with this?
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
According to the USGBC (US Green Building Council) these two homes will be the first registered LEED certified residences in this state. I talked to one of the partners from TLP and got a small list of their green elements:
GeoThermal heating and cooling
Rain water catchment system
Green roof
Low E windows
SIP framing
Recycled content flooring
Bamboo flooring
Low to No VOC finishes
Energy Star appliances
two flush toilets
tankless water heater (they weren't positive yet on this)
Wiring for solar panels so if and when the huge tree to the south of the lot dies a system could be installed if desired
http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/RegisteredProjectList.aspx?CMSPageID=243&CategoryID=19&
http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/Project/CertifiedProjectList.aspx?CategoryID=19&CMSPageID=244
This sounds like a great project! I hope they also try to preserve the existing greenspace, setbacks, and trees as much as possible.
Will this home be stick framed or concrete formed? Check out the innovative insulating concrete forms (//%22http://www.eco-block.com/about/%22) being used to build the new Marquette early childhood evelopment center right off Cherry St.
Are they able to incorporate any passive solar into the design?
Do they plan on building a storm shelter or safe room?
Is this house for sale?
P.S. I am also pleased that the existing home will be moved and reused by someone instead of being fed to the dozers, like so many of Metro Lofts properties just so the lots can sit empty for months on end before any construction begins.
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
^Clarify that. You are being snarky about how the stupid acorn fixtures shine in all directions instead of downward, right? Because, read a different way, your post might seem to say that you would prefer not lighting the sidewalks at all.
How odd, Im completely missing where that might have been implied, but ill give it a shot.
Contrary to popular belief, the major benefactors of streetlighting are pedestrians rather than motorists (the later providing their own illumination). A well-lit area at night (one that is free of glare and grossly overlit/underlit transitions) can provide not only a sense of security but facilitate safe utilization. While the mere presence of lights impart the illusion of safety, real safety can be promoted by illumination that is designed to gently compliment human vision (as opposed to dazzling glare that assaults it).
It is in our best interests to illuminate pedestrian areas, to do so moderately, without waste and in a way that actually provides useful illumination. To just plant post after post of blazing blue glare bombs doesnt cut it no matter how pretty they look in the daytime. If a "street furniture" light only puts 30% of it's output on the sidewalk you have to wonder why your paying for the other 70% to cast disabling glare or make clouds glow. Even a little town like Atoka figured this one out (See the Clear Glass Promenade Series (//%22http://www.darksky.org/fixtures/posttopp.html%22) they installed for their historic district renovation).
So yes, I see getting light out of your eyes and onto the streets as a very practical and responsible thing for Tulsa to pursue. We might even find out it costs less when you waste less.
The Quincy units start after 1st of year, St Louis units start end of January, In March we are hoping to start Trenton units, there will also be a fourplex on Rockford starting (condos). There is a 10 plex affordable unit project starting in May on Quincy.
As far as defending ourselves I guess you cannot please everyone. We have appx 23 lots in Cherry st and have never torn down a house that was capable of being removed. Our demo guy also moves houses and he couldnt do a thing with those houses on Quincy so we tore them down. Drug addicts break in and squat, the neighbors get angry, cats multiply and so something had to be done there. We plan to start earth change in April so I dont think that we leave empty lots very often at all.
Oh the joys of being a developer:) We take in numerous ideas, complaints, etc on how to do good and still do well. We spoke to the city about streetscape, crosswalks, neighborhood signs and we dont expect to get much help financially.
The area is promising to say the least. There are going to be 4 developers building townhomes and condos by March. We develop much of the land and are trying to get to all price points but we are the mercy of the remaining land holders in the area and what the cost of extending sewer lines, running new water lines, etc comes to be for each development. I have stated before that there is more to what we do than just construction. Tulsa requires replats on almost everything and it takes 200k in civil engineering just to get the site ready to build. Spending this on a 3 unit affordable site would work out like this:
Lot cost appx 100k
Replat, attorney, engineer, architect fees - 60k
Sewer extension - 90k
New water sewer lines - 40k
Carry 10k
We are allowed to build two to three homes on one single lot so adding these up we have 300000 total and if we can split to three lots it costs 100k per townhouse lot. I am open to any suggestions on how we can build a 100k home with this scenario, the lot itself should be about 20k for a 100k home and its impossible to do that in Cherry St. We do look at condo conversions but the current multi unit owners want well over a million for a run down 6 plex and that doesnt work either. We do have remodels that are for sale in the 119-159k price range. We are also working on some loopholes to keep us from a replat on some of our land.
Keep these things in mind when you add up what you think units like these should cost. I love what I do and want to continue to do things in Tulsa...but we have to pay our bills too.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
This sounds like a great project! I hope they also try to preserve the existing greenspace, setbacks, and trees as much as possible.
Will this home be stick framed or concrete formed? Check out the innovative insulating concrete forms (//%22http://www.eco-block.com/about/%22) being used to build the new Marquette early childhood evelopment center right off Cherry St.
Are they able to incorporate any passive solar into the design?
Do they plan on building a storm shelter or safe room?
Is this house for sale?
P.S. I am also pleased that the existing home will be moved and reused by someone instead of being fed to the dozers, like so many of Metro Lofts properties just so the lots can sit empty for months on end before any construction begins.
The existing home is on its way out right now.
I don't think they are using passive solar because the southern exposure is heavily shaded by a decidious tree. The east and west walls will have significant exposure but I don't think that counts toward passive solar heating. At least two deciduous trees will be planted in front of the house to block that harsh western summer sun.
I'm not sure if they are putting in a safe room. They are using SIP (wood) framing (to learn more: http://www.sips.org/portal/tabid__5768/Default.aspx ) SIP framing is stronger and much more energy efficient than traditional stick framing.
As far as setback goes, they are in a multi-family district and will probably bring the new homes up to the building line. I would assume that they will line up with Mlofts new townhomes to the north but be in front of the apartment building and house next door. They are knocking out the front access driveway and will have two porches and some landscaping. I think they want this development to be as low maintenance as possible so that nixes the front lawn.
The houses are for sale. I think they will be comparable with Mlofts pricing points. They are constructing an alley loaded garage with an accessory dwelling unit on the second level. The accessory dwelling unit represents their contribution to affordable housing in the hood. It provides many benefits to the property and the neighborhood. It creates income for the home owner, it provides an affordable housing option in an up and coming desirable and walkable neighborhood near transit options, it contributes pleasantly to the neighborhood's density, it provides a human presence on the alley. I like this element most of all, can you tell.
Mlofts, I am glad to hear that you are still going full on. I love your contribution to the hood and the areas critical mass. I think between you and some of the other developers in that area Tulsa will have a new face to show within the next two years. I do wish that your multi-unit developments turned in would provide a better interaction with the neighborhood. Maybe give the end units a better presentation. I have been inside your units and I love the interiors. Very cool!
I also sympathize with you on pricing. It is not inexpensive to develop.
I used to bemoan developers for not providing affordable housing until I realised all that goes into putting houses up...especially infill housing where you can't necessarily buy up large acreages for pennies on the dollar and pop out simple homes like widgets on an assembly line. Density helps spread the basic costs like land and utilities but construction is not free and if your doing something quality the materials will add up. So...rock on with the modern homes. Someday...they may trickle down.
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
I do hope that you plan to attend as many meetings as humanly possible and contribute to the public discourse as well as support the final outcome (provided that it is somewhat reflective of your input) in front of our crap/weak/non-visionary Council.
Now who's hatin'?
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
I do hope that you plan to attend as many meetings as humanly possible and contribute to the public discourse as well as support the final outcome (provided that it is somewhat reflective of your input) in front of our crap/weak/non-visionary Council.
Now who's hatin'?
I'm just sayin...
I know that the Council has some great advisors and technical staff and the Planner that will head the Comp. Plan is more than competent. If they were developing and adopting the plan I would be more than satisfied however...we will have to put whatever plan we create in front of our weater vain Council. I am afraid that in order to get a Comprehensive Plan through the democratic process it will be encroyably watered down. I am afraid that it will be difficult to get a ground breaking direction changing revolutionary Comprehensive Plan through the adoption process. Are you telling me that our current Council has the stomache for such a product? Will Christiansen and Eagleton, Troyer, and Dist. 2 guy have the nads to adopt a plan that calls for heavy investment in our Core? Will the no-brains goofball representing district 3 have the ability to recognize a good plan even if it doesn't pave his hood with gold? Will Cason Carter have the ability to articulate and vocally support a Comp. Plan that calls for public investment in our City's mobility and image? Who steps up on our Council and Champions a good but controversial Comp. Plan? Educate me!! If we have a Councilor with a pair tell me. Now that I'm thinking of it I do remember Dist. 2 guy putting together a discussion in support of Amtrak recently - that was a step in the right direction...what else? Tell me I'm ignorant and that we have Councilors just chomping at the bit to get a Great Comp. Plan in front of them. I just hope that our Mayor is willing to share some balls (hers are definitely big enough) with our Councilors and fight for the plan.
Well...back to topic...Kiah, what do you think of NoChe?
They have barely started on the comprehensive plan and already you guys are blaming different parties and saying it ain't going to be good enough.
Settle down. The comprehensive plan is going to take a long time and half the people you all are talking about will be retired or ran off by the time it is finished.
This is going to be a positive thing for Tulsa. Look for the bright side of what a good plan will mean for Tulsa before you guys go off on all the reasons why it will fail.
Be happy.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
They have barely started on the comprehensive plan and already you guys are blaming different parties and saying it ain't going to be good enough.
Settle down. The comprehensive plan is going to take a long time and half the people you all are talking about will be retired or ran off by the time it is finished.
This is going to be a positive thing for Tulsa. Look for the bright side of what a good plan will mean for Tulsa before you guys go off on all the reasons why it will fail.
Be happy.
Not suggesting it will fail at all. I think we have an opportunity to restablish course for Tulsa with this Comp. Plan and be a leading player in the urban sea change occurring across the County. I'm just a little nervous with the body that will have final review and approval.
Back to topic...RM...what do you think of NoChe?
You really want to know what I think of NoChe?
If I really thought about it, I wouldn't like it.
It is a contraction of two words that don't have real meaning to me. It implies it is north,(a negative perception in Tulsa) and it uses a street name that is not that common to anyone who is not a mid-towner. The Cherry street name has to be explained in today's Urban Tulsa and the explanation is that it was used once on an old map.
Where are the cherry trees?
I don't know what you should call your half-mile wide by one block area between the expressway and 15th street. But if you are going to just make up words, try something that doesn't sound like a food of melted cheese on chips.
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
I do hope that you plan to attend as many meetings as humanly possible and contribute to the public discourse as well as support the final outcome (provided that it is somewhat reflective of your input) in front of our crap/weak/non-visionary Council.
Now who's hatin'?
I'm just sayin...
I know that the Council has some great advisors and technical staff and the Planner that will head the Comp. Plan is more than competent. If they were developing and adopting the plan I would be more than satisfied however...we will have to put whatever plan we create in front of our weater vain Council. I am afraid that in order to get a Comprehensive Plan through the democratic process it will be encroyably watered down. I am afraid that it will be difficult to get a ground breaking direction changing revolutionary Comprehensive Plan through the adoption process. Are you telling me that our current Council has the stomache for such a product? Will Christiansen and Eagleton, Troyer, and Dist. 2 guy have the nads to adopt a plan that calls for heavy investment in our Core? Will the no-brains goofball representing district 3 have the ability to recognize a good plan even if it doesn't pave his hood with gold? Will Cason Carter have the ability to articulate and vocally support a Comp. Plan that calls for public investment in our City's mobility and image? Who steps up on our Council and Champions a good but controversial Comp. Plan? Educate me!! If we have a Councilor with a pair tell me. Now that I'm thinking of it I do remember Dist. 2 guy putting together a discussion in support of Amtrak recently - that was a step in the right direction...what else? Tell me I'm ignorant and that we have Councilors just chomping at the bit to get a Great Comp. Plan in front of them. I just hope that our Mayor is willing to share some balls (hers are definitely big enough) with our Councilors and fight for the plan.
Are you referring to the Council that unanimously approved the Pearl District Plan, or the Council that unanimously approved the East Tulsa plan? Perhaps you're referring to the last Council, which (unanimously) insisted that funding for the comp. plan be included in the Third Penny vote?
So, you think 'the people' should come together to develop their vision for Tulsa (the same 'people' who elect "no-brain goofballs," without a "pair" among them), but only as long as it's "ground breaking, direction changing, and revolutionary" -- by your standards?
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
I do hope that you plan to attend as many meetings as humanly possible and contribute to the public discourse as well as support the final outcome (provided that it is somewhat reflective of your input) in front of our crap/weak/non-visionary Council.
Now who's hatin'?
I'm just sayin...
I know that the Council has some great advisors and technical staff and the Planner that will head the Comp. Plan is more than competent. If they were developing and adopting the plan I would be more than satisfied however...we will have to put whatever plan we create in front of our weater vain Council. I am afraid that in order to get a Comprehensive Plan through the democratic process it will be encroyably watered down. I am afraid that it will be difficult to get a ground breaking direction changing revolutionary Comprehensive Plan through the adoption process. Are you telling me that our current Council has the stomache for such a product? Will Christiansen and Eagleton, Troyer, and Dist. 2 guy have the nads to adopt a plan that calls for heavy investment in our Core? Will the no-brains goofball representing district 3 have the ability to recognize a good plan even if it doesn't pave his hood with gold? Will Cason Carter have the ability to articulate and vocally support a Comp. Plan that calls for public investment in our City's mobility and image? Who steps up on our Council and Champions a good but controversial Comp. Plan? Educate me!! If we have a Councilor with a pair tell me. Now that I'm thinking of it I do remember Dist. 2 guy putting together a discussion in support of Amtrak recently - that was a step in the right direction...what else? Tell me I'm ignorant and that we have Councilors just chomping at the bit to get a Great Comp. Plan in front of them. I just hope that our Mayor is willing to share some balls (hers are definitely big enough) with our Councilors and fight for the plan.
Are you referring to the Council that unanimously approved the Pearl District Plan, or the Council that unanimously approved the East Tulsa plan? Perhaps you're referring to the last Council, which (unanimously) insisted that funding for the comp. plan be included in the Third Penny vote?
So, you think 'the people' should come together to develop their vision for Tulsa (the same 'people' who elect "no-brain goofballs," without a "pair" among them), but only as long as it's "ground breaking, direction changing, and revolutionary" -- by your standards?
Come on Kiah, I knew you were going to get me on this and maybe I was harsh on some however...The Pearl District plan had absolute concensus behind it after 5 or so years of work! I don't recall any opposition to that plan. A unanimous vote was a no brainer and it was also a safe vote for all of the Councilors. They didn't change public course with that approval. Sure there are design recommendations in the plan but that Council didn't approve a plan that fundamentally changed the way things work around here. And by no means am I knocking the plan I think its good and I hope it eventually does pave the way for good development. I know the Council didn't commission the plan nor were they directly involved in the planning dialog...we'll see what happens when Jamie brings the form based request forward.
East Tulsa plan...same thing working, I think. That plan isn't final anyway.
The Comp. Plan money. That was the work of two that are no longer on the Council and what a mighty amount they put out there...eh, at least it's a start. And how many years in a row did INCOG get shot down by the Mayor/Council when they requested money for a Comp. Plan update?
And yes, revolutionary, ground breaking, and direction changing by my standards...and yours!
http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A15542
here is the story from UTW.
I think NoChe is catchy but what do I know...
The reason we did not use North Cherry is bc people did not suggest we utter the word North in Tulsa. If we shortened one we had to shorten the other (No Cherry would be silly) and viola! It actually means "night" in spanish, not Taco, or Nacho. I dont expect the term NoChe will be sweeping Tulsa anytime soon but when it does, and it will:), we are better off prepared. Lots of other cities coined similar descriptions of areas like Soma (south of Market), SoHo, etc. Just a description, not much more to it than that.
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Come on Kiah, I knew you were going to get me on this and maybe I was harsh on some however...The Pearl District plan had absolute concensus behind it after 5 or so years of work! I don't recall any opposition to that plan. A unanimous vote was a no brainer and it was also a safe vote for all of the Councilors. They didn't change public course with that approval. Sure there are design recommendations in the plan but that Council didn't approve a plan that fundamentally changed the way things work around here. And by no means am I knocking the plan I think its good and I hope it eventually does pave the way for good development. I know the Council didn't commission the plan nor were they directly involved in the planning dialog...we'll see what happens when Jamie brings the form based request forward.
East Tulsa plan...same thing working, I think. That plan isn't final anyway.
The Comp. Plan money. That was the work of two that are no longer on the Council and what a mighty amount they put out there...eh, at least it's a start. And how many years in a row did INCOG get shot down by the Mayor/Council when they requested money for a Comp. Plan update?
And yes, revolutionary, ground breaking, and direction changing by my standards...and yours!
So, let's see, your complaint against the Council is that they only approved, verbatum, the imperfect, inadequate, and incomplete plans presented to them by INCOG staff? Hmmm, I think psychologists call that "transference."
Mind sharing which two Councilors (out of the nine who approved it) are
actually responsible for the funding of the comp. plan (which, inadequate though it may be, is twice as much as INCOG requested)? Do you think the Mayor's (not the Council's) rejection of INCOG's budget request might have had anything to do with that agency's management of the compehensive plan for the last 30 years?
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by OurTulsa
Come on Kiah, I knew you were going to get me on this and maybe I was harsh on some however...The Pearl District plan had absolute concensus behind it after 5 or so years of work! I don't recall any opposition to that plan. A unanimous vote was a no brainer and it was also a safe vote for all of the Councilors. They didn't change public course with that approval. Sure there are design recommendations in the plan but that Council didn't approve a plan that fundamentally changed the way things work around here. And by no means am I knocking the plan I think its good and I hope it eventually does pave the way for good development. I know the Council didn't commission the plan nor were they directly involved in the planning dialog...we'll see what happens when Jamie brings the form based request forward.
East Tulsa plan...same thing working, I think. That plan isn't final anyway.
The Comp. Plan money. That was the work of two that are no longer on the Council and what a mighty amount they put out there...eh, at least it's a start. And how many years in a row did INCOG get shot down by the Mayor/Council when they requested money for a Comp. Plan update?
And yes, revolutionary, ground breaking, and direction changing by my standards...and yours!
So, let's see, your complaint against the Council is that they only approved, verbatum, the imperfect, inadequate, and incomplete plans presented to them by INCOG staff? Hmmm, I think psychologists call that "transference."
Mind sharing which two Councilors (out of the nine who approved it) are actually responsible for the funding of the comp. plan (which, inadequate though it may be, is twice as much as INCOG requested)? Do you think the Mayor's (not the Council's) rejection of INCOG's budget request might have had anything to do with that agency's management of the compehensive plan for the last 30 years?
GD, you got me! I'm griping about the system in general. Who's responsible? Me as a citizen for not coralling enough of my contemporaries to build a majority to push for a progressive agenda, the Mayors for not pushing a progressive planning and development agenda, Councilors for not requesting progressive actions? Many cities across this country have a planning champion, be it a Planning Director, strong Mayor, City Manager, or City Councilor. There is someone who agressively fights for good planning principles and urban maintenance and reinvestment. It doesn't appear that we have had that and I apologize but many of the cities that I have had experience with (except the suburban ones) have had some strong councilors that pushed for progressive policy changes so I am quick to criticise our Council for not appearing to have that champion among it. I shouldn't insult them when things don't go the way I wish (but I won't take back the goof-ball comment).
So on to the Comprehensive Plan. Even though the public process hasn't even been organized I am getting anxious. I think Tulsa has an amazing oportunity to redefine itself, at least part. That redefinition includes encouraging density, walkability, mixed-use, transit, blah,blah,blah...some progressive concepts that don't always find traction among the established residents in the surrounding low density hoods and/or don't find traction with suburban dwellers. I plan to voice my opinion in support for them and encourage everyone I know to voice their own support for them but I get nervous that through the public adoption process we are going compromise the plan to a bland and safe death.
See, we agree.