120 new Brady District Lofts + retail

[TulsaFuture]

Con't --
It could happen and thats a good reason for a committee or trust to have direct approval directly by the stadium.  Also, this thread has been very angry and hostile.  I am not the mayor nor do I know her or her family - I'm offended that someone suggested that just because I have a different opinion.  I also never use my name on the Internet anywhere as do many of the people on this site!

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Wilbur

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Wilbur
Or name it after all the big donors (Although, since the taxpayers are the largest donors, I'll want my name up there too).  

Wilbur Field?

All the taxpayers are not paying for it. Just the property owners in a three square mile area. Do you own property in the inner dispersal loop?

Those in the three mile area are going to benefit. Maybe we should name it after them.

Three Mile Park? Is that too close to Three Mile Island (a closed nuclear plant)?

Those properties within that 3 miles are mostly businesses, who pass along business costs to their customers.  The taxpayers are their customers, thus, taxpayers are footing the bill.

Call it what you want.  Government placing a 'fee' (without even being able to vote for it, which is a whole other issue) upon a group of people is a tax.

There's famously very little retail downtown. By far most of the customers of businesses downtown are not local as those are national and international businesses. What little retail that currently exists are the very  businesses that stand to gain the most. They aren't going need to raise prices.

Rico,

I understand what you are saying, I would like to see a couple of average citizens added to the trust. And I would also like a statement to the effect that they would like the 120 lofts project to be part of the development in some way, somewhere. But I also think it wise to step back since the scope and use of the area is now changing dramatically. The lofts project is the kind of project we want downtown, but it's also likely that next to the stadium may no longer be the best location. It might be, but some thought and planning need to go into this before that step is taken.

And I don't think this stinks, I think it's finally a step towards planning the area around an attraction before we build.  Unlike what has happened with the arena. It's going to take years to develop that area and we don't really have any idea what is going to develop there. The city has zero control of that area. With no real design or use standards a developer can build almost anything right next door. That was very poor planning by LaFortune, again. Land cost for the arena should have included most of the surrounding surface lots and unused buildings. If that had happened, we might be opening a new hotel with the arena on the Towerview site instead of waiting on the old city hall to be leveled so that we have some marketable land for a hotel and then only after the arena opens.

Point Taken...

Someone earlier in this thread referred to "guidelines that were laid out for development" around Bricktown..

My point is that likely you will have an individuals concept as to what the "Greenwood and Archer" scene is... I just don't think we all are going to see the same vision..

When you build something you are creating an atmosphere...

If these individuals get their way this may take the shape of an enclosed mall... Everyone breathing the same air everyone walking down the same corridor etc.

Let the few artistic builders we have in Tulsa look at this as a blank canvas...

Lay down guidelines... but don't connect all the dots.

[TheArtist]

If there were some sort of appropriate guidelines in place, many developers could come in and build and everything would work together to create a great space. The "finely woven tapestry".

Apparently the donors and the TDA do not think that kind of approach is "for the greater good" so to speak.

My guess is that if the ballpark goes in there they think they can attract a major developer, and or larger developments. Seems that one of the reasons we lost one of the larger developments before was because all the property could not be secured. Perhaps they think the most likely chance they have of getting a Global Development type project in the area is to get a large chunk of property under their control. Though I wonder why they couldn't have used imminent domain the last time as they are threatening to use this time?


If Will can get any property between the Ballpark and the Brady Theater on down to the Blue Dome, his project will do very well there. Especially if the ballpark goes in and some major development happens around it. In a few years all of that property is going to be much more valuable and harder to get than it is today.

[brunoflipper]

quote:Originally posted by TheLofts@120

How would Mayor Taylor feel after spending so much time, money and energy advocating for a development to bring about positive growth and change only for Chuck Lamson to say sorry, Im leaving to talk to Jenks in case they can offer something and forget about having that agreement, doesnt mean anything?  

talk is cheap...
get it in writing...
no contract means NO CONTRACT...
without a contract, this is all fairplay...
in business, these types of situations occur everyday...

why is anyone shocked/surprised/appalled?

[ARGUS]

800 pound gorilla in room asks:

WHO GOES TO THE GAMES ANYWAY?
WHY MOVE IT? WHY PUT IT IN AN AREA THAT HAS NO READILY AVAILABLE LAND?

[RecycleMichael]

I go to games. We go to twenty games a year. They average almost 5,000 attendance each game.

Take your gorilla to the zoo.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by TheLofts@120

How would Mayor Taylor feel after spending so much time, money and energy advocating for a development to bring about positive growth and change only for Chuck Lamson to say sorry, Im leaving to talk to Jenks in case they can offer something and forget about having that agreement, doesnt mean anything?  

talk is cheap...
get it in writing...
no contract means NO CONTRACT...
without a contract, this is all fairplay...
in business, these types of situations occur everyday...

why is anyone shocked/surprised/appalled?

Will Wilkins had it in writing. The TDA passed a resolution in January granting them an exclusive negotiating period, and in April they extended the period to September 4. These resolutions were passed by the board, signed by the chairman of the TDA board, and entered into the TDA's minutes.

The City doesn't have a contract with the Drillers either. The Drillers gave the City has the same deal the TDA gave the Wilkinses: a commitment to negotiate in good faith during the period and not to entertain any other offers until the period has expired.

[waterboy]

I resolve to lose another 5 lbs. before August 30th. Digitally signed and dated this 10th of August 2008. I will negotiate with myself each day and even throw in some roadwork if necessary to make it happen. If I don't make the date, I may extend the period of time. If someone offers me free food at Oscars Gastropub, well the negotiations may breakdown.

They had permission to negotiate. They decided not to. Not too rare in business.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I resolve to lose another 5 lbs. before August 30th. Digitally signed and dated this 10th of August 2008. I will negotiate with myself each day and even throw in some roadwork if necessary to make it happen. If I don't make the date, I may extend the period of time. If someone offers me free food at Oscars Gastropub, well the negotiations may breakdown.

They had permission to negotiate. They decided not to. Not too rare in business.

The TDA isn't a business. It's a public trust.

So if the Drillers behaved the same way toward the City of Tulsa, it wouldn't trouble you a bit?

[Rico]

I'm kinda curious to know if TulsaNow (The organization not the forum) has taken any sort of an official stance on the action of the TDA....

Or do they plan to??

While on the "TulsaNow organization" topic....

Is the following list of officers current?


TulsaNow Officers
President: Sarah Kobos
Vice President: Carlos Moreno
2nd Vice President: Michael Patton
Secretary: Jamie Jameson
Treasurer: Linda Doty

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

I'm kinda curious to know if TulsaNow (The organization not the forum) has taken any sort of an official stance on the action of the TDA....

Or do they plan to??

While on the "TulsaNow organization" topic....

Is the following list of officers current?


TulsaNow Officers
President: Sarah Kobos
Vice President: Carlos Moreno
2nd Vice President: Michael Patton
Secretary: Jamie Jameson
Treasurer: Linda Doty

Yes, the list you posted is the current list of officers. We also have another half dozen board members. We meet on a monthly basis. Our officer elections are scheduled for November.

Will Wilkins made a presentation to our board last month. We were not asked to have an official position, but many of the board members have posted on this thread.

I don't know if you think we should have a position on this development or any other development. I don't think it is in our best interest to get involved in every issue, but often we have a board discussion about certain issues.

Our process is to have a discussion online, then one board member will make a motion and then we will vote. In the past, we have had positions regarding zoning issues or waivers of rules regarding matters before the planning commission or the board of adjustment.

Last month we agreed as a board to speak up before the board of adjustment regarding an applicant trying to get a waiver on off street parking requirements for a development on 6th and Peoria. Our president spoke to the BOA of our position (as did many others) and the matter passed.

We have another board meeting planned for later in August and have our semi-regular meetings for the general membership planned for later this year.

[ARGUS]

ok 5k folks go...what about the other points asked?

[RecycleMichael]

I don't know why you are arguing, Argus.

Tulsa has a long history of supporting baseball and the team wants a new stadium.

If you want to argue about the stadium, use a different existing thread or start a new one.

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Rico

I'm kinda curious to know if TulsaNow (The organization not the forum) has taken any sort of an official stance on the action of the TDA....

Or do they plan to??

While on the "TulsaNow organization" topic....

Is the following list of officers current?


TulsaNow Officers
President: Sarah Kobos
Vice President: Carlos Moreno
2nd Vice President: Michael Patton
Secretary: Jamie Jameson
Treasurer: Linda Doty

Yes, the list you posted is the current list of officers. We also have another half dozen board members. We meet on a monthly basis. Our officer elections are scheduled for November.

Will Wilkins made a presentation to our board last month. We were not asked to have an official position, but many of the board members have posted on this thread.

I don't know if you think we should have a position on this development or any other development. I don't think it is in our best interest to get involved in every issue, but often we have a board discussion about certain issues.

Our process is to have a discussion online, then one board member will make a motion and then we will vote. In the past, we have had positions regarding zoning issues or waivers of rules regarding matters before the planning commission or the board of adjustment.

Last month we agreed as a board to speak up before the board of adjustment regarding an applicant trying to get a waiver on off street parking requirements for a development on 6th and Peoria. Our president spoke to the BOA of our position (as did many others) and the matter passed.

We have another board meeting planned for later in August and have our semi-regular meetings for the general membership planned for later this year.

Thanks.

Went by the new infill Wilkins is doing in Brady Heights today..

The view will say quite a bit.

Just a rumor... I've heard the Tri-Neighborhood Alliance (Brady, Crosbie, and Owen) will be voicing support of the 120 project.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I resolve to lose another 5 lbs. before August 30th. Digitally signed and dated this 10th of August 2008. I will negotiate with myself each day and even throw in some roadwork if necessary to make it happen. If I don't make the date, I may extend the period of time. If someone offers me free food at Oscars Gastropub, well the negotiations may breakdown.

They had permission to negotiate. They decided not to. Not too rare in business.

The TDA isn't a business. It's a public trust.

So if the Drillers behaved the same way toward the City of Tulsa, it wouldn't trouble you a bit?

Semantics. Like the thin lines between cops and crooks, lawyers and mafia. They didn't direct them to negotiate successfully, just negotiate. They did. Now they have likely been directed to stop negotiating and they have.

And no, I wouldn't. I love baseball but made it clear from the beginning that either location was fine with me as long as a minimum of public dollars is involved.