Homeless Hi-Rise at Admiral and Yale

[carltonplace]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Isn't the actual "Y" moving into the MAYO Hotel?

Mayo Building I think (5th and Main) not hotel.

[Double A]

I think they should build the new unit on the site of the old Homeland on Denver just down the street from  the current Y. Riverview is used to having the homeless population in close proximity, put it there.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

I think they should build the new unit on the site of the old Homeland on Denver just down the street from  the current Y. Riverview is used to having the homeless population in close proximity, put it there.

THERE's an idea.

However, the THA may not already own the land where the old Homeland Store is located at 11th and Denver.

Wasn't that near the location that the proposed "Grand Central Library" was to be built....on Schusterman land?

Right across Denver Avenue?

Maybe the Schustermans, the Zarrows, the Kaisers and the Rabinowitzs could convene a minion to decide the issue......


[]

[sgrizzle]

Maybe I was dropped on my head, but I'm pretty sure it's the YMCA GYM that's moving.

Homeless people are not gym equipment.

[Limabean]

So it looks like the neighbors have organized into an effort to recall Gomez and Patrick. See their website, whoownstulsa.com. Good question.

[waterboy]

This has been described as a high rise. I saw the rendering on the news this morning and its a rather nice looking spread out complex that appeared no more than a few stories tall.

How embarrassing that the White City crowd lights their torches and starts boiling the tar. They have worked no harder in solidifying their neighborhoods than Riverview, Maple Ridge, Tracy Park or other midtown hoods that have group homes, treatment centers and homeless populations.

The lady on camera representing them bitterly asked "Would you want them in your neighborhood?" repeatedly. Well, ma'am. We do and we don't suffer for it.

Lately, I'm of the opinion that Tulsan's just like getting angry and being against change of any sort. Some on here enjoy the spectacle and throw fuel on the fire for their own ego. The idea that every project and those behind it are evil, nefarious, self serving and incompetent is getting real tiresome. It will eventually stifle our city altoghether.

[sgrizzle]

They say "homeless hi-rise" because it sounds good.

70-whatever units is not that big. Probably have that many mental patients on Admiral right now, with or without the building.

[swake]

I support the ideal of housing for the homeless. We are a wealthy enough nation that we should not have people living on the streets, especially when they are there because of mental or other illnesses. And I think facilities like this have the potential to save us a ton of money.

There have been studies that show that it's far cheaper (not to mention kinder) to house and take proper care of the homeless. When a street person today isn't feeling well and it's cold out they simply do something to get arrested. We suddenly incur the cost of arresting, and then housing the homeless person in jail. If he's really sick we then have emergency healthcare costs we pay for. If charges are pressed we have court time and cost. All that just because it was cold out and he didn't feel well. A single homeless man can cost the public hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in this way. It's far cheaper to house, feed and give basic non-emergency medical care.

But, Facilities like this done at the local level are a losing proposition. If we created great facilities like this for all of our homeless people we are just going to end up with even more people on the streets as more homeless migrate here from other places to take advantage of what we offer. We will become (if we are not already) a haven for the homeless. This kind of project needs to be done, it would save the public a ton of money in healthcare, social services and law enforcement just to name a few. But it needs to be done at a national level, not local.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Maybe I was dropped on my head, but I'm pretty sure it's the YMCA GYM that's moving.

Homeless people are not gym equipment.

Basically they are moving the "gym" but they are also getting out of the "homeless business" as well, so are leaving the whole building.

You can ask why the donors arent buying the old building from the Y and refurbishing it into a "housing first" program. But even then they would need some place to house these people while that was being done. Its likely the whole building would need to be gutted.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by swake

I support the ideal of housing for the homeless. We are a wealthy enough nation that we should not have people living on the streets, especially when they are there because of mental or other illnesses. And I think facilities like this have the potential to save us a ton of money.

There have been studies that show that it's far cheaper (not to mention kinder) to house and take proper care of the homeless. When a street person today isn't feeling well and it's cold out they simply do something to get arrested. We suddenly incur the cost of arresting, and then housing the homeless person in jail. If he's really sick we then have emergency healthcare costs we pay for. If charges are pressed we have court time and cost. All that just because it was cold out and he didn't feel well. A single homeless man can cost the public hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in this way. It's far cheaper to house, feed and give basic non-emergency medical care.

But, Facilities like this done at the local level are a losing proposition. If we created great facilities like this for all of our homeless people we are just going to end up with even more people on the streets as more homeless migrate here from other places to take advantage of what we offer. We will become (if we are not already) a haven for the homeless. This kind of project needs to be done, it would save the public a ton of money in healthcare, social services and law enforcement just to name a few. But it needs to be done at a national level, not local.

Fortunately this type of "housing first" program has been active across the nation and many cities are using it. Tulsa is actually behind the curve.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

This has been described as a high rise. I saw the rendering on the news this morning and its a rather nice looking spread out complex that appeared no more than a few stories tall.

How embarrassing that the White City crowd lights their torches and starts boiling the tar. They have worked no harder in solidifying their neighborhoods than Riverview, Maple Ridge, Tracy Park or other midtown hoods that have group homes, treatment centers and homeless populations.

The lady on camera representing them bitterly asked "Would you want them in your neighborhood?" repeatedly. Well, ma'am. We do and we don't suffer for it.

Lately, I'm of the opinion that Tulsan's just like getting angry and being against change of any sort. Some on here enjoy the spectacle and throw fuel on the fire for their own ego. The idea that every project and those behind it are evil, nefarious, self serving and incompetent is getting real tiresome. It will eventually stifle our city altoghether.

I agree with your assessment.  But...

I think the city could have saved a whole lot of grief if they would have been more up-front about the whole project.  Instead, they are standing by statements that posting legal notices in the paper was sufficient.

Both Patrick and Gomez could have informed residents this was coming and informed people of what this project is and is not.

Instead, it's got the markings of an under-handed project to import a bunch of mentally-ill social rejects to their neighborhoods.

The best way to create fear is through ignorance.  If local residents were not enlightened to the project, it should come as no surprise the have negative paradigms about it.

[swake]

I also think this is also a poor location. I agree it's not a "residential area" the way some are saying. The site is in a run down commercial strip between I-244 and Admiral that stretches for miles. Across Admiral is a cemetery. The only nearby homes on that side of I-244 are on the northeast corner of Yale and Admiral and they are set pretty far back.

But, this location is still a poor choice. This facility will impact the TU area right on the other side of  I-244, and that's bad. This isn't being NIMBY, it's that we should want to follow the European city model as noted on another recent thread on the evolution of cities. The core of a city should be it's most desirable part. The area around TU should be one of our "core" areas that we need to fight to support. Downtown is the center of our core and this facility should not be located there either. A location further out that has access to entry level employment, social services and medical care is what we need to find. Access to those services via transit is and should be perfectly acceptable. Good locations might include near the airport or Port of Catoosa or Cherokee Industrial Park. Entry level jobs are plentiful in those locations and if they don't have access transit now, they should as employment centers anyway and locating a facility like this nearby would only increase the need.

We need to stop making all the same old mistakes are rethink what and where we do things.

[rwarn17588]

How did White City get its name?

I don't know, and I'm genuinely curious.

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

How did White City get its name?

I don't know, and I'm genuinely curious.

It's named after a family farm that used to be there.

[AMP]

http://www.cityoftulsa.org/Community/Neighborhoods/SignGuide.asp

http://www.cityoftulsa.org/Community/Neighborhoods/images/whitecitysmall_000.jpg

For some reason I believe it was at one time a large Dairy Farm called White's Dairy.