Homeless Hi-Rise at Admiral and Yale

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

The YMCA was not running a "homeless" shelter. They were providing affordable living for people that needed a hand. They also had in house services to help the clients look for work and acquire appropriate clothes to interview. How can anyone be against a facility that will help people get back on their feet and become constructive members of society?

+1

Most of the residents at the Y have a job. A low-paying job, but a job. Many are on disability. Without an affordable place to live like the Y or a comparable facility, they would be homeless.

The YMCA has done a very good job of offering inexpensive, short-term housing for those men needing spartan, dormitory-room type lodging.

The Y has a variety of transients, including recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, emotionally disturbed, and others in transition, trying to work their way back into normal society.

The Tulsa Fire Chief has an unbridled agenda to promote a ruinously expensive building code change requiring implementation of an active fire suppression system in all existing downtown high-rises.  

The Fire Suppression Industry has been vigorously promoting this retroactive building code change across the country in order to require a building code MANDATE that will line their pockets.  

However, most jurisdictions have been too smart to bite.

This mandate kills the value of older high-rises that under existing building codes do not need an active fire suppression system, and are not undergoing a major change in use or rehabilitation requiring the installation of an active fire suppression system.

The Fire Chief's agenda fits hand-in-glove with the local ruling power establishment's desire to run the transient population OUT of downtown Tulsa.

Hence, plans to close the YMCA by 2010.  
Perfect fit.

[PonderInc]

It's funny... I'm not against building a shelter, and I'm tempted to cite property rights, existing zoning, etc to support it.

But at the same time, I believe that people shouldn't be able to randomly tear down historic buildings that they own....because of the impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the loss to future generations.  (Believing that irreplaceable architecture should, in some way, trump the short-sighted desire to destroy history through demolition.)

Mr. Spock would not be ambivalent....it must be a human trait....

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

The YMCA was not running a "homeless" shelter. They were providing affordable living for people that needed a hand. They also had in house services to help the clients look for work and acquire appropriate clothes to interview. How can anyone be against a facility that will help people get back on their feet and become constructive members of society?

+1

Most of the residents at the Y have a job. A low-paying job, but a job. Many are on disability. Without an affordable place to live like the Y or a comparable facility, they would be homeless.

The YMCA has done a very good job of offering inexpensive, short-term housing for those men needing spartan, dormitory-room type lodging.

The Y has a variety of transients, including recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, emotionally disturbed, and others in transition, trying to work their way back into normal society.

The Tulsa Fire Chief has an unbridled agenda to promote a ruinously expensive building code change requiring implementation of an active fire suppression system in all existing downtown high-rises.  

The Fire Suppression Industry has been vigorously promoting this retroactive building code change across the country in order to require a building code MANDATE that will line their pockets.  

However, most jurisdictions have been too smart to bite.

This mandate kills the value of older high-rises that under existing building codes do not need an active fire suppression system, and are not undergoing a major change in use or rehabilitation requiring the installation of an active fire suppression system.

The Fire Chief's agenda fits hand-in-glove with the local ruling power establishment's desire to run the transient population OUT of downtown Tulsa.

Hence, plans to close the YMCA by 2010.  
Perfect fit.

You are way off-base on a hidden agenda to benefit local fire control companies with this one project and your assertion that suddenly the COT is using the IFC's as a form of emminent domain.  The COT implements many national codes, of which, the origins could be from fire protection advocates (i.e. fire marshals) or industry-driven (sprinker companies).

The powers that be at the local office of Simplex-Grinnel and Mac Systems are far too busy to be lobbying the city to tear down the Y, just so they can get in on some sprinkler action at a new shelter.

International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code, International Building Code etc. ad nauseum are accepted by many municipalities.  They are a pain in the donkey to deal with and there's a lot of redundancy when comparing with state code requirements.  As over-reaching as they may seem at times to those in the construction industry, they do serve the purpose of protecting the public.  It's one rare instance of where I feel government works for the common good.  

[TheArtist]

I am guessing that in order for the old Y to be used as a "housing first" type program it would require substantially more than just a new fire repression system. It would essentially need to be gutted and rebuilt. Not sure how feasible or cost effective that would be. Housing first programs have it so that the homeless person has their own place. They get the key to their own apartment, sometimes one thats shared. Its not a dorm or institutional type environment with a lot of rules. Its a real place they can call their own with a bathroom, kitchen, bedroom, etc. I dont know for certain, but I am just guessing that the old Y isnt set up like that? And if not it would probably require extensive remodeling and wouldn't be able to have as many tennants.

However, if it were possible to purchase and remodel the old building properly, with the added fire prevention stuff etc., at a cost that would be less than the new building... that would have been the way to go. If anything just because there are a lot of services and opportunities nearby for the homeless to utilize. You could have used any money saved, to provide more case workers and services for the tennants. I just dont know how the numbers would work out for doing that?

I also dont think it would have been a problem for visitors to downtown or the arena. Its the downtown of a city for goodness sakes. A city dweller just almost expects to see people like that, its part of the landscape of a city. Even Mayberry had its town drunk, Otis wasnt it? lol As for the arena and guests there, I hardly think a couple of raggedy looking individuals would be all that disconcerting when there are crowds of thousands going in and out of the arena for events. They would survive the indignity of having to see a few "bums". And again, a remodeled Y would have fewer tennants and hopefully better programs and services for them.

[MDepr2007]

It's going to take more than moving the Y and making apartments all over Tulsa to remove what some consider unsightly.

We are already seeing more intersections with people holding signs for food all over Tulsa also. There are more out of town visitors to Tulsa in these other areas than will be in downtown. The sight is not going anywhere out of town , just shared in more areas and growing as THA spreads the kindness.

[carltonplace]

quote:Originally posted by MDepr2007

It's going to take more than moving the Y and making apartments all over Tulsa to remove what some consider unsightly.

We are already seeing more intersections with people holding signs for food all over Tulsa also. There are more out of town visitors to Tulsa in these other areas than will be in downtown. The sight is not going anywhere out of town , just shared in more areas and growing as THA spreads the kindness.

In most cases the sign holders are not the homeless, they are opportunists and grifters that know how much money can be made holding a cardboard sign and preying on the sympathy of others.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

The YMCA was not running a "homeless" shelter. They were providing affordable living for people that needed a hand. They also had in house services to help the clients look for work and acquire appropriate clothes to interview. How can anyone be against a facility that will help people get back on their feet and become constructive members of society?

+1

Most of the residents at the Y have a job. A low-paying job, but a job. Many are on disability. Without an affordable place to live like the Y or a comparable facility, they would be homeless.

The YMCA has done a very good job of offering inexpensive, short-term housing for those men needing spartan, dormitory-room type lodging.

The Y has a variety of transients, including recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, emotionally disturbed, and others in transition, trying to work their way back into normal society.

The Tulsa Fire Chief has an unbridled agenda to promote a ruinously expensive building code change requiring implementation of an active fire suppression system in all existing downtown high-rises.  

The Fire Suppression Industry has been vigorously promoting this retroactive building code change across the country in order to require a building code MANDATE that will line their pockets.  

However, most jurisdictions have been too smart to bite.

This mandate kills the value of older high-rises that under existing building codes do not need an active fire suppression system, and are not undergoing a major change in use or rehabilitation requiring the installation of an active fire suppression system.

The Fire Chief's agenda fits hand-in-glove with the local ruling power establishment's desire to run the transient population OUT of downtown Tulsa.

Hence, plans to close the YMCA by 2010.  
Perfect fit.

You are way off-base on a hidden agenda to benefit local fire control companies with this one project and your assertion that suddenly the COT is using the IFC's as a form of emminent domain.  The COT implements many national codes, of which, the origins could be from fire protection advocates (i.e. fire marshals) or industry-driven (sprinker companies).

The powers that be at the local office of Simplex-Grinnel and Mac Systems are far too busy to be lobbying the city to tear down the Y, just so they can get in on some sprinkler action at a new shelter.

International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code, International Building Code etc. ad nauseum are accepted by many municipalities.  They are a pain in the donkey to deal with and there's a lot of redundancy when comparing with state code requirements.  As over-reaching as they may seem at times to those in the construction industry, they do serve the purpose of protecting the public.  It's one rare instance of where I feel government works for the common good.  

It definitely is the NATIONAL Fire Suppression Industry that is trying to get a segue into at least one major city to require the adoption of city fire and building codes that REQUIRE the RETROFIT of active fire suppression systems on ALL high rises, regardless of when built.

That MANDATE will collectively put $billions into their pockets.

Existing buildings that complied with existing building code when they were built typically do not have to retrofit to meet changes in the codes until they make a substantial change in the building use or function.

This mandate will force the installation of active fire suppression systems into all high rise buildings.

Remember the big fight between the downtown Tulsa residential high-rise condo associations and the City Fire Chief over this proposal??

They went to WAR against the Tulsa Fire Chief, who was carrying the water for the national Fire Suppression Industry over this proposal, which would require $1,000,000's to retrofit active fire suppression systems into their solid concrete structures, built as "fire-proof" back in the 1960's.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

Originally posted by MDepr2007



In most cases the sign holders are not the homeless, they are opportunists and grifters that know how much money can be made holding a cardboard sign and preying on the sympathy of others.

+1 on that. They do well enough to contact each other by cell phone. Street performers with a hangover.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

The YMCA was not running a "homeless" shelter. They were providing affordable living for people that needed a hand. They also had in house services to help the clients look for work and acquire appropriate clothes to interview. How can anyone be against a facility that will help people get back on their feet and become constructive members of society?

+1

Most of the residents at the Y have a job. A low-paying job, but a job. Many are on disability. Without an affordable place to live like the Y or a comparable facility, they would be homeless.

The YMCA has done a very good job of offering inexpensive, short-term housing for those men needing spartan, dormitory-room type lodging.

The Y has a variety of transients, including recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, emotionally disturbed, and others in transition, trying to work their way back into normal society.

The Tulsa Fire Chief has an unbridled agenda to promote a ruinously expensive building code change requiring implementation of an active fire suppression system in all existing downtown high-rises.  

The Fire Suppression Industry has been vigorously promoting this retroactive building code change across the country in order to require a building code MANDATE that will line their pockets.  

However, most jurisdictions have been too smart to bite.

This mandate kills the value of older high-rises that under existing building codes do not need an active fire suppression system, and are not undergoing a major change in use or rehabilitation requiring the installation of an active fire suppression system.

The Fire Chief's agenda fits hand-in-glove with the local ruling power establishment's desire to run the transient population OUT of downtown Tulsa.

Hence, plans to close the YMCA by 2010.  
Perfect fit.

You are way off-base on a hidden agenda to benefit local fire control companies with this one project and your assertion that suddenly the COT is using the IFC's as a form of emminent domain.  The COT implements many national codes, of which, the origins could be from fire protection advocates (i.e. fire marshals) or industry-driven (sprinker companies).

The powers that be at the local office of Simplex-Grinnel and Mac Systems are far too busy to be lobbying the city to tear down the Y, just so they can get in on some sprinkler action at a new shelter.

International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code, International Building Code etc. ad nauseum are accepted by many municipalities.  They are a pain in the donkey to deal with and there's a lot of redundancy when comparing with state code requirements.  As over-reaching as they may seem at times to those in the construction industry, they do serve the purpose of protecting the public.  It's one rare instance of where I feel government works for the common good.  

It definitely is the NATIONAL Fire Suppression Industry that is trying to get a segue into at least one major city to require the adoption of city fire and building codes that REQUIRE the RETROFIT of active fire suppression systems on ALL high rises, regardless of when built.

That MANDATE will collectively put $billions into their pockets.

Existing buildings that complied with existing building code when they were built typically do not have to retrofit to meet changes in the codes until they make a substantial change in the building use or function.

This mandate will force the installation of active fire suppression systems into all high rise buildings.

Remember the big fight between the downtown Tulsa residential high-rise condo associations and the City Fire Chief over this proposal??

They went to WAR against the Tulsa Fire Chief, who was carrying the water for the national Fire Suppression Industry over this proposal, which would require $1,000,000's to retrofit active fire suppression systems into their solid concrete structures, built as "fire-proof" back in the 1960's.

There was a pretty big fire back in the 70's I believe in the London Square apartments and shopping area. Seems it was exacerbated by not having "firewalls" between units or the firewalls didn't extend into the attics. Suddenly we realized that many of Tulsa's apartments built during the 60's boom did not have them even though builders/developers knew of their importance. They just followed the existing code.

Is that what you are championing? Grandfathering in outdated construction that escalates fires? That's a poor argument.

When I spoke with Kent Moreland (sp?) at lunch one day during his election campaign I seem to remember that he was unhappy with the all or nothing approach the Chief was taking. He wasn't against gradually adding fire suppression methods. But then he seemed pretty reasonable and didn't see it as conspiracy by anyone.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

The YMCA was not running a "homeless" shelter. They were providing affordable living for people that needed a hand. They also had in house services to help the clients look for work and acquire appropriate clothes to interview. How can anyone be against a facility that will help people get back on their feet and become constructive members of society?

+1

Most of the residents at the Y have a job. A low-paying job, but a job. Many are on disability. Without an affordable place to live like the Y or a comparable facility, they would be homeless.

The YMCA has done a very good job of offering inexpensive, short-term housing for those men needing spartan, dormitory-room type lodging.

The Y has a variety of transients, including recovering alcoholics and drug addicts, emotionally disturbed, and others in transition, trying to work their way back into normal society.

The Tulsa Fire Chief has an unbridled agenda to promote a ruinously expensive building code change requiring implementation of an active fire suppression system in all existing downtown high-rises.  

The Fire Suppression Industry has been vigorously promoting this retroactive building code change across the country in order to require a building code MANDATE that will line their pockets.  

However, most jurisdictions have been too smart to bite.

This mandate kills the value of older high-rises that under existing building codes do not need an active fire suppression system, and are not undergoing a major change in use or rehabilitation requiring the installation of an active fire suppression system.

The Fire Chief's agenda fits hand-in-glove with the local ruling power establishment's desire to run the transient population OUT of downtown Tulsa.

Hence, plans to close the YMCA by 2010.  
Perfect fit.

You are way off-base on a hidden agenda to benefit local fire control companies with this one project and your assertion that suddenly the COT is using the IFC's as a form of emminent domain.  The COT implements many national codes, of which, the origins could be from fire protection advocates (i.e. fire marshals) or industry-driven (sprinker companies).

The powers that be at the local office of Simplex-Grinnel and Mac Systems are far too busy to be lobbying the city to tear down the Y, just so they can get in on some sprinkler action at a new shelter.

International Fire Code, International Mechanical Code, International Building Code etc. ad nauseum are accepted by many municipalities.  They are a pain in the donkey to deal with and there's a lot of redundancy when comparing with state code requirements.  As over-reaching as they may seem at times to those in the construction industry, they do serve the purpose of protecting the public.  It's one rare instance of where I feel government works for the common good.  

It definitely is the NATIONAL Fire Suppression Industry that is trying to get a segue into at least one major city to require the adoption of city fire and building codes that REQUIRE the RETROFIT of active fire suppression systems on ALL high rises, regardless of when built.

That MANDATE will collectively put $billions into their pockets.

Existing buildings that complied with existing building code when they were built typically do not have to retrofit to meet changes in the codes until they make a substantial change in the building use or function.

This mandate will force the installation of active fire suppression systems into all high rise buildings.

Remember the big fight between the downtown Tulsa residential high-rise condo associations and the City Fire Chief over this proposal??

They went to WAR against the Tulsa Fire Chief, who was carrying the water for the national Fire Suppression Industry over this proposal, which would require $1,000,000's to retrofit active fire suppression systems into their solid concrete structures, built as "fire-proof" back in the 1960's.

There was a pretty big fire back in the 70's I believe in the London Square apartments and shopping area. Seems it was exacerbated by not having "firewalls" between units or the firewalls didn't extend into the attics. Suddenly we realized that many of Tulsa's apartments built during the 60's boom did not have them even though builders/developers knew of their importance. They just followed the existing code.

Is that what you are championing? Grandfathering in outdated construction that escalates fires? That's a poor argument.

When I spoke with Kent Moreland (sp?) at lunch one day during his election campaign I seem to remember that he was unhappy with the all or nothing approach the Chief was taking. He wasn't against gradually adding fire suppression methods. But then he seemed pretty reasonable and didn't see it as conspiracy by anyone.

I'm actually in favor of following common sense.

There is a cost-benefit relationship to any retrofit.

The cost to retrofit is definite and concrete.  

However, the benefit is amorphous, like someone "might" die if there is no active fire suppression system in an older high-rise.  Maybe.  Possibly.  

Has ANYONE died in Tulsa in the last 40 years in a major fire in a high-rise office or residential building?

I think that answer is:

NO.

So, retrofitting existing buildings to comply with the zealotry of those public officials shouting "We'll Be SAFER", when they are simply carrying the water for the vested financial interests of a particular industry is stupidity defined.

Furthermore, I would say that lack of an adequate city code inspection during the construction of homes and buildings is 1000X the problem of what is or is not in the actual building code.

Original homeowners only find out years later when they try to sell their homes that they were not built to code in some respect, even though those homes successfully passed FINAL CITY of TULSA Building INSPECTIONS.  

Then the homeowners have to retrofit to fix the code defects in order to pass the Home Inspection to sell.

That's the REAL swindle.

[waterboy]

You might say that, but at the time the problem was that the city code didn't require them but they were known to contain fires to smaller areas. Any fireman or developer/builder could tell you even in the 1960's that they could not effectively fight a fire above the 4th floor in the multi-story residences that were being built. But they were built anyway to existing city codes.

Are you saying that we don't have enough city inspectors or that they don't do an adequate job? What difference does it make if fire suppression sprinklers weren't required when the high rises were built?

Wow, you entirely changed your post before I could respond. Just like arguing with my teenager.[]

[waterboy]

If fire suppression systems are not needed in residential high rises, then it follows they aren't needed in commercial and industrial settings either. Might as well nip this conspiracy in the bud...In The Bud!

Good luck on getting the insurance companies to sign on to that. Commercial companies see the cost/benefit as positive as well. Perhaps they are getting kickbacks from the fire sprinkler companies too. Its a huge web of vipers using safety as their tool I guess. I was totally unaware.

[RecycleMichael]

Maybe the reason why more Tulsans don't die in fires is because we follow fire codes.

I am sorry, friendly bear. Of all your wild conspiracy theories, saying the homeless are being run out of downtown by the Fire Marshall is your dumbest.

The Fire Marshall didn't just pick one building of near homeless people and make up special rules. He is trying to keep Tulsa safe and following the international guidelines.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Maybe the reason why more Tulsans don't die in fires is because we follow fire codes.

I am sorry, friendly bear. Of all your wild conspiracy theories, saying the homeless are being run out of downtown by the Fire Marshall is your dumbest.

The Fire Marshall didn't just pick one building of near homeless people and make up special rules. He is trying to keep Tulsa safe and following the international guidelines.

Yup. I know someone who lives in the Sophian, and they b*tched a lot about having to retrofit sprinkler systems in the building. But that's where my friend and I parted ways -- especially in a really old building like that one.

Fire prevention in high-rises is a good thing. No sense in having another Triangle Shirtwaist situation nearly a century after it occurred.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Maybe the reason why more Tulsans don't die in fires is because we follow fire codes.

I am sorry, friendly bear. Of all your wild conspiracy theories, saying the homeless are being run out of downtown by the Fire Marshall is your dumbest.

The Fire Marshall didn't just pick one building of near homeless people and make up special rules. He is trying to keep Tulsa safe and following the international guidelines.

The Fire Marshal can certainly be pursuing multiple objectives in his intentional zealotry regarding retrofitting automatic sprinkler systems in high-rises.

1) Serve the financial interests of his future employer:  The Fire Suppression Industry, or the Fire Truck Industry with MANDATES.

2) Ingratiate himself with the local power oligarchy by closing down low-cost, affordable housing downtown, and running the dregs away from their shiny new Arena with High-Rise building Automatic Fire Suppression System mandates.

3) Maybe he'll do a Tom Baker, too, and roll-out of retirement as Fire Chief, with the Lorton's World endorsement into a city council seat.

Again, name a single, major fire in a downtown Tulsa high-rise in the past 40 years that killed even ONE person?

It's a Solution Looking for a Problem.