Brady District

[SXSW]

I noticed on a bike ride earlier that someone is renovating the old brick Ward building at Archer & Boulder (NE corner).  Anyone know what they are putting there?  They are replacing all of the windows.  That section of Brady really needs the Boulder Bridge - what is the timetable for its construction? 

They are also nearly finished with the brick on the north facade of the Tribune II.  Looks pretty good. 

[carltonplace]

I noticed on a bike ride earlier that someone is renovating the old brick Ward building at Archer & Boulder (NE corner).  Anyone know what they are putting there?  They are replacing all of the windows.  That section of Brady really needs the Boulder Bridge - what is the timetable for its construction? 

They are also nearly finished with the brick on the north facade of the Tribune II.  Looks pretty good. 

Boulder Bridge is suppose to start construction in September of 2011 (oops) and complete summer of 2012 (uh-huh).

[David]

I'd just like to say...

This is my favorite part of Tulsa and I'd kill to be a resident here. I'd also love it if the entire area was renamed Greenwood.

[AquaMan]

I'd just like to say...

This is my favorite part of Tulsa and I'd kill to be a resident here. I'd also love it if the entire area was renamed Greenwood.

I enjoy the area. Your suggestion won't resonate much here, but it has some merit. My neighborhood is called Southside, the one north of me is Morningside and the areas south of me have various names. However, the entire area is designated as Maple Ridge which gives it a more powerful image. Greenwood will always have a separate identification because of its being the ground zero of the 1921 race riots.

[LandArchPoke]

All the development in the Brady is great, I can't wait to see what this area is like even a year from now. Being down there recently I have noticed that parking is getting a lot more difficult (which does not bother me at all). I am curious what the street scaping plan will do for this area as well.

Also, just an idea... since Archer Street isn't really a major east west thoroughfare (it pretty much dead ends once you get to the east and west of the IDL) why not narrow the street and make it more pedestrian friendly? There is pretty much never that much traffic on it that you need more than one lane each way. You could pretty easily turn the lanes on the north and south into parallel parking and then also have enough room for a bike lane. This could be done pretty cheaply with just repainting the traffic lines like what they did to Cherry Street recently.

[Red Arrow]

Being down there recently I have noticed that parking is getting a lot more difficult (which does not bother me at all).

That ought to keep all us nasty suburbanites away.  Make sure there is no useful transit system on top of that and downtown will be reserved for the chosen ones.  (No religious connotation intended.)  While you're at it, tear out the BA Expressway, I-244, US 75 and the IDL.

We've been down this road before, pun intended.  I agree there is too much surface parking but until there is a reliable transit system to suburbia, there will need to be automobile parking if you want suburban dollars.

[jacobi]

Also, just an idea... since Archer Street isn't really a major east west thoroughfare (it pretty much dead ends once you get to the east and west of the IDL) why not narrow the street and make it more pedestrian friendly? There is pretty much never that much traffic on it that you need more than one lane each way. You could pretty easily turn the lanes on the north and south into parallel parking and then also have enough room for a bike lane. This could be done pretty cheaply with just repainting the traffic lines like what they did to Cherry Street recently.

I heard from the staff at caz's that parallel parking was going to be put in along archer.  I just hope they don't eleminate the bike lanes that are there.  But they probobly will.

[LandArchPoke]

That ought to keep all us nasty suburbanites away.  Make sure there is no useful transit system on top of that and downtown will be reserved for the chosen ones.  (No religious connotation intended.)  While you're at it, tear out the BA Expressway, I-244, US 75 and the IDL.

We've been down this road before, pun intended.  I agree there is too much surface parking but until there is a reliable transit system to suburbia, there will need to be automobile parking if you want suburban dollars.

Well to start out, I actually live in Broken Arrow at the moment and grew up here. We are still 10-20 years away from needing transit to the suburbs... it's just not realistic unless there were major changes in the planning of the city. Streetcars could solve the parking issues pretty easily if we were to have a few lines that run through downtown. This would allow you to easily park in structure parking in the core of downtown and ride a streetcar to the Brady, Greenwood, and so on.

People are so over top about parking in downtown. I mean seriously... about 1-2 years ago when I would go out in the Brady I could literally park 100 feet from where I wanted to go if I was unlucky... now (GASP!!!) I have to maybe park a block or two away and walk 500-600 feet.

From growing up in suburbia and interacting with people here all the time, I can say that most people realize you walk a little bit while you're in a downtown setting. These crazy theories of keeping suburban people away, the Tulsa World commentators, and so on saying nothing will last in downtown because of parking issues or that there is even a parking problem are the minority not the majority.

[Red Arrow]

Well to start out, I actually live in Broken Arrow at the moment and grew up here. We are still 10-20 years away from needing transit to the suburbs... it's just not realistic unless there were major changes in the planning of the city. Streetcars could solve the parking issues pretty easily if we were to have a few lines that run through downtown. This would allow you to easily park in structure parking in the core of downtown and ride a streetcar to the Brady, Greenwood, and so on.

People are so over top about parking in downtown. I mean seriously... about 1-2 years ago when I would go out in the Brady I could literally park 100 feet from where I wanted to go if I was unlucky... now (GASP!!!) I have to maybe park a block or two away and walk 500-600 feet.

From growing up in suburbia and interacting with people here all the time, I can say that most people realize you walk a little bit while you're in a downtown setting. These crazy theories of keeping suburban people away, the Tulsa World commentators, and so on saying nothing will last in downtown because of parking issues or that there is even a parking problem are the minority not the majority.

When you write things like

I have noticed that parking is getting a lot more difficult (which does not bother me at all)

, it gives me a different impression than what you write above.

I would agree that a downtown circulator system would be needed to make a link to suburban transit viable.  If we are 10-20 years from needing transit to the suburbs, we need to be planning now and I believe we are. (Fast Forward Transit Planning)

Downtown does not really have a parking problem now, at least not in the evening.  I don't get downtown during the day.  I don't mind walking a few blocks.  Parking issues won't keep people away from things like Ball Games or events at the BOK Center if they really want to go.  Parking issues may keep people away from businesses that have an acceptable substitute farther out from downtown with easier parking.  I have previously written about my distaste for pay parking.

[LandArchPoke]

When you write things like , it gives me a different impression than what you write above.

I would agree that a downtown circulator system would be needed to make a link to suburban transit viable.  If we are 10-20 years from needing transit to the suburbs, we need to be planning now and I believe we are. (Fast Forward Transit Planning)

Downtown does not really have a parking problem now, at least not in the evening.  I don't get downtown during the day.  I don't mind walking a few blocks.  Parking issues won't keep people away from things like Ball Games or events at the BOK Center if they really want to go.  Parking issues may keep people away from businesses that have an acceptable substitute farther out from downtown with easier parking.  I have previously written about my distaste for pay parking.

I guess I'm confused at how you took what I originally said. It was an observation which is true... parking in the Brady is becoming more difficult, but it isn't a bad thing and isn't an issue that really needs to be addressed yet. I would like to see Archer redone with parking along the street and a more friendly bike lane. This will allow the corridor to be more walkable.

The additional development will help us to get to a point where a street car line is actually reasonable. I have only been reading this forum recently so I'm not really familiar with your views on the parking situation but I responded to what seemed like that unreasonable view that some people like to portray "all south tulsan/ suburban" people have, and from what I have noticed gets played up a lot on this forum and in reality it's not true of what the majority of people actually think in Tulsa.

I can see you're point about it potentially keeping people from South Tulsa/ BA/ Owasso or wherever away if they were just making a trip to one special place say the chocolate store in the Brady. That is why the Ballpark and the BOk Center were so vital to the rebirth and success downtown is having. Making downtown a destination point for entertainment helps build the ground work and establishing a demographic for these places that makes the parking situation more acceptable. Without this downtown would never have made the turn around it has. Once the ground work is laid like it has it then in turn allows for the residential development we are seeing and in each cycle the need to draw in suburban people to support downtown is less.

The more development you see though the more attraction it will gain to people outside the core, however, and with better infrastructure you can solve parking problems that are created, and in time you can see Tulsa transformed to a city with a core more like Portland. You can see this happening with Cherry Street (they are installing parking meters) and I bet this won't stop anyone driving in from outside the core because it is a destination for people in the metro. On a side note to be against pay parking, while frustrating I'll admit, is just the norm for cities everywhere. Just be thankful you can park downtown for a couple dollars an hour compared to a lot of places that are a lot more expensive.

I also think the Fast Forward planning session is a good step forward in transit planning for Tulsa and hopefully we can get our zoning codes redone ASAP to get more walkable development made legal.

I don't know if that maybe helped clear it up? Sorry for the miss communication.

[Red Arrow]

I guess I'm confused at how you took what I originally said. It was an observation which is true... parking in the Brady is becoming more difficult, but it isn't a bad thing and isn't an issue that really needs to be addressed yet. I would like to see Archer redone with parking along the street and a more friendly bike lane. This will allow the corridor to be more walkable.

I thought you were going for the keep your **** suburban cars out of our city position.  Stop using our streets, you are wearing them out without paying for them .....   That attitude has been presented in previous threads.

The additional development will help us to get to a point where a street car line is actually reasonable. I have only been reading this forum recently so I'm not really familiar with your views on the parking situation...

Additional development could enable a street car line which would, in turn, enable more development.  Having larger but less parking locations and a circulator system would allow development of a lot of areas now occupied by surface parking. 

As for paying for parking, it's a big negative for me but I have a squeaky wallet.  I know that when I go to a shopping mall that parking is included in the price of the stuff I purchase there.  It is a cost of doing business for the merchants to attract customers and a cost of convenience for the customers.  I think if a parking garage were built, local businesses should be able to validate for parking.  Parking would be "free" for customers of local businesses.  If you are just browsing, then you would have to pay to park.  I know that the folks not using cars would want to know why they have to help pay for my parking.   Attracting business is the object.   It's a matter of getting nickeled and dimed to death.  I am about 15 mi from downtown.  There is no viable way to get downtown other than to drive my car.  The cost of gas alone is about $3.50 round trip.  If I want a beer, that will be about another $5.00 or more since I like craft beers. I can only have one or at the most two since I have to drive home.  Let's say one for now.  When free street parking is gone, it will cost another $5 for a couple hours parking. Maybe I'll play some shuffleboard, darts, or something.  Now my one beer costs about $13.50.  That had better be a pretty special beer.  I don't really care if a couple of dollars per hour is less expensive than NYC, Chicago.....  It puts things above my threshold of dollars per enjoyment.  It might even cause me to go to someplace like Baker Street on Memorial.  Others' views will probably vary.  I believe parking near the BOK Center can be $10 or more for some events.  I was downtown one evening when there was something going on there and wondered why anyone able to walk would pay whatever the rate was to be that close.

Development of every day businesses and more residential units will make downtown more viable for those who want it.  I think it should be available for those who want it.  There will some excitement to going downtown for many.  For some of us boring suburbanites, going downtown will be reserved for something not available in suburbia.  The concept of "it's more expensive because it's in the city and it's worth it because it's in the city" will be valid for some but not all.  I probably don't fit Artist's demographic but I don't go bar hopping (gotta drive home, also the reference to Baker Street Bar), am generally not interested in trinket shops etc. and don't get excited about going downtown because it's downtown. 

I guess that's more than enough for now.

[TheTed]

There's still soooo much excess parking downtown. Whether there's free parking is another issue.

But even on a night the BOK is sold out, a show at Cain's, a well-attended baseball game, there's still tons of extra parking.

The newish garage at 1st/2nd/Cheyenne/Boulder is never ever full. The top couple floors just don't fill up.

That garage that's being expanded on First by the Jazz Depot, I'm not sure that place is even open on weekends. It's not used for off-hours parking. Open that on weekends and you've just added a ridiculous amount of parking to an area with no shortage of parking. That garage is three-four blocks from any downtown attraction.

OSU-Tulsa will never be full for Drillers fans (and that's free).

I really would like to see some numbers crunched on available parking vs. people downtown can hold. I imagine every single downtown venue/restaurant/bar would have to be packed to fire code (or beyond) for all the current parking to be full.

[jacobi]

There's still soooo much excess parking downtown. Whether there's free parking is another issue.

I think what he is saying is that the easy parking gone from the brady (or at least a big chunk of it).  The new hotel has done more than rip out the sidewalk, they ripped out the old angled parking at main and brady.  I assume that this is temporary since there is going to be retail space in this building.  For now though, alot of the spaces in the brady have been eaten up.  If you go down there you will see what he means.  It feels like a *sniff* big city all grown up!  I'm so proud.

You're point is well taken though.

[TheArtist]

Development of every day businesses and more residential units will make downtown more viable for those who want it.  I think it should be available for those who want it.  There will some excitement to going downtown for many.  For some of us boring suburbanites, going downtown will be reserved for something not available in suburbia.  The concept of "it's more expensive because it's in the city and it's worth it because it's in the city" will be valid for some but not all.  I probably don't fit Artist's demographic but I don't go bar hopping (gotta drive home, also the reference to Baker Street Bar), am generally not interested in trinket shops etc. and don't get excited about going downtown because it's downtown. 

And thats perfectly fine.  Downtown and urban environments can't be for everyone any more than suburban sprawl can be for everyone (some, most, however you want to put it).  The only thing Tulsa is trying to do is balance things out a teeentsy bit more so that instead of us having 99% plus suburbia, that your gonna have to take whether you like it or not, and about 1% urban.  We might instead have "gasp" 95% suburbia and 5% urban. Tulsa all by itself, not including the suburbs, is about 185 square miles.  If every inch of downtown and some surrounding areas like Cherry Street and the Pearl were to be urban, that would be about 2 square miles?  Yet it seems as if we have to beg and plead in order to even get that small percentage to become a true urban zone. If people weren't flocking to urban living all over this country, perhaps you might have a point.  But even here in Tulsa people seem to want more.  Tulsa can be proud of its nice suburbs and suburban living areas, but if it wants to pretend like its a CITY! it danged well ought to be proud of having at least a tiny little speck of good urban living/shopping/entertainment/dining areas as well for those who like that. 

[Red Arrow]

There's still soooo much excess parking downtown. Whether there's free parking is another issue.

I can agree with the above statements.  Obviously for me, free parking is an issue.  For me it's value for my dollar.  On the flip side,  I have no problem with spending $40 for airplane gas to go fly around the pattern at Riverside/Jones Airport for an hour of fun.  Everyone one has different things they are willing to pay for.