Brady District

[DowntownDan]

There is a sign up on the Central Parking Garage just north of the BOK Tower and the Jazz Depot offering Brady District parking for $2 Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.  I assume they stay open until 2.  There is no parking excuse anymore.  It's just a stroll over the pedestrian bridge and you are right there.  Not to mention I think there is still valet in front of Brady Tavern.  Not sure if there is a charge or only tipping involved.

[TheTed]

Workers are currently cleaning up the Ward Building at 107 N. Boulder. Did I miss it, or has something been announced for that building?

Vague info is all I find on the internet:

New tenants have been found to occupy the Ward Building at 107 N. Boulder.

http://www.newson6.com/story/16685889/brady-art

And...

Ward Building, 107 N. Boulder Ave., interior alteration, $180,000.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/site/printerfriendlystory.aspx?articleid=20120422_477_E2_Cmecab910468

[jacobi]

Workers are currently cleaning up the Ward Building at 107 N. Boulder. Did I miss it, or has something been announced for that building?

A vodka Bar, a gym (?) and some kids thing.  It's already been discussed.

[Red Arrow]

There is a sign up on the Central Parking Garage just north of the BOK Tower and the Jazz Depot offering Brady District parking for $2 Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.  ...  There is no parking excuse anymore. 

Sounds like a $2 excuse to me.

[jacobi]

Sounds like a $2 excuse to me.

I agree with RA on this.  When there is a street car that runs through the brady, then people will be out of excuses.

[TheArtist]

  If people are going to complain about $2  they need to stay home and or work and not be out cavorting around the Brady Arts District. 

[Red Arrow]

 If people are going to complain about $2  they need to stay home and or work and not be out cavorting around the Brady Arts District.  

We've had the pay for parking conversation many times.  In my case, I choose not to pay for parking on top of everything else.  You are partially right though.  If I can afford a couple (have to drive home) beers at $7 to $10 each including tip, what's another $2 for parking except for my attitude about paying it.  I guess I'll just have to go to Baker St Pub or where ever it was you loved so much across from Woodland Hills Mall.

Edit: OK, I checked McNellie's beer list and saw a couple as inexpensive as $4.50 before tip that I would drink but most were  $5.50 to $8.00 before tip.

[BKDotCom]

There is a sign up on the Central Parking Garage just north of the BOK Tower and the Jazz Depot offering Brady District parking for $2 Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.  I assume they stay open until 2.  There is no parking excuse anymore.  It's just a stroll over the pedestrian bridge and you are right there.  Not to mention I think there is still valet in front of Brady Tavern.  Not sure if there is a charge or only tipping involved.

If you approach from 1st street, that $2 Brady parking becomes $5 BOK parking..
At least I was a chump and payed $5.. I kinda thought that they mustuv raised the price... but nope...the banner still says $2.   So make sure you mention the $2 price on the banner.

[TheArtist]

We've had the pay for parking conversation many times.  In my case, I choose not to pay for parking on top of everything else.  You are partially right though.  If I can afford a couple (have to drive home) beers at $7 to $10 each including tip, what's another $2 for parking except for my attitude about paying it.  I guess I'll just have to go to Baker St Pub or where ever it was you loved so much across from Woodland Hills Mall.

Edit: OK, I checked McNellie's beer list and saw a couple as inexpensive as $4.50 before tip that I would drink but most were  $5.50 to $8.00 before tip.

Ok.   To each his own. Ain't nobody in south Tulsa suburbia going to accommodate me and what I like, why on earth should we water down our potential urban areas to make them less urban to accommodate suburbanites?   There are pleeeenty of people who love good urban areas so imo, we need to make our downtown into one thats attractive to urbanites (and their willingness to pay 2bucks for parking to be in a good urban area, or take transit, or walk/bike a little).  As I have said before, we have almost 200 square miles of suburban stuff for those who like that within the city limits alone, surely we can allow about 1% of that to be good quality urban space?  We don't need to try and make our downtown someplace that will be attractive to everyone.  We can't, because I have heard every excuse in the world on why people won't go downtown and if we tried to accommodate every one of those and fix every complaint,,, we would turn downtown into the area around Woodland Hills Mall.  Just this week I was talking to a lady and mentioned our Art Deco Museum project downtown.  She went on railing about how we should have built it in south Tulsa because she wouldn't go downtown.  She mentioned Utica Square (as if that was downtown) and how she hated the "logistics" of going there and the traffic.  Whatever that meant.   It's just absurd the things I have heard.  I mentioned parking garages to some people and then they started saying how "parking garages are scary".   So, you know what, not going to worry about those kinds of people.  I say make downtown into the best urban area we can to allow those people who love good urban spaces to have something they find just as fantastic as those who can't stand urban areas and who like suburban type ones.  Nobody ever HAS to pay for parking downtown, IF they are willing to walk/bike or take transit.    

[Red Arrow]

why on earth should we water down our potential urban areas to make them less urban to accommodate suburbanites?  

I don't expect you to.

Nobody ever HAS to pay for parking downtown, IF they are willing to walk/bike or take transit.    

I don't mind walking a few blocks and have been downtown when street parking is free.  Transit is not really an option, yet.  My only real point is that pay parking is not an attraction to me.  Maybe it is to others.  If there is something I really want to do, I'll pay for parking but expect some grumbling.

[TheArtist]

I don't expect you to.

I don't mind walking a few blocks and have been downtown when street parking is free.  Transit is not really an option, yet.  My only real point is that pay parking is not an attraction to me.  Maybe it is to others.  If there is something I really want to do, I'll pay for parking but expect some grumbling.

Suburban sprawl isn't an attraction to me either but I don't point that out and "grumble" about it every time something, new restaurant etc., in suburbia gets brought up in this forum.  I know a LOT of people who do not like all kinds of things in suburbia but do we really want to point each and every one of those things out in every conversation that there is something grumble worthy, to me, going on there?  Is that what we are about?

Hey they are bulding this or that at 71st and Yale let's grumble about it not being as urban as I would like, I hate berms, I hate neighborhoods that aren't on a grid and only have one or two exits, I hate there not being sidewalks, I hate large parking lots, I hate cheap bland looking buildings, I hate wide roads, I really hate wide intersections, etc. etc.... Am I going to grumble about every new thing that it is being done there as something I do not like?  No, cause that area is what it is lol.  Let downtown be the best urban area it can be, and let 71st and Memorial be the best suburban sprawl it can be.  To each his own.  I can say I don't want to live in or visit suburbia for ABC reasons and that I dont like it, but I hope I don't constantly grumble about everything thats done or built there because it's not urban enough.  I don't know, perhaps I should and let all the suburbanites know how it feels when they constantly grumble about things in downtown.  I don't care about the $2 parking and you shouldn't care whether I don't like the ugly parking lot by the mall.

[we vs us]

Suburban sprawl isn't an attraction to me either but I don't point that out and "grumble" about it every time something, new restaurant etc., in suburbia gets brought up in this forum.  I know a LOT of people who do not like all kinds of things in suburbia but do we really want to point each and every one of those things out in every conversation that there is something grumble worthy, to me, going on there?  Is that what we are about?

Hey they are bulding this or that at 71st and Yale let's grumble about it not being as urban as I would like, I hate berms, I hate neighborhoods that aren't on a grid and only have one or two exits, I hate there not being sidewalks, I hate large parking lots, I hate cheap bland looking buildings, I hate wide roads, I really hate wide intersections, etc. etc.... Am I going to grumble about every new thing that it is being done there as something I do not like?  No, cause that area is what it is lol.  Let downtown be the best urban area it can be, and let 71st and Memorial be the best suburban sprawl it can be.  To each his own.  I can say I don't want to live in or visit suburbia for ABC reasons and that I dont like it, but I hope I don't constantly grumble about everything thats done or built there because it's not urban enough.  I don't know, perhaps I should and let all the suburbanites know how it feels when they constantly grumble about things in downtown.  I don't care about the $2 parking and you shouldn't care whether I don't like the ugly parking lot by the mall.

+1

[DTowner]

Article in today's Tulsa World about Oklaoma Pop Museum that says the project could go away if it doesn't receive state bond money soon.  Not sure how much of that is posturing, but I don't think Tulsa can get this money without OKC getting another $40 million for the Indian museum.  Not much indication the legislature is willing to put out $80+ million in bond funding for these two projects.

       

Proposed OK-POP museum seeks one-time bond issue for funding


OKPOP, as the museum would be known, is proposed for the Brady District, and could be one of a handful of elite facilities of its type, Oklahoma Historical Society Executive Director Bob Blackburn said. Courtesy By WAYNE GREENE World Senior Writer
Published: 5/2/2012  1:49 AM
Last Modified: 5/2/2012  7:41 AM

A proposed popular culture museum for downtown Tulsa won't need any state funding to operate, according to a pre-design study being distributed to state lawmakers.

Museum backers are seeking a one-time $42.5 million state bond issue to finance construction of the project.

While they don't make the comparison, the contrasts to the half-built state Native American Cultural Center in Oklahoma City are obvious.

The cultural center has been the beneficiary of three state bond issues totaling $63 million and millions more in city and federal funding. The Oklahoma City project is asking lawmakers for another $40 million bond issue this year.

The authority that is building the facility has already gotten $35.4 million in state appropriations since 1997, including about $30 million over the money to finance the facility's debt, according to Office of State Finance records.

"We will not need an appropriation to operate," said Oklahoma Historical Society Executive Director Bob Blackburn.

The pre-design study projects annual operating costs for the museum - known as OKPOP - at $2.1 million, including a staff of 22. That amount will be covered by admission charges, annual donations, income from the facility's planned five-story, 650-space parking garage, facility rentals and other nontax income sources, the report shows.

The historical society has a track record of developing facilities that are self-supporting, most prominently the Oklahoma History Center just northeast of the state Capitol, Blackburn said.

The Tulsa museum is envisioned for a 90,000-square-foot lot donated by the Bank of Oklahoma along Archer Street between Boston and Cincinnati avenues.

The four-story museum would feature almost 25,000 square feet of exhibit space and another 41,000-square-feet of other public and semipublic space, including research areas, classrooms, performance space and retail operations.

The museum would be dedicated to the creative spirit of the state's people and the influence of those artists on popular culture around the world, the report says. Its permanent collection would include artifacts, archival materials, film and video, and recorded interviews.

Blackburn said he thinks the facility has a chance to be one of the handful of elite pop culture museums in the nation, putting Tulsa in the exclusive league with Nashville, Seattle, Cleveland, Ohio, and Los Angeles.

The $42.5 million price tag on the project is higher than previous estimates, but Blackburn said it now reflects specific input of architects and construction companies.

The costs include $26.7 million for the museum and $10.7 million for the parking garage. The proposed bond issue also includes nearly $3 million for architectural and consulting fees, enough to ensure the building will have a world-class look, Blackburn said.

If the Legislature approves a bond issue for the project this year, the report envisions design and preconstruction work to begin in 2013, construction to begin in September 2014, exhibit installation to begin at the beginning of 2016 and a grand opening in June 2016.

The state's first payment on the project wouldn't come due until fiscal year 2015, by which time some 300 jobs would have already have been created by the effort, Blackburn said.

A unique set of circumstances - including low interest rates, the incipient state of Brady District development and the backing of Tulsa philanthropists - make the project feasible, but not for long, Blackburn said.

Legislative leaders have said publicly that there is little chance for a bond issue other than a possible $160 million to $200 million package to do repair work to the state Capitol, but Blackburn said the Tulsa project is time-sensitive.

"If we delay two years, I think this goes away," he said.

[TheArtist]

160-200 mill for a vanity project in OKC.  Great     

Oh, and another 10 million dollar parking garage instead of putting that money into a downtown transit system. 

I really do wonder how much it would cost to purchase then run/maintain per year, a couple of small busses and or wheeled trolleys that would circulate downtown to and from the ample parking that already exists?   

[TheTed]

A new parking garage 50 feet from the newly expanded giant parking garage that's just across the Boston Avenue pedestrian overpass???

That existing garage is empty nights and weekends. Plus we just added street parking along Archer in that stretch that's underutilized. How much parking do we need?

When I walk from one side of downtown to another, I've always thought of counting the empty parking spaces I pass. But then I wouldn't have time to do anything else.