"The Pearl" an area that will go down in History as a turning point in Tulsa

[TheArtist]

  Drats, wish I could have gone.

[46hudson]

I'm pretty sure the question has been brought up previously however, I'm not sure there has been a concise answer. Is there a time frame or a funding source for the other storm water retention ponds for the Pearl? I'm starting to think the long term success of the area is increasingly dependent upon them due to the ever shrinking boundaries.

[carltonplace]

I'm pretty sure the question has been brought up previously however, I'm not sure there has been a concise answer. Is there a time frame or a funding source for the other storm water retention ponds for the Pearl? I'm starting to think the long term success of the area is increasingly dependent upon them due to the ever shrinking boundaries.

The funding source is part storm water management that you pay on your COT water bill, and part TIF collected from the Downtown Home Depot (at least the TIF funded Centenial Park improvements).

The sticky part is that there are houses/private property where the planned "pearls"/retention ponds will go, where as Centenial Park (ne Central Park) was already COT property.

[JCnOwasso]

Where would be the best place to view some of the plans for the Pearl District?  The only thing I have found thus far is on Mr. Bates--line. 

We are soon to be joining the Pearls growing list of tennants and I would like to see what the future will look like... in hard-to-read-2-D-form. 

[carltonplace]

Where would be the best place to view some of the plans for the Pearl District?  The only thing I have found thus far is on Mr. Bates--line. 

We are soon to be joining the Pearls growing list of tennants and I would like to see what the future will look like... in hard-to-read-2-D-form. 

There was a previous discussion with lots of pictures and proposals: http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=12606.0

[JCnOwasso]

There was a previous discussion with lots of pictures and proposals: http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=12606.0

Thank you!!! didn't even consider searching on the forum.  

[carltonplace]

From the UTW August 1st

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=51275

"As our city continues forward with our comprehensive plan and small area planning, formed [sic] based codes will be written and presented to you again and again. How you handle this code, matters greatly," wrote Dave Strader, president of the Pearl District Association, in a letter to planning commissioners dated July 9. The association helped design the code.

City leaders embraced the concept of form-based code by adopting a new municipal ordinance, Title 42-B, which defines a form-based code.

The code "regulates land development by setting controls on building form -- while employing flexible parameters relative to building use," the definition states. One purpose is "promotion of compact, mixed-use development at an urban density."

Among the crowd of 80 were at least four planning commissioners, as well as Blake Ewing, city councilor for the district that includes the Pearl District.

"We have a chance to do something really special in this neighborhood," said Ewing, a business developer with plans to open a coffee shop at South Peoria Avenue and East 6th Street. He spoke in favor of the code, describing how employees at his restaurants desire a more urban lifestyle. He told the crowd that type of environment is something "we don't offer well" as a city. The crowd had dwindled significantly by this point, however.

[46hudson]

The reduced "expanded area" is a bit of a blow to supporters of the district, but it seems like approval in this proposed form is still a step in the right direction. IMO if the other proposed ponds and canal are built this area will thrive and I could see the code expanded even further once people acutally see the benefits. However, I doubt the development can wait 10+ years for the necessary project funding.

[carltonplace]

I agree, baby steps. Any approval is a step forward.

[JCnOwasso]

How often are these meetings held? 

[46hudson]

I 've never been to one, but I believe the Pearl District Association meetings are held on the 2nd Tuesday of every month at "the Boathouse" 1028 East 6th, (you may check them out on facebook to confirm that). The meeting referenced in the article was a one time informational meeting to inform interested parties regarding the reduction of the district and to gather further information for the TMAPC to consider.

[Teatownclown]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=65&articleid=20120803_65_A19_CUTLIN964899
Readers Forum: Pearl District planners need realistic zoning rules

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=65&articleid=20120803_65_A19_CUTLIN964899
By JOHN OWEN
Published: 8/3/2012  1:50 AM
Last Modified: 8/3/2012  3:53 AM

I would like to applaud city councilors for an excellent decision on the QuikTrip zoning request. I believe that the form-based zoning adopted for the Pearl District is a combination of wishful thinking and unrealistic expectations lacking the considerations of economic sustainability.

As I understand it, the new requirements are for two-story buildings built on the property line with no parking except behind the buildings, accessible only from the alley. What business would want to work with those restrictions?

By comparison, Cherry Street is sprouting many new businesses in new or remodeled buildings. While most are built on the property line, most are one-story and have off-street parking accessible from the street. Cherry Street, unlike the Pearl District, is also nestled into a charming older neighborhood filled with affluent people who can well afford to help support the new businesses.

The Pearl District is thinly populated; large areas of it are filled with warehouses and industrial operations, there are many vacant lots where dilapidated houses have been torn down, and many of the remaining houses are in disrepair, some with boarded-up windows. There simply are not enough people with enough income to walk to, and support, new businesses.

The Pearl District's plan to "discourage automobile use" lacks economic viability and risks hurting the district by keeping out businesses whose customers will need to park their cars, which is almost all businesses.

In a recent drive through the Pearl District, I saw many older brick buildings that are built on the property line with little or no parking. The planners are obviously trying to keep the historic flavor of the neighborhood, and that's good. A few buildings are even two stories.

But the one thing they have in common is that many if not most of them are vacant and appear to have been so for a long time. This is an obvious testament to their lack of commercial viability.

Like the planners, I love dense, walker-friendly neighborhoods. Recently in Andersonville, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, we found downtown sidewalks vibrant with activity, jammed with pedestrians on Friday and Saturday nights. It reminded me of downtown Tulsa in the 1950s before shopping centers were invented.

Similarly, I love small European cities where everyone walks two or three blocks to the town marketplace for their daily shopping.

But it takes more than a "plan" to achieve these results. Everything from architecture to public transportation to cultural changes, investment and much more are needed to blend over many years to arrive at such a result.

I suspect that the new dental office at Sixth Street and Utica Avenue and the planned QuikTrip are the best things that have happened to the Pearl District in years.

If the planners really want to rejuvenate the Pearl District, they need to devise a means of encouraging development and accommodating the automobile traffic necessary for the new businesses to succeed. Unrealistic form-based zoning rules are not the answer.
Original Print Headline: The Pearl District plan may be wrong

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=65&articleid=20120803_65_A19_CUTLIN964899

well thought out

[TheArtist]

well thought out

Might as well not even have a new comprehensive plan if that's the case.  And I am sure there are folks who do not want the new comprehensive plan to come into play and see defeating this as the first salvo in that battle. 

One of the critical things when your a developer, especially a small developer, is having some idea of what the future will bring. 

We keep saying we want pedestrian/transit friendly areas to develop, but our zoning defeats that in many ways.  I have been looking at property in the Pearl District, and want to build something that will be pedestrian/transit friendly.  But what I have seen go in there would hurt that vision (dental office and QT expansion).  You can't get high quality, pedestrian/transit friendly development (Cherry Street is not that at all though sadly it's some of the best we have.) going in this city without "protective" zoning of some sort (protecting from the car culture that will want to fight and tear down any transit/pedestrian friendly area).

I would rather our city have little or no zoning at all (like Houston) or more progressive zoning and Form Based Codes like Denver.  But what we have is some halfway in the middle, screwball zoning that is more appropriate for a new suburb than an actual city.

We changed the zoning in the Pearl District area once before to make what once was there illegal and to try and create a new type of "form",,, why can't we do that again?  Especially when we say we want our city to change and have expressed that change in the new Comprehensive Plan?

[carltonplace]

Its not well thought out. Its not even factually accurate.

[jacobi]

TMAPC failed us today.