Wish list for downtown...

[jacobi]

I firmly believe that Tulsans aren't city people.  They may have been once, but that envelope of time is long gone.  

The Past 1 3/4 generations may not have been city people, but that does not mean that there we cannot be in future (see David Hume; problem of induction)  My generation (I'm 29) does not and mean DOES NOT want to live in suburbs.  The reason that we don't have those young and single people is because we hemorage them to Portland Austin Seattle Denver New York, et al.  We aren't catering to the lifestyle that my generation wants to live.  We generate so much amazing freakin talent it's nuts.  But unless they are like me (and love this place to the point of fealing like I belong to it), they split town.  If we could retain that talent and keep those young people here, watch out.  And those who do want to go live in sprawling awful suburbs can always move to OKC.  They seem to do that pretty well.


As for your list, I agree with everything you said.  Esp. the bit about uptown.  That screams for development.

[Boksooner]

The Past 1 3/4 generations may not have been city people, but that does not mean that there we cannot be in future (see David Hume; problem of induction)  My generation (I'm 29) does not and mean DOES NOT want to live in suburbs.  The reason that we don't have those young and single people is because we hemorage them to Portland Austin Seattle Denver New York, et al.  We aren't catering to the lifestyle that my generation wants to live.  We generate so much amazing freakin talent it's nuts.  But unless they are like me (and love this place to the point of fealing like I belong to it), they split town.  If we could retain that talent and keep those young people here, watch out.  And those who do want to go live in sprawling awful suburbs can always move to OKC.  They seem to do that pretty well.


As for your list, I agree with everything you said.  Esp. the bit about uptown.  That screams for development.

I am of the same generation (30) and I feel the same way. If there was affordable housing, either rent or purchase, you would see a lot more young professionals living in downtown.

The only place I have seen that has apartments for less than $800+ a month is the Central Park Condos, which are barely in downtown.

Hopefully, someone will considering developing some cheaper housing soon.


PS. If anyone knows of any reasonably priced apts, flats, lofts or condos in downtown, please let me know.

[dbacks fan]

I'm 48, and I would live downtown if there was a job that fits me. I don't need high end attributes, marble counter tops, media rooms, great rooms for entertainment/party room, I'm single, not into the entertainment crowd, just would want a living space, and jeezus cricket, I can f'ing walk further than the three feet required for travel distance from car to door if not in the area I don't live. And I can walk through spaces from building to building, whether it's 110 degrees or -10 degrees, or sea level, or 9,000 above sea level.

[dbacks fan]

My mother used to joke that at sixteen her kids legs quit working, but their mouths continued on.

[TheArtist]

  All over the country demographers have seen the trend of people wanting to move back to the core and wanting to live an urban lifestyle.  

Just about every single person that was in my "posse" of freinds has moved away to live a more urban lifestyle.  Heck I have had several groups of friends who have done that.  First this person would leave, then the next, then the next and then I would have to find another group of friends and watch as they would leave to a bigger city or one that had offered a more urban lifestlye.

Then add to that the people just I alone have heard about (from business owners looking to recruit, to families talking about other family members) or personally met, that would have moved to Tulsa for work, school, relationship, family, etc. but chose not to live here becase all we have to offer is the suburban lifestlye and not an urban one.

None of us are thinking of changing all 200 sq miles of Tulsa, (then add to that the suburbs) into Manhattan.  All we really need is just a tiny little percentage of that in the core to be urban, and competitive, high quality urban.  Once you get that small start going, and in the right form (fake car centered urban or, true pedestrian friendly/transit friendly urban) it will begin to grow and add to itself.      

Wish list....

1.   A connected "loop" of pedestrian friendly streets that enables you to comfortably, enjoyably walk from one district to another and not isolated chunks that will never be able to create a "critical mass" of urbanity.  Just right off the top of my head I would say..... 5th street to Elgin, Elgin to Brady, Brady to Boulder, Boulder to 5th.   And of course the more pedestrian friendly branches you have off of that the better, but even there if those little branches don't lead anywhere or lead you back to the main "loop" the business on the dead end will not be as successful as one thats on a "loop" whether that loop is just around one block or to another main destination.  Pedestrians at an intersection naturally look down a street and then decide which one looks most interesting to walk down... only a few shops or businesses in one direction versus the other direction goes for blocks, guess where most of the traffic is going to go.  Sucks to be the shop on the dead end next to say a parking garage or some other non-pedestrian friendly structure. They won't get nearly the traffic as the business on a loop or near a main attraction/destination.

How to help create that main connected loop?  

A.  Invest in transit along or nearby some of those main pedestrian friendly strips.  Up and down Boulder for instance.  
B.  Zone or incentivise for pedestrian friendly structures.  Fine grained development, aka narrower buidlings or buildings that are broken up at street level to have lots of shops/restaurants/businesses, etc. not huge mega block developments where there is say one business taking up a whole block with only door leading in and out.    


Running out of time this morning so quickly...

2.  More angled parking.
3.  Less one way streets
4.  Small downtown police force that doubles as parking enforcement (lot of discussion about that at the CORE meeting) There was mention that these police can be paid less for they don't have to be as "highly trained or certified" as the typical officer.  There was also mention of privatizing the parking meters and such, but the catch is that only city employees can write tickets so a police presence with ticket enforcement plays double duty by also helping to create a feeling of security vrs the "meter maid" doesn't add that security factor.
5.  Destination shopping downtown.  Whether a local small business or a larger chain like H&M, Nordstroms, etc. Things that are unique and show that downtown is "fashionable" place to shop for unique and interesting things.  Likely will of course start with a critical mass of smaller, locally owned businesses and mor of thats going to start happening here soon.  
6.  More living.  We are getting there just going to be a long haul. Build it and they will come, but as time goes on if those folks are paying for it they will also want the whole package including those pedestrian friendly, high quality urban, streets.  
7.  Coordinated, easy to see, signage on parking garages noting whether its private or public parking.  (I know I rail against catering to the suburbanite and car culture, but really thats only because it seems thats ALL we go out of our way to cater to.  Give me the urbanite a little attention and some of what I want on occasion and I have no problem helping the suburbanite find parking lol)

[Red Arrow]

Running out of time this morning so quickly...
2.  More angled parking.

I am not a fan of angled parking.  It seems that there is always a huge pickup truck or van that parked next to me obscuring my view of traffic to exit the parking space.

[AquaMan]

I am pleased to see that I don't live on an isolated island within the metro. All of us have concerns and insights as to what this city is and what we want it to be for ourselves.

I am a native Tulsan. My perspective comes from having watched much of the growth of the city as it morphed from 50's dense inner city walkable to 70's suburban drivable. the  city I knew will never return but that is okay. I probably never saw it as it really was anyway. My purpose in this thread is to try to get people to not make the same mistake. See Tulsa for what it is and stop trying to make it something it just can't be and probably never was.

Wevus makes a strong argument in that direction. Our suburban dominance doesn't mean we can't offer an alternative style of living which is centered in downtown and nearby areas. Nor does it mean that suburbans have to be enticed to come downtown. They are already there every day or else the expressways and Riverside wouldn't be clogged each morning and evening. A Nordstrom's would do well downtown I suspect. It simply means that we need to correctly and frankly assess the potential of the area, then decide if the current path coincides with that potential. If not, how strongly do we feel about increasing that potential by drawing in outsiders to the community.

As you can tell, I believe we have overestimated the demographics from within Tulsa to keep it a viable daily community and that comes from our natural suburban orientation for development. The very people who are attracted to the area find it economically impossible to afford. Because there is demand from that demo to be nearby, they will naturally drive up the price of surrounding resources. Essentially, downtown then becomes an entertainment shopping area and that is what will lead to a push for something dramatic to pull in outside revenue. The Utica Square branding idea is tremendous. I hope they read this forum. The tactics that Artist and others have espoused are good ones, and who could not want a great bakery, but they are not primary in nature.  

Here is an example of what is happening downtown imo. I moved to an old area of town when i was under 30 because I simply loved the nature of old housing, walkable hoods, parks, lack of traffic, relaxed living if you will. It suited our tastes and was affordable. Our block was mediocre at best with only two large, well cared for homes. Lots of rental, out of state owners and old po' folks. Skip forward 30 years and the block was now solid, still attractive to young folks but totally out of their price range. They began to buy the homes that the rest of us had written off and commenced making them solid contributors. Then they sold out and moved when they had kids to escape public schools (the district boundaries needed changed). Plus they could make a killing off their home investments and move to the burbs to live like kings. Sound familiar? Now the people moving in are unhappy with the old homes and have the money to flatten them and re-build. Thus, the characteristics that attracted us 30 yrs ago are disappearing and the money to attract new under 30's of modest means is scarce. So, they move into Owen Park, Brady, etc. and the pattern repeats.

If we have some idea that downtown is for young, cosmopolites only, we are missing the reality. I think it may actually be better suited for empty nesters over 40 who have high disposable income and are anxious for a new, non-suburban lifestyle. That means the plans may not coincide with the reality.

Anyway, what I want for downtown is affordable townhouses parked around an Owen Park setting in walking distance to a transplanted Utica Square next to a huge waterfall cascading down from the hills just north of OSU converging into a small stream that allows kayaks and canoes to end up in the Brady district next to a fine collection of ethnic restaurants, pubs and theatres. And a corral for ponies, of course.

[Hoss]

I am not a fan of angled parking.  It seems that there is always a huge pickup truck or van that parked next to me obscuring my view of traffic to exit the parking space.

Hell, even parking parallel to each other (not angled) that big-donkey truck always seems to obscure my view trying to back out.  And it never fails at work; they ALWAYS park next to me on at least one side.

[DTowner]

My wish for downtown is the growth of existing employers and the addition of new employers.  More people working downtown will drive up demand at existing stores/restaurants and encourage new stores to start up or open locations downtown.  More people working downtown will increase demand for housing in and near downtown, which will help drive demand for stores/retail, restaurants and other entertainment.  More and growing employers will cause more business travelers to stay downtown who will support hotels, restaurants and entertainment venues.

While this is not a central identifying attraction that AquaMan asked about in his original post, I'm not sure we have to have one at this point in time, although I like his waterfall idea.  I prefer to let it happen like so much has in downtown - from the bottom up.

I suppose Bricktown in OKC had its canel, but is that really a central identying attraction?  Now, I would say the OKC Thunder is their central identifying attraction, and they only play 1/2 the year (in a non-strike year).  Like OKC, we are now preparing the ground work today that may create an opportunity for us in the future for a central identifying attraction that few would believe possible today.

Tulsa's downtown development has happend much slower than I would like, but it is really quite amazing what has happened in the past 3-4 years, especially when you consider the economic conditions under which it occurred.  More importantly, I believe the growth in downtown is accelerating and creating its own momentum.  The ranks of the naysayers is shrinking as their predictions of doom are continually disproven by actual events. 

[LandArchPoke]

My #1 on wish list would be to grow the university enrollments downtown:

Students have lots of loan money to spend on housing, more willing to ride transit, more willing to walk, more willing to ride a bike, and live urban. Tulsa and Oklahoma is still lacking in pure numbers of college graduates and  from what I've seen a lot of companies say this is the number one reason that don't look into the state as a place to relocate and is the reason we see companies flock to Dallas, Houston, Austin is because they have great LARGE university for companies to pick students right out from when they graduate. There is no hassle of relocation/recruitment to a new city.

By creating a rich environment for students and young professionals you will in turn create a lot of amenities that retirees and empty nesters seek in an urban environment as well.

I think the city should try to integrate the TCC Metro campus with OSU's Tulsa campus and then that the buildings that are left at 10th and Boston and set up a more technology based research university, something that is severely lacking in this state. Something that wouldn't exactly create a direct competition to OU/OSU/NSU/UCO and other state institutions.



Just think if we turned the TCC Metro campus into a urban four year tech university (good example of an urban campus would be Portland State University)

From this connect OSU - the new university - TU with a modern streetcar route with possible future extensions to the north and east.

OSU's main problem right now in Tulsa and generally with the university is that it is really lacking a lot of post graduate degrees. In my opinion this is really what the Tulsa campus needs to heavily focus on. I've seen people complain about the lack of undergraduate degree at the campus here in Tulsa and that will never change because they will directly compete with the Stillwater campus, like it or not that will never change. However getting the university to set up more postgraduate degrees in the Tulsa would bring in a lot of research dollars and allow for employers to better recruit people.

If you look outside of the energy belt, the cities that have done the best in this economy are the one's that have the most educated workforces and best universities: San Fransisco, Boston, NYC, Washington DC



Once the first route is established you can later at a circular route around downtown (heritage line) and another modern route that could connect other neighborhoods outside of downtown.

If we could take our student population from somewhere around 8,000 - 10,000 now with OSU/TCC/TU to over 30,000 just think of what kind of difference this would do to downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.

[AquaMan]

I really like the way you've laid that out. And your logic and routes make sense. Education has always been key to growth. But how and why would TCC want to change the current strategy? It seems they will be more likely to defend their turf, just like OSU does with post grad programs. TU also has little to gain in watching a new 4 year pop up nearby even if it is technical in nature. If you could somehow quantify for all of them that it is more of an opportunity to increase the size of their potential student bases rather than a potential shrinkage, you have something. Our legislature so far has been immune to logic like that.

The modern streetcar alone running from TU through Pearl, and over to Greenwood has been mentioned before and I think, would be a huge success for all three areas. As the facilities become popular, and they will be, the circulator would be needed.

The 30,000 student base is worth commenting on. When I was at OU we only had about 18,000 students. As the University grew in students and expansion of facilities, so did the city of Norman which was only about 20,000 at that time. Now I'm guessing OU is about 24-25K students and the city is well over 100K. 

[LandArchPoke]

I really like the way you've laid that out. And your logic and routes make sense. Education has always been key to growth. But how and why would TCC want to change the current strategy? It seems they will be more likely to defend their turf, just like OSU does with post grad programs. TU also has little to gain in watching a new 4 year pop up nearby even if it is technical in nature. If you could somehow quantify for all of them that it is more of an opportunity to increase the size of their potential student bases rather than a potential shrinkage, you have something. Our legislature so far has been immune to logic like that.

The modern streetcar alone running from TU through Pearl, and over to Greenwood has been mentioned before and I think, would be a huge success for all three areas. As the facilities become popular, and they will be, the circulator would be needed.

The 30,000 student base is worth commenting on. When I was at OU we only had about 18,000 students. As the University grew in students and expansion of facilities, so did the city of Norman which was only about 20,000 at that time. Now I'm guessing OU is about 24-25K students and the city is well over 100K.  

Thanks, I'll try to put more information together about the graduate programs and better compare them to other schools. Here's some links to OSU/TU/OU about what they offer graduate school wise and OSU and OU list what is available at the Tulsa campus'

http://www.ou.edu/content/gradweb/aud/current/programs/norman_campus.html

http://gradcollege.okstate.edu/degrees/default.php

http://www.utulsa.edu/academics/colleges/Graduate-School/Graduate-Programs-and-Advisors.aspx

Overall I think especially legislators need to change the thinking that it's competition. We live in a dynamic region that has ample opportunity for recruitment of students. If we can offer an "urban playground" experience for students, the only other place they could get is this is Austin (UT) in this region, we could attract a lot of bright minds in the region. Tulsa sit's within a 2 hour drive of about 6 million people (I believe, last time I looked into it) and that only gets larger when you think a 5 hour drive (you add KC, DFW) and then within a 10-12 hour drive (Houston, STL, Denver and others) that are all recruit able student bases. I'm not so sure if TU would be that worried about a new 4 year university because they are a niche university and recruit to a different demographic than what this would be. This is the key thing the legislator needs to think about because this brings in new people every year student wise that could stay in Oklahoma and brings more research jobs (professors). With the influx of students mean more tax dollars to local business, population growth, research dollars, and eventual local start up businesses, and so on. More universities, with more education opportunities are not a bad thing and they need to be funded better by the state.

Cities that have a major university always ride out dips in the economy better and tend to have some of the best quality of life out of American cities and higher average level of incomes. University's make great partners to cities and encourage growth in the private sectors.

With OSU I would like to see them rebrand the Tulsa campus to Oklahoma State University's Urban Campus. Even as an OSU alum I can say that the idea of going to graduate school in Stillwater is less than appealing. Growing graduate program's in a metropolitan region will only help their enrollment and attracting students that would want to live in an urban environment.

For TCC it would be a bit of a change in the direction that they are thinking but I'd like to see it more integrated with the new four year university and OSU's campus. NOC (the TCC of northern oklahoma) built a new building in conjunction with OSU. Link below:

http://www.dlrgroup.com/?p=3.4.4#/3.4.4/

TCC could have a presence on both universities campus' and this I feel would only help the enrollment of TCC. There is usually a lot of movement back an forth between local community colleges and the local major 4 year universities. So by turning the metro campus into a State tech based university it would only be a positive for TCC overall.

[SXSW]

LandArchPoke, I like your idea and visuals and have thought the same things myself.  It would make more sense to have the urban campus of OSU, combined with TCC, at 10th & Boston.  It would serve as a major anchor for the Boston Ave corridor and could be a dynamic place with more buildings, housing and of course students and faculty.  TCC has already done a good job building up the campus and there is a lot of room around it to expand on parking lots that could be consolidated into garages. 

The hard part, obviously, would be convincing OSU to take over TCC's campus though TCC would still have a presence and offer classes/programs there, similar to how Denver's downtown Auraria campus works with Community College of Denver, Metro State and CU-Denver all sharing a campus/buildings but still separate entities. 

This then would free up the Greenwood campus to be used as an urban research campus for OSU.  That is something OSU lacks and it makes more sense for that to be in Tulsa than Stillwater, especially with the Helmerich ATRC already there and long-range plans for another research building across the street on Elgin.  The other buildings could be re-purposed.  Imagine if TU also used the Greenwood campus for some of its research activities in a partnership akin to OU and TU combining to create a medical school at 1st & Greenwood.

[bacjz00]

as opposed to bricktown (which i think is absolutely horrid), which doesn't have anything that is unique to OKC (which is why i think it's horrid). it's just a suburban development made to look urban. it's much too forced. i really don't want that to happen to downtown tulsa.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but no one who visits OKC seems to care how "authentic" Bricktown is.  Their money still spends and they leave the city with an impression of an energetic and up & coming city.

I was in a meeting recently with several colleagues (who office in OKC) as well as some out of state business guests.  The guests mentioned that it was their first time to Tulsa and they were surprised how little there was to do in downtown, it seemed to be empty at night (they were staying at the Mayo).  I tried to deflect a little, mentioning the Blue Dome area but I really didn't get very far in convinvcing them that Tulsa was on the rise.  

To add insult to injury, they then mentioned to my OKC colleagues how much better and nicer OKC was since the last time they were there, because they had been there just weeks before for the first time in years.  They even mentioned how super clean downtown seemed and how vibrant it was. I'm surprised the conversation wasn't actually more awkward than it was because basically they just insulted "Tulsa" to her  face and then turned around and started flirting with the more "popular" one.

We have to be honest here, downtown is still where the vast majority of our out of town guests end up when they visit due to business meetings, conferences and events.  They leave downtown with an "overall" impression of our city, fair or not.  

In my opinion, we had better start giving Tulsa's downtown more than just some different shades of lipstick if we want to completely recharge her sex life.

[LandArchPoke]

LandArchPoke, I like your idea and visuals and have thought the same things myself.  It would make more sense to have the urban campus of OSU, combined with TCC, at 10th & Boston.  It would serve as a major anchor for the Boston Ave corridor and could be a dynamic place with more buildings, housing and of course students and faculty.  TCC has already done a good job building up the campus and there is a lot of room around it to expand on parking lots that could be consolidated into garages. 

The hard part, obviously, would be convincing OSU to take over TCC's campus though TCC would still have a presence and offer classes/programs there, similar to how Denver's downtown Auraria campus works with Community College of Denver, Metro State and CU-Denver all sharing a campus/buildings but still separate entities. 

This then would free up the Greenwood campus to be used as an urban research campus for OSU.  That is something OSU lacks and it makes more sense for that to be in Tulsa than Stillwater, especially with the Helmerich ATRC already there and long-range plans for another research building across the street on Elgin.  The other buildings could be re-purposed.  Imagine if TU also used the Greenwood campus for some of its research activities in a partnership akin to OU and TU combining to create a medical school at 1st & Greenwood.

I knew I had heard people talk about this idea of turning the Greenwood campus into a research park on here before. The only problem with that is how political OSU is and I have been in the with administration in the AG school and the CEAT school trying to change a few thing and it's like ramming your head into a brick wall. This is one thing I will say about OU is I really like how the school is structured.

While if we could get OSU to truely go into a more research format and turn the Greenwood campus into something like this I feel like it would do essentially the same thing without having to start a new four year tech based university and then combining the ungrad programs to the 10th and Boston campus and expanding it with TCC. From my experience with the OSU admin in the colleges is this would take decades with the thinking a lot of them have at the moment. Expanding the range of degree's and research going on at OSU will take a major restructuring to a lot of the college's and eventually you'll see OSU's structure more resemble OU's which is a good thing.

With that in mind that's why I felt like getting funding to start a new four year university at the 10th and Boston campus would be much easier to accomplish then dealing with the political BS at OSU.

Oklahoma Institute of Technology:

College of Computer Technology
College of Sciences - Biotech, Chemistry, etc
College of Liberal Arts - These programs are really lacking in Oklahoma
College of Business
College of Art, Design and Sustainability
College of Engineering