New Developments in the 2000's

[TheArtist]

Each decade leaves its mark on a cities skyline and landscape. Since we are nearing the close of this decade I thought it might be nice to start a compindium of building developments that have happened in this decade. I think it would be nice to list structures that were finished, started, or are currently proposed to be started within this decade. We got off to a rough start early on, but I think we will find we havent done so bad all in all.  

[TheArtist]

NEW MEDICAL BUILDINGS

New Hillcrest building underway.



The new Childrens Hospital





Another hospital building on the Warren Campus. Not sure of the name and not my pic.



St Johns two new buildings and parking garage.



Urilogical Center



Southcreek Medical Plaza



Heart Hospital



Morton Health Care Clinic

[YoungTulsan]

Umm, all I can think of is the Borg Cube, St John's new buildings, and upcoming Utica Place and the BOK Center.  Pretty stagnant decade tho the last 2 years might be the most substancial.  The next decade should be a nice one, barring some sort of huge economic collapse.

Edit - My bad, I didn't even think of Hillcrest and St Francis.  Still, pretty stagnant when the only things I can think of came as a result of 1) The internet bubble 2) Skyrocketing medical costs and 3) Sales tax financed construction

[TheArtist]

Utica Place






Utica? something or another lol


Montereau

front



back west side

[TheArtist]

Tech Building, "new city hall"



New BOK Center Arena

[TheArtist]

Renaissance Hotel



Muskogee Creek Nation Casino

[TheArtist]

EDUCATION FACILITIES



Helmerich Advanced Tech Research Center on the OSU Tulsa Campus


TU Collins Hall


TU Apartments



TU Case Athletic Complex


TU Chapman Stadium remodel


OU Tulsa Schusterman Campus, building and new parking garage completed, plus a new addition underway.


OU Tulsa Learning Center


Tulsa Tech Lemley Campus Health Sciences Center

[sgrizzle]

The new building at St Francis mentioned above is the Natalie building.

[TheArtist]

Some general developments on south Yale. There seem to be several of these "village" or "neighborhood" looking business developments. If your wondering where a lot of the business people are choosing to go instead of downtown. Its in places like this. The one on the NW corner of 91st and Yale is actually quite large. Just went up slowly under the radar, one building at at time. During the week the parking lot is packed. There are a couple of similar developments going west on 91st. Dentists offices, lawyers, accountants, decorators, builders, etc. etc.





No, not a neighborhood, its another collection of office buildings. Goes on for blocks.


101st and Yale (Were the Shops of Seville built in the 2000s? I know the new larger building was built recently and the rest of those in the other pics as well)  

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

I was having a discussion on the Skyscraper forum and made a comment about how St Louis was smaller than Tulsa population wise, etc. This one girl came back at me and said something to the effect. "If St Louis was as massivly huge and had an area as spread out as Tulsas, it would be a lot larger population wise".  I said "good point". I hadnt really thougth of Tulsa as being huge area wise.  As I was driving around this weekend taking picks, I noticed that Tulsa really is very spread out and encompases a very large area. Many areas feel, sparse and isolated, its people and communities equally isolated.  Plus trying to imagine improving this or that area gets overwhelming when driving around and seeing the distances and scales your talking about. There was an article in the paper recently about our roads and how we compare with other cities noting how much larger an area we have to contend with compared to those listed. I guess we are used to comparing ourselves to OKC, but I suppose that is hardly a good comparison lol. Someone said the other day, "well we should just annex Jenks" they were joking of course, I hope, lol, but I am starting to be of the opinion that we should start DE-annexing some land and let others focus on it and allow ourselves to focus on a smaller amount. Though one cant at this point pick and choose what parts you want. We are stuck with what we have. But certainly we do not ever need to annex more imo. I think it was a mistake to have gotten as large land wise as we have and to have allowed so much disjointed, isolated, sprawl. What little new developments we have had this decade are sprinkled here and there diminishing their impact for the most part. I can easily see how the Mayor, whoever it is, can end up focusing on the core more than perhaps they should. It would be very difficult to spend the amount of time and effort on each and every area that needs concerted attention in this city. Its difficult enough in just the few areas around the core that need it.

Actually, Tulsa is fairly small in land area- it only ranks 39th in the US (OKC ranks 7th)In fact, Norman, OK is only 6 square miles smaller than Tulsa, and many cities with more land area than Tulsa actually have much smaller populations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_area

I have had the exact opposite experience while driving aroung Tulsa. I have always felt it is fairy small in area and quite compact for the most part (excluding the west side).

[TheArtist]

Though not that up to date, what I have found puts Tulsa in the bottom 20 in persons per sq mile of the 100 largest cities. Aka, of the 100 largest cities in the US about 80 of them are denser population wise than Tulsa.

http://www.census.gov/population/documentation/twps0027/tab22.txt

As per the earlier mentioned St Louis, even though it has lost population in its core, it still has a density of about 6000 people per square mile, while Tulsa is about 2000 people per square mile.

While this obviously cant show the whole picture it says something. A city could have a large area, but its population reside in a small area within the over all area. Tulsa it seems to me, really spreads out and fills in its area lol. BA seems even worse. Why did they put NSU for instance clear on the other side of their town? Why not spend a little extra and put it closer to their downtown? That alone could have helped their "core" become denser, more enjoyable and attractive. They dont really even have a place where you can take someone and say, "Here we are, this is BA"  BA is more an "area" than a place.  

Another thing is that it seems the kind of development matters. In large areas of Tulsa there are no real central places. No "mini or secondary, town squares or main streets" No social core, no central place to shop, work or socialize. Those kinds of places can act like a place of identity where development can occur around them. Whittier Square for instance and Brookside or even places in South Tulsa like the shopping center at 101st and Yale. I was there this weekend and there were people sitting outside at a cafe, and walking around. it had a very pleasant feel to it. There arent any places like that in large parts of our city. Strip shopping malls set far back from the roads, wide roads and highways, large chain stores, vacant spaces, etc. all jumbled around. Especially in far East Tulsa around 21st 11th etc. Just the way some areas are laid out stifle density, good infill, community and revitalization. And importantly, there are people who live in those areas and they seem  very isolated from opportunity and community. No place for the city to focus any sort of revitalization efforts.  There is no "there" to imagine building up, or around.  No place for the people to collect or point to as being their part of town. Perhaps thats an idea for the cities comprehensive plan. Encouraging development of main street, town square "nodes" in different distinct areas that development and identity can center around and grow from.

Within the one large city area of Tulsa, have other distinct small town centers.

[Oil Capital]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist


New wing, rotunda and gardens, at Villa Philbrook

Whoah, there.   The "new" wing and rotunda at Philbrook are not projcets of this decade.  They are approximately 20 years old, having been built in the 1980s.

[TheArtist]

Really? Dang I must be getting old. Seems like they just finished yesterday. Perhaps I was thinking of the renewed gardens. They did add the south gardens though.

I think the historical society moved to its new place in the 2000s and made its new addition as well. Plus their new gardens and the new Linneus gardens. Will have to check.

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Some general developments on south Yale. There seem to be several of these "village" or "neighborhood" looking business developments. If your wondering where a lot of the business people are choosing to go instead of downtown. Its in places like this. The one on the NW corner of 91st and Yale is actually quite large. Just went up slowly under the radar, one building at at time. During the week the parking lot is packed. There are a couple of similar developments going west on 91st. Dentists offices, lawyers, accountants, decorators, builders, etc. etc.

Yeah, it's getting ready to get bigger.  The developer just purchased the land to the West of it that abuts Thousand Oaks Neighborhood.  And across the street to the East is going to be another office/retail complex (behind the QuickTrip).