A mayoral election is coming up soon here in Tulsa, and due in some part to this contest, each "contestant" is going to have to answer the "What can we do to not end up with more surface parking downtown?"
Oh and as a quick side note, I am a Tulsan and I don't mind the comparison to Canadian cities for the contrasts are definitely eyeopening. But it would also be nice, and perhaps more constructive, to be compared to more similar cities in order to garner some more relatable and applicable solutions and ideas.
Currently there is a moratorium on buildings being torn down and replaced with surface parking. But that was a temporary ban and is due to expire this year. The reason the moratorium went into place was because the local paper was rumored to possibly be in the works to tear down one of the buildings it owns "one of the oldest high-rises in the city", and this after it had torn down another only a couple years ago for a few measly parking places. There is a fantastic little nugget of pedestrian friendly urbanity within that crater of parking lots, but you tear out any more and even that will be severely damaged, and many, but not all, people realize that.
During the period of the 80's, Tulsa's downtown essentially turned into a suburban, high-rise, office park. Then in later decades many of the oil companies left, leaving empty buildings. Empty buildings that cost a lot more to pay taxes on than a parking lot, set in a culture that is used to to parking right next to where it is going.
Now things are turning around downtown. We have a new Arena, a downtown Ballpark, several new downtown museums and art venues opening, some great new parks, old buildings are being converted into living and hotels, and of course lots of new restaurants, clubs, art galleries, shopping, etc. and recently we have even seen new multifamily living developments going in and new office towers.
There are at least a few things I would like to see happen in Tulsa and downtown to help grow and create good quality, attractive, pedestrian/transit friendly urban development (I have a saying "Pedestrian friendly and Transit friendly are the same thing, two sides of the same coin".)
1. At least make it legal to build urban, pedestrian/transit friendly development in more parts of the city, especially in those areas near and around downtown. Within the IDL (the highway that circles downtown) it's legal to do what you want, but outside that... current zoning laws and restrictions are still geared towards creating suburban style development. In most of the city there are minimum parking requirements (there have been instances where developers who want to build more urban, have had to go before the board of adjustments in order to get exceptions in order to not have to tear out nearby buildings in some of our small, remaining, pedestrian friendly strips, in order to meet minimum parking requirements!). In most of the city mixed use developments (like living above shops) is illegal. Accessory dwelling units that add density and a range of living/price options are illegal, and on and on. Again: at least make it legal to build pedestrian/transit friendly developments. Would love to have some areas zoned to, not just make it legal, but to encourage good urban development, BUT this is a very conservative area and if you try to go too far they will cry "Get the government out of telling me what to do with my property!" and "Don't want the government trying to take away my car and my freedom with some United Nations plot to have us all riding busses and living in apartments!". So, considering the circumstances, one can make a case saying that the current zoning "tells people what to do with their property" so lets get rid of that and allow more freedom (thus at least allowing for more urban development to occur vrs, having it be illegal). Baby steps, one does what one can.
2. Now, in downtown, within the IDL, I would like to be brave and push things a bit further. Not just allow for urban development, but actually zone for good urban development (like one might argue that we have zoned for and encouraged suburban development in the rest of the city for over a generation). ( Another of my sayings "If you try to make ALL your streets "A" high quality, pedestrian/transit friendly streets, you will likely end up with very few of them being that way.) There are some great pedestrian friendly strips in downtown and some budding, pedestrian friendly areas as well. But, these areas and strips are separated by gaps. Those gaps are more often than not empty lots and surface parking. My greatest fear for downtown is that those gaps will either be enlarged by more tear-downs and or will be filled in with pedestrian unfriendly developments, thus destroying any chances of having a decent "critical mass" of quality urban development from ever taking root. I think downtown Denver has a plan that does that with incentives and the like to encourage good pedestrian/transit friendly development along certain connected corridors and discourage bad urban development.
Any ideas or specifics on what incentives and disincentives can be used for this, please let me know so that I can be a voice for them here in Tulsa.
There are other things that could be done, but those above would be great, politically, socially and economically feasible starts imho.