Scenarios

[Double A]

Group given preview of options for growth

By KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer

Development scenarios
It's been about 30 years since Tulsa did a comprehensive update of its comprehensive plan, which provides guidelines for the physical development of the city.

John Fregonese, the city's consultant on the creation of a new comprehensive plan, presented the PlaniTulsa Citizens Team with four development scenarios Tuesday evening.
They are:
Scenario A: Slow growth would continue along current trends, with development primarily in vacant areas in the northeast, east and west parts of town.

Scenario B: Emphasis would be on infill development along corridors, creating a much denser development pattern that would include more condominiums and townhouses.

Scenario C: Fregonese described it as Mayberry on the outside of the city and city living inside. Vacant land on the edge of city limits would be developed to include pedestrian friendly neighborhoods.

Scenario D: Emphasis on making Tulsa's development more environmentally sustainable. It would decrease the carbon footprint by limiting development on new land and stressing infill development.
What's next
May 12-June 18 — Scenarios will be presented to the public for input.

September — Consultant's development "Vision" will be presented to the public and to public officials for their input.

Early 2010 — The proposed comprehensive plan will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for their review and approval.

Why is there a negative connotation(slow growth) given to developing in vacant areas of north, east, and west Tulsa; yet there is positive spin for infill development in stable, healthy, well established areas of town?

What might be desirable for the residents of the Pearl District might be absolutely opposed by the residents of single family residential historic neighborhoods a mere mile away. I like a plan that incorporates all of these scenarios and lets different areas of town decide what works best for them.

I still think whatever the planners, TMAPC, Council and Da Mare come up with should to go to a public vote for final approval, adoption, and implementation. That's the only way to truly verify that there is public support for this plan.

Tulsa is a city of neighborhoods, each with it's own unique character and identity. Tulsa's inability to be unique is only overshadowed by it's inability to preserve what makes us unique.

BTW, it would be swell if the results from the Forrest Orchard small area workshop were posted on the PlaniTulsa website for review.   

[TheArtist]

Hard to make an assessment on a couple sentence descriptions. Will look forward to seeing more detailed ones and their accompanying map scenarios.

as for... "Why is there a negative connotation(slow growth) given to developing in vacant areas of north, east, and west Tulsa; yet there is positive spin for infill development in stable, healthy, well established areas of town?"

First, I doubt that the healthy, well established areas of town will see less change or growth with any of the above scenarios. There are plenty of areas within the city, that are not doing as well as they could be, or are doing quite poorly. To promote good, refill/infill in those areas could only help imo. There are areas in the city, that dont have roads, like the large swaths to the east. The choice could be to not build more infrastructure in those areas, but spur redevelopment in the areas to the east that already have infrastructure for instance. Same with areas to the north and west. Better utilize what we have and already have to maintain and pay for, versus adding even more. The catch to that though is we may be stifling opportunity for Tulsa itself to catch some of the suburban, inexpensive, new neighborhood growth that the suburbs will see. Or, same with the comment on finishing the Gilcrease expressway, to the north we may be stifling that same type of suburban growth to the north which can help our central core, actually be central and not a spot on the upper north.

My personal opinion would be to go ahead and do a compromise. Aka, go ahead with the highway to the north, build out suburban "good suburban or Mayberry/urban village" type growth in vacant areas there to give balance to the city and capture some of that type of growth. But in the vacant areas to the east, not build any more infrastructure and spread more that direction, but focus on good refill/infill in the eastern part which already has roads and infrastructure. Look on a map of far east Tulsa and you can see square mile after square mile with no roads what so ever. Do we want to add more, while the east part of the city that does have infrastructure continues to struggle and in which we could promote good redevelopment?

But here I am making blanket statements without being able to see what the listed scenarios above really imply. One problem with taking "a piece of this scenario, and a piece of that" to create a different one, is that each scenario is based on growth estimates and such. For instance, its assumed there will be a future range of popoulation growth and thus housing needs, and also an amount of money to be spent on infrastructure. There will only be so much future housing, shopping, etc. So you cant move or change something in one area without there being consequences for another (more or less housing/retail for another area).  If we want some high density areas, that will have consequences,perhaps less growth in some struggling areas, perhaps no growth and minor growth in new areas. If we go for lots of new growth in the vacant areas, that will mean the struggling areas or desired higher density areas wont have as much growth or attention and resorces. 

[PonderInc]

How 'bout we wait and see the options before we judge them?

The concept is not about choosing "Scenario A" over "Scenario B."  It will be about picking and choosing the best components from each scenario.  It's not a binary thing. 

There will also be a ton of backup documentation provided that will explain the in-depth research related to the various models and research that has been done (example: projected economic outcomes, transportation useage, predicted environmental outcomes, jobs, etc).

The goal is to get thousands of people to weigh in and offer their opinions.  Since nearly 2,000 people have already participated in the time-intensive workshops, it shouldn't be difficult to assume that more than 10,000 will participate by voicing opinions on the scenarios.

Anyone who worries that the voice of the people won't be heard (or will be ignored by elected officials when push comes to shove) needs to get involved and participate in PLANiTULSA.

I look at it this way:
A total of 10,302 votes were cast for all candidates in the last City Council election (general ballot).  Most City Councillors were elected with fewer than 1,500 votes.  (By margins ranging from about 1,000 to a little over 100 votes.)

I hope to see well over 10,000 people vote on the PLANiTULSA scenarios.  Then, we can take the results to the City Council and say "There's more support for this plan than for all of you combined."

I would expect that statement to carry some weight.

[TheArtist]

How 'bout we wait and see the options before we judge them?

The concept is not about choosing "Scenario A" over "Scenario B."  It will be about picking and choosing the best components from each scenario.  It's not a binary thing. 

There will also be a ton of backup documentation provided that will explain the in-depth research related to the various models and research that has been done (example: projected economic outcomes, transportation useage, predicted environmental outcomes, jobs, etc).

Ok, that doesnt really make sense. If each scenario has different set of specific outcomes,,,, how can you pick and choose components from each scenario and then know what the outcome would then be? 

Just like when we made our maps,,, if you wanted more of one type of housing than your scenario allowed, you had to trade a proportion from another packet. If there is projected to be X # of new residences needed. You cant create a plan for the city that has twice that and expect it to work. In other words say you want multiple high density nodes all over the city, and another person wants a super high density core... and both scenarios use up most of the projected future housing needs growth... you cant have "the best of both" so to speak. Something will have to give. You cant build the infrastructure for both scenarios either because the city only has so much it can spend etc.

If someone sees the idea of filling up the empty area of east Tulsa as the best component from one scenario, and another sees infill/refill of older areas like the Pearl... There is only so much road/infrastructure/mass transit funding to go around. New roads in far east Tulsa, or redo roads/sidewalks, and build canals etc. in the Pearl. Perhaps not the best example, but the point is we cant do everything, we have to make choices. These scenarios ARE the different choices made tangible with the research etc. I cant see how you can pick and choose pieces from each scenario, even if you think they are great pieces, because then you change the consequences.  Each scenario is a tapestry of interconnected causes and effects. We cant have everything, with each choice, something has to give or change in another area. More housing growth in one area, means less growth in another.  This effects mass transit, etc. Dont have enough money to have new roads and wider roads everywhere and do rail up and down Memorial and 71st etc. within the lifetime of this plan. Doing something here, means giving up something there. Picking and choosing parts from one scenario and putting it into a different one... I just cant see how it would work unless it is pointed out what the consequences would be to the first scenario. How would that go about, you could create an infinite # of different scenarios that way?   

If we are not voting on scenarios, and can vote on parts of scenarios we like... what are going to be the rules? Again, like when we traded housing types in the packets, there was an exchange... more of one type in one area, meant less of another type in another area. If a lot of people like one part of one scenario, and another group like one part in another scenario and they were somehow able to vote on these parts...What if the consequences werent practical or doable? In other words there isnt enough growth/new rooftops, and possible infrastructure/transit funding to make it happen?   

[Double A]

How 'bout we wait and see the options before we judge them?

The concept is not about choosing "Scenario A" over "Scenario B."  It will be about picking and choosing the best components from each scenario.  It's not a binary thing. 

There will also be a ton of backup documentation provided that will explain the in-depth research related to the various models and research that has been done (example: projected economic outcomes, transportation useage, predicted environmental outcomes, jobs, etc).

The goal is to get thousands of people to weigh in and offer their opinions.  Since nearly 2,000 people have already participated in the time-intensive workshops, it shouldn't be difficult to assume that more than 10,000 will participate by voicing opinions on the scenarios.

Anyone who worries that the voice of the people won't be heard (or will be ignored by elected officials when push comes to shove) needs to get involved and participate in PLANiTULSA.

I look at it this way:
A total of 10,302 votes were cast for all candidates in the last City Council election (general ballot).  Most City Councillors were elected with fewer than 1,500 votes.  (By margins ranging from about 1,000 to a little over 100 votes.)

I hope to see well over 10,000 people vote on the PLANiTULSA scenarios.  Then, we can take the results to the City Council and say "There's more support for this plan than for all of you combined."

I would expect that statement to carry some weight.

So, are you in favor of a public election to approve, adopt, and implement the final version of the Comp plan update?

How can it be that the concept is not about choosing "Scenario A" over "Scenario B" if you hope to see well over 10,000 people vote on the PLANiTULSA scenarios?

That seems pretty contradictory to me.

I would like to see the data from the previous workshops that was used to develop these scenarios. These scenarios seem eerily similar to the four predetermined chip packages you could choose from for the map projects at the workshops.

[PonderInc]

Unless you want to change Oklahoma state law and Tulsa city ordinances, it would not be possible to have a city-wide election to adopt the comp plan.  Besides, we have elected officials to handle stuff like this.  Our job is to participate, and hold them accountable.  It's this thing called representative government. 

The idea of the scenarios is not about saying "I like 1,2,3 or 4."  The ballot will give a lot of information about the various scenarios, and then ask people questions about which scenario would be best at x,y or z.  I haven't seen the ballot yet, but the questions should reflect concepts that normal people can relate to and clearly understand... to enable them to judge the merits of various aspects of the scenarios.

Another way to judge the merit of any proposed plan is to hold it up to our "guiding principles" http://www.planitulsa.org/node/108. 

The consulting team has created a large list of "indicators" which are measurable ways of judging a plan against the desired outcomes of the guiding principles. 

Examples of "indicators" would be things like:  Number of housing units within 1/2 mile of frequent bus or other transit service.  Total jobs added.  New parks per capita.  Added sales tax revenue. Etc, etc.

Here's a draft of some of the research data and "indicators" related to the scenarios:  http://www.planitulsa.org/files/Tulsa%20Indicators%20Consolidated%20List%20Print%20Version%20Small%20041409.pdf.  This is obviously not very user friendly, and many items require explaination, so this will not be the format used in the balloting process... but it does give some idea of the kinds of research being done "behind the scenes."  (If you can call it that when it's been posted on the public website...)

[Double A]

PlaniTulsa Reveals 4 Plans ! 

We can vote on our favorite one to lead future development in Tulsa.



Mark Your Calendar!

Tuesday, May 12, 2009
6:00 - 7:00 p.m.
Doors open at 5:30
Cain's Ballroom, 423 N. Main

Public input from thousands of Tulsans has been gathered, processed, digitized, synthesized, and mapped. In other words - Tulsa spoke, we listened!

Using your ideas, the PLANiTULSA team has developed four different scenarios of how future growth in Tulsa would look. We used data gathered at public workshops, and through surveys and interviews conducted throughout the city. The resulting scenarios are visual representations of your input, including maps, photos, and sample building types. We as a community have a decision to make - which of these scenarios makes the most sense for our city?

We're going to answer that question the best way we know how - by asking you to help decide! Beginning on May 12, you will have an opportunity to review the scenarios and then share your opinions and insights by completing a ballot, either paper or on-line. Rate different aspects of each scenario and offer suggestions. The results will form the foundation of Tulsa's updated Comprehensive Plan.

How to get started? Join Mayor Taylor for the PLANiTULSA Balloting Blitz! Part pep rally, part social event, this is the kick-off of the month-long public balloting process. There will be local food from Eloté Café and Catering and local music by Little Chairs at the historic Cain's Ballroom. Get a first-hand look at the four scenarios. Ask questions. Visit with friends. And hopefully you'll be motivated to spread the word throughout Tulsa! The goal is for 15,000 Tulsans to submit a ballot. Help make that happen and help shape Tulsa's future!

Balloting begins May 12

The results of workshops, surveys, and interviews are now being synthesized into four distinct scenarios for future development.  On May 12, Tulsans will once again have an opportunity to weigh in on Tulsa's future growth.  Polling will occur online, by mail, and fax.  If you would like to help distribute and/or collect paper ballots to an organization or group, please contact us at planning@cityoftulsa.org or call 576-5684. Thank you.

[Double A]

Save the Date of the Big Rollout! Give us your input on Tulsa's future!

Dear PLANiTULSA supporter:
Over the past 8 months, input from thousands of Tulsans has been gathered at public workshops throughout the city, collected through surveys and recorded during interviews. Based on all these ideas for Tulsa's future, the PLANiTULSA team has developed four different scenarios of how future growth in Tulsa might look.

Help Plan Tulsa's Future!This email is a two-fold announcement. First, the PLANiTULSA team is rolling out these scenarios to the public at a fun event at the Cain's Ballroom on May 12, 2009. We've been building up to this point for months!

Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Cain's Ballroom
423 N. Main St.
6:00 – 7:00 p.m.
(Doors open 5:30 p.m.)

Get directions »

Please bring friends and family to enjoy live music & snacks and learn about the possible scenarios for Tulsa's future growth. Your input will influence the new comprehensive plan for Tulsa.

Don't miss:

    * Doors open with snacks and live music at 5:30 p.m.
    * Short presentation at 6 p.m.
    * Draft results of small area workshops exhibited
    * Newsletter and survey distributed

Second, we need YOUR help. The PLANiTULSA team wants your opinions, thoughts and feedback on these four scenarios. We've prepared a survey for you to rate various aspects of the scenarios. During a month-long survey drive, May 12 - June 18, we hope thousands of Tulsans will fill out the survey. The more the better! The survey results will drive the process of turning the four scenarios into one shared vision for Tulsa's future.

If you can't join us at Cain's, please take the survey online after May 12, 2009!

For more information, go online www.planitulsa.org
Thank you from The PLANiTULSA Team!

Contact Information
PLANiTulsa, City of Tulsa c/o Urban Insight 5657 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 290 Los Angeles, CA 90036
Telephone: 323-857-6901

[PonderInc]

OK, Gang, let the balloting begin!  Be sure to read through some of the more detailed information, for a better idea of how each scenario works.

http://www.planitulsa.org/whichwaytulsa

[Theron Warlick]

Complete the online survey before June 18th.  Thanks.

[PonderInc]

If you haven't taken the survey, GET BUSY!  (It's fun, and it only takes a few minutes, unless you want to read ALL the available info...then you can delve into it for hours.)

I was happy to see that the online survey DOES include a section for comments.  The following questions appear at the end of the PLANiTULSA survey:

7. Are there any significant issues that you would like to see given more attention? Is there anything about the specific growth scenarios, that doesn't fall under the previous questions that you would like to tell us?

8. If you could focus the comprehensive plan on just one part of the city, which area would it be?  (Be as general or as specific as you like)

9. What policies or strategies would you like to see the City of Tulsa pursue?

10. Please use the space below to provide any other comments that you would like the PLANiTULSA team to receive.

[Double A]

I've been thinking about it, with 2010 being a census year Tulsa might have a unique opportunity to work in partnership with the Census Bureau to help circulate surveys. Just a thought, probably not much of one.