mysterious new jenks riverfront development???

[TheArtist]

^Who said that?

[bacjz00]

*************
From the TW article:

It also shows a pedestrian bridge crossing the river into South Tulsa along with several connecting water taxis that would stop at the area's attractions across the river in south Tulsa, such as King's Landing and the Creek Nation Casino.
*************

It just hammers home the mediocrity of Tulsa thinking.  Selling a new shopping center (lets face it, that's all the "River District" is...no residential right?) because you can ride a water taxi across the river to
ANOTHER strip mall?  Gimme a break.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by bacjz00


It just hammers home the mediocrity of Tulsa thinking.  Selling a new shopping center (lets face it, that's all the "River District" is...no residential right?) because you can ride a water taxi across the river to
ANOTHER strip mall?  Gimme a break.

A)  That's the "mediocrity" of Jenks thinking, partner, not Tulsa.  Get your municipalities straight.

B)  You're begging the question by assuming mediocrity and then saying the proposal indeed is mediocre.  How is it actually so?  How is it any different, conceptually, than Bricktown or San Antonio's riverwalk?  Both are based on retail/entertainment models.  What do you want to see in Jenks?

C)  Stop posting on a Tulsa forum if you're going to slam* Tulsa.  It gets on everyone's nerves and earns you no friends here.



*Slamming Tulsa's "thinking" in this particular post, so don't beg off by saying you didn't slam Tulsa.

[TheArtist]

It is easy to forget this is development in Jenks, a tiny suburb of Tulsa.  We shouldn't put all our river development expectations on their shoulders.  They can't be like "The Bridges"  http://www.thebridgesofsaintpaul.com/b07.html thats the kind of development I expect for Tulsa.

However it was inappropriate for the Tulsa World to categorize the Kings Landing as an area attraction. That kind of talk makes the shopping center, Jenks, and Tulsa look worse not better. They were probably trying to make things sound more exciting, but the result is to make us a laughing stock.

[aoxamaxoa]

There is a BIG difference between slamming Tulsa and being honest about all the puffery in this town.

[perspicuity85]

Something overlooked here is the fact that Jenks is a suburban area by every definition.  For all intents and purposes, Southwest Tulsa, which is part of the Jenks school district, might as well also be called Jenks.  Kings Landing, the Riverwalk Crossing, and this River District project are all suburban projects.  That means they are all going to attempt to cater to middle-aged upper-middle class people with families that live in subdivisions in and around South Tulsa.  That is their market.  All suburban areas are full of mediocre crap like strip malls, Wal-Marts and Applebee's style restaurants.  It's the same thing in hundreds of cities throughout America.

The point is, we shouldn't get so bent out of shape about this.  The suburbs will always be the suburbs.  Tulsa needs to work on building its own urban riverfront district within its urban core.  Let Jenks and all the rest of the 'burbs do their thing, and work towards giving Tulsa a true urban identity.  Who knows,  maybe people in Jenks will actually go to "Tulsa" for a change.

[aoxamaxoa]

Leave them out there in Jinx....otherwise, agreed.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by perspicuity85

Something overlooked here is the fact that Jenks is a suburban area by every definition.  For all intents and purposes, Southwest Tulsa, which is part of the Jenks school district, might as well also be called Jenks.  Kings Landing, the Riverwalk Crossing, and this River District project are all suburban projects.  That means they are all going to attempt to cater to middle-aged upper-middle class people with families that live in subdivisions in and around South Tulsa.  That is their market.  All suburban areas are full of mediocre crap like strip malls, Wal-Marts and Applebee's style restaurants.  It's the same thing in hundreds of cities throughout America.

The point is, we shouldn't get so bent out of shape about this.  The suburbs will always be the suburbs.  Tulsa needs to work on building its own urban riverfront district within its urban core.  Let Jenks and all the rest of the 'burbs do their thing, and work towards giving Tulsa a true urban identity.  Who knows,  maybe people in Jenks will actually go to "Tulsa" for a change.

I aaabsolutely agree.  Tulsas primary riverfront development, especially that near downtown and midtown need to be urban, not suburban.  There are plenty of places along the river, like near 71st for suburban type development if you like, but I hope that whatever is put near 21st is suburban.  That area should in no way be anything like the incog plan shows for the area which is definitely low density and suburban. It does seem that the Mayor recognizes we have one chance to get that area done right for Tulsa.

[bacjz00]

quote:Originally posted by perspicuity85

Something overlooked here is the fact that Jenks is a suburban area by every definition.  For all intents and purposes, Southwest Tulsa, which is part of the Jenks school district, might as well also be called Jenks.  Kings Landing, the Riverwalk Crossing, and this River District project are all suburban projects.  That means they are all going to attempt to cater to middle-aged upper-middle class people with families that live in subdivisions in and around South Tulsa.  That is their market.  All suburban areas are full of mediocre crap like strip malls, Wal-Marts and Applebee's style restaurants.  It's the same thing in hundreds of cities throughout America.

The point is, we shouldn't get so bent out of shape about this.  The suburbs will always be the suburbs.  Tulsa needs to work on building its own urban riverfront district within its urban core.  Let Jenks and all the rest of the 'burbs do their thing, and work towards giving Tulsa a true urban identity.  Who knows,  maybe people in Jenks will actually go to "Tulsa" for a change.

Nice perspective...I can't disagree with that.  Tulsa SHOULD by all accounts want a different kind of development than what Jenks is doing.  Perhaps my inclusion of Jenks into Tulsa "thinking" was a bit off-base

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by Sangria

(Quote from the news story)"Mayor Vic Vreeland said city officials are working on several options to raise additional funds. Tulsa County Commissioner Randi Miller has said that additional funding for a low-water dam at 105th Street would likely be on a county ballot next year as part of a river development initiative that is expected to feature some type of river development in Tulsa through a public-private partnership"


Hmmmmm..... looks like she has not given up.

Looks like she's running for reelection and pandering for votes.