$38 million development being proposed across from BOK Center

[OurTulsa]

Why not create a plan for the block and break it up?  Why can't the City address development issues ahead of time and create a development scheme to fit - break up the block in to bite size chunks to sell to individuals/groups to develop piece by piece.  So long as each piece fits the puzzle.

It seems like this game of waiting for the big developer with mounds of resources is not turning a positive outcome.  I bet there are quite many more developers with resources to pull off a corner piece than the whole block.

Maybe allowing one corner to develop would give confidence to another developer to do the other corner or end of the block.  Of course, make sure each piece fits the desired outcome illustrated in the plan.

Sell the first piece for next to nothing...build confidence in the market and adjust the price accordingly.  Is the City in the game to make an immediate ROI or should we be looking at the long term return of a healthier downtown?

[TheArtist]

I met with OC Walker of the TDA, about the Art Deco Museum we are wanting to get started. I know its early in the game for us, but wanted to get a feel for what they are looking for, what we would need to do to be considered, whats available, etc.  Basically start a relationship and see if there can be any possibilities here. My goal at this point is to check out any and all possibile options.

I had read this article in the Urban Tulsa Weekly,  http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A28117  and it sounded like they might be willing to work with a group like us. I would think we could be a great fit in helping to revitalize some part of the city.  If we got a chunk of property say, we could make benchmarks like,,, we will break ground and start building within x amount of time. Or if its and old warehouse we could make such and such improvements by this benchmark, and so fourth to show that we are in earnest and making progress to do what they want for the city,,, revitalizing blighted areas, and thus earn some claim to the property. And if we don't meet those goals, they have the right to take the property back and let someone else have a try. Just thinking out loud there but never got to that point with them.

He said it sounded like a great project, shook my hand, said he would get an email out to me showing the properties they have available, and then we could talk about the different restrictions on any of the properties our group might find interesting "apparently some properties were donated for instance and have different goals/restrictions attached".   But,,, no email.  I emailed him back a couple days later thanking him for his time, enjoyed meeting with him, etc.,,,, still no email back.

I am starting to feel like we are being blown off.  But why say it sounds like an exciting project, smile, shake my hand, and then not at least tell us later "Well, after thinking about it, I don't think your a fit for us,,," or "Perhaps when you get further along and do this, this, and this,,"?  I went there to explore options, see if we could figure out a way to possibly work together and be a part of something that could help the city in some area, and to learn. I am gonna keep exploring all potential options and may just end up having to be a pest and go back over there lol.  I am not gonna give up so easily on any potential front,,, but ya know, unless they are really busy and just cant be bothered, I would hope that they would want to reach out and encourage groups like ours and want to work with us to make a go of something? But, I know I am still new at this game and have a lot to learn. 

[waterboy]

Sorry, but a good friend of mine worked on the Aquarium for years trying to get it into Tulsa, and the problem was elected officials in Tulsa.  It was all set to go into 71st and the river when a meeting was called hastily to "discuss finances".  All of a sudden, a certain Mayor puts out a motion to kill the entire program, with absolutely no warning to the Aquarium folks, and the project gets nixed.

Tulsa never wanted the Aquarium, now look what it's done for Jenks.

The Aquarium was set to be built on the West Bank in Tulsa at 23rd. It only lacked a vote by the River Parks Authority who, under pressure from another local board representing another local attraction, killed it by a single vote. Neither board was pressured by elected officials. Tulsa wanted it. The Zoo board did not.

If what your friend says is true, I would look to jealousy and defensiveness from other conflicting board interests or the casino interests before assuming a mayor personally killed the process.

[Wilbur]

The Aquarium was set to be built on the West Bank in Tulsa at 23rd. It only lacked a vote by the River Parks Authority who, under pressure from another local board representing another local attraction, killed it by a single vote. Neither board was pressured by elected officials. Tulsa wanted it. The Zoo board did not.

If what your friend says is true, I would look to jealousy and defensiveness from other conflicting board interests or the casino interests before assuming a mayor personally killed the process.

The Aquarium was set to go in on the north-west corner of the 71st Street bridge.  Those involved in trying to get the project open are now actually glad it never went in there, since the area around the Aquarium has taken off at its current location.

Susan Savage was the one at the meeting who made the motion to kill the project.  That info comes straight from a meeting attendee.  I agree the zoo never wanted that project in Tulsa and perhaps Savage was killing the project on behalf of the zoo.

[RecycleMichael]

Back to the topic...

I am excited that something will go in the block to the east of the new BOKcenter.

I am guessing that the TDA will approve the negotiated terms with the builder at their meeting this Thursday.

[waterboy]

Wilbur, the mayor is not a member of the River Parks Authority, though the city does have an appointed member. The RPA board does not follow the commands of the mayor. Though they may have responded to her wishes, she has no authority to direct them to do anything. They are quite proud of that. My information came from two members of the RPA staff around 2002 (they were at the meeting) who relayed that they were all surprised at the vote of a particular board member whose wife was a member of the Zoo board and applied last minute pressure to have him change his vote. Perhaps you are referring to another board or a different time period. Or perhaps our second hand sources are not correct.

[sgrizzle]

I talked to a lot of aquarium staff as I volunteered there both before and after opening. They said they were happy the city thing didn't work out as they were being offered only like 6 acres as opposed to the Jenks 65 acres. Also, they were being told they had to focus on outdoor exhibits.

[swake]

Wilbur, the mayor is not a member of the River Parks Authority, though the city does have an appointed member. The RPA board does not follow the commands of the mayor. Though they may have responded to her wishes, she has no authority to direct them to do anything. They are quite proud of that. My information came from two members of the RPA staff around 2002 (they were at the meeting) who relayed that they were all surprised at the vote of a particular board member whose wife was a member of the Zoo board and applied last minute pressure to have him change his vote. Perhaps you are referring to another board or a different time period. Or perhaps our second hand sources are not correct.

The land at 71st is city park land, not Riverparks

[waterboy]

The land at 71st is city park land, not Riverparks

Then we are obviously talking about two different episodes and two different locations. There was no reason for administrators at RPA to have shared the story if it was not true.

[Oil Capital]

The land at 71st is city park land, not Riverparks

Huhhh?   which "land at 71st" are you talking about?  The land between Riverside Drive and the river is Riverparks land, not city park, as is the land west of the river.  At least they claim it on their website (and the city does not claim it on theirs.)

[OpenYourEyesTulsa]

Back to the topic...

I am excited that something will go in the block to the east of the new BOKcenter.

I am guessing that the TDA will approve the negotiated terms with the builder at their meeting this Thursday.

Hopefully they will get things rolling.  Please let us know.  The TDA website is pretty worthless for up to date information.  The website has a form to take complaints but it does not work.  I read somewhere that TDA recently got new leadership so maybe things will get better.

[swake]

Huhhh?   which "land at 71st" are you talking about?  The land between Riverside Drive and the river is Riverparks land, not city park, as is the land west of the river.  At least they claim it on their website (and the city does not claim it on theirs.)

There's a Tulsa Parks sign on the land, not RPA. I think it's called Helmerich park.

[Conan71]

Then we are obviously talking about two different episodes and two different locations. There was no reason for administrators at RPA to have shared the story if it was not true.

This location Wilbur and I have been referencing was in the early 1990's, I was still at UTW.  Though I remember it as being south of the 71st St. bridge, not north, I'm thinking now Wilbur is right on the original site.  In any case, it didn't get built in Tulsa.

[Oil Capital]

There's a Tulsa Parks sign on the land, not RPA. I think it's called Helmerich park.

That would be at 73rd and Riverside, EAST of Riverside Drive.  I thought we were speaking of 71st and Riverside, and actually adjacent to the river.

[BKDotCom]

So, is something happening across from the BOK?