A grassroots organization focused on the intelligent and sustainable development, preservation and revitalization of Tulsa.
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 24, 2024, 07:33:52 am
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 46   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Vision 2025...Part 2?  (Read 254552 times)
Vision 2025
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 851


WWW
« Reply #600 on: May 01, 2015, 11:46:09 am »

A little real data never hurts, try this http://riverprojectstulsa.info/index.php/arkansas-river-low-water-dams-and-public-accessrecreational-improvements.

The ST/J Dam location is closer to 104th Street South and it will back (thin) water to 71st plus the area of the casino will be more flooded due to significant mining and fill removed for the Hotel/Casino project, together, some 1,000,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel has been removed from the river.  

Also the $ you list for Zink are just a bit short.

Please note this is not a proposal but a summary of all in costs and requirements based on solid engineering for the dams and conceptual sketches of public use areas as the local entities requested and overall the costs didn't change dramatically but the contingency(s) were reduced with significantly better data to estimate from.

Good luck and good hunting,

Kirby
« Last Edit: May 01, 2015, 12:28:43 pm by Vision 2025 » Logged

Vision 2025 Program Director - know the facts, www.Vision2025.info
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8189



« Reply #601 on: May 01, 2015, 12:38:44 pm »

A little real data never hurts, try this http://riverprojectstulsa.info/index.php/arkansas-river-low-water-dams-and-public-accessrecreational-improvements.

The ST/J Dam location is closer to 104th Street South and it will back (thin) water to 71st plus the area of the casino will be more flooded due to significant mining and fill removed for the Hotel/Casino project, together, some 1,000,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel has been removed from the river.  

Also the $ you list for Zink are just a bit short.

Please note this is not a proposal but a summary of all in costs and requirements based on solid engineering for the dams and conceptual sketches of public use areas as the local entities requested and overall the costs didn't change dramatically but the contingency(s) were reduced with significantly better data to estimate from.

Good luck and good hunting,

Kirby

Thanks Kirby,

One question I had was that in the past it was stated that the Sand Springs dam would be a containment pool used to ensure the lower dams were always full, is that still the case? It doesn't indicate it in the PDF from what I can see and the timeline has the Sand Springs dam built well after Jenks and Zink.
Logged
SXSW
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4865


WWW
« Reply #602 on: May 01, 2015, 02:41:28 pm »

The cities involved will create a River Authority that would call for a vote in those cities only for the taxes to support the dams. The last river vote actually passed in Tulsa and Jenks but failed badly in Owasso and Broken Arrow.  The Creek Nation has also indicated they will support with some funding as well.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/newshomepage3/river-task-force-chairman-suggests-spring-vote-on-dams/article_202ae572-a46e-56b0-b33b-dcb1254417b0.html

Not a county vote.

So Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks and Bixby only?  I think if that's the case it could pass but will be close.  All four cities have a lot to gain especially the Jenks/Creek Nation area where the bulk of the "river development" is currently located.  Tulsa also the Gathering Place which will be enhanced by more water.  Sand Springs has a lot of potential but currently no vision.  Same with Bixby.
Logged

 
swake
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8189



« Reply #603 on: May 01, 2015, 02:58:19 pm »

So Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks and Bixby only?  I think if that's the case it could pass but will be close.  All four cities have a lot to gain especially the Jenks/Creek Nation area where the bulk of the "river development" is currently located.  Tulsa also the Gathering Place which will be enhanced by more water.  Sand Springs has a lot of potential but currently no vision.  Same with Bixby.

Tulsa could do cool things at 71st and on the west bank at 21st.
Logged
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10912


WWW
« Reply #604 on: May 01, 2015, 06:43:40 pm »

Cue Country Joe and the Fish-

Cause its one, two, three, what are we fightin' for?
Don't ask me I don't give a damn 'bout any of them low water dams.

Cause it four, five, six, open up the Keystone gates!
Ain't no time to wonder why, whoopee, them pigs are gonna' fly.

Just having fun. Glad Karen Keith is excited. She deserves it.

Give me a "F".......
Logged

 
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10912


WWW
« Reply #605 on: May 01, 2015, 06:49:36 pm »

So Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks and Bixby only?  I think if that's the case it could pass but will be close.  All four cities have a lot to gain especially the Jenks/Creek Nation area where the bulk of the "river development" is currently located.  Tulsa also the Gathering Place which will be enhanced by more water.  Sand Springs has a lot of potential but currently no vision.  Same with Bixby.

I would rather support a usable transit system than water in the river.

The Arkansas is not the Delaware, Mississippi...... river.  I grew up near the Delaware River.  It was subject to tides and there were huge mud flats in the areas just downriver from Phila Int'l Airport in Essington where we took our family boat for the winter and spring maintenance before going back to the Chesapeake Bay for boating season.
Logged

 
TheArtist
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6804



WWW
« Reply #606 on: May 01, 2015, 06:50:11 pm »

Anyone know what you need to do to get on a ballot?

 If they are having a city vote this fall I wonder what I would have to do to get a "Tulsa Art Deco Museum" thing put on there?  If I need signatures a great time to do it would be during Mayfest etc. so would have to get moving.

If nobody knows I will wander around city hall next week bugging people or ask Blake.
Logged

"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10912


WWW
« Reply #607 on: May 01, 2015, 06:52:16 pm »

Anyone know what you need to do to get on a ballot?

 If they are having a city vote this fall I wonder what I would have to do to get a "Tulsa Art Deco Museum" thing put on there?  If I need signatures a great time to do it would be during Mayfest etc. so would have to get moving.

If nobody knows I will wander around city hall next week bugging people or ask Blake.

Good Luck.  Let us know if you get something going.  I don't get to Mayest but I would make a trip downtown to sign a ballot petition to help you out.

Logged

 
Conan71
Recovering Republican
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 29334



« Reply #608 on: May 01, 2015, 10:07:17 pm »

I would rather support a usable transit system than water in the river.

The Arkansas is not the Delaware, Mississippi...... river.  I grew up near the Delaware River.  It was subject to tides and there were huge mud flats in the areas just downriver from Phila Int'l Airport in Essington where we took our family boat for the winter and spring maintenance before going back to the Chesapeake Bay for boating season.

Agreed.  Many people of all age groups I’ve spoken to are puzzled by all this.  I don’t see a viable ROI for this proposal, at least not in my lifetime.

$300+ million.  For water.  Wow.

I can’t even drive to work and back without my car trying to rattle apart.  Dysfunctional and crumbling roads are a real disincentive to new commerce and appealing to the really important job creators.  Our priorities are so screwed up here because Tulsa has always been a “new found wealth” city. You go through a binge phase and you blow through all your surplus on superfluous items which don’t improve livability nor attract new people to the area.

You go through lean times and you dream of the next round of superfluous items which still won’t achieve a notable payback in the tax base.

If the idea is we can now ring the Arkansas with a bunch of new retail development with water in the river and this will be our path to prosperity, this vision is a total FAIL. 

Retail development upon retail development is simply not sustainable.
Logged

"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first” -Ronald Reagan
Vision 2025
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 851


WWW
« Reply #609 on: May 02, 2015, 08:30:50 am »

Thanks Kirby,

One question I had was that in the past it was stated that the Sand Springs dam would be a containment pool used to ensure the lower dams were always full, is that still the case? It doesn't indicate it in the PDF from what I can see and the timeline has the Sand Springs dam built well after Jenks and Zink.

Take a look at slide 7 of the presentation (bottom link on the site I posted above) it's the graph showing the lake elevations comparison.  The inset gives sample release durrations from SS to augment the low flow conditions using the top three feet of the SS lake.  For those of us concerned with the regulatory side and it's implications it is important to realize that the low flow swag between hydro power cycles often gets down in the 100-300 cfs range which is well below the EPA's (theoretical) 7Q2 flow for wasteload allocations.

Kirby
Logged

Vision 2025 Program Director - know the facts, www.Vision2025.info
carltonplace
Historic Artifact
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4587



WWW
« Reply #610 on: May 04, 2015, 06:54:45 am »

So around $5M per mile to spur development along the river in Tulsa around 71st. Yea, that is much more palatable.
Logged
rdj
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1583



« Reply #611 on: May 04, 2015, 08:04:53 am »

At $5MM a mile it is still cheaper than the I-44 widening...
Logged

Live Generous.  Live Blessed.
AquaMan
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4043


Just Cruz'n


« Reply #612 on: May 04, 2015, 08:47:31 am »

At $5MM a mile it is still cheaper than the I-44 widening...

Which had a lot larger tax base paying for it.
Logged

onward...through the fog
LandArchPoke
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 847



« Reply #613 on: May 04, 2015, 05:08:20 pm »

I was wondering, has there been a total $$$ amount released that this package will be worth in just the City of Tulsa? I know Dewey wants $300-350 for police, fire, etc. and then $300 for civic projects - so is the total $0.01 tax for 14 years $600 million?
Logged
heironymouspasparagus
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13226



« Reply #614 on: May 04, 2015, 09:08:32 pm »

This is one crazy-a$$ project.

Will be good for all the engineering companies and construction companies involved.  Anyone else??  Not so much...

Logged

"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?"  --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.

I don’t share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently.  I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 46   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
  Hosted by TulsaConnect and Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
 

Mission

 

"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa become the most vibrant, diverse, sustainable and prosperous city of our size. We achieve this by focusing on the development of Tulsa's distinctive identity and economic growth around a dynamic, urban core, complemented by a constellation of livable, thriving communities."
more...

 

Contact

 

2210 S Main St.
Tulsa, OK 74114
(918) 409-2669
info@tulsanow.org