(PROJECT) A Gathering Place For Tulsa

[guido911]

I'd rather ride down the middle of 111th st at 15 mph and really piss Guido off.

YES!!!!

[guido911]

Did you guys see this hilarious vidja that some of the neighbors produced?

http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2014/12/3/friday-news-digest-12514?utm_content=buffer1fd65&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What's so funny about it? Sounds like some people who actually live in that area expressing dissatisfaction with having more intrusion into their lives. Is it funny that the production value wasn't better? 

[RecycleMichael]

I thought it was funny that it showed people walking along a grassy path saying that a sidewalk would be more dangerous than walking along a grassy path.

Maybe funny is the wrong word. Ironic is better.

[Red Arrow]

YES!!!!

Will you be going east or west? I'll go the other way to be sure he cannot escape by deftly moving to the opposite lane.

[carltonplace]

What's so funny about it? Sounds like some people who actually live in that area expressing dissatisfaction with having more intrusion into their lives. Is it funny that the production value wasn't better? 

oh come on. A sidewalk is not an intrusion into anyone's life.

It looks like the mayor is proposing a change to the proposed Riverside drive design that would allow more space for this sidewalk. Good for him, this is a good sign. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

I thought it was funny that it showed people walking along a grassy path saying that a sidewalk would be more dangerous than walking along a grassy path.

Maybe funny is the wrong word. Ironic is better.

I think "stupid" is the word you are looking for, but are too polite to use!


I like grassy paths well enough, but sidewalk is more likely to be safer overall.

[Red Arrow]

oh come on. A sidewalk is not an intrusion into anyone's life.

I'll have to disagree that "A sidewalk is not an intrusion into anyone's life" but they make sense in an area with some density.  Sidewalks require shoveling when it snows, edging in the summer, occasional replacement of sections due to damage (tree roots at the house where I grew up), sweeping etc.  However, if you don't want that, move to an area with less density like where I am now on approximately 1 acre lots.  Not much traffic because there aren't many reasons to be driving back here.  Walking in the streets is not a problem.  If there are several houses per acre you need sidewalks.

[rebound]

What's so funny about it? Sounds like some people who actually live in that area expressing dissatisfaction with having more intrusion into their lives. Is it funny that the production value wasn't better? 

I was in the meeting when they showed this video, and I happened to be sitting next a gentleman who was from the area and later spoke against the sidewalk.  He was obviously very excited about the video, and thought it was great.  My reaction (and he and I spoke about it during the meeting) was that while I am a bit ambivalent about the sidewalk in general,  the video misses the mark and borders on being humorous (I didn't go as far as stupid, but that was my reaction also).  He did not appreciate my comments.

But to your point Guido, the video is specifically NOT presented as people "expressing dissatisfaction with having more intrusion into their lives".  That is, at it's core, the reason for their irritation but they rightfully understand that saying "I don't want people parking on my street or walking past my house" is not going to be a message that is well-received by the general public.  Instead, they attempt to present a string of rationalizations and false comparisons, along with a comical scene of a women walking in high-heels on uneven grass about a foot from the roadway and declaring she felt uncomfortable about it.  (Pretty sure when this section came on during the meeting, I audibly said "you have got to be kidding...")

So again, I'm on the fence regarding the sidewalk (although generally for it), and I do appreciate that it is going to impact the current residents somewhat.  That said, here is a quick (and I am sure incomplete) list of the problems with the video:

- They go to great pains to illustrate the existing paths, and highlight that two other trails already exist. (Across Riverside, and Midland Valley) / Counter: This was my initial thought as well, but is immaterial.  There is no doubt that the sidewalk would improve access to the park, especially from the West side of the neighborhood in question  (as shown in the video where the highlight the side streets in yellow). 

- They use the false comparison of safety (on an absolute measure) between the proposed sidewalk and Midland Valley Trail.  / Counter:  Of course the MVT is safer in an absolute sense than the sidewalk.  This would be true of comparing the MVT to any sidewalk in Tulsa, as there are no cars alongside the MVT.  Again, the question is not "is this sidewalk as safe as some other alternative", but rather simply "is it safe as compared to similar sidewalks, or simply safe in general".

- The point about the sidewalk crossing the side streets is simply laughable.  This is perhaps the biggest "reach" argument they attempted.  Sidewalks, almost by definition, cross streets at intersections.  Especially given that the streets in question are very low-volume streets specific to that neighborhood, and given that this same scenario exists throughout the city, bringing it up as a negative point is simply unfounded.

- The portion of the video showing Barbo Cox and companion attempting to walk in high-heels immediately adjacent (and very close) to the roadway, on rough unkempt grassy terrain, is (at best, and think I'm being forgiving here) another false comparison.   Even the most unfamiliar with the proposed sidewalk understands that "it's not going to look like that when it's done".    Of all the attempted points in the video, I thought was the point where the video "jumped the shark", and went so far as to be negative to their overall attempted message.

- They finally came back to the real point at the very end, and briefly mention that the anticipate additional cars parked in the area will be an inconvenience.  But they again miss the mark by attempting to suggest it is a major safety issue, and by that section in the video most viewers will have already discounted any further points.

Again,  I appreciate and understand their concerns about increased parking and traffic in their neighborhood.  And I think some good arguments could be made that (for at least that small area) some changes in street parking could/should be made.  If they had taken this route, I think they would have been more successful, but as it is I think the video is counter-productive to their goals.

[Red Arrow]

Again,  I appreciate and understand their concerns about increased parking and traffic in their neighborhood.  And I think some good arguments could be made that (for at least that small area) some changes in street parking could/should be made.  If they had taken this route, I think they would have been more successful, but as it is I think the video is counter-productive to their goals.

Parking on one side of the street only could be an option.

[carltonplace]

FACT: The gathering place will have on site parking and lots of it
FACT: People will park on the PUBLIC street during events just as they do now
FACT: in the video a couple of residents says that people should walk down the jogging/biking path to get to the gathering place, (she does not state where these people should park.)

PERCEPTION: This sidewalk will create more pedestrian traffic walking from parked cars in the neighborhood.

My take is that the property owners that abut Riverside do not want the right of way to be altered. The right of way is going to be altered whether there is a sidewalk there or not. Because of the width of the lanes as designed there will be less right of way and the road (and potentially the sidewalk) are going to be closer to their properties and their houses.

The best sollution is to redesign the road which the mayor has stated he would be interested in pursuing.

[LandArchPoke]

FACT: in the video a couple of residents says that people should walk down the jogging/biking path to get to the gathering place, (she does not state where these people should park.)

This is what I find funny. In reality all the property owners along Riverside have worked up all the other Maple Ridge residents into thinking this is "bad for all of them", when in reality they are just shifting people parking and (gasp) people walking by their house to the property owners abutting the MVT. If people are going to use this way to enter the park, they are going to park as close as they can to the trail and the park instead of parking close to Riverside and using the sidewalk. If I was a property owner anywhere else in Maple Ridge I'd be mad, and tell the folks living along Riverside to deal with it because you're the one who bought property next to a large public thoroughfare.

[carltonplace]

That plus the lack of a sidewalk is not going to stop people from walking on the east side of Riverside...they will just walk in the grass as exhibited by the residents in the vidja.

[Bamboo World]

...the lack of a sidewalk is not going to stop people from walking on the east side of Riverside...they will just walk in the grass...

...and, some people might decide to walk through mud and tree roots in high heels, as Barbo [sic] Cox chose to do.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

If they are so concerned with their quality of life and privacy in their neighborhood,  let them rezone it as private streets, put up a security gate, have an HOA that they pay dues to to cover street maintenance and then they can walk down the middle of the street and not worry about outsiders parking in front of their homes. Then they will have their little utopia and not be bothered by the common folk.

Nice little NIMBY video.

[guido911]

If they are so concerned with their quality of life and privacy in their neighborhood,  let them rezone it as private streets, put up a security gate, have an HOA that they pay dues to to cover street maintenance and then they can walk down the middle of the street and not worry about outsiders parking in front of their homes. Then they will have their little utopia and not be bothered by the common folk.

Nice little NIMBY video.

Maybe what these people want are folks that don't live in this area to APPRECIATE their concerns. Maybe if this was your neighborhood that is about to eat a ton of new traffic, have bunches of strange people walking around your house at all hours, cars parking in front of your house, etc. you might have some empathy for their lot.

But hey, after reading about how awful and unfair owners wanting to development their own property for an outlet mall is unfair to those non-property owners using Turkey Mountain at no cost to them, and how those people's opinions should be taken seriously, maybe the same courtesy can be extended to Maple Ridge folks. Here's a thought. Maybe those people who are upset about the outlet mall can make a video or use some other media that we all can make fun of. That would be a hoot.

edited.

I did see that those opposing the outlet mall have gone all Facebook-y.

https://www.facebook.com/NoMallByTurkeyMountain

On the cover page there is a pic of a guy running. Were is that?