A Critical Look at the Proposed Arkansas River Infrastructure Development

[dbacksfan 2.0]

Seems to be a common thread in engineered solutions.  I can't tell you how many times we have looked at a seemingly impossible boiler replacement in a basement 30 feet down with 16" thick walls or in a penthouse 20 stories up.  The question always comes up: "What the hell were those engineers thinking building a building around the boiler room?" 

It was easy placement and by the time the lifespan of the boiler was over that engineer would be long retired.  I've seen boilers with a 40 year life expectancy reduced to junk in five years.  I've also seen boilers with a 20-30 year expectancy approaching 90 years old.  There are still a few around Tulsa providing nice toasty heat every winter. 

IOW- the dams may have had a 50 year life expectancy, but what all did they not know about materials and construction in the early 1960's which has proven much more durable beyond anyone's wildest dreams.

There again, we do seem to learn new things with every decade that goes by. 

Yeah, I learned a lot about that when I worked for a company that built modular oil and natural gas refining equipment back in 1991 at the Port of Catoosa. I understood the life expectancy of the materials used because of the chemicals that would flow through the equipment. It's just when you think of something like a dam along a river you think they would design for more than 50 years. But you look at the state of refinery systems in the US and most people don't understand that they are as old as they are, and the pipeline infrastructure is just as old. It's sad that it's a build it and let some one else figure it out to fix or replace it decades later.

[AquaMan]

Which is why the two things in life I no longer have much faith in are weather reports and engineering estimates. The latter being unduly influenced by economic pressures and politics. Once an engineer says "our estimates show it to be within acceptable industry standards...", hold on to your donkey. The promoters take those remarks, spin them, capitalize them, put their names on the commemorative plaque and move on for others to clean up later.

BTW, does anyone remember the weather forecasters back in March and April warning that it would be a rainy, stormy spring with intense storms? I do. Apparently the Corps doesn't trust weathermen either. They didn't release water from keystone, keeping the river bone dry for weeks (some think it was to affect support for more dams or the gathering place), until record rainfalls all along the system kept them from doing so. Then bragged that they were working hard to minimize flooding. My trust in individual engineers, metereologists, wildlife experts and ecologists is intact. The organizations they work for, not so much.

[johrasephoenix]

Please put water in the river...  Please.  The best investment Tulsa could make in itself in a generation.

[Vision 2025]

Which is why the two things in life I no longer have much faith in are weather reports and engineering estimates. The latter being unduly influenced by economic pressures and politics. Once an engineer says "our estimates show it to be within acceptable industry standards...", hold on to your donkey. The promoters take those remarks, spin them, capitalize them, put their names on the commemorative plaque and move on for others to clean up later.

BTW, does anyone remember the weather forecasters back in March and April warning that it would be a rainy, stormy spring with intense storms? I do. Apparently the Corps doesn't trust weathermen either. They didn't release water from keystone, keeping the river bone dry for weeks (some think it was to affect support for more dams or the gathering place), until record rainfalls all along the system kept them from doing so. Then bragged that they were working hard to minimize flooding. My trust in individual engineers, metereologists, wildlife experts and ecologists is intact. The organizations they work for, not so much.

The USACE has an operational protocol and from my view they appeared to follow it quite well.  Oh and there is significantly more to it that hey it's goanna rain better open up...

[carltonplace]

Please put water in the river...  Please.  The best investment Tulsa could make in itself in a generation.

I'm all for having water in the river...this plan puts water in the river, just not significantly in Tulsa. It puts water in the river at Sand Springs and at Jenks and fixes the impound at the pedestrian bridge in Tulsa. The water level from 31st to 61st in Tulsa will mostly stay the same.

And, Tulsans because there are more of us then there are Sandites or Jenks Americans will pay the most to build the additional dams.

Cannon Fodder wrote a pretty remarkable breakdown and Conan summed it up concisely.

If there are three proposals on the ballot I will vote in favor of fixing Jenks dam. If this is one big proposal on the ballot then I can't find a compelling reason to spend Tulsa tax money on this. For this same amount we could make a huge impact to public transportation or education or even a Tulsa specific economic generator of some sort.

[Townsend]

I'm all for having water in the river...

If this is one big proposal on the ballot then I can't find a compelling reason to spend Tulsa tax money on this. For this same amount we could make a huge impact to public transportation or education or even a Tulsa specific economic generator of some sort.

Yeah, that

[Tulsasaurus Rex]

The Arkansas River Infrastructure Task Force has suspended its regular meetings to give a subcommittee time to evaluate public comments the task force received at its recent town hall meetings.

Meanwhile, in interiews with The Frontier Tuesday, Sand Springs Mayor Mike Burdge, said his city may not be included in a final proposal to build low-water dams in the Arkansas River, and Tulsa City Councilor Anna America said she would like to see the overall proposal scaled back.

City Councilor and Task Force Chairman G.T. Bynum informed area leaders in an email Monday the meetings were being halted.

"Moving ahead, we are suspending meetings of the task force while our drafting team assembles a proposal that responds to concerns raised in town hall meetings," the email states. "When that revised proposal is ready, we will call another meeting to present it to the full task force and get your feedback."

DOCUMENT
TEXT
Zoom

Bynum told The Frontier in an interview that "major issues raised and on the table for discussion largely come down to the disparity within the draft plan between what Tulsans pay and what they get in return."

Asked whether the proposal could be scaled back to exclude some suburban communities, Bynum said: "Anything and everything is up for discussion."

Councilor Phil Lakin said the same thing in an interview Tuesday.

"Everything is on the table because we don't have a proposal yet to put out there," Lakin said. "We just had a plan we discussed that had four dams."

Bynum stressed at the public meetings that the plan presented to the public was not a finished product and that the public's input would be used to come up with a final proposal.

He reiterated that point Tuesday, adding that each river community is represented on the drafting team.

"That was the whole point of the town hall meetings," he said. "They weren't intended as a pep rally, they were intended as a chance for Tulsans to let us know what they think so we could revise the proposal accordingly."

America said she's heard strong support for scaling back the proposal.

"What I am hearing loud and clear from Tulsans in my district — and in much of the rest of the city — is that they don't necessarily oppose four dams, they just don't want Tulsans to pay for dams in other communities, and I agree with that.

"My preference would be that Tulsans get to vote on a scaled-back package that focuses on things within our city limits. That means all necessary levy repairs and improvements on the Zink Dam to build on our greatest river asset."

America said she could potentially see a south Tulsa-Jenks dam included in the proposal if the cost were shared proportionally by those who would benefit from it.

Jenks' Mayor Kelly Dunkerly said the process is proceedings as it was intended, with each river community involved in coming up with a final proposal.

"I think the main thing is the proposal is still under development," he said. "Everyone has had their input and no final decisions have been made, but there have been discussions about the merit" of each dam location.

Dunkerly said the public input has had the desired effect of providing task force members and policy makers with the information they need to make the best decisions possible.

"We have all been trying to understand the different options," he said.

Bynum said a possible Sand Springs dam remains integral from a water-quality standpoint. However, the task force learned during the public meetings process that the Sand Springs dam would not provide as much water between the Tulsa dam lakes as anticipated.

"That weighs on the valuation of that dam from the standpoint of its benefit to Tulsans," Bynum said.

Burdge said he has heard from colleagues in Sand Springs the city may be left out of the package.

"If Tulsa makes that decision, that is their decision to make," Burdge said. "We will revamp what we are doing. That is no problem; we'll just catch another train."

In Bixby, City Manager Doug Enelvoldsen said his city remains committed to building four dams in the river.

Enelvoldsen sits on the drafting team.

"We believe that the Arkansas River is our region's greatest natural asset," he said. "And the creation of these series of lakes will stimulate private-sector development, improve recreational opportunities and enhances quality of life throughout the Tulsa metropolitan region."

The river task force has spent more than a year and a half formulating a plan to build low-water dams in the Arkansas River. The group is made up of representatives of Tulsa County, the Creek Nation, private industry, the cities of Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby and others.

The proposal presented to the public at town hall meetings in May and June called for spending $298 million to build dams in Sand Springs, south Tulsa/Jenks and Bixby and to overhaul Zink Dam in Tulsa.

The proposal offered a new twist Bynum and other advocates for the dams said made it different than earlier proposals: Only communities that would benefit directly from the dams would be asked to pay for them.

Those communities would be Sand Springs, Tulsa, Jenks and Bixby. Funding would come from a Vision 2025 sales tax renewal. The sixth-tenths of a penny sales tax expires at the end of 2016.

Under the proposal, the four communities would dedicate half of the renewal, or three-tenths of a penny, to build, operate and maintain the dams.

However, during the town hall meetings, several speakers questioned whether Tulsans would essentially be paying to build other communities' dams because of the Tulsa's much larger population.

Others asked whether the task force had done a cost-benefit analysis to determine how much private-sector investment the dams might generate.

The suspension of the meetings could throw a wrench into the overall Vision renewal process.

Independent of the dam discussions, the city of Tulsa is holding public meetings to hear how Tulsans would like to spend the remainder of the Vision tax should they choose to renew it. Sand Springs, Jenks and Bixby are holding or plan to hold similar meetings.

Until recently, Bynun and other officials had indicated that the Vision renewal vote could take place as early as the fall. That now seems unlikely.

Near the end of his email, Bynum writes there is a good reason no dam proposal has been approved in 50 years.

"It's complicated," he wrote.

Monday, it seems, the proposal became even more so.

http://www.tulsafrontier.com/regular-river-task-force-meetings-suspended-final-proposal-up-in-the-air/

[TeeDub]

Those communities would be Sand Springs, Tulsa, Jenks and Bixby. Funding would come from a Vision 2025 sales tax renewal. The sixth-tenths of a penny sales tax expires at the end of 2016.

Under the proposal, the four communities would dedicate half of the renewal, or three-tenths of a penny, to build, operate and maintain the dams.

So rather than a county wide tax, it will omit Broken Arrow and Owasso?   I guess they couldn't find a way to sweeten the deal enough for those without river frontage.

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

That's good news!

Why don't they try to get private investment/match from those who will benefit the most like the Casino/Riverwalk in Jenks? If they will see revenue increase from it, they should pay for it.

Hopefully they just scratch off the 3 new dams and fix the existing one. There are so many other priorities. Read the article in the TW about the school near 61st & Peoria from yesterday. Public Education in Tulsa is, if anything, getting much worse. We need an education "Vision" tax, not a dam tax to create a few murky lakes no one will use (no one uses Zink lake as-is when it is when full, why would they then?). And definitely not a sales tax to "bring the Boeing 787 production to Tulsa, but really just a tiny fraction of the plane, but really not even Boeing, but a smaller company owned by a Canadian company which gets sold off".  

[heironymouspasparagus]

We have been lucky.  If you could cut a slice out of Keystone, I suspect there would be a lot of concrete to rebar failures going on.  The concrete cracks, water intrudes and rusts the rebar, the rust swells causing the concrete to crack, letting water intrude, rusting the rebar.....


I am curious about silting behind the dam.  There was some speculation I heard of a month or so ago that the flood and heavy release of water would act to "scrub" some of the silt out from behind the dam.  Wonder if the Corp has looked at that...?

Which would put all that silt right into the Sand Springs mud hole/sand pit, if so....

[Bamboo World]

I'm all for having water in the river...this plan puts water in the river, just not significantly in Tulsa. It puts water in the river at Sand Springs and at Jenks and fixes the impound at the pedestrian bridge in Tulsa. The water level from 31st to 61st in Tulsa will mostly stay the same.

Overall, the quantity of water from 31st to 61st is likely to decrease a bit, because the flow will be restricted by two dams, and there will be evaporation from the surfaces of two shallow lakes upstream.  This plan puts water into the atmosphere, keeping most of the river through Tulsa County as a relatively dry streambed of small, braided channels, as it is now.

[Vision 2025]

Hardly.

[Breadburner]

We have been lucky.  If you could cut a slice out of Keystone, I suspect there would be a lot of concrete to rebar failures going on.  The concrete cracks, water intrudes and rusts the rebar, the rust swells causing the concrete to crack, letting water intrude, rusting the rebar.....


I am curious about silting behind the dam.  There was some speculation I heard of a month or so ago that the flood and heavy release of water would act to "scrub" some of the silt out from behind the dam.  Wonder if the Corp has looked at that...?

Which would put all that silt right into the Sand Springs mud hole/sand pit, if so....

Lol....Wut....

[heironymouspasparagus]

Lol....Wut....

You don't understand concrete, either, do you?  Along with all the other things...

[heironymouspasparagus]

Hardly.

Moves parts of Keystone further down the line...still no good reason advanced - at least not $250 million worth - and probably much more!