River Plan- Public Infrastructure

[OurTulsa]

I'm also all about some serious infill at the Blair property.  Not high rise, don't want to ruffle the Ridgers but give me a nice mix of townhomes and low rise condos over some commercial spaces.  Of course, it transitions up in intensity as you move from the neighborhood to the river.  All oriented toward the river and built around a great public square that connects the property to the river OVER Riverside.  Now that would so rock.  

Imagine if you could build something equally impressive or more so just on the other side of the river across the ped. bridge and/or across the 23rd St. bridge.  We'd be talking some serious critical mass and the makings of a great area.  

[dbacks fan]

I'm glad to see that there is a positive response to developing projects along the river that make sense. I remember in the 70's when they created the pedestrian bridge as part of River Parks and riding my bike from the Hale High School area to there and riding the paths on both sides of the river. When I got older I always thought that something should be done along the river to create something unique for Tulsa.

The city of Tempe has done something similar along a stretch of the Rio Salado which for years was just a dry river bed and has created a new destination there for all kinds of development and events, and is growing with business and residential development. I hope that his venture for the Arkansas River development is a sucess, and it would be great, I think, for some kind of a link between Sand Springs and Jenks along the river.

http://www.tempe.gov/lake/

[TheArtist]

Lets not go crazy here.  We have a lot of people in this city that don't want any development on the river.  This seems like a good compromise position to get something actually done. Plus those "gathering" areas are more about enhancing public park space not developing businesses with gelatos and ferris wheels.  

I dont see that its going to be any use to start immediately dreaming up other plans when it may be difficult to get this one passed.  Lets focus on getting the task at hand passed, theeen you can push for a next phase.  A lot of people have worked hard to develop this, and to immediately start throwing out other ideas seems to make light of it and not take it seriously. That combined with people who are going to be pushing against it could kill it and we will end up with nothing once again.

This is a perfectly good plan as it is.  If there are legitimate concerns and well thought out arguments for change, then sure go ahead.  But to just blow it off and start all over is just going to get us right back here with another plan that others can obviously have ideas about changing or doing this or that etc. We can all dream up an infinity of great ideas, this one seems perfectly good, lets do it and get it done.

[pfox]

River Corridor Summary Report

[dbacks fan]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Lets not go crazy here.  We have a lot of people in this city that don't want any development on the river.  This seems like a good compromise position to get something actually done. Plus those "gathering" areas are more about enhancing public park space not developing businesses with gelatos and ferris wheels.  

I dont see that its going to be any use to start immediately dreaming up other plans when it may be difficult to get this one passed.  Lets focus on getting the task at hand passed, theeen you can push for a next phase.  A lot of people have worked hard to develop this, and to immediately start throwing out other ideas seems to make light of it and not take it seriously. That combined with people who are going to be pushing against it could kill it and we will end up with nothing once again.

This is a perfectly good plan as it is.  If there are legitimate concerns and well thought out arguments for change, then sure go ahead.  But to just blow it off and start all over is just going to get us right back here with another plan that others can obviously have ideas about changing or doing this or that etc. We can all dream up an infinity of great ideas, this one seems perfectly good, lets do it and get it done.

I completely agree with you. The info that I gave from Tempe was not an overnight deal and is still developing today. Most of what is in the video clips happened over the last 8 years. It was not an overnight thing. I think that there are some good plans and ideas for developing the river that can eventually suit alot of things to get people to live there and businesses to develop there and provide alot of events for people to go there. I hope that this can become a draw to Tulsa on all levels.

[NellieBly]

So how is the funding provided for the river through Vision 2025 impacted? Is it included in the costs as well? I think there was about $150 million for parks inlcuding low water dams and bank improvements in Vision 2025 proposition 4.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

So how is the funding provided for the river through Vision 2025 impacted? Is it included in the costs as well? I think there was about $150 million for parks inlcuding low water dams and bank improvements in Vision 2025 proposition 4.

According to Gaylon Pinc in this morning's World, 5.6 million of V2025 funds was set aside for design and engineering. The cost for the low water dam constrution will total about $150 million for all three. This .4% along with the private funding will accomplish that.

[cannon_fodder]

Great question Nellie.  We earmarked money for the river, did the studies, and then the Corps vetoed it.  Someone should kill those river terns over whatever they are so we can get some stuff done.  But really, what happened to that money?  Sucked into the arena along with the nature center?
- - -

Page 7 of the PDF linked about makes in REALLY clear that the Blair property is a target.
- - -

I have decided to support this project.  I feel that Tulsa was in decline for far too long and we need to step up the game and get our act together.  After traveling recently to OKC, KC, Des Moines, Omaha, and even Little Rock - those cities seems new and shiny compared to most of Tulsa.  I do not think this is due to recent changes in Tulsa, but an extended policy of neglect.

Thus, my tax hating self is willing to help foot the bill to bring things back to where they should be - one of the most beautiful cities in America.  The fact that the Kaiser foundation and private donors are willing to help support this confirms that this is a well thought out and logical plan for the future of Tulsa.

On the development:  one thing that I hear creeping into the conversation (more at Tulsaworld.com discussion) is that people do not want to see the river "commercialized."  I disagree.  I want to see life in, around, and near the river.  To accomplish this and to maintain its integrity it is important to give people a stake in the area.  Note the parks near "River's Edge" always have more people, see less trash, and new features from time to time.

I think such smaller scale commercial ventures periodically along the river would be a huge plus.  Perhaps an ice cream shop or coffee house or a bar on the pier.  Somewhere to go from downtown for outdoor lunch or gather after work. A place to rent paddle  boats or canoes.  A small workshop for artists to rent kiosk space to sell wares, do portraits or whatever.  Maybe even a little side 'harbor' where you could rent remote control boats or sail your own.  In America, commerce = life.  I do not want it to be 71st street nor a mall, but some commerce in the river corridor would be an investment in the area, a draw for more people, and a vote of confidence by the private sector.

As I understand it, this is included in the master plan and I hope it come to fruition.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

So how is the funding provided for the river through Vision 2025 impacted? Is it included in the costs as well? I think there was about $150 million for parks inlcuding low water dams and bank improvements in Vision 2025 proposition 4.

According to Gaylon Pinc in this morning's World, 5.6 million of V2025 funds was set aside for design and engineering. The cost for the low water dam constrution will total about $150 million for all three. This .4% along with the private funding will accomplish that.

WB- is there any mention so far for putting rip-rap along the banks to stabilize it like they have on the "Oklahoma River" in OKC?

I think the weedy-seedy look and erosion along our river banks is one of the least attractive aspects of the Arkansas River.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71


WB- is there any mention so far for putting rip-rap along the banks to stabilize it like they have on the "Oklahoma River" in OKC?

I think the weedy-seedy look and erosion along our river banks is one of the least attractive aspects of the Arkansas River.

I'm of the opposite opinion. the river in okc looks like a drainage ditch. River banks should be natural, not concrete.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

So how is the funding provided for the river through Vision 2025 impacted? Is it included in the costs as well? I think there was about $150 million for parks inlcuding low water dams and bank improvements in Vision 2025 proposition 4.

According to Gaylon Pinc in this morning's World, 5.6 million of V2025 funds was set aside for design and engineering. The cost for the low water dam constrution will total about $150 million for all three. This .4% along with the private funding will accomplish that.

WB- is there any mention so far for putting rip-rap along the banks to stabilize it like they have on the "Oklahoma River" in OKC?

I think the weedy-seedy look and erosion along our river banks is one of the least attractive aspects of the Arkansas River.

Under the heading "bank stabilization and beautification". I remember seeing illustrations of rip-rap. I like the natural boundaries in some areas and the rip-rap makes for horrendous access to the river but it does serve a purpose and provides definition. Recent addition of wide swaths of concrete debris (old bridge debris, bricks, re-bar etc.) along the north river bank at Gilcrease Museum Drive by a large petroleum marketer is simply awful viewed from the river. That is the worst method of reinforcement. Who allowed that?

I also agree with CF that trying to stop commercialism is both a subjective process and urinating into the wind. Not all of the population enjoys running, biking and bird watching, yet they will contribute their tax dollars and deserve to enjoy the river too. I foresee sectors of the river that can accomodate both groups.

[T-Town Now]

This is the best sounding proposal I've heard for the river so far. I think it's important to address the river banks so they are safer and more accessible to the public, but they need to retain a natural look. (No light green painted concrete walls.)

They could use natural stone and plantings to accomplish this.

Tulsa needs to do something with the river, it's our natural asset, along with the trees, which we seem bent on allowing the developers to cut down as fast as they possibly can. The whole city is going to look like Yale Avenue between I-44 and 51st Street if they keep it up. Ugly, ugly, ugly. We need to preserve the beautiful trees we have.

I hope this happens, it's long overdue.

[NellieBly]

So the Vision 2025 money for the river has already been spent? I thought the Incog study was completed way before V2025 was voted on?

Is there a plan for infrastructure along Riverside? How will the additional traffic be handled. Is Riverside going to be turned into a 35 mph road with lights every couple of blocks to accommodate all the added traffic and pedestrians.

That is really a concern for me. I am so disappointed in the state of Tulsa's streets and the lack of planning for infrastructure when ever something new is built. Riverside is a busy, high speed link to south Tulsa. What will slowing down the traffic and adding more pedestrians to the mix do to the traffic in and out of downtown? Will the city put in left and right turn lanes?

My other concern is parking. We have a beautiful green space that is open and filled with wildlife. If there are restaurants, stores and other commercial enterprises built on the river's edge, are we going to "pave paradise to put up a parking lot?"

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by NellieBly

So the Vision 2025 money for the river has already been spent? I thought the Incog study was completed way before V2025 was voted on?

Is there a plan for infrastructure along Riverside? How will the additional traffic be handled. Is Riverside going to be turned into a 35 mph road with lights every couple of blocks to accommodate all the added traffic and pedestrians.

That is really a concern for me. I am so disappointed in the state of Tulsa's streets and the lack of planning for infrastructure when ever something new is built. Riverside is a busy, high speed link to south Tulsa. What will slowing down the traffic and adding more pedestrians to the mix do to the traffic in and out of downtown? Will the city put in left and right turn lanes?

My other concern is parking. We have a beautiful green space that is open and filled with wildlife. If there are restaurants, stores and other commercial enterprises built on the river's edge, are we going to "pave paradise to put up a parking lot?"

The city has already added turning lanes and lights at 31st and 41 so there are turning lanes and/or lights at Denver, 21st, 31st, 41st,2 at  I-44, 61st, 66th, Peoria, 71st, 75th, 81st, The Creek Casino, 91st, Deleware/96th, 2 at The Creek Turnpike and 101st. That really should cover it.

The money from the 3rd Penny and 2025 is in the reports as being added to these funds, so it is not gone. Also if you look at the plans, there is a very substantial amount of parkland in the plans, by far most of the existing park would be untouched by commercial development.

Now, Riverside in sections is badly in need of reconstruction, I would like to see the street rebuilt, but major changes aren't needed. Maybe a light and turn lanes at 36th.

[jtcrissup]

I really like this plan (always have...).  

Another idea that may have been tossed around already...Has anyone thought of, or proposed, a simple lock system in the low water dams (specifically the one on Zink Lake)to allow for boats (canoes, rafts, kayaks...no motorized boats) to move through the low water dam into the "Living River"?  I think it would be cool to put in at Zink Lake, paddle around for awhile, go through the dam lock, and then ride the "Tulsa Wave" along the "Living River" down to a designated get out location.  This would be fun to do, and it would be fun to watch as well.