Elm Creek, Other Tributary Development

[waterboy]

I think Cherry Creek meanders around behind and south of 41st almost to Union. There is a nice park at 41st & Union it could tie into also. Not to leave out other creeks that empty into the Arkansas. These are the ones I know the names of.

A method of keeping water in these creeks would need to be devised. But its been done. I think the Bricktown canal pumps well water into the canal, then re-circulates it. We could pump river water to add to regular run-off.
The best part of the idea is that it can be done incrementally with direct input from the affected 'hoods yet co-ordinated with each other. It should positively affect drainage as cleaning them is easier too. Having gathering areas on each end of the creeks means minimal disturbance as well.

For those concerned with property values, consider the Swan Lake, Owen Park and 31st/Gary homes as examples of increased value vs. the surrounding area.

[Conan71]

I've been pondering the same idea of how to keep water in the creeks and came to the same conclusion as you.

Do we need another low water dam downstream of I-44 to accomplish that?  Not really.  I believe the cost of piping and pumps from Zink lake a mile upstream to keep that particular creek full would be less than a low water dam spanning more than a quarter mile of river.

For Crow Creek and Elm Creek the problem is even simpler.

Cherry Creek forks, either that or they dredged in a drainage tributary at some point paralleling Hwy 75.  There is a channel which goes under Hwy 75 (Tulsamini feel free for any correction) to Reed Park, there is also an over-sized grassy drainage ditch which forks north of the Reed Park finger, and continues northward toward Sinclair refinery.

That might cut off the west side of Cherry Creek from the 75 viaduct to the river, but there's no reason that area cannot be improved for the enjoyment of those living on the west side of 75.  God only knows they've been neglected by the city long enough.

I had given even more thought to the primary use of Cherry Creek from the river to the highway and think it might be best as improved park and trail.  As it is now, there is a loop just south of the I-44 bridge which is pretty much the west side terminus of the River Parks.  Turning Cherry Creek west of Elwood into park area would bring a unique feature.  

As well, there is a lot south of the lift station at Cherry Creek on the river which used to have an asphalt race track on it.  It's just overgrown with weeds & trees now.  I've assumed for years this is city property since they own the land north and south of there for a treatment plant.  Unless there is some underlying environmental issue with it, I don't see why that can't be developed into public use area as well with another park.  Though it's hard to envision  something next to the I-44 bridge as a peaceful haven.

I'll drive around after work this evening to look at key places along Cherry Creek since we are talking about something a half mile from my office in about any direction.

I'm assuming this would entail fewer impact studies and infrastructure engineering than dams and what it does to flow up and down stream of low water dams.  I'm under the assumption that many studies were done when the main stream bed was concreted in.  I imagine there's more to uncovering Elm Creek than just ripping up asphalt, but this sounds like a more desireable and innovative plan to me.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Then take into account why the old part of the city is built the way it is. Its the railroads. The railroads had to make their routes as flat as possible because heavy locomotives don't climb hills well. That means they took naturally undulating topography and raised the elevation or flattened it out to achieve a gradual incline or decline. Of course the area surrounding them still follows a downward incline towards the river. The rr beds are so well designed and built that a hundred years later some are still in operation and the others are now paths.

Most all railroads in this area were constructed for industrial purposes on land that was not residential at the time. Homes that sprung up near the rr were not usually the best in the hood. Gentrification and the closing of these industrial based rails has saved those homes.

Now think big. The most powerful, beautiful neighborhood in town has an abandoned rail road bed that runs right down its backside. Its remains start near 18th & Boston. Near the Elm Creek path. It has deep canal like ditches on each side of it that are engineered to empty into Zink Lake right next to the largest undeveloped piece of real estate on the river, the Blair Mansion. It crosses over into West Tulsa where the city owns a huge parcel of land soon to be vacated.  

Put water into it. This shallow canal could be tastefully, designed for low impact usage of electric ferryboats connecting restaurants and shopping areas as well as gathering spots on both sides of the river. It could connect with both an Elm Creek branch as well as a Crow Creek branch. It is separated from most of the neighborhood on its upper reach by high sides. As it drops it becomes higher than the surrounding hood and would need to be walled off. It can be done if we have the guts.

Your insight about the relationship between railroad tracks and streams is brilliant. You see the same thing with the Frisco and Sand Springs tracks through downtown -- they follow the underground course of Cat Creek until they reach the river, at which point the SSRR veers west to Sand Springs and the Frisco goes across the river to West Tulsa.

I was just looking at a satellite image of the Maple Ridge area, wondering where Swan Creek emerges into the river. This tributary starts at Swan Lake and heads southwest, and you can see the above-ground remnants of it in Woodward Park's pond. My suspicion is that it follows Owasso Ave.'s diagonal path until it reaches the old Midland Valley ROW.

[booWorld]

^ Swan Creek is piped below the Sunset Terrace neighborhood.  Some of the streets there are laid out along the creek, and there are a couple of small triangular parks near the creek's intersection with Norfolk Avenue.

I've wondered for a long time if Swan Creek could be exposed to create a small water feature in the larger of the two triangles.  The neighborhood is nice enough with the subsurface creek, but I think it could be even better with the water flowing at the surface as it does through the corner of Woodward Park.

[waterboy]

I am heartened by your responses. It seems to me this plan requires less risk, less money, has more potential return, and utilizes standard engineering. If SS and Jenks want to build the low water dams, then do so at their own expense. That may be why they are so pumped about the existing plan anyway, because we will pay for 70% of it, yet we have the lowest potential return. I guess this would reverse that formula. If they build them, they pay and we get the better return. However, we could still do the living river concept on our stretch of river.

To keep water in the creeks, and to maximize their potential, we could tie them all together at the river by digging a short canal that runs from Crow Creek, past the Midland Valley outlet (Swan Creek?) and ending at Elm Creek. This canal would capture water as the river rises each night. We then pump that water up to the head waters of each creek. It then flows back into the river during the day. On low flow days we could augment the flow using water wells which have always been easy to drill over there.
Of course we line the creeks with running paths and bike paths.

The result is that a visitor could enjoy dinner in the Pearl district, shopping in Brookside, a beer at Rivers Edge or music in SoBo then take a silent cruise through park settings to any of the other areas on the circuit. The boats could be weatherized for year round use. The impact to the neighborhoods is positive. The areas already have foot and bike traffic through these areas and the entertainment/commercial is limited to existing areas. Maybe new construction would be appropriate along them.

[waterboy]

I just jogged the course of the Midland Valley running path this morning. We just call it "the path". That's the one that starts at 18th & Cincinnati and continues to the pedestrian bridge at Riverside (about a mile). I tried to envision how it would work, where the crossovers/unders would be and the intersection with the Arkansas and the other creeks. It seems alarmingly uncomplicated. This is city park land so not much has been done to it. There would be very little utility re-routing, the housing sits pretty far back, the parking areas are in place on each end. Shopping, restaurant and available commercial at upper end.

This creek would travel over Riverside Drive (the road dips at this point) and deposit into the fountain area at the pedestrian bridge where it would flow into a canal. This canal would only need to carry water for about two blocks from the low water dam to Crow Creek.

At 19-21st & Riverside, where the mouth of the Elm Creek would empty, there is a straight path up 19th to Boulder, along the edge of Boulder Park, then upwards towards the start of the Midland Path Creek. Elm then runs up towards Pearl.

The result is a continuous water connection between three shopping/entertainment districts, Philbrook and near downtown. The water connection to Cherry Creek is more tenuous since that part of the river tends to dry up but offers similar potential on that side of the river. A wing dam could be built to hold and direct water that way for a year round connection to the other creeks.

MB, how was Neas's plan received in 1991 and why was it not acted on? Was it part of a funded study?

[pmcalk]

quote:Originally posted by booWorld

^ Swan Creek is piped below the Sunset Terrace neighborhood.  Some of the streets there are laid out along the creek, and there are a couple of small triangular parks near the creek's intersection with Norfolk Avenue.

I've wondered for a long time if Swan Creek could be exposed to create a small water feature in the larger of the two triangles.  The neighborhood is nice enough with the subsurface creek, but I think it could be even better with the water flowing at the surface as it does through the corner of Woodward Park.

A side note:  If you drive down Cincinnati, there is a lot with the foundations of a house & a stop work order attached.  I have heard that the foundation is directly over the sewer carrying Swan Creek, hence the stop work order.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by booWorld

^ Swan Creek is piped below the Sunset Terrace neighborhood.  Some of the streets there are laid out along the creek, and there are a couple of small triangular parks near the creek's intersection with Norfolk Avenue.

I've wondered for a long time if Swan Creek could be exposed to create a small water feature in the larger of the two triangles.  The neighborhood is nice enough with the subsurface creek, but I think it could be even better with the water flowing at the surface as it does through the corner of Woodward Park.

A side note:  If you drive down Cincinnati, there is a lot with the foundations of a house & a stop work order attached.  I have heard that the foundation is directly over the sewer carrying Swan Creek, hence the stop work order.

I wondered about that. A friend of mine owned a house that was built over Elm Creek on Detroit around 17th. The basement kept filling up with water. Finally, the city bought the house and razed it.

[pfox]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk


A side note:  If you drive down Cincinnati, there is a lot with the foundations of a house & a stop work order attached.  I have heard that the foundation is directly over the sewer carrying Swan Creek, hence the stop work order.

Doh!

[Conan71]

Waterboy-

I drove around the Cherry Creek area yesterday.  The creek running under Union south of 41st. is Red Fork Creek.  It merges with Cherry Creek just east of a point about 1/3 of the way down the northbound exit ramp from H 75 onto W. 41st.

I've never really taken much notice of this particular channel other than thinking of it as a large drainage ditch.  I drove back over into Reed Park and drove up Elwood to where there is a gravel road off the south side of the creek.  On the north side is a gravel trail, but there is a pipe gate in place.  I'm not sure if it's to keep vehicle traffic limited to stormwater management and pipeliners, or is intended to discourage pedestrians as well.  It's quiet and deserted.  That trail follows the contour of the creek around to west 41st St. just east of the Hwy 75 exit.

IOW- there is trail already there people could enjoy.  It might be it is okay to walk and bike back there but it's under-publicized and under-utilized.  Some enhancements like benches, additional trees, drinking fountains, or a pavillion or two could be added at minimal cost compared to other options which have to be created.  It could be a nice area to essentially "continue" the west bank trail.  Many people are likely not aware it exists.  I wasn't, and I've worked within a half mile of it for three years.  There is even a pedestrian underpass under the Elwood bridge.  There might never be demand for commercial entertainment development back there, but it could be useful for public gathering.  It's an interesting layout looking at it from Google Earth.

Back to the mid/downtown channels- I'll second Michael Bates' "brilliant" and raise it a "why haven't we done that?"

[waterboy]

I don't know why Mr. Neas was ignored. Perhaps my post above explains: "People who spout new ideas about river development have generally been marginalized during this process. The first reaction is "that can't be done", the next is "no one else wants that" followed by "that's too expensive". Then we see other cities doing it and we wonder how that happened. How many other potential ideas are out there that simply got ignored because of the momentum of the "dam the river" crowd? That is the fallacy of public input that the v2025 cabal touts."

I originally thumbnailed the concept of the Midland Valley creek to River Parks Authority staff back in 2002. Their response was simple. That will never work. End of discussion. When you look at who is now on the RPA board you get the feeling that would be in bold type now.

[Renaissance]

Waterboy - I don't mean to rain on your parade, but I don't think the Midland Valley Canal idea makes a whole lot of sense.  You'd basically have a canal going through people's backyards.  Not the most scenic route.  Whereas the Pearl District plan would have commerical areas fronting the canal, you'd have back fences.  Not to mention, we'd lose a great trail connection from midtown to the river.  

That said, I like the general idea of open canals when they can be incorporated into neighborhood developement.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Waterboy - I don't mean to rain on your parade, but I don't think the Midland Valley Canal idea makes a whole lot of sense.  You'd basically have a canal going through people's backyards.  Not the most scenic route.  Whereas the Pearl District plan would have commerical areas fronting the canal, you'd have back fences.  Not to mention, we'd lose a great trail connection from midtown to the river.  

That said, I like the general idea of open canals when they can be incorporated into neighborhood developement.

We wouldn't lose that connection. Run the path along the edge. Its a beautiful route that has a solitude to it that inspires and the commercial parts would be on each end leaving the path its character. At the beginning the yards are out of view over your head. Towards the river it is so heavily treed that the yards are hardly noticeable and few fences. Have you been on it recently?

Pearl would be good, Crow would be good too, Cherry has less potential but ...different strokes. Having all four would be the ticket.

Doesn't matter really. There are some squeaky wheels in that hood that would stake themselves to the path to stop it.

[Double A]

I still maintain Crow Creek is the best place to start, it already has nearby commercial, rooftops and access to some of Tulsa's best public parks, cultural and recreational attractions. We just have to do it in a way that is in character, scale, and harmony with existing neighborhoods. Besides, it is already exposed so it would be much  less difficult for the general public to picture whatever proposed development that might take place. City planning should do a crow creek plan like the the INCOG plan or the Lewis Infill Plan as a pilot program to implement so we can use it as a prototype for designing a plan for the other potential tributary developments within the city in the comprehensive plan update.

[YoungTulsan]

How would you do Crow Creek without razing the Legacy (Former Place One) apartments?  And how would it still be infill if you moved 500-1000 people out of the area?  You'd need a mid-rise residential structure or two to keep the same population levels up.  Not that that would be a bad thing, but would it happen?

(Im not saying screw the idea, Im just asking how would be the best way for it to work?)