Questions regarding the River Development

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by ttown_jeff
Just so this doesn't get lost.  I didn't bring the roads up.  I made a statement which was in context with the response that I replied to.  The acutal statement is irrefutable. Roads add value to property.  Otherwise, there would be no use for the terms "unimproved" and "improved."  It follows then, that a well maintained road adds value to property more than a poorly maintained road.

No it does not follow, please provide an example of when property values have been impacted by the quality of the maintenance of a road.

quote:Originally posted by ttown_jeff
So if there is a red herring, I didn't introduce it, and it was aggravated by you Swake, when you started drawing minute   distinctions in a somewhat minor point to a very broad subject "roads" that I made about someone else's theory.

Maybe you need to reread your own blog then

quote:Originally posted by ttown_jeff
Great cities from the beginning of time are built on their transportation and  infrastructure.  There are thousands of years of precedent on that.  There is little comparative precendent for betting the farm on liesure pork projects, unless you are talking about Vegas, and Branson. We are neither.

Again, our infrastructure is outstanding. We have an excellent and simple roadway system that moves traffic better than almost any other city in the world. What exactly other than moving people is the purpose of roads? The purpose is not to be smooth, that is simply a desired feature. We do very well in other elements of infrastructure as well: We have good and plentiful water, cheap electricity and natural gas. The majority of the schools and school districts in the area are good. You are complaining about the actual physical maintenance of the roadway system, not the actual build, design or functionality of that roadway system. And the part of that system that is in the worst repair is completely outside of local control or budgeting.

I would also put to you that a big part of the reason for the insufficient maintenance for the part that is under city controlled is due to the lack of real growth in Tulsa in nearly a decade which has led to a tight operational budget, which would be positively impacted by this plan.

I would further put to you that most of the great cities of the world have absolutely miserable roadway systems that are completely overwhelmed. London, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington are all completely gridlocked. A strong case can be made that great cities are due at least in part to the density that is driven by their lack of a functioning road system.

[ttown_jeff]

1. When a road is made from a dirt road to a paved road; When a road is widened to handle more traffic; When a bridge is raised so that a truck can go under it.  Those all add value.  That's how they make suburbs.

2.  My blog is independent from this thread.

3.  Whether or not we have traffic jams may be somewhat relevant.  But you again are changing the point.

The big cities have traffic jams because they have business and population, neither of which we have.  But the people in the cities built all the fun and modern stuff after all the people were already there.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by ttown_jeff

1. When a road is made from a dirt road to a paved road; When a road is widened to handle more traffic; When a bridge is raised so that a truck can go under it.  Those all add value.  That's how they make suburbs.

2.  My blog is independent from this thread.

3.  Whether or not we have traffic jams may be somewhat relevant.  But you again are changing the point.

The big cities have traffic jams because they have business and population, neither of which we have.  But the people in the cities built all the fun and modern stuff after all the people were already there.

No, you are confusing the point because you just don't like my argument and you have no facts to dispute it.

You want to say we need to improve infrastructure. Fine. Where are we lacking?

Tulsa does not have a big backlog of needed improvements on any type of physical infrastructure. It doesn't exist. Are there places we would like to improve roads, certainly, but we have zero large scale traffic problems, what exactly else are you wanting from our roads system that would require large amounts of money? Again, the purpose of a road system is to move people, and ours does an outstanding job.

What we have is a backlog of needed maintenance, but that is a very different beast than some massive list of needed road improvements. We certainly should perform the needed repairs, but, doing these repairs will NOT do anything to improve Tulsa's economy. It will not improve traffic flow or access; it will not improve property values. And again, I would say that outside of our state and federal highway system our repair needs are not dire for the most part either.

I have asked you over and over to provide a single example where our roads, or any other lacking in physical infrastructure have cost the location of a single job, and you have been unable to do so. My own brother left because he thought it was boring here and took his advanced degree with him

I can provide a LONG list of people that left because of that.

[TheArtist]

I can add to that list quite a few people I know as well. They would have made great taxpayers to help pay for the roads too. When Tulsa was losing population, they werent all moving to the suburbs.

[CoffeeBean]

Can someone please clarify if the River Tax includes a ped bridge at 41st?  

And by, "includes a ped bridge," I mean an actual bridge - not a study about a bridge, not partial funding for a bridge to await future matching funds - but an actual, real, walkable  bridge?  

If so - has a decision been made regarding its location, i.e., where will this bridge sit in relation to 41st st. proper?  

While I desperately want to vote in favor of the plan, I cannot, in good conscience, vote in favor of obstructing a future vehicular connection to the west bank - a connection already recognized in Arkansas River Corridor Master  Plan.

[CoffeeBean]

Interesting bridge examples:

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

Can someone please clarify if the River Tax includes a ped bridge at 41st?  

And by, "includes a ped bridge," I mean an actual bridge - not a study about a bridge, not partial funding for a bridge to await future matching funds - but an actual, real, walkable  bridge?  

If so - has a decision been made regarding its location, i.e., where will this bridge sit in relation to 41st st. proper?  

While I desperately want to vote in favor of the plan, I cannot, in good conscience, vote in favor of obstructing a future vehicular connection to the west bank - a connection already recognized in Arkansas River Corridor Master  Plan.

Yes the proposal includes an actual pedestrian bridge and sufficient funds to do something special, likely not as special as some of the interesting designs you show given the spans required for our river but definitely much better than a box.  I believe the renderings show the actual bridge alignment to be offset to the South from the 41st street alignment.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Vision 2025

I believe the renderings show the actual bridge alignment to be offset to the South from the 41st street alignment.

That would still allow for a future vehicle bridge, I hope...

I read that QT is designing and putting some of their money into 41st St and plan on doing it quickly.

[pmcalk]

That's another good question--if a pedestrian bridge is done at 41st, will an automobile bridge still be possible in the future?  I have heard two answers.  One is that it is something that can be done at some point in the future.  The other, the redesign of the park/gathering space at 41st will preclude an automobile bridge at anytime, that some didn't want an automobile bridge cutting through the park, and that was the reason it was dropped from the plan.  Can anyone shed any light on that?

[Tony]

Hello Pro proponents -this is ANTI typing -- The Arkansas Thru Tulsa is a braided Prairie river -- its not the upper Canadian (in OKC) its not the Mississippi, Missouri etc. It is what it is -- why are we not celebrating what our river is? Why are we trying to make it over into something it is not nor will ever be?

It will be an ecological disaster for our river if current development plans succeed -- its GREAT that in this discourse people are actually talking about our Water Resource through Tulsa  - we also have to remember this river is important to ALL OKLAHOMANS and not just the development groups -- please be thorough in you study of the plans for the river, read what has been written about the 230 year History for low head dams, then judge for yourself how you should vote Oct. 9.

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by Tony

Hello Pro proponents -this is ANTI typing -- The Arkansas Thru Tulsa is a braided Prairie river -- its not the upper Canadian (in OKC) its not the Mississippi, Missouri etc. It is what it is -- why are we not celebrating what our river is? Why are we trying to make it over into something it is not nor will ever be?

It will be an ecological disaster for our river if current development plans succeed -- its GREAT that in this discourse people are actually talking about our Water Resource through Tulsa  - we also have to remember this river is important to ALL OKLAHOMANS and not just the development groups -- please be thorough in you study of the plans for the river, read what has been written about the 230 year History for low head dams, then judge for yourself how you should vote Oct. 9.

The Arkansas ceased being a prairie river when Keystone was built.  It is a hydro power river as evident by the on/off nature of the generation regime.  No prairie river sees flow daily flow extremes of the magnitude that the Arkansas through Tulsa sees.   This is why the Army Corps of Engineers is involved in the Arkansas River corridor Master Plan work because they know that by today's standards they screwed up the river environment with the construction of a flood control/power generation/navigation project.

[Tony]

I know the "FACTS"as Vision proponents would LIKE them to be -- kinda like statistics there are statistics then there are damn statistics,

I LISTEN to the SCIENTISTS like US Fish And Wildlife and Oklahoma Department of Wildlife, USACE has screwed up just about every waterway they have ever gotten their hands on  --  BILLIONS of US Taxpayer dollars have been spent remediating the ecological damage USACE has done over the years.

With those FACTS who ya gonna TRUST

INCOG and the development groups including INCOG, PMg, Kaiser are in bed, USACE is not as impartial as they should be in this proposal, construction keeps the colonel in business.

SO yep that VISION 2025 group --thru "The looking glass"  NO is the vote.

[sgrizzle]

What about the Corps of Engineers?

Keep in mind it was "scientists" who signed off on the Channels plan that could've flooded West Tulsa.

[Lorax]

--------------
ByVision2025
"The Arkansas ceased being a prairie river when Keystone was built. It is a hydro power river as evident by the on/off nature of the generation regime."
--------------------
Please prove your statement that the Arkansas is not a prairie river because the intermittent flow excludes it from that definition.  The Arkansas River downstream from Keystone dam, and above it, is a Prairie River Ecosystem.  The key word is Ecosystem.  Ecosystems are NOT defined by one characteristic, such as intermittent water flow, but are affected by them.  Ecosystems are defined by many variables.

[RecycleMichael]

The Corps of Engineers never signed off on the Channels plan.

Please Tony...USACE is not as impartial as they should be in this proposal, construction keeps the colonel in business.

Stop making unfounded accusations against federal employees that you have probably never met. You have lost all credibility making statements like that.