There's a lot of land being opened up on the east side of Riverside south of 81st.
The giant parking lot is owned by the Creek Nation, and it's not on the river.
A big piece has been cleared in the last couple of weeks south of the apartment complex across the street from the casino.
That property is owned by the City of Tulsa is is storm water collection, and is also separated from the river by Creek Nation land.
The old mobile home park south of there is also for sale. Both plots of land extend from Riverside over to Lewis and between the two that's well over a half a mile of land riverfront available from 84th to the Southwoods location at 91st.
The property isn't on the river, is separated from the River by Creek Nation Land, doesn't have access to Riverside Drive, and doesn't abut Lewis (it has access easements over Little Joe Creek through other peoples land). 19.5 acres that has been a mobile home park since 1970 and is sandwiched between "affordable" apartments, run down commercial, and an Indian Casino. It is currently valued at $100k an acre. I don't see the value or development of that land exceeding $100million because there is water in a river just on the other side of the casino.
Then there's another half a mile of riverfront land actually on the water south of 101st to where the dam would be located.
The dam is supposed to go in at 103rd street. There is very little land between 101st and 103rd street - 2 acres maybe?
Then of course there's the concrete plant and city land at 21st on the west bank.
Which has had "water in the river" for 40 years and still hasn't been developed.
The water pool doesn't extend a full three miles up stream. By 71st street, it's played out. You can't build multi-story near Jone's Riverside Airport - and most of the land there is owned by either the Creek's or the Tulsa Airport Improvement Trusts anyway. Redoing Zink dam, while needed and I support, I don't expect to bring new development by knocking down the refinery, plowing under parkland, or doing what the concrete plant could have done at anytime in the last few decades.
I think you're proving my point. Other than park land, land that has been on a portion of the river fulled with water for decades, Jenks land, and Creek Nation land... there isn't really land in Tulsa that can be developed to take advantage of water in the river. I'm not trying to be a nay sayer, I[m trying to be pragmatic. I just don't see it.