The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Saw this posted on the RiverParks Facebook page and thought I'd bring it to everyone's attention. Apparently, some God-driven (seriously, God told him to put it there) developer wants to put an amusement park on/at Turkey Mountain.

(http://rexbrown.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/tulsa-harbour.jpg)

Apparently, the City knows about it, representatives know about it, and George Kaiser knows about it. All (it seems) are opposed so far.

Anyone have more information on it?

Turkey Mountain Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/turkeymountain (https://www.facebook.com/turkeymountain)

More on the story: http://maduko.com/2012/02/19/bad-river-development-idea-no-24/ (http://maduko.com/2012/02/19/bad-river-development-idea-no-24/)

Edit: I really want to know what the "Coliseum of Speed" is.

Turkey Mountain needs to be left the way it is.  I always remembered it as a landmark when I'd fly back in to RVS.  That and the Camelot Hotel (tower ATC would use that as a directional landmark, i.e. "fly direct to Camelot").  Not so much anymore...in the winter, 'fly the white tanks' was more prominent when the wind was out of the north.

While I would love to see a large amusement park built in Tulsa, I would hate to see Turkey Mountain developed in any commercial way. All that needs to be there is trails. For that reason I oppose this development, although I do applaud the concept of a developer trying to bring something to the river. I think other locations could possibly be considered (maybe) but not here.

I think God should leave Turkey Mountain the way he made it: as a large hill with some trees and trails and ponds on it (but no turkeys)

Had any of you been aware of the Petroglyphs?  From my reading, many mainstream archaeologists think these are hoaxes, but I'm curious...

http://www.tatur.org/Turkeycarvings.html

My favorite line from the blog that ran the story: "It must be classy because they put a U in harbor." Reminds me of our discussion about Shoppes and Towne Centres.

I wonder how far along this is; whether it's just a pretty drawing, or if the Council has had discussions about it and just not let the public in. I honestly don't see this going anywhere, though. Aside from the approvals and permits needed from the City Council and TMAPC, they'd also have to do an EIS and get approval from the Corps of Engineers. We all know how hard it is to develop anything in this town, let alone something like this.

And for that matter, what the hell is the "Coliseum of Speed"?

A quick Google investigation turned this up:

"Just learned of Kens death. What a racing tradegy. A friend for sure and he will be missed. Have known Ken for 40 years. He was the greatest. Had the opportunity working with him the least several months on the up and coming auto racing Museum here in Tulsa THE COLISEUM OF SPEED which will include a complete history of Ken and his work. What a shame. REST IN PEACE KEN!"

(source (http://coles.smugmug.com/Cars/Midget-Cars-1950s-60s/10717160_arkcK#!i=746505850&k=SzBJk))

If God is involved you just know its going to have some lions running around.

Urban Wilderness Area suits the description of Turkey Mountain so well.  I don't see this ever coming to fruition. 

Thanks for the link.  Ken Coles was an amazing photographer.  I'd often wondered if there were an on-line archive for his images.

The genesis of the now world-famous Chili Bowl Midget Nationals lies somewhat in that Astrodome midget show in 1969.

I wouldn't hate this is if it were further north.  If it were somewhere on zink lake (maybe a marina too) it would be great.  But that far south doesn't make any sense.

I feel you have just incurred the wrath of Aquaman....

I feel like I should make a justice league of america joke.  :D

If the area this fellow is talking about is the old sludge pits on the north side of the 71st St. bridge, it's not a bad land use for it.  However, It looks like he wants to build up into Turkey.

Even south of 71st St. would make good sense.

Well, surprise, surprise. An area that is attractive to one set of Tulsans, is also attractive to a developer who wishes to capitalize on that attractiveness.

My first thought was, yeah well, they should understand the track record of dealing with River Parks Authority. Then I read this post,

"POSSIBLE GREAT NEWS ! A good friend of ours talked with developer Tony Lombardi. Tatur Racing was informed that they are no longer interested in developing Turkey Mtn. Our source stated that Tony Lombardi said that River Parks makes the process difficult and that Kaiser was not interested in developing Turkey Mtn !! Kudos to River Parks Authority Tulsa and Kaiser !!

We were told that they are now looking at areas towards Jenks or Sand Springs. I don't think that we can or should, let our guard down, but we may be in the clear.......for this month !!"

Then I read the other link which notes the developers are only interested in the SW portion of the Southernmost end of the Turkey mtn trails. That is the area between the 71st street bridge and the end of the trails. That is a totally different picture than carving up Turkey Mountain for an amusement park. That actually isn't such a bad idea.

Turkey Mtn is one of my favorite places in Tulsa.  Most cities, especially in this part of the country, would kill to have something similar in the city limits.

But as we know from political discussion a little hyperbole mixed with misinformation is the best way to create fear and opposition.


The trails at Chandler Park are pretty cool as well, but fairly spooky because there's rarely anyone else out there on the trail section.

Right, and if we had more information, rather than an unconfirmed post here and there, it'd be a lot easier to judge the project. But there's no website or any kind of documentation other than personal conversations and a rendering.

Silly children. There is no justice league. Totally made up. Really. We aren't behind this development either.

Seriously, it isn't the first time an amusement park has been suggested around Zink or somewhere along the river. I don't think its the location that is important as it is the economics behind an amusement park anywhere. If they could get the land donated well, maybe. But building one along the side of a mountain is difficult for plains people.

They would have better luck attracting support if the the Jenks dam was already built and water backed up to that area. Even then....

A much better spot would have been the old Hissom site. Easy access, flat, water usually in that portion of the river and a supportive city nearby. It would draw from all over the region. Too late. It is now industrial.

Without details and firm commitments on financing, add this to the long list of grandiose Tulsa area development projects that consist of little more than a press release and a rough drawing capturing someone's fantasy.

It's probably a developer from Jenks wanting to get rid of the airport.  The more stuff they can put under the pattern, the easier it will be to claim the airport is too noisy.

 

...Not even a press release.

But the Tulsa World did pick up the story.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120220_334_0_MayorD4143 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120220_334_0_MayorD4143)

I suspect this is like the fully-enclosed NASCAR track up near Vinita that was supposedly under development about 10-15 years ago.

I've driven up Turkey Mountian a few times with my kids recently and if they want it to be a 'park' or 'natural' or whatever they're calling it, they need to move all the freaking rocks that block the parking lot. People on Saturdays are parking on those windy roads to the west and walking over to the trails while a big ole parking lot sits empty.

These images show the park by the river and the tracks, not on the Mountain so I'm not sure what the issue is.
I haven't been hiking there in 25 years but I don't recall any trails down to the river. You had to make your own and it you could get yourself in some precarious situations if you weren't careful.

So, parking is blocked off at the top yet they reference the location as if it is at the top and say they don't want to ruin the natural wildlife of the the mountain even though the park is down along with river?

I'm confused. Sounds like the City just doesn't want these people doing it.

On the other hand, can it really not be done along the west bank?

They could. The city has planned to move Public Works and that land would be a good fit. And, the cement plant land would be good although expensive. The repairs and improvements to the Zink dam will mean deeper water for longer periods. The new Whitewater below the dam would argue for the Public Works site being the best location right now. Of course the same complaints will abound about not spoiling park lands, paths and natural beauty, only add in noise pollution and traffic congestion. It is a little surprising to see how much opposition is forming for a plan with so few details. Its a wonder anyone bothers to propose river developments with all the hostility they seem to engender. Runners, bikers, hikers...chill. Those lands are not exclusively for your usage.

25 years is a long time. You should ride the trails and see for yourself how they have changed. I have ridden the paved one that runs along the lower part of the mountain along the railroad tracks. I love it. Someday I'll do the others. I can't imagine why people are not parking in the lots. Are the entryways too narrow?

The descent from Turkey Mountain to the river is almost like a roller coaster on a bike...what a blast.

The parking lot is blocked by...well, blocks of rocks.

so true.

Yes, it scared the beJesus uh, Santorum out of me the first time I did it downhill. Going up hill is a good workout.

But, why are the parking lots blocked with rocks? Is River Parks afraid too many people might use the area?

The old lot at where Elwood curves to the northwest is closed, and that may be the lot you're talking about... but the new lot closer to 71st is open and is quite nice, actually.

From the Riverparks website:


Seems plenty big enough to me.

That makes sense.

I suspect the cars at the top of Elwood Hill are people who are hiking or biking back toward the Y and don't want to have to climb out from the base lot.

I've seen a few hobo encampments there over the years.

I very much hope this project never goes anywhere. The parks along our river are the best part about this city in my opinion. I do not want it to be ruined with a bunch of development. In my ideal world, both the east and west banks would be lined with parks with development behind the parks, not right up against the bank.

Didn't they block off that lot to keep people from catching the gay?

Judging by some of the signs of wild-life up there (condoms, beer cans, clothing) there was some kind of happiness being spread.

So that's what they were spreading.......

See, that I don't understand. Ruined? Aesthetically having both sides lined with parks is a nice idea. In reality, aesthetics don't really do much for the bulk of the taxpaying public. You drive down Riverside and do a Chevy Chase, (yeh, uh-huh, yeh) and keep driving. Its like having a guest bathroom remodeled for Home and Garden magazine and never used.

Some of that natural aesthetic that we all pay for could be set aside for actual use by people other than runners, bikers, dogs and hobos. Something like an amusement park, boat rides, fishing, restaurants, etc. While some of it could be set aside for no development whatsoever. We have started down that path by having an assortment of activities like the Aquarium, a hotel, sand volleyball, soccer fields, frisbie course, rugby field, skate park, some shopping, and restaurant/bars besides the paths.

I would think an amusement park would be one more general population use that we could accommodate on the 40miles of river bank.

I believe the correct phrase is "spreading santorum".

I use a drop spreader each year on my front lawn to get rid of that....creeping santorum. It stays dormant through most of the season then surges when springtime comes. Some folks say you can romney it and it will go away, but I have my doubts.

Didn't realize that they had bulldozed Hissom, knew that it was going to be done. As was pointed out there is a long stretch of the river that could be developed this way and would hate to see it be Turkey Mtn. But just my $.02 it looks rather lofty in the rendering much like the Channels project. Don't get me wrong, I think an amusment park development would be great, and it sounds like Robbie Bell is confined to kiddie rides at a swapmeet parking lot, I see at as an ambituous dream.

And that is becoming an industrial site as Webco is building a new plant there.

Could boat rides and fishing not tie into parks? I don't believe I suggested (sorry if I did) that the parks on either side have to be trails. I would like to see trails incorporated into them, but I would love to see them be large, engaging parks, not just trails. Things like boat rides, fishing docks, volleyball courts, frisbee courses, skate parks, and even a small restaurant here and there could all be tied in with the parks, and ideally they would become a place that families would spend their weekend afternoons.

And perhaps I'm just naive, but why do people need to live, work, shop, etc. as close to the river as possible? I do not see the draw of having these things right against the water itself, vs them abutting lush and interactive parks. Do that many people really want to live on the river?

I see that when you say development you mostly mean housing and shopping. I didn't catch that at first.

People want to live next to visually attractive and/or unique vistas. Often that means a pond, a lake, a river, a skyline. I even have had people on canoe trips on the Arkansas gush over the sight of the refinery towers as foreground to the skyline just as evening light dims. It adds a little seasoning to your life.

I don't think that area would be a good place for an amusement park.  I like to think that there is some sort of general, over all master plan/vision for the River Parks that envisions having areas of all sorts available, aka. "untouched" wilderness, to "cleaned up" parkland, semi-developed parkland, to higher density development.  

There are areas that lend themselves more to each type and this does not really fit that scenario.  

Also, like people have mentioned, there are a lot of parties involved with this piece of property from River Parks to INCOG to the city, Kaiser, the Master Plan, etc. And to think that these developers would consider this obviously very difficult and "political" area makes me wonder about the depth of their research/thoughs on this project and their thoroughness as business people.  Are they serious people dedicated to the idea, or someone with some "fun" dreams and the money to get some drawings done?

did you know this area they describe is next to the bridge, over old acid pits and not really available for current use? Untouched would be a good description.

.

+1 ( with the caveat that I'm not a big supporter of the government taking broker/ownership roles in private enterprises)

I visualize that Ferris wheel over on the west side by the refinery on 23rd as one looks northeast out onto our skyline as they ride. From here sitting on the east side, it would be more visually attractive than anything else over on the west side.

It would be nice to put them on other TDA land that was Evans above the Brady/OSU campus or the east end...

Who are these developers/users? Jimmy Dejarnette?

I thought they were just drying beds for sewage sludge. Essentially compost heaps.

The site plan that newson6.com shows does not depict this to be contained to the bottom of the mountain. Seeing the site plan has made me even more against this. "Minimally intrusive"...yeah right!

This is a really good point. This fact together with the fact that this project is so big and came out of nowhere make me really pessimistic that it is has legitimate potential. I really, really, really want to see a good amusement park come to Tulsa, but I hope they can utilize a location that won't immediately land them in a political hotseat. It's unfortunate that so many people are trying to compare this project with Frontier City and Bell's, it just goes to show how entertainment starved our community is when they define "amusement park" by these shady examples. Kemah boardwalk down in Houston is a really good example of a classy amusement park/entertainment district done right like this could be.

I didn't know Turkey Mountain had such a vibrant following until today. In some ways this is really good publicity for the park and the hiking/cycling community assuming their park isn't chopped up. I was ecstatic to hear the plans and thought that those opposed were being typical Tulsans at first, but now I'm also somewhat opposed to the location and I hope they can relocate. I'm also planning on actually checking out the trails at TM sometime.

Getting back to the development itself, regardless of location, it looks too idealistic to be true. There's so much retail space and so much lodging. I really doubt that this attraction will become an anchor so fast that these elements will do good business. It seems very much like a "build it and they will come" strategy, which has pretty much never worked, especially here. As far as the amusement/water park goes, the water park is actually much larger than the amusement park judging from the plans. It looks like there are a few roller coasters shoved inbetween the shops and the water park, but the vast majority of the area is taken up by parking, the water park, and the shops.

Not trying to compare Phoenix to Tulsa, but there are some similar places, or a mix of places that might be a good fit for Tulsa. In Phoenix you have http://www.castlesncoasters.com/1CNC/index.html (http://www.castlesncoasters.com/1CNC/index.html) and http://www.golfland.com/mesa/ (http://www.golfland.com/mesa/) that are really good draws for amusement parks. Phoenix for years has wanted to get a Six Flags style of park based on the fact that it would be a draw not only from residents, but because of the mild winters, would be a draw during "snowbird" season during the months of October to May. While the three major water parks are closed during that time, Castles and Coasters is open year round. The biggest issue is, that a major park won't locate there because of all of the parks that are in southern California from Six Flags/Magic Mountain to Sea World in San Diego. Even Gaylord Entertainment is hesitant about building in the area. The biggest issue I see, and I grew up in Tulsa, is the fact that Bell's and Big Splash have always had a very limited season, and with the weather in OK for some features of a park you are limited in the time you can operate certain rides. The ideal thing (jmo) would be for someone to open a park that could operate year round, and I really don't think that Turkey Mountain is the place, nor out somewhere between BA and Coweta. Just me, if the area around the west bank between Westport and the 23rdst bridge were are different area it would be an ideal place. I have always thought that area would be a great place for development, but it has been stunted for the last 40 years.

Is it not clear why they chose this location?

I drive over this bridge each morning 5 days a week. This is what I see. A huge development at Tulsa Hills, new Medical Clinics, burgeoning Jenks, South Berryhill, easy to drive I-75, Jenks Airport, and  most all of Southwest Tulsa are easily within reach of this location and that's just on the west side of the river. On the East side is the densest population of apartments in the city, the 71st street corridor and high demos of South Tulsa.

I drive over the 23rd street bridge each morning as well. I see, and smell, refineries, lots of tanker trucks coming and going, a concrete plant, lots of cement trucks coming and going, dense subsidized housing, a tie up on Southwest Boulevard, Tulsa Refuse truck center, lots of trash trucks coming and going, Tulsa Public Schools Bus lot, (do I need to say it?),no retail to speak of and a history of failed amusement undertakings.  Good demographics on the east side of the river but difficult for traffic to cross on 66 or 23rd and then negotiate traffic to the RPA lands because of the railroad overpass, the undivided bridge and the tracks themselves.

Don't get me wrong. I love the view from each of these places and my choice would be the land between the river and Public Works, but as far as a development, the Turkey Mtn. site is loads better. It is convenient, unused, is near the part of the river where the Jenks dam will back up and provides another chance at water park development.

The same arguments offered about Turkey have been voiced about development south of 23rd on Westbank as well. I suppose the Blair site will also face them even though it is mostly private. Let the plans be discussed but don't kill it outright.

Since (strangely enough?) Mr. Robbie Bell turned up at the public meeting, I suspect he knows more than he's saying to the press. He was probably at the meeting to judge public reaction. That's my opinion (as is all of this post).

If the county won't have anything to do with the Bells; I opine Robbie could be trying to cover his tracks by going through a third party [developer].

I don't think it's an accident Bells has yet to open at the Flea Market and Robbie Bell was attending this meeting. Who likes to move an amusement park twice?

And, I don't think Robbie's attendance at this meeting was about "competition".  Two kiddie rides aren't going to make much money whether or not he has another amusement park to contend with as a competitor.

One shouldn't demean others peoples hard work with such reasoning. You are surely aware of the difficulty of starting something new from scratch and the myriad of elements at play.

The parties you listed, with the exception of Kaiser, have not exactly excelled at timely, thoughtful, logical, exploitation of the lands under their purview. Political is a good word to describe them all. Without Kaiser's money and stature we would still be running perverts off the paths at Turkey and 41st/Riverside while stumbling over potholes on the bike paths as the river banks eroded under them.

I assure you from the times I met Frisbee, he is a serious real estate player and a thorough man. I am not aware of the other two but when they spoke of the difficulty of working with River Parks Authority I knew they were not naive. My take is that they pretty much bypassed Meyer knowing they weren't well connected enough and he has responded in a typically bureaucratically petty way without regard to all parties interests. That has become the modus operandi of that authority. Heck, any authority.

I saw the same silent development course on the Islands proposals and they were some sharp, thorough business people. The idea just wasn't doable. Whether this plan sucks or not its a lot of work to even get this far. And as far as fitting the scenario of plans for the river, I seem to remember these types of uses were envisioned.

Good insight. I know from as far back as 2006 I was aware of some guys who wanted to build an amusement park over on the West Bank and were trying to get a welder friend of mine to commit funds to it. They had experience in amusement park operation. It never came to anything. If I were considering building one here I would want to include Bell type characters for their first hand knowledge. Even bad experience is experience!

If Robbie wants to do a new amusement park, he should just take over the RiverWalk thing and re-do it.  It already has all the power/utilities he would need, so he can fail just like they did in a place that doesn't mess up an otherwise nature filled area (sort of).  Why keep moving to a new location to trash it out - just rebuild over the previously used area...

Here's the siteplan from KOTV.com:

(http://kotv.images.worldnow.com/images/16977660_BG1.jpg)

I'd like to know what they mean by "minimally invasive", since the parking lot, which is bigger than the entire complex, is situated on a steep incline all the way up the hill and all the way north to the brand new trailhead built by GKFF. Maybe they're thinking of a different Turkey Mountain? The view from the east side would be the park followed by a mountain of parking. Wow, stunning.

Story: http://www.newson6.com/story/16977660/proposed-turkey-mountain-amusement-park-draws-opposition-at-tulsa-town-hall (http://www.newson6.com/story/16977660/proposed-turkey-mountain-amusement-park-draws-opposition-at-tulsa-town-hall)

Yea, looking at that pic, I have issues.

Yuck.

Move it on north people!
Or, do they not want it on the west bank because of some the ideas on the table for the east side?

A. Move it to 21st
B. Move it to 41st
C. Move the parking lot to the other side of 71st and only develop the flat land at the base of TM

I can't tell how far the park extends to the North. It just isn't that clear on the map. Does anyone know if it extends as far North as the current parking lots at the base of the hill?

It seems there is a lot of exaggerated fear being expressed. When people talk about a development as being "Scary" like the quote from Ms Culpepper, I start to be doubtful. No one is promoting defiling Turkey Mountain. BTW, that railroad line is barely used.  

I like C mr. Grizz.

I've taken a topographic view of the area and put the siteplan next to it. I've tried to correct for size and put them on an equal scale but it's hard to do with the siteplan because it was a photo taken at an angle and there aren't many other markers on it. But here's my guess, and I don't know how in the world they plan on doing this...

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7070/6917749309_99048d8823_o.jpg)

And they call that 'minimally invasive'?  Compared to what?

Hiroshima...Nagasaki...Dresden

If the shaded part represents the area they are wanting to develop...they are delusional.

I would almost bet Robbie Bell and Jimmy DeJarnette know each other from the Tulsa fairgrounds.

While there at it, why not build an island in the river with all the material they would remove from TM, and develop more housing and shopping there as well? Who needs an airport out there in Jenks anyway, they could turn it into upscale shopping and dining. They could tie it all together as a new district and have a regional draw that would attract thousands of people to come and spend money, it would be the greatest thing since sliced bread!

Isn't there a rail line running right through the middle of that too?

Some of that parking would be at 45 degree angles on the side of the mountain. Or they would have to pull a Tulsa Hills and just level the whole thing. This isn't just a bad plan, it's stupid and not thought out.

Sorry for late reply, but for sure it sounds like you haven't seen the new trailhead and parking for Turkey Mountain which was moved a couple of years ago further down the hill.  You definitely should take your kids back and check out the upgrades, including great restroom facilities and some bouldering rocks for the little ones.

Don't know why anyone would start at the top now.

That still bugs me.  My wife and I were talking about how pleasant it would be if it was actually "hilled"...with something called a "view".  Then I finished my panera, got back in my car, pointed it at pedestrians and moved on.

My daughter, who was 9 or 10 at the time, cried when they burned the forest that was on that hill.

It was done again South of 81st.

I know!!!  Let's re-elect Randi Miller to County Commissioner.  Then Robbie Bell can develop the site plan and spend the money on the preliminaries, then the county can give it to Murphy to develop.

That RR goes to Kimberly Clark.  It is also part of the future commuter/light rail route to Jenks and eventually to Bixby.

That site plan is so jacked up in so many ways it's not even worth addressing.

This is a joke, and not even a funny one.

I'm confused why the backers say this is the only spot they will consider.  The land south of the Creek Turnpike is mostly cleared and waiting to be developed (I'm assuming that $1 billion project is not going to happen).  This spot has everything the Turkey Mountain site has without the need to minimally invade a nature park.

These folks may have spent a lot of money putting this "plan" together, but something about it just doesn't sound legit.

Tulsa Hills and surrounding area development must have something to do with it.

Didn't someone mention God telling him to do it?

They don't have the money.  Just some attention whore who got a free copy of "Site Plan Rendering Lite" with a connection at the newspaper.

Looks like I need to make a trip up there this weekend; camera in tow...

What about on the other side of the bridge south of 71st on Riverside Drive. It's an even better location with excellent street access, no security issues with a police station across the street. The two sites can't be 2000 feet apart. The site is flat and potentially huge reaching from 71st to as far south to the Casino at 81st with only one apartment complex and Helmrich park in the way. You could easily just build behind them. You would have almost a mile of waterfront.

Anyone think we're having a come-apart about something that has no chance of happening?

Seriously...we're talking about

A) an amusement park in Tulsa
B) river development in Tulsa
C) Robby Bell is involved

I think we should all go back to one of our award winning political threads and crap on it.

Don't bend over to tie your shoes.

I don't have shoes that tie.  Also, I'll kick my keys to the river before picking them up if I drop them...

Velcro? Just like Biden?

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_v81YUTe-7Bs/SeCdYV3wGrI/AAAAAAAABH4/SQ0q_-uq8xA/s400/biden_001.jpg)

No worries, I never see any blatant untoward activity or, ahem, telltale signs of it when I'm up there. 

Now, there's some insight.

You could have mentioned something about Mayor McFly.

Stava was on tonight's news (many here are indulging for Fat Tuesday) and said that the home owner (Bruford?) was going to be moving the mansion off the Blair property to one of his properties.

Also, neighbor's along the border of the Blair property received a notification/mailing over the weekend. The first step in rezoning is to survey the adjacent owners to find out the level of resistance.

I'd guess this project is 5-20 years off into the future.

Wrong thread, perhaps?

No, the Blair property is the one in question for GKFF's gathering place, so this is the right place.

Stava was also on KWGS this morning, talking about the public input forums to be held in March at the TCC Center for Creativity.

This isn't the thread about the Blair property.

I could've sworn I clicked on "A Gathering Place". How weird! Maybe admin is playing tricks with the links ;).

There's never much need for me to defend my statements! :D

So even you know they are indefensible and not worth the time trying to defend them.
 
 ;D

Thanks for the info!

Sure thing Damon ;)

(golden!)

Ha!
Seems you have me at a disadvantage  ;)

Hurricane!

From your comment, I can tell you haven't been out there in the past ten years! Turkey Mountain is already a jewel to Tulsa The only activity up there now is Family's hiking, runners and mountain bikers. Those other activity's are in the past. So lets leave them there!

Scott

No, you just missed my dry sense of humor.  8)

Actually, I'm a very active cyclist, road, mountain, & CX and ride all over TM and around it. 

FAIL-where is the so-called developer named in this bad pipe dream? No name=fail. Kinda even pisses me off that a media outlet would run a crap story as this w/out disclosing the "developer". We as a nation need less of this type of hype.

The developer's name is Jimmy DeJarnette. You can read a little from him here: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120221_16_A1_CUTLIN381030

Part of the reasons that the developers are being quiet right now is that this all blew up in their face before they were ready. Somehow somebody associated with Turkey Mountain ran into one of the developers, got a photo of the plans, and within a day all the news stations and area activists are up in arms over the proposal. They're probably biding their time until things cool down and the city is more willing to break a deal. We'll see if he's true to his word about not doing it in another location. If he's serious and push comes to shove, he'll move it up or down the river eventually. We'll see if this proposal actually survives a few more months though.

He's a novice from what you say. See, it's amazing how much trouble crayons can cause....

Cool  8)

Here's an interesting message from the developer: http://tatur.org/tatur-tulsa-harbor-prop.pdf

Interesting how he talks about things like a trolley stop using the existing rail line to go back and forth from downtown Tulsa... kinda sad. I really want something like this developed for Tulsa, why can't we get somebody grounded in reality to do it?

Now he wants the south side of 71st, wants the city to lease him the land and move the wastewater treatment plant. No big deal.

It would be nice to see this developer take an interest in projects in Tulsa.
My apologies if this article has been posted elsewhere.

---

New Marina for Lake Keystone

By John Durkee   

Work is getting under way on a new 450-boat slip marina at Keystone Lake. The facility is being built on the north side of Mannford.

Tulsa Mayor Dewey Bartlett is taking part in the dedication ceremony. He says Lake Keystone is an economic development tool for Tulsa.

The new facility will feature heated fishing docks as well as an upscale restaurant. It is being built by the same developer who created the Cross Timbers at Skiatook Lake. it is being built on Army Corp of Engineers' property under a public/private partnership

I would love to actually see this guy sit down and try to explain the "conceptual" master plan of his development and how that giant surface parking lot would not destroy a large chuck of forest and terrain north of 71st between the river and elwood. If he wants to build this on the site of where the museum was supposed to go that's great. If he wants to lease the area where the water treatment facility is and he pays enough up front for the city to build a new one, then great, let him lease that area. If he expects the city to finance the new waste treatment facility, what happens in 5 years and this place goes belly up? Then the city just wasted a ton of money it didn't have to I say no to giving him a lease on that land. Here's an idea for the developer, build some parking garages instead of the GIANT nature killing surface parking lots shown and people probably wouldn't have been so upset about this proposal.

The key fact in the statement was the proposed museum covered 40 acres, this plan covers 95 acres.  And he's not asking for any public moneys to be spent, well, except for moving a wastwater treatment plant and movig one of Turkey Moutain's trails.  Oh, and the whole thing is "non-profit."

Put this on the self with all the other grandiose plans that are not serious and will never come to fruition.

Oops, I've been placing these in a bin rather than a shelf...my bad.

Anyone have any guesses on what a new wastewater treatment plant might cost? Even if you could find a location. It can't be cheap.

I prefer the shelf because like the visual image of all the plans from the past....

I put them in the recycle bin because it seems the crazy donkey ideas always pop back up.

Any more word on this "project"   where is he looking now

I think its now slated to be part of newts moonbase.

I am sure he can do this project at another site.

That sounds like a magical place. I hope they have a petting zoo with unicorns.

I doubt he could do it anywhere, even if someone were to straight up give him a piece of land and all the permissions. The more I look at this whole ordeal the less I trust these developers from a professional standpoint. Sloppy work all around.

It's a shame too, because again, I'm a huge fan of amusement parks and entertainment centers. This state has yet to see one built and managed the right way.

I'd say at this point his goose is pretty much cooked and there is no where to go with this proposal. All those supposed years of work for nothing.

You may be right. And the consequence is that any other amusement park development now carries the burden of his sloppiness. Its hard enough to get people to listen to good ideas around here unless you have tons of money or a foundation behind you. This just makes it even harder.

Gilbert Arizona built one in the las decade, opened in 2009, with a capacity of 24MGD (million gallons/day) expandable to 48MGD for $102million dollars. Took about three years to build.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/2009/06/08/20090608gr-waterplant0610.html (http://www.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/2009/06/08/20090608gr-waterplant0610.html)

http://www.gilbertaz.gov/pw/pdf/SVWTPBrochure0709.pdf (http://www.gilbertaz.gov/pw/pdf/SVWTPBrochure0709.pdf)

Wastewater plants cannot be just easily moved around. You also have to move the pipes that feed the plant. Everything comes into play. Elevation matters and if you have to make water go uphill, you have to add pump stations too.

I smell Red Herring.

1. The location is 100% unworkable, and would never gain approval.
2. The location is designed to get the people up-in-arms.
3. There was a plan circulating around several years ago for a harbor with all of the same features floated by a jenks developer that would have required the purchase of land owned by the Creeks.
4. If moved north or south of this location, this thing could work.  Therefore, I think that is the intension.

Great way to get lots of free publicity and "watchers" for your project without spending any money.  I suspect an announcement that "after input from the community, the developer is exploring options to move the project to ________."  At that point there will be rejoicing, back-patting and everyone will feel like a winner. Of course that's only if there is actually the potential for funding.

Please explain about your comment... sloppy work all around?   

Have you been following this project at all? Look through the pages of this thread. They chose a terrible location that not only is poorly suited for their project but also riled up half of Tulsa against them, their planning is obviously terrible, and their communications make them sound like they are all insane. Even the project itself doesn't make sense if you pull it apart. The amusement and water parks aren't going to attract nearly enough people to make all that lodging space feasible, and the retail space is going to have a hard time doing well seeing as so many other locations like this are doing poorly already. I don't see that racecar museum doing all that great here either. Never mind the fact that to do all this they have to bulldoze a mountain first.

I would use explosives.

Simple question... didnt mean to touch a nerve.    :)