|
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Double A on February 02, 2009, 11:19:25 pm PUBLIC HEARING
Please find attached a Notice from Public Works Engineers regarding a Tuesday Public Hearing of the latest designs for the Pearl District's 6th St. Canal and stormwater system. This project is critical to public safety and to the social and economic revitalization of the Pearl District, just east of Downtown Tulsa. It is probably among most creative and progressive stormwater solutions in the nation, and among the most innovative yet designed by the City of Tulsa's Public Works team - recognized nationally for their stormwater management systems. We believe it is also critical to re-defining Tulsa as a livable, sustainable city (financially and environmentally) in the 21st. Century. The Pearl District Association is leading the way in: (1) Progressive land use policy (piloting 'form-based' land use codes), (2) Progressive approaches to pedestrian-focused street design ('Living Streets'), (3) Residential re-development (new urbanism), (4) Food security: bringing locally-grown produce to the inner-city (Pearl Farmers Market) Now we aim to show how great, urban Design can deliver a real return on public investment. Public Works, its consultant engineers and the Pearl District Association are planning a distinctive, livable, cost-efficient, urban neighborhood through innovative approaches to essential infrastructure improvements. The Board of the Pearl District Association invites you join us, the design team, and neighbors, Tuesday. link (http://"http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&attid=0.1&thid=11f37617109d6083&mt=application%2Fpdf") Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: sgrizzle on February 03, 2009, 08:04:57 am When I hear "Pork" I think primarily of bacon, but I don't see that hear. The second possibility is that there is a large sum of money dedicated to a politician's pet project. I see neither money nor any politician who really cares about this.
What gives? Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Conan71 on February 03, 2009, 08:11:21 am I bet if they were spending money to wipe out Bumgarner's blight on the north Cherry St. area, it wouldn't have said "pork" in the title.
Maybe AA has heard a swine farm is moving to 6th & Peoria. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: cannon_fodder on February 03, 2009, 08:18:17 am quote: I've heard this project described, but never have seen the plans. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 03, 2009, 08:50:39 am I have seen the old Pearl District plans. Would really like to see the new refined version. What time is the meeting and where?
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: RecycleMichael on February 03, 2009, 09:04:17 am I think it was a biblical reference...
Matthew 7.6 "Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine." Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: PonderInc on February 03, 2009, 11:45:31 am Ever wondered why the 6th street commercial corridor is sitting there dormant? Ever wished for a revitalized connection between TU and downtown? Ever envisioned 6th street as the next fun, funky neighborhood (now that Brookside has been gentrified).
The thing that is holding all of the dreams back is that the area around 6th and Peoria is in a FLOOD PLAIN. They can't build anything new there until the flood problems get fixed. This is the proposal from the public works department about how they intend to pursue the next phase of flood remediation in this area. It will benefit the Pearl District, Elm Creek, Gunboat, a bit of Kendall Whittier, and eventually, believe it or not, Riverview neighborhood downstream. Solving the flood problems will open up this prime real estate for new development, as well as revitalization of existing historic buildings. It's the perfect location for infill, with a neighborhood that is supportive of great urban design. If, by "pork," you mean that they hope to make the project beautiful as well as functional... I say "Bring on the bacon!" Meeting: 6:30 PM Location: Central Center at Centennial Park 1028 E. 6th ("The Boathouse") See conceptual drawings, talk to hydrologists, city planners, landscape designers, etc. Ask questions, comment, or just learn more about the project. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: PonderInc on February 03, 2009, 11:59:44 am Here's the letter that Public Works sent out to property owners in the area...
You are invited to a public meeting for review and comment concerning the Elm Creek Master Drainage Plan. The meeting will be held Tuesday, Feb. 3, at 6:30 p.m. in the Central Center at Centennial Park, 1028 East Sixth St. (southwest corner of Sixth Street and Peoria Avenue). The City of Tulsa has held several public meetings to keep citizens informed and to receive comments regarding the development of plans for the Elm Creek basin. We have developed exciting conceptual designs for facilities in the City’s Elm Creek Master Drainage Plan and invite you to review and comment on them. Working closely with the Pearl District and Kendall-Whittier neighborhood associations, the City of Tulsa has prepared designs for proposed multi-purpose stormwater detention ponds, storm sewer improvements, and Sixth Street storm drainage conveyance (see attached map). The proposed plans and designs are quite creative, and will have a major impact on the Elm Creek/Pearl District/Kendall Whittier neighborhoods’ redevelopment potential. We invite your review and comments prior to moving on to the final design of the project. Our records indicate that your property is in or near the proposed facilities and may be affected by this updated master drainage plan. A summary plan map is on the reverse side of this notice. We also will have information fact sheets and maps for you at the meeting. Representatives from the City and from the consultant team will be available at the meeting to answer your questions. If you are unable to attend the public meeting and have questions or concerns, you may contact the City project manager: Carl Craigo, P.E., Project Manager City of Tulsa, Department of Public Works 2317 S. Jackson Ave. Tulsa, OK 74107 (918) 596-1549 Here's the map... (http://www.tulsanow.org/images/ElmCreekBasin.jpg) Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: sgrizzle on February 03, 2009, 12:34:38 pm OMG the Pearl District is being invaded by Tetris!
Seriously though, why are all the new ponds only right angles? Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Renaissance on February 03, 2009, 01:22:12 pm quote: Two possibilities come to mind: 1) The new ponds will be more utilitarian than aesthetic. 2) Those blocks are placeholders covering tracts that will be condemned and taken for the drainage project; specific designs are forthcoming. I'm wondering what the cost difference is. I'm also wondering just how "shovel-ready" these projects are. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 03, 2009, 03:51:17 pm Actually, I think the detention ponds being more angular is to help make them more urban and unique. I think the intention is to also have it so that, and dont quote me on this, buildings can be built up next to them. More like something you would see in the central part of a European city. They are part of the neighborhood, the streets, interwoven into the the pedestrian fabric of the area. Not off in the middle of some park, but right there. Remember whats unique and experimental in Tulsa or the US, is often tried and true in other parts of the world [;)]. The first retention pond was great and definitely an improvement to the usual hole in the ground. If these are going to be the way I think they might, its just a completely different approach from what we usually see. And could be quite remarkable. Will have to go and check it out tonight.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 03, 2009, 08:36:54 pm They managed to get the Laura Dester Shelter out of there as soon as the new one is built. Typical Tulsa cleansing[B)]
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 03, 2009, 10:14:01 pm Went to the meeting. Was interesting to see how the plans and ideas had progressed from the previous sketches and possibilities we have seen before.
The meeting started out with the hydrological and engineering situation of the area. This is apparently one of the last major areas of the city to have its flooding problems addressed. They stated how the old system in place since the 1920s was out of date and couldn't handle what the minimum the city has to consider, which is the 100 year flood scenario. One of which happened in that area in the 80s (some areas still have minor flooding problems on a regular basis). The plan that was subsequently put forth in the 80s would have required taking out a huge amount of the homes and businesses in the area and cost more than this new plan. The speaker mentioned that there are basically 3 tools which can be used to help control flooding. Retention ponds which hold excess water during flooding events and meter out the water into the downstream system so as not to overwhelm that downstream system. Canals, culverts, underground culverts, etc. which rapidly transport the water from one place to another and vary in size depending on the amount of water carrying capacity you want. And removal of buildings/residences from the flood plain. After a lot of going back and forth, for this particular area they came up with a scenario that includes elements of all 3. During this process they worked with the neighborhood groups, property owners and residents to come up with a plan to try and take into consideration their concerns and wishes. They wanted something that would do many things, yes be a flood control project, that had to be done, but done in a way that both didn't hurt the area, taking out too many homes and businesses, but also acted to actually improve the area. This is one of the areas of the city that has seen a long and steady decline. The thought was to come up with a way to take an important flood control project that had to be done, and creatively use it to have the ancillary benefit of helping revitalize that part of the city. A part of the city that feeds into downtown "essentially a downtown neighborhood and part of that revitalization effort" and connects other parts like TU and the Utica corridor. Another part of this project isn't just utilitarian as a flood control, or even to lay the foundation for future growth in the area, but its nature is such that it seeks to improve the quality of the area and any future development. Making the area have higher quality, beautiful pedestrian friendly streets, higher quality neighborhoods for Tulsa, a beautiful environment to live in, work in, shop, etc. It seeks to enhance Tulsa's quality of life and attractiveness. A foundation that would take the nature of the city up a level from what would otherwise occur in the area. Here are some birds eye renderings. I will try and get some of the street level renderings and elevations later, for that is where you can really get a feel for what this may be like. (http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/5223/pearlfloodpreventionwebpf9.jpg) (http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2415/pearlwestpearlpondwebgl3.jpg) (http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/1963/pearleastpearlpondwebvg6.jpg) Couple of notes... The areas in the map first shown in this thread where the vol aquisition/buyout buildings are, represent where homes will be bought out on a voluntary basis over time so that those areas will no longer have homes in the flood zones. They mentioned that it would likely have been more disruptive, difficult and expensive to have added more water retention ponds and culverts for those areas, so the Voluntary Buyout was the option for those sections. The "building squares" around the retention ponds/public spaces are mostly suggestive only. If there is say a building where one of those is, that doesn't necessarily mean it will have to be removed. Those "building squares" are general, suggestive possibilities. They may like to perhaps gather up some segments of property for development. But otherwise, if you have a property in those spots, there may, only in some instances, be voluntary buyouts. The areas IN the actual water retention segments would of course be require buyouts which would have to happen with any configuration. These plans are said to not be the final, exact plans. But appear to be getting close to what it may look like. When and if funding ever happens lol. There are several steps and more meetings before anything can be approved. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: PonderInc on February 04, 2009, 12:09:51 pm Great summary, Artist! Thanks for the pics and the explanation of historic problems and future plans.
If you can post some street-level elevations of the proposal, that would be great. I'm personally always very happy and proud when I drive by the new "lake" at Central Park. Happy that Tulsa created something beautiful to solve a flooding problem. Happy that we considered aesthetics and people, instead of just the cheapest possible technical solution. We need more thinking like this. Especially near downtown, which should be the showcase of the metro region...and reflect the heart and soul of Tulsa. Tulsa is not some two-bit town, and we need to stop thinking like one. Anybody with a backhoe can dig a ditch for flood retention. It takes real vision and courage to create something useful and beautiful that will serve the community for generations to come. Can't wait to see this plan come to fruition! Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: dsjeffries on February 04, 2009, 03:30:53 pm It was a treat to be able to sit next to you, Artist. [;)]
The plans look very good overall, and I'm excited about the canal. I'm also thrilled with the possibility of including teaching gardens, community gardens and wetlands. This looks to be a very promising start of a fantastic redevelopment of an area that needs some more TLC. I'd also like to point out that all of this was somewhere between $58 and $60 million, the same cost of the new baseball stadium and adjoining development, but will likely lead to a greater return on investment. Imagine a truly urban neighborhood, shops, cafes, bookstores, parks, apartments, rowhouses... all within walking distance. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 04, 2009, 06:48:43 pm if you buy out the homes anyway , why spend more money for flood control that isn't needed after buying the homes?
There are enough areas in town that cars flood in their driveway. Money needs spent on those and not prissing up an area we've already ignored and few really care about so a developer can make money off ours. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: dsjeffries on February 04, 2009, 07:21:42 pm quote: You've got to be kidding me. Has inteller hacked into someone's account? Surely no one else can make such ridiculous statements. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Renaissance on February 04, 2009, 09:03:57 pm I think the general solution has been to ignore that one.
I think it looks really cool. Probably needs more entrepreneurs on board--although that may depend on the city's actual commitment to following through with the infrastructure repair. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 04, 2009, 10:09:57 pm quote: They would have to buy up a lot more homes if they didnt put in the water retention ponds. Not to mention the businesses that would be in continual danger of flooding. Remember too, that adding water retention ponds in this area helps mitigate flooding in other areas and neighborhoods downstream by first holding, then more gradually metering out the flood waters. And you would be taking a much larger area out of future development, versus setting the stage for more development in what should really be an important part of the city. The added density alone would help pay for the roads, buyouts and detention projects over time. We need more people per square mile paying for infrastructure not fewer and fewer, often poor and elderly people, as has been the case in this area for a long time. Tulsa once had 6,000 people per square mile paying for each square mile of roads, water, etc., Then it went to around 3,000, then down to around 2,000. That area probably has even less trying to pay for all the roads and stuff in that area. Putting more land back into play for growth and setting it up for denser more urban growth will in the long run help the city. Speaking of roads, I believe part of the cost mentioned above includes redoing several of the roads in that area which need to be redone anyway. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: YoungTulsan on February 04, 2009, 10:25:32 pm I guess the area being a flood plain would make sense in it not seeing any new development or increase in desirability despite the EXCELLENT location in proximity to not only Downtown, but the other desirable areas such as Brookside, Cherry Street, Utica Square, and TU.
My personal opinion on why the area is avoided is due to the railroad. The railway is surrounded by dozens of ugly old warehouses, some abandoned, some operational. The whole area looks industrial, and passed on by time. (http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3107/warehouseszv0.jpg) But what do you do about that? I know some of those warehouses are probably productive job and tax revenue sources. Telling them to get the hell out might not be the best option. But as long as that section along the railway looks like your one stop location for rusty metal crap and rotten wood, those "urban hipsters" aren't going to be building any "bohemian lofts" nearby. I know a good place in West Tulsa to put in additional warehouse-type industrial zoneage if you want to offset a loss. Tear down Garden City next to the refinery. No one deserves to live next to a stinking refinery anyway. Just from a satellite view you can see the trail of blight that follows the railway. Where the railway is embedded into the Broken Arrow Expressway from Lewis to Sheridan is a nice section of uninterrupted residential. I believe that is a big piece of why midtown is as quaint and livable as it is. (http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1430/midtownra0.jpg) It would be a completely different story with a railroad and industrial warehouses cutting right through the middle of it. But again, I don't see any easy solution to that, nor do I see that area being extremely desirable without one. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: waterboy on February 05, 2009, 08:37:38 am That's an interesting take YT. There are warehouses along the BA route where spurs come off near the sheridan exit and sure enough those areas are residentially blighted. Consider 36th & Lakewood with nothing but blighted apartments. They are however pretty efficient for those businesses that located near the railroad like furniture, industrial etc.
My impression is that many of the rundown warehouses along the stretch from 13th & Lewis to 3rd and Peoria are prized by small businessmen for their utility and price value. They are cheap to rent if you don't ask much of the landlord. That's why they are not improved much. That said, the warehouse district there is not much different than the way the old warehouse district in OKC looked back in the 80's before it became Bricktown (sorry to mention that word in mixed company). But it was that same mix of economics and location that spurred that development. I would keep an open mind about whether the three (railroad, warehouses, housing) can co-exist. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: AVERAGE JOE on February 05, 2009, 09:28:39 am YT, those "blighted" areas of today are the prime real estate development opportunities of the future. Bring a light rail system through the area on those tracks and create a stop right in the middle of the "blight" and presto -- transit oriented development. Those abandoned warehouses would be converted to lofts in a heartbeat.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: grahambino on February 05, 2009, 09:37:51 am Blight didn't follow the railroad through Maple Ridge when it was operational.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: waterboy on February 05, 2009, 07:28:26 pm quote: It wasn't always "Maple Ridge". It was kind of dicey pre 70's when the train still ran through there. Bars on windows, hippies milling about, dilapidated commercial structures. Some areas didn't appear to have much appeal and seemed to have a 50/50 chance at best. The buildings were cheap if you had any vision at all and patience. Betsy Horowitz made the case for saving alot of the property along the old railway including Lee School. That, and the sale of one of the semi-mansions on 18th for a whopping $30,000 in 1975, were turning points in its resurgence. Nothing within the area had ever sold for the cost of a new home in the suburbs. I think the Pearl area projects are pretty exciting. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Gaspar on February 05, 2009, 08:05:46 pm quote: Agree. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 05, 2009, 10:12:44 pm Here are a few more renderings. Courtesy of Guy Engineering.
http://www.guyengr.com/guyengr_files/Page628.htm (http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8279/pearleastpond2dp5.jpg) (http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/7736/pearleastpond3lu1.jpg) West Pond (http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5663/pearlwestpond4ph9.jpg) 6th Street showing canal and "living streets" approach. Notice the democratic nature, cars bikes, pedestrians all equal. Sidewalks and streets the same. OMG something new in town. (let the freaking out begin lol [:P] ) (http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4824/pearl6thcanalzi1.jpg) (http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5602/pearlsixthstam7.jpg) Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: OurTulsa on February 05, 2009, 11:01:53 pm I truly appreciate a public works project that attempts to transcend its utility. This project proposal not only serves a public purpose but it becomes an amenity at the same time, much as Centennial Park. I think the City will see a much higher ROI (Return on Investment) with this method. This version of the ponds will not only make the area surrounding developable by clearing flood plain challenges but it, I think (ok, hope) will entice investors to buy in to the area (in addition to those who are already putting their money where their mouthes are).
The Pearl is about to become a pilot for a Form Based Code. That new land use guideline can establish a highly desirable and PREDICTABLE set of outcomes giving investors confidence that their early investments won't be undermined by some get in/get out speculator down the block. Those in combination with continuing development of our trail system, downtown as a desirable destination, Cherry St., an eventual commuter line on to BA, and TU, the Pearl will be a no brainer for realizing some explosively urban growth... I was initially concerned with affordability and gentrification of the Pearl but I think there are enough old walk-up apartment buildings (assuming they are preserved) in the neighborhood to provide a decent amount of low/moderate rental units. Additionally, there are many apartments just to the south in Forest Orchard close enough to contribute to the diversity of the area. I'm excited about Public Works effort here; although I know that it is in large part a result of the consistent banging from the Pearl District Association. I hope this becomes a trend in the department's work. I hope future elements of basic infrastrure are designed in a manner so that they contribute beyond pure utility. I hope the Pearl ponds and canal happens. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: OurTulsa on February 05, 2009, 11:16:13 pm quote: If the City of Tulsa is willing to do the woonerf concept on a street that was previously four lanes anywhere near what the concepts suggest I will freak! Tulsa will earn instant cool points in the world of urban design. And that street will become the coolest street in town. It will take many folks around here alot of time to figure out how to share public space but it will become routine eventually (so many still come to a complete stand-still at and in the rotary in 5th/Main). I am seriously digging it! I always thought this street provided the best frame for the downtown skyline! But, quick, someone get Patric after them on their concept for lighting!!! Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 06, 2009, 07:42:57 am Yes, I definitely think they want to be smart and do things right here, so I am sure they would be amenable to fixing the lighting situation there. Now is the perfect time to get a change while the details are still being hammered out.
Per Patric, he should proffer his ponderings past the Pearl people pronto. [:)] Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: carltonplace on February 09, 2009, 09:27:44 am I really want this to happen.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Double A on February 09, 2009, 08:28:15 pm quote: A light rail mafia is born. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 09, 2009, 10:29:52 pm So really what did Centenial Park do but cost us more for a new library to go with it and see a few other places remodel. Any new revenue come from it? and yet we still wait for all that new dreamable developement downtown too. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: brunoflipper on February 10, 2009, 07:15:09 am library? huh? im confuzzled...
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: sgrizzle on February 10, 2009, 10:20:25 am And MDepr's descent into complete nonsense is complete...
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 10, 2009, 09:32:18 pm quote: So what is the building on the north side for? Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: JoeMommaBlake on February 11, 2009, 12:30:41 am The building is a community center. It has been nicknamed "the boathouse" because of its proximity to the pond.
There is a library several blocks away on Denver. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 11, 2009, 12:30:46 pm We can tell that someone hasnt gone to many public and civic meetings in the last few years. Dozens of them have been held there on all kinds of important local issues. Like this last one on the Pearl District Pork as a small example lol.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 11, 2009, 07:39:56 pm Ok I was wrong in my thinking of what the building was. So what has the new park really brought to the area that makes spending more money than is needed worth it?
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: carltonplace on February 11, 2009, 09:11:05 pm Besides flood mitigation, new homes and business, increased property value, renewed interest in a blighted abandoned area, the possibility for a downtown to TU corridor, some pretty fountains and a new event center that is always in use, all payed for by people shopping at Home Depot?: Nothing.
You're right...let's get the bulldozers out and fill it back in. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: Renaissance on February 12, 2009, 09:12:59 am quote: Wait no - this is a valid question. Why not just have a utilitarian detention pond without the extra landscaping? It would both serve the goal of flood mitigation and cost the city less money, both in original construction cost and upkeep. The answer, I think, lies at the heart of civic choice. When you're faced with projects like flood mitigation in the Pearl District, there are two ways to go about it. 1) You can get the job done in the most efficient way possible with no regard for any purpose other than the necessary. Or, 2) You can spend extra money to attempt to provide benefits from the project on the side. In this case, the city chose number two. Beautiful parks are certainly a public good. They may not be a functional requirement for public infrastructure, but they raise the level for quality of life and city aesthetics. These are concerns that have real value and are worth monetizing. Plus, I think there is a fiscally conservative case to be made for this sort of infrastructure work. I view it in terms of marginal cost. Say the floodwater detention work costs the city 10x. Say a new park typically costs the city 6x. Say a floodwater detention project combined with a new park costs the city 12x. There are two ways to look at this picture. In strict functionality terms, a lovely park is not a necessary part of civic infrastructure. So the city could take care of flood mitigation for 10x instead of 12x if it so chose. BUT- the other way to look at the picture is in terms of marginal value. By spending 12x on flood mitigation + lovely park, instead of 10x on flood mitigation, the city actually SAVES 4x. Because to build the park and mitigate flooding separately would cost the city 16x. I view the Pearl project as effective stewardship by the City of Tulsa. If you've got the bulldozers there and you're turning earth, you may as well spend the money now on the margins to make the end result beautiful. Really, it's a bargain. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: joiei on February 12, 2009, 10:50:31 am Plus there is a farmers market there now during growing season and to take a walk around the park is fun. Unlike some of the paths around some of the retention ponds in the east side of Tulsa.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 12, 2009, 01:21:43 pm Well put Floyd.
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 12, 2009, 10:51:42 pm So quality of life only equalled more soccer fields and walking trails along the edge for those in east Tulsa... poor saps
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: TheArtist on February 13, 2009, 08:33:37 am quote: Better than nothing, even those are used as good examples of how cities can multipurpose their water retention and control facilities. Cities from all over the country come to Tulsa to see the progressive things we have done on this front. Though the Central Park project wasnt the right size and such to have soccer fields in it, the park was definitely a nice touch. Will be just as nice and treasured as Woodward Park in the future when the plants get a few more years growth on them and the area around it continues to improve. And yes, I hope with the new Master Plan that we start paying even more attention to getting nice redevelopment nodes going in some areas which could use it in the East side of the city. That side could use some pork as well. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: waterboy on February 13, 2009, 08:37:31 am quote: Maybe they bought your argument. But no, the areas out east were more interested at that time in mitigating flood damage. They had recently had floods. The solutions they employed were considered pretty novel at the time as well as the idea to utilize the land for soccer fields and paths. It was a start. Your enmity towards this park and the Pearl plan is not reasonable. Its a good idea, its being developed with thoughtful insights and the return will be good. You should be ecstatic that we are reclaiming a part of the Tulsa core. The last flood prone area of town to receive mitigation and you're complaint is...what? Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: grahambino on February 13, 2009, 09:16:33 am (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/199/510809653_0fd633d8be.jpg?v=0)
Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: joiei on February 13, 2009, 12:11:27 pm quote:Thanks for the further information. In my own ignorance I have learned something new that I had never considered before. I retract my poorly thought out statement about the retention ponds in east Tulsa. I still enjoy the new Central Park. It is a great place to take a walk and get some fresh air. Title: Pearl District Pork Post by: MDepr2007 on February 13, 2009, 06:32:59 pm quote: last? |