|
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: tim huntzinger on August 21, 2007, 06:21:12 am JENKS MAY LURE DRILLERS (http://"http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070821_1_A1_hThec72150")
# # # The Tulsans in T-Town liked the River a lot, but the Trolls in the committees downtown did NOT. They hated the River, its wildlife and beauty, but pavement and buildings gave them quite a woody. # # # Can we PLEASE stop talking about Branson Landing, and is it too late to stop the presses on the RiverTax signs? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: cannon_fodder on August 21, 2007, 07:47:27 am Honestly, if the TULSA Driller's want to move to Jenks - have fun. I won't be making the drive to see you play, but have fun.
In the last few years - other than the Aquarium, Riverwalk development, and Bass Pro Shops Tulsa has done really well attracting retail/tourist development. I mean, we did get a new strip mall in south Tulsa. Any one of those developments in downtown and something could have gotten started. Instead, I'm happy to see a damn walmart considering a move in. - - - - and while I'm at it, what does this do to the Branson Landing thing? I'll be so incredibly pissed off if the new "urban" living and shopping destination is in the most rural of settings. Get your crap together Tulsa and get something done to lure exciting development to my city. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Breadburner on August 21, 2007, 08:00:15 am Chucky knows where his bread is buttered......
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 21, 2007, 10:47:37 am Here is the Baltimore firm designing the project, and a similar project in Maryland they did:
http://www.ddg-usa.com/Projects/National_Harbor/Project.html Images of the Jenks Project: (http://tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2007/graphic2.jpg) (http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2007/graphic.jpg) I personally still hope the Drillers go downtown, but this is a private developer that is willing to build a stadium for them and the downtown sites have been talked about for years with no action. Can you blame them? This site is literally 1000 feet from Tulsa and they weren't in Tulsa before anyway. Read the World article. It's a huge project and great for the Tulsa area. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070821_1_A1_hThec72150 This development is not contingent on the river tax passing or on The Drillers moving, it's happening. Tulsa needs to get on board with river development now or the Tulsa river may never be developed, which is fine too, it's a very nice park, but is that really what's best for the city of Tulsa? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 21, 2007, 11:19:13 am It amazes me how many people believe this type of development has the critical mass neccesary to become reality.
The media never questions the rationale behind this kind of dreaming. [V] Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on August 21, 2007, 12:24:30 pm I'm gonna agree with AOX. This is not the first plan for this development. They just think the lure of the drillers will bring in investors. That is a horrid location and layout for the stadium. They would be right up against the power plant in jenks. Plus, anything south of the turnpike is very low visibility. You'd have a great view of Kum-N-Go.
If anything, I hope this is just another example of dumb idea begets good idea. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: MichaelC on August 21, 2007, 12:31:43 pm There is something to be said for the Bricktown folk . Ideally, if you can drag a whole bunch of commercial in just because there the agreement on the stadium, it ends up become self-fulfilling prophecy here. Commercial jumps on board because of the stadium agreement, Drillers jump ship because there's commercial lined up.
Obviously there's little reason for the Drillers to move tomorrow, but perhaps the same could have been said for the 86ers down in OKC pre-MAPS. The clock may truly be ticking here. Can't completely discount it, IMO. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 21, 2007, 01:24:47 pm No retail department store in their right mind ends up there in that location.
Just more architects getting paid to use their crayons to create that vision thang because a land buyer pays him to draw. Mitchell bought property that needs major infrastructure and roads to suck seed. Give me a break. Kevin Costner developments we need not.... The Jenks Stink....great name for a ball club. Very fitting. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: YoungTulsan on August 21, 2007, 01:32:51 pm Could this possibly be just an oligarchy ploy to "scare" us into voting yes for the river tax so we do not "lose" Tulsa to Jenks and the burbs?
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: MichaelC on August 21, 2007, 01:37:27 pm Ha, good one. No, we've been losing that battle for a while now. The objective should be to make Jenks work harder, and for Tulsa to lose with style.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Breadburner on August 21, 2007, 01:58:14 pm One only needs to look at the players to see this deal is going nowhere....What a bunch of puffery and bull$hit......
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 21, 2007, 01:59:15 pm The site is from the turnpike to about 111th and the Jenks power plant is just south of 121st, just a little over a mile or about exactly the same distance from the “Tulsa Landing” to the power plant on Riverside (and is minus the refinery across the highway).
And, as for multiple plans for this site, that’s just not correct, Bells wanted the site, but wanted Jenks to buy the land for them. The city said no and didn’t really want Bells anyway with it’s track record. The current owners bought the land out from under Bells even as they still were saying they might move to Jenks. This is the only real and tangible plan there has been for this location. As for access, Elm (Peoria) is now five lanes to the turnpike and the funding to widen Elm to five lanes with a jogging trail to 111th was passed last year. That jogging trail will connect to the one that follows Aquarium Drive. Aquarium Drivewhich is also going to get a direct connection to the stop light at the end of the 96th St Bridge. At one end of this development is the 96ths St bridge and at the other is the Elm St Creek exit with improved streets all around it. Not to mention green space and jogging trails that connect into the whole Riverparks system already. There’s even a nearly unused (but still working) heavy rail line to the site that goes through downtown Jenks all the way to downtown Tulsa. The other issue is Demographics? Well, the article states that the Jenks zip code now is the wealthiest in the state. That’s aside from being the fastest growing, growing at about 10% a year. And Tulsa’s zip codes right across the river aren’t too shabby either. You are taking your idea that it won’t fly from the guy that said no one would go to Riverwalk, that it was too hard to get too. The same person that said there were only 10,000 (ugly drunk) people at the PGA Championship for the final round on Sunday. The biggest problem with Riverwalk has been that there’s simply not enough parking. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 21, 2007, 02:00:58 pm The site is from the turnpike to about 111th and the Jenks power plant is just south of 121st, just a little over a mile or about exactly the same distance from the “Tulsa Landing” to the power plant on Riverside (and is minus the refinery across the highway).
And, as for multiple plans for this site, that’s just not correct, Bells wanted the site, but wanted Jenks to buy the land for them. The city said no and didn’t really want Bells anyway with it’s track record. The current owners bought the land out from under Bells even as they still were saying they might move to Jenks. This is the only real and tangible plan there has been for this location. As for access, Elm (Peoria) is now five lanes to the turnpike and the funding to widen Elm to five lanes with a jogging trail to 111th was passed last year. That jogging trail will connect to the one that follows Aquarium Drive. Aquarium Drivewhich is also going to get a direct connection to the stop light at the end of the 96th St Bridge. At one end of this development is the 96ths St bridge and at the other is the Elm St Creek exit with improved streets all around it. Not to mention green space and jogging trails that connect into the whole Riverparks system already. There’s even a nearly unused (but still working) heavy rail line to the site that goes through downtown Jenks all the way to downtown Tulsa. The other issue is Demographics? Well, the article states that the Jenks zip code now is the wealthiest in the state. That’s aside from being the fastest growing, growing at about 10% a year. And Tulsa’s zip codes right across the river aren’t too shabby either. You are taking your idea that it won’t fly from the guy that said no one would go to Riverwalk, that it was too hard to get too. The same person that said there were only 10,000 (ugly drunk) people at the PGA Championship for the final round on Sunday. The biggest problem with Riverwalk has been that there’s simply not enough parking. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 21, 2007, 02:34:17 pm quote: I did not refer to them as ugly...they were actually quite funny drunks....I will stand by my 5 pm Sunday crowd estimate. Riverwalk continues on thin ice. Except the boozeries. Swake, where did you get your degree in urban land planning? OSU? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on August 21, 2007, 02:41:51 pm The baseball field is south of 106th so we'll say 108th or 109th. The power plant is from 111th to 121st. So the north end of plant property is less than half a mile from the stadium property. Not to mention the plant in Jenks is far larger than the old plant in Tulsa.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: restored2x on August 21, 2007, 02:43:17 pm Shoot, I'd go there. Been to Riverwalks and it rocks. We can't get our shoot together, and Jenks does it - then we get mad and curse Jenks. The firm that designed this have their shoot together - study some of the stuff Baltimore City has done. That should be a blueprint for Tulsa to follow.
We get a big box walmart smack dab in the middle of downtown - they get our stadium, and all the money. Shoot Yeah, shoot. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 21, 2007, 02:47:11 pm quote: Its one of the wealthiest, fastest growing areas in the state. They can pull from most of south Tulsa, Jenks, Bixby, and Glenpool. Its right on the river, near other attractions. And they can get a huge tract of property. Where else in the whole region could you find a better spot or more likely location to do a development like this? 95% of all my work comes from within a 5 or 6 miles of that area. Lots of young wealthy people and gobs more to come. If this development happens it will only spur more people to move to the area. Plus its not as though its a huuuge development. May be for our state. But like my grandpappy always says, "A billion aint what it used to be". Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 21, 2007, 03:09:27 pm quote: Looking at Google Earth, the main part of the power plant is at 115th stretching onto about 122nd. There's nothing north of there. And there are half million dollar homes within a couple of blocks of the power plant too. It's pretty well shielded. Tulsa Landing would have an Oil Refinery within 500 feet, directly across I-244 and the Branson Landing people want in there. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Kenosha on August 21, 2007, 03:15:07 pm Here's the real problem.
Jenks has officially pissed off Tulsa. Not good. Not good at all if they want stuff from us. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 21, 2007, 03:17:12 pm quote: Then make a better offer to the Drillers, I'm all for them being downtown. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: tim huntzinger on August 21, 2007, 03:25:38 pm Downtown would have a great atmosphere, awesome view of the skyline, but it is such a hard sell for the burbanites. The proximity of the proposed stadium to the Creek may help attendance.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 21, 2007, 04:52:55 pm quote: Why? By offering $1 billion in private funding for a mixed-use project that will include a new ballpark for the Drillers?... compared to what? A taxpayer funded stadium downtown? If it involves higher sales taxes, I'd assume many Tulsa taxpayers would be grateful it was private money that built the stadium... even if it were in Jenks. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 21, 2007, 05:29:20 pm Filched this pic from channel 6. Looks like a few 5 story buildings and possibly one thats 8 or 10 stories. Looks like a decent development for Jenks.
(http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/796/jenksriverdistrictij6.jpg) Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on August 21, 2007, 05:40:40 pm Wow, riverfront parking. Still leaving out the powerplant with like 200ft candy-cane stacks looming over the stadium.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on August 21, 2007, 05:44:59 pm quote: The neighborhood has lots of trees and even they aren't that pleased with the plant and substation being there. To the north is cooling towers and very few trees. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 21, 2007, 06:08:37 pm quote: Perhaps thats so the stadium can be closer to the water. [:P] I think the power plant will be kewl to look at. Will help add some authenticity and grit to the urban feel they are going for. [8D] Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: inteller on August 21, 2007, 06:25:03 pm quote: ooooOOOH....I'm sure they are soooo scared! they don't give a flying **** if tulsa is pissed off. they can simply take what they want until Tulsa city council gets some BALLS and Tulsa gets its OWN chamber of commerce, not this regionalist Metro Chamber bull****. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 21, 2007, 06:33:48 pm quote: Is that styrofoam is see? [}:)] I assume the view from the ballpark will be of the river and the CityPlex Towers and NOT the refinery... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: CoffeeBean on August 21, 2007, 07:06:27 pm Assuming passage of the river tax, what stops Jenks from luring the Drillers away?
Seems this project is moving forward and the river tax contains nothing to lure the Drillers downtown. If you want baseball downtown, you're competing with river development, whether in Jenks or at 21st on the west bank. I'd like more details from Norton . . . Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 21, 2007, 08:40:19 pm Hey, Jenks. Looks like a great plan. You're a daisy if you do.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: YoungTulsan on August 21, 2007, 09:57:29 pm What would traffic flow be like? They don't have a straight through street down to there (Lewis makes some sort of odd path around the area). Will the 96th St Bridge be enough once that development, and the critical mass needed in new Jenks residential, are completed? Im sure they are counting on numerous new subdivisions popping up in the Jenks/Glenpool/Bixby area.
And the momentum for that stupid Yale toll bridge will escalate further. (I only see a bridge there as stupid if it is toll, and without proper infrastructure on the streets that lead to the bridge) Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: bassfisher74133 on August 21, 2007, 10:24:28 pm love the look of this plan but how the crap are the water taxi’s supposed to float threw the dams… LOL you have to make the stadium accessible from the river, if you don’t this plan will officially suck.
Think about it Jenks if you know your having traffic troubles then you make this park accessible by water taxi that way you would be able to park anywhere along the river. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 21, 2007, 10:47:55 pm Trolley system in the works.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 21, 2007, 11:15:55 pm quote: Well, Bricktown was already around long before the new ballpark was built... the stadium just added to the disneyfication of Bricktown... and Jenks has a successful Riverwalk already in place... Actually there was a lot of pressure for the triple-A 86ers to move pre-MAPS... http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/minor-league-baseball-team2.htm quote: The "minimum standards" for ballparks hit the triple-A clubs the hardest... and cities like OKC and Indy obliged rather than risk losing their teams. The Drillers seem to host many games where general admission tickets are free, and those same days give other ticket holders a chance to "upgrade" their seats... a local car dealership even sponsored the Texas League playoffs last year, offering free tickets... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 22, 2007, 06:25:17 am quote: Dreamer. Been in the works for at least 6years. Your dislike of boats and water keeps you from thinking big. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: brunoflipper on August 22, 2007, 06:47:01 am jenks should just get an mls team and leave the drillers alone...
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Breadburner on August 22, 2007, 07:42:37 am It's interesting how this group of numpty's are getting instant credibillity with this project while The Channels developers were laughed at....This whole deal is just a laughable as that was.....
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: cannon_fodder on August 22, 2007, 07:55:16 am Interesting point Bread. Who are these people that have $1bil to invest? Our news media is like a 7 year old - oooh a production studio, oooh East End, oooh naked indian, oooh East End (repeat), oooh Branson landing, ooooh new baseball stadium. No follow up, no real in depth research - just whatever the PR department of XYZ tells them to report and they move on.
Also, the little mock up the development fails to accurately show the mud in the river. If they have $1bil to build this development, can we score $20mil for a low water dam near there please? I guess I'm disappointed that such grand plans are actually taking place in Jenks, and not somewhere actually urban. Why try to create an urban environment in the most suburban of suburbs when you could build in an actual urban environment? I guess I'd be grudgingly glad if it came through, better Jenks than not at all. So long as it doesnt derail Tulsa's plans. [;)] Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Wilbur on August 22, 2007, 07:55:58 am quote: Amen, Brother! Amen! Jenks gets it. Tulsa does not. The road to prosperity does not go through city hall and is not funded with taxes. Until our Tulsa leaders, on both sides of the political isle, understand you can not tax this city to prosperity, we will continue to languish. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 08:14:18 am quote: 6 years or not, ya got to have enough of the developments done and critical mass of people going to them to make it work before you put them to use. Once the Riverwalk is done ( that developer said he would try to get a trolley once both parts of his development were done) and once this River District gets going there will be enough people and need to use it. The comment I made was in relation to the number of people apparently expected to have problems getting to the new ballpark. That would sound like the perfect catalyst, if there ever was any, to get a trolley stysem going, especially if they have been saying they want one eventually. No need to put it into place until there is a real need for it. Creating a more urban type environment where there isnt a lot of parking is actually a good thing to spur mass transit options like a trolley and water taxi. I am not against a water taxi, just throwing out a possible solution. From what I can tell the dam is going to be just upstream from the proposed stadium. People can still use the water taxi to get to the River district and other areas along the river but they can also use the trolleys as well. I use the water taxies at Disney World all the time and really like them, just so you know. [:P] And I like using the monorail and the Mickey Buses too. [:D] Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 08:23:03 am quote: If the channels people were footing the bill I wouldn't have laughed at them. One laughable part was them asking the taxpayers to foot the bill. The River District is a private development. Another thing about the Channels was the engineering and environmental problems, plus, cost versus benefit. This River District isnt trying to dam the river and put an island in the middle of it. They are building buildings, not land. Completely different animals. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 22, 2007, 08:58:03 am quote: There are parking problems at the current Driller stadium. Only on special occassions do they relent and offer shuttles. Someone has to pay, the Drillers won't, the county won't. Apparently the consumer won't either. One trolley operator tried to connect downtown development, Cherry Street and Brookside with a system. Plenty of density there. Couldn't make it work. The same guy offered trolley service to Jenks Antique center to link with the Aquarium and Riverwalk. Denied. Bill White has answers as to why. It isn't incompetence or lack of density. See a pattern here? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Wrinkle on August 22, 2007, 10:06:10 am Anything that helps Jenks, helps the whole region.
Isn't that the mantra? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: cannon_fodder on August 22, 2007, 10:52:49 am Wrinkle, that's not necessarily true. While, of course, it is usually the case and I am not discussing the current project...
But when suburbs suck all the retail out of a central city you end up with a broke shell. Soon the companies move to the suburbs. Now we have a Detroit in the middle with nice suburbs all around it. Nearly impossible to fix the situation... many people are able to live in a happy little ring around poverty and crime. Eventually dragging the entire community down. Generally speaking, a metro area is only as nice as the central city allows it to be. No one goes to Washington, DC because Arlington is really nice. How many companies have HQ in Manhattan because they really like Yonkers? Not trashing the 'burbs here, just saying the giant sucking sound of money flowing from Tulsa is not always best for the area. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 22, 2007, 11:01:31 am I think this Jenks project is good for the city of Tulsa, even moreso if the Drillers are not part of it. It’s not just a shopping center, it is a destination area that should improve the quality of life in Tulsa metro and should make the Tulsa metro a better destination for visitors. Tulsa Hills, if it were located in Jenks, would hurt Tulsa, just like the new Wal-Mart Supercenter in Glenpool (but right across the street from Jenks) will hurt Jenks.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: deinstein on August 22, 2007, 02:20:57 pm ANNEX JENKS!
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 03:06:54 pm quote: Yea. Your a complete loon. We have had discussions as to why the "Brookside, Cherry Street, Downtown" thing didnt work on other threads. I am not going into it yet again. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: inteller on August 22, 2007, 03:55:34 pm quote: no downtown should get an MLS team for all the worldly weirdos that collect down there. put America's Pastime where the attendees will be. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Kenosha on August 22, 2007, 04:34:15 pm Looking at that plan...how do they plan to accommodate 7000 people exiting that parking lot at the baseball stadium simultaneously?
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Renaissance on August 22, 2007, 04:42:40 pm Do you know what world has not been uttered once to describe this development?
SPRAWL. That's what it is. It's total urban sprawl at the expense of the city core. That's what so many of us who call the city home are reacting against. Yes, it's a very pretty development, but outside the outer loop of the city! That's why Tulsans don't give a **** about it. We live in the city so we don't HAVE to drive 30 minutes to do things. It may as well be an outlet mall in Stroud. Yes, it will be a nice park. But it's another step towards a city in which, to do anything at all, you must spend hours in the car. If you are an enthusiast of the automobile commute, by all means applaud away. Otherwise, call this spade a spade: SPRAWL. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Vision 2025 on August 22, 2007, 05:03:34 pm quote: I don't know the plan but the concept of a venue centered sports facility is simple; Patrons don't all arrive or depart the area at the same time; Some come early, enjoy the area, go to the game, and go home directly home afterwards; Some leave late and enjoy the are before leaving; And some come to the game and leave right after. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 22, 2007, 06:56:05 pm quote: Wrong. Have you ever been to the Jenks Riverwalk? It has something downtown Tulsa and the 71st street areas don't have... walkability. It's an easier and shorter drive from Broken Arrow, south Tulsa and east Tulsa than driving to downtown. It's pleasant... it's walkable. Wish downtown Tulsa had something like it, but the downtown-squatter mafia want their pound of flesh and will stop at nothing to get it. I'd love to live in walkable urbanity but that ain't happening in Tulsa... if it happens in Jenks, more power to 'em. After visiting the Aquarium and the Riverwalk, I no longer consider Jenks to be a suburb anymore. Jenks is a "bedroom community." quote:Somehow, they're able to do it for Jenks High School football... ain't rocket science, ya' know... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Renaissance on August 22, 2007, 07:44:35 pm This development is suburban sprawl by its very definition, brother. Your compliments to Riverwalk are lipstick on a pig. I understand you find it pleasant. My point is that it's ultimately undesirable for a healthy urban area to force folks to take a TOLL ROAD for MILES and MILES just to pretend they're in the middle of walkable urbanity. Get it?
Not. A. Good. Thing. You hate the condition of the roads? Stop building destinations 15 miles from the center of town so that more street maintainence is required. You don't like the empty state of things downtown? Put something there instead. Rufnex--I hear you talking about Chicago a lot--Wrigleyville, etc.--like it's what you want. Well this is like moving the Cubs to the North Shore suburbs and surrounding New Wrigley with parking lots and malls. Sure, it's pretty and there's rich people up there, but you're taking the soul out of the city. Not. A. Good. Thing. Don't you realize that the same thing could be plopped down in the middle of downtown Tulsa if this city had leadership? I'm not talking about political leadership. I'm talking about responsible developers who realize that the extra seed money to locate their pies-in-the-sky in the vital center will yield greater dividends for both their bank accounts and for the region. Make no mistake: this development is a clear step AWAY from the goal of revitalizing Tulsa. If you think it's desirable, your values lie outside the tollway, away from Tulsa's history and heritage. It's a step towards the decline of Tulsa. And if you don't think the decline of Tulsa means the decline of the region, you can't see past the tip of your nose. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 22, 2007, 08:19:39 pm quote: Artist has it all figured out. They're working on a Trolley system you know. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 22, 2007, 08:55:55 pm quote: There's no need for attitude. I owned & operated a shuttle bus, I had discussions with a man named Lund, (Brad, I think) who owned and operated two trolleys advertised in UT. Then spent time discussing the business with Bill White and his employees. Somehow I missed your in depth discussion on this forum. Were any of those experienced operators contributing? Here's the bottom line. The only reason it works in OKC is the huge draw of the Murrah. Even so it is subsidized. No private trolley system will work here because of the MTTA. They will eventually operate one if anyone does, and it will be subsidized by the taxpayer cause they lose money even in a developed area. Even Bill White would have difficulty without the DTU contract to pay the overhead. Check out the website "trolleybroker.com" and look at who is selling their trolleys...municipalities mostly. The only other ones come from high tourist traffic areas like Niagara, San Francisco etc. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 09:02:14 pm I meant "loon" in the friendliest sort of way of course.[:)]
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Wrinkle on August 22, 2007, 09:03:42 pm But...but...., what about the 'region' guys?
Anything that helps one, helps us all. That's what our Tulsa Regional Government always says, especially when Tulsa is on the giving end. In this case, Tulsa (the City) currently derives little benefit from the Drillers being on County land, except the road improvement/maintenance work required to support traffic. Technically, there's no real loss to Tulsa involved here. It's that someone is messing with the Mayor's (and cohorts') plans. I recall in the late 70's, the Chicago Bears signed a contract to move out to Arlington Heights, and a brand new stadium....didn't go over well with Mayor Daley, who promptly shook his finger and said he'd sue if they tried to use "Chicago" in their name. Immediately began calling them the "Arlington Heights Bears". Didn't stick around to see what actually happened, but they never moved, and also did not get the new stadium they demanded in the first place. Though, I think Soldier Field was renovated. Frankly, this is a premediatated (near genius) business negotiation being performed by Driller's ownership. Even if they lose, they win. Nice position to be in. The Mayor's p.o.'d cuz it's now going to cost her a heap more, and that's out of pocket since she'll never be able to get tax support for a new stadium. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 22, 2007, 09:20:06 pm quote: Easier said than done. The timing on this still smells like the Drillers want to use a potential move to Jenks against the city of Tulsa as "leverage" for a preferred downtown ballpark. I don't think the Drillers want to pay a nickel of their own $$$ for a brand new stadium. They've been doing just fine $$$-wise at the Fairgrounds for years now, thank you very much... I think their heart is set on the East End location after they tried to piggyback off Global Development Partners when the soccer deal fell through... And I think the Drillers want a higher cut of concessions (overpriced hotdogs, chips, pop & beer) than the city of Tulsa is willing to give them. The city wants to transform the Drillers from a Fairgrounds county-tax deadbeat to a downtown city-tax cash cow. Funny how Mayor Taylor emailed her constituents to put pressure on the Drillers to locate downtown. Notice how she didn't say anything about them staying at the Fairgrounds... that's because she's kicking them out! And she didn't say anything about the river, because I bet the Drillers found the prospects of playing at 23rd and S. Jackson unacceptable for a variety of reasons... this is all about who pays and how much... and which location is ultimately acceptable... this location east of OSU-Tulsa was quoted from KOTV... "Sportyart to the white courtesy phone, please... sportyart to the white courtesy phone..." (http://kotv.com/newsimages/214/e0b2d0ff-60b9-4fe1-8cc5-8d4d448869f9.jpg) BTW, an MLS team would be much more expensive in many different ways. The most obvious is that they would require a 20k-seat stadium versus 7k or 8k. Tulsa's grassroots efforts at MLS have always been a day late and a dollar short... and as long as the city of Tulsa decides that a potential Major League Soccer team could or should play second-fiddle to double-A baseball, TULSA WILL NEVER GET A TEAM... EVER. Tulsa could have had David Beckham and his international media/paparazzi entourage playing T-town a couple of times per year... I mean, we see Tiger Woods twice a decade, if we're lucky... The Drillers have a team in Tulsa and an owner... Major League Soccer for Tulsa has neither. For your entertainment, here's Tulsa's current local ownership group for MLS... (tip your waiters, try the veal)... 1. No comment. 2. Speak with my lawyer. 3. I signed a "confidentiality agreement." 4. No really, I signed a "confidentiality agreement." Get off my back about this. 5. The Easter Bunny. 6. The Tooth Fairy. 7. Jimmy Hoffa. 8. If you spill the beans, I'm gonna tell the media you voted democrat in two different states at the same time just like I did to... er, uh... <click>. ***I honestly don't know if "Corky" was part of the Tulsa group for MLS, he was just on my list of suspects... [;)] Of course, on Tues. night's News on 6, we get this... http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=134394 quote: Okay, if they mentioned the East End and failed to give credit to the soccer people who attracted the developers in the first place, that's forgivable... but when KOTV acts like the Drillers were promised a downtown ballbark for the 1997 Tulsa Project and then show a picture of this?!?!?... (http://kotv.com/newsimages/214/5ca29f21-8309-43ee-85ba-0c70108a6c19.jpg) "Doggone it Earl, that don't look like no ballpark to me... heh-heh, me neither..." Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 09:40:12 pm OOOOOOH,,,, AAAAAAH.... OOOOOO [:P]
(http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/1472/riverdistrictfountainfe0.jpg) Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: AVERAGE JOE on August 22, 2007, 09:49:45 pm quote: That plan couldn't suck any worse. Ballpark surrounded by a sea of asphalt next to a detention pond. It's a "river" location with most of the surface parking along the river and the ballpark hundreds of feet inland. How freakin' creative. Might as well put it in a cow pasture for as much as the ballpark interracts with the river. Terrible access too. Look at the tiny little roads leading to the ballpark and how few there are. Pinned in by the toll road. Not walkable. Nothing to walk to. By the time you walk to the stuff to the north, you might as well drive there rather than walk all the way back to the parking lot. And you'd be a LONG way from Riverwalk Crossing. Looks to me as though the ballpark is a complete afterthought in that plan. Like they had leftover land reserved for phase two and decided to plop a stadium on it. Not integrated well at all. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 22, 2007, 10:30:18 pm I do think the baseball park could have been shuffled closer to the rest of the development. Could have put that parking on the North side on the south side of the stadium for instance. Having said that though. I do like the general idea of a ballpark being off to one side. Just have the main entrance and exit right onto an interesting streetscape. Its really not a large distance at all, but could easily have been a bit closer. Its better to have a ballpark off to one side because most of the time it would be a "blank space" to have to walk past, unless it had ground level retail and such, and thats not going to realistically happen.
The rest of the plan however looks very good. Great layout of buildings, types of buildings and usages. Better than many I have seen of this type. Plus, whats the difference whether or not the ballpark is actually on the river or set back from it? Would you be able to see the river any more or less from the stands if it were closer? I think the ballpark is by the river because of the synergies the ballpark can have with the rest of the development. Which happens to be by the river. Its an occasional draw to help the development and it helps the ballpark to be near an interesting development like this. I think this developer is hedging his bets and not relying on either the river getting a dam nor relying on getting the baseball stadium. That parking lot on the north can always be developed in the future if warranted. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: RecycleMichael on August 22, 2007, 10:42:26 pm I am a regional guy...I believe what is good for each helps all and I think that we need to have lots of common things and experiences as a region.
But this is baseball. It is different to me. I love the Tulsa Drillers and don't want to share them. I want them in Tulsa. Help me show the Drillers that Tulsans want them to stay. When the home team scores a run, we want home plate to be here in Tulsa. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 22, 2007, 11:06:02 pm I think we have a split decision...
http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=134447 ----"The News On 6 was the first to tell you Monday that the Tulsa Drillers have signed a letter of intent with developers to possibly move to Jenks. The letter is said to be non-binding. So we asked you, where would you prefer the Drillers locate? We listed three options on KOTV.com. In more than 17 hours, 2,461 people voted on KOTV.com. About 40% chose Jenks. Thirty-two percent said the team should stay where it is. And 28% supported a move to downtown Tulsa." ------------------------------------------------ I smell a sweetheart deal in downtown Tulsa... dats whut ah smell... [}:)] For me, I'd like a ballpark with 90-degree angles similar to Frontier Field (Rochester, NY) so it can accomodate a USL1 soccer team or maybe this for Jenks if they don't attract the Drillers.... http://www.charlestonbattery.com/stadium_overview.asp#poptop ***privately funded, BTW. Umm. Floyd. This $1bil project without the stadium would be "walkable urbanity." What I see is in Jenks is more walkable than most of south Tulsa. The project is nice and yes, the stadium appears like an afterthought... wonder if the Drillers provided the stryofoam... A few years ago, the Chicago Bears had an offer from Gary, IN to build a domed stadium and Mayor Daley used the same tactic of threatening the team by forcing them to be called the "Gary Bears." I walked today from Jenks to Tulsa, then walked back... hope they become an Evanston or an Oak Park... oh, and please don't compare a double-A minor league ballclub to the Cubbies... I grew up in Tulsa. Most Tulsans who go to Drillers games are casual fans who have no clue whether the team is 4 1/2 games ahead or 7 1/2 games behind Springfield or Wichita or Arkansas... If I want a downtown, urban feel... I need to at the very least be able to walk back and forth to the grocery store. If I can do that in Jenks, it is NOT sprawl. If I can't do that in "urban" Tulsa, it's not really very urban at all, now is it? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Kenosha on August 23, 2007, 12:23:04 am quote: Ummmkay. I am going to have to go ahead and disagree with you on that. While I concur that patrons tend to arrive at random times, they do not, at these sporting events, leave at different times. 90% of these people leave after the game or concert is over. At the same time. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Kenosha on August 23, 2007, 12:25:29 am quote: AJ...to me it looks like they designed the "Urban Village" and then, later, stuck the stadium on there. And that in itself tells me a few things... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: brunoflipper on August 23, 2007, 07:02:01 am quote:i was just saying that i'd rather have them bring in an mls team than have them steal the drillers... but i'm also convinced that a downtown, mls/baseball mixed use stadium would work... so what do i know... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Oil Capital on August 23, 2007, 07:20:29 am quote: like... C'mon man, what does that tell you? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 23, 2007, 08:14:46 am What is that chunk of water in the upper right hand corner. Makes it look like the land on the north of the Creek turnpike is flooded.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: pmcalk on August 23, 2007, 08:34:38 am quote: What do you mean? The mayor has authority to kick anyone off the fairgrounds. That's entirely up to the fairboard. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: pmcalk on August 23, 2007, 08:36:31 am City Council votes on a resolution tonight supporting the Driller's in Tulsa:
http://www.tulsacouncil.org/pdfs/meetings/Addenda/CC%2008-23-07-6-ad.pdf Not that it means anything, but shows that the city is taking this very seriously. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 23, 2007, 09:01:06 am quote: PM, I think you mean the mayor does not. Again, The city had nothing do with Bells moving, and currently has nothing to do with the Drillers. The Fairgrounds is not even in the city of Tulsa, it’s un-annexed land (for two more years), and the fairgrounds is actually owned by the county, it’s not just in the county, it’s owned by Tulsa County. Even after annexation by the city in two years, the county will still OWN the fairgrounds. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Townsend on August 23, 2007, 09:09:45 am quote: Does it mean anything at all? What will this resolution provide? Will Roscoe vote for or agin' it? Someone peed in your popcorn...this and more coming up on news at 9. (edit) I guess I should follow up the smarta$$ comments with asking if it really means anything. Does it really mean anything? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: jackbristow on August 23, 2007, 10:16:20 am This is all about private investors making business decisions. Jenks is booming. The Jenks Riverwalk and Aquarium are successful. There are young families galore in the the suburban areas and the area will just continue to grow. This PRIVATELY FUNDED development will prosper for these reasons.
Downtown doesn't have the momentum that Jenks does right now and that is why there isn't more private investment going in there yet. Maybe the publicly funded stuff will help, but it is all about business and bringing private money in. The demand for downtown is waning and that is why it is taking public money to make anything happen there. It just isn't attractive enough to private investors and developers...yet. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: pmcalk on August 23, 2007, 10:20:19 am quote: Oops. Yeah, that's what I meant. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 23, 2007, 10:38:48 am quote: And there’s something else I want to address. The idea that this is a “private” development that doesn’t cost any tax dollars. While that is true on the face of it, understand this. Jenks has very good schools, the streets are all recently paved, Jenks has the lowest crime in the metro, and more factors that all lead to the demographics that make a “private” development like this possible. Something else Jenks has, is the highest overall taxes in the entire region, if not state. And Jenks still has all the same operational budget problems Tulsa does. Jenks certainly is paying for this project, just not directly. If Tulsa were to bring it’s property tax rates up to what people in Jenks pay, the capital projects that could be done in the city would be amazing. But most of the same group that is against the river (and everything) would be against that tax increase too. These are the same people that had the “Do The River First” signs during the vote for 2025. The argument for them changes, but it’s always “no”, and you get what you pay for. Always. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: MichaelBates on August 23, 2007, 11:44:52 am quote: The "Do the River First" signs were not from the Vision 2025 campaign. David McKinney launched that campaign after Four to Fix the County II was announced in the fall of 2005. And as far as I know, that is the only campaign in which Mr. McKinney has been active. There's a big difference between tax increases for non-essential projects and "if we build it they will come" wishful thinking, and taxes that go directly to basic city services. With the exception of one or two people, every one I know that you would call "anti-tax" has supported tax renewals for basic infrastructure and basic services. I voted for every third-penny sales tax except the 2006 edition, and the only reason I voted against that is because I thought the newly-elected mayor and council should determine what would be in the next five-year package. I would have supported an extension of the 2001 tax to finish those projects, followed by a new package. I endorsed and voted for the first Four to Fix the County in 2000, because it was a renewal of an existing tax and addressed significant county infrastructure needs. I've voted for and endorsed each city bond issue for as far back as I can remember. If you added up all the dollar amounts of taxes I've voted for in the last 10 years, it would total well over $1 billion. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: MichaelBates on August 23, 2007, 12:08:50 pm quote: The City of Jenks levies 15.72 mills. The City of Tulsa levies 12.67 mills. Raising Tulsa's millage to Jenks' level would raise an additional $7.9 million a year. That's not nothing, but compared to the $385 million proposed 2008 street bond issue, it's a drop in the bucket. http://www.treasurer.tulsacounty.org/documents/County_of_Tulsa_2006_Levies_Detail.pdf Surprisingly, Owasso doesn't levy any property tax at all. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on August 23, 2007, 12:58:48 pm quote: I always thought the higher property taxes had to do with the school system. You pay higher property tax anywhere within the Jenks district. Move a few blocks out of the district and your property tax rate drops by a fair amount. Same with Union School District. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on August 23, 2007, 01:00:02 pm quote: How is education funded in Owasso? I had always thought that property tax helps pay for public schools and Owasso has had a lot of new building projects and renovations going on for years. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 23, 2007, 01:28:42 pm quote: I was not grouping you into this argument, I know you are not against everything, but there is a certain radio station, newspaper and a group of bloggers that ARE against every tax vote, no matter what it is for. Oddly. I have heard former streets commissioner Hewgley say that Tulsa is short about $8 million a year on road maintenance, that’s almost exactly what you say Tulsa is short of Jenks a year. Also, Jenks has passed a GO bond that likely isn’t included in those figures from 2006 so the gap is likely wider now. Also, the millage that you are quoting is city bond issues only. People don’t move to Jenks for the great roads, it’s schools, less expensive housing and a child centric culture. The crime rate doesn’t hurt, but in reality most of Tulsa has low crime too. Schools are a huge issue. The city of Tulsa needs to be working overtime with developers that would like to build in JPS in west Tulsa. That area is set to boom. Jenks Schools millage is 132.55 vs 118.35 for TPS. Combine the two and millage in Jenks/Jenks Schools is 148.27 vs 131.02 for Tulsa/Tulsa Schools. And, urban TPS has all kinds of issues that are very expensive to deal with that Suburban Jenks just simply doesn’t. TPS needs more than Jenks to achieve at the same level, not less. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: jackbristow on August 23, 2007, 01:30:29 pm quote: There you go. The road issue is a whole other discussion and will require something else entirely. Frankly, I'm for the tax for the river development and any road bond issue that comes up in the next year or so. I can handle paying an additional $10 a month in sales tax if it means I will have a nicer city to live in. I realize that some things we want take public money because there isn't anything to attract business on the front end (i.e. downtown and the river). It would be nice if the tax packages would be more comprehensive and complete and address everything we want all at once, but I know that the real world isn't that simple, so I don't vote no on things on principal, because then nothing would ever get done. Tell us more about the proposed 2008 street bond issue. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on August 23, 2007, 02:17:26 pm quote: Point taken. But I have to ask: Why does it look like the fairboard is kicking out the Drillers (still smells like the city's swaying the fairboard more than the other way around)... I'd be naive if I didn't think the city wasn't at the very least, throwing its weight around... and why does the city of Tulsa want the Drillers downtown so badly? I may not know all the minutae of city and county government... just following the money. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: RecycleMichael on August 23, 2007, 02:54:15 pm But baseball players are among the most superstitious people around.
I would think the players would not want to play in a town named Jinx. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Rico on August 23, 2007, 04:40:07 pm quote: Actually Mike, Jenks and Bixby are thinking about joining forces..... They will become one town known as "Jixby".... That way they will have at least ten Police officers to do crowd control at the "Jixby Drillers" games. [}:)] Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Double A on August 23, 2007, 07:24:53 pm I think we should get rid of Big Splash and build a new ballpark for the Drillers on that space. RM was very eloquent at the Council meeting, I really do appreciate what he had to say. It was a very poignant moment when he spoke about Drillers games at the Fairgrounds being a gathering place that we already have as a city, where people from across the city come together, that we don't have to create. Thank you for your thoughtful comments and for choosing not to promote a specific location in Tulsa for the Drillers to locate(like the Mayor), just that they stay in Tulsa.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: RecycleMichael on August 23, 2007, 07:45:14 pm Thank you doubleA.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: pmcalk on August 23, 2007, 07:58:19 pm ^^Wow. I think H*ll just froze over.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Aa5drvr on August 23, 2007, 08:14:56 pm Funny and if you think back, there was an amusement park not far from there......hmmmmmm
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 23, 2007, 08:46:02 pm That wasnt an amusement park. It was a nasty mess that kept getting worse every year. Unless the amusement was that it was called an amusement park.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: tim huntzinger on August 25, 2007, 06:22:32 am It may have been a nasty mess, Paintin' Billy, but there was no point in smashing Zingo.
The more I look at the Jenks development the more it looks mish-mash. If they wanted an 'urban' experience why not wrap the retail around the stadium? I suppose this has to do with the stbility of the river bank, but why not put it closer to the river instead of seperating the stadium the two by a baking hot parking lot? And is this crew easily connected by a Medlock-o-gram to Ron Howell? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 25, 2007, 07:33:24 am quote: How many small towns or urban centers are wrapped around a baseball stadium? That seems even more faux and artificial. Most baseball and sports stadiums were placed on the edges not in the center of downtown. A central square, park or plaza is whats supposed to go in the middle not a huge hulking baseball stadiu. Plus, unless there are shops and such around the bottom edge of the baseball stadium it would hurt walkability because you would then only have stuff on one side of the street and a wall of dead space on the other. Just like you wouldnt put a large parking garage in the middle or by a town square without having businesses around it. Plus this stadium is larger than most parking garages and with shops wrapped around it, it would take up an even larger space that you couldn't cut through and would have to walk all the way around. It would essentially take up 4 blocks if you added buildings around it. As for being closer to the river. Can you see the river from inside the baseball stadium? With the way the walls wrap around the stadium, it would seem that the closer you were to the river the more of the river would be blocked from your line of site. I guess if your waay up in the top stands on the SW side you could see out over the river. And even then if you draw a line of sight arrow to the closest area of ground, or river, you could see, its not going to fall anywhere near the stadium. I dont understand why people want the stadium right up on the river? You wont be able to see it from inside. Is there some other reason? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: waterboy on August 25, 2007, 07:42:13 am From my perspective, its just that I don't relish seeing a parking lot right next to the riverbank. Seems like that would be prime visual land and as pretty as Jenks Lexus' are I don't care to see them next to the bank!
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: tim huntzinger on August 25, 2007, 07:44:30 am I like the idea of walking through a neighborhoodish setting to the ballpark, maybe even have shops on the ground level of the park.
That summertime pavement is scorching hot, and the traffic access will obliterate a good portion of the riverfront. I hope the comments here are right and this is just totally conceptual because it will be pointless to have it near the river if attendees are kept a good quarter mile from it. Like having an arena that gives one a great view of the downtown skyline - NOT! Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on August 25, 2007, 07:54:47 am I noticed there's a train station in the plan.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: jackbristow on August 27, 2007, 03:52:22 pm quote: I may be seeing it a little differently, but I think the point he was trying to make was that it would have been cool to have the baseball field and stadium more incorporated into the retail areas. If someone could emulate the Wrigley Field experience they would have a definite winner. Has anyone ever been to a game there and hung out around the surrounding bars, shops, restaurants before and after? It is awesome. The stadium is right in the middle of the area and fits in nicely. This could be mimicked in Jenks or Downtown without a problem. I don't care where it is frankly. If it is built and done well, I'll go. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on August 27, 2007, 05:24:53 pm That is a legitimate point on the parking lot being near the river and not some sort of shops or living. However this whole development is not really "river centric" or a boardwalk type development. Its more a town square type developent that happens to be near the river. You will still get a sense of being near water with the lake, canal, fountains, etc. but its not focused on that like the Riverwalk is. Plus the proposed dam will not put water in the area where the stadiums parking lot is situated. Missed opportunity? Perhaps. But also just doesnt seem to be what these people are going for anyway. And ya know, that parking lot can just as easily be redeveloped in the future with things facing the river, as it could be if they dont end up having any stadium there at all.
I hope that if any development goes in between 11th and 21st on the west bank in Tulsa that it faces downtown and the river and that a good part of it is right on the river. It would be nice for Tulsa to have true riverfront development, not just development thats near the river. That can be one thing that makes our development unique and attractive compared to this one. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: BKDotCom on August 27, 2007, 10:40:16 pm quote:I think he was referring to the former Amusement park (called "Skyline") in Jenks. skyline info on tulsatvmemories.com (http://"http://tulsatvmemories.com/skyline.html") Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on November 02, 2007, 08:40:59 am Sounds like even this project is in danger of not happening. Apparently there is some loud opposition to the use of a tif for this development. Most notably the use of a tif for the baseball stadium and the fountain. I was really hoping for this development to happen. It would be the first example of new urbanism or the "urban village" concept in the Tulsa area. Perhaps in Oklahoma.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: tulsa1603 on November 02, 2007, 10:11:29 am quote: I understand wanting this to happen, but it's just one more draw away from Tulsa.... Hear that giant sucking sound? =) Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on November 02, 2007, 11:07:22 am quote: According to the world, the Jenks school district will actually get LESS money for 18 years than they get now. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: TheArtist on November 02, 2007, 11:40:49 am quote: I compleeetely disagree. First off its so close, it IS Tulsa imo. Losing some tax revenue from some people that shop there instead of Tulsa, yes. But Tulsa itself is growing and Jenks and Glenpool... The pie isnt one size, its growing. Plus this is just the kind of development that the Tulsa area needs to help make it more attractive. We will all benefit from that just like the whole area is better because of that Riverwalk Crossing. Gives us all one more place to go, thing to do. Are you suggesting we have too much of that lol? OH no, there is sooo much to do here, sooo many neat places to go and shop, stop! no more! its just too much![:P] Again, the population is growing, jobs are growing, etc. This will actually help me feel better about being IN TULSA. I will like living here a little better. Plus things like Tulsa Hills pulling from Jenks and areas out that way will help balance out some of what the River District will pull from Tulsa. Sometimes its just the appearance of things, the availability of something makes an area more attractive. Like friends of mine who have moved to Dallas. I find out they have really moved to areas like Plano or Addison. But its the "Dallas" that is the draw. Something doesnt have to be directly within the borders of Tulsa to make Tulsa a better place to live. How many people visit the beach every day that live by the ocean on the west coast. The beaches would have millions upon millions of people on them every day even if a percentage went. Its that its there, even if its not used that much. What percentage of people really, actually go to the mountains in Denver, even just once a month? Those things are A reason to live there, but many people do not honestly avail themselves of those reasons on a daily, weekly, even monthly basis. So on top of the fact that Jenks, Tulsa et. al. are already growing. A nice development like this can actually help those places become more attractive and grow even more. This positive can spill over into Tulsa. As for losing taxes. The area would lose, according to TW, about 6,000 dollars in taxes each year over the life of the tif. The area now generates about 13,000 a year in property taxes, during the life of the tif it will generate about 7,400 dollars a year. After the 18 years the area is estimated to generate about 21.8 million per year. The school district gets about half. So during the life of the tif the Jenks schools will lose about 3,500 per year. Minus whatever would be developed there without any tif if something is developed there otherwise. The developer says he wont build without the tif. If that property is developed piecemeal over the years will that area 1. Be as attractive and a draw as it would be if this development were to go through? (I say no) 2. Would what is likely to go there piecemeal be as nice, dense and make as much taxes over all as this development? (again I say no, its highly unlikely that any development there would have midrise buildings, apartments surrounding structured parking, etc. if its developed with your typical strip mall and big box stores. The typical development will not be as likely to be as dense, expensive and raise as much taxes over the long run as this development would. A large coherent development like this can afford to do more expensive things because each part works together to create a more desirable, cost effective whole. Plus the tif helps that and even small developers with a tif wont likely do as much over all in that area.) Even as nice as the River Walk is, its nothing in comparison to the scale of this. The river district will raise much more taxes in the end than probably anything else that is likely to go there. Plus its not as though Jenks will not be growing more property taxes in other areas. This can actually help spur even more growth. Its also quite likely that it will take, what, 10 years or more for that area to fill in naturally? Its not as though they are going to be instantly getting the full amount of whatever development begins to go in there if its lots of smaller developments building up over time. Once this big swath of property is gone in Jenks. There isnt going to be another. They arent going to have another chance at a large development like this. They simply dont have the available land and certainly not land thats this desirably located. This is their best chance to get this type of development if they ever want anything like it. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: spoonbill on November 02, 2007, 03:53:18 pm quote: Simply a concept for now. The planners haven't gotten ahold of it yet. Once they start to crunch numbers and review flow and traffic patterns it will change. Nice preliminary though. I guarentee it will have a better "riverfront" presence once the final orentaions and spacing is calculated. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: FOTD on November 05, 2007, 12:00:01 pm Schools will suffer if extremist developers continue to prey on our funds for schools...
REPOST! http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.c... Just what the banks need. The debt bubble is not just sub prime. Commercial Real Estate nightmare.... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: spoonbill on November 05, 2007, 12:17:45 pm quote: Huh? What's an extreemist developer? I don't get it? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: FOTD on November 05, 2007, 12:29:33 pm What's a guarentee???
An extremist developer is one who plops down lots of money for land knowing they will leverage their way into fee development by using the tax system or a dumb banker for their own benefit with the disguise that it's great for the community. Capitalism? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: perspicuity85 on November 05, 2007, 12:38:28 pm So South Tulsa/Jenks gets the Drillers, and DT gets a Wal-Mart? Ouch.
I'm still waiting on Rufnex to come out of nowhere with some clutch news concerning a MLS stadium. If Tulsa's unique urban scene continues to expand, maybe it will be attractive to MLS. Most of the D-Fest crowd, for example, would definitely attend an MLS game in Tulsa. If the Drillers move to Jenks, Tulsa needs to look for alternatives. Sporting venues can be great anchors for urban development. Think Wrigleyville, Chicago, on a smaller scale. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: spoonbill on November 05, 2007, 12:54:50 pm quote: Oh! I see. That's a rather pessimistic view of development But the process of development usually weeds these people out, unless they get signifigant support by the community. It is the responsibility of the community to be vigilant of where and how their tax money is spent. By and large, most developers are ego driven, rather than financially driven. They want to see what they build become "the great new thing." There are less than 10 big development players in Tulsa and they all have more than enough money to do whatever they want. They play the game because they want to win. They want a RiverWalk Crossing, or a WindRiver, or a Branson Landing. The money is great, but it's a long way out, and the "Developer's Fee," built into the financing for the development, is easily burned up (and usually is) in expenses long before the development is complete. These guys play because they like to see their name on stuff. They are building little empires. They don't want to build garbage. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Renaissance on November 14, 2007, 11:15:23 am The TIF is approved.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=071114_1_A9_hSome68134 Um, that was fast . . . if only Tulsa had some sort of leadership-type position with a bully pulpit and business leverage, elected by the city, with executive responsibility . . . the type of position that might get folks into one room and hammer out a development agreement for downtown Tulsa before the suburbs suck any remaining life away . . . too bad we don't have one of those. Oh wait, it's called a ****ing MAYOR. GET ON THE BALL, TAYLOR! Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on November 14, 2007, 11:32:24 am quote: Then file bankruptcy on that bank, I dunno, maybe BOK? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: FOTD on November 14, 2007, 12:16:58 pm The music man....Lynn Mitchell.
Nordstrom and Crate and Barrel. Right. Everyone's looking for income in all the wrong places. What happened to good ole efficient government? What happened to free enterprise without the government? The project has Jinx all over it.... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on November 14, 2007, 12:24:23 pm Nordstrom, Crate & Barrel?
What ever happened to small, local or regional chains like OTASCO? Government push them out or were they sloppy business managers and the times passed them by? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on November 14, 2007, 12:38:06 pm quote: Wal-Mart Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: sgrizzle on November 14, 2007, 12:48:43 pm quote: I think you might have it a bit skewed. The residents and school district in Jenks largely objected to the TIFF. So are we wanting Taylor to piss MORE people off in the sake of progress? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: FOTD on November 14, 2007, 01:20:18 pm quote: The chain was purchased by Ohio junk bond masters in the early 60's who placed the company into their Rapid American Corp. which proceeded to drain the company for years for the benefit of their other retail divisions including McCrory and to maintain their high New York lifestyles. High interest rates in the 70's threw this highly leveraged business into desperation in the early 80's. Desperate employees wanting to save their hides took it private. Lawyers, lacking good business judgment, running the show chose to roll up the chain into a new entity that fizzled very fast by 85. Rather than let the New York owners sell it, greedy leaders stepped in to bilk ex employees, current employees and banks. I think many of the master minds now work for the government. Figures. BTW, Otasco was for a while Oklahoma's largest employer. Also, first company in this nation to create a trust for their employees to protect their pensions. A very successful company up until they were sold in the early 60's to bank manipulators (shysters). One must wonder what ever happened to TG and Y and others like Oklahoma Tire And Supply Co..... Guess they got discounted. Times have past by the honest man. The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on November 14, 2007, 01:24:51 pm quote: Um, OTASCO was the Oklahoma Tire and Supply CO. OTASCO was the abbreviation. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on November 14, 2007, 02:15:21 pm quote: I think he's well aware of that... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Conan71 on November 14, 2007, 02:20:20 pm quote: Okay, seems like you know a little about this. So why did the original owners decide to sell the company to an out-of-state conglomerate if they were concerned enough about the future of their employees to protect their pensions? If it's a going business, profitable, and big enough where there must have been a good management structure, why sell? It couldn't have been too big a PITA for the owners to keep it, just watch the checks roll in and go play golf at So. Hills or Meadowbrook. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: brunoflipper on November 14, 2007, 02:33:45 pm quote:no ****... nordstrom? no ****ing way. he is FOS. crate and barrel? i seriously doubt it. but that, i might believe. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Renaissance on November 14, 2007, 02:38:33 pm quote: Whether people in Jenks are objecting or not, their TIF is moving forward, which gets them closer to being able to finance the theft of the Drillers. We need Taylor or her economic development team to move more quickly in developing an alternative plan for a downtown stadium. Lamson is going to move his team. The only question is where, and if he only has one option, that question is answered, no? I'm pleading for our city's leadership to lead, before the writing is on the wall. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: swake on November 14, 2007, 03:18:26 pm quote: Well, I guess FOTD doesn’t like Jerry Goodman (CEO) very much. From what I know he did his best to save the company but it went under as Wal-Mart started to really get big in the mid 80s. I knew his daughter pretty well. Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: FOTD on November 14, 2007, 04:41:11 pm quote: [/quote] Well, I guess FOTD doesn’t like Jerry Goodman (CEO) very much. From what I know he did his best to save the company but it went under as Wal-Mart started to really get big in the mid 80s. I knew his daughter pretty well. [/quote] Don't assume that any single individual could be responsible. Yes, Wal Mart and the big box craze helped change retail dynamics. Otasco was set up with multiple regional warehouses and small outlets. They'd been wise to go strictly automotive in 80. ToysRUs took over toys for a while and myriad of appliance chains including Home Depot hindered their redo in 82. The one's who took it private had the best intentions but could not quite figure out a strategy quick enough in a changing environment. Banks were not doing well at the time. The reason for the original founders intent to sell was simple. 5 immigrant Russian brother's and many sons and cousins made for a tough transfer of control. It became necessary to sell and reinvest as money came second to family. Many went on to other careers and some were asked to stay on to grow the chain. It was combined by Rapid American with a similar chain called Eastern Automotive and together it was branded Otasco Otasco was really the country’s first franchiser as well. Their stores were referred to as “associate” stores. Most real small towns and suburbs had associate stores owned by locals. Company stores were mainly in the cities from Western Oklahoma to the Atlantic ocean and from Kansas to South Oklahoma. Incidentally, there were no Jews playing golf in 60 at So Hills. Meadowbrook obviously. Now, get back on topic. That’s today’s Oklahoma Centennial History lesson. You won’t see it anywhere else but here at TNF. I think back in the old days, government had very little real estate involvement. Back in the days when public schools were of the highest priority. The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~Bertrand Russell Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: USRufnex on November 14, 2007, 06:40:02 pm quote: Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I've never been privy to insider info from anyone living in Tulsa... dating back to 2002... http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=142997&postcount=7 [:P] ...and over five years later, I still have no clue "who the mysterious Tulsa people are." [}:)] As much as I believe a "unique urban scene" is a desirable goal for Tulsa, no amount of urban chic will lead Major League Soccer (or any major sports league, IMHO) to consider Tulsa over the sexier cities of Portland, Philly, Atlanta, St Louis, Las Vegas, etc, etc... Tulsa has had chances at MLS based on the city's high level of support for the Roughnecks back in the late 70s and early 80s. It made perfect sense, less than ten years after the NASL's collapse in 1985, that Tulsa should rise to the top of the list of potential MLS cities. You see, MLS also wants to be in cities where they have the best chance of being treated fairly by the local media, local government, and get local corporate support and local ownership along with a high level of fan support. A lot of this happened in the early 80s with the old Roughnecks.... and in 1994, Tulsa rose to close to the top of the list of potential MLS cities, leapfrogging much larger cities like St Louis and Indianapolis and Detroit and Portland and Seattle... the only thing missing at the time was a grass field at Skelly. I thought that with Lamar Hunt (who owned multiple MLS teams) believing in Tulsa and Winnercomm's close relationship with MLS, it'd only be a matter of time before Tulsa got its soccer team back. I also saw enough games in Denver, Chicago, and Boston to still feel like Tulsa could be a success in this league... and still do. Back on topic, I guess I just don't understand all the bad blood about Jenks possibly financing a stadium for the Drillers. After all, the Arkansas Travelers now play across the river in North Little Rock... I mean, it's not like they're moving to Muskogee... or Springdale, AR... Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: YoungTulsan on November 14, 2007, 09:34:42 pm I think they could still be called the Tulsa Drillers with a Jenks location, and it wouldn't be too big of a deal to still support them like a hometown organization. The main thing we don't want to do is miss out on the opportunity to revitalize downtown. A ballpark brings activity to an area that sorely needs activity and the perception of life to build momentum. Baseball would do more for an area's activity level because they play a crapload of games compared to Soccer.
Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: bacjz00 on November 15, 2007, 10:58:00 am Baseball downtown (coupled with the arena) could literally transform what downtown is. The amount of contagious development would be unreal. The Drillers choosing not to play downtown is simply catastrophic to any re-emergence of downtown Tulsa. With that said, why would Tulsa start doing things that make sense now? We've always been "stooopid backwurdz" at everything else.
* Main interstate bypasses downtown * No 4 year public college * River? We have a river??!! * 100 feet beyond a multi-million, multi-lane intersection improvement..."Right lane ends" * 71st Street & US 169 Need I continue? Title: $B-B-BILLION Jenks River Development Lure Driller Post by: Aa5drvr on November 15, 2007, 11:15:18 am >>I think they could still be called the Tulsa >>Drillers with a Jenks location.
It happened in Roller Derby. The San Francisco Bombers became the San Francisco Bay Area Bombers. "You're watching Roller Derby, King of Sports." http://www.ajepstein.com/photo%20gallery/bomberbody2.html |