121st and Yale development, Yup, a South Tulsa question

[Townsend]

A friend of mine, living at 121st and Delaware, was made aware of this TMAPC meeting coming up and asked me about it.  The meeting, of course, is at 1:30 in the afternoon.

I dug into the issue and it looks like the maps provided for the meeting being sent out to neighbors is different than what is provided on the site.

Can anyone with more working knowledge help me out about what is going on in the area?

Will the park designation still stand South of 121st by the river?

Will there be huge commercial development at Yale South of 121st?  (I seem to remember a map showing a lot of development in the area somewhere on TN but can't find it.)

What is this park NE of the 121st and Yale intersection?

I was told that Yale is going to be widened.  Is that for the possibility of the bridge?

Thanks for any information.

http://www.tmapc.org/tmapc/pud-528-a%20abandonment.pdf

[tulsa1603]

Looks to me like there was once a PUD in place (Mix of residential and commercial) south of 121st and west of what would be Yale if it continued straight south past 121st, but now the city is requesting that it be abandoned in order to develop it as a new park.  The City of Tulsa Parks Department is who filed the application and also who owns the land per their application.  There isn't a park NE of the intersection, the last drawing is upside down relative to the others, so it's kind of confusing.  

And there is nothing on here regarding widening Yale or extending it with a bridge, this is all about the land use of that triangle SW of the intersection.

[Townsend]

Looks to me like there was once a PUD in place (Mix of residential and commercial) south of 121st and west of what would be Yale if it continued straight south past 121st, but now the city is requesting that it be abandoned in order to develop it as a new park.  The City of Tulsa Parks Department is who filed the application.  There isn't a park NE of the intersection, the last drawing is upside down relative to the others, so it's kind of confusing.  

And there is nothing on here regarding widening Yale or extending it with a bridge, this is all about the land use of that triangle SW of the intersection.

Thanks.

The abandonment thing is strange to me.  I could've sworn the land was left to the city with the condition that it was made a park and nothing else.

[tulsa1603]

Thanks.

The abandonment thing is strange to me.  I could've sworn the land was left to the city with the condition that it was made a park and nothing else.

It sounds like that is what they are doing.  Abandoning the PUD (planned unit development) and building a park.  There wasn't a park designation before - it was a PUD.  A PUD is a development, it can be commercial, residential, or a mix, and it sometimes varies from standard zoning regulations.  New neighborhoods are always PUDs.  You have to present to the city a plan showing streets, parking, lot size, etc.  So it looks like at one time, someone had plans to do a development there, but the land has been left to the city, so the city has to abandon that PUD to make it a park.  I know it seems illogical that you would have to get permission to build a park instead of building a commercial or housing development, but that's just typical red tape.  I would be pleased with this if I was a homeowner in the area.

[Townsend]

It sounds like that is what they are doing.  Abandoning the PUD (planned unit development) and building a park.

Not trying to beat it into the ground but why would there be a PUD on a property left to the city to become a park?

[Hoss]

Not trying to beat it into the ground but why would there be a PUD on a property left to the city to become a park?

Maybe the PUD was there before it was left and never was abandoned to become a park?  Just a thought.

[tulsa1603]

Not trying to beat it into the ground but why would there be a PUD on a property left to the city to become a park?

A PUD sticks with the property.  Say I own a huge piece of land and want to develop a neighborhood.  I get a PUD from the city, which means they approve of my plans (streets, lot sizes, etc).  So the overlying zoning and PUD work together in a sense to dictate what setbacks are, etc.  If something isn't prescribed in the PUD, it would be taken care of in the zoning.  If I then sell that land, the PUD is still in place.  So if another developer comes in, he either has to follow my PUD standards or develop his own, in which case he would have to abandon what I set up, file for his own, etc.  So at some point in history, a previous owner had a PUD set up on that land.  Now the city has to abandon that in order to build the park.  It's just bureacracy at work.

[Townsend]

A PUD sticks with the property.  Say I own a huge piece of land and want to develop a neighborhood.  I get a PUD from the city, which means they approve of my plans (streets, lot sizes, etc).  So the overlying zoning and PUD work together in a sense to dictate what setbacks are, etc.  If something isn't prescribed in the PUD, it would be taken care of in the zoning.  If I then sell that land, the PUD is still in place.  So if another developer comes in, he either has to follow my PUD standards or develop his own, in which case he would have to abandon what I set up, file for his own, etc.  So at some point in history, a previous owner had a PUD set up on that land.  Now the city has to abandon that in order to build the park.  It's just bureacracy at work.

I've learned a lot today.  Time to finish up and have beers.

Thank you for the information.

[guido911]

Not trying to beat it into the ground but why would there be a PUD on a property left to the city to become a park?

Not trying to beat the PUD?

[carltonplace]

There was a story on this once during the Yale Avenue Bridge argument. A family donated this land to the Riverparks authority with the stipulation that it is to be used as a park.

Here is something I found on the intrawebs:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100906_11_0_CityCo895517

Park creation on donated land a priority for Tulsa councilor

By BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Published: 9/6/2010  9:17 PM
Last Modified: 5/4/2011  6:07 PM




Correction
This story originally contained an incorrect name for Cousins Park. The story has been corrected.



City Councilor Bill Christiansen will try to raise private money to finally transform some south Tulsa land into a park after a dozen years of waiting, he told the Tulsa World.

The Cousins family donated 10 acres at the southwest corner of 121st Street and Yale Avenue to the Park and Recreation Department in 1998, with the stipulation that it remain a conservation area and that the family be involved in the design for its use.

The city purchased 35 more acres bounded by 121st Street, Yale Avenue and the Arkansas River for $950,000 with the intention of eventually turning the entire site into a park. Even though the land remains a field, it is referred to by the city as the future Cousins Park.

Strapped for cash, the Park Department has been unable to keep up with its current facilities, such as pools and community centers, much less focus on adding parks, Park Director Lucy Dolman said.

But Christiansen said that although Tulsa in general has lots of park land, south Tulsa has hardly any. The city hasn't focused on adding parks to its growth areas, he said.

"There's literally thousands of young children and families between 91st and 121st streets who need a park," he said.

The issue surfaced again during a recent council briefing on the recently completed park master plan. Christiansen was upset to learn that it doesn't include any specific plans or timeline to create Cousins Park.

"It's time to do something about this," he said. "The citizens of south Tulsa have been waiting long enough."

Dolman acknowleged that there is much less park land per capita in south Tulsa and in east Tulsa than in other sections of the city.

"There are parts of town that are better served than others," she said. "You can look at any map and see that."

Michael Wisner, CEO of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Trade and Commerce Authority, said in a telephone interview in March that the Creek Nation hopes to build a toll bridge across the Arkansas River in the area.

The tribe also has plans for major commercial development around the bridge, which would span the Arkansas River from 131st Street in Jenks to Tulsa near 121st and Yale.

Although the area donated by the Cousins family is supposed to remain in a natural state, Christiansen said, the land purchased by the city needs to be cleared and supplied with traditional park amenities.

"I really don't think it would cost that much to get started," he said. "I'm not talking about adding a pool or anything like that but maybe a splash pad, a basketball court, some playground equipment."

Cousins Park would be enormously popular, Christiansen said, noting that the closest park, Hunter Park on 91st Street near Hudson Avenue, is always packed.

The councilor said he plans to call private foundations and other groups to see whether they would be interested in donating.

"I think it's something that people will really get behind," he said.

Dolman said she would love to see the land turned into a park, "but then again, we'd love to see a lot of things happen."

The project poses challenges, she noted. The land is partially in a flood plain, and the area is home to least terns, which must be protected.

"It would be a great thing if it could work out," she said.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100906_11_0_CityCo895517

[guido911]

I'm liking the park idea. Also, need to put in a White Castle, Del Taco, Imo's Pizza (yes, I like it), Buffalo Wild Wings, and Joe Mammas near the park. There, South Tulsa is complete.

[sgrizzle]

I'm liking the park idea. Also, need to put in a White Castle, Del Taco, Imo's Pizza (yes, I like it), Buffalo Wild Wings, and Joe Mammas near the park. There, South Tulsa is complete.

You had me at white castle