Why do we "need" a 41st Street Bridge?

[sauerkraut]

As I see it one can never have too many bridges across a river.

[Sangria]

The "Private Sector" aka "The Wealthy People of Tulsa" are developing the west side of the river. The bridges will connect their west side developement to the east side.

This has nothing to do with "kindness to the people of Tulsa" it instead has everything to do with the people of Tulsa footing the bill to help the rich get richer.

They have already purchased the land on the west side for developement. DOH.

I am not against them developing anything - I just am tired of being lied to and mislead by these people.

$111 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what it's really going to cost to build.

We passed the 4th of a cent tax to provide people with a lot of high paying jobs. I don't think they will pass it to build bridges that are not nessesary.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Sangria

The "Private Sector" aka "The Wealthy People of Tulsa" are developing the west side of the river. The bridges will connect their west side developement to the east side.

This has nothing to do with "kindness to the people of Tulsa" it instead has everything to do with the people of Tulsa footing the bill to help the rich get richer.

They have already purchased the land on the west side for developement. DOH.

I am not against them developing anything - I just am tired of being lied to and mislead by these people.

$111 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what it's really going to cost to build.

We passed the 4th of a cent tax to provide people with a lot of high paying jobs. I don't think they will pass it to build bridges that are not nessesary.

If you know of some wealthy development on the west bank at 41st, then you have info no-one else has.

The west side is the neglected red-headed stepchild of Tulsa and calling a bridge connecting them to the rest of Tulsa as being elitist is laughable.

[sgrizzle]

I wish they could do a double-decker bridge. 1 lane each way for vehicles on top, pedestrian underneath.

The soccer field, PSO power plant and rainbow concrete seem to be the key properties for west bank development.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by Sangria

The "Private Sector" aka "The Wealthy People of Tulsa" are developing the west side of the river. The bridges will connect their west side developement to the east side.

This has nothing to do with "kindness to the people of Tulsa" it instead has everything to do with the people of Tulsa footing the bill to help the rich get richer.

They have already purchased the land on the west side for developement. DOH.

I am not against them developing anything - I just am tired of being lied to and mislead by these people.

$111 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what it's really going to cost to build.

We passed the 4th of a cent tax to provide people with a lot of high paying jobs. I don't think they will pass it to build bridges that are not nessesary.

Here, I will tell ya the truth. I want this deal to pass because I am going to get richer on it too. Oh, I know some people think thats a horrible thing to do, but oh well. Though I am "cash poor" I try to live a rich life. I love getting out and enjoying different activities. I can't wait to have more places to go, some different things to do all at wonderful facilities in a great environment. This will help make me rich indeed. And all our children will get to inherit this wealth.  Everyone that comes to town will get to prosper in it.

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaMINI

There has been talk of "Lookout Mountain Estates".  A 41st street bridge would be convenient for that area.

Personally, I still don't want it because W 41st is pretty much a racetrack already. A bridge would make it worse.

People are in a hurry because they have to go all the way down to I-44 in order to get anywhere

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by Sangria

The "Private Sector" aka "The Wealthy People of Tulsa" are developing the west side of the river. The bridges will connect their west side developement to the east side.

This has nothing to do with "kindness to the people of Tulsa" it instead has everything to do with the people of Tulsa footing the bill to help the rich get richer.

They have already purchased the land on the west side for developement. DOH.

I am not against them developing anything - I just am tired of being lied to and mislead by these people.

$111 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what it's really going to cost to build.

We passed the 4th of a cent tax to provide people with a lot of high paying jobs. I don't think they will pass it to build bridges that are not nessesary.

Here, I will tell ya the truth. I want this deal to pass because I am going to get richer on it too. Oh, I know some people think thats a horrible thing to do, but oh well. Though I am "cash poor" I try to live a rich life. I love getting out and enjoying different activities. I can't wait to have more places to go, some different things to do all at wonderful facilities in a great environment. This will help make me rich indeed. And all our children will get to inherit this wealth.  Everyone that comes to town will get to prosper in it.

                                              Everyone will prosper in it. That's a bold statement. Artist is a smart and srewd bidnez man. I would be singing the praises of this plan put forward by wealthy potential patrons, too. What's the saying- don't s#*t where you eat? Just don't try to wear it as a badge of integrity and always remember that you will always be nothing more than the help to them.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Just took a look at google earth, it almost seems as though someone was purposely trying to disconnect west Tulsa from the east.

whats wrong with that?  I say cede west tulsa to sand springs.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Okay, here's your pollution. In one day Sinclair was alleged to have released 1million gallons of wastewater that wasn't adequately treated. It had oil and wax in it. They did this for two years. That sounds like a lot to you I'm sure. But put it in perspective. It was water, oil and wax that mixed with the river water. That water then diluted the discharge and moved it on downstream.

Here's how much it was diluted. I don't know the capacity of the river at that time but I know the typical releases. Lets assume that the dam was releasing 10,000 cfs. Thats cubic feet per second and that would be a low average for the year. A cubic foot of water is .13368 gallon so that 1 million gallons is 133,680cubic feet of untreated waste water.

But it is going into a river that is running 10,000 cubic feet every second. In a day that would be 864,000,000 cubic feet of water and that doesn't include what was already in the river! That amounts to .00015% of the river or about 1 cubic foot of untreated wastewater for every 6,463 cubic foot of river each day.

Now, Sinclair knows better, and they deserved to be penalized. But is that enough to call the river polluted and unsuited for development David?

I thought there was something wrong with your math...turns out, there is. You're off by a factor of 56. A cubic foot of water contains 7.48 gallons. Still, your 1M gallons remains 133,680 cubic feet, but it's unclear how you got there.

 Ref: WikiPedia Info

I also thought a 10,000 cfs flowrate as an average was quite high. During recent releases 30,000-36,000 cfs was common, yet only about half of the potential max release, I think. But, average per hour over all days, all year would be much lower. I'd _guess_ an average hourly flow rate would be under 5,000 cfm. But, I have no reference to validate. And, recent rains are by no means considered norm.

In any case, I'd hate to get a glass full of whatever Sinclair dumped since wax and oil doesn't mix with water at all, thus does not dilute.

If ninty-nine out of hundred glass fulls were perfectly clean, the hundreth one still kills you.

[Note: Edited "cfm" to "cfs"]

[akupetsky]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaMINI

There has been talk of "Lookout Mountain Estates".  A 41st street bridge would be convenient for that area.

Personally, I still don't want it because W 41st is pretty much a racetrack already. A bridge would make it worse.

I think there are people in Red Fork that would like to improve the area, and it may be that a bridge would help.  To me, another footbridge is a clear benefit; you can't have too many of those crossings in a river park, as it will provide continuity and alternative routing options for foot, bike and skating traffic.  It would also connect and therefore expand any walking/biking/skating community that develops near the river parks, which would be good.  I agree that a bridge for autos could add to traffic problems on 41st street.  It could also lead to calls for expansion of 41st and Riverside if the bridge accommodates much traffic.  I would probably only support an auto bridge if it combined two lanes (one each way) for cars with wide sidewalks and biking paths on each side.  It would have to be a neighborhood bridge that really brings together the two communities on each side of the Arkansas and sort of be an attraction in itself, with space for artists and musicians.  Sounds quaint (and very unlikely to happen), but that's the only type of auto bridge I would support.

[Wrinkle]

This 41st Street bridge for auto and pedestrian traffic should be built, by the City. Since it's wholly a City of Tulsa placement, it would seem a City of Tulsa deal, rather than County. It is also needed to a much higher degree than the south Yale bridge, so should be a higher priority.

I'm wholly against a pedestrian only bridge, either at 41st or 61st. These should be removed from the current plan.

And, I'm against this SALES tax by the County. The funding issue needs resolution, but the County will get none of my support for this method of funding.

How easy it would be to have a 41st Street Auto/Ped Bridge as a single ballot item CITY BOND issue. We just need quotes, so issue an RFQ for bridge only.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:Originally posted by TulsaMINI

There has been talk of "Lookout Mountain Estates".  A 41st street bridge would be convenient for that area.

Personally, I still don't want it because W 41st is pretty much a racetrack already. A bridge would make it worse.

I think there are people in Red Fork that would like to improve the area, and it may be that a bridge would help.  To me, another footbridge is a clear benefit; you can't have too many of those crossings in a river park, as it will provide continuity and alternative routing options for foot, bike and skating traffic.  It would also connect and therefore expand any walking/biking/skating community that develops near the river parks, which would be good.  I agree that a bridge for autos could add to traffic problems on 41st street.  It could also lead to calls for expansion of 41st and Riverside if the bridge accommodates much traffic.  I would probably only support an auto bridge if it combined two lanes (one each way) for cars with wide sidewalks and biking paths on each side.  It would have to be a neighborhood bridge that really brings together the two communities on each side of the Arkansas and sort of be an attraction in itself, with space for artists and musicians.  Sounds quaint (and very unlikely to happen), but that's the only type of auto bridge I would support.

Employing the lost and forgotten art of compromise and true thinking outside the box to come up with a solution that everyone can be comfortable with? That's practically a guarantee it'll never happen. It's sounds like a great idea to me, though.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by deinstein

I mean...do you want to change that entire area from industrial to retail/residential? I'm confused on how you're going to develop the area otherwise. I also don't get why people think the river needs to be developed. It's not the Columbia River or Russian River...it's muddy, half empty and polluted. But, it's up to you guys...

Ah, the Russian River, now that brings back some memories(barely). Sorry to wax nostalgic, let's get back to ripping each others throats out.

[pfox]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

This 41st Street bridge for auto and pedestrian traffic should be built, by the City. Since it's wholly a City of Tulsa placement, it would seem a City of Tulsa deal, rather than County. It is also needed to a much higher degree than the south Yale bridge, so should be a higher priority.

I'm wholly against a pedestrian only bridge, either at 41st or 61st. These should be removed from the current plan.

And, I'm against this SALES tax by the County. The funding issue needs resolution, but the County will get none of my support for this method of funding.

How easy it would be to have a 41st Street Auto/Ped Bridge as a single ballot item CITY BOND issue. We just need quotes, so issue an RFQ for bridge only.

Well, there is not a road on the west side of the river at 61st, but there is a trail and Turkey Mountain...

[YoungTulsan]

Turkey Mountain needs to be developed.

Also, Musicians and artists have nothing to do with a frigging street across the river.  What the hell is wrong with you helmuts?  Infrastructure is about giving people easy access around the economy.  Not about the liberal arts.

We need to increase our tax base, and West Tulsa has a plethora of lowly populated land which could be turned into densely populated and/or revenue generating retail space.  It is one of the final frontiers of growth for the City of Tulsa, since we are boxed in by Broken Arrow, Bixby, Jenks, Sand Springs, and Owasso.