http://drop.io/hidden/zinp9rd4iwxags9/asset/Z2tmZnJmcTA5MjEwMS1wZGY%253D
I hope they get some good responses - looking forward to seeing ideas tying that whole 31st/Riverside area together with hoods behind and maybe even using Crow Creek to the south to tie in to Brookside.
They suggest a museum or similar type function for the Blair property or (and I'm intrigued by this) a mixed-use development with an emphasis on residential near the east of the property. Why not do both? They also talk about redeveloping the Crow Creek apts. and tying them into the development concept. Love that! Throw a smattering of small neighborhood commercial under an apartment building at the corner of 31st/Riverside and pull some narrow streets into a compact new residential neighborhood behind it...nice.
The Ridgers will start looking for their pitch-forks but I think it can be done so that it adds a ton of value to that neighborhood.
This would be one of the more significant midtown infill projects since Brooktowne was developed in the 90's. I will be interested to see the proposals.
The Crow Creek apartments are in too good of a location to be as rundown as they are. Hopefully any proposal there includes the jogging trail along the creek connecting Peoria (and possibly beyond to Zink Park) to the river trails.
I'll add that I think these properties should be primarily residential. Keep the Crow Creek apartments as apartments but with higher density and better connections to the river, Crow Creek itself, and Brookside i.e. taller buildings along Riverside. Dense townhomes closer to Riverside and single family houses to the east on the Blair property with better connections to the existing Maple Ridge neighborhood. Focus any new large park/museum development on the west bank at the Mid-Con plant/Festival Park. JMO
TW article
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20101017_11_A1_CUTLIN7660 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20101017_11_A1_CUTLIN7660)
With an Oct. 29 deadline for interested firms to respond with their qualifications to help draft a master plan, the foundation has already fielded 90 inquiries, including 50 which were "team-based" firms both in and out of the country, Stava said.
Quote from the TW article.>
"Levit said project is estimated to be a five- to 10-year effort."
It would seem this would have to be a very long ranged endeavor.
If I remember correctly... one of the terms of the "sale" of the Blair property was that the current owner/resident, could maintain residence and use of the property for the remainder of his life. Dan Buford doesn't look to be ready to make an exit any time soon.
Kind of Ghoulish to be doing this and setting any sort of time line on the start of construction.
Oh well, there may be a clause that calls for the elimination of the tenant
past a certain date.
Rrriiico that's bad....
But a damn good laugh
Quote from: Rico on October 20, 2010, 06:04:42 PM
Quote from the TW article.>
"Levit said project is estimated to be a five- to 10-year effort."
It would seem this would have to be a very long ranged endeavor.
If I remember correctly... one of the terms of the "sale" of the Blair property was that the current owner/resident, could maintain residence and use of the property for the remainder of his life. Dan Buford doesn't look to be ready to make an exit any time soon.
Kind of Ghoulish to be doing this and setting any sort of time line on the start of construction.
Oh well, there may be a clause that calls for the elimination of the tenant
past a certain date.
My understanding is that the foundation wasn't going to use the property anytime soon so he was free to stay, but that the invitation was not indefinite. No matter what the plan, the house may still be able to be used as a house for years.
Quote from: Rico on October 20, 2010, 06:04:42 PM
Oh well, there may be a clause that calls for the elimination of the tenant
past a certain date.
This sounds like an episode of Scooby Doo.
I seem to remember when the property changed hands that the foundation said they had no plans for development for a long time. I think that was to defer controversy till it was established that Kaiser is a good guy, that the upgrading of the paths was a wonderful improvement and that any further development would not only be on his dime, but well done. This is a long process that started a couple years ago when one of our posters noticed pink stakes along the Katy path.
I'm not nearly as excited as some of you are. The path behind the Blair mansion is also due for "upgrading" (they've already pulled core samples over there in preparation and I assure you the Parks dept didn't fund it) and has to be considered if the rest of the area from 31st to the mansion is done. That's when the Kaiser Foundation will run into opposition. That path is a quiet, under the radar outlet for the neighborhood, just like the West bank path was once unnoticed except by those wishing to avoid crowds. The rush to satisfy bikers with more wide, smooth high speed bike pikes is not universally appreciated. Some balance would be nice.
Quote from: waterboy on October 21, 2010, 07:15:21 PM
I seem to remember when the property changed hands that the foundation said they had no plans for development for a long time. I think that was to defer controversy till it was established that Kaiser is a good guy, that the upgrading of the paths was a wonderful improvement and that any further development would not only be on his dime, but well done. This is a long process that started a couple years ago when one of our posters noticed pink stakes along the Katy path.
I thought the Pedestrian Bridge and connecting paths were from the Midland Valley RR.
That could be. Perhaps the bridge was built by the Midland Valley RR. We always called it the Katy path around here until the last few years because when I first moved in the MK&T railroad operated along that path. It is now owned by the Tulsa Parks dept. because the River Parks did not want to take on the responsibility of upkeep. Parks doesn't have the funding the RPA and Kaiser Foundation have. Look for that path to be "donated" to the RPA or the foundation. Then they can do as they wish without interference from pesky taxpayers.
And here's what they should do: excavate the path beginning at 18th and Boston to where it approaches the river by the Blair Mansion. The path is already pretty level. Strengthen the sides, add a bike/running path on each side, pump in water and run watercraft in your new 6ft deep canal that empties into the river. Once the changes are made to the Zink low water dam to allow linkage between Zink lake and the new Jenks lake, you can run ferry trips to the Casino and Riverwalk from the bars at 18th and Boston with a stop at the "Shoppes at Blair Mansion".
Visionary eh?
Quote from: waterboy on October 21, 2010, 10:16:05 PM
And here's what they should do: excavate the path beginning at 18th and Boston to where it approaches the river by the Blair Mansion. The path is already pretty level. Strengthen the sides, add a bike/running path on each side, pump in water and run watercraft in your new 6ft deep canal that empties into the river. Once the changes are made to the Zink low water dam to allow linkage between Zink lake and the new Jenks lake, you can run ferry trips to the Casino and Riverwalk from the bars at 18th and Boston with a stop at the "Shoppes at Blair Mansion".
Visionary eh?
Could make for some interesting U-tube videos.
Could you keep enough flow to keep the water from becoming stagnant?
Quote from: waterboy on October 21, 2010, 07:15:21 PM
I seem to remember when the property changed hands that the foundation said they had no plans for development for a long time. I think that was to defer controversy till it was established that Kaiser is a good guy, that the upgrading of the paths was a wonderful improvement and that any further development would not only be on his dime, but well done. This is a long process that started a couple years ago when one of our posters noticed pink stakes along the Katy path.
Even if he was going full speed ahead without some sort of calculated delay for PR purposes, a project the scope of which is proposed here is going to take a decade to pull off in the snail's pace of development in Tulsa.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 21, 2010, 11:06:43 PM
Could make for some interesting U-tube videos.
Could you keep enough flow to keep the water from becoming stagnant?
Yeah, it has a gentle slope towards the river. I would pump water from the Blair Fountains area up to points at 18th and 26th to create a gentle current. Adding some automatic gates to open or close depending on water levels could manage the flow. That is similar to how OKC operates their canal and river.
I propose this rather tongue in cheek. I doubt anyone could get Maple Ridge to sign off on it even though eventually it would skyrocket the home values nearby.
Quote from: YoungTulsan on October 22, 2010, 02:11:21 AM
Even if he was going full speed ahead without some sort of calculated delay for PR purposes, a project the scope of which is proposed here is going to take a decade to pull off in the snail's pace of development in Tulsa.
Foundations and city's are in it for the long haul. Its not PR, its just the way it has to happen because there can be no real innovative change like this without a Kaiser, Warren or Chesapeake to spearhead it. They take out the politics and the tax complainers.
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Yeah, it has a gentle slope towards the river. I would pump water from the Blair Fountains area up to points at 18th and 26th to create a gentle current. Adding some automatic gates to open or close depending on water levels could manage the flow. That is similar to how OKC operates their canal and river.
I propose this rather tongue in cheek. I doubt anyone could get Maple Ridge to sign off on it even though eventually it would skyrocket the home values nearby.
Hey there might be a use for Bell's old log flume ride cars/boats whatever they are called, afterall.
Now there's creative recycling for historical artifacts.
I envision a concession for canoes, kayaks, a small electric ferry and perhaps a canal security guy with a small jet boat. Its only 1.5 mile but could be done a lot cheaper than most proposals. The low swampy area on the south side of the Blair property could be a staging area. The canal would actually travel over Riverside drive and gently slide into the river.
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 01:26:59 PM
....and gently slide into the river.
Been reading Mrs. Waterboy's Harlequin romance novels again, eh?
Mostly into periodicals but same imagery I guess. How cool would it be to have those log flume cars on a rail in the stream moving slowly, methodically, rhythmically along its gentle curves, probing the depths of the canal till exploding into the river with a gleeful, yet muffled scream of delight?
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 02:38:51 PM
Mostly into periodicals but same imagery I guess. How cool would it be to have those log flume cars on a rail in the stream moving slowly, methodically, rhythmically along its gentle curves, probing the depths of the canal till exploding into the river with a gleeful, yet muffled scream of delight?
and scene
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 02:38:51 PM
Mostly into periodicals but same imagery I guess. How cool would it be to have those log flume cars on a rail in the stream moving slowly, methodically, rhythmically along its gentle curves, probing the depths of the canal till exploding into the river with a gleeful, yet muffled scream of delight?
Sheesh, I think I'm going to have to take up smoking again
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 11:36:39 AM
Foundations and city's are in it for the long haul. Its not PR, its just the way it has to happen because there can be no real innovative change like this without a Kaiser, Warren or Chesapeake to spearhead it. They take out the politics and the tax complainers.
Yeah, I was just saying re: your suggestion they were deferring controversy that you probably couldn't move any faster anyway in Tulsa.
Quote from: YoungTulsan on October 22, 2010, 04:16:15 PM
Yeah, I was just saying re: your suggestion they were deferring controversy that you probably couldn't move any faster anyway in Tulsa.
Yeah, true. The deferring controversy is sort of a zig zag maneuver to keep folks from poking their noses into the process. I actually think the Kaiser foundation has done a fine job of finding a vehicle (RPA) and a mission (improvement of the river banks) that will eventually effect some development along the river area. Not the development I would savor, but any attention is good. Remember, its been over 20 years since any real change has happened over there. They have now set up a working relationship and can make something happen.
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 02:38:51 PM
Mostly into periodicals but same imagery I guess. How cool would it be to have those log flume cars on a rail in the stream moving slowly, methodically, rhythmically along its gentle curves, probing the depths of the canal till exploding into the river with a gleeful, yet muffled scream of delight?
I just....Um....ahh....just don't have a comment.
Quote from: waterboy on October 22, 2010, 07:01:16 PM
Yeah, true. The deferring controversy is sort of a zig zag maneuver to keep folks from poking their noses into the process. I actually think the Kaiser foundation has done a fine job of finding a vehicle (RPA) and a mission (improvement of the river banks) that will eventually effect some development along the river area. Not the development I would savor, but any attention is good. Remember, its been over 20 years since any real change has happened over there. They have now set up a working relationship and can make something happen.
Yeah, yeah, yeah................. When do we get to the part about the rebirth of the "Channels"? Or was it "Chanel"...?
Quote from: Rico on October 26, 2010, 09:15:28 PM
Yeah, yeah, yeah................. When do we get to the part about the rebirth of the "Channels"? Or was it "Chanel"...?
Are the Warren's and the Kaiser Foundation that close? But, I get it. Most folks running in those circles are prone to being out of touch with the rest of us.
Quote from: waterboy on October 27, 2010, 10:56:13 AM
Are the Warren's and the Kaiser Foundation that close? But, I get it. Most folks running in those circles are prone to being out of touch with the rest of us.
It's not that, WB. They simply know what is best for the rest of us. ::)
Now H20..... Let me see if I understand your question.
Are the Warren's and the Kaiser Foundation that close?
If I remember correctly you were in attendance at many if not all of the "Channels" meetings. The ones that they had, to explain how Bing Thom and Company, had arrived to lead us out of the darkness.
Seems you also attended the TYPro's concert held by the current majority of members on this board.
But.... You don't remember that the "Channels" was a group effort as explained here.>>> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20060907/ai_n16724787/?tag=content;col1
As explained on the second page, of the above referenced article, the "Tulsa Stakeholders" were a group............. well they explain it much better.
Tulsa Stakeholders - the offspring of a gathering of friends 18 months ago - would work in support with the Tulsa Community Foundation. The other founders of Tulsa Stakeholders are Margie Warren, Scott Lambert and Rusty Patton. More information is available at/
What fun it is to take a glance at the current "Board of Directors of the "Tulsa Community Foundation". The largest proponents of the "Channels.
have a look>>>
http://www.tulsacf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=77
I have no personal choice as to whether they ever wind up building their island in the sun.....
But it is always best to look at the big picture and which way the wind is blowing...
I think you were trying to say they overlap but provide nothing to support it.
The channels was Warren Jr and a couple of friends talking over drinks. The only real link between their vision for the river and Kaiser's is that they both had Bing Thom do some work but they were completely different plans.
Bing Thom is an architect tasked with trying to make a concept become reality, just like Pelli. The idea of building an arena wasn't Pelli's idea so don't think the island was all Bing Thom's either.
Quote from: Rico on October 29, 2010, 07:31:25 PM
Now H20..... Let me see if I understand your question.
Are the Warren's and the Kaiser Foundation that close?
If I remember correctly you were in attendance at many if not all of the "Channels" meetings. The ones that they had, to explain how Bing Thom and Company, had arrived to lead us out of the darkness.
Seems you also attended the TYPro's concert held by the current majority of members on this board.
But.... You don't remember that the "Channels" was a group effort as explained here.>>> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20060907/ai_n16724787/?tag=content;col1
As explained on the second page, of the above referenced article, the "Tulsa Stakeholders" were a group............. well they explain it much better.
Tulsa Stakeholders - the offspring of a gathering of friends 18 months ago - would work in support with the Tulsa Community Foundation. The other founders of Tulsa Stakeholders are Margie Warren, Scott Lambert and Rusty Patton. More information is available at/
What fun it is to take a glance at the current "Board of Directors of the "Tulsa Community Foundation". The largest proponents of the "Channels.
have a look>>>
http://www.tulsacf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=77
I have no personal choice as to whether they ever wind up building their island in the sun.....
But it is always best to look at the big picture and which way the wind is blowing...
Someday, Rico, I would like you to introduce yourself to me. I'll buy your beer. Your memory is better than mine for sure. Thanks for reminding me. I did attend some of the Channels meetings, including the engineering ones that Benham had. That was fun. Like a living Salvador Dali painting (pretty pictures but lots of suspended belief). My head swims knowing how close I was to real wealth and power...yet not a drop for me!
And, what was the TYPRO's event? I seem to remember something with large crowds of inebriated young people over by the floating amphitheatre, but I don't remember why. I knew I was too old to be there!
It became obvious, I think, even to them, the folly of the Channels project as it progressed through the planning stages. Partly because of a lack of real understanding of the river upstream from Tulsa and partly because of a dissociation from the proletariat. I like grand visions but reality is neat too. There were lots of puppies looking for a teat that fed them what they wanted to hear.
I see that a representative of the Kaiser Foundation is also on the Tulsa Community Foundation. No doubt there are many of those same faces on other foundation boards as well. I confess that I didn't remember them being so involved. Maybe you are right that they still harbor some of those pipe dreams. In fact, one of the Bing Thom ideas, opening the river to viewing by taking out trees and bushes along the banks, has already been accomplished and is being continued along the west bank as well.
Blair property
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101017_BlairMansion1017.jpg)
Crow Creek apartments
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101017_CrowCreek1017.jpg)
I would like to see high density, urban apartments at the Crow Creek site which interact with the creek and include a portion of the hike/bike trail proposed between the river and Zink Park. For the Blair site single family residential is more appropriate, IMO, but could be built more densely and connected to the surrounding neighborhoods better. These will be great projects and it will be interesting to see the actual proposals.
Quote from: SXSW on February 10, 2011, 02:58:42 PM
Blair property
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101017_BlairMansion1017.jpg)
Crow Creek apartments
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101017_CrowCreek1017.jpg)
I would like to see high density, urban apartments at the Crow Creek site which interact with the creek and include a portion of the hike/bike trail proposed between the river and Zink Park. For the Blair site single family residential is more appropriate, IMO, but could be built more densely and connected to the surrounding neighborhoods better. These will be great projects and it will be interesting to see the actual proposals.
I would be willing to lay down money that Blair will not become a residential development. It's supposed to become some sort of public space.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 10, 2011, 08:41:23 PM
I would be willing to lay down money that Blair will not become a residential development. It's supposed to become some sort of public space.
The Blair property becoming some sort of dense housing would be a travesty. Someday we'd be looking back wishing we'd not built up all our green space. If there's one cue we could and should take from Austin, it's the idea that they have not built all up and down both sides of Town (Lady Bird) Lake.
I agree that it won't become single family housing. I'm not so sure it will become a public green space though.
Maybe Bell's will locate there.
You can mix dense residential and open space on this site. It will be interesting to see the proposals and I'm sure we all will have different opinions on what should go there. The redevelopment of the Crow Creek apartments should begin first. Midtown needs a new high quality apartment development and this is a perfect location. If it gets the Crow Creek Trail built all the better.
For the Blair property, I would like to see rowhouses on three sides and then a small/medium park in the middle of them. Maybe a fountain or something in the middle of the park. Has anyone ever been to downtown Mobile? They have one of the best parks I have ever seen. It has a fountain (I think) in the middle, and then huge oak trees creating a canopy over the rest of the park. Something like that with rowhouses on three sides would be amazing here IMO.
Quote from: waterboy on February 10, 2011, 09:01:41 PM
Maybe Bell's will locate there.
Ha!
Funny man over there...
Quote from: waterboy on February 10, 2011, 09:01:41 PM
Maybe Bell's will locate there.
You owe me a keyboard, monitor and large coffee for that one!!
Quote from: ZYX on February 10, 2011, 09:48:38 PM
Has anyone ever been to downtown Mobile? They have one of the best parks I have ever seen. It has a fountain (I think) in the middle, and then huge oak trees creating a canopy over the rest of the park. Something like that with rowhouses on three sides would be amazing here IMO.
It is called Bienville Square http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=&q=bienville+square&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=GFdVTa7dDYOgsQOx_4nSBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CC4QsAQwAQ&biw=1071&bih=591 (http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=&q=bienville+square&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=GFdVTa7dDYOgsQOx_4nSBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CC4QsAQwAQ&biw=1071&bih=591)
Rittenhouse Square in Phila, PA.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=rittenhouse+square+philadelphia+pa&aq=&sll=30.692831,-88.042518&sspn=0.002703,0.005606&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Rittenhouse+Square,+Philadelphia,+Pennsylvania&ll=39.9494,-75.171751&spn=0.002513,0.005606&t=h&z=18
Sorry, but you can count me for a vote in the "Children's Museum" corner for this space. This is LONG overdue for a city like Tulsa. We preach "family first" yet we still don't have a first clas Children's Museum.
Quote from: joiei on February 11, 2011, 09:41:19 AM
It is called Bienville Square http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=&q=bienville+square&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=GFdVTa7dDYOgsQOx_4nSBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CC4QsAQwAQ&biw=1071&bih=591 (http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=&q=bienville+square&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=GFdVTa7dDYOgsQOx_4nSBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CC4QsAQwAQ&biw=1071&bih=591)
Yup.
Quote from: bacjz00 on February 11, 2011, 10:22:46 AM
Sorry, but you can count me for a vote in the "Children's Museum" corner for this space. This is LONG overdue for a city like Tulsa. We preach "family first" yet we still don't have a first clas Children's Museum.
We have one but it has yet to acquire a building
tulsachildrensmuseum.com
The Children's Museum promoters in Tulsa are very cool. They keep doing exhibits and events all over town while trying to raise money for a building.
This weekend they have some great kid's activities happening at the Tulsa Historical Society.
QuoteQuote from: ZYX on February 10, 2011, 09:48:38 pm
Has anyone ever been to downtown Mobile? They have one of the best parks I have ever seen. It has a fountain (I think) in the middle, and then huge oak trees creating a canopy over the rest of the park. Something like that with rowhouses on three sides would be amazing here IMO.
I just stumbled across this while looking at pictures of that park.
MOBILE, Ala. -- An 81-year-old woman with a self-described incontinence problem awaits trial on a charge of public lewdness after Mobile police arrested her for urinating in the bushes in Bienville Square.Unforseen problems: Old people urinate in nice parks. Perhaps we should just leave it like it is. I've never seen anyone urinate on the current piece of land.
Quote from: JoeMommaBlake on February 11, 2011, 02:20:25 PM
I've never seen anyone urinate on the current piece of land.
Challenge accepted.
Quote from: JoeMommaBlake on February 11, 2011, 02:20:25 PM
I just stumbled across this while looking at pictures of that park.
MOBILE, Ala. -- An 81-year-old woman with a self-described incontinence problem awaits trial on a charge of public lewdness after Mobile police arrested her for urinating in the bushes in Bienville Square.
Unforseen problems: Old people urinate in nice parks. Perhaps we should just leave it like it is. I've never seen anyone urinate on the current piece of land.
You haven't seen those 40+ male joggers frantically looking for a tree on the path behind Blair? Good, I'm safe for now. ;)
Really, I think we should somehow integrate the usage of that land with the nearby creek and lake. We are overdue for a children's museum, but the last thing I would like to see is a high usage area requiring lots of parking like the Aquarium.
QuoteWe are overdue for a children's museum, but the last thing I would like to see is a high usage area requiring lots of parking like the Aquarium.
I 100% agree. The last thing we need here is a large parking lot or garage.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 11, 2011, 12:54:18 PM
We have one but it has yet to acquire a building
tulsachildrensmuseum.com
I think you're just proving my point. Hopefully this isn't an argument AGAINST using this land as an opportunity to give the Tulsa Children's Museum a permanent home.
Quote from: bacjz00 on February 11, 2011, 04:05:18 PM
I think you're just proving my point. Hopefully this isn't an argument AGAINST using this land as an opportunity to give the Tulsa Children's Museum a permanent home.
I understand your point, but this is a terrible spot for a children's museum. It would decharacterize the neighborhood, and you would probably have some angry residents.
Ain't nothin' gonna' please folks who have had a green space around them for a hundred years! Really, the abuse any development will face is a given. Private money will assuage some of that.
Quote from: waterboy on February 11, 2011, 05:16:31 PM
Ain't nothin' gonna' please folks who have had a green space around them for a hundred years! Really, the abuse any development will face is a given. Private money will assuage some of that.
Yes, but does anyone want a huge parking lot?
Some things are better left undeveloped......
I'd rather see the science/childrens museum downtown by Blue Dome or on the west bank. I think the residential nature of this area should stay intact and be an extension of the Maple Ridge neighborhood around it.
West bank for the Children's Museum sounds good.
Wouldn't bother me if Blair becomes a permanent green belt. Breathing space.
Sorry but the west bank is dead...we don't need yet another mediocre pocket area that is underfunded and underutilized.
Also I wasn't advocating taking away the green space, just using the Blair house as a museum, maybe putting some underground parking nearby?? The green space should stay I agree...
Given my first paragraph, I suppose we should probably look downtown for the Children's Museum...Just thought the Blair House had some charm that would be a good fit. Will be interesting to see the proposals.
I hadn't thought of the house as a museum. That is an interesting idea. I just thought west bank has some existing buildings and parking over by the public works area that could work. Long term plans were to move that function somewhere else and the buildings might be useful.
Downtown however already has a good deal of momentum to play off of.
Attractions are already spread out as it is, which is why downtown makes more sense for a new museum. The east bank needs more residential density while the west bank, specifically Festival Park and the Mid-Con plant, should be a park, IMO.
I think the west bank would be great if we made it all a park. It would be the place to go where you could get away from it all, without really getting away from anything. I would love to see the east bank high density residential, and then the west bank converted to park land.
Quote from: SXSW on February 12, 2011, 10:57:21 AM
Attractions are already spread out as it is, which is why downtown makes more sense for a new museum. The east bank needs more residential density while the west bank, specifically Festival Park and the Mid-Con plant, should be a park, IMO.
East bank needs more residential density? How far South? Its already pretty dense up to 61st. The only blank land I can think of north of 61st is the Blair land and the hills below a couple mansions.
Do you mean high rise type density?
Quote from: waterboy on February 12, 2011, 11:29:16 AM
East bank needs more residential density? How far South? Its already pretty dense up to 61st. The only blank land I can think of north of 61st is the Blair land and the hills below a couple mansions.
Do you mean high rise type density?
We'd better get some good public transit if we want any real residential high density.
Quote from: waterboy on February 12, 2011, 11:29:16 AM
East bank needs more residential density? How far South? Its already pretty dense up to 61st. The only blank land I can think of north of 61st is the Blair land and the hills below a couple mansions.
Do you mean high rise type density?
Not necessarily highrise. Just more density in the area along Riverside from 15th to 21st and points east including the area around Veterans Park south of downtown and north/west of Maple Ridge. And of course development of the Blair site and redevelopment of the low rise Crow Creek property into higher density apartments.
I think tying the waterfront into any kind of development of the Blair site is important. I found this image where a roadway cuts through but with landscaping it doesn't act as such a barrier as it does now. I could see the portion of the riverfront just to the west of Riverside and north of the Ped. bridge looking like this:
(http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/StapletonOpenSpace.jpg)
For the Crow Creek redevelopment I think something like what they have developed along Cherry Creek by downtown Denver would be nice but with better landscaping along the creek (there are already plenty of big oak trees lining the creek, a luxury they don't have in Denver):
(http://mydenverloft.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Delgany-EMAIL-Building-1-Aug-05.jpg)
Very good. Couldn't we put in a water sluice ala Bell's' log flume that would float right over Riverside into a protected harbor? :)
The areas you describe as needing greater density do have some open areas and a lot of cheap, non historic apartments. Would be nice to take out some of the drug havens over there and recreate the area sort of like Devon is doing in OKC.
For example: The Terrace View apartments on Denver. That is a perfect spot to tear out what is there, and replace it with something nicer, and more urban. Something 5 or 6 stories there would be amazing.
Edit: Location is at Denver and 18th.
Can we rename the house Beauvior which was the name of the home the that the racist Jefferson Davis spent enough time for the state of Mississippi to now call it a "Shrine" and the house which it was a copy of? OMG did I leave a hanging preposition? I will get off my soapbox.
Using the house as a children's museum would be a great idea, at least I think so. I used to love to take my nephews to the Exploratorium in San Franciso, to spend time watching the lights come on for them, nothing can replace that. I can see some 3 and 4 story urban brownstones on either side of a park from the house to the river left as a greenspace. A central water feature with a distinctive fountain artwork could become a city of Tulsa signature.
Quote from: bacjz00 on February 12, 2011, 09:53:48 AM
Sorry but the west bank is dead...we don't need yet another mediocre pocket area that is underfunded and underutilized.
That leaves more land for the tribes to buy up and turn into sovereign (read: no zoning laws) property... that taxpayers will be expected to pay for infrastructure (roads, utilities, fire protection).
Has anyone heard anything about this RFQ? I just happened to come across this proposal (http://www.west8.com/projects/tulsa_riverfront/) by West 8 an urban design and landscape architecture firm. It has some interesting elements, but the multi-story buildings tucked back by the existing neighborhoods would never fly. They also show Riverside Drive being really diverted. It also includes some islands and what they call "cascades." Perhaps that is a white water element???
Woah! I hope those multistory buildings would 'fly'. That's huge. As someone who cycles though, that looks obnoxiously diverted.
I thought the planned white water cascades would be downstream from the Zink dam. It does look like they re-routed Riverside to the east side of the property and included a canal with barrier islands downstream where the white water should be. This is close to an idea I floated a couple of years ago. Put a gate at the upstream part of the canal and a low water dam at the lower end of the canal and you have a way of keeping water in the canal during low river levels. I suspect these guys haven't seen what the river bed looked like this past few months.
I also doubt that re-routing Riverside that far inland is an idea that would fly.
QuoteI also doubt that re-routing Riverside that far inland is an idea that would fly.
Agreed. Riverside is nice because it is so direct. Diverting would cut down its usage.
Quote from: AquaMan on February 13, 2012, 12:19:23 PM
I thought the planned white water cascades would be downstream from the Zink dam.
Yep that is where the feature is being designed.
hurry up stem cell research....I want to be alive in 100 years to see this! :D
I am sure thats just one of several proposals they will get. This one looks like it would take a lot of maintenance work and funding. Those ponds will be full of trash that blows into them, or is thrown into them and will have to be scooped out every week. The next thing I see is all that cement will look ratty in short order and have to be redone. Unless Kaiser springs for granite or pavers or stone. Not against it, but if you build it, please put aside some money for proper upkeep. And yes, curving riverside that much, not the best idea.
Quote from: jacobi on February 13, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
Diverting would cut down its usage.
I believe there are some in the area that would welcome less usage of Riverside Drive by thru traffic. The diversion as shown is probably an accident waiting to happen.
Quote from: jacobi on February 13, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
Agreed. Riverside is nice because it is so direct. Diverting would cut down its usage.
Traffic slowing has actually been a goal of many Riverside plans. traffic flow on riverside is 10-15mph ABOVE the speed limit.
Quote from: Red Arrow on February 13, 2012, 07:54:04 PM
I believe there are some in the area that would welcome less usage of Riverside Drive by thru traffic. The diversion as shown is probably an accident waiting to happen.
I don't see it being any worse than the current swoop and dip in the same area, likely better.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 14, 2012, 08:13:25 AM
I don't see it being any worse than the current swoop and dip in the same area, likely better.
Might actually be fun as compared to all the straight roads around here. That is, unless you are texting or something and the road turns but you fail to notice.
Quote from: jacobi on February 13, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
Agreed. Riverside is nice because it is so direct. Diverting would cut down its usage.
IMO, that would be a good thing. Turn it into a scenic drive, rather than a raceway.
As long as its used as an expressway into downtown it will always be fast and furious. I have noticed lately though, that its traffic count seems to be declining.
I enjoy the curve and dip but it can be harrowing for large vehicles and seeing that lane of traffic coming at you head on after the dip is a bit creepy, but I've never actually heard of any bad wrecks right there.
A smaller curve would make more sense at that point. One which would be at the level of the bridge and curving slightly to the east. The remaining low area could be part of the new white water park. But, I'm told the utilities, water and sewer pipes etc are a hindrance to that idea.
Pretty sure that West 8 was a finalist, but not selected. That looks like their proposal for the competition.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120221_11_A1_CUTLIN46753 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20120221_11_A1_CUTLIN46753)
Tulsans' ideas sought for George Kaiser Family Foundation's proposed park
QuoteThe George Kaiser Family Foundation wants public input into the creation of a new gathering space on two large tracts of land along the east side of Riverside Drive.
"Because this will be space for all of Tulsa to enjoy, we want the entire community to give us their ideas on what they want to see in their new park," said Jeff Stava, project manager for the foundation's proposal.
The project, estimated to cost between $100 million and $150 million, would stretch from 26th Street to just south of 31st Street.
The land includes the 33.6 acres of the Blair Mansion property at 26th Place and the 21.5-acre tract where the Crow Creek Apartments sit just south of 31st Street. Both properties are owned by the foundation.
As part of the planning process, public meetings will be held at 6 p.m. on March 6 and March 7 at the Center for Creativity on Tulsa Community College's downtown campus.
The public-input sessions will be open-house style for people to engage with members of the project team about the "potential for the site to deliver a unique experience to the community," Stava said.
He said the foundation is soliciting ideas for low-impact activities such as splash pads, tree forts, zip lines, sculpture gardens and nature trails through the wooded area there.
"Great parks in cities have all sorts of these type of activities, many of which we don't have here in our parks," Stava said.
He noted that parks draw people "for all different kinds of reasons, whether it's activities or enjoying the atmosphere of the park itself."
A small parking lot that takes up 4.2 acres sits between the two Kaiser Foundation tracts. Mayor Dewey Bartlett said it has not yet been determined whether that land is owned by the city or jointly by the city and county.
"No matter, from the city's perspective, we need to be very flexible when somebody has made a commitment to embark upon a very visionary development that is beneficial to the public," he said.
Bartlett said that while he will be supportive, the role of the public land will be determined by the foundation's final plans.
Stava said the biggest challenge for the project is unifying the sites not only with each other but also to River Parks on the west side of Riverside Drive.
"You have to be able to get people back and forth fluidly and effortlessly," he said.
He noted that the Midland Valley Trail, formerly a railroad track, sits atop a berm and is a barrier between the Blair property and the publicly owned land. Then 31st Street is a barrier between the public land and the Crow Creek Apartments site.
The most obvious barrier, he said, is Riverside Drive between River Parks and the new gathering spaces.
"This is a big creative challenge," he said. "We're asking the public for its thoughts and ideas on how to unify the sites and what the activities should be on the sites."
The foundation is using Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, a landscape architecture firm based in Brooklyn, N.Y., to design the project based on the public input.
Stava said the firm specializes in riverfront projects, and he pointed out how it transformed the Hudson River Park, a former industrial waterfront, into a community landscape featuring a boardwalk, a carousel and expansive views of the river.
The firm's staff, Stava said, "are true park builders and focus on the essence of a site."
The foundation selected the firm after narrowing the field from 35 companies that submitted qualification packets. The firm also competed with three others in a competition process, Stava said.
"The Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates have a way of looking at things in a super-creative way. They keep the green green and make it better by weaving together landscaping and trails and all of the activities," he said
Stava said the firm has proven experience in designing "amazing parks in numerous metropolitan areas around the country, and their dedication to creating landscapes that reflect the community in which they're based made them the clear choice for this project."
Started a new thread on it since we have real info:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=18723