I didn't see a thread on the first page or two but I was on the creek turnpike East Bound and noticed they have already started construction on the the new river district project in Jenks. Anyone have any new news on shops, stores that are going to be in there?
On another note, on the news last night they discussed phase 2 of the Riverwalk and announced that a Lewis and Clark outfitters which they touted as an upscale Bass Pro Shop.
RW Phase2:
https://tulsanow.org/wp/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9542
No tenants have been listed for the river district and I believe the earthwork portion is supposed to take a year.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
RW Phase2:
https://tulsanow.org/wp/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9542
No tenants have been listed for the river district and I believe the earthwork portion is supposed to take a year.
I saw that thread after I posted, my bad. A year you say? WOW. That's nuts. Maybe within the next few months they will announce some tenants.
Here's the web site for the River District:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/
Marketing brochure:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/brochure.html
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e150/shake2005/riverdistrict.jpg)
Notice now there's no baseball stadium, but there is a DAM.
This is the best outcome for everyone, the Drillers go downtown and the river is filled for all the development down south in Tulsa and Jenks.
Looks cool enough. Curious that there are no piers, no docks, no ferries, no activities shown on the river lake that the dam creates. I would have thought that the smaller existing lake would be an interesting connection to the river as well.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Looks cool enough. Curious that there are no piers, no docks, no ferries, no activities shown on the river lake that the dam creates. I would have thought that the smaller existing lake would be an interesting connection to the river as well.
Weren't there supposed to be piers, ferry's, and all sorts of water activity in the original concepts for Zink Lake?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Looks cool enough. Curious that there are no piers, no docks, no ferries, no activities shown on the river lake that the dam creates. I would have thought that the smaller existing lake would be an interesting connection to the river as well.
look closer, the lake shows what appears to be boats and docks
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Looks cool enough. Curious that there are no piers, no docks, no ferries, no activities shown on the river lake that the dam creates. I would have thought that the smaller existing lake would be an interesting connection to the river as well.
look closer, the lake shows what appears to be boats and docks
Yes, I see them on the smaller existing lake, but it shows no connection to the river (downstream side of the dam). Probably because it might necessitate some sort of lock/dam to keep the existing lake from draining into the river in low level situations. However, the existing lake doesn't need much of a pier if it doesn't connect to the river as pretty much paddle boats is all it will accomodate. Maybe that's all they envision for watercraft. I thought I remembered that the dam would have been farther downstream so that the existing lake would connect and provide a safe harbor away from the current.
It shows nothing on the new lake formed by the dam other than some steps leading from a fountain area. I guess that would be a ferry port.
Zink lake was supposed to have all those things as well. It didn't take long for the reality of this river to sink in for them. Deja vu.
From what I recall from the more detailed plans, nothing in the River District faces the river. Everthing is more centered around the central square and the lake.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
Here's the web site for the River District:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/
Marketing brochure:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/brochure.html
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e150/shake2005/riverdistrict.jpg)
Notice now there's no baseball stadium, but there is a DAM.
This is the best outcome for everyone, the Drillers go downtown and the river is filled for all the development down south in Tulsa and Jenks.
The dam on the left is existing. the one on the right is further south than the v2025 stuff we've seen before.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=36.01035,-95.959611&spn=0.011994,0.021822&t=h&z=16
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
From what I recall from the more detailed plans, nothing in the River District faces the river. Everthing is more centered around the central square and the lake.
No problem there. Just lamenting the lack of connectibility that I had been told would be included. Looks like it ignores how that springboarded development and sponsorship on the Oklahoma river.
The little lake may be all they need. Some paddle boats, some alfresco dining and a few small kayaks. but then, why build the dam? What is its purpose for this development?
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
quote:
Originally posted by swake
Here's the web site for the River District:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/
Marketing brochure:
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/brochure.html
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e150/shake2005/riverdistrict.jpg)
Notice now there's no baseball stadium, but there is a DAM.
This is the best outcome for everyone, the Drillers go downtown and the river is filled for all the development down south in Tulsa and Jenks.
The dam on the left is existing. the one on the right is further south than the v2025 stuff we've seen before.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=36.01035,-95.959611&spn=0.011994,0.021822&t=h&z=16
Hmm, that's true.
If so, I'm not sure how realistic that is for a dam location. I've been told by Jenks officials that the dam there can't be located south of the Polecat creek outflow, there's just too much water coming out of there. Maybe that has been addressed. Maybe the location is more hopeful than realistic.
All it would take is make a connection to Polecat Creek somewhere across that south border of the existing lake where the railroad runs. That would allow for downstream small watercraft usage but protected from the main river. Then add some sort of dock/pier by the fountain area where they show steps. The steps aren't going to be sufficient for docking a ferry or anything else really.
Presently the approximate dam location is as shown in those renderings and has been coordinated with the River District Development team. The proposed alignment being studied is at approximately 105th (+/-) Street South however the structure will likely be more perpendicular with the channel than appears in the rendering and may be shifted a bit as engineering studies dictate.
There are comments in this thread about Polecat Creek which are incorrect; PC enters the River below (South of) the dam site (always has in the plans to the best of my knowledge). This is primarily due to the silt loading in that stream which would be a significant maintenance issue (slow the water down in the creek as it enters the lake and the silt drops out in the creek bed and plugs the channel). Plus, having such a tributary join into a lake would project the lake level back up-stream (in the tributary) and effectively raises the water elevation of the creek (which can be a great idea) however that also increases the frequency of the tributary being at flood elevation(s) which can cause other difficulties.
I believe the River District has an alternate plan to address on site and local storm water runoff which in the master plan site concept rendering was accomplished by a combination drainage channel/inter-lake access canal.
Lastly the notion that the River District only faces inward appears incorrect from what I have reviewed (although I see differences in these renderings from those previously released) as the sites along the river will have tremendous views and there will be considerable access along the river but not everything can be on the river at this site, hence the development feature concept further inland.
Hope that helps,
Kirby Crowe
There needs to be a river access boat ramp to the Arkansas River! I am shocked that the Oklahoma Aquarium din not put one in..............yes some of us have shallow draft boats (air boats, go-devils, hover-craft)capable of navigating this river.
There is an abundance of wildlife in there to see and sport fish.
I once had access to a dirt ramp that put in at Jenks and spent several nice afternoons showing friends Tulsa and Jenks from the river.
Updates to the River District Website.
Here is a neat video.
It takes a couple minutes to completely download, or you can hit the play, then wait, then hit play, then wait, etc. as I did lol.
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/video.html
The Marketing Brochure...
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/brochure.html
Here is a preview of the "football field sized" water fountain. Is it just me, or does this seem a bit nicer than the fountain in Bartlett Square? [:P]
http://www.flipseekllc.com/nhorriverdistrictvideo.html
Noticed there is a lot of parking around the edge of the River District. But hopefully it will be eventually used up and made into structured parking and other businesses/living, as I have seen other developments of this sort do. The development does have a lot of structured parking already though which is great. Is going to make a very nice little "Mc Downtown" for Jenks.
It would be nice to see two main things addressed:
1) The river itself. Some kind of dock where you could actually go out by the water and (eventually) board boats to take you up to the Aquarium, Riverwalk Crossing, and Kings Landing and points further north and south in the future. A continuation of the wide riverside trail that connects this with Riverwalk and the Aquarium is a given, right??
2) The tracks. This would be perfect location for a Jenks stop on a future commuter rail line up to downtown. Perfect location for commuters in Jenks/South Tulsa right off the Creek Tpke. where they could park their cars (or ride a bus, or bike), hop on the train, and then be in the heart of downtown in about 10-15 min. depending on how many stops are included in between. This would make this project the first significant transit-oriented development (TOD) in Oklahoma and could really help build support for that commuter line.
Wow, great thought. A commuter rail from that area to downtown would actually make sense. There is enough parking for park and ride to downtown, PLUS on the weekends there could be enough Tulsan's heading that way for the Riverwalk, New River District and/or the Aquarium to have it used.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Wow, great thought. A commuter rail from that area to downtown would actually make sense. There is enough parking for park and ride to downtown, PLUS on the weekends there could be enough Tulsan's heading that way for the Riverwalk, New River District and/or the Aquarium to have it used.
EXACTLY! However the plans show no mention of such a stop or how the stop would connect to the rest of the development. Maybe if the City would even address that the downtown-Jenks corridor is even slated for future commuter rail they could add it to the plans so they're prepared once it happens. Denver has some great TOD's on their rail lines that would be very similar: Littleton, Englewood, and Broadway.
quote:
Originally posted by SXSW
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Wow, great thought. A commuter rail from that area to downtown would actually make sense. There is enough parking for park and ride to downtown, PLUS on the weekends there could be enough Tulsan's heading that way for the Riverwalk, New River District and/or the Aquarium to have it used.
EXACTLY! However the plans show no mention of such a stop or how the stop would connect to the rest of the development. Maybe if the City would even address that the downtown-Jenks corridor is even slated for future commuter rail they could add it to the plans so they're prepared once it happens. Denver has some great TOD's on their rail lines that would be very similar: Littleton, Englewood, and Broadway.
There was a rail station included in the early plans for the River District, but it was removed even though INCOG has targeted this very rail corridor as having potential for transit.
This rail line is perfect. It's almost unused (unlike the Broken Arrow line that constantly has trains parked on it) so there's little to no conflict with freight trains. It goes from downtown south through west Tulsa right by the OSU College of Medicine, Riverparks and on through the west side industrial area. It passes near Tulsa Hills, Jones Riverside Airport and then Riverwalk Crossing. It goes to the middle of downtown Jenks, then very near the Aquarium and then right next to The River District and then on to Bixby. It directly serves downtown, several residential areas, several shopping area, a number of employment centers, several tourist spots, the area's second largest airport and the regions two fastest growing cities. One single very limited bus service radiating out from a major stop at 71st you could add major employment and dense residential areas along 71st (Riverside to Lewis), ORU, Citiplex and even the Creek Casino.
I think that should tell you all you need to know about the prospects for rail here in the near future. A developer thought of it, planned for it and then after consideration shelved the idea even thought it's the single best rail line for transit in the entire metro.
I rode alongside the line on the new pedestrian path. It would be practical as well as scenic, especially in summer. I think there would be commuter advantages and could help connect downtown entertainment districts with those in Jenks.
Most of the infrastructure is there. We just need the choo-choo and some well-placed stations.
This one is so obvious, it's almost certain the city will miss it.[;)]
What's up with this PFox?
^ Funny how many people and many city leaders are fixated on the BA line when the Jenks line should probably take priority and be the first implemented. IF they could clean up the wastewater facility at 71st on the west bank of the river a park-n-ride station would be perfect there. Then eventually surround it with apartments and houses right there at the base of Turkey Mountain with river trail and 71st St. access.
I'd propose these stops between downtown and the River District, with eventual connection to Bixby on the same rail line:
-West Bank near OSU (could be another TOD just waiting to happen)
-23rd Street (another prime redevelopment spot just across the bridge from Riverview/Maple Ridge
-71st Street (see above)
-Downtown Jenks (right by their historic Main Street area)
I could also see a station at 41st ONLY IF the City was serious about a 41st Street bridge in the future, which it seems they are not...
Am I the only one excited about the Tulsa area getting a development like this? Was hoping to get some comments about the video and the development, not get a litany of gripes about dams and rail lines. Everyone gripes about this or that bad strip mall type development going in Tulsa or one of the suburbs, then this, which looks pretty decent to me, comes along, and instead of commenting about the development, they find a way to use it as a reason to gripe about something else. Zeeeesh.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I rode alongside the line on the new pedestrian path. It would be practical as well as scenic, especially in summer. I think there would be commuter advantages and could help connect downtown entertainment districts with those in Jenks.
Most of the infrastructure is there. We just need the choo-choo and some well-placed stations.
This one is so obvious, it's almost certain the city will miss it.[;)]
What's up with this PFox?
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/rico2/Loco.jpg)
Yes... Inquiring minds want to know..?
[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Am I the only one excited about the Tulsa area getting a development like this? Was hoping to get some comments about the video and the development, not get a litany of gripes about dams and rail lines. Everyone gripes about this or that bad strip mall type development going in Tulsa or one of the suburbs, then this, which looks pretty decent to me, comes along, and instead of commenting about the development, they find a way to use it as a reason to gripe about something else. Zeeeesh.
I can't speak for everyone here, but it's hard for me to get excited about much that's happening in Jenks. What I'm about to type is going to sound somewhat hostile, but please don't take it personally. Also, don't turn it around and point it at Tulsa. I know Tulsa's failings. I'm just expressing my lack of excitement for Jenks. The reasons:
1) Fairly or not, I view Jenks as a place for those who fled Tulsa to create their own insular community. It's not my town; it belongs to those who rejected my town.
2) The developers tried to steal my baseball team for their own profit. I took this personally. You can have the rich suburbanites, but don't take the minor league baseball with you.
3) It's a Disney Downtown in former pastureland. I'll take the real thing, thanks. If nothing else, I'll stick with Utica Square--better traffic flow, and a Saks Fifth Avenue.
Anyway, you asked. Dallas folks don't get excited for the latest development in Southlake or Frisco, and neither should Tulsans be expected to get fired up about a new shopping center 18 miles from home. My two cents ....
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Am I the only one excited about the Tulsa area getting a development like this? Was hoping to get some comments about the video and the development, not get a litany of gripes about dams and rail lines. Everyone gripes about this or that bad strip mall type development going in Tulsa or one of the suburbs, then this, which looks pretty decent to me, comes along, and instead of commenting about the development, they find a way to use it as a reason to gripe about something else. Zeeeesh.
I can't speak for everyone here, but it's hard for me to get excited about much that's happening in Jenks. What I'm about to type is going to sound somewhat hostile, but please don't take it personally. Also, don't turn it around and point it at Tulsa. I know Tulsa's failings. I'm just expressing my lack of excitement for Jenks. The reasons:
1) Fairly or not, I view Jenks as a place for those who fled Tulsa to create their own insular community. It's not my town; it belongs to those who rejected my town.
2) The developers tried to steal my baseball team for their own profit. I took this personally. You can have the rich suburbanites, but don't take the minor league baseball with you.
3) It's a Disney Downtown in former pastureland. I'll take the real thing, thanks. If nothing else, I'll stick with Utica Square--better traffic flow, and a Saks Fifth Avenue.
Anyway, you asked. Dallas folks don't get excited for the latest development in Southlake or Frisco, and neither should Tulsans be expected to get fired up about a new shopping center 18 miles from home. My two cents ....
I get your feelings. But to me, Jenks might as well be Tulsa. It wouldnt exist as we know it without us. May be 18 miles away for you, its not that far from me. This will be closer to many many Tulsans than Downtown Tulsa. Matter of fact some will be able to look out their windows, across the river and see this development. It is just across the river, some of Tulsa is just across the river. If Jenks were called Tulsa or a part of Tulsa, people would be moving there just as surely as they are moving to South Tulsa. Have the people in South Tulsa "left your city"?
We can complain against suburban sprawl, but whether its in Tulsa or across the street, or river, its all the same. Many people, like my parents did when I was growing up, went for the latest subdevision on the outskirts of the city...it just so happened at that time those new suburban neighborhoods were still well within the city proper. The growth is migrating south, Tulsa ran out of room, across the street, across the river is more land.... and there ya have it. Again, I dont think people would have cared any more about whether that spot was called Tulsa or Jenks, they would be moving there, just like the booming neighborhoods on the other side of the river in South Tulsa. "Its not the schools, Gleenpool is starting to see growth and their schools suck compared to Tulsas though they are getting better as their student demographics change. Glenpool too is just in the path of the current direction of growth"
Remember to, when OKC gets something like this they are excited about it. The city of OKC is bigger than Tulsa county. Why should we knock something that happens within Tulsa county, yet watch as OKC revels in what they achieve within their city? Here is theirs.... http://oktalk.net/bb/index.php?topic=1450.75
and the office park going nearby...http://oktalk.net/bb/index.php?topic=2947.0
Both our development and theirs are almost exactly the same distance from downtown.
As for the baseball stadium,,, different topic, but I would rather it go downtown so that it helps downtown, for a thriving downtown will benefit the image of the whole region, including Jenks. If there wasnt a way for it to go downtown, I wouldnt have minded it being in Jenks. It would probably have done well there, if not better than its current location, and that too would have been better for us all.
Sure I would like to change everyones attitudes about suburban sprawl and get them to choose to live in older neighborhoods within the city or abandoned parts to the north (can you imagine the infill?). And I hope we will continue to see more of that and change more peoples attitudes, its not just Tulsa that is seeing similar changes ... but that is a BIG task and is going to take time before a majority here think that way. I doubt it can ever be completely changed. But this development aint bad, its more urban than what we usually see and is right on Tulsas border. Good news on both fronts if you ask me.
Disney downtown... I dont think we have to decide which is better or choose between them, Utica Square or the River District. Glad we will have both. IMO it IS Tulsa that is building the River District, we are after all building Jenks. Its because of Tulsas success, Tulsas prosperity. This development wouldnt exist without Tulsa.
I can understand Floyd's sentiment and bet he's not alone. It's not his cup of tea and I'm not going to take someone to task over it.
Personally, I believe a rising tide raises all ships so I think all that development has been good for all of Tulsa. I go out to the Riverwalk Crossing or King's Landing about every-other week, and also patronize many places in mid-town and in-between. It's a nice scenic ride on the motorcycle, except for all the damn stop lights on Riverside now.
I guess the way I look at it is it's money which is going back into the local economy whether I eat at SoChey or Gina and Giuseppe's. Many of the people who work out there, own businesses, or manage them spend their money all around the area as well, likely most of it in Tulsa proper.
Jenks helped make the land developable instead of sitting on it like a stupid elephant guarding a pile of dung, which is more or less what COT has done for ages with it's share of the river. They also managed to do it without a large scale money grab on hapless taxpayers who had the same attitude about not really caring about what was planned 18 miles from where THEY lived.
My life has cycled from mid-town to the Jenks district and back a couple of times. First as a child. Then starting out after school I gradually migrated further south till I was back in the Jenks district, now I've been back in midtown, living only about five houses from the first house I ever owned- on the same block.
I'm not anti-River District, I'm just not excited about it. Call it ambivalence.
Read this article about "lifestyle centers," pulled from the link to the other forum Artist made. There's something inauthentic and creepy about this suburban faux-urbanism and the author captures it well.
http://www.slate.com/id/2116246/
quote:
There's something a bit unhealthy about faux public places designed to attract rich people and make them feel comfortable. (At least the traditional mall didn't try to hide the fact that it was a shopping center.) The lifestyle center is a bizarre outgrowth of the suburban mentality: People want public space, even if making that space private is the only way to get it.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
QuoteOriginally posted by SXSW
QuoteOriginally posted by cannon_fodder
This rail line is perfect. It's almost unused (unlike the Broken Arrow line that constantly has trains parked on it) so there's little to no conflict with freight trains. It goes from downtown south through west Tulsa right by the OSU College of Medicine, Riverparks and on through the west side industrial area. It passes near Tulsa Hills, Jones Riverside Airport and then Riverwalk Crossing. It goes to the middle of downtown Jenks, then very near the Aquarium and then right next to The River District and then on to Bixby.
The Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Rwy uses a section of the tracks to serve (at least) the Kimberly-Clark plant. I don't know the frequency of the service. The tracks used to go on to Muskogee and Ft Smith. The flood of 1986 (or was it 88?) damaged a lot of the tracks and roadbed. They were abandonded. The tracks stop somewhere between the K-C plant and downtown Bixby. I know they don't go as far as Memorial any more.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
I'm not anti-River District, I'm just not excited about it. Call it ambivalence.
Read this article about "lifestyle centers," pulled from the link to the other forum Artist made. There's something inauthentic and creepy about this suburban faux-urbanism and the author captures it well.
http://www.slate.com/id/2116246/
quote:
There's something a bit unhealthy about faux public places designed to attract rich people and make them feel comfortable. (At least the traditional mall didn't try to hide the fact that it was a shopping center.) The lifestyle center is a bizarre outgrowth of the suburban mentality: People want public space, even if making that space private is the only way to get it.
If I were to choose, say, between OKCs Bricktown and our Brookside, I would choose Brookside. Brookside is more "real" and Bricktown seems more strained and artificial, "Disneyesque". I would also choose between Bricktown and the River District I would choose the River District.
I have read other articles about these new "enhanced" lifestyle centers, ones that dont have just shopping but a good component of living, office, hotel, structured parking, etc. and they point out what I have seen happen with some of the older ones. They evolve, expand outward, shake off the newness and start gathering some authenticity. Utica Square anyone? Utica Square wasnt always the charming, cozy, lived in, place it is now. It was once a shiny new shopping center out in a suburban area, built in a field.
I would think that people would be encouraging this type of development, pointing out the good points about it. What it does right, what others should do. We complain when south Tulsa or the suburbs do differently, then feel "ho hum" when they do it right? I doubt that something this dense, urban and mixed use would have gone in that area otherwise. Fake or not, beats the heck out of some Tulsa Hills type development. Its even better than what we have with Woodland Hills and whats aroun that. Will STILL take a long time for that to evolve into a "real" pedestrian friendly, mixed use, urban, environment.
I don't begrudge them their chance to build a Utica Square South. It fits well with the suburban lifestyle and is probably perceived as daring and innovative out there. It is however just a modern recreation of the downtown/near downtown lifestyle of Tulsa during the 40's-50's.
These folks who left the city during the last 40years to inflate Jenks and BA have no interest in coming back to repopulate our downtown. Conan's flexibility is not the norm. After having leapfrogged early suburban neighborhoods for the newest sprawl, they are more likely to build density where they are now planted. I will visit and enjoy a few times a year then retreat to my own little hood.
Artist--sorry for my shrugs--just answering why I'm not doing backflips (can you shrug or do backflips on an internet forum?).
Definitely, though, it's a good sign for the economic health of the metro area. And anything that brings folks to greater Tulsa or gives them a reason to stay is fine by me. Of the entire development, I'm probably most interested in the fountain--that will be really cool! I love the Bellagio water show, and it's exciting that the same folks are doing a project here.
I like it only if it's part of a bigger plan to eventually make the Arkansas River navigable through Tulsa/Jenks and bring commuter rail service to the downtown-Jenks-Bixby corridor. Those things make this ho-hum suburban faux-downtown shopping/entertainment/dining area into something that could be really exciting for our entire city. I'll wait to see how this progresses and hopefully those issues are addressed. Connecting this to the rest of Tulsa outside of the southside and Jenks/Bixby is good for everyone, and even better if it's using the river (our greatest shared asset as a city/region) and rail (our future as a sustainable city).
That being said I look forward to seeing more information as it becomes available i.e. what stores they have planned, what type of restaurants, the connection to the river and the Aquarium/Riverwalk, etc. Also would be great to see renderings of the proposed design...any available besides what was used in the marketing brochure?
quote:
Originally posted by SXSW
Those things make this ho-hum suburban faux-downtown shopping/entertainment/dining area into something that could be really exciting for our entire city. I'll wait to see how this progresses and hopefully those issues are addressed. Connecting this to the rest of Tulsa outside of the southside and Jenks/Bixby is good for everyone, and even better if it's using the river (our greatest shared asset as a city/region) and rail (our future as a sustainable city).
That being said I look forward to seeing more information as it becomes available i.e. what stores they have planned, what type of restaurants, the connection to the river and the Aquarium/Riverwalk, etc. Also would be great to see renderings of the proposed design...any available besides what was used in the marketing brochure?
The video gives a really good idea of what its going to look like. I dont think the developers have any "stores planned" they may have stores they would like to see or types they imagine would be interested.
""I like it only if it's part of a bigger plan to eventually make the Arkansas River navigable through Tulsa/Jenks and bring commuter rail service to the downtown-Jenks-Bixby corridor.""
That doesnt make any sense? If you want those things, this development actually makes it more likely for such a scenario to occur. This development wasnt "planned" by the city, but it being there gives more credence for a rail connection in the area, and the dams that are planned for the river were planned before this development was even imagined. I think if you want the river to be navigable from Jenks to Tulsa your going to have to figure out some way to get others to decide thats a good idea. None of the dams currently proposed would make the river navigable with any type of ferry from Jenks to downtown Tulsa. The dam proposed for the Jenks area is not tall enough to keep the river full all the way to the next dam (which I would not want because of the immense habitat loss not to mention expense). There would have to be a larger dam or some sort of channeling or something done for low water times. The Kaiser plan with the Living River Concept was the best bet for something like that, but that will cost far more than they are currently thinking of spending.
The most likely bet is that there will be a low water dam in Jenks which will allow a ferry to go either from this development or the aquarium depending on where the dam can be placed, to the Riverwalk, Kings Landing, and the Casino. I dont know who or what will decide precisely where the dam in that area will go, INCOG? but I dont think the developers can force it to go where they want it to. Though they may indeed want it to go near their development, plus I think others will decide the height of the dam as well. So dont knock this development, find those who are making the descisions about the matter and get on their case. If this development wasnt going in now, the dam would more likely be further upstream and thus there would be no chance for it to have been a consideration.
Really, Artist. You seem a little defensive and certainly overreaching. The dam would not have been farther upstream if this development did not materialize. The planned location was made before the RiverDistrict came about. It is more governed by nature and stream geology than where the shopping and gambling areas are.
You are totally focussed on the development of the banks and are missing the bigger picture. Putting in locks now is good planning. Much harder to retrofit when it becomes obvious to everyone. You think only in terms of big bulky ferries but there are many craft that are able to utilize the river and are not dependent on shopping centers (your current universe). Even in the parts of the river that are not part of the lakes. Making the communities interconnected by something other than rubber wheeled trolleys and cars is valuable, progressive thinking and should be done with current dollars.
The railroad being nearby is like found money. Should be interesting to see if only the slow, status quo folks moved to the burbs during the last 40 years.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Really, Artist. You seem a little defensive and certainly overreaching. The dam would not have been farther upstream if this development did not materialize. The planned location was made before the RiverDistrict came about. It is more governed by nature and stream geology than where the shopping and gambling areas are.
You are totally focussed on the development of the banks and are missing the bigger picture. Putting in locks now is good planning. Much harder to retrofit when it becomes obvious to everyone. You think only in terms of big bulky ferries but there are many craft that are able to utilize the river and are not dependent on shopping centers (your current universe). Even in the parts of the river that are not part of the lakes. Making the communities interconnected by something other than rubber wheeled trolleys and cars is valuable, progressive thinking and should be done with current dollars.
The railroad being nearby is like found money. Should be interesting to see if only the slow, status quo folks moved to the burbs during the last 40 years.
Your right, for some odd reason I got the impression that the dam in Jenks was originally supposed to go North of the Turnpike. Then when I saw the River District rendering with the dam shown South of the Turnpike I thought perhaps some changes had been made. My bad. However I dont think that these developers can be expected to put the dam in themselves. So waiting on judging the development on whether or not the dam goes in still seems kind of harsh.
I hope it is connected by rail and by the river, but to suggest its the responsibility of this development and the development is a failure if it doesnt do that is again a bit much. Its up to us, the citizens to make that happen, the developers can help push for those connections, but they cant really be expected to build the rail and the dams, the docks, run the rail, etc. all the way into Tulsa and if they dont, they have built a lousy development.
I would appreciate it if you would give me an example of a mass transit option that could carry people back and forth as a mode of transportation on the river as it is currently planned? I dont know that much about it, I can imagine small ferries but cant imagine how they would get past the shallow part north of 71st on towards the Zink Lake? I can envision smaller touristy or recreational type boats and such, but cant see how that really connects Jenks to downtown Tulsa as a real transportation option? Is there something in the middle between these types of things? Again, I am all for it, but just cant see how it will work with what seems to be planned. Nor do I see how its a failure on these developers part if they do not make it happen somehow? If there are watercraft that will work as a viable transportation option, surely I would think they would and should put in a dock and connect to the river over there. But more than that, building dams, locks etc. is a bit much to ask.
As for this being a shopping center and that being my "current universe". A. if this development were only the hotel, office, living around structured parking part, I would be excited about it. It would still be a significant development for the area. B. Its about an 800 million dollar development. Thats a lot of money being invested here. That alone is significant. Plus the hundreds that will be employed building it, then working there, living there, etc. 800 million dollars for goodness sakes. Ho Hum?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Really, Artist. You seem a little defensive and certainly overreaching. The dam would not have been farther upstream if this development did not materialize. The planned location was made before the RiverDistrict came about. It is more governed by nature and stream geology than where the shopping and gambling areas are.
You are totally focussed on the development of the banks and are missing the bigger picture. Putting in locks now is good planning. Much harder to retrofit when it becomes obvious to everyone. You think only in terms of big bulky ferries but there are many craft that are able to utilize the river and are not dependent on shopping centers (your current universe). Even in the parts of the river that are not part of the lakes. Making the communities interconnected by something other than rubber wheeled trolleys and cars is valuable, progressive thinking and should be done with current dollars.
The railroad being nearby is like found money. Should be interesting to see if only the slow, status quo folks moved to the burbs during the last 40 years.
Your right, for some odd reason I got the impression that the dam in Jenks was originally supposed to go North of the Turnpike. Then when I saw the River District rendering with the dam shown South of the Turnpike I thought perhaps some changes had been made. My bad. However I dont think that these developers can be expected to put the dam in themselves. So waiting on judging the development on whether or not the dam goes in still seems kind of harsh.
I hope it is connected by rail and by the river, but to suggest its the responsibility of this development and the development is a failure if it doesnt do that is again a bit much. Its up to us, the citizens to make that happen, the developers can help push for those connections, but they cant really be expected to build the rail and the dams, the docks, run the rail, etc. all the way into Tulsa and if they dont, they have built a lousy development.
I would appreciate it if you would give me an example of a mass transit option that could carry people back and forth as a mode of transportation on the river as it is currently planned? I dont know that much about it, I can imagine small ferries but cant imagine how they would get past the shallow part north of 71st on towards the Zink Lake? I can envision smaller touristy or recreational type boats and such, but cant see how that really connects Jenks to downtown Tulsa as a real transportation option? Is there something in the middle between these types of things? Again, I am all for it, but just cant see how it will work with what seems to be planned. Nor do I see how its a failure on these developers part if they do not make it happen somehow? If there are watercraft that will work as a viable transportation option, surely I would think they would and should put in a dock and connect to the river over there. But more than that, building dams, locks etc. is a bit much to ask.
As for this being a shopping center and that being my "current universe". A. if this development were only the hotel, office, living around structured parking part, I would be excited about it. It would still be a significant development for the area. B. Its about an 800 million dollar development. Thats a lot of money being invested here. That alone is significant. Plus the hundreds that will be employed building it, then working there, living there, etc. 800 million dollars for goodness sakes. Ho Hum?
Lots of misunderstanding here between us. I didn't mean to infer that mass transportation could be accomplished by river. I suppose it could but not without a dredging budget. It probably wouldn't be as efficient as busses. But enabling 4 different communities to be connected by water with pleasure craft, electric powered canal boats or human powered craft is really just as important. Ferries can travel between shopping, dining and gambling but they are pretty boring. And you can't beat a bus or a train for people carriers to the core of downtown but we're talking leisure time activities. It's easier to take a helicopter to the top of a mountain but people keep climbing them anyway!
I will attempt to pull historical numbers from the corps website to confirm, but I would bet that between 4pm and 2am the water level on the Arkansas in Tulsa has been navigable for over 75% of the last decade. If so, that coincides with the time most folks are drinking, dining and gambling. Makes you think. I believe we will have even more water flow, though episodic, during the next decade.
Does the lack of locks seriously limit the potential of the river? Absolutely. Is it shortsighted to ignore that assertion? Yes. Is it the responsibility of the developers? No, but they have much influence on such things otherwise there would be no plans for a dam at all. Should the players (kings crossing, the district and riverwalk) have to pay for them? Once again it will benefit them but no they shouldn't have to pay anymore than the rest of us. They should however encourage them to be a feature of the dams.
You expect folks in Tulsa, Bixby, Broken Arrow, Sand Springs, and Owasso to get excited about 800 million pumped into a tiny rich white bread nneighborhood they visit a few times a year? Really?
I am having difficulty finding the time frame of 4pm to 2am but initial numbers pulled up show that during the last decade only two years averaged a flow of less than 4000cfs. Those two years may have been difficult to navigate the river but 80% is pretty good. Since they are averages that could mean it was high in the spring and dry during the summer, but I will continue to look. These are mean cfs rates for the last decade.
1997 14,230
1998 11,390
1999 22,930
2000 9,661
2001 7,722
2002 3,803
2003 7,861
2004 9,988
2005 9,069
2006 2,266
2007 15,750
I was operating on the river during '01 to '04 and can attest to it being navigable at least 75% of the time in the evening hours during that period.
Monthly means:
00060, Discharge, cubic feet per second,
YEAR Monthly mean in cfs (Calculation Period: 1997-01-01 -> 2006-12-30)
Period-of-record for statistical calculation restricted by user
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1997 5,191 9,221 11,390 25,360 12,580 11,250 24,650 17,630 12,590 11,730 4,093 6,554
1998 19,850 9,726 25,000 28,580 17,390 6,306 4,549 1,726 892.8 18,270 54,540 10,430
1999 5,245 15,920 20,520 22,650 34,310 42,850 37,630 8,196 4,955 3,649 1,353 13,380
2000 6,298 4,274 26,650 18,840 10,680 8,933 14,810 4,073 2,429 2,048 6,672 3,036
2001 4,225 10,400 24,620 7,247 9,956 17,730 5,194 783.0 1,078 1,765 1,340 545.1
2002 869.5 3,283 1,388 2,365 4,273 12,520 8,209 5,166 4,026 15,010 7,116 3,122
2003 3,482 3,807 15,970 10,090 11,700 10,990 4,527 2,677 5,513 11,360 2,429 1,914
2004 2,821 7,036 29,200 9,540 15,310 10,370 18,210 8,966 2,010 1,661 6,984 4,924
2005 12,220 10,730 8,418 5,793 3,554 27,240 8,908 11,900 7,013 3,065 2,196 955.0
2006 1,124 1,884 840.9 872.7 8,300 1,633 2,802 2,085 1,300 305.0 58.8 84.8
Mean of
monthly
Discharge 6,130 7,630 16,400 13,100 12,800 15,000 12,900 6,320 4,180 6,890 8,680 4,490
If you have the patience to peruse these, you find that it confirms that only 2002 and 2006 were dry years for river discharge. Bear in mind that 3-4000 cfs keeps the river at about 3ft deep.
It's taken a whole lot of restraint to not gloat and say "I told you so" on all the momentum which has been building about the river since Oct. 9th.
Let's see, without a sales tax smash and grab job by Friendly Bear's "Tax Vampires" we have gotten:
-Revamped and separated trails between 31st & 11th (though there are people *****ing now they took away the chat gravel [}:)] ) along with new lighting. I believe this was from the generosity of the Kaisers. 31st to 51st is underway.
-QT park at 41st St. construction is underway. Thank you Chet!
-Kaiser is buying the Blair property (think that's the proper name) on the east side of the road just north of the ped bridge(house with big lawn)
-$50mm to build LWD's, thank you Feds and State. These were from the existing tax base collections if I'm not mistaken, not a new one. Now the people who biznitch that Inhofe doesn't bring home the bacon are biznitching that he supported an earmark. Sheesh...
-West bank trail extension from I-44 to Turkey Mountain- That's done. I believe that was already in the works.
-Creek Casino expansion. Paid for by one degenerate gambler at a time, looks about 50% complete.
-River District- they are moving dirt, more when it dries out.
-Riverwalk Crossing Phase II supposed to be starting up.
If the city will get off their donkey and consolidate the M&E facility at 23rd & Jackson into the old Downtown Airpark as was originally rumored, there's a huge tract available for development without lining the pockets of whomever the huckster is that actually owns the dirt the concrete plant is sitting on. We can afford to cut a deal on property we already own or do a long term lease to a developer. This one is soooo obvious, and I believe it could be served by the same rail line from DT to Jenks.
If the city maintains their predictability, they will instead wind up selling the M & E yard to Sinclair so we can further junk up the west bank, then we will pay $70mm for the concrete plant and give it away for $5mm.
Looks like development on the river and around the river is still controversial and probably always will be. We are a community of homebuilders, lawyers and shopping centers. 'Nuf said.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
It's taken a whole lot of restraint to not gloat and say "I told you so" on all the momentum which has been building about the river since Oct. 9th.
Let's see, without a sales tax smash and grab job by Friendly Bear's "Tax Vampires" we have gotten:
-Revamped and separated trails between 31st & 11th (though there are people *****ing now they took away the chat gravel [}:)] ) along with new lighting. I believe this was from the generosity of the Kaisers. 31st to 51st is underway.
-QT park at 41st St. construction is underway. Thank you Chet!
-Kaiser is buying the Blair property (think that's the proper name) on the east side of the road just north of the ped bridge(house with big lawn)
-$50mm to build LWD's, thank you Feds and State. These were from the existing tax base collections if I'm not mistaken, not a new one. Now the people who biznitch that Inhofe doesn't bring home the bacon are biznitching that he supported an earmark. Sheesh...
-West bank trail extension from I-44 to Turkey Mountain- That's done. I believe that was already in the works.
-Creek Casino expansion. Paid for by one degenerate gambler at a time, looks about 50% complete.
-River District- they are moving dirt, more when it dries out.
-Riverwalk Crossing Phase II supposed to be starting up.
If the city will get off their donkey and consolidate the M&E facility at 23rd & Jackson into the old Downtown Airpark as was originally rumored, there's a huge tract available for development without lining the pockets of whomever the huckster is that actually owns the dirt the concrete plant is sitting on. We can afford to cut a deal on property we already own or do a long term lease to a developer. This one is soooo obvious, and I believe it could be served by the same rail line from DT to Jenks.
If the city maintains their predictability, they will instead wind up selling the M & E yard to Sinclair so we can further junk up the west bank, then we will pay $70mm for the concrete plant and give it away for $5mm.
Whats your point? lol
Mr Kaiser had already promised to pay for the trail improvements we are seeing before the vote. Had nothing to do with the vote. Was going to pay for a lot more stuff if the vote passed.
The Riverwalk expansion and River District would have been just as likely to have happened regardless of the vote, everyone knew that.
Chet said he was going to build a QT park there regardless of the vote, but if the vote failed it would be much smaller,,, and it is.
The Creek Casino was already going to expand, regardless of the vote, had nothing to do with the vote. They still have plans to expand even more after this next phase is done.
Everything that is happening was said to be going to happen before the vote even came up. The vote was to pay for things... "in addition to" what was already going to happen. In the case of the dams... it would have made the process more certain,(we havent got that federal money yet and still dont have enough to build them and I still hope they are able to build a larger holding dam in Sand Springs which ALONE would cost almost as much as ALL the federal monies we are due to get), the dams plus pedestrian bridges over them, the Living River concept at one dam. Dont forget the QT park we are getting is a greatly scaled down version, plus no park at 71st and no river development on the West Bank, no connector to downtown, no piers, iconic pedestrian bridge, enhanced park north of 71st, Shoreline reconfiguring and hardening, habitat restoration, etc. etc.
Now will we eventually get most of that stuff or something similar, regardless...? Sure, hopefully. Could have said that 50 years ago.
Inhofe hasn't gotten us a dime, he got a commitment to add the river projects to the federal list of approved projects but so far he's hasn't gotten a dime of real money. And he got that commitment BEFORE the vote. The trails work was actually already underway at the time of the vote and Artist is right about the park at 41st, it was not dependant on the vote either. The Casino was under construction long before the vote was even considered.
We did get $25 million from the state, but that's far short of the total needed and most of that money is going to be spent in Jenks and Sand Springs. That $25 million was going to come to Tulsa in some fashion anyway as it was payoff for the state giving money the Indian Museum in Oklahoma City. And even when (IF) Inhofe gets the $50 million in federal funds and the work on the three dams is completed there still will be no new water anywhere in the river in Tulsa except from about 76th St south. There still is no money to buy the concrete plant and there's still no river development happening in the city of Tulsa that was not already happening before the vote, none. That $500 million "Tulsa Landing" mixed use project on the west bank is dead and gone. The tax dollars that project would have generated in the city of Tulsa will now all be generated in Jenks. The river isn't being "done", at least not anywhere except in Jenks.
I hope you made good use of that two dollars you saved on sales taxes last month.
Still whining like a ***** I see Swake. You live in Jenks, what are you *****ing about? Pretty funny all this stuff that is going on now was or would have happened regardless of the river vote, yet the "Yes" crowd made the river sound like a bleak, dreary place w/o the tax. Have all of you forgotten the rhetoric that all these developers were going to take their plans and go home?
The River District did not get firmed up until after the vote, BTW. RW Crossing II was announced as moving forward after the vote. There were all sorts of innuendo, rumors and outright threats no one else would develop along the river without the low-water dams. They still don't exist, yet they are moving dirt. What a miracle!!!
Nice way to spin Inhofe's contribution, BTW. The federal funds will come which means the original V-2025 funds can be applied as they were intended. The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 passed on Nov. 9, 2007 over a Presidential veto, exactly one month after the river vote, not prior to the river tax vote.
Tulsa Landing was a pig in a poke from the git go. Someone else with the money will show up and do it right.
The developers down in Jenks didn't ask the city or county to over-pay someone else for a piece of property then ask for the city or county to sell it for a drastically-reduced price so they could build on it. They got a TIF, which I think is the proper way to go about it. The concrete plant deal stinks to high heaven.
Unless I missed something on the agreement in purchasing OneTech, the city pitched the move to taxpayers predicated on consolidating operations and offices. The M&E center at 23rd & Jackson was one of those sites, as I recall. I don't know the exact measurements, but the site looks about as big as the concrete plant, it belongs to the city and is supposed to be divested as per the OneTech deal, as I recall.
Kaiser announced more contributions to the river trails since the vote and I expect will do more around town in the future.
It is what it is. Progress without a mysterious slush fund for the county commission to dip out of as they see fit to use for any project they want.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Still whining like a ***** I see Swake. You live in Jenks, what are you *****ing about? Pretty funny all this stuff that is going on now was or would have happened regardless of the river vote, yet the "Yes" crowd made the river sound like a bleak, dreary place w/o the tax. Have all of you forgotten the rhetoric that all these developers were going to take their plans and go home?
The River District did not get firmed up until after the vote, BTW. RW Crossing II was announced as moving forward after the vote. There were all sorts of innuendo, rumors and outright threats no one else would develop along the river without the low-water dams. They still don't exist, yet they are moving dirt. What a miracle!!!
Nice way to spin Inhofe's contribution, BTW. The federal funds will come which means the original V-2025 funds can be applied as they were intended. The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 passed on Nov. 9, 2007 over a Presidential veto, exactly one month after the river vote, not prior to the river tax vote.
Tulsa Landing was a pig in a poke from the git go. Someone else with the money will show up and do it right.
The developers down in Jenks didn't ask the city or county to over-pay someone else for a piece of property then ask for the city or county to sell it for a drastically-reduced price so they could build on it. They got a TIF, which I think is the proper way to go about it. The concrete plant deal stinks to high heaven.
Unless I missed something on the agreement in purchasing OneTech, the city pitched the move to taxpayers predicated on consolidating operations and offices. The M&E center at 23rd & Jackson was one of those sites, as I recall. I don't know the exact measurements, but the site looks about as big as the concrete plant, it belongs to the city and is supposed to be divested as per the OneTech deal, as I recall.
Kaiser announced more contributions to the river trails since the vote and I expect will do more around town in the future.
It is what it is. Progress without a mysterious slush fund for the county commission to dip out of as they see fit to use for any project they want.
Not whining.
And Pig in a Poke? A national developer with a proven track record of similar successful developments. Whatever.
Look, you are a businessman. You turned down a very marginal tax amount of .2 percent sales tax for the river. Saved yourself enough money to buy half a gallon of gas a week.
As a community that tax would have generated $270 million in tax revenue. That is money that would have been taken out of the local economy but in return there were donations of roughly $150 million and at least $500 million in private development money that we have not realized. That $270 million conservatively would have had a ROI of $3 brought into the economy for every $1 in taxes taken out. When it comes to government development that's a really great return, and then add to that the increased sales tax base and increased property tax base from Tulsa Landing and it was beyond stupid to turn it down.
And let's be specific about what Inhofe has accomplished for us; there have been NO federal appropriations bills passed that include money for the river in Tulsa. The projects have been authorized but there's been no money attached. He's been promising the money for four years now (since 2025 was passed) and only in the past six months has he even gotten the spending authorized.
That might make sense if Inhofe was just some bumpkin first term Senator, but he's not. He's the ranking Republican on the committee in the Senate that oversees this kind of work and until last year he was the friggin' Chair of the committee and he didn't get us anything. He simply wasn't even trying, that's the only explanation I can come up with. You tell me how else the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works fails for years to get money for dams and river work passed in his home city.
Inhofe gets no credit, first of all because we still don't have the money but most of all because getting the money through Congress would be a very simple thing for him to accomplish and he just hasn't bothered.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
The River District did not get firmed up until after the vote, BTW. RW Crossing II was announced as moving forward after the vote. There were all sorts of innuendo, rumors and outright threats no one else would develop along the river without the low-water dams. They still don't exist, yet they are moving dirt. What a miracle!!!
I dont know what galaxy you were living in at the time, but I never heard anyone suggest that the River District or any second phase of the Riverwalk would not happen if the vote did not pass.
Matter of fact, I remember people complaining about how the River District wasnt even paying attention to the river, even then. It had its back to the river basically and I remember commenting numerous times about how the River District was a "River District" in name only, It is a development BY the river not ON the river. They could care less if there is a dam there or not, their development will do great either way, regardless.
BTW, I am going to be gone until Sunday night or Monday morning for work. So just because I havent responded to your next feeble, argument doesnt mean you have wone. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
I'm not anti-River District, I'm just not excited about it. Call it ambivalence.
Read this article about "lifestyle centers," pulled from the link to the other forum Artist made. There's something inauthentic and creepy about this suburban faux-urbanism and the author captures it well.
http://www.slate.com/id/2116246/
quote:
There's something a bit unhealthy about faux public places designed to attract rich people and make them feel comfortable. (At least the traditional mall didn't try to hide the fact that it was a shopping center.) The lifestyle center is a bizarre outgrowth of the suburban mentality: People want public space, even if making that space private is the only way to get it.
"Lifestyle center" is just one of those marketing terms that have been so overused that they lose their meaning. I can think of a few others, such as "urban," "upscale," "Tuscan," and "Mediterranean."
The most liberally defined lifestyle centers are usually accompanied by a brand name that has been unsrcupulously slapped onto a development or geographic region. "The River District" may be the best case scenario for South Tulsa because the name does at least reflect a defining characteristic of the region-- the river.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Really, Artist. You seem a little defensive and certainly overreaching. The dam would not have been farther upstream if this development did not materialize. The planned location was made before the RiverDistrict came about. It is more governed by nature and stream geology than where the shopping and gambling areas are.
You are totally focussed on the development of the banks and are missing the bigger picture. Putting in locks now is good planning. Much harder to retrofit when it becomes obvious to everyone. You think only in terms of big bulky ferries but there are many craft that are able to utilize the river and are not dependent on shopping centers (your current universe). Even in the parts of the river that are not part of the lakes. Making the communities interconnected by something other than rubber wheeled trolleys and cars is valuable, progressive thinking and should be done with current dollars.
The railroad being nearby is like found money. Should be interesting to see if only the slow, status quo folks moved to the burbs during the last 40 years.
Your right, for some odd reason I got the impression that the dam in Jenks was originally supposed to go North of the Turnpike. Then when I saw the River District rendering with the dam shown South of the Turnpike I thought perhaps some changes had been made. My bad. However I dont think that these developers can be expected to put the dam in themselves. So waiting on judging the development on whether or not the dam goes in still seems kind of harsh.
I hope it is connected by rail and by the river, but to suggest its the responsibility of this development and the development is a failure if it doesnt do that is again a bit much. Its up to us, the citizens to make that happen, the developers can help push for those connections, but they cant really be expected to build the rail and the dams, the docks, run the rail, etc. all the way into Tulsa and if they dont, they have built a lousy development.
I would appreciate it if you would give me an example of a mass transit option that could carry people back and forth as a mode of transportation on the river as it is currently planned? I dont know that much about it, I can imagine small ferries but cant imagine how they would get past the shallow part north of 71st on towards the Zink Lake? I can envision smaller touristy or recreational type boats and such, but cant see how that really connects Jenks to downtown Tulsa as a real transportation option? Is there something in the middle between these types of things? Again, I am all for it, but just cant see how it will work with what seems to be planned. Nor do I see how its a failure on these developers part if they do not make it happen somehow? If there are watercraft that will work as a viable transportation option, surely I would think they would and should put in a dock and connect to the river over there. But more than that, building dams, locks etc. is a bit much to ask.
As for this being a shopping center and that being my "current universe". A. if this development were only the hotel, office, living around structured parking part, I would be excited about it. It would still be a significant development for the area. B. Its about an 800 million dollar development. Thats a lot of money being invested here. That alone is significant. Plus the hundreds that will be employed building it, then working there, living there, etc. 800 million dollars for goodness sakes. Ho Hum?
Oklahoma City built their dams with locks and already has a ferry boat system. And the Oklahoma River is a lot less scenic with NOTHING along its banks...
http://www.oklahomarivercruises.com/
Not faulting the developers, just indicating how proactive this could be for the City/County with river developments (existing or planned) in Tulsa, Jenks, and now Bixby (South Village announced today on the riverfront).
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Updates to the River District Website.
Here is a neat video.
It takes a couple minutes to completely download, or you can hit the play, then wait, then hit play, then wait, etc. as I did lol.
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/video.html
The Marketing Brochure...
http://www.okriverdistrict.com/brochure.html
Here is a preview of the "football field sized" water fountain. Is it just me, or does this seem a bit nicer than the fountain in Bartlett Square? [:P]
http://www.flipseekllc.com/nhorriverdistrictvideo.html
Noticed there is a lot of parking around the edge of the River District. But hopefully it will be eventually used up and made into structured parking and other businesses/living, as I have seen other developments of this sort do. The development does have a lot of structured parking already though which is great. Is going to make a very nice little "Mc Downtown" for Jenks.
The Bartlett Square "fountain" is an absolute embarassment. More like a bubbler.
The BS fountain is a net for drunk drivers. Ok, more like a ballard for drunk drivers.
I just noticed that they have updated the website at http://www.okriverdistrict.com/ so it seems that it is still a go. Does anyone have any info about when they will start to build?
Quote from: SDTULSA on June 09, 2009, 04:15:37 PM
I just noticed that they have updated the website at http://www.okriverdistrict.com/ so it seems that it is still a go. Does anyone have any info about when they will start to build?
You'll know when Harold Hill shows up with his trombones....
"with the arms of a jungle animal instinct, massteria
friends, the idle brain is the devil's playground....
we've surely got trouble
Right here in river city
remember the main plymouth rock and the golden rule"
Meredith Wilson
The River District
Location: The west bank of the Arkansas River, south of the Creek Turnpike in Jenks
Original plans: Lynn Mitchell and the River District Development Group were going for 852,000 square feet of upscale and unique shopping with a price tag of $1 billion. It would also include a host of restaurants, office space, condominiums, hotels and a performance fountain, and it was sought to be the site of the new Drillers' stadium.
What happened: The 300-acre site was cleared a year ago, but nothing has happened there since.
Current status: Steve Walman, managing broker for Walman Commercial Real Estate Services and a real estate agent for the project, said the slumping economy and a lack of capital have slowed the project down, but it's still making progress.
"We are working with the owners, and continue to do pre-development work."Walman said they're now shooting for construction to begin in 2011, though the scope of the project may change. :'(
Last I had heard it was being scaled back to around $600 million in development and has stalled due to credit and market economy. The advent of Village on Main probably isn't helping either given their projections of office and retail square footage, as well as a hotel development.
Still, any development of that area is a good development, bringing more jobs, revenue, venues and what not to not only Jenks, but Tulsa county as well. Shame City of Tulsa has not moved river development plans any further along.
There will come a point in time though that this area can not support further and expansive river growth at the prices projected.
If these areas do develop the way they are intended, it will also create a significant office market that can and will challenge an already depleated downtown Tulsa market. Downtown should be weary of these development and push revitalization in all core segments - office, residential, hospitality, restaurants, entertainment, etc.
Going to be interesting to see how it all comes about over the next 5 years.
BTW anyone know the latest on Riverwalk II? I've saw the residential apartments under construction but not much else the last time I was out that way.
Quote from: DowntownNow on December 29, 2009, 01:02:06 PM
BTW anyone know the latest on Riverwalk II? I've saw the residential apartments under construction but not much else the last time I was out that way.
I was there yesterday. There are two separate buildings under (active) construction (frame mostly complete, and tented for interior work during the cold) between the apartments (which are topped out) and the movie theater with what appears to be room for two more similar sized structures or one big one... I don't know the occupancy of these but will try to find out.
Online exclusive - McDermott's Grille is the RiverWalk's newest restaurant by Erica Harley font size:decrease font sizeincrease font size Print Email 0 comments
McDermott's Grille offers a one-stop shop for evening entertainment.
"When you walk in, you won't forget what you see."
So says Craig Boilla, co-owner of McDermott's Grille, the newest addition to the RiverWalk development in Jenks.
Boilla says McDermott's Grille is not the average local upscale restaurant. In fact, it will be one of the largest restaurants in Tulsa to feature live music and entertainment in a sports-themed setting. The 13,500-square-foot facility is expected to open in early February.
Through 40 years of owning and managing music and restaurant venues, Jim McDermott has learned what goes into creating a dining and entertainment venue that provides customers with everything they need to have a good time.
Jerry Gordon, of Enterprise Construction, developer of RiverWalk Crossing, had become aware of the success McDermott and his wife, Laura, achieved with their business ventures. So two years ago, Gordon recruited the couple to start a new venue in Phase II of the RiverWalk. Jim McDermott soon approached Boilla and his wife, Kathy, and together the four friends became owners of McDermott Grille.
Although the restaurant's opening was delayed a year, Boilla says the extra time allowed for more research and planning so the team could "make so many better decisions." They reconsidered everything from the design of the kitchen and lighting fixtures to how guests will be served indoors and outdoors, he says.
Additionally, much planning is necessary to create an atmosphere that is equally appealing to a mature crowd during the day as to the late-night-loving younger crowd.
Inside the restaurant, tables will be available to serve 350 guests, and the facility will also include all LED lighting, a revolving door, two jumbo 300-inch plasma screens and 30 flat-screen televisions tuned to sports or news stations. Guests can also lounge in one of three seating areas, complete with overstuffed chairs, sofas and drop-down lighting. An upstairs VIP area, dance floor, stage and two champion shuffleboards will be featured as well, Boilla says.
McDermott's Grille's comfort-food-oriented menu will include three steak entrées, hot wings, fajitas, ribs, hamburgers and more. The restaurant will also include a conversational, or two-sided, bar seating 35 people and featuring some of the best drinks in town, McDermott says.
Outside, McDermott's Grille will include seating for 200 guests, as well as an outdoor stage hosting local and regional performers, such as Wanda Watson and bands Bopcats, Alex Cartwright Group, Another Alibi and 3 Hour Tour.
In an effort to provide entertainment for a variety of audiences, Boilla says McDermott's Grille will feature bands catering to an older clientele in the early evenings and to the younger crowd until the venue closes.
As an added perk, visiting bands will receive their own dressing rooms, and Boilla says a production company designed all of the venue's lighting and speakers so bands will not have to bring as much equipment as for a typical show.
"They can just plug in," he says.
Other outdoor amenities include three sombrillas (umbrellas) sitting alongside a 22-foot round, Polynesian-style palapa seating 30 people and offering specialty alcoholic drinks.
While customers once had to drive all over town to find a one-stop source for nighttime entertainment, Boilla says he is excited to offer so many amenities in one venue.
"We want to allow people to come to our place, have dinner, listen to a band, maybe play some shuffleboard or darts and not have to drive four different places to do that," he says.
I think this will be a great addition to Riverwalk.
The devil should be keeping a long list of eateries and boozeries that come and go from this property.
I went by the other day and was suprised by the scale of the apartment buildings. Much larger development than I had originally supposed. Anyone know how many apartments there will be? Yes, it looks like there are 2 buildings that are nearing being closed in. But I have found it odd that they havent started what is to go in between those buildings and the theater. Will, for a while, leave quite a large gap between the new development and the old that many people may not choose to cross.
Anyone venture to predict what, if anything, else will be added to this development once phase 2 is completed? Will it stay as is? Or perhaps add some more stuff and fleshing out into something like a Branson Landing? ( buildings behind the ones that exist now, perhaps the opening between a couple of buildings becoming the entrance to a "town square" or faux streetscape, possibly a parking garage in some area, etc.). If the first two phases make a go of it, he has the room to do more.
Quote from: TheArtist on January 12, 2010, 04:04:28 PMBut I have found it odd that they havent started what is to go in between those buildings and the theater. Will, for a while, leave quite a large gap between the new development and the old that many people may not choose to cross.
Anyone venture to predict what, if anything, else will be added to this development once phase 2 is completed?
TulsaNow world headquarters and a rip-off of your idea for an art deco museum. ;)
Speaking of, when is the next meeting?
Quote from: Conan71 on January 12, 2010, 04:11:09 PM
TulsaNow world headquarters and a rip-off of your idea for an art deco museum. ;)
Speaking of, when is the next meeting?
Third Thursdays, or did we decide on Wednesdays because of your rowing lol? Speaking of which, I think you and Jesse were in charge of Booze, hows that goin 8) ?
Quote from: TheArtist on January 12, 2010, 06:50:10 PM
Third Thursdays, or did we decide on Wednesdays because of your rowing lol? Speaking of which, I think you and Jesse were in charge of Booze, hows that goin 8) ?
Booze?? What Booze?? Hic!! I never saw any booze!
I'm off rowing for three months at this point anyhow, so doesn't matter which night of the week now. I'll put it down as a standing date, and that would be then, next Thursday, yes?
Quote from: Conan71 on January 13, 2010, 01:19:22 AM
Booze?? What Booze?? Hic!! I never saw any booze!
I'm off rowing for three months at this point anyhow, so doesn't matter which night of the week now. I'll put it down as a standing date, and that would be then, next Thursday, yes?
Yep, next Thursday
Quote from: FOTD on January 12, 2010, 03:44:35 PM
The devil should be keeping a long list of eateries and boozeries that come and go from this property.
So far I only know of 2 very poor attempts (INMHO) at Asian food and 2 attempts at quiet mixed cuisine (one good, one not) in a tough mid-center location, an over priced wannabe burger joint and maybe one bar/grill (not sure about that one) located away from hopping end of the development... I believe the apartments and additional establishments will pull many more customers, plus improvements to 91st Street which are underway to open a back way in and out will help with a big complaint for big events at the development.
Cabbo's is still full 7 days a week and the Melting Pot seems to be doing well as we were there for a family birthday dinner (daughter's choice) last week on a brutally cold week day evening and the place was 1/2 full. Additionally, the nearby Louis's appears to be doing quite well and can be a eating out bargain.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on January 14, 2010, 09:08:17 AM
So far I only know of 2 very poor attempts (INMHO) at Asian food and 2 attempts at quiet mixed cuisine (one good, one not) in a tough mid-center location, an over priced wannabe burger joint and maybe one bar/grill (not sure about that one) located away from hopping end of the development... I believe the apartments and additional establishments will pull many more customers, plus improvements to 91st Street which are underway to open a back way in and out will help with a big complaint for big events at the development.
Cabbo's is still full 7 days a week and the Melting Pot seems to be doing well as we were there for a family birthday dinner (daughter's choice) last week on a brutally cold week day evening and the place was 1/2 full. Additionally, the nearby Louis's appears to be doing quite well and can be a eating out bargain.
Bar (f) food..... The emphasis on alcohol here and around town is approaching a sick level relative to the average waist line.
Quote from: FOTD on January 14, 2010, 01:40:36 PM
Bar (f) food..... The emphasis on alcohol here and around town is approaching a sick level relative to the average waist line.
I think there has been an "emphasis" on sodas, that is and has been, FAR greater, in FAR, FAR, FAR, more places than you could ever say alcohol is. Where have you been on that "average waist line" topic? Heck you can probably find more "emphasis" (more places serving) ice cream and milkshakes than serve alcohol lol. I dont think its the serving of those things as it is the consumption of them. You could find adequate amounts of sodas and or ice cream, etc at just about every single restaurant that existed when I was a kid, but yet the "average waist line" was much smaller then (course I was smaller then to,,, hmmmm).
Or how about fried potatoes in various forms?
Quote from: Conan71 on January 15, 2010, 10:30:20 AM
Or how about fried potatoes in various forms?
Evil, puuuure unadulterated evil. Should be banned entirely.
UPDATE FROM TULSA WORLD
River District development shrinks, but still on drawing board
As far as its owners and developers are concerned, the River District lives.
But the former $1 billion residential, shopping and employment hub planned in Jenks near the Arkansas River is being retooled into a significantly smaller, $85 million to $120 million phase one, said Steve Walman, a real estate broker and developer on the project.
"With the downturn in the economy, we wanted to come up with a more manageable plan," he said. "Often the larger developments are done in phases, and we're taking that route now."
Lynn Mitchell and the River District Development Group, which is still the owner and development entity for the project, initially planned 852,000 square feet of space for the 300 acres along the west bank of the river south of the Creek Turnpike.
Mitchell and the development group still own the entire 300-acre site, which was leveled for development nearly two years ago. Walman said they hope to eventually develop the entire tract.
The new plan, which is still taking final shape, calls for 479,000 square feet of buildings over the 45 acres along the river, Walman said. Currently, the plan features 130,000 square feet of retail space, 80,000 square feet for office, one hotel and 46 brownstone-style homes.
Since even the smaller project is still large and complex compared to other area developments, construction is at least a year away. Walman said it would likely take an additional 14 months for all buildings to be completed.
Everything is still planned to have high-end finishes and attract higher-tier tenants. Although nothing is final, the revised project is attracting interest from potential tenants.
"We've already got some pre-leasing activity," Walman said.
The more than two dozen buildings in the latest plans are organized more densely than typical shopping developments in order to encourage walking and exploration of the entire center, Walman said.
There will be some outside parking, but it will be supplemented with parking within the ground floor of the buildings themselves. Stores, offices and restaurants will be on the upper floors, which will give many tenants a different feel from the Tulsa area norm.
"The restaurants will be able to have elevated patios that look out onto the river or the River District plaza," Walman said. "We don't have much in our market that offers elevated dining."
As they get the site plan in order, developers are working with the city of Jenks on infrastructure issues.
The economy isn't the only thing that has changed since the River District was announced. The Village on Main, a $60 million retail, office, residential and hotel development on Main Street near the River District site, also has been seeking upscale tenants since it was announced last year.
Walman said there's plenty of room for both developments, and that each may benefit from the other.
"It's like having three jewelers across from each other in a mall," he said. "They don't cannibalize the sales of each other, since you have people who cross-shop."
Not long ago I was in Memphis and noticed they have an interesting development next to the Mississippi River by downtown called Harbor Town that I think would fit better at this location. It's mostly new neighborhoods built in the New Urbanist style, along with some townhouses and apartments with some retail in certain areas. I don't think more retail/restaurants like what is proposed are needed with Riverwalk's struggles to the north. More housing, especially something different than your typical suburban neighborhoods, would do well and would offer good access to the Turnpike and river trails, and the potential for a commuter rail stop in the distant future (the rail line from downtown bisects the site). The property itself is really unique with the Arkansas on one side and Polecat Creek on the other, and the aforementioned rail line. It's also adjacent to the aquarium and close to the Village on Main and Riverwalk Crossing, both with plenty of retail/restaurants.
Harbor Town
(http://www.riverinnmemphis.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/harbor-town-pictures-067-custom.jpg)
Anyone know how much the Mississippi River has to rise to turn Harbor Town into a Harbor, no town? Last time I was in Memphis, that spot of ground didn't look that much higher than the River but I wasn't actually on that spot.
Quote from: SXSW on August 20, 2010, 04:18:33 PM
Not long ago I was in Memphis and noticed they have an interesting development next to the Mississippi River by downtown called Harbor Town that I think would fit better at this location. It's mostly new neighborhoods built in the New Urbanist style, along with some townhouses and apartments with some retail in certain areas. I don't think more retail/restaurants like what is proposed are needed with Riverwalk's struggles to the north. More housing, especially something different than your typical suburban neighborhoods, would do well and would offer good access to the Turnpike and river trails, and the potential for a commuter rail stop in the distant future (the rail line from downtown bisects the site). The property itself is really unique with the Arkansas on one side and Polecat Creek on the other, and the aforementioned rail line. It's also adjacent to the aquarium and close to the Village on Main and Riverwalk Crossing, both with plenty of retail/restaurants.
Harbor Town
(http://www.riverinnmemphis.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/harbor-town-pictures-067-custom.jpg)
Interesting.
What is the pyramid?
/Just finished reading
The Lost Symbol and am intrigued.
--
Quote from: Hawkins on August 20, 2010, 06:36:02 PM
Interesting.
What is the pyramid?
/Just finished reading The Lost Symbol and am intrigued.
--
It's an arena
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_Arena
Quote from: swake on August 20, 2010, 06:49:57 PM
It's an arena
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_Arena
Cool, the last I had heard it was just an economic failure. I hope the Bass Shop can make it work.
The River District seems to be back on, albeit in a smaller form.
I've also noticed that there is work that looks to be taking utilities to the site. Power, fresh and waste water links going to the site are all currently being built.
Also, in this weeks Jenks Journal, the developers have asked for a shrinking of the TIF. They state the scope of the River District has been shrunk from $980 million dollars to $400 million dollars. The TIF is reduced from $294 million to $85 million.
It's a smaller, but still huge project that now seems to be back on.
Also, I know that the city of Jenks last week gave the street based rights of way for the old streets to the developer of The Village on Main so they can start to take out the old street grid. And in the same article about The River District the TIF for the Village on Main was increased from $2 million to $24 million and will pay for changing the levee and a parking garage for the project. The Utica Clinic that's part of the village is done and the Los Cabos owned restaurant and trail additions that are part of the village are well under construction now.
Iiiinteresting. Haven't been over in that neck of the woods lately.
Tulsa World now has more details:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=81&articleid=20101009_81_A1_CUTLIN699495
The Village on Main to have a natural foods grocery store called Green Acres Market, looks similar to an Akins.
http://www.greenacres.com/
I met with the Green Acres Market people yesterday. I am very excited about their entry into the Tulsa area grocery scene.
http://greenacres.com/
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 09, 2010, 07:47:11 AM
I met with the Green Acres Market people yesterday. I am very excited about their entry into the Tulsa area grocery scene.
http://greenacres.com/
Green Acres is the place to be!
Quote from: Gaspar on October 10, 2010, 07:10:33 AM
Green Acres is the place to be!
Do you have to climb the phone pole to use your computer?
We all heard this development was back on.... what when it going to actually start up? anyone heard anything??
From whom and or where forth didth thou heareth this?
Still hoping for no retail and more housing. If Jenks wants retail they need to make it work at Riverwalk. Upscale retail needs to remain concentrated at Utica Square.
This is a unique opportunity to build a new neighborhood next to the river. And if they ever build the low water dam it will be next to a lake. Not many lakefront neighborhoods in the Tulsa area...
Quote from: swake on October 09, 2010, 07:32:34 AM
Tulsa World now has more details:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=81&articleid=20101009_81_A1_CUTLIN699495
This is the last update I can find on the River District project... and still haven't seen any progress from Lynn Mitchell and the River District Development Group.
Anyone heard anything else recently???
Quote from: RitzLondon on April 14, 2012, 10:28:19 PM
This is the last update I can find on the River District project... and still haven't seen any progress from Lynn Mitchell and the River District Development Group.
Anyone heard anything else recently???
It's dead
Quote from: swake on April 14, 2012, 11:47:48 PM
It's dead
Can you please elaborate? Where was this information obtained from? The sign is still posted at the site. Thanks!
It would appear they've begun to do something
Looks like they're moving in a job site trailer.
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
It would appear they've begun to do something
Looks like they're moving in a job site trailer.
There was a zoning notification box near there recently as well.
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
It would appear they've begun to do something
Looks like they're moving in a job site trailer.
I think that is for the Creek Turnpike widening.
Quote from: rdj on May 21, 2012, 08:58:18 AM
I think that is for the Creek Turnpike widening.
Well crap. I was hopeful since they cleared what I thought were the first two lots.
I have no knowledge of how that all works so I thought, "huzzah, it's starting."
Oh well, at least my route will be 55 mph for 15 months. Tough to go that slow. Sammy was a wise man.
Is it 33rd from Riverside to Peoria that will serve as a retail/mixed use corridor from Brookside to Riverside?
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
It would appear they've begun to do something
Looks like they're moving in a job site trailer.
Driving by I saw a River District sign by the construction trailers.
Is there more happening there than just the Creek expansion?
The undead perhaps?
Quote from: Townsend on July 09, 2012, 10:46:04 AM
Driving by I saw a River District sign by the construction trailers.
Is there more happening there than just the Creek expansion?
The undead perhaps?
no, it's where all the old concrete and other junk is being dumped from the turnpike widening. If anything it shows it is MORE dead since this excludes anything else being done at the site for more than a year.
Quote from: swake on July 09, 2012, 11:15:39 AM
no, it's where all the old concrete and other junk is being dumped from the turnpike widening. If anything it shows it is MORE dead since this excludes anything else being done at the site for more than a year.
Why'd they put up a new sign?
I'll be going by again in about 30 so I'll verify the sign's there.
The sign's there. I have no idea if someone put it there in case they could get investors.
There's been a sign at the site for years. I haven't noticed a new one and I drive by there every day multiple times. I will double check on the way home.
I don't think that's a new sign. If it is they just moved it from the other side of the district.
The players in that deal have moved on to other projects. Primarily the S Memorial corridor.
Quote from: Teatownclown on May 21, 2012, 12:08:18 PM
Is it 33rd from Riverside to Peoria that will serve as a retail/mixed use corridor from Brookside to Riverside?
Partially but much of that is residential
Quote from: rdj on July 10, 2012, 09:10:53 AM
I don't think that's a new sign. If it is they just moved it from the other side of the district.
The players in that deal have moved on to other projects. Primarily the S Memorial corridor.
OK, thanks. I wasn't really expecting much. Just noticed the sign in a new location by construction.
QuotePartially but much of that is residential
Was this part of the park?