TUWC: a view from our Government Affairs Officer:
From monitoring the PRC meeting yesterday, I can say that INCOG and the city appreciate the gravity of what Simon is attempting to do and where they are attempting to do it. There are a few things they have to provide for clarification or more detail prior to this going to the full TMAPC on March 18.
Simon, thus far has avoided the local media unless it has been their own public announcements they have invited the media to. They refused to comment yesterday and last week when the YMCA finally went public with their comments on the development. Ask yourself why does Simon want to control the conversation and why are they not responding to the concerns of local citizens if they really want to be good members of the community.
Our stance has not changed, we still would prefer this development go elsewhere. This is NOWHERE close to a done deal. Simon has very high hurdles to clear.
Simon’s plan must get past the planning commission, then it must get past the City Council where your voices really count. Your representatives know the value of Turkey Mountain and so long as they know public opinion supports a pristine, undeveloped Turkey Mountain, they will act in our best interests. That’s why we need to keep emailing, calling, and need to show up when this goes before the City Council.
Simon has to explain and address the traffic issue east of their development. To date, they have no answers and meetings this week have shown there is no simple solution to the obvious reality Elwood and 61st will see a large uptick in traffic. This is a very important issue they must address as it’s in the interest of public safety on a very dangerous stretch of road.
Simon said they will be asking for tax incentives to help finance their project. Let the councilors know you do NOT support sanctioning the destruction of urban wilderness by providing tax incentives to the #1 mall developer in the world. Tax incentives to large out-of-state developers takes incentive money away from local developers who appreciate our culture and who are members of our community. Those are the developers who need help financing projects, not mega-developers with a $60 billion market cap.
Simon also has very keen competition with two other competing developments which may render this project dead at any time. Because of your emails, phone calls, and the coverage the media has provided on this issue, the city knows this is a controversial project.
We are simply providing an account of our observations on the progress of the planning process as promised. The next steps will be warm bodies at the TMAPC meeting on March 18 and the City Council meeting about a month later, unless some snags come up in their plan prior to those dates which would push it back.
Here are items that came up (please note that I am interchanging INCOG and city comments/inquiries as “city”):
-Simon has completed the traffic, geotechnical, topographical, and enviro studies. They have a plan for the 61st St. bridge but absolutely no answer for additional traffic on 61st heading east to Elwood then down Elwood Hill. I do believe these would be part of the public record and I am looking into obtaining copies.
-The city is concerned about the lighting standards they will use and if they really can minimize light pollution toward the Y and the wilderness to the east.
-The city expressed concern about the quality of run off water which will run off into Mooser Creek. It does not sound like all the engineering has been completed for the storm water system, but Simon’s engineer explained some of the natural filtration process they intend to use. Still, filtering the run off from over a million square feet of impermeable surface sounds like a daunting task. Again, that’s not my area of expertise. Simon seems to reply to many things with: “We’ve done this over 80 times with our outlet malls, we haven’t gotten this far by not learning something every time.” Basically, “Trust us to do the right thing.”
-The city does recognize that Turkey Mountain has regional and national prominence as a tourist draw. They want to make sure Simon understands this and will incorporate as many methods to respect this. I think they may have even referred to it as making it a bigger draw.
-The city advised Simon that their planned bridge over 61st Street will have to respect the SW Tulsa small area plan which called for a pedestrian-friendly bridge to connect Turkey Mountain to the neighboring areas to the west. Simon had proposed a 4’ sidewalk on the north side of the bridge, I believe the city will require a minimum of 6’. There was something in the SAP about assuring equestrian access from the Union Ave. corridor to Turkey Mountain. I’m not sure a 6’ pedestrian lane will cut it in that case. It appears to me, they may not have been aware of the small area plan, nor the Mooser Creek Study prior to now. INCOG will ensure those are respected in design
-The city has expressed concerns about pedestrian safety in the parking areas and circulator road. Obviously, this is an auto-centric project with pedestrian features once you are on-site. Any consideration to pedestrian access to the entrance of the site appears to be an afterthought at this time. The city is requiring a bus shelter for public transit access.
-The city also wants better clarification on how this project can link to the trails and consider the future use and demand for the trails. The city recognizes there is increasing interest in the recreation area. Simon thus far has been very vague on trailhead access or additional parking for trail users. This is an issue we are continuing to push and appears to have been a stipulation in the project from the beginning.