Feedback wanted: PLANiTULSA, Driller Stadium
The PLANiTULSA draft vision document, which will serve as the foundation for a fully-elaborated comprehensive plan for the City of Tulsa, is online. You can read it online as separate web pages, or download the "Our Vision for Tulsa" PDF. It's only 50 pages long (with lots of photos), so please take time to read it, and then go online to provide your feedback.
Tulsa County Commissioners would like to know what should be done with Driller Stadium or the stadium site after the Tulsa Drillers move downtown. There's an online survey where you can rank possible options for using the existing stadium or for replacing it with some other kind of development.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Feedback wanted: PLANiTULSA, Driller Stadium.
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5293
Subscribe to this blog's feed:
BRING BACK BELLS!
I had the same thought A Team. This is what I put in my survey, "Tear it down and bring back Bell's"
One more thought:
A PUBLIC VOTE ON THE PLANITULSA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE!
I truly do not understand the purpose in bothering to provide feedback online. After allowing online feedback, the PLANiTulsa results were what the money belt wanted. Throw money into downtown. How can you possibly base a planning document and the future of the city on a result that may have had input from outside the city limits? I've not seen a shred of evidence that there was any kind of security measure that would determine the bona fide address of a respondent over the Internet.
Same deal with the county. Why not have some public meetings and give people a chance to speak their mind? Maybe the county is being badly advised to use the Internet for input. I'll bet they build a hotel there.
Put a big tarp over it and keep it. It won't be that long before somebody has the bright idea that what Tulsa needs for "revitalization" is a new ball park someplace other than downtown.
According to today's Tulsa World, another version of the PLANiTULSA draft vision document was posted on PLANiTULSA's website for a brief time on September 14 before it was removed. I didn't see the earlier version, but I'd like to be able to compare it to the revised document.
The World article mentions that some wording about INCOG and the City's planning department was changed before the document was reposted on September 15. I can understand computer glitches, grammatical mistakes, and spelling errors, but the integrity of a "transparent" process suffers when documents suddenly vanish, are quickly edited behind the scenes, and then reappear the next day without the public knowing what the revisions were, who made them, and why.