Concerned citizens claim development plans are at odds with wetland health

[urbanity]

http://www.okgazette.com/article/12-...nd_health.aspx

[MustangGT]

I frequent that area and would like to see it remain in its natural state with no development beyond what is there now. IMHO some areas just need to be left alone.

[Kerry]

Another case of "I already live here, but I don't want you living here". I wonder if Lynda Bahr was so concerned about the water quality when her home was built.

[Midtowner]

1 home =/= a massive apartment complex in terms of environmental impact. There's zero comparison.

[Kerry]

1 home =/= a massive apartment complex in terms of environmental impact. There's zero comparison.

True, but 1 home =/= 0 homes either.

[Architect2010]

Also true, but 1 home > 100+ unit complex with grocery store. In terms of environmental protection for that area.

[Double Edge]

Tulsa Audubon:
Stinchcomb

The primary ways to enjoy the refuge are by foot, mountain bike and boat. Several trails suitable for hiking run through the refuge linking four small lakes to the river. Entrances to the trails are from NW 50th on the east side of the refuge and County Line and Morgan Roads on the west side.

Nesting Prothonotary Warblers and Wood Ducks are found in the several ponds along the river roads. Indigo Buntings, American Goldfinches, smaller woodpeckers, and Carolina Wrens are among the small birds present. Late summer concentrations of Double-crested Cormorants may number in the hundreds. Mississippi Kites, Swainson's and Red-tailed hawks use the area as well as Great Horned, Barred, and Screech-Owls. When water levels are low, wading birds including White-faced Ibis and rarely such southern visitors as the White Ibis, Roseate Spoonbill, and Olivaceous Cormorant are seen. During the periods of migration warblers, kinglets, and smaller flycatchers are abundant. Fall weather brings the wintering sparrows, Song, Swamp, Lincoln's, White-throated, White-crowned, Harris's and Fox

http://www.tulsaaudubon.org/guides/s...ife-refuge.htm

OKC Audobon

Lake Overholser

With its variety of habitats, birding can be good here any season of the year. Obviously, spring and fall migrations are best with the combination of migrant passerines, shorebirds and waterfowl producing the largest numbers of birds. Winter can be productive with large rafts of ducks, gulls and cormorants, especially during iceover events.

Spring:
Rafts of ducks are common with Mallards, Shovelers, Green-winged Teal, Redhead, American Wigeon, Lesser Scaup, Bufflehead, and Ruddy Duck being the most numerous. Loons, grebes, gulls and terns are common. Watch for Common Loon, Horned and Eared Grebe, Franklin’s and Bonaparte’s Gulls, Forster’s and Black Terns. Passerines to look for are Yellow-billed Cuckoo, all swallows, Chimney Swift, Eastern Phoebe, Great-crested Flycatcher, Western and Eastern Kingbird, Scissortailed Flycatcher, House Wren, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Swainson’s Thrush, Cedar Waxwing, Vireos, as well as Yellow-rumped, Nashville, Black & White and Parula Warblers. Added to this list are Indigo Buntings, Dickcissel, Baltimore Orioles, and American Goldfinch.

Summer:
Breeding birds are limited due to lack of extensive woods around the lake. The best areas are the park areas on the north and east sides of the lake and the woods below the dam. Look for Mississippi Kite, Yellow-billed Cuckoo, Common Nighthawk, Chimney Swift, Kingbirds, Scissortailed Flycatchers, Cliff and Barn Swallows, Carolina Chickadee, Tufted Titmouse, Carolina and Bewick’s Wrens, Eastern Bluebird, Robin, Mockingbird, Warbling Vireo, Common Yellowthroat, Indigo and Painted Buntings, Lark Sparrow, Baltimore Oriole, and American Goldfinch.

Fall:
Fall migration is less productive than spring but can hold a few surprises. Expect grebes, pelicans, egrets and herons, Snow Geese, ducks, Mississippi Kite, Osprey, Swainson’s Hawk, Sharp-shinned and Cooper’s Hawks, White-faced Ibis, gulls, terns, swallows, flycatchers, White-breasted Nuthatch, Blue-gray Gnatcatcher, vireos, warblers, Summer Tanager, sparrows, orioles and blackbirds.
Unusual birds would be bitterns, night herons, Broad-winged Hawk, rails, shorebirds, owls, Ruby-throated Hummingbird, Easter Wood Pewee, Marsh Wren, American Pipit, Rose-breasted and Blue Grosbeak, Clay-colored Sparrow, Yellow-headed Blackbird, and Pine Siskin.

Winter:
Large rafts of ducks become common, especially Common and Red-breasted Mergansers, Shovelers, Redheads, Lesser Scaup, Bufflehead and Ruddy Duck. Lesser numbers of teal, Gadwall, Canvasback, Ring-necked, Goldeneye, and Hooded Merganser may be present, Ring-billed, Herring and Bonaparte’s Gulls are regular. Cormorants and coots are common. Sparrows to watch for are Tree, Field, Song, Lincoln’s, White-throated, and Harris’s as well as Juncos.

Birds to be expected year-round are Pied-billed Grebe, Great Blue Heron, Canada Goose, Mallard, Red-tailed Hawk, Kestrel, Coot, Killdeer, Least Sandpiper, Ring-billed Gull, Rock Pigeon, Mourning Dove, Kingfisher, the Red-bellied, Downy and Flickers, Blue Jay, American Crow, Chickadee, Titmouse, Carolina and Bewick’s Wrens, Eastern Bluebird, Robin, Mockingbird, Starling, Cardinal, Red-winged Blackbird, Eastern Meadowlark, Great-tailed Grackle, Brown-headed Cowbird, House Finch, American Goldfinch, and House Sparrow.

http://okc-audubon.org/?cat=19

[kevinpate]

If someone elects to buy next to or near bare land which isn't restricted to remaining bare land, they either can purchase the bare land too or they can roll the dice and take their chances that no one else will buy it and choose to put something on it.

Maybe it's not as simple as it seems to me.

[Double Edge]

I grew up riding motorcycles out at Stinchcomb and it was the party/hangout spot in high school, I knew the area well. When they gated it off and called it a wildlife refuge we used to joke that the humans were the only "wildlife" out there. I rode mountain bikes out there about 10 years after they closed it to vehicular traffic and the trails were gone by then but the horses had the road all chewed up. It definitely became a "nature area" due to lack of attention and/or use.

Maybe one of our historians will weigh in but if memory serves the last time I investigated, it was a wildlife refuge from back before we were born, twenties or so. (I'm guessing at your age) That's probably the reason why access was limited, for misuse, motorcycle riding, high school parties, rather than the use it was designated for. That and policing it, I've heard there was a drowning of a high schooler in the late sixties at the river just north of 39th, known as Stinchcomb now. That was the end of swimming there according to my friend.

[Spartan]

We need to start sending these people to sprawlers' anonymous meetings because of the severity of the failed logic here. This makes absolutely no sense. I understand the premise of sprawl: all this cheap, useless land around the metro. But now we're just sprawling for sprawl's sake. It doesn't make sense for you to build an apt complex in the middle of an environmentally protected SWAMP that's 20 miles from downtown, but they want to anyway, because..because they can! But if you deny a developer the right to build that then he will cause a huge stink and then we get to hear all the usual worn arguments over property rights and all that good stuff.

[MadMonk]

I suspect that her objections are driven more by a potential reduction of property value than her concern for the wetlands and the "problem" of sprawl.

[Double Edge]

Either way, it was already a wildlife refuge in 2002 when the city hired a consultant to study it and make a long term plan for it. I can tell you the end result was not to turn it back to the kind of 'use' you're speaking of, parties and motorcycle riding, but to conserve the natural aspects of it and provide limited changes in infrastructure to accommodate the public's enjoyment of that.

[Spartan]

No doubt. Anyone should be mortally concerned when apartments are proposed right next to where you live. "There goes the neighborhood.."

[ljbab728]

This sounds like much ado about nothing to me. It says the property is already zoned commercial so some kind of development will happen anyway. It's not part of the wildlife refuge, just next to it and if you can trust the proposal they are planning to protect the wetlands that are currently designated. If development was denied here why couldn't development be denied on land next to this property but further away for the same reason? If more property needed to be protected the wildlife refuge should have been a larger area.

[mcca7596]

This sounds like much ado about nothing to me. It says the property is already zoned commercial so some kind of development will happen anyway. It's not part of the wildlife refuge, just next to it and if you can trust the proposal they are planning to protect the wetlands that are currently designated. If development was denied here why couldn't development be denied on land next to this property but further away for the same reason? If more property needed to be protected the wildlife refuge should have been a larger area.

^Exactly^ I don't think anyone desires sprawl; I see it more as a growth of northeast Yukon, an area underserved in retail.

[Double Edge]

I'm sure the city has been inconsistent over the decades WRT management of the area. This 2002 study was ordered by the parks department, or the water resources board possibly, I don't remember exactly. The area is still used for city, state or county controlled duck hunting too.

I participated in the below mentioned meetings...

Master Plan Development for Stinchcomb.

GUERNSEY and Howard Site Design were selected to perform the master planning activities for future development of the 1,000-acre Stinchcomb Wildlife Refuge, located north of Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City. The refuge serves as a buffer and water resources protection area for Lake Overholser.

Since 1920, the City has used the wildlife refuge and its four lakes as a filtering mechanism to trap floodwater sediments that would ultimately enter Lake Overholser. Lake Overholser is the storage reservoir for water coming to the Oklahoma City water supply system from Canton Lake and the North Canadian River. Water ultimately is diverted from Lake Overholser to Lake Hefner for additional storage, treatment, and distribution.

The refuge serves as a “filter” for water flowing from the North Canadian River into Lake Overholser. The 1,100-acre refuge contains four distinct, off-channel lakes and various wetland attributes that provide source protection for the City’s water supply during high flow periods (spring and fall). This provides extensive water quality enhancement.

GUERNSEY’s role in the process was to address the environmental issues related to the master planning process. Those issues include the following:

The process included several meetings with environmental groups and interested public agencies.

* Environmental Constraints (composite)
* Topography / geology
* Soils
* Surface water hydrology / groundwater
* Wetlands / other water bodies
* Site vegetation
* Cultural Resources
* Air Quality
* Recreation
* Wildlife
* Permitting Requirements

http://www.chguernsey.com/project.php?ProjectID=148

[Midtowner]

This sounds like much ado about nothing to me. It says the property is already zoned commercial so some kind of development will happen anyway. It's not part of the wildlife refuge, just next to it and if you can trust the proposal they are planning to protect the wetlands that are currently designated. If development was denied here why couldn't development be denied on land next to this property but further away for the same reason? If more property needed to be protected the wildlife refuge should have been a larger area.

It doesn't matter that the place isn't part of a wildlife refuge. If the land is registered as a wetland with the federal government, it is entitled to certain protections. The developers are going to have to satisfy the relevant governmental body (I believe it'll be the DEQ) that the wetlands will be sufficiently protected, or the whole project can be deep-sixed regardless of what the Council says or what public sentiment is.

[ljbab728]

It doesn't matter that the place isn't part of a wildlife refuge. If the land is registered as a wetland with the federal government, it is entitled to certain protections. The developers are going to have to satisfy the relevant governmental body (I believe it'll be the DEQ) that the wetlands will be sufficiently protected, or the whole project can be deep-sixed regardless of what the Council says or what public sentiment is.

Only a portion of the property is designated wetlands and the article says that issue will be addressed. I doubt if the developers are unaware of the requirements. Again, if all of this property was meant to be left alone it should have had some other type of designation for the entire area.

[Double Edge]

Only a portion of the property is designated wetlands and the article says that issue will be addressed. I doubt if the developers are unaware of the requirements. Again, if all of this property was meant to be left alone it should have had some other type of designation for the entire area.

That's the issue. It's not zoned for what they want to do and perhaps the last zoning change was an error as well. It would be worth knowing when it was zoned commercial and what the OKC plan was at the time it was zoned commercial.

From the gazette link:

The land is currently zoned as commercial — after an aborted attempt to bring in a Walmart — and the land’s majority owner, Ken McGee of McGee Investments, is looking to zone part of the land as residential to make way for an apartment complex.

[Double Edge]

Basically all of NW 10th needs to be torn down and rebuilt and not in apartments. That is a real ghetto. That doesn't mean that multifamily building should be denied in other areas until this area is rebuilt though.

This is textbook example of sprawl. Put in a highway for commuting at the outskirts, convert rich farmland, natural areas be damned, build new and let the inner city decay. That's a great plan, except for reasons I just listed and it continues to add the burden and cost of the city to maintain services over an ever widening area, does nothing to make the best use of areas already impacted and adds to fuel use and mass trans for commuting, to name a few issues.

[Double Edge]

There are issues and risks with building in a floodplain both with the property itself and with the impact on other parts of the floodplain. That's probably not going to slow down this project tho.

[Double Edge]

And a tidbit I just learned about it today, it's the 99th largest city park in the US. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933260.html

[Kerry]

So let me sum up the last 7 posts, "I already live here, but I don't want you to. Sprawl and living next to wetlands was ok when I did it, but if you live here it will be bad."

[Spartan]

So let me sum up the last 7 posts, "I already live here, but I don't want you to. Sprawl and living next to wetlands was ok when I did it, but if you live here it will be bad."

Huge apartment complex > one house.

How do you know that these people, who you're talking crap about, wouldn't mind one or two more single-family neighbors?

[ljbab728]

Huge apartment complex > one house.

How do you know that these people, who you're talking crap about, wouldn't mind one or two more single-family neighbors?

Spartan, that wouldn't surprise me at all. I lived in Mustang for many years and when it was really starting to grow the general consensus was that every new family that moved there hoped they were the last ones and wanted to prevent any additional growth.