I think it would be cool for a getaway from a decent ways away, but I just don't see how this would be better locally then just going to Hurricane Harbor which will have many more rides/slides.
I think it would be cool for a getaway from a decent ways away, but I just don't see how this would be better locally then just going to Hurricane Harbor which will have many more rides/slides.
I suppose if you really like waterpark rides and wanted to go off-season this would fit the requirement.
I have young kids. I can 100% see us going here for a weekend during a cold month just to get out of the house and do something fun. I’m sure I’m not alone.
Yeah the cold months stuff definitely makes sense. I guess they'd just have the big pool closed but all the indoor stuff will still be open.
Resort fees are just an attempt at deceiving consumers by hiding the true room cost. Airlines played similar games, and they were finally made to show the full price including all fees and taxes when looking at airfare. Hotels (and really everything) should have to follow the same rules. There is no reason for the split out, required fees, except for deception (i.e. making a price look lower than it is until the consumer is nearly done with the booking process).
There are times when the amount of the resort fee needs to be separate. For instance, when a hotel has to be booked using the GSA rate, the GSA rate can't include the resort fee. If the room is being prepaid by someone who has to follow the GSA rate, like the OKC public schools, they can't pay for the resort fee using federal money.
More reason why mandatory fees should be rolled into the price. For a hotel with an indoor water park, you can at least make the claim that the resort fee is for an actual real amenity that is above and beyond normal hotel rates, but most resort fees are just things that are included at every hotel.
That being said I follow GSA rates at work on federal contracts, and have never had a problem expensing resort fees, although I avoid them like the plaque.
Then you never worked with the OKCPS. When Title 1 federal funds are being used to pay for a hotel, they will absolutely never include resort fees because it is specifically not covered. They have to pay for resort fees out of another source. I was told this directly from their person in charge of Title 1 spending.
Um, why would someone using a GSA (like OKCPS) need a room at Okana? Or then need the water park? If they're paying GSA, there are far better options for a hotel that make a lot more sense.
Just keeps getting better.
If this drought lasts much longer, we won't need the bridge.
I'm just kidding, kind of.
It’s nice to have substantial projects like this to be excited for instead of pretending to care for vaporware type projects like Legends Tower.
I rarely talk about the Oklahoma River Cruises operation here or elsewhere for a number of personal reasons, but I do honestly pull for it to succeed as legitimate transit someday, and this landing might help kickstart movement in that direction.
The River Cruises operation is heavily subsidized by the City (meaning all of us).
It would be nice if they could stand on their own two feet.
I think it will likely never see fully adequate cash flow from the fare box (plus assorted revenue sources like on board advertising) to fully cover its own costs. It’s a VERY expensive operation. But that’s totally OK - pretty much all transit requires subsidy - if it can begin to replace automobile travel for some - especially visitors - plus make traffic flow more smoothly and seamlessly between key nodes, districts and amenities. That (extensive and easy walkability between commercial districts and areas of interest) is what could put our visitor economy on steroids, and a robust visitor economy directly benefits every local taxpayer.
River Cruises is considering adding a fourth boat to meet an expected increase in operations. Most of, if not all of, these type of operations are subsidized at some level. Hornblower (the River Cruises operator) also runs the East River Ferries in NYC, Seattle ferries, London operations, and San Diego just to name a few. As Urbanized stated, it is considered part of the transit system and should be supported.
Looking at the indoor waterpark renderings, I don't see a lazy river. I feel like that's a big miss. That's one of the best things about any waterpark.
That dock with the stairs, rails, and ledges has potential to be one of the best spots to skate at night in the metro. It is almost like a level on Tony Hawks Pro Skater.
How does the waterpark compare in size to the Water Zoo in Clinton or Great Wolf Lodge in DFW?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks