OKC Whitewater Park Design and Schedule

[aburnett04]

Great info regarding the WW park coming to OKC. See the attached file of excerpts or get the full details from http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/meeting.as ... ocid=46430

Year round kayaking at last!

Please take my poll by logging in, which enables the radio buttons. I'll pass the results to the OKC project director.

Regards,
Alex
Edmond, OK

[CAPTAIN ALEVE]

I guess I didn't know about this plan. Here's what I found on one of the links in your post:


OKC whitewater plan by CaptainAleve, alias Mike Coogan, on Flickr
So OKC is planning to have a man-made whitewater competition and recreational course, fed by pumps?

Mike Coogan, alias Captain Aleve

[sig]

Neat... thanks for sharing. Too bad the powers that be in Little Rock don't understand that $22M spent on amenities like this would attract more people and jobs to the area than the "tech park" fiasco that they are chasing.

[Shep]

Nothing is simple, and this is no exception. I would also love to have something like this in Arkansas, but in the case of Oklahoma City it is really building on something that has grown over the last 15 years. When the Bricktown area was being revitalized in the 90's, Rowing was part of what happened there. By extension, it is a wonderful place to train for the flatwater canoe and kayak disciplines. When MAPS 3 got passed, funding the WW course, it was only about a month before Joe Jacobi was in OKC announcing USA Canoe Kayak's new location. I think that a lot of good things have happened, and it has led to a WW course in OKC, but it wasn't a spontaneous thing. It was a result of 15 years of positive developments.

Shep

[okieboater]

I know several of the gents that made this happen. It all started on the PSO Tulsa Wave chatting on the bank.

The key success factor is OKC is a city of people that make things happen for the good of the entire city. Even if it does take some tax money.

I am afraid both Tulsa and several cities in Arkansas that have river places that would make great WW Parks have been out classed by OKC who basically had just a dry most of the time flood control channel to work in to a world class flatwater setup and now they are doing the impossible dream for WW.

Hat off to Matt and the guys and gals in OKC who made the dream come to reality .

[CAPTAIN ALEVE]

The ACC Malvern wave project has sunk to a low point with no one working on it presently, but maybe it is not dead. It's only been in the works for 14 years; maybe 15 will be the lucky number like it was for OKC. There's still $120,000 of donations and grants in Malvern's interest earning bank account, and there's still $8,000 of a Ouachita River Environmental Fund grant sitting in the ACC's non-interest bearing account where it has been since 2007, so at least there is a foot in the door so to speak. And that 404 Permit which has been effect since 2004 does have at least 2 years left on its extension, so there is time. That's long enough for the ACC to have 6 more Board meetings (not counting Canoe School Board meetings) in which to get this project rolling to a conclusion. I guess someone should take Scott Hanshaw's place on the ACC Malvern wave committee since he's left Arkansas. Any volunteers?

Or maybe it's time for this project to be put to rest. The original engineering firm gave us false hope by estimating the cost to be about twenty percent of the price that contractors submitted when they bid on the project twice in 2007. If it had been known in 2003 that the project was going to require a half million dollars (or more since no one has performed the new engineer's recommended consultation with local contractors to see if the current cost estimate is in the ballpark; it's only been two years since that recommendation was received so there's plenty of time left), then maybe the wave project would have ended at that point.

I'm glad it didn't end and I'm not ready to call it dead. All that's needed is some leadership to coordinate the human and monetary resources that are available. Since not a single grant has been applied for since the plans were received two years ago, it must be obvious that the project in its present form does not qualify for funding from any government source. Yet there is funding available from two sources which is not being pursued: the Environmental Fund for the Ouachita River (they are sitting on $100,000 and have already donated or committed $20,000 to the project) and the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission/US Fish and Wildlife agency. The AGFC usually quadruples the amount of money it has for in-river projects by going through the USFW and have suggested they would use their heavy equipment to further reduce construction costs. True, the project would have to conform to AGFC standards for improving the environment for aquatic species, which might not yield a world class rodeo wave, but maybe the membership of the ACC would rather go that direction rather than see the project go away. The members could always be asked, if there was any doubt about which option they preferred: some modest play waves or nothing.

Mike Coogan, alias Captain Aleve

[Cadron Boy]

Well most of the seed money for the OKC Whitewater Park -- like some $3.5 million -- came from Chesapeake Energy and given falling natural gas prices -- I don't think we will be able to count on Chesapeake for funding. But one big donation makes up for a lot of small grants.

Now obviously Tanner bridge is no OKC whitewater park. Tanner bridge is low-tech, low cost in comparison. But the differences don't stop there. At the OKCWP there isn't another wave in sight -- at Tanner bridge you need only look a few hundred yards upstream to see a delightful river-wide play wave. At OKCWP they'll be able to offer paddlers 24 hour play 365 days a year thanks to powerful energy-consuming pumps that will recirculate millions of gallons of water each day -- Tanner bridge will offer optimal play waves only for a few hours each summer during dam releases. At OKCWP even during the peak rainy season one doesn't have a lot of whitewater paddling options in the area, whereas, within an hour's drive of Tanner bridge there are so many whitewater paddling options most have yet to be fully utilized. Similarly, OKC and its citizens already have an established history of sponsoring boating events including hosting the U.S. Olympic Team Trials -- whereas Malvern has hosted ..hmm ... I guess you could count the hometown throwdown and Surf 'n Turf. I could go on and on -- the point I'm trying to make -- we can't compare Tanner Bridge to OKC or any other water parks that exist in the country. There are far more many variables than them all having water and 15 years to get the boat spinnin'.

IMHO -- Folks in Malvern are probably looking at Rockport wondering if a second wave feature at Tanner Bridge is really what the community needs. What will one more wave feature bring to the area? More high-spending visitors to support local jobs? Or nothing more than a few big Macs and a couple of cold beers behind the bushes before heading home? A tourist mecca for paddlers? Or more areas to patrol, more temptations to drink and party, and more venues in which to get hurt or drowned? Step outside the boat and I can understand Malvern's reluctance to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just so a few of us have a place to paddle every once in awhile for a few hours during the heat of the summer. We need to make sure all the benefits are touted loud and often so they far outweigh the risks and costs the city will incur.

Lastly -- and I gotta play the devil here -- I betcha if you were to put a user fee on use of Tanner Wave -- no paddlers will show. The wave couldn't pay for itself. Tanner Bridge would have to be hands down a far better wave than Rockport before people will start throwing down hard earned cash to catch it. And if it can't pay for itself, I can only wonder -- is it really needed? And if it is needed and if the demand is there -- then market forces and/or personal motivation will ultimately prevail. If needed and in demand folks will pass the can and make donations of money and sweat to get the job done.

And paddlers are the ones who should be stepping up to bat to make this project happen -- we have the most to benefit and thus it is only logical that we should also be the ones that bear the brunt of the load. Tanner Bridge project should be bought and paid for by those people who are actually going to use the wave feature and the ACC has already contributed and should continue to do so if this a project the membership supports. If not and otherwise -- consider the Tanner Bridge wave feature a good idea that simply wasn't fruitful when planted and move on.

Thus...

JOB OPPORTUNITY: Seeking passionate and motivated paddler with get-er-done attitude to take the reins and step forward to volunteer to take Mr. Hanshaw's place on the ACC Malvern Wave Committee. The groundwork has been laid and the paddling community stands firmly in your corner. Be it a challenge or opportunity -- a favorable outcome would be a summertime blessing!

[okieboater]

Well I am gonna jump in here for what it is worth.

Cadron Boy makes sense to me RE: paddlers need to jump in.

Rockport has a great existing river feature, that gives us fun times most all of the summer. It would not take much to make that feature even better.

As what happens with a lot of white water parks, the concept goes big time and just gets so expensive that no taxpayer these days wants to kick in more money for more ww parks costing millions of dollars. Heck, most of us are watching our money go to big government and spent in places most of us cannot spell. There is just no way people want to pay more taxes.

If the Captn is correct, there is a lot of money (lot to us normal people) stashed away waiting to be spent.

I personally wondered why the play wave was moved to Tanner Bridge. Had to be a reason for it, I just don't know why.

But, based on my experience here in Tulsa, reasonable play waves can morph into gadget ridden WW parks that get so big that things just get out of hand money wise.

If some sort of winning combination of paddlers, whom ever controls the money already raised and a low cost easy to build alterations plan built around the existing drop = My take is Malvern would have it's WW Park, costs would be reasonable and the paddling community would flock to Malvern like they used to flock to Tulsa when we had the old PSO Tulsa Wave going. Keep the alterations simple, see what local outfits can offer to help build it and just do it. Being a old time farm boy, I remember our neighbors showing up with gear to plow or gather sometimes build what ever one of us needed but could not do alone. Seems like the same concept would apply to Rockport play spot.

Just saying, the days of easy money from folks like Chesapeake Energy provided are few and far between. OKC had it's timing just right. The rest of us did not.

[CAPTAIN ALEVE]

With all the facilities at the Rockport ledge (parking, bathrooms, shady areas) that location seems like the ideal spot for development. Why didn't that happen?

The original idea put forth by the best surfers in the ACC was a project to build a wave that worked at the minimum release flow level at Tanner Street. That way there would be surfing at Tanner Street when the generators at Remmel Dam were not running, and surfing at the current Rockport ledge when generation was taking place. That was going to be good enough. Four years later when the engineers from Recreation Engineering and Planning (REP) began work on the project, the top surfer's plan had become one of a full scale competition level wave at generation flow at Tanner Street and some enhancements at the current Rockport ledge. When REP filed the 404 Permit application the concept drawings for the project included changes to the current Rockport ledge (as spelled out by the top surfers) as shown in the drawing below which is from the 404 Permit application. The present sidewalk out to the wave is located at the far right side of the drawing behind the row of stones shown, but didn't exist at the time the drawing was made so it is not shown.


REP UPPER LEDGE PERMIT DWG by CaptainAleve, alias Mike Coogan, on Flickr


As it became clear that cost might become an issue, work at the Rockport ledge was dropped. At the same time there had been comments from ACC members who opposed altering the existing Rockport ledge because that would be an unnatural act. There was also a question of whether or not development would be allowed near Malvern's new (in 2007) water intake that is just above the ledge, centrally located in the river near the big rock. That's why no actual plans were ever developed for improvements at the Rockport ledge. It should be noted the the existing Rockport ledge has been heavily modified from its natural form, first by surfers who moved and anchored a large stone that is essentially responsible for there being any surfing at all (prior to 1999), second by Malvern (in 2007) which blocked off flow that was eroding the bank where the present sidewalk out to the wave is. That sidewalk work was made possible by the ACC's $12,000 donation to the sidewalk,trail, and parking lot project in 2007. That money was matched by federal funds for the project in a 20 - 80 split with the $12,000 being the twenty percent. Yay! Free Money! After the sidewalk project was completed, the original $12,000 was still available (due to the payment timing required to get the fed money, you pay the contractor first and get reimbursed by the feds afterward, so you had to have money to get free money) and remains available in the Malvern account for the wave project.

Clearly there was no consensus in the ACC on whether or not to alter the Rockport ledge. It should be pointed out that the membership of the ACC as a whole has never been consulted as to what they might want the club to do at either Tanner Street or the Rockport ledge. As Maggie Powell said in the Malvern Wave post, the ACC should develop a plan for the future that includes what to do with the wave project. I would hope that in this modern era of communication all members would be given the opportunity to comment, whether electronically or by prepaid post card, or whatever means reaches all members best.

Mike Coogan, alias Captain Aleve

[Dr. Steve Yaney]

The results of this survey are embarrassing to say the least. Do you folks not know what a gem this is?? I guess asking for an ACC discount is out of the question if only 14 of us will visit this world class facility.

[sig]

I don't think a web poll on a message board is a good way to survey the entire 600+ household membership. I know I only got one vote even though we are a three paddler household.

I also think if I'm going to drive 5-6 hours to a concrete flume in Oklahoma City where I'll probably need a hotel room to spend the night then I would prefer to drive the 8 hours east to camp and run the Ocoee.

I might expect an ACA discount but not an ACC discount.

[Shep]

For me, events will be what draw people. I wouldn't drive over for a random weekend, but I would drive over for a slalom race, class, or other special event. I didn't vote because I will probably be living half a country away by the time it opens, so it's pretty hard for me to predict how often I might visit...

Open Canoe Slalom Nationals 2015!!!

Shep

[Cadron Boy]

I'm with Sig on this one. Paddling in a chlorinated man-made concrete river holds no appeal for me. Did the Charlotte thing once -- and albeit it was blast, I'd never do it again. Twas a "been there done that" kind of affair. We already talked about transportation and lodging costs but it went far beyond that -- I felt gouged at every turn -- extra for this, extra for that -- it even cost to park. And lord help you if you take any kids and they want to eat pricey food or take a canopy tour at $89 a pop. I tend to be a lone wolf anyway and the appeal of sharing a pool with kids, newbies, rafters, and what all -- when there are hundreds of miles of free flowing streams in a mostly natural setting in my backyard this is one kid that ain't going to make the drive to Oklahoma City. Get that far down the road and I'll keep going as I'm half way to Colorado, Utah and other diversions I find more appealing.

That's not to say there isn't a BIG market for the OKC Whitewater facility -- I just think there are a lot of paddlers who share my sentiments.

[okieboater]

All of that which Cadron Boy and others have stated is what makes a reasonably priced construction to the play spots at Tulsa PSO or Rockport so inviting.

At Rockport there is great parking, plenty of cheap food and lodging including a state park nearby and one heck of a good site (both sides of the river) for viewing.

It is a very long drive over to Rockport but I have done it many times for the existing play spot and expect to do it again.

As far as Tulsa is concerned when we did the Rodeo's we had cheap lodging for folks and people came from all over including a major group of pro level stars like Corran Addison and Spelious bringing their buds, boaters from surrounding states and pacific NW.
We had to cut off participants even tho there was a entry charge we kept on getting people wanting in. I doubt if Tulsa will ever have that great play spot ever, but I know that if we can get a real rodeo type hole at Rockport, the sky is the limit. Plus you got clean cool water.

All we need at Rockport is the engineering work to make that river left spot as good as the Tulsa PSO Wave (for get the gadgets just make a great play hole) was and I bet Malvern would be full of hungry boaters looking for food, gas and even motel rooms!!!!@

I would love to see a world class WW Park at Malvern or Tulsa like OKC is building. But even tho the OKC water is muddy and most of us who are used to clean Arkansas water like we have at Malvern, I am betting that the OKC facility will be loaded with people who don't care much about the water quality or the fact that it is totally man made IE not natural. People for hundreds of miles west of OKC are starved for water - don't care if it is muddy or in man made channels. To them water is water. The water they see is coming from a pump and sprayed out of a rotating line of man made sprayer heads!!!!

PSO Wave had water that for years would shine with petro products leaking into it, but many of us used it for decades. And, it has gotten a lot better over the years. That water might have turned our hair white, but made me for one, safe from all sorts of germs encountered in Costa Rica, Mexico, Honduras, Chile and Ecuador. While I can understand why some would not boat in a man made OKC facility I bet a WW park there will be overrun with boaters starved for a play spot.

Keep the Malvern dream alive!!!

[Cadron Boy]

Amen brother!