It is fair to study & speculate as to the reasons, whatever they may be, for the voting patterns, if any, in this, and/or in any election. The plain facts are that, as a whole, Wards 3, 4 & 5 voted No, and that Wards 1, 2, 6, 7 & 8, voted Yes.

From that generalization, one could conclude that the vote turned on where one lived in the north/south parts of the city. However, on closer look, one could also conclude that the generalization just stated presents an inaccurate and unuseful oversimplification. Let's look at the geography and vote more carefully.

Below, I'm showing a pair of maps. Note that boundary discrepancies exist in them. The 1st map is Ward & Precinct map which was current when the March 4, 2007, vote occurred on the Ford Center vote. I got this map from the County Election Board and then combined it with the Precinct map from the OU Spatial Studies website. The 2nd map is the "vote map" that which appeared in the Oklahoman following the Maps 3 vote. Either Oklahoma City's city limits changed after the March 4 vote or the Oklahoman map has Oklahoma City's limits and precincts wrong, I don't know which. But, even with discrepancies, they are generally similar when superimposed on one another.

Wards & precincts, generally ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/precinctmap2009_1.jpg

Yes/No votes ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/maps3precinctmap.jpg


Overlaying the above maps ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/precinctmap2009_votes.jpg

Same map as above but showing radial proximity
to downtown with concentric rings at about 3-mile distances ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/precinctmap2009_votes2.jpg

From the above, at the least these things are reasonable to conclude:


No bright line exits which identifies boundaries of the so-called North & South sides. Parts of Ward 3 are north of I-40; parts of Ward 6 are below it and extend as far south as SW 44th, an area which would certainly be characterized as "South Side" in the past if not the present. If one is wanting to analyze North/South divisions, precincts are probably more useful than wards, per se.
But, even when only looking a precincts, geographic area does not necessarily equate to the number of voters within them. A comparison of precincts shows some to be geographically large but relatively small compared to others which are geographically small but which contain many more voters. The rural areas of some wards, particularly, in Wards 3, 7 & 5, fall into the category of containing precincts with a relatively small number of voters per precinct. The point is: geography, alone, provides no reasonable basis for concluding that the geographic area is proportionate to an equivalent number of voters in a much more highly populated precinct. Unfortunately, I don't know of a map which presents this information demographically. But it easy enough to have a glance at the precinct-by-precinct votes (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/12/maps-3-unofficial-vote-totals.html) to see that some precincts dwarf others in the number of votes cast, sometimes ridiculously so.

Very generally, it can accurately be said that the "North Side" voted yes and the "South Side" voted no. But, whether that generalization makes sense in concluding that a north/south dichotomy-mentality-whatever is relevant in the voter analysis prompted the yes/no votes is an entirely different matter.
Very substantial exceptions exist to both general patterns. Notably, the Capitol Hill part of Ward 8 voted No; but the south central areas of Wards 3 & 5 voted Yes, as did significant northern parts of Ward 3 and, to a lesser extent, north-central parts of Ward 4. Conversely, far northwesterly parts of Wards 1 & 8 voted No, as did a chunk of north-central Ward 2 and the northeastern parts of Ward 7, bucking the trend of the "north side" vote analysis.
Proximity to downtown was not significant, except as to the approximate 9-square mile inner core. Except for that innermost 3-mile square section, proximity to downtown reflects no pattern which is readily evident ... in fact, the 2nd-radial area reflects more No precincts than Yes.


So, while analysis is a worthwhile thing to do, sweeping generalizations as to a north/south dichotomy are quite possibly inaccurate and misleading. There may be, probably are, good explanations as to why who voted how. But geography, I think, may not be high up on the list.

Thanks for the analysis Doug.

Excellent work, Doug. Thank you very much!

I think that analysis puts too much consideration on the rural wards where very few people voted. Honestly if you toss out most of wards 3 and 7, which rural except for small portions where people do live, then you have a more accurate visual. You will see a clear divide between north and south. Yes, there are very few exceptions..some rundown parts of the north side and the nicest parts of the south side by Westmoore High School went the other way. But the overall trend is clearly north yes, south no. There are some nice parts of the south side that went no, and there were tons of bad parts of the north side (NE OKC) that went yes. That proves that regional identity was more indicative of how people voted than income levels, even though you can say both are trends to some extent. It's just that the north/south divide was stronger than the high-income/low-income divide.


On the other hand, places like the Paseo and the Plaza District developed de novo. All of those areas began because someone saw value in investing in them.....either homeowners or business owners. I certainly think the Capitol Hill business district has a lot of potential, but, to be honest with you, I haven't paid much attention to the homes around it. If they're the kind of houses that would be good investments for people, and a few businesses start moving in to Capitol Hill, there's no reason it couldn't take off. I'm just not sure what the city should do to make it happen on it's own. I know that the streetscaping on 23rd street happened before retail started to take off there, but don't really remember where the impetus for the streetscaping came from. Perhaps the councilman from the Capitol Hill District needs to push for something like that. Because much of the change in neighborhoods comes from perception and value. If people perceive it's a great value and has potential, they will come. As stlokc said, it's the concept of the river as a dividing point that seems to be some of the issue, as the distance to the CBD is no farther.

As far as Stockyards City goes, we just build a new entrance to it, and I would suspect it will get public transit before lots of other places in the city. I think there's a fair amount of touting of it done by the city. Again, what it needs to take off even more is a few entrepreneurs putting in a hotel perhaps, a few country-western bars/music venues, more retail.

The city actually recently finished a streetscape along Commerce Street in Capitol Hill. It looks great.

I'm not offended, I just think the discussion is pointless. Going on for 50,000 words about dichotomy's and cultural assets is meaningless if it does not identify the root cause of a problem and make a suggestion on how to gain more "yes" votes, or just general civic support, in the future. At the end of the day this thread isn't doing much to help if nothing of that nature is accomplished.

It is clear to me that of the $777 million that voters were asked to support, very little of that is going to projects directly based in the "no" regions of the city. I don't disagree that this isn't going to offer some kind of ephemeral help to those districts, I don't live in south OKC, and I do think MAPS 3 was a good idea. But if the question is how do we garner more support city-wide for MAPS in the future, I think the answer is pretty clear... the next MAPS needs to identify "cultural assets" all across this city and offer funds to directly preserve or enhance them. Bundle that up with downtown improvements and I think it's a sure thing to improve the number of yes votes in the districts that we're talking about here.

I agree with you. I hope that in the future, whenever MAPS 4 should come if ever, the goal should be away from downtown for a change and focusing on the neglected inner-city neighborhoods that could use a boost. Garner Stoll got that momentum moving in the 90s with all of the streetscapes and support the city offered to give neighborhoods throughout the inner north side new momentum during the 90s. Now we need to continue that and build the inner north side into a great community similar to Midtown Tulsa, West Houston, or North Dallas. We need to focus on getting the south side where the north side is right now.

The problem, in simple terms, is that residents of this side of town are less educated (most of the are govt workers or blue collar, whereas north is more white collar and high tech) and don't have the same worldly interests that I do, and that people on the north side have. That's a-okay. Then you just try and find something that southsiders would appreciate that you can focus on instead. Maybe sports facilities. Maybe park facilities. Something for families to enjoy. Perhaps try and get something like a family-friendly Paseo/Spanish Village where families can revel in their heritage and stuff like that.

It's is quite bizarre the lack of local dining on the southside--even the more affluent areas. There's pretty much nothing outside of branches of Ted's and Primo's. They had Nonna's but it moved to Bricktown.

I don't think on Western it was actually Nonna's Ristorante. I think that was just the gift shop portion.

I don't think on Western it was actually Nonna's Ristorante. I think that was just the gift shop portion.

Nonna's on Western definately had a resturant, I took my grandmother there at least once a week, I've taken her to the Nonna's in Bricktown, however, Nonna's in Bricktown is no longer on our list, the food was very bland, and the waitstaff was the worst I've had in years.
We ordered a sandwich and two salads, took 1 hr and 20 minutes from time order was placed. I understand the delay wasn't the waitstaff's fault, but when I have to get up and refill our tea/coffee (3 times), that's unacceptable.

I never knew that was a full service restaurant. That's cool. The nice local joints on the south side, that I'm aware of (that aren't Mexican joints), are Boomerang, The Grill on the Hill, Bella Vista, Cattlemen's, and that's it. I guess you can count Coach's on Walker, too.

Nonna's on Western definately had a resturant, I took my grandmother there at least once a week, I've taken her to the Nonna's in Bricktown, however, Nonna's in Bricktown is no longer on our list, the food was very bland, and the waitstaff was the worst I've had in years.
We ordered a sandwich and two salads, took 1 hr and 20 minutes from time order was placed. I understand the delay wasn't the waitstaff's fault, but when I have to get up and refill our tea/coffee (3 times), that's unacceptable.

Sounds like a fluke. I've always heard great things about their food and their service, and that was my experience as well.

the next MAPS needs to identify "cultural assets" all across this city and offer funds to directly preserve or enhance them. Bundle that up with downtown improvements and I think it's a sure thing to improve the number of yes votes in the districts that we're talking about here.

Isn't that just a formula to have a bunch of insignificant projects spread out across an unusually large city, instead of a handful of large scale centrally located projects that actually change the city's competitive position and provide greater access to every project for a greater amount of people? This just to appease people who apparently don't view the city as their community to begin with.

I think when the majority of the city doesn't feel ownership or a sense of community for the city, then we don't deserve the things that initiatives like MAPS can provide, really. The very point is to create a vibrant city center to which we all feel connected. Fragmenting the efforts for people who already feel disconnected from the city seems self defeating to me.

The reality is that many people who voted no in the inner south side will have better access to these projects than much of the north side that voted yes.

Isn't that just a formula to have a bunch of insignificant projects spread out across an unusually large city, instead of a handful of large scale centrally located projects that actually change the city's competitive position and provide greater access to every project for a greater amount of people? This just to appease people who apparently don't view the city as their community to begin with.

I think when the majority of the city doesn't feel ownership or a sense of community for the city, then we don't deserve the things that initiatives like MAPS can provide, really. The very point is to create a vibrant city center to which we all feel connected. Fragmenting the efforts for people who already feel disconnected from the city seems self defeating to me.

The reality is that many people who voted no in the inner south side will have better access to these projects than much of the north side that voted yes.

I think we should continue to build up the city's core, but I disagree that this means we should focus on downtown to the exclusion of all other sites around the city. Also I don't know why we have to assume that if we spread the improvement money around the city that this automatically means it would go to insignificant projects around town.

Right now, if I have friends visiting from out of town where do I take them to show the city off... Bricktown? Midtown? Okay, well that covers one night or maybe two. Then what? Most cities have multiple things going on around town and provide a draw from many angles. Why wouldn't we further invest in East Wharf? How about improving Stockyards City and making it a real destination, more so than it already is? Why couldn't we spend some money on Capitol Hill and give it some of that long-lost urban flair? Why should the Paseo have to fight and scrape up every last cent it can via half-assed improvement funds... can't we do more for it so that it doesn't look like the site of a nuclear holocaust on most nights? Why does our Asian District look the way it looks? Can't we afford arches or dragon sculptures or something in the area (and yes I realize the city has initiatives in this area on-going, but how about a jump-start)? Yes let's keep the downtown momentum going, but why does that momentum need to be so monolithic in its nature? The last time I visited Seattle I checked out the Wharf, I hit Pike Street, I visited the Underground city, I checked out the touristy area around the Space Needle, I checked out some stuff in Redmond, and on and on. Bricktown is a great idea for this city, but it can't stop there.

We won't invest in East Wharf because the people who sail on Hefner don't want structures blocking wind patterns and the joggers like there being limited commercial activity. That's why they keep opposing development there. Capitol Hill and Stockyards City don't have a community behind it capable of producing a vision..the people who are behind the limited progress behind made in those areas are themselves somewhat opposed to gentrification I think. They don't want Stockyards to lose the authenticity it has from being a hard-scrabble, sparsely-developed, rough-looking cowtown area. We don't realize it but the majority of people eating at Cattlemen's are REAL cattlemen. Seriously. That's cool. The Paseo is too hippy to be accepted by the suburban demographic so they would never be the recipient of a MAPS project. The Asian District is supposed to get an arch eventually..it was SUPPOSED to be included in the streetscape, but that appears to be still yet underway so we'll see.

Those are the bad reasons for "why not" .. we just need a leader who can come up with a more compelling vision. It's like Tom McDaniel said, MAPS 3 was about vision..and more and more the OKC revitalization is becoming about vision. Each district that has seen improvement exists because there was at least ONE visionary individual behind it making things happen. It's all about having people who live here who give a damn about this city. We need more people like Steve Mason, Randy Floyd, Neil Horton, Greg Banta, Dennis Wells, Anthony McDermid, and the list goes on and on..

Of all the things you mentioned, I think the opposition around East Wharf amazes me the most. The place is flat, barren, and man-made... and yet conservationists go wild if anyone dare consider more development there. It has become OKC's ANWR. But only after a bunch of crappy useless office space and restaurants managed to go up. I just don't get it. Can we not have an East Coast style boardwalk on the lake? To me that would be a very cool attraction and would fit in with the environment there. But again, small minds.

It has become OKC's ANWR.

Very true. Except that I don't think anyone would mind if we built a massive oil pipeline across Lake Hefner. "Drill baby drill! But don't develop!" LOL

Save the boardwalk for the Oklahoma River. Maybe Grant Humphreys will include it with his Ferris Wheel.

Well that project isn't going anywhere until at least 2012. IF the world survives the end of the Mayan calender then we might see about The Waterfront.

We need more people like Steve Mason, Randy Floyd, Neil Horton, Greg Banta, Dennis Wells, Anthony McDermid, and the list goes on and on..

You've been spending too much time in Canada. :smile: Some of the people on your list aren't as good for development as you might think. I think Steve Mason is the most impressive example of someone doing it right. We need more Steve Masons. Personally, it's not the architects we should be praising, it's the developers. The architects may have a vision, but most can't act upon it without a developer, or many don't work on something until being paid for their ideas.

Randy Floyd is an architect, but she's also done several of her own preservation projects. Dennis Wells made his own home sort of a SoSA landmark to get the ball rolling, and he's actively seeking people to come live in SoSA. For a house in SoSA there are two architects you go to see, Fitzsimmons or Wells. Banta's not done in downtown and he's the one who got MidTown where it is now. McDermid isn't just an architect either. He serves on the Downtown Design Review committee, as well as other committees, he also has developed several projects himself. He was one of the principles behind the Triangle, and his project was the Central Avenue Villas--not just designing all of Bradshaw's Maywood Park projects (McDermid also lives in the CAV). McDermid was also behind Ellison Square and got shunned by OCURA.

I know two of the people on the list don't see eye to eye on much, but Floyd and Wells are both respected members of the community. All of them are respected members of the downtown community. One developer once told me that Ft. Worth has the Bass family, and Dallas has the Perot family.. but OKC doesn't have a dominant family who is moving things forward. Here we have a list of people that is 50 names long. Lots of people who are individually behind this revitalization. It's been a community effort so far.

I agree with you that I've been spending too much time away from OKC, though.

Speaking of Canada, did you say you were studying in Calgary? If so, it might be interesting to hear some comparisons/contrast between OKC and Calgary... because as I understand it that city has a long economic history in oil as well as government/military, and many of the cultural inclinations (such as country music) are very similar to this city's.

That would be interesting. I think Calgary is more like Denver and OKC is more like Dallas..

Great Google Map of the MAPS 3 vote... and all precincts are clickable.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=114468290773106272016.00047a7cff226712cc227&ct=docsearch&cd=2&cad=docsearch,cid:5494368715875498625

Great Google Map of the MAPS 3 vote... and all precincts are clickable.

Maps 3 Vote - Google Maps (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=114468290773106272016.00047a7cff226712cc227&ct=docsearch&cd=2&cad=docsearch,cid:5494368715875498625)

That's really interesting, because you can look at how the vote for the Ford Center went in each precinct as well. Although many were similar on both votes, there were some definite differences in some.

That's a terrific link, Platemaker ... thanks a bunch.

Somebody has a LOT of time on their hands.

With a few exceptions, it appears to have gone very much along economic lines. One way of looking at it is that areas of the city that are currently experiencing growth appear to have voted for it overwhelmingly. I would guess that a lot of the red on that map are areas that don't feel that they have seen any improvement from previous MAPS or other city projects.

I was (and continue to be) an avid supporter of MAPS3. Living in inner north OKC, I feel excitement. I can see this area improving before my eyes, and I can day by day see it getting better. I can see the tangible improvement and growth of Western Avenue, Belle Isle, the Paseo, Plaza, Gatewood, midtown, AA, my own neighborhood...the list goes on and on. I suppose if I lived and spent most of my time in areas of the inner south side, I wouldn't see much of the positive improvements from all of these votes either, hence the cynicism that this one would do anything for them.

Somebody has a LOT of time on their hands.

Paul Monies..

I was (and continue to be) an avid supporter of MAPS3. Living in inner north OKC, I feel excitement. I can see this area improving before my eyes, and I can day by day see it getting better. I can see the tangible improvement and growth of Western Avenue, Belle Isle, the Paseo, Plaza, Gatewood, midtown, AA, my own neighborhood...the list goes on and on. I suppose if I lived and spent most of my time in areas of the inner south side, I wouldn't see much of the positive improvements from all of these votes either, hence the cynicism that this one would do anything for them.

I agree that the areas you've mentioned are improving significantly, and undoubtedly MAPS has had some role in the transformation. However, if you look at distances from the areas MAPS impacted directly, it's not as if these areas benefitted by being immediately adjacent to Bricktown and the Ford Center, etc.

Personally, I think that the MAPS river improvements should create tremendous impact on the inner southside. And, that's one improvement that definitely exists on the south side of the river. If Grant Humphreys builds his mixed use development in the old downtown airpark, or if Aubrey McClendon develops any of the land he owns south of the river, that will probably have as positive an impact as anything. One of the problems is that close in neighborhoods in the north haven't priced themselves out of the market for new home buyers, and so we haven't seen movement south to take advantage of lower home prices that you might have seen in other cities pre-recession. But, a few developments south of the river might well increased perceived desirability of those locations and we might see a tremendous boom in the inner southside neighborhoods.

I agree that the areas you've mentioned are improving significantly, and undoubtedly MAPS has had some role in the transformation. However, if you look at distances from the areas MAPS impacted directly, it's not as if these areas benefitted by being immediately adjacent to Bricktown and the Ford Center, etc.

Personally, I think that the MAPS river improvements should create tremendous impact on the inner southside. And, that's one improvement that definitely exists on the south side of the river. If Grant Humphreys builds his mixed use development in the old downtown airpark, or if Aubrey McClendon develops any of the land he owns south of the river, that will probably have as positive an impact as anything. One of the problems is that close in neighborhoods in the north haven't priced themselves out of the market for new home buyers, and so we haven't seen movement south to take advantage of lower home prices that you might have seen in other cities pre-recession. But, a few developments south of the river might well increased perceived desirability of those locations and we might see a tremendous boom in the inner southside neighborhoods.

I agree largely with this, but I would say that if there hadn't been projects a la MAPS to instill civic pride and make people want to live within some proximity to downtown, none of the above areas would be anywhere near where they are. It all branches outward into communities from downtown. Another interesting thing to note of this growth and these 1920s suburban areas that have experienced it is that people here are more used to suburban living than true urban living, hence why the people who want to play in Bricktown might buy around Gatewood or Paseo or Mesta Park, etc in larger numbers than through downtown. I guess what I'm saying is that, in a residential sense, these pre-1930s neighborhoods have become the residential "winners" out of MAPS projects and downtown improvement, even though downtown got all of the direct "improvement".

Paul Monies..

Oh well then he's being paid to do it. I would die. Too many numbers.

Is there anyway we can make a sticky thread for maps? It would a lot easier than having all of these different threads.