Maybe I'm reading the Central OK-GO Summary incorrectly.

It says "Street car": $610-$830M for the N2 route which is the one they selected. Is that if they were going to run the street car all the way up to Edmond?

Right that number is for the hybrid of street car/rapid street car LRT all the way to Edmond.

Capital cost for the route to classen curve chk was estimated at a little over 80 mil in 2013

MAPS money should be for transformative projects that inhance the quality of life, not to bridge a funding gap for routine maintenance or to make up for a lack of collective class by sprawling suburbanites. It is possible the MAPS brand has run its course.

I would be ready to pay a marginally higher permanent tax to better fund civic operations and have more access to quality of life amenities. Not everything can be improved with capital spending, operations funding is also needed. Let's mow the city parks weekly, let's fill potholes that are currently too small to demand attention, let's put sidewalks on pedestrian routes, let's build out a public transit system that serves the people in an efficient and comfortable manner, let's staff our police department to account for the increased population, let's hire enough code enforcers to make our neighborhoods a safe and attractive place to come home to. That's what I want my city to do. Not everything good is big enough to have naming rights, a commemorative plaque, or be featured in travel literature.

That is the problem OKC is just now starting to realize Mr. Cotter. OKC is a high maintenance city and it requires an enormous amount of tax dollars to keep it going.

I would be ready to pay a marginally higher permanent tax to better fund civic operations and have more access to quality of life amenities. Not everything can be improved with capital spending, operations funding is also needed. Let's mow the city parks weekly, let's fill potholes that are currently too small to demand attention, let's put sidewalks on pedestrian routes, let's build out a public transit system that serves the people in an efficient and comfortable manner, let's staff our police department to account for the increased population, let's hire enough code enforcers to make our neighborhoods a safe and attractive place to come home to. That's what I want my city to do. Not everything good is big enough to have naming rights, a commemorative plaque, or be featured in travel literature.

Ding Ding Ding. Exactly!

I don't disagree with the investing in the inner core one bit and agree with it.

I vehemently disagree with the group think on this board that nw expressway and memorial are going to go south.
First not everyone wants to live in the urban core. There is a ton of people who prefer the semi suburb life. Quick access to the core without some of the cores problems.

Second there is a ton of businesses along memorial and nw expressway that employ a lot of people. Good jobs too. There is something very appealing about a 10 min drive to work while also having quick access to anywhere else in the city because of the nearby freeways. A good chunk of the people this city love private schools so the district doesn't even matter as much. For those that don't Pc north and Edmond schools are good plus charter schools are an option.

40 years ago, people were saying the same thing about 39th Expressway.

I graduated North in '06. Came back several times over the following 6-8 years and saw my Spanish I/II teacher who had become the college admissions adviser. Around '12 she was telling me about how drastically everything had changed and how far PC North has slid in the 5ish years since I graduated. She said parents are less involved, kids come from poorer backgrounds, and the quality of student has dropped tremendously. She said that we were one of the last great classes to go through North.

I've periodically done research into how real-estate in the PC North area has done over the last 30+ years, and while some properties have done quite well (usually the properties that were the most valuable to begin with that most people never would have been able to afford back then), the majority haven't even kept up with inflation.

My grandma passed away last year and we sold their house that they purchased @ $85k in 1985 for a whopping $100k. Inflation alone should have increased the value to $188k+, but alas, the property would have had to sell for $116 per square foot, something only the nicest of properties in that area of town can bring.

These are the neighborhoods that predominantly feed NW Expressway. And they can't even keep up with inflation? How is this *not* a recipe for NW Expressway go the way of 39th St? I mean, 39th is not a bad street really, but it certainly doesn't beat Western Avenue in terms of the value that it brings to the city. NW Expressway isn't going to become a barren land, but what will be the quality of the businesses along that stretch? What will be the state of property values in 5, 10, 15 years? What will be the employment and education opportunities there?

Do communities that develop on the fringe really continue to believe that they are immune from the same issues that befell PCO/Warr Acres? Midwest City? Moore?

Right that number is for the hybrid of street car/rapid street car LRT all the way to Edmond.

Capital cost for the route to classen curve chk was estimated at a little over 80 mil in 2013

So certainly not near the $700M+ figure I was thinking (Which is super exciting to me), but I found this:


The North Corridor, providing a one-seat ride between downtown Edmond and Norman, with service to the Oklahoma City Santa Fe Station Intermodal Hub, was recommended to be served by commuter rail. The existing BNSF right-of-way would be utilized wherever possible along the 14-mile alignment. Additionally, a five-mile extension of the Oklahoma City streetcar is recommended to run along Classen Boulevard between NW 10th Street and Walker Avenue to NW 63rd Street to provide a connec- tion to a future commuter rail station near the Chesapeake Energy campus. Capital costs for commuter rail are estimated between $260 million and $360 million, with the streetcar route expansion estimated between $270 million and $370 million. Ongoing operating and maintenance costs are estimated at $5 million per year for the commuter rail and $2.5 million per year for the streetcar extension. Commuter rail ridership for the entire North/South Corridor (between Edmond and Norman) is projected at approximately 5,700 daily riders. For the extension of streetcar service to the rail station near the Chesapeake Energy campus, daily ridership is ex- pected to reach about 2,100.

Even if it were $400M to build the extension, making that investment would show the other metro area cities that we are serious about moving forward toward a more comprehensive public transit system and should make the RTA more of a reality.

Do communities that develop on the fringe really continue to believe that they are immune from the same issues that befell PCO/Warr Acres? Midwest City? Moore?

Great question and the answer is they are not immune. A generation ago it was 39th. Now its NW Expressway. 20 years from now it will be Memorial. Such is the nature of suburbia in OKC. It's disposable. It has a 20-25 year lifecycle and then the money moves on to the next "in" suburban neighborhood leaving yesterday's neighborhoods to rot from the inside out. There are a few exceptions to this but that is the general rule with suburbs here. This is why something like a MAPS package should be focused on building a stronger city for the future and one that will be sustainable, and that is best done in the urban core.

All for transit & neighborhoods.

MAPS appeal has always been an initiative that bundled projects; you will not get everything completed with one MAPS initiative. Expect to keep the brand intact where the more projects you include the greater the appeal.

Transit will grow with each passage of MAPS; same with our neglected neighborhoods--you piecemeal these projects.

MAPS has charted its own success. You don't want to limit its scope to just 3 or 4 projects. Keep it a 7 or more.

Great question and the answer is they are not immune. A generation ago it was 39th. Now its NW Expressway. 20 years from now it will be Memorial. Such is the nature of suburbia in OKC. It's disposable. It has a 20-25 year lifecycle and then the money moves on to the next "in" suburban neighborhood leaving yesterday's neighborhoods to rot from the inside out. There are a few exceptions to this but that is the general rule with suburbs here. This is why something like a MAPS package should be focused on building a stronger city for the future and one that will be sustainable, and that is best done in the urban core.


Maybe we could use MAPs money, to build a great big wall. Like maybe 20 feet tall...and border all of the nice areas/neighborhoods in the city. And then only allow access to these "special areas" to people of a certain race, social status, and or economic background. There could be armed gates, and people would have to have "access" cards to enter or exit. Then, maybe these areas would stay nice over long periods of time, and be free of this "suburban blight" disease that seems to infect OKC? Think this would work?

Look, I'm all for bettering neighborhoods, but that means picking and choosing which neighborhoods are worthy of investment, and it means changing the rules those communities have played by since they started developing.

To me, the only real way you could make the PC North area viable long-term is to completely re-imagine Rockwell Avenue between Hefner and 122nd. The development at both intersections would need to come down and be replaced with more density, higher quality development, and a major anchor business that is completely lacking in the community. What does OKC need to invest to make that happen? If you think $10M is going to do it, you're sorely mistaken. I'd guess we'd be looking at a lot closer to $200M ($100M for each intersection) just to get things started. You'd need private money to make a major impact as well.

So I guess you could try and run a maps where we raise $800M and give $200M to *a* community in each quadrant. But if you think the other 3 or 4 communities in each quadrant that aren't going to receive any subsidy are going to vote for that, forget about it.

At least if we pour another $800M of public money into the Grand Boulevard Loop, somebody at 122nd and Council can drive to 63rd and May to enjoy the fruit of their tax money rather than Reno and Walker.

I am still laughing at the idea that elementary school children aren't walking 3 miles to school because there aren't any sidewalks. Like crossing 6 lanes of 50 mph traffic and the sheer distance have nothing to do with it.

I wonder how all the home owners are going to feel about 5' of their front yards being taken over for public sidewalks. Since I suggested this to my homeowners association, I can tell you it was met with a resounding No.

I am still laughing at the idea that elementary school children aren't walking 3 miles to school because there aren't any sidewalks. Like crossing 6 lanes of 50 mph traffic and the sheer distance have nothing to do with it.

They aren't walking because it is 2015. Parents are charged with child neglect if they let their kids play in a park w/o supervision. The days of a free range childhood are nothing but a fond memory.

I suspect that most public officials will say they are addressing many of the needs outlined in this thread in the upcomming 2016 GO Bond Issue. MAPS 4 itself will probably be in large part transit and connectivity oriented.

Of course in the middle of all of this is probably some sort of public vote on the jail.

There are some exciting announcements coming up.

If we tried to spread $500 million across 650 sq. miles no one would even notice.

I have no idea what it's going to cost to repave all our neighborhood streets and put down sidewalks, but it starts in a few weeks.

This is something that the Chamber is working on. Home - Project for Public Spaces (http://www.pps.org/)

Look, I'm all for bettering neighborhoods, but that means picking and choosing which neighborhoods are worthy of investment, and it means changing the rules those communities have played by since they started developing.

To me, the only real way you could make the PC North area viable long-term is to completely re-imagine Rockwell Avenue between Hefner and 122nd. The development at both intersections would need to come down and be replaced with more density, higher quality development, and a major anchor business that is completely lacking in the community. What does OKC need to invest to make that happen? If you think $10M is going to do it, you're sorely mistaken. I'd guess we'd be looking at a lot closer to $200M ($100M for each intersection) just to get things started. You'd need private money to make a major impact as well.

I was just at the Crest this afternoon and was thinking about this. The Warwick Crossing shopping center has become very blighted. While Crest itself is always busy, the rest of the shopping center is very distressed. Lots of vacancies and the property and the parking lot hasn't been kept up very well. Across Rockwell there is another abandoned building that looks like it was once a grocery store (Food Lion maybe?).

While I think the homes in that area are still decent, its the aging shopping centers and apartment complexes really bringing down the area. Question is, what is the solution? What can the city do to salvage these areas? The city cannot force the owners of the shopping centers or apartment complexes to rehabilitate their property. This problem seems to be a little worse in OKC than in other cities that I've lived and visited, at least from my own experience (Note: I am not saying that it is MUCH worse here or that it doesn't happen elsewhere because it does). How do other cities handle the situation of suburban blight and what could OKC learn from what works elsewhere?

One thing that I think really hurts OKC in terms of these aging shopping centers goes back to Wal-Mart and what they have done to the grocery/retail situation in this city. In other cities, developers can easily sign somebody like Kroger, Tom Thumb, H-E-B, etc on as an anchor and thus make it easier to redevelop some of these blighted 80s strip malls. That's more difficult to do in OKC due to lack of retail competition in this market so you have abandoned or distressed strip malls all over that have little chance of redevelopment. The rumored Supercenter at N Rockwell and Memorial could be even more bad news for the retail at both the 122nd and the Hefner Road intersections with Rockwell.

One thing is the PC North area isn't in the dire straights the area south of NW Expressway is yet, but if there isn't an intervention soon, it will become that way.

One thing is the PC North area isn't in the dire straights the area south of NW Expressway is yet, but if there isn't an intervention soon, it will become that way.

I live and work just South of NW Expressway in the Meridian - Rockwell area and it is definitely not in dire straits. I'm not counting Lyrewood because that is an issue all on it's own.

Question is, what is the solution? What can the city do to salvage these areas? The city cannot force the owners of the shopping centers or apartment complexes to rehabilitate their property. This problem seems to be a little worse in OKC than in other cities that I've lived and visited, at least from my own experience (Note: I am not saying that it is MUCH worse here or that it doesn't happen elsewhere because it does). How do other cities handle the situation of suburban blight and what could OKC learn from what works elsewhere?

The below misses the mark somewhat in that it's not only "poor people" who live in these areas in OKC. It's poor people, middle class and some wealthy, AKA the majority of the citizens of OKC. But the idea should be the same. A square for each hamlet? With masstrans connections? We're planning on more of the latter anyway, it only makes sense it would be considered with neighborhood redevelopment. Maybe start with the ones that need the most help. If an area isn't broken, don't fix it.


Retrofitting suburbia’s abundant and underused commercial properties and parking lots with a mix of uses, including apartments that support walking and public transit, does not displace anyone and can connect the suburban poor to jobs, schools, parks and affordable housing and transportation.

Converting old suburban properties like parking lots into mixed-use residential spaces close to public transit does not displace anyone and connects the poor to opportunities.

Is this happening? Over the past year, our database of suburban retrofits has grown to over 800 examples. Many of them – Jackson Medical Mall in Jackson, Miss., Collinwood Recreation Center in Cleveland, Ohio, and Austin Community College in Austin, Texas – are designed to introduce lower-income populations to career, health, and educational opportunities in refashioned suburban wastelands like run-down shopping centers. Other organizations are building on top of parking lots to encourage small suburban downtown hubs or retrofitting park-n-rides into transit-oriented housing developments.

^That's JTF's retrofitting suburbia people. I dislike the term for OKC, it's more realistic and productive to think of our Neighborhoods as what they are, neighborhoods where the vast majority of the citizens of OKC live, work, shop and go about their daily lives. A MAPS 4 Neighborhoods could fund a program whereby these kinds of things can happen.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/13/the-pros-and-cons-of-gentrification/gentrify-those-suburban-parking-lots

As far as bonds for fixing streets, we need to do that anyway, not in place of other efforts.

Economies are really quite simple…to be successful you need the following:

1. The ability to export a good/service in which they have a competitive advantage over a considerable amount of competitors in order to draw outside resources into the economy.
2. The ability to draw outside resources into the economy via "tourism"
3. The ability to create efficiencies within the economy that result in more disposable capital.

The PC North area has none of that.

#1 is usually relegated to a whole municipality or larger entity (state/province/country). In OKC it is Oil. So if you get a big enough fish in your backyard, the net effect is probably supremely helpful (I'm sure Exxon moving significant number of jobs to The Woodlands will be a massive boon for the Houston-suburb). Likewise if MidFirst or some other big company moved their offices to Rockwell and Hefner, believe that the area would see a massive spike in quality-of-life and property value.

#2 The only draw to that area of NW OKC is PC North. Maybe if the PC North area enveloped Lake Hefner, it would have that to fall back on, but traffic to Hefner is probably a net loss for economic activity in the PC North area. That area is my stomping grounds, and I wouldn't be surprised if I spend a grand total of 24 hours for the rest of my life (I'm 27) in that area of town since my parents no longer live there. Contrast that to where I live now…even if I sold my home, I'd still hit up Western Avenue and Belle Isle, and Classen Curve if I lived in another area of the city.

#3 This is where you would have to start…and the only way to do that is to increase density and make sure that the influx of residents and businesses that come in diversify your current base.

PC North relies on Blue Stem, Warwick, Lansbrook, and several other nice residential areas maintaing their status as great places to live throughout the city

The problem is that they're not…because Deer Creek and Edmond offer so much more for not much more money.

From a recent thread...Paycom is in the general area, along with several other employers.


Of course the energy business impacts OKC but I think that is much more psychological than real.

This is the latest list of largest employers and the 3 energy companies only comprise 4% of the total shown here.

Surprised Paycom isn't on this list but I'm sure they soon will be.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/employers2015energy.jpg

And is it predominantly serving the area? Where do its employees live? What amenities has it attracted to the area?

I'd be welling to bet a lot of money that if Paycom were located on Hefner and Rockwell that the economic impact in the PC North area would be substantially larger than it is right now.

Also, I did forget Francis Tuttle (And Brown Mackie for that matter), which is actually probably the biggest draw and positive in the district over against PC North. At least F.T. has a more legitimate chance to really bring in people from outside to spend their money in the area.

But at any rate…once the high school in any given suburban area starts to fall off, the rest of the area will follow. The high school is the #1 reason people chose this area over countless other suburban areas that were likely cheaper and closer to more established amenities.

The enemy of these suburban areas is not only downtown. It's the newer, shinier, "better" suburban areas that only cost a bit more and people are willing to reach for…at which point the money in the newer, shinier, "better" area starts to flee further, because generally people don't want others who are less fortunate than themselves to come into their neighborhoods and "bring down the value".

How can something truly great ever be built if people keep cutting off their nose to spite their face?

Farmers, Express. Lots of stuff relatively close.

No, most of the people who work there don't live there. Just like most of the people who work at Devon don't live downtown. They could live in the neighborhood. With improvements under Maps 4 Neighborhoods it could be more attractive than living at Deer Creek and improve. That's the point. And that people do live there now. OKC citizens even.

What's in Deer Creek? Schools, some newer homes and that's about it the last time I looked, but it's been awhile.

Yeah, the enemy of existing suburban areas is not downtown. In fact, as we have seen over the past decade, a reviving downtown actually stabilizes and enhances the quality of life and value of existing suburban areas, especially those close to the heart of the city. Witness the viability and climbing values in places like Plaza/Gatewood/CTP and surrounding areas, or what is now happening along Uptown23, Western and beyond. The JFK neighborhood is poised to be a comeback story. NE 23rd is showing signs of life. The same momentum is also likely to happen soon to corridors such as May Avenue and Capitol Hill.

These areas were once hit very hard by a centrifugal movement of people away from a rotting urban core, and the places THEY moved to are now struggling because the upwardly mobile have since moved on, yet again. And again. The new places had newer houses, newer schools, more/newer entertainment/dining/shopping options...

No, the enemy of existing suburban areas is the NEXT suburban area being planned a few miles down the same road. Those places steal people and resources from ALL of the other places in town. The FRINGE and beyond are the enemies of a healthy city.

Or course downtown isn't the enemy of the neighborhoods. Most of us realized the importance, voted to spend money to revitalize it. It has led to gentrifying adjoining areas.

Now it's time to work on other parts of the city where most of the people live, where most of the jobs are, where most of the city funding comes from. The neighborhoods are not the enemy of downtown. What's good for the neighborhoods is good for all of OKC.

I'm one of the enemies here, as we just left the Hefner/MacArthur area to the NW 150th/MacArthur area. Did we really want to leave where we were? No, but when one of our best friends who teaches at Hefner MS tells us to "get out" we had to think about it. Let me throw in a couple of thoughts:

First, I don't see the Deer Creek area ever getting passed up by "the next great suburb" like bchris stated. At some point there is a threshold that people dont want to pass as far as being a certain distance from "the action." I grew up in Katy, what was a small town 30 miles from downtown Houston. There used to be somewhat of a break from Houston to Katy, but that no longer exists. The city of Katy is growing west, to points where I can't fathom why people would want to spend that much windshield time in their lives, but the quality of the community hasn't really diminished. Tons of families there are second and third generations. They take pride in making sure the community stays desirable. Maybe what hurts Deer Creek in this is that it's not it's own city, but from what I gather families are really supportive of that school, and where there is pride in at least one thing that helps.

Second, the PC area reminds me a whole lot of Spring Branch area of west Houston. When I was in High School (late 90s) there was one of the schools that was in a very affluent area, one in a hood, another in an area that was probably a bit more decayed than PC North now, and another that was old money mixed in with some lower income crap development. In the last decade plus, BP built a headquarters there, other O&G players followed, and the entire area (and Spring Branch ISD) is firmly within what is called the Energy Corridor. That's one of the things that Teo referenced that could help the area. Unfortunately, Farmers, Paycom, et al were built I think too far north to really help boost the PC North area. In Spring Branch, you have residences going for triple what they went for 15 years ago, it's ridiculous. Friends are moving in to the areas of Spring Branch that we called ghettos around 2000. I don't know if PC North will ever get that far, but if it does, and something happens that allows a bounce back, the bones are without a doubt there.

As much as we talk of moving downtown when we get older when our girl goes off to college, we both could totally see ourselves in an older Blue Stem home too.

Yeah, the enemy of existing suburban areas is not downtown. In fact, as we have seen over the past decade, a reviving downtown actually stabilizes and enhances the quality of life and value of existing suburban areas, especially those close to the heart of the city. Witness the viability and climbing values in places like Plaza/Gatewood/CTP and surrounding areas, or what is now happening along Uptown23, Western and beyond. The JFK neighborhood is poised to be a comeback story. NE 23rd is showing signs of life. The same momentum is also likely to happen soon to corridors such as May Avenue and Capitol Hill.

These areas were once hit very hard by a centrifugal movement of people away from a rotting urban core, and the places THEY moved to are now struggling because the upwardly mobile have since moved on, yet again. And again. The new places had newer houses, newer schools, more/newer entertainment/dining/shopping options...

No, the enemy of existing suburban areas is the NEXT suburban area being planned a few miles down the same road. Those places steal people and resources from ALL of the other places in town. The FRINGE and beyond are the enemies of a healthy city.

Downtown proper, no. The inner-loop, yes. People who would have otherwise normally invested in a home in the PC North area, now have an option to invest somewhere South and East of the May and NW Expressway because of how quickly everything is improving. Homes can be comparable per square foot, and the difference is that many homes on the NW side are 1. On the decline 2. Stagnant in value and 3. Far away from amenities that are continuing to develop in the core, particularly as it pertains to entertainment.

Even 5 years ago, I'm not sure that your average OKC citizen really understood the value of living closer in, even if they're not living in downtown proper. Now it is a legitimate pull against people who might have otherwise chosen a more suburban lifestyle. @ 32nd and Villa, you frequently have better options, especially if you don't have kids or don't have to worry about their school district. Anybody who bought specifically for the district is white-flighting it.

I have zero issues with spending money on "neighborhoods". I just would like to have even the vaguest idea of what that means in a practical sense. Are we talking street beautification? How do we pick what neighborhoods receive MAPs money?

I just read this stuff and I don't see any kind of real plan or communication of what is actually needed. We can't communicate what we need, we just know we need money because too much is being spent elsewhere. To me it just sound like a bunch of flowery language without any kind of semblance of actual foundation or realistic implementation.

Hey if you want to spend money in my neighborhood I would vote for it. However, I have zero interest in voting MAPs money for neighborhood improvements in Putnam City. I'm guessing the people in Putnam City feel the same way towards me.

Typically, MAPS is branded with easy to identify major public improvements. I agree that this seems esoteric from a campaign perspective. It is possible that the brand might stand on it's own feet and people would vote for it even with esoteric goals if it did not encounter organized opposition.

Again, I suspect that an argument will be made by officials that many of these goals described by this group will be addressed in the upcoming GO Bond initiative.

On a personal note, I love the idea of place making, suburban "downtown" type density nodes, beautification, trees, and so forth. I also think that it is awesome that this is somewhat "grassroots" and that these folks are endeavoring to use the same sorts of strategies that we used to get the streetcar firmly planted in MAPS 3.

The close timing of these two votes however and the ambiguity of their goals for the general public does make it a tough nut to crack. Undoubtedly, it will influence the game plan and there is a broad appreciation that more needs to be done beyond the true urban core center of this city.

Does anybody think OKC's very large land area compared to its population is somewhat responsible for the "disposable sprawl" problem? If OKC had less land to work with, would there be more initiative to preserve existing suburbia and to keep it desirable?

Of course. It's simple math. That's why doing a MAPS project that is suburban in focus would be incredibly challenging. To make an appreciable impact throughout the entire city you would have to tax/spend several times the amount of MAPS so far, which ostensibly already serves the entire community. That's why major corridor/transit improvement probably makes the most sense if concentrating on the suburbs next time around. At least you might be able to make enough of an impact to get the ball rolling on private redevelopment of connected areas.

Does anybody think OKC's very large land area compared to its population is somewhat responsible for the "disposable sprawl" problem? If OKC had less land to work with, would there be more initiative to preserve existing suburbia and to keep it desirable?

Definitely.

The problem is that you can't get real improvements in a 650 square mile area without spending way way more money than we're going to have. That's why we need to concentrate on "shared" spaces like downtown. Creating a system of sidewalks and bike trails throughout the inner loop sounds like a pretty good idea. Make it easier to get around the city without a car. But you can't beautify all the way up to NW 250th and Council. You'll go broke and make no difference at all.

But you can't beautify all the way up to NW 250th and Council. You'll go broke and make no difference at all.

Exactly. The cutoff definitely needs to be NW 206th and Council. Taking it past NW 234th at all would be a significant waste of funds.

One way forward would be to identify commercial nodes or corridors that are in close proximity to neighborhoods. Those corridors could receive MAPS funding for walkability and beautification infrastructure. A primary focus could be connecting people to special places throughout the city. Another focus could be in completing the city's bike, trails, and sidewalks master plans.

One way forward would be to identify commercial nodes or corridors that are in close proximity to neighborhoods. Those corridors could receive MAPS funding for walkability and beautification infrastructure. A primary focus could be connecting people to special places throughout the city. Another focus could be in completing the city's bike, trails, and sidewalks master plans.

In other words, implementing the public portions of planokc? Big Ideas (http://planokc.org/development-guide/big-ideas/)

Everything we do in MAPS should be a stepping stone to creating the city we wish we had. Nothing in "the city I wish we had" involves having suburbs that stretch to Guthrie and Okarche.

In other words, implementing the public portions of planokc? Big Ideas (http://planokc.org/development-guide/big-ideas/)

I wondered when (if) someone was going to mention PlanOKC.

What we are talking about is fleshed out there. Needs commitment from the city and funding, especially as it relates to the areas being discussed, and not just our newly fair haired child.

Everything we do in MAPS should be a stepping stone to creating the city we wish we had. Nothing in "the city I wish we had" involves having suburbs that stretch to Guthrie and Okarche.

For some perspective on areas mentioned in this thread already, the distance from City Hall to Lantana Apartments is about the same as the distance from Wall Street to upper Manhattan. PC North may not be all that much farther. I'd have to pull out a map and check.

For some perspective on areas mentioned in this thread already, the distance from City Hall to Lantana Apartments is about the same as the distance from Wall Street to upper Manhattan. PC North may not be all that much farther. I'd have to pull out a map and check.

Yeah but they've got a lot more people in Manhattan.

I wondered when (if) someone was going to mention PlanOKC.

Well, I was looking for a good opportunity to do so. :)

I was very involved in planokc during its development; now that it's adopted, I want to make sure it's followed through with.

Yeah but they've got a lot more people in Manhattan.

Certainly they do in all of the 5 boroughs combined. Plus, Manhattan doesn't spread out in all directions; only N-S-ish.

When the city has no intention of doing anything about the worst property in the city (because they say they can't afford it) and the property is as close to OKC downtown as Upper Manhattan is to Wall Street, they don't have much credibility for being committed to the ideas in the page linked for PlanOKC.

Well, I was looking for a good opportunity to do so. :)

I was very involved in planokc during its development; now that it's adopted, I want to make sure it's followed through with.

Thanks for your efforts. Good luck in doing so.

Another focus could be in completing the city's bike, trails, and sidewalks master plans.

That is probably easily achievable in the GO Bond or a "small" portion of MAPS 4 if one were to use the construction techniques used today.

When the city has no intention of doing anything about the worst property in the city (because they say they can't afford it) and the property is as close to OKC downtown as Upper Manhattan is to Wall Street, they don't have much credibility for being committed to the ideas in the page linked for PlanOKC.

This is ridiculous. Not everyone gets to win. Not every area gets to be desirable. Not every area has the infrastructure to improve.

Priority non-central corridors: SW 29th St, NW Expressway, May Avenue, I-240, NE 23rd, 39th Expressway, NW 23rd (West of I-44), Shields BLVD

The 7500 block of NW 10th is so far away from being an important place in this city that we really don't have time to care.

The inability to prioritize is why this city has so many dead spots in the first place. I don't know if you've driven NW 10th from Broadway all the way out to Council recently, but it's dead. Just because you can drive between the two areas, does not mean they're connected. Downtown is (almost) better connected to Piedmont than it is to NW10th and Rockwell.

This is ridiculous. Not everyone gets to win. Not every area gets to be desirable. Not every area has the infrastructure to improve.

Priority non-central corridors: SW 29th St, NW Expressway, May Avenue, I-240, NE 23rd, 39th Expressway, NW 23rd (West of I-44), Shields BLVD

The 7500 block of NW 10th is so far away from being an important place in this city that we really don't have time to care.

The inability to prioritize is why this city has so many dead spots in the first place. I don't know if you've driven NW 10th from Broadway all the way out to Council recently, but it's dead. Just because you can drive between the two areas, does not mean they're connected. Downtown is better connected to Piedmont than it is to NW10th and Rockwell.

^That's pretty much irrelevant, but as it happens, it is a heavily traveled road that does run right past St. Anthony and by downtown. Again, most of the people in OKC don't live, work, or do most of their shopping in downtown and never will. Most of the jobs are not downtown and never will be.

(Yes, I drive it on a regular basis, as well as a lot of OKC.)

http://s4.postimg.org/fd7ge9yx7/10th.png

10th street is down the middle. Lots of neighborhoods along 10th street with taxpaying, voting citizens, midtown and the fairgrounds. The arrow is about where Lantana apartments are. But of course most of it isn't downtown so it doesn't matter to some people.

http://s4.postimg.org/fd7ge9yx7/10th.png

10th street is down the middle. Lots of neighborhoods along 10th street with taxpaying, voting citizens, along with midtown and the fairgrounds. The arrow is about where Lantana apartments are. But of course it's not downtown so it doesn't matter to some people.

I wouldn't say it doesn't matter to people. I just don't understand what the Lantana apartments have to do with a potential MAPs 4 vote.

^That's pretty much irrelevant, but as it happens, it is a heavily traveled road that does run right past St. Anthony and by downtown. Again, most of the people in OKC don't live, work, or do most of their shopping in downtown and never will. Most of the jobs are not downtown and never will be.

(Yes, I drive it on a regular basis, as well as a lot of OKC.)

So what?

If you're saying that there are a lot of crappy areas out there in the sprawl, I'll agree with you. That's what happens when you have an enormous area and not enough people to fill it.

The Lantana Apartments are pretty bad. I've been there. I had a case there once and had to go out there to interview witnesses. Not a nice place. The city would be better off if that place caught fire and burned to the ground (I've often said this city could use a civic-minded arsonist). But that doesn't mean that we're wasting money spending it in the core. That just drives the point home all the more.

We don't have enough money to fix up the entire city. The fact that those apartments are on a heavily traveled street and the city can't afford to seize it through eminent domain shows that pretty clearly. So if we're going to spend money fixing up the city, we have to be judicious with where we spend it.

Now, you might make the argument that using MAPS funds to seize those particular apartments and tear them down is so beneficial that the city should do it anyway. And you might be right. Maybe you could do a MAPS where we do nothing but tear down incredibly awful stuff that is poisoning various neighborhoods. But we can't afford the level of spending needed to clean up every neighborhood in the city.

You're right -- most people in this city don't live downtown, and won't live downtown in my lifetime. But MAPS should not become yet another subsidy for people who move farther and farther away from the core of the city.

So what?

If you're saying that there are a lot of crappy areas out there in the sprawl, I'll agree with you. That's what happens when you have an enormous area and not enough people to fill it.

The Lantana Apartments are pretty bad. I've been there. I had a case there once and had to go out there to interview witnesses. Not a nice place. The city would be better off if that place caught fire and burned to the ground (I've often said this city could use a civic-minded arsonist). But that doesn't mean that we're wasting money spending it in the core. That just drives the point home all the more.

We don't have enough money to fix up the entire city. The fact that those apartments are on a heavily traveled street and the city can't afford to seize it through eminent domain shows that pretty clearly. So if we're going to spend money fixing up the city, we have to be judicious with where we spend it.

Now, you might make the argument that using MAPS funds to seize those particular apartments and tear them down is so beneficial that the city should do it anyway. And you might be right. Maybe you could do a MAPS where we do nothing but tear down incredibly awful stuff that is poisoning various neighborhoods. But we can't afford the level of spending needed to clean up every neighborhood in the city.

You're right -- most people in this city don't live downtown, and won't live downtown in my lifetime. But MAPS should not become yet another subsidy for people who move farther and farther away from the core of the city.

Or we do a Maps for neighborhoods that does some cleaning up derelict property; placemaking activites; masstrans hubs; etc., all of which are outlined in PlanOKC. Without question, some of these will overlap. Maybe not with Lantana Apartments specifically but maybe so. Maybe it's ideal to raze, make a park, a square, masstrans point or whatever and begin improvement on the area.

When the city gets asked what they are going to do about it, the answer isn't "we don't have the money" the answer is it's part of our adopted plan to improve these areas. Here is the plan (link to PlanOKC.) Here's more details on implementation and funding and here's the timeline. Otherwise it is what it is now, no plan. Give us your vote and your money and we'll spend it somewhere else. When the city takes this position on the worst property, forget the second, tenth or fiftieth. Lantana is a poster child for this no plan position.

I think the issue is this. In any MAPS package passed with a focus on suburbia there will be limited funds. Being that there are limited funds, not everywhere will be able to be fixed up. Certain corridors will need to be established as being priority. What suburban areas are the most important to the city? What can the city NOT afford to lose to suburban decay? Is NW 10th west of Meridian important enough to the city that it should be prioritized over say NW 39th, NW Expy, or N MacArthur through the PC school district? Why or why not?

Personally, I think they should fine the shiznit out of the owner of those apartments. Every code violation they can find. Once the fines hit a high enough level, ED the property and apply the money against the fines.

Personally, I think they should fine the shiznit out of the owner of those apartments. Every code violation they can find. Once the fines hit a high enough level, ED the property and apply the money against the fines.

I love that idea! Oh, wait...the state won't allow it. Because of lobbying done by suburban home builders, who specifically profit when existing areas of the city become stressed and people move on to greener pastures.

White flight followed by the decline of OKC Public Schools contributed greatly to the growth of OKC suburbs. In my opinion to attract more people to stay in OKC or move to OKC, the Oklahoma City Public School District must improve its academic performance and safety of students.

The City is probably hoping that these dilapidated structures will eventually fall (fire/burned) as a result of vagrant occupancy. It will probably be more economical to clear them once that happens.

White flight followed by the decline of OKC Public Schools contributed greatly to the growth of OKC suburbs. In my opinion to attract more people to stay in OKC or move to OKC, the Oklahoma City Public School District must improve its academic performance and safety of students.

OKC Public School District can only improve when there is once again a viable tax base to support the school. A host of reasons could be argued as to why sprawl happened, but I think the common thread, and the absolute main issue that undergirds US sprawl is systemic classism, which is, when considering US history, effectively systemic racism.

White Flight *is* the decline of OKC Public Schools, because even by the 50s, Black Americans had barely made any headway toward gathering wealth (and still today are greatly lagging their white counterparts), so when the flight occurred it ripped away nearly all the funding and middle/upper class parents that make a school excel. Then in the 60s and 70s, when Blacks finally started making some headway, they attempted to move into the areas the Whites fled to in the 50s…only to find that Whites would then put their houses on the market either out of 1. Outright racism ("I don't like them negroes") or 2. Complicit/Systemic Racism ("I can't afford to/don't want to hold onto a property that is going to be devalued").

And now the next wave is in progress. And though this wave is happening through the veil of classism more than in the past, it is using an operating system built (like so many other things in this country) originally with a foundation of racist philosophy and politics.

So in OKC:

White-Flight wave 1 (50s/60s), was leaving inner-Grand Loop OKC --- aka OKC Public Schools

White-Flight wave 2 (70s/80s/90s), was leaving outer-Grand Loop OKC --- aka PCO/PCW, certain other OKC Public Schools, Midwest City, etc.

White-Flight wave 3 (00s/10s/20s), is leaving far-side OKC, Moore --- aka Moore schools, PCN, early stages of Edmond/Yukon/Norman flight.

If Wave 1 took place in the 50s and 60s, and it's now 2015 and we're still several years away from fixing the OKC problems, then we can probably plan on the places affected by wave 2 not getting fixed until the 2030s, and the places being affected by the current wave 3 not being fixed until the 2050s.

OOORRR We can let wave 2 completely rot to pieces, try and stabilize wave 3, and continue to strengthen the incredible progress we've seen in wave 1.

It's important to keep in mind that the bones of wave 1 were built on a solid foundation, and that the bones of wave 2 are among the worst bones for development in the whole of human history. So while the refresh/gentrification of wave 1 has been arduous and costly, it will have been a cake-walk compared to what it will take to make wave 2 viable once again.

------------------------------

So, if you want to do a MAPS for neighborhoods, fine. I'm down. But I won't vote for a MAPS that is going to pour money into neighborhoods built between 1940 and 1975 (maybe later by the time the actual vote rolls around). And I won't vote for a MAPS that fails to build on the success of what we've already built in the core.

Fortunately the 90% or so of total OKC residents, who live in the neighborhoods, have the same individual voting power.

While talking about 10th St. and connectivity, here's the bus route that's been operating on it from Midtown to Council Road for as long as I can remember.

http://s16.postimg.org/4oe8j4fw5/10thbusroute.png