Maps 4 Neighborhoods

[hoya]

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.

[LakeEffect]

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.

[Urbanized]

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.

[mkjeeves]

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.

[mkjeeves]

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.

[Urban Pioneer]

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.

[Teo9969]

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.

[mkjeeves]

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.)

[mkjeeves]

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.

[OSUFan]

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.

[hoya]

^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.

[mkjeeves]

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.

[bchris02]

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?

[hoya]

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.

[Urbanized]

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.

[SouthSide]

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.

[Laramie]

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.

[Teo9969]

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.

[mkjeeves]

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

[mkjeeves]

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.

[hoya]

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

Does that 90% of the population want to just pour MAPS dollars down the drain? Because that's what they'll be doing.

We don't have enough money to fix up every neighborhood. There are too many of them. We are too spread out. Will the 90% be satisfied when we come in and put 50 feet of sidewalk in their neighborhood? Or will they be satisfied if we focus on only a handful of neighborhoods? Let's go with SW 59th and May, SE 44th and Bryant, NE 23rd and Prospect, and fine, NW 10th and Rockwell. These are all areas that could use a little sprucing up. Do you think the entire city is going to get behind a program to benefit these 4 areas?

[OSUFan]

Does that 90% of the population want to just pour MAPS dollars down the drain? Because that's what they'll be doing.

We don't have enough money to fix up every neighborhood. There are too many of them. We are too spread out. Will the 90% be satisfied when we come in and put 50 feet of sidewalk in their neighborhood? Or will they be satisfied if we focus on only a handful of neighborhoods? Let's go with SW 59th and May, SE 44th and Bryant, NE 23rd and Prospect, and fine, NW 10th and Rockwell. These are all areas that could use a little sprucing up. Do you think the entire city is going to get behind a program to benefit these 4 areas?

Your asking for logic and real world ideas and none will be given at this point by those participating in this thread (for the most part). It is not about neighborhoods to some of these people. It is more about no more money for "downtown".

I can't see anyway a MAPs 4 vote passes that is centered on certain neighborhoods. Who is going to vote for a sales tax to fix up 4 neighborhoods they don't live in? I'm 100% for more resources for neighborhoods throughout the city. I've yet to see a decent proposal on how MAPs is the right vehicle for it.

[Just the facts]

The problem is "size of the project area", and there is no amount of money that can over come that. This isn't just true of MAPS money, but eventually the City's general fund as well. I always think if OKC was developed at the same density as European cities all 1.3 million metro residents would live within 3 miles of MBG. Does one realize from a tax liability perspective how easily a city that size could be maintained - especially on a per-capita basis. But OKC isn't so we will have to accept that some places (and by some, I mean many) will get neglected. It is just how we chose to develop post WWII.

[krisb]

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.

Explain your reasoning. Those neighborhoods need the most help right now.

[Pete]

More mileage for MAPS: Group seeks to bring series to neighborhoods
By: Brian Brus The Journal Record August 24, 2015

OKLAHOMA CITY – Now that the heart of Oklahoma City is beating strong, it’s time to help its outlying areas with special tax issue, supporters of the grass-roots MAPS 4 Neighborhoods movement said.

“The other MAPS programs have really helped revitalize downtown; and as one of our city officials said once, we can’t have suburbs of nothing,” said Jonathan Dodson, one of the founders of the citizens group. “But the other side of the equation is that we have other areas that haven’t received the attention they deserve.

“So maybe it’s time that we start to push for something that’s not so focused on the center of the city,” he said.

Even though several projects under MAPS 3 haven’t been completed – a 77-acre central park near downtown is still undeveloped, for example – Dodson said it’s not too early to get started on designing a fourth MAPS.

Voters passed the original Metropolitan Area Projects plan in 1993 as a temporary one-cent sales tax, later extending it six months to reach a $350 million target. Projects included construction of the Bricktown Canal and renovations to what’s now known as the Cox Convention Center.

In 2001, voters came back and supported OCMAPS, also called MAPS for Kids, to raise $700 million for school district infrastructure improvements within the municipal boundaries including classroom technology, gymnasiums and buses.

In 2009, residents approved MAPS 3 to raise $777 million for projects such as a new convention center and Oklahoma River improvements.

Following the eight-year cycle established thus far, a fourth MAPS program would likely go up for vote in late 2017, and that would require public input and planning to begin soon. Of course, the MAPs series isn’t set on a schedule, so MAPS 4 doesn’t have a deadline.

Councilman James Greiner said he supports MAPS 4 Neighborhoods’ proactive approach rather than residents waiting for their elected officials to set an agenda.

“Anytime that a group of citizens gets together to form some sort of organization to express their opinions, I think it’s a good thing,” said Greiner, who represents northwestern Ward 1. “My constituents have expressed that they’re kind of tired of all the money going downtown and they’d like their roads to be fixed and their parks maintained properly. It keeps coming up.”

Mayor Mick Cornett, who was out of the office on vacation Monday, issued a statement on the neighborhood-focused MAPS 4 movement.

“We love their enthusiasm for Oklahoma City,” he wrote. “No question there are a lot of needs out there. Right now we are focused on delivering MAPS 3 projects as approved by the voters. That’s still our main concern.”

Those involved in the MAPS 4 Neighborhoods push don’t have a solid list of goals yet. Dodson said that will be developed by the community at large as the process progresses. However, sidewalks, intersection crossings and road repair frequently come up in conversations, he said, as does a larger system of easily accessible parks and trails.

City Councilman Ed Shadid has already expressed support for public health initiatives and public safety improvements. Several residents have spoken at City Council meetings to make similar suggestions.

Voters passed MAPS 3 on a thin margin with just 54 percent support. At the time, opponents argued that the projects were too focused on downtown and failed to support the suburbs. Oklahoma City covers 621 square miles.

“I don’t think this is a push-back from the earlier MAPS,” Dodson said. “It’s more of a focus on what we can do now.

“I’m definitely a product of MAPS’ success, since me and my wife could have moved to many other attractive places in the country, but we chose Oklahoma City because of its turnaround,” Dodson said. “So you could say that MAPS made this a place we want to live in. MAPS 4 Neighborhoods could really go a long way in making sure we stay.”