With all the hype about MAPS3, Devon Tower, and Bricktown developments, people are forgetting that Project 180 will have more effect on our city's central business district, then any other project. Project 180 will revitalize our downtown's streets, and park area, making it more attractive for corporations and developers to consider downtown as an investment.

What's my point? My point is that until Project 180 is complete, we won't see anymore major developments in the downtown area as far as new towers, residential areas and so on. The good thing is that Project 180 has gained more ground then other developments and is on schedule to start in less then a month.

You have to build it, before they come. Currently our downtown infrastructure will not support any other major developments, but after Project 180, this will all change. Project 180 saved us, without it, the central business district will be at a stand still.

I think you might have it backwards. Without a growing downtown Project 180 wouldn't be necessary. Cities don't typically build things until they are needed.

I think you might have it backwards. Without a growing downtown Project 180 wouldn't be necessary. Cities don't typically build things until they are needed.

Our infrastructure has to be attractive enough to attract white collar business, right now its not...

I disagree as well, without Devon Tower, there would be no Project 180. Remember Devon self-imposed a TIF on itself and paid it all in advance instead of over 20 years.

I think the crux of Walker's comment is that Project 180 is critical to downtown continuing to move forward - an idea I think is very supportable.

Sure it will be a catalyst, I don't think anyone is debating that, but I don't think it's the only thing that will allow downtown to attract new business as G.Walker states. Who says our current infrastructure can't support more towers? MAPS3 will attract more development on it's own, regardless of if there was a Project 180.

I am not a city engineer but the existing infrstructure in downtown OKC appears no worse than the infrastructre in downtown Jacksonville, Atlanta, or any other American city.

Sure it will be a catalyst, I don't think anyone is debating that, but I don't think it's the only thing that will allow downtown to attract new business as G.Walker states. Who says our current infrastructure can't support more towers? MAPS3 will attract more development on it's own, regardless of if there was a Project 180.

I know MAPS3 will attract new developments, retail that is, I am talking about big businesses, not condos, parks, and retail. I am talking about major corporations and high rise development. MAPS3 is 15-20 year project, and still has a long way to go, moreover, its not considered a part of the central business district.

I am not a city engineer but the existing infrstructure in downtown OKC appears no worse than the infrastructre in downtown Jacksonville, Atlanta, or any other American city.

Our street, and parking infrastructure is out dated. There in no place downtown right now where we could build a new tower if we wanted to, without the restructuring of land area, demolishing old buildings, etc. Project 180 is a good urban renewal plan that will feed to that.

Not that I have a single criticism of Project 180 but you made a statement that I wanted to question. If a new project were to come on line today, you say it couldn't be done without restructuring of land area and demolishing old buildings. How, exactly, is Project 180 going to change this? Its not going to provide any more land for development or suddenly make buildings disappear or move. It's going to make downtown a much nicer looking place.

Not that I have a single criticism of Project 180 but you made a statement that I wanted to question. If a new project were to come on line today, you say it couldn't be done without restructuring of land area and demolishing old buildings. How, exactly, is Project 180 going to change this? Its not going to provide any more land for development or suddenly make buildings disappear or move. It's going to make downtown a much nicer looking place.

By new street development, and park development. With pedestrian walkways, and bicycle lanes, it will be more "pedestrian friendly" giving way for investors/developers to consider major residential development in those areas.

“Project 180 is one of the most ambitious downtown transformations in the country,” said project engineer Laura Story. “When it is completed in 2014, Downtown will be more visitor friendly and better poised for economic growth.”

Plans call for the addition of landscaping, public art, marked bike lanes, decorative street lighting, on-street parking spaces and even a few electric car recharging stations.

It doesn't restructure much land area other than streets and sidewalks or change whether old buildings are demolished or not, however. Just pointing out something, not criticizing your message, though. Project 180 is nothing but good.

Walker, I'm on your side on this one. Guys, Project 180 is eliminating the confusing one-way street system and bringing sanity - something that would be critical if our downtown were to enjoy the addition of another major corporate anchor. Likewise, our sidewalks and public spaces are a throwback to 1970s Urban Renewal - unfriendly and cold to pedestrians. And this creates a sense of place that is hostile and unwelcoming to the up and coming younger workforce. And I know Metro has been to the same seminars as I have were we've heard over and over again that the key to prospering in this new century is to create an environment where the younger workforce WANTS to work, wants to live, wants to play. And if they have a job offer in one city that pays more, but isn't where they want to be, and another job offer in another city that pays less but offers the lifestyle they want, they will likely pick the lower paying job.
Metro, back me up this....
Now, let's go down the logical path that follows: how important is Project 180 in creating a livable, walkable environment - the sort of urban neighborhood that will attract this up and coming workforce?

confusing one-way street system and bringing sanity

I don't have any problem with one way streets and they are pretty much a staple of most city cores. They do usually allow for better movement of traffic, timing of lights, pedestrian crossings, and expose traffic to commerce on two streets in a round trip instead of one. They also help public transit move more freely without competing with left hand turn back ups.

What makes our downtown streets confusing are the broken streets in combination with our current one way structure. The breaks in Main, Robinson, Park, and 5th, as well as the Colcord/Couch split are really what makes navigating downtown confusing to someone who is unfamiliar with it. I realize none of that is going to change, but that's why eliminating the one ways isn't going to make it less confusing in most cases, imo. It will just make it slower and maybe easier to find your way back when the street you're on ends or your forced to turn before you destination.

Its very important to attract young professionals, new major corporations will want to relocate, or expand their business in the central business district, once Project 180 is complete. This will give way to young professionals working for those companies, and boosting residential development. Now I am not talking about the residential developments like The Hill, or Block 42, and I am not talking about major high rise condominiums like The Austonian in Austin. But more realistic mid rise condominium develop that compliments our OKC central business district like this below:
443

I for one think that the confusion of folks who are boosters of the growth of OKC and project 180, may have more to do with the terminology that was being used, rather than the result or hoped for outcome of project 180. When you use the word infrastructure it denotes not only roads, streets but utilities as well. Also the argument that it somehow would provide for land was a bit baffling to me as well, so if you would care to elaborate on how you felt that would take place it might help the rest of us follow your thinking. I am very excited to see this project take place!

Our street, and parking infrastructure is out dated. There in no place downtown right now where we could build a new tower if we wanted to, without the restructuring of land area, demolishing old buildings, etc. Project 180 is a good urban renewal plan that will feed to that.

Again, I think you're misinterpreting our points, we all agree Project 180 is good and transformational, but to say we can't attract another corporation because of it is ludacris. You haven't provided one proof of evidence to back your claim.


Walker, I'm on your side on this one. Guys, Project 180 is eliminating the confusing one-way street system and bringing sanity - something that would be critical if our downtown were to enjoy the addition of another major corporate anchor. Likewise, our sidewalks and public spaces are a throwback to 1970s Urban Renewal - unfriendly and cold to pedestrians. And this creates a sense of place that is hostile and unwelcoming to the up and coming younger workforce. And I know Metro has been to the same seminars as I have were we've heard over and over again that the key to prospering in this new century is to create an environment where the younger workforce WANTS to work, wants to live, wants to play. And if they have a job offer in one city that pays more, but isn't where they want to be, and another job offer in another city that pays less but offers the lifestyle they want, they will likely pick the lower paying job.
Metro, back me up this....
Now, let's go down the logical path that follows: how important is Project 180 in creating a livable, walkable environment - the sort of urban neighborhood that will attract this up and coming workforce?

Steve, while I think ALL of us agree Project 180 is awesome and will be completely transformational, I still don't agree with GW's original post about how we can't attract corporations without it. Sure it will make it more lucrative, no one is questioning that, but to say we can't attract further development is nonsense. Sure it will help make downtown OKC more attractive for the creative class, as well as all classes in general. I'd even argue it will make downtown OKC more attractive to the other classes morseo than the young professionals. Take a look downtown, if not the majority, a good portion of us young professionals are the urban pioneers that are already down here. My suburban counterparts, people my parents age, etc. are the ones who barely get down here. I think when it's done, they will be completely blown away and visit more often.


Its very important to attract young professionals, new major corporations will want to relocate, or expand their business in the central business district, once Project 180 is complete. This will give way to young professionals working for those companies, and boosting residential development. Now I am not talking about the residential developments like The Hill, or Block 42, and I am not talking about major high rise condominiums like The Austonian in Austin. But more realistic mid rise condominium develop that compliments our OKC central business district like this below:
443

I don't need a lecture on luring young professionals, I am one and I used to be Executive Director of the city's underfunded young professionals organization and was involved in leadership and committee capacities for several years before that. Now I'm not saying I can't learn more about it, but I know more on the topic than the average joe blow. Again my point is that Project 180 IS a good project, however it would be pie in the sky were it not for the Devon Tower, a project you said is not as transformational. I don't see it that you can seperate the two considering there would not be the latter if not for the former. What is your hope for this thread?

I never said that Devon Tower has no impact on Project 180, I stated that Project 180 will have more effect on our cities central business district then any other project right now. I am not talking about Bricktown or nightlife for young professionals. I am talking about establishing major young professional workforce that is key for the future of the CBD. Devon Energy is a homegrown company, that was already located downtown, and decided to build a new headquarters. But you don't see any other major corporations outside Cklahoma, or major residential developers wanting to locate or expand in the OKC's CBD. Why? It's because when companies outside of Oklahoma look at downtown now, and its like they went back in time to 1975.

Project 180 is key for us to attract new major business and development, and I firmly believe we won't see any until Project 180 is complete.

GW, I know your not talking about Bricktown or nightlife. Heck most of us downtown young professionals hang in Auto Alley or MidTown. Bricktown is a tourist trap. I realize you are talking about a MAJOR employer and not a Dave and Busters opening up shop. I think we'll see American Fidelity or other local major employers step up downtown before much longer.

Take Austin for example, below is a list from Commercial Real Estate Information and Construction Data | Emporis.com (http://www.emporis.com), which is a site that gives you construction status of major high rises in any city in the world. As you can see, 8 out of 10 of the tallest building in Austin were constructed within the last 5 years, shortly after a major streetscape project like Project 180, however this project in Austin was called Second Street District Streetscape Improvement Project, it wasn't until this project was completed that Austin underwent a major central business district development, here is the link for more info: City of Austin - Second Street District Streetscape Improvement Project (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/downtown/ssdsip.htm)

Tallest buildings
# Name Height Year Completed
01. The Austonian
208 m 2010

02. 360 Condominiums
172 m 2008

03. Frost Bank Tower
157 m 2004

04. Spring
132 m 2009

05. Ashton
127 m 2009

06. One Congress Plaza
121 m 1987

07. One American Center
121 m 1984

08. Four Seasons Residence..
120 m 2010

09. Austin Hilton Conventi..
115 m 2004

10. Legacy On The Lake
103 m 2008

I will second Metro's comment. Project 180 is going to be a huge improvement but downtown OKC would survive without it. Two-way streets downtown will have a very positive impact but Tyco is going to say, "Look two-way street, let move there."

G.W. - I hope you are correct and we see major development downtown after Project 180 is completed. I still think the street car will creat more development than anything. I guess we will know the answer in 5 years. I am sure we will all still be here debating the same topics.

I think there is danger is identifying a single item as a stimulus for the type of growth that Austin has seen in their CBD. There are far too many contributing factors that play into the demand and climate (financially) at the time that drove the developments.

The greatest thing is that right now in OKC it is not just project 180 alone but we also have the street cars, and MAPS III that will all contribute and amplify the positive effect on the CBD. We have serious reason to be poitive about the direction things are going, yet we need to be looking for the next elements that need to be addressed to raise the bar.

I agree, you can't directly attribute the development in Austin solely on streetscape improvements alone. Austin had already been building up momentum and there are countless more high tech and white collar jobs in Austin than OKC. Again SURE the streetscaping helped, but it in in of itself wasn't the only catalyst for new development. It was also during the peak of condo speculation in the U.S. and funds were easily available. We have no way to prove that it would not have happened regardless of the streetscape project.

GW, yes most of us are very familiar with Emporis, you're preaching to the choir on OKCTalk. Your title of this thread states Project 180 "saved" us, and I simply agree to disagree. I think it helps catapult us further.

"Gee, the sky is beautiful shade of indigo."
"No, you're all wrong. It's just blue."
"But don't think it's beautiful?"
"Maybe, but it's just blue."
Ah yes, another day on OKC Talk....

"Gee, the sky is beautiful shade of indigo."
"No, you're all wrong. It's just blue."
"But don't think it's beautiful?"
"Maybe, but it's just blue."
Ah yes, another day on OKC Talk....

Well, Steve, it IS a talk forum. What do you want?

For us to come up with another description of the sky all together - not sure if blue or indigo really cut it! Or, really, truthfully? A thread that combines the best of Tom Elmore, the firefighters union and mysterious Coffee Slingers poet. Now that's entertainment.

Perhaps the discussion really doesn't center on Project 180 at all. It centers on the descriptions by a poster of what the project will do.

Perhaps the discussion really doesn't center on Project 180 at all. It centers on the descriptions by a poster of what the project will do.

Exactly...

Who is designing the improvements for the intersections? I remember seeing some older renderings that had fairly extensive paver work designed into the intersections, but can't seem to find 'em now. I think that the latest renderings that I saw are a mistake as far as not dressing up the intersections with any more durable material than the asphalt shown...it leads to those that hear all of the hype regarding how game changing the project will be; then when it is finished and folks come in to see what it looks like, I would hate to hear, "what is the big deal" we have asphalt streets everywhere anyway. I think that a misconception about the decorative pavers comes from the mis-use of clay pavers which do not withstand the impacts, weights etc...that occur in an urban enviornment. Also if they are inset in concrete bed with concrete boarders, they perform very well, and have a significant visual impact that will endure. I really hate to see all this effort and then not hit the high notes when it was possible.

I really don't think they will spend all this time and effort for this project to nothing less then perfect, I think we will be surprised once the project is finished.

I really don't think they will spend all this time and effort for this project to nothing less then perfect, I think we will be surprised once the project is finished.

Well I hope that it is a pleasant surprise. Unfortunately as a person who has been involved with development projects and watched how they evolve from concept to reality, It is often the case that the renderings are often better then the actual built final product and there are a lot of reasons for this. One being that regardless of the budget, there are always budgetary concerns that call for value engineering. The most current renderings that I have seen for the Myriad Gardens improovements are fantastic! The most current ones showing the street and intersection improovements may as well be anywhere in the metro that has asphalt and painted road striping and traffic lights. Sure the asphalt is new and flat sans pot holes, but leaves a lot to be desired, and the pot holes will be back in one or two winters, so...would have liked to have seen more concrete and decorative pavers at the intersections.

?
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/INTERSECTION.jpg

Downtown in going to be a mess in the next several years.

There is going to be proj 180, Devon TIFF, MAPS 3, and Devon tower work going on all at once. The biz distrcit is going to look completely different in 5-8 years.

Downtown in going to be a mess in the next several years.

There is going to be proj 180, Devon TIFF, MAPS 3, and Devon tower work going on all at once. The biz distrcit is going to look completely different in 5-8 years.

Don't worry, Sandridge is making a new plaza that will bring in some peace and serenity. I even saw a rendition of a business guy sitting on bench reading the paper. While the south side of downtown OKC goes up, the north side goes down - literally and figuratively.

Yea, I'm sure going to miss those abandoned dilapidated buildings. I guess all those Sandridge employees will miss walking by the boarded up structures.

Yea, I'm sure going to miss those abandoned dilapidated buildings. I guess all those Sandridge employees will miss walking by the boarded up structures.

For the one millionth time - it isn't about what is being lost, it is about what is coming. Corporate Plazas are a black hole everywhere they are built. They do the exact opposite of what they claim to accomplish. They won't attract people to the area, they will force people away. Go to the architect’s web site and see their past projects. All of their completed plazas and public spaces are completely devoid of people - all of them (except for the one with the tennis courts - and only one person is using it).

http://www.rogersmarvel.com/BTM.html

You can't tell anything from their website. I used to be in the architectural photography business. You schedule the shoots for when people WON'T be there since you can't control what you get with misc. people. So the "proof" you cite is no proof. As for the tennis court, it is likely it was a set-up shot anyway. If you have use counts from the city or building owners, or some other "proof", please share it.

I spend a lot of time in large cities and see plenty of people using the plaza's and parks. The key is, there have to be PEOPLE downtown to use them. We have to get employers to hire more and move more businesses downtown. Then we will get more "density". Density of buildings will FOLLOW density of people, not the other way around.

You can't tell anything from their website. I used to be in the architectural photography business. You schedule the shoots for when people WON'T be there since you can't control what you get with misc. people. So the "proof" you cite is no proof. As for the tennis court, it is likely it was a set-up shot anyway. If you have use counts from the city or building owners, or some other "proof", please share it.

I spend a lot of time in large cities and see plenty of people using the plaza's and parks. The key is, there have to be PEOPLE downtown to use them. We have to get employers to hire more and move more businesses downtown. Then we will get more "density". Density of buildings will FOLLOW density of people, not the other way around.

Exactly Rover, I am with you on this one, bringing white collar jobs downtown is the key for everything else to follow like retail and residential developments, right now there is not a demand for new retail and mid residential high rises because there is too much vacant office space downtown that needs to be filled.

If you have use counts from the city or building owners, or some other "proof", please share it.

I spend a lot of time in large cities and see plenty of people using the plaza's and parks. The key is, there have to be PEOPLE downtown to use them. We have to get employers to hire more and move more businesses downtown. Then we will get more "density". Density of buildings will FOLLOW density of people, not the other way around.

I have offered proof many times but will gladly do it again. Log on to Google Earth, pick your favorite urban downtown, zoom in so you see 2 or 3 blocks at a time, and move around until you see a coporate plaza (don't look for parks because a corporate plaza is not a park). When you find a corporate plaza switch over to Google Street View and see if anyone is in the corporate plaza. I have checks dozens and dozens and dozens all over the US and all of them are empty except for the occasional bum. The sidwalks next to plazas are full of people but that plazas themsleves are completley devoid of people - all of them.

How many people use the plaza at the Bank of Oklahoma Building. Ever see anyone there that is just walkig across it to get to the building.?

?
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/gandjdunlap/INTERSECTION.jpg

Architect5311 what are the material designations for the area in Black? I appreciate the image but there was not material notes for me to be able to determine what they were consisting of.

Where did you get access to these drawings? Are you involved in anyway in the project? Thanks again for the post, I am really just trying to get a handle on what our realistic expectations should be for what is going to actually make it to the street.

What does the 180 stand for? I've heard 180 blocks and I've heard 180 million dollars. Just curious.

Google Earth is not live. It is a series of cameras that sit on top of a van and they ususally pick low traffic times to go shoot. They don't want traffic and or lots of pedestrians. The drive routes and record at a point in time. It is not from satellites and again, IS NOT PROOF. Don't add 2+2 to get 6.

Proof is actual counts over periods of time to have empirical data showing use patterns. There is a way to actually do this. You can't make the argument from Google Earth and staged photographs where you have no time of day, weather, control, etc. info. No respected researcher would have any use for that kind of "proof"". It just isn't valid. Sorry, I do market research and would never make decisions on flimsy and unsubstantiated "data".

Google Earth is not live. It is a series of cameras that sit on top of a van and they ususally pick low traffic times to go shoot. They don't want traffic and or lots of pedestrians. The drive routes and record at a point in time. It is not from satellites and again, IS NOT PROOF. Don't add 2+2 to get 6.

Proof is actual counts over periods of time to have empirical data showing use patterns. There is a way to actually do this. You can't make the argument from Google Earth and staged photographs where you have no time of day, weather, control, etc. info. No respected researcher would have any use for that kind of "proof"". It just isn't valid. Sorry, I do market research and would never make decisions on flimsy and unsubstantiated "data".

But there are hundreds of people on the sidewalks, they just aren't in the corporate plazas. Try it, you will see. Most of the pictures I saw were taken on weekdays - all the people in business suits gave it away. There are even FedEx delivery trucks in the pictures and everything. There just aren't people in ANY corporate plazas other than bums and people walking up to the buildings.

Come on try it. Pick any city - even New York City.

I don't really need to google it, I actually travel to most large cities in the US at least once a year, and to many of them multiple times. I see for my own eyes. Of course there are less during the work hours, but at lunch time and at various other times there are always more.

Look, I would love to have a downtown area like Vancouver (one of my favorites), or Chicago, but we don't have the corporate mass or the people to have growth like that. If you moved all the offices from NW Expressway and Quail Springs to downtown, you still wouldn't have that kind of mass. We are what we are.

When we have easy transportation (like light rail) so you can get around and go a mile or two downtown without having to take your car, it will help. When we have more JOBs downtown, it will help. The best thing for infill and density would be for us to recruit a corporate relocation to take over the Devon building when it comes up and to get the buildings we have (1st Natl, City, etc., full with people. Then there will be more demand for residences, retail, and supporting businesses in a highly desirable downtown area. Density development is about JOBS and people wanting to live near their work and have a fun, easy lifestyle. Get the jobs downtown and we will get the building density. No jobs and we will continue to have gaps and more of them as buildings get old and no one spends money to make them usable.

Get the city to make it easier to build offices downtown than in the burbs (easy and quick permitting, infrastructure assistance, district hot and cold water at a basic price, light rail throughout, good street-lighting, no pan-handlers, sales tax breaks for stores located in the central district, free activities sponsored by the city downtown, an agressive urban renewal board, relocation assistance, crack-down on dilapidated structures, higher taxes for vacant properties, etc., etc. There are a ton of things we can do to get businesses to re-locate downtown. 180 is a good step in the right direction...but it is just ONE step.

Rover, your killing me.


The best thing for infill and density would be for us to recruit a corporate relocation to take over the Devon building when it comes up and to get the buildings we have (1st Natl, City, etc., full with people.

The best thing we could do for in-fill is NOT tear down existing density. The whole idea of tearing down existing building to make in-fill more desirable has been proven to be wrong. OKC tried this already - it didn't work. Unless you count parking lots as in-fill.

What does the 180 stand for? I've heard 180 blocks and I've heard 180 million dollars. Just curious.

180 acres

180 acres

And, a 180 degree shift in attitude and approach. It's an apt metaphor, imo.

What SR is attempting to do is NOTHING like what urban renewal did. Complete apples to oranges comparison.

I wonder how many who are so sure on this would accept having a dilapidated empty house next to their $500,000 house in a good neighborhood and argue to keep it standing, regardless of the fact it was too small, unusable and likely infested. Few could argue that it was good for the neighborhood.

Let me guess...you do urban renewal work too?

i have had the good fortune of being in charge of business development for companies involved in supplying equipment to building developers and contractors for more than 20 years. Most of the time, I have served as VP Sales & Marketing covering more than 30 countries. So, I have visited hundreds of cities worldwide, large and small and have my own opinions of what makes a city livable and what doesn't. I celebrate the uniqueness in cities and appreciate the ones that have their own personality. I don't happen to think there is one blueprint as to what is "urban" and desirable. I see plazas and parks that work and some that don't (it isn't the concept it is the execution that matters). Doesn't mean I am right, but that I have first hand experiences and definite opinions.

By the way, I am actively recruiting two new businesses to Oklahoma City from LA because I feel so strongly about this city. I love what is going on here. I just am not so doom and gloom about clearing out some really bad buildings.

So how much is this approximate 1/4 of a square mile going to cost?

So how much is this approximate 1/4 of a square mile going to cost?

Mike, the estimate has been $140 million. And, somehow, I get the feeling this discussion is going to go back to how this money should be spent for fire and police instead.

This is a different thread, I have never heard how much this was going to cost and at $777,777.78 I am certainly wondering where the funding for this is coming from!

Mike, the funding for Project 180 is coming from a special tax increment finance district (TIF). Property tax, more specifically NEW property tax, is where the money comes from. TIF money does not come from the general fund or any other sources. This is not a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Funding from TIF, by law, must be spent within the TIF district and be used for capital improvements or economic development incentives. The TIF funding is derived by first setting a baseline for the existing property tax level for the identified property/area, and locking that tax in for the current recipients of ad valorem tax. Any new tax then goes to the TIF. In the case of OKC, property tax generally goes to the schools, and if I am not mistaken, some to the county. All of the entities who currently get property tax funding must agree in advance to allow TIF to happen, which they have done. In the case of the OKC public schools and other entities, the groups in question felt that rather than securing their slice of the current pie it was better to work together to bake a bigger pie. The theory being that a bigger pie, in the long run, will benefit them more.

In most cases, TIF is used to help lure a developer. Those developers usually request amenities (parking garages, pedestrian walkways, etc.) to improve their own sites. In the case of Devon, however, the company is unselfishly funding all of these types of improvements attached to their project themselves. They requested that all new property tax generated by their building be dedicated instead to improving PUBLIC amenities like the Myriad Gardens and the streets and sidewalks in downtown. This despite the fact that the City would likely have been willing to spend all of it on parking garages or whatever Devon asked them to.

Again, it seems that their big-picture view told them that a healthier downtown would have a positive impact on their own recruitment efforts, among other things. In other words, the more the community around them improves and succeeds, the more likely the company's own needs would be met.

Recall, again, that TIF dollars by law must be spent on capital improvements and incentives, and that it MUST be spent within the TIF boundaries. Note also that these new tax dollars would not exist at all if not for the new building.

Personally, I think Devon and Project 180 are above reproach in this area. If you spend time trying to link Project 180 with public safety spending woes, you're really barking up the wrong tree.

Sounds like we are getting a pretty good deal out of this!

If you mean that sincerely, then I wholeheartedly agree. The best of deals.

Devon is obvoiusly hoping to benefit by attracting a larger, more qualified pool of potential hires, but they are still being incredibly unselfish here. I don't think most people in OKC appreciate quite HOW generous Devon is being.

If you mean that sincerely, then I wholeheartedly agree. The best of deals.

Devon is obvoiusly hoping to benefit by attracting a larger, more qualified pool of potential hires, but they are still being incredibly unselfish here. I don't think most people in OKC appreciate quite HOW generous Devon is being.

I agree. They could have very easily negotiated themselves out of the tax district but not only volunteered for it, but paid years of it in advance!

I am all about our city being the best city that we can be. Sometimes we may disagree about priorities and how to get there.