The appeal of the demolition of the Union Bus Station is on the agenda for the 3/5 Board of Adjustment meeting.

The brief of the appeal is interesting to read and raises lots of good points.


This appeal shall be heard and tried de novo by the Board, provided such appeal shall be limited to the issues and evidence presented to and decided by the Downtown Design Review Committee, and the grounds specified in the Notice of Appeal. In deciding an appeal, the Board shall use the same standards and criteria of review as set forth in the Downtown Design District Ordinance. Upon review, the Board may affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Committee; or the Board shall remand the case to the Committee based upon new evidence in the event that new evidence is presented.

Read full brief here (PDF) (http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/busappeal.PDF)

The appeal of the demolition of the Union Bus Station is on the agenda for the 3/5 Board of Adjustment meeting.

The brief of the appeal is interesting to read and raises lots of good points.



Read full brief here (PDF) (http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/busappeal.PDF)

Is this an open forum with time allotted for public comment?

Is this an open forum with time allotted for public comment?

Yes.

It is scheduled for Thursday March 5th at 1:30PM in the Council Chambers at City Hall.


The applicant will be requested to present their case first. Following the applicant's presentation, the public will be called upon to present testimony, for or against, the stated request. Each person who speaks should first state their name and address. Each person shall be given the opportunity to present their case once, as succinctly as possible. All parties should limit their remarks to five minutes. Large groups who want to address the Board should choose one spokesperson. After protestant's remarks, the applicant will be entitled to one brief rebuttal.

After reading the brief, I agree with Pete - there are some good points made in it. Maybe the DDRC did not do their due diligence here. I didn't previously support the idea of saving the bus station, but I don't love the idea of just a parking garage being there either. I don't think the structure as whole should be saved however. The appeal presents the idea of saving the exterior facade, and I think that's a good idea.

Don't get your hopes up...

The point about not even talking to the City about the possibility of using TIF funds was a great one to make.

Their whole argument is that the building is not economically feasible, but bridging that gap is a big part of the purpose of TIF, and there is plenty of money in that budget.

Of course, everyone knows they just want to make room for more parking, but then they should at least say so rather than put up the cost argument because it is full of holes.


I don't expect the BOA to overrule, but it may be an interesting meeting and process. Remember, the vote on Stage Center by this same body was very close.

Not sure applying tif funds or not will have any impact on this application. As those funds may or may not have been approved.

I think that the TIF thing is the way to go, because then the argument isn't anti-Devon, but rather that Devon and the City just need to work together to make this happen. To me, that's the right message.

If any of you are going....give em hell to save it. :P

Via Steve's Twitter

https://twitter.com/stevelackmeyer/status/572806993913622529

Typical arrogant attitude displayed by the big oil bullies.

Man, this 499 building looks less & less inspiring every single time I look at the rendering. What a ugly boring annex it is going to be.

ummmm.... is right. Aren't we still waiting on the Board of Adjustment appeal?

Some folks are waiting. Some perhaps trust their gut and/or ability to count noses. Not unlike when a sports team blows off the final bit of the clock because clock striking zero or not, it's actually over, and has been for a spell (as in long before the renderings were ever drawn, let alone pitched.)

ummmm.... is right. Aren't we still waiting on the Board of Adjustment appeal?

Is removing a sign demo? Do they even need appoveal to do that?

Are they actually removing the sign or just inspecting it? I'm sure they are getting demolition and sign "Preservation" estimates so they can start demolition as soon as they can.

It doesn't look like they actually have a crane there to take it down.

Via Jon Dodson

https://twitter.com/dodsonster/status/572863995192852480

Via Jon Dodson

https://twitter.com/dodsonster/status/572863995192852480

The old times change.
Such a shame they're not saving the lunch box's sign.

Via Jon Dodson

https://twitter.com/dodsonster/status/572863995192852480

It looks like they are just taking down the sign, which they had said they wanted to preserve inside the new development.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_M4v-4U0AAaGgd.jpg

Not trying to misdirection the topic of 499. However, I found this Office Tower proposal in Nashville, TN by Hines and a local developer to be very interesting:

Hines, Ragland team to develop downtown office building - Nashville Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/real-estate/2015/03/hines-ragland-team-to-develop-downtown-office.html)

The key takeaway is that this proposed office tower will be 24 stories tall with the parking garage built 'UNDERGROUND'.

Not trying to misdirection the topic of 499. However, I found this Office Tower proposal in Nashville, TN by Hines and a local developer to be very interesting:

Hines, Ragland team to develop downtown office building - Nashville Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/real-estate/2015/03/hines-ragland-team-to-develop-downtown-office.html)

The key takeaway is that this proposed office tower will be 24 stories tall with the parking garage built 'UNDERGROUND'.

Wow, good find. That really ticks me off. I think more than anything this is Devon running it telling them what they want. Or maybe Nashville's DDRC has a backbone?

What are the relative costs for 499 Sheridan compared to the Nashville building? Will any of the Nashville building and parking be subsidized with government funds or TIF? One good thing with the convention center is that if it has effectively raised the cost of land in downtown OKC, it will become more and more cost effective to conserve land and build parking underneath. Up to now, the city was estimating the cost for a huge plot of land at only $13 million. Why go underground if it costs so little to acquire surface space? Now that the bar has risen, building a 1/2 block parking garage may be prohibitive.

Wow, good find. That really ticks me off. I think more than anything this is Devon running it telling them what they want. Or maybe Nashville's DDRC has a backbone?

Only been to Nashville twice, can't remember the topography in relation to their river. I know that our water table fluctuates (downtown) 14-22 feet. I was told the river passed through CBD at one time or another. This makes for a
less affordable underground parking.

Not trying to misdirection the topic of 499. However, I found this Office Tower proposal in Nashville, TN by Hines and a local developer to be very interesting:

Hines, Ragland team to develop downtown office building - Nashville Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/real-estate/2015/03/hines-ragland-team-to-develop-downtown-office.html)

The key takeaway is that this proposed office tower will be 24 stories tall with the parking garage built 'UNDERGROUND'.

Yep. It has never really been about what they can and can't do. Tearing down the block to turn it into mostly parking is what they want to do. It's like they look at the blocks of parking garages on Gaylord and get jealous.

Only been to Nashville twice, can't remember the topography in relation to their river. I know that our water table fluctuates (downtown) 14-22 feet. I was told the river passed through CBD at one time or another. This makes for a
less affordable underground parking.

Someone needs to sit down with our convention center planners then.

Vote is in .......bus station will be razed!

Vote was 4-1.

Ed Shadid will now take the matter to district court.

That's right, they need that space for parking garages for this glorified mid rise. I am far from a Shadid fan and he needs to just give it up, but this is getting more ridiculous by the day. With the new CC and CC hotel not going in near by, they are creating a super block of parking garages and our little mini 399 tower. I can't help but believe that some of these garages will not be getting used as much as they anticipated. With this project and they way it went down for what little we are getting, and the CC and CC Hotel now in ruins because of our city leaders, it is becoming for obvious to most that our leaders are failing us more than they are helping now days. It's almost getting as bad at the Dewey Bartlet in Tulsa.

As far as roof top height goes, this building will be OKC's third tallest. Far from being a punk building.

...it is becoming for obvious to most that our leaders are failing us more than they are helping now days.

I have been thinking the same thing for awhile. The problem is City Leaders said they wanted to make downtown 'walkable', but approved every objection to it, and did a very poor job of plan execution with the rest. So now we have a bunch of square pegs in round holes and nothing is fitting together.

Sucks, but I don't see what Ed plans to accomplish by pushing this to District Court. It might be time to let this go and consider it a lesson learned.

He'd be far better off using his position as a councilor to start pushing for stricter standards so we can stop going down this path again and again.

I don't think anybody learned a darned thing here. We're just repeating the mistakes of the past with no changes in sight.

Sucks, but I don't see what Ed plans to accomplish by pushing this to District Court. It might be time to let this go and consider it a lesson learned.

He'd be far better off using his position as a councilor to start pushing for stricter standards so we can stop going down this path again and again.

I don't know the exact thinking or strategy but do know the old political axiom: "If you don't have any power, delay".

And in this situation, Hines/Devon are so anxious to start that even the prospect of being hung up for another year might bring a compromise to the table.

That's right, they need that space for parking garages for this glorified mid rise. I am far from a Shadid fan and he needs to just give it up, but this is getting more ridiculous by the day. With the new CC and CC hotel not going in near by, they are creating a super block of parking garages and our little mini 399 tower. I can't help but believe that some of these garages will not be getting used as much as they anticipated. With this project and they way it went down for what little we are getting, and the CC and CC Hotel now in ruins because of our city leaders, it is becoming for obvious to most that our leaders are failing us more than they are helping now days. It's almost getting as bad at the Dewey Bartlet in Tulsa.

Wait, so you would approve of this if the building was taller?

Wait, so you would approve of this if the building was taller?

No sir, not what I said. I think to create a super block out of parking garages and a building that doesn't a whole lot of people is just wrong. I think compromises could have been made and even then, it would have been easier to digest this if the actual building that isn't a parking lot had a little more height and made more of us proud. Lets just agree, despite its lack of height, nothing really is impressive about this building compared to what could or should be put on this block. It also does nothing for walk ability.

No sir, not what I said. I think to create a super block out of parking garages and a building that doesn't a whole lot of people is just wrong. I think compromises could have been made and even then, it would have been easier to digest this if the actual building that isn't a parking lot had a little more height and made more of us proud. Lets just agree, despite its lack of height, nothing really is impressive about this building compared to what could or should be put on this block. It also does nothing for walk ability.

Just to be clear, 499 does not comprise a superblock. It would be a super garage block though.

I don't think anybody learned a darned thing here. We're just repeating the mistakes of the past with no changes in sight.

The negative posters on here and the general public have a different view of "mistake" here.

Sucks, but I don't see what Ed plans to accomplish by pushing this to District Court. It might be time to let this go and consider it a lesson learned.

He'd be far better off using his position as a councilor to start pushing for stricter standards so we can stop going down this path again and again.

The problem is taking this case to a court of law offers a far better shot than trying to get the rest of council to go along with stricter standards downtown. They clearly don't want high standards.

However the practical reality is that you don't turn to the courts to uphold higher standards. The case rests on arguing to protect the investments of previous developers that were held to a standard, as a reasonable expectation.

Molly Fleming's article about Ed's pending lawsuit. Of interest is the part I highlighted.


Councilman plots unusual move in building battle
By Molly M. Fleming
The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY – Councilman Ed Shadid wants to challenge the process for deciding a building’s fate, and he is willing to take the issue to district court.

City attorney Dan Brummitt said Shadid’s battle will be between the Ward 2 councilman and the city’s Board of Adjustment, not the city itself. He said the city hasn’t seen a similar issue with a councilman since the 1980s.

In February, Shadid filed an appeal to the Downtown Design Review Committee’s decision to demolish Union Bus Station to make room for the 499 Sheridan Ave. project. He tried to get the City Council to appeal the DDRC’s decision, but that matter failed to pass as well.

The bus station and eight other buildings will be removed to make way for a 27-story office tower and two parking garages. The nine buildings are owned by Nick Preftakes.

Shadid’s appeal was heard before the Board of Adjustment Thursday. He said during the meeting that the process to demolish the buildings and construct 499 Sheridan moved too quickly, and more thought should have been given to the matter.

The board voted 4-1 to keep the DDRC’s decision, and Shadid said after the meeting he would take the matter to district court. He has not filed his case yet.

Brummitt said the court hearing will be similar to the Board of Adjustment meeting. It will be heard by only a judge.

“What I expect to happen is the property owners will intervene as support of the Board of Adjustment,” Brummitt said. “They’ll work on putting the case together. It’s really their interest, not the city’s.”

He said during the hearing, the judge will either affirm or reverse what was decided by the Board of Adjustment.

A city councilman taking a city entity to court is an unusual case, said Andrew M. Coats, University of Oklahoma School of Law dean emeritus, who was Oklahoma City mayor from 1983 to 1987. He said that when he was mayor there was a similar issue and the judge threw it out of court.

“You have to complete all your possible remedies with the city before you sue the city,” Coats said. “I think you’d want to explore all the possible options.”

He said if he were the judge, he would recommend that Shadid go back and make sure he’s covered all his ground. He said he would expect the building’s owner would bring the lawsuit against the board, not a sitting politician.

“I don’t remember a state legislator suing the Legislature because they didn’t win,” Coats said. “I think that’s the unusual part of this. It’s certainly a unique situation when you think about the fact that it is happening.”

While Shadid is debating the city’s building demolition process in court, the city’s planning department has been working on an ordinance amendment that would require more criteria to be considered when a structure is proposed for demolition. The new criteria would evaluate a building’s design, form and urban character in regards to the district, historic or architectural significance, structural integrity, economic feasibility and what would replace the existing building.

The Urban Development Committee of the city Planning Commission will discuss the amendment during its meeting Thursday.

Yes, that ordinance amendment has been in the works for a long time.

Some may even say the timing of it just now being finalized is a little suspicious in that it is only coming after the Preftakes Block decisions.

It's too late now. There's not much left to save.

It's too late now. There's not much left to save.

Well, there's currently nothing stopping our progeny 30 years down the line from taking down Leadership square or everything on Film Row even if they have plenty of lots in the Coop site to develop.

But I'm with Pete on this…timing is, well, suspicious.

I feel like the additional criteria should've been in the ordinance from the beginning.

I feel like the additional criteria should've been in the ordinance from the beginning.

Yeah, what in the world were they evaluating in the first place? Seems if they had no basis for denying demolitions, they've been as irrelevant as they have appeared all along.

Steve's update on the lawsuit. "Should vs Shall"

Lawsuit filed to block bus station demolition | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/lawsuit-filed-to-block-bus-station-demolition/article/5401942)


Brett Davis, the attorney filing the appeal, is wanting the court to settle whether the ordinance’s instruction to preserve historic buildings is the intent of the law, or whether wording that says the design committee “should” take such steps instead of “shall” is the key part of the ordinance. Such conflict was cited previously in the debates over demolition of Stage Center and buildings torn down to make way for the SandRidge Commons development. In each prior case, the design committee went with the discretionary wording in the ordinance with critics countering they ignored the instruction to preserve historic buildings.

Its always interesting to see how the public feels on issues outside of OKCtalk. The overwhelming majority of people are opposed to demolition based on this KFOR-TV facebook post:

https://www.facebook.com/kfor4/posts/10152699777646636

I can honestly see The Nichols taking his ball and going home sooner rather than later. Might be good for this site.
He'll just pack everything up and say "See, OKC? We try to progress and you fight with me. I tried and you didn't want it!"

Except 499 doesn't represent progress. It just represents one possible version of the future, and one that many people think will reduce the quality of civic life. There are other possible versions of the future that will enhance civic life. The future is coming, but shouldn't that future be an improvement over the present?

Except 499 doesn't represent progress. It just represents one possible version of the future, and one that many people think will reduce the quality of civic life. There are other possible versions of the future that will enhance civic life. The future is coming, but shouldn't that future be an improvement over the present?

I agree. But, it's clear to all of us that Nichols believes HIS vision is what progress should look like.
Out with the old, in with the new, we're gonna steamroll everything and if you don't like it, well...

I like the pushback this is receiving, all after a time when we thought all was lost. There is a little fight left in this block.

I can honestly see The Nichols taking his ball and going home sooner rather than later. Might be good for this site.
He'll just pack everything up and say "See, OKC? We try to progress and you fight with me. I tried and you didn't want it!"

Does OKC want to be a Big League City? Because Big League Cities turn down bad proposals because they're not desperate or beholden to anyone willing to build. I'm not even saying whether this proposal should be accepted, but implying that proposals shouldn't be rejected or at least face scrutiny seems detrimental to OKC's future (and past... Most of which is gone anyway).

Does OKC want to be a Big League City? Because Big League Cities turn down bad proposals because they're not desperate or beholden to anyone willing to build. I'm not even saying whether this proposal should be accepted, but implying that proposals shouldn't be rejected or at least face scrutiny seems detrimental to OKC's future (and past... Most of which is gone anyway).

Definitely agree with you, Dan. Scrutiny isn't a bounty; it should never be left off the table.

In some respects to the Big League City realm, OKC continues to carve its niche; it will take more than one project. We continue to gauge what happens in other cities similar in size to OKC like Omaha, Little Rock, Tulsa, Wichita & Memphis. Omaha's goal has been to get better without an emphasis on bigger. Tulsa is where OKC should be now in respects to retail and other categories like beautification.

The 'Big League City' transition in areas other than sports will not occur overnight. Our city experienced a 30 yr., period of neglect from 1960 through 1990. The 1989 Centennial was the turning point along with the MAPS launch passage in 1993. The destruction of the Murrah Building brought national attention to the heart & true soul of our people.

Improvement takes time; we need to work with leaders like Larry Nichols who has invested in Oklahoma City. Where would OKC be without Devon Energy had he taken his 50 story skyscraper along with employees to Houston? Larry Nichols has earned a say; not to be confused with earned his way.

We're not Dallas, Houston or Denver; however, follow some of the positive blueprints of those cities to make OKC better. You should be encouraged by OKC's growth & economic indicators.

OKC has strength in the oil & gas segment with complementary energy giants like Chesapeake Energy, Sandridge Energy & Continental Resources along with more companies in the energy area with aggressive growth potential. General Electric Global Research chose to put its center here to serve and advance oil & gas exploration worldwide. Those are the giants you want to attract as you become 'Big League.'

Does OKC want to be a Big League City? Because Big League Cities turn down bad proposals because they're not desperate or beholden to anyone willing to build. I'm not even saying whether this proposal should be accepted, but implying that proposals shouldn't be rejected or at least face scrutiny seems detrimental to OKC's future (and past... Most of which is gone anyway).

What I am about to say I do not mean it as negative but purely my opinion which I find to be quite accurate. The answer to your question is no, I don't think OKC "truly" wants to be a Big League City. I think their are some that share that dream but are derailed by the power of some power people that I think have their pocket books above all else. This state has basically always been about catering to a select few to get richer while infrastructure, roads, schools, and non liquor stores suffer the consequences. I am sorry but that is just the way it is and has always been and has basically set this state back many decades from the rest of the country. It is my state, I love my state and think it has some of the best people in the entire world in it. However, we have been victims of lots of corruption for many years at many levels which is the reason why we are not Texas when we could be just like Texas.

So, of course we will never see a major attraction, theme park, etc here. We will never be a major player regarding our airport and flights, and we will never be a viewed positively because of the stigma that has followed us for many years and that we allow to continue. We don't dream big, we are pretty content on just trying to keep pace or improve. They have done an admirable job of that and that is to be commended. I have stated it before but it is the perfect description of this city that I love and have big dream for. OKC is not nor will it ever be a great city. It is what it is and that is an OK City. The very name of the city says it all and fits it perfectly. I guess that beats where we were years ago for sure but if you want to keep it real we don't have enough dreamers or people who seem to want to take action to make this place great.

Soondoc, OKC could have simply not passed MAPS, never built the Peake and would not have the Thunder. The city could have left Bricktown as a run down industrial warehouse district. The city could have turned away the Devon tower, sending Larry Nichols and his company to Houston. That would be not dreaming big and accepting mediocrity. I think OKC does want to be a big league city but special interest groups and an extremely conservative state are hurting its efforts.

OKC could do much better but I think you are way off-base when you say things like OKC will never be big league, will never have a major attraction, or will never be viewed positively. It can and will take work to make happen but it can happen.

OKC is not nor will it ever be a great city.

Then why are you here?

I take exception to 'conservatism' being blamed. I am as conservative as anyone can possibly be and I am constantly attacked because my urban ideas are to radical. What is holding OKC back is people who glory in mediocrity, are slaves to the status quo, and have a complete lack of taste and style - and that cuts across all political ideologies.

What I am about to say I do not mean it as negative but purely my opinion which I find to be quite accurate. The answer to your question is no, I don't think OKC "truly" wants to be a Big League City. I think their are some that share that dream but are derailed by the power of some power people that I think have their pocket books above all else. This state has basically always been about catering to a select few to get richer while infrastructure, roads, schools, and non liquor stores suffer the consequences. I am sorry but that is just the way it is and has always been and has basically set this state back many decades from the rest of the country. It is my state, I love my state and think it has some of the best people in the entire world in it. However, we have been victims of lots of corruption for many years at many levels which is the reason why we are not Texas when we could be just like Texas.

So, of course we will never see a major attraction, theme park, etc here. We will never be a major player regarding our airport and flights, and we will never be a viewed positively because of the stigma that has followed us for many years and that we allow to continue. We don't dream big, we are pretty content on just trying to keep pace or improve. They have done an admirable job of that and that is to be commended. I have stated it before but it is the perfect description of this city that I love and have big dream for. OKC is not nor will it ever be a great city. It is what it is and that is an OK City. The very name of the city says it all and fits it perfectly. I guess that beats where we were years ago for sure but if you want to keep it real we don't have enough dreamers or people who seem to want to take action to make this place great.

Ok Stan.
http://southpark.cc.com/clips/ux8mdp/same-old-crap

BTW throw some cities out there that are "great" I'll happily take them down a notch for you.
Seattle and Portland have high suicide and depression rates because of the lack of sun.
San Fran is always sorta cold and costs and arm and a leg.
NYC smells terrible, expensive, and crowded.
Chicago is cold, crime ridden, and corrupt to no end.
Washington DC has politicians and is filled with power hungry people.
Florida is God's waiting room and is always humid and hot.
Dallas is sprawled and you'll live in a car basically. (I'm not even a big urbanist but even Dallas seems excessive)
LA is fake, expensive, sprawled.
Paris is expensive and has french snobbery
London is super expensive, cold, rainy.
Phoenix is 5 months of good weather followed by 7 months of heat, plus it is the $30,000 millionaire's paradise
Las Vegas would suck to live in always dealing with drunken tourists, plus crime.
Austin has unbearable traffic, rapidly increasing cost of living, and there's no more locals-its some bro or chick from somewhere random complaining about how much Austin has changed even though they've lived there all of 7 months. I can't even imagine how annoying all those festivals would get- 50,000 people pouring in from all over the place constantly and getting obliterated drunk or high then eating at the great restaurants so they always have long wait times. Denver isn't much different, swap festivals for weed.

Everywhere can suck. You attitude determines everything. Your attitude sucks which is why your perception of the city sucks.

-We have 2 of the great basketball players in the world playing in the state 42 times a year. Not only that, they seem to genuinely like it and they are great citizens and representatives of the city. Can you even grasp what other cities would do to get that? I'll give you a hint they start attempting to recruit then 2 YEARS before their contracts are up. Wear an OKC Thunder polo next time you are out of town and watch what happens.

-There is a very very deep sense of community here. People are very kind to each other. The tragedies we have had to endure (the bombing, tornados) and the constant threat an EF5 will wipe out a few miles of town bind us to each other that is unusual for a town this size. It's the #1 thing people notice when they get here or visit. A town of 1.3 million feels like a family. We bicker, have disagreements, and a few knuckleheads like any other family but overall its pretty unique to us.

-Things actually function decently well at the city level. You don't think another city has said wow look at OKC is doing let's get our own MAPs going? Yet very few seem to be able to pull it off. For a government our city does a pretty good job.

-You can live close to work in just about any part of the city. It's also fairly easy to get around. Walk-ability is improving daily.

Sure the urbanists have been losing some battles lately but dang it you went against billionaires. When you play tennis with McEnroe you shouldn't expect to win. Same thing in this case. You go against powerful people you are probably not going to come out a winner. There's no harm in fighting, but don't burn yourself out on battles you can't win. A winnable battle will appear but if you've spent too much emotional capital on the wrong fights that winnable fight becomes a loss as well.

There's plenty to enjoy here, just as much as anywhere else. This is a you thing, not a OKC thing.

I take exception to 'conservatism' being blamed. I am as conservative as anyone can possibly be and I am constantly attacked because my urban ideas are to radical. What is holding OKC back is people who glory in mediocrity, are slaves to the status quo, and have a complete lack of taste and style - and that cuts across all political ideologies.

I know what you mean. When I say "conservative" I am not talking about your shade of conservatism but people like Mary Fallin, Jim Inhofe, and Sally Kern.

OKC is not nor will it ever be a great city. It is what it is and that is an OK City.

I would say that OKC was a GREAT city pre-WWII when we had all the streetcar lines and our beautiful buildings pre-urban renewal. And as such what was once great can be great again.

Defeatists posts like the ones above are a reason I'm considering taking a little vacation from OKCtalk. Way too much negativity on here lately. Given how quiet its been on here lately, I think others are doing the same.

If soondoc and others want to stink up this place with their self-loathing, don't expect me to stick around and smell it.

^^^^ Enjoy your vacation, I am sure not much will have changed when you come back. I am sorry, but the things I stated may not have been popular to some of you all but it is not being negative. CChris had some valid points, but lets be honest with ourselves and just admit that the city and state has held itself hostage with many poor choices for years. Yes, the took a chance with MAPS and a disaster in New Orleans helped us land the Thunder with some luck of course. Lets also be honest on how it took someone like Clay Bennett who is from Oklahoma and had a dream and vision to land this team here.

I gave kudos to OKC for the things they have done, you seem to ignore that fact. It has changed and is a much better place. However, poor decisions at both levels have always and shall continue to be what never will allow us to be Texas. It is a stigma that we have endured for years and that will not leave us most likely. We have some people who have great ideas and vision for OKC but will be trumped by those who run the show. It is not me being negative as much as it is about just being honest about this city. It does things on the cheap as does the state. ODOT should be in prison as far as I am concerned, but that is beside the point. Why can't they build and design highways like they do in other states? I know the answer but it might hurt someone's feelings and cause them to take a vacation from here.

Defeatists posts like the ones above are a reason I'm considering taking a little vacation from OKCtalk. Way too much negativity on here lately. Given how quiet its been on here lately, I think others are doing the same.

If soondoc and others want to stink up this place with their self-loathing, don't expect me to stick around and smell it.

^^^I've been thinking the same way lately.^^^ Some folks don't know what 'bad times' really are.