View Full Version : Maps 4 Neighborhoods



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8

hoya
08-25-2015, 09:06 AM
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
08-25-2015, 09:38 AM
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
08-25-2015, 09:41 AM
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
08-25-2015, 10:51 AM
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
08-25-2015, 10:53 AM
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.”

OSUFan
08-25-2015, 10:55 AM
Explain your reasoning. Those neighborhoods need the most help right now.

I just don't see a practical or realistic approach (but I'm definitely open to suggestions).

1.) How do you pick what neighborhoods get the investment that appeases everyone?

2.) Even if you come up with a list how do you get the people in OKC who live nowhere near there to vote to spend their money on taxes in neighborhoods that they never visit?

hoya
08-25-2015, 11:39 AM
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.

Well, the truth is, you need to have a balance. We had cheap gasoline for decades, and I think it's rather narrow-minded to ignore that advantage. The US experienced record growth in the post-WWII era. The ability to rapidly build cheap housing on inexpensive land allowed people who would never be able to afford homes in a European city to purchase them in American cities.

Is it sustainable forever? Oh, of course not. Eventually distance becomes a huge limiting factor. The problem American cities have had is they went all-in with the suburban solution. The problem isn't having T3 development, even extensive T3 development. The problem is that it spread so far and so fast that people have just been abandoning a lot of the old suburbs.

The solution for OKC is to redevelop the central core, and simultaneously stop the next wave of sprawl. We can't abandon the suburbs, there are too many people out there and too much money. But we shouldn't pretend that everything is hunky-dory and that building tracts of houses on the NW side of Lake Hefner is somehow fiscally responsible. The city is going to continue to grow in population -- if we can get that population to reinvest in existing neighborhoods within the city, and develop better urban neighborhoods, I think OKC of 2040 will be a lot healthier and more financially sound than OKC of 2015.

Sprawl is like a McDonald's extra value meal. It's cheap, it tastes pretty good, sometimes it just hits the spot. But if that's all you eat, you're going to have a lot of problems.

jerrywall
08-25-2015, 11:42 AM
It seems to me that general civic improvement and construction projects, things to raise the standard for the whole city (such as public transport, public safety, health, etc) make more sense than trying to create maps projects to benefit specific neighborhoods. More businesses, more residents, and more infill and density will generate more revenue and then going forward those increased revenues can be used for more specific street and neighborhood projects. It also seems more sellable to the voting base.

Just the facts
08-25-2015, 12:52 PM
So MAPS for street repairs? They are going to need a lot more than a 1 cent tax.

Teo9969
08-25-2015, 12:56 PM
Explain your reasoning. Those neighborhoods need the most help right now.

Because in most of those neighborhoods, the values of those home are so far away from being what they once were, which means they are never going to attract a diverse range of incomes. Only the poor, people starting out their economic lives, landlords, and older people who have been in the neighborhood are going to buy in these areas for the next 15 years. These areas are already decidedly poor, and they're only going to become poorer. Couple that with the fact that there will never be the kinds of amenities in the area necessary to draw in families, young professionals, and successful business people the end result is we'd literally be throwing money in the garbage.

We can put sidewalks in, but we can't make people invest in their homes (especially when many are absentee landlords…something you can see in the inner-loop right now: On one street you'll have 3 or 4 beautiful houses paired with a vacant house that is completely overgrown and clearly dilapidated.

And that's in an area that *has* amenities, that is already receiving private money investment along with public improvements.

The reason is simple: The ROI is TERRIBLE. The ROI of the Arena has been unreal. We can't be that far away from having paid off the arena already, and that was about a $200M project overall, and it's been a major piece in the entire city having pride for where they live.

Sidewalks in residential areas isn't going to move any needles. And the problem that I have with this whole discussion to begin with is that some people think Blue Stem is a neighborhood. It's not. The "neighborhood" is essentially from County Line to Meridian and Expressway to Memorial. And similarly large areas throughout the entire city. If you want to identify 4 of those, maybe one in each quadrant, and go from there. I'm fine with that.

I wanna say I would be okay with pouring $200M into Rockwell Ave between Hefner and 122nd, but it would require that the city takes an active role in changing the way the game has been played for a long time: Changing zoning laws, requiring density, encouraging multi-modal transportation, creating BID and specific taxations on the area that funnel into the improvement of the area. What's sad, is that I can fathom $200M not being enough money to drastically improve a single mile of street. I think the area is closer to $1B out from becoming a sustainable and compelling place to live. Again, maybe if we can get some bigger business to occupy the center of the neighborhood/district/area then we'd have a start.

When I look at this picture, keeping in mind that the PCN area is one of the nicer areas of OKC-Proper, I really struggle to see much hope:

11374

Pete
08-25-2015, 12:59 PM
The irony of all this "MAPS 4 public works" type of talk is that the MAPS sales tax surtax actually has kept OKC's overall sales tax artificially low, and sales tax is what drives public safety and public services.

OKC's sales tax is at or below most the surrounding communities WITH the MAPS surcharge. So, I think it's safe to say OKC's sales tax would be another $.01 higher if there hadn't been MAPS all these years.

So, by removing MAPS and allowing the OKC sales tax to seek it's proper level, almost all that incremental sales tax revenue would go to services and safety.

Also, several TIF districts siphon off incremental sales tax from the same recipients, and several more programs in the the works.


Oklahoma State Sales Tax 4.5% +
Norman 3.5%
Moore 3.75%
Edmond 3.75%
Midwest City 3.85%
OKC 3.875% (includes 1% MAPS surcharge)
Yukon 4%
Mustang 4%
Bethany 4%
Warr Acres 4%

Just the facts
08-25-2015, 01:18 PM
We don't need MAPS for Neighborhoods to fix these problems, we need arrondissements. OKC is too big for a one size fits all solution to these issues.

mkjeeves
08-25-2015, 02:10 PM
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.

That's basically everything between the two circles more or less, except you reserve the right to exclude everything outside the outer circle too. In other words, you only support spending money in the inner circle.

Give us your money and go rot is a plan. Maybe that will be on the next Maps (Not for Neighborhoods) advertisements.

http://s1.postimg.org/xbahv5u8f/OKCRot.png

Just the facts
08-25-2015, 02:49 PM
This whole concept is ridiculous and at this point I am content to let the supporters reach that conclusion on their own.

Teo9969
08-25-2015, 03:12 PM
That's basically everything between the two circles more or less, except you reserve the right to exclude everything outside the outer circle too. In other words, you only support spending money in the inner circle.

Give us your money and go rot is a plan. Maybe that will be on the next Maps (Not for Neighborhoods) advertisements.

That map is not even close to accurate.

Teo9969
08-25-2015, 03:22 PM
The irony of all this "MAPS 4 public works" type of talk is that the MAPS sales tax surtax actually has kept OKC's overall sales tax artificially low, and sales tax is what drives public safety and public services.

OKC's sales tax is at or below most the surrounding communities WITH the MAPS surcharge. So, I think it's safe to say OKC's sales tax would be another $.01 higher if there hadn't been MAPS all these years.

So, by removing MAPS and allowing the OKC sales tax to seek it's proper level, almost all that incremental sales tax revenue would go to services and safety.

Also, several TIF districts siphon off incremental sales tax from the same recipients, and several more programs in the the works.


Oklahoma State Sales Tax 4.5% +
Norman 3.5%
Moore 3.75%
Edmond 3.75%
Midwest City 3.85%
OKC 3.875% (includes 1% MAPS surcharge)
Yukon 4%
Mustang 4%
Bethany 4%
Warr Acres 4%

I would be fine with OKC's overall rate hitting 10%.

4.5% State
3% General Fund (.5% to 1% allocated to Capital Projects upon vote, aka MAPS)
1.125% Public Safety
1.125% RTA (County Tax?)
0.125% Zoo

krisb
08-25-2015, 03:30 PM
I'd say it's pretty accurate in that the neighborhoods just beyond the inner loop were all built in the post-war era. I'm convinced those neighborhoods could make a comeback given the right mix of public-private investments. Heck, if every neighborhood in OKC was a comfortable walk away from a park and mixed use development then the property values would increase. The fringe of Nichols Hills proper is a lot of postwar housing. Those homes have character and potential if people choose to invest in them. My modest 1950s neighborhood is about to get new streets and sidewalks, we are across the street from Will Rogers Park, and close to tons of shopping. The potential is there. When millenials start getting priced out of downtown and the urban core the next best thing will be the inner-ring suburbs.

Laramie
08-25-2015, 03:38 PM
There are improvements needed in all neighborhoods. We do need to address the concerns of our neighborhoods (MAPS 4 Neighborhood) as we did with our schools with MAPS for Kids.

MAPS IV collection 2017 - 2024 (7 years - $700 million).

There are eight wards. MAPS IV could provide $50 million for each of the 8 wards ($400 million)--those wards decide where they want the $50 million spent.

As the first $400 million is generated; it goes in that particular Wards' trust or account until total is collected. The $300 million (includes $50 million contingency fund) of the final collection years could be used for other projects throughout the city.

Meanwhile, each Ward could work with their council representatives to plan how that money should be spent. The neighborhoods would have $400 million; the city would have that final $300 million to use as needed.

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 08:59 AM
I like the self-governing Ward idea, and not just for MAPS, but for everyday governance. So let me ask you Laramie, what Ward do you live in and how would you spend your $50 million share? Be specific if you can.

Urbanized
08-26-2015, 09:19 AM
...Heck, if every neighborhood in OKC was a comfortable walk away from a park and mixed use development then the property values would increase...

You make it sound so easy..."heck"...like it's the very LEAST that could/should be done. I honestly think people throw out ideas like this without considering scale, at all. Remaking OKC like that - touching EVERY neighborhood - would of course be great. But it would also cost billions and take decades. It's not something that could be accomplished with a MAPS-sized project.

Spreading the MAPS approach throughout the city sounds great in theory and may even work in practice, but people would need to understand that they can't get the same bang for their buck that they've had in previous iterations, which were designed to build game-changers that ostensibly benefit the ENTIRE community. A city-wide implementation would have to consist of mostly small, incremental changes and improvements, not dramatic ones. The city is just too big, geographically.

That's why I think if a new MAPS reaches beyond the inner city it should concentrate on key corridors, with the hope that adjoining neighborhoods and commercial properties build upon that momentum with private investment.

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 09:46 AM
For every neighborhood to be within walking distance (0.5 miles) of a mixed-use commercial district we would need to build a shload of new mixed-use commercial centers. Some homes are a half-mile from the enterance to their own subdivision thanks to a dendritic street network.

David
08-26-2015, 09:56 AM
That's why I think if a new MAPS reaches beyond the inner city it should concentrate on key corridors, with the hope that adjoining neighborhoods and commercial properties build upon that momentum with private investment.

That's not a bad plan if you could get it passed, but it also feels like it comes pre-packaged with reasons for people to vote no. Why should someone who lives or works or owns a business outside those key corridors vote yes when their only expectation for something that would directly effect them is theoretical future momentum?

hoya
08-26-2015, 10:03 AM
We can't rely on MAPS to fix every problem the city has. I don't want MAPS to be used for things the city normally pays for. That's not why it exists. If you start using it to fix roads or put in new street lights, that money is going to vanish in an instant. You'll see no benefit from it.

I don't think that just sprinkling a few things here and there in different neighborhoods will give you the same "bang for your buck". The canal, the ballpark, the river improvements, the Ford Center, these are all major improvements to the city. The new central park, the streetcar, the river rapids, and (yes) the convention center, these are all major improvements. They aren't just major, they're transformative. They've changed the city's perception of itself, and changed (to a degree) the nation's perception of us. You can't ask for a bigger return than we've gotten.

A MAPS for Neighborhoods program could theoretically work, maybe, but we'd need to have a lot more concrete ideas than what we've seen in the video. Right now it's way too vague.

Laramie
08-26-2015, 11:24 AM
I like the self-governing Ward idea, and not just for MAPS, but for everyday governance. So let me ask you Laramie, what Ward do you live in and how would you spend your $50 million share? Be specific if you can.

I toggle back & forth from My house (where oldest son/grandson reside) in Ward 6 and my duplex in Ward 4 (live on one side/rent other side); registered to vote in Ward 4.

What would I do with that $50 million?

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzGSbttb7sE95C2-fPFoJnkVw9k19C_-nNWXeA-G4HDcOrbeZJ https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQH6S15qRHeZOlBpRRRYEqkwHuIoVrlZ 738ZV7-4YOnSssODvBtvghttps://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTB47yOe9lGD344S695zYRGyxvAhn1KO NQ8DOi8zS813ysRGi9bKw
Upgraded street lighting, planters (areas like neighborhoods in Stockyard City area, Gatewood, Paseo), park improvements (family friendly) a few more upgraded park community centers with the emphasis on additions to baseball, soccer & football fields where feasible. More neighborhood sidewalks, lighting where needed. Nice decor entrances to Ward 6: Stockyard City, Gatewood & Paseo and Ward 4: Oak Cliff and improvements to Draper Lake, picnic areas, restrooms & camping facilities etc.

Would like to hear about ideas from other neighbors in those two areas (Wards 4 & 6).

Urbanized
08-26-2015, 11:25 AM
We can't rely on MAPS to fix every problem the city has. I don't want MAPS to be used for things the city normally pays for. That's not why it exists. If you start using it to fix roads or put in new street lights, that money is going to vanish in an instant. You'll see no benefit from it.

I don't think that just sprinkling a few things here and there in different neighborhoods will give you the same "bang for your buck". The canal, the ballpark, the river improvements, the Ford Center, these are all major improvements to the city. The new central park, the streetcar, the river rapids, and (yes) the convention center, these are all major improvements. They aren't just major, they're transformative. They've changed the city's perception of itself, and changed (to a degree) the nation's perception of us. You can't ask for a bigger return than we've gotten.

A MAPS for Neighborhoods program could theoretically work, maybe, but we'd need to have a lot more concrete ideas than what we've seen in the video. Right now it's way too vague.

That's why I personally think it should possibly be allowed to expire, as it did in '99 (and remained for about a year and a half). I don't think MAPS should be a tax in search of projects, but rather a way of funding truly transformative projects that have community-wide benefit, as they present themselves. Honestly I think the next project fitting that definition will probably be transit-oriented.

And please note: "community wide benefit" has nothing to do with putting a project in every neighborhood, and just because your specific neighborhood wasn't touched doesn't mean a project doesn't benefit you, as some continue to preach here regarding previous versions of MAPS. This idea that projects like the ballpark, arena, Civic Center, central library, canal, river, fairgrounds etc only benefit downtowners (or was even built primarily for them) is wrong-headed poppycock.

Teo9969
08-26-2015, 11:28 AM
I just think people don't realize how little $1B actually is when you reach the city-scale.

Private dollars absolutely dwarf public dollars.

OKC is an economy of $439 Billion dollars over the span of the life of MAPS 3. We're using not even $1B in MAPS 3…We budgeted ~0.18% of "GDP" for MAPS...

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 11:42 AM
I toggle back & forth from My house (where oldest son/grandson reside) in Ward 6 and my duplex in Ward 4 (live on one side/rent other side); registered to vote in Ward 4.

What would I do with that $50 million?

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzGSbttb7sE95C2-fPFoJnkVw9k19C_-nNWXeA-G4HDcOrbeZJ https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQH6S15qRHeZOlBpRRRYEqkwHuIoVrlZ 738ZV7-4YOnSssODvBtvghttps://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTB47yOe9lGD344S695zYRGyxvAhn1KO NQ8DOi8zS813ysRGi9bKw
Upgraded street lighting (areas like neighborhoods in Stockyard City area, Gatewood, Paseo), park improvements (family friendly) a few more upgraded park community centers with the emphasis on additions to baseball, soccer & football fields where feasible. More neighborhood sidewalks, lighting where needed. Nice decor entrances to Ward 6: Stockyard City, Gatewood & Paseo and Ward 4: Oak Cliff and improvements to Draper Lake, picnic areas, restrooms & camping facilities etc.

Would like to hear about ideas from other neighbors in those two areas (Wards 4 & 6).

Let's start with the street light. The only numbers I could quickly find were from the City of Santa Monica and they say about $5,000 per street light install in residential areas. I assume busy roads and commercial areas will be higher, but who knows, so we can use the $5,000 figure. You can have 10,000 street lights; how many do you want for Ward 4?

Urbanized
08-26-2015, 11:42 AM
If you're going to include JUST parks, you'd probably do best to concentrate on a few key regional parks, such as Lincoln, Will Rogers, Earlywine, Trosper, etc.. Otherwise you probably couldn't even install sidewalks in all 120+ OKC parks for the price of MAPS, and even all of THOSE parks certainly don't touch every (or even most..?) neighborhoods in OKC. The scale of the city is truly massive.

hoya
08-26-2015, 11:52 AM
To be the city we want it to be, there need to be some big changes. MAPS only covers a small part of those.

1) We need to stop the bleeding. Stop expanding farther out. Like immediately. We're only making the problem worse by continuing to build neighborhoods farther and farther away.
2) We need to combine sidewalks, street lights, bike trails, and normal neighborhood improvements with street repairs. So whenever we'd normally go in and repave a street, we make sure we include bike lanes and sidewalks and all that stuff at the same time. This will be a very gradual process, but in 25 years we'll get there. Overall this is part of incremental improvement -- making sure that when we do something, we do it right.
3) We need to develop a mass transit system for the entire metro area, with transit-oriented development. We could fund some of that with MAPS, if necessary.

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 12:52 PM
To give one an idea of the scale and cost, Project 180 is over $170 million and it doesn't even cover 1 sq mile. It is economic realities like this that me reconsider everything I thought about City Planning 7 years ago.

mkjeeves
08-26-2015, 01:16 PM
You make it sound so easy..."heck"...like it's the very LEAST that could/should be done. I honestly think people throw out ideas like this without considering scale, at all. Remaking OKC like that - touching EVERY neighborhood - would of course be great. But it would also cost billions and take decades. It's not something that could be accomplished with a MAPS-sized project.

Spreading the MAPS approach throughout the city sounds great in theory and may even work in practice, but people would need to understand that they can't get the same bang for their buck that they've had in previous iterations, which were designed to build game-changers that ostensibly benefit the ENTIRE community. A city-wide implementation would have to consist of mostly small, incremental changes and improvements, not dramatic ones. The city is just too big, geographically.

That's why I think if a new MAPS reaches beyond the inner city it should concentrate on key corridors, with the hope that adjoining neighborhoods and commercial properties build upon that momentum with private investment.

Maps 1 and 3 alone cost a billion, has taken two decades and it's not done yet. Yes, it will take money and time to affect the rest of the city. That's not a reason to not do it and let it fall apart over the same period.

It would benefit the entire community. 99+ percent of the people in the entire community work, live, shop, play, visit friends, have family and/or rely on resources outside of downtown.

Yes, incremental change makes the most sense. We can't fix everything at once and certainly not with a token amount of money.

Old proverb: The best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago. The next best time is now.

mkjeeves
08-26-2015, 01:33 PM
On best ROI...and "the most bang for our buck"

I'm a business man. I own a business going on 26 years. I have money in investments, including real estate. I get it.

That said, when the carpet is filthy or worn out in your house you replace it. That's not because it's going to magically put more money in the bank, or increase the resale value. I'm not planning on selling my house anytime soon. I might wear it out and replace it two or three more times before I do. It's because you live there, and you work, earn money and pay taxes for a reason. Sometimes you make improvements to your surroundings because you can and your life would be more enjoyable, even when/if putting the money in some other activity might be a "better" investment. It all depends on what the metric is to make the decision about what's better. Happiness and well being for the people dealing with their immediate environment is pretty darn high on the list of metrics IMO.

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 02:40 PM
You don't replace the carpet if you can't afford that much carpet. A wise man doesn't buy more than he can afford to maintain, but that is exactly what OKC has been doing for 60 years. Now it is getting junky and rundown and the amount of money to fix it is more than we can get and the growth model stopped working.

bchris02
08-26-2015, 02:44 PM
Downtown is the city's living room, used by people from all of the different bedrooms. When you don't have enough money to re-carpet even a small percentage of the bedrooms and to do it right, and the living room is still a work-in-progress, wouldn't money be better invested continuing work on the living room?

hoya
08-26-2015, 02:48 PM
You don't replace the carpet if you can't afford that much carpet. A wise man doesn't buy more than he can afford to maintain, but that is exactly what OKC has been doing for 60 years. Now it is getting junky and rundown and the amount of money to fix it is more than we can get and the growth model stopped working.

Its like my uncle who's got 12 cars in his yard. Most of 'em don't run, but he's got 'em. He'll fix them "one day".

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 02:52 PM
Well it's too bad we can't have a dilapidated car registry where we can fine him or make him fix them.

ctchandler
08-26-2015, 03:01 PM
Downtown is the city's living room, used by people from all of the different bedrooms. When you don't have enough money to re-carpet even a small percentage of the bedrooms and to do it right, and the living room is still a work-in-progress, wouldn't money be better invested continuing work on the living room?

Bchris,
I really believe what you say makes sense, but at my age and with my health problems, I don't spend much time in the living room (downtown) anymore, so why should I be interested in new carpet there when my bedroom needs it and that's where I spend most of my time? Actually, I would vote yes for a MAPS project designed for what we are discussing. You did make a very good point.
C. T.

Just the facts
08-26-2015, 03:08 PM
At 45 I'm not all that old and I don't have any interest in waiting 25 years for any of this - bedroom, livingroom, or otherwise.

Filthy
08-26-2015, 03:56 PM
That said, when the carpet is filthy or worn out in your house you replace it.


You don't replace the carpet if you can't afford that much carpet.

With all due respect, I think you guys are looking at it all wrong. This is OKC, so when your carpet gets worn, just build/buy a new house out in the "newest, latest/greatest" suburban sprawl hotbed, and rent your "worn out carpet house" to the lol poors! 3-5 years later, you can do it again! Rinse and Repeat! Never have to worry about worn out carpet ever again.

mkjeeves
08-26-2015, 03:58 PM
Downtown is the city's living room, used by people from all of the different bedrooms. When you don't have enough money to re-carpet even a small percentage of the bedrooms and to do it right, and the living room is still a work-in-progress, wouldn't money be better invested continuing work on the living room?

Not even close. For the vast majority of Oklahoma City citizens it's primarily an amusement park they may or may not visit occasionally.

Urbanized
08-26-2015, 03:58 PM
With all due respect, I think you guys are looking at it all wrong. This is OKC, so when your carpet gets worn, just build/buy a new house out in the "newest, latest/greatest" suburban sprawl hotbed, and rent your "worn out carpet house" to the lol poors! 3-5 years later, you can do it again! Rinse and Repeat! Never have to worry about worn out carpet ever again.

Touché

bchris02
08-26-2015, 04:08 PM
Bchris,
I really believe what you say makes sense, but at my age and with my health problems, I don't spend much time in the living room (downtown) anymore, so why should I be interested in new carpet there when my bedroom needs it and that's where I spend most of my time? Actually, I would vote yes for a MAPS project designed for what we are discussing. You did make a very good point.
C. T.

This takes us back to the issue of priority. If there is only enough money for new carpet in a few rooms, how do you select which rooms get new carpet? How do you convince people in rooms not getting new carpet to vote for it for those who get selected?

NW 10th and Rockwell isn't important to a vast majority of people who live in OKC. Unlike downtown, most people in OKC never venture out there nor do they have a reason to.

OSUFan
08-26-2015, 04:21 PM
Not even close. For the vast majority of Oklahoma City citizens it's primarily an amusement park they may or may not visit occasionally.

By that logic no part of the city deserves any investment because the vast majority of citizen don't primarily live or work in any one place of OKC compared to the city as a whole.

Laramie
08-26-2015, 04:27 PM
At 45 I'm not all that old and I don't have any interest in waiting 25 years for any of this - bedroom, livingroom, or otherwise.

Has time passed?
Kerry, you're a young buck--same age as my daughter. I thought you were at least 25 when I first met :) you some 30 years ago at the old downtown library on 4th & Walker (Rem: free lance transit meetings). Got to admit, you look much younger now--lay off that fill & freeze, let the skin creators along with the crown of glory epitomize your age :D.

His (bchis02) analogy was simple and straight forward.

OKC has had extended periods of niagravated neglect; you're not going to wave a magic wand with overnight development. It's going to take as much time to fix up what was neglected for 20-25 years. May be the boost needed with those neighborhoods that are in revitalization.

mkjeeves
08-26-2015, 04:34 PM
Not even close. For the vast majority of Oklahoma City citizens it's primarily an amusement park they may or may not visit occasionally.


By that logic no part of the city deserves any investment because the vast majority of citizen don't primarily live or work in any one place of OKC compared to the city as a whole.

I didn't say downtown didn't deserve investment, I've said many times including in this thread I voted for it, helped pay for it for the last twenty plus years, (still am every time I buy something in OKC) and it's a good thing.

Otherwise, that's exactly on point. My downtown (or living room) for all practical purposes isn't Downtown OKC. It's over here on the west end of OKC where I live, have my office and do most of my shopping and a good bit of fun. It's different for just about everyone in the city, thus, why we need to work on all those parts too.

hoya
08-26-2015, 05:15 PM
Bchris,
I really believe what you say makes sense, but at my age and with my health problems, I don't spend much time in the living room (downtown) anymore, so why should I be interested in new carpet there when my bedroom needs it and that's where I spend most of my time? Actually, I would vote yes for a MAPS project designed for what we are discussing. You did make a very good point.
C. T.

No offense CT, but aren't you like 150 years old? Shouldn't you be spending all your money on hookers and drugs instead of carpet? Or like, praying for forgiveness to make up for anything bad you ever did? I can tell you for sure I'd be racking up some insane credit card bills, and laughing while I did so.

Just saying, it's a little bit different situation than the city finds itself in.

Edit: Point being, analogies to how we behave in our personal lives only go so far before they aren't applicable any more.

mkjeeves
08-26-2015, 05:17 PM
Its like my uncle who's got 12 cars in his yard. Most of 'em don't run, but he's got 'em. He'll fix them "one day".

Just like Downtown OKC before we started.

ctchandler
08-26-2015, 08:54 PM
No offense CT, but aren't you like 150 years old?

Hoyasooner,
Hey, give me a break, I'm only 108! I'm anxiously waiting for all of those folks older than me to croak so I can be the oldest toot in the world and be famous.
C. T.

bradh
08-26-2015, 09:10 PM
Well it's too bad we can't have a dilapidated car registry where we can fine him or make him fix them.

or a registry where they could sell cars to people who want to fix them. i think there are plenty of those folks out there :)

Teo9969
08-27-2015, 02:33 AM
Just like Downtown OKC before we started.

Downtown already had infrastructure. We didn't completely build downtown from scratch. It had businesses, restaurants, walkability, density. All these things that are 100% true of every great urban area of the world were extant in downtown. Sure they still need updating after years and years of work, but the bones were there.

NW10th Street west of I-44 has never been great. It was never even good. It was poorly planned to start, it was a grave mistake to start, and a complete misallocation of resources both public and private from the outset. There are no good bones. There is no good infrastructure. It was set up in the 1960s/70s to FAIL. And it has. It has completed its mission and now those who have "invested" in the area (and similar other areas) are acting surprised.

That seems to be the problem in all these conversations we have on this website. Those who support suburban sprawl will never come to grips with the reality that it is planned failure, intentional or otherwise. It completely ignores everything about what has made good planning since the decline of nomadism thousands of years ago. That's not even to say that everyone should live in an area as dense as Manhattan. The real point is that for an area to succeed, there needs to be a compelling marketplace and those simply don't exist in most areas of OKC (or other sprawled areas of the United States of America) and would be prohibitively expensive to fabricate in rundown areas of the city.

As Urbanized said BILLIONS of dollars. Unless you're ready to pay 20% sales tax, Lantana and its neighbors are going to have to continue to suffer. That doesn't mean the city isn't serious when it says it wants to get better…it just means the city is being wise about spending the limited resources that it does have.

mkjeeves
08-27-2015, 08:22 AM
and yet, OKC suburbia is so poor it's been able to cough up a billion dollars to spend on its amusement park; has most of the jobs; residents and tax base that runs the city. How many more billions in subsidy does downtown want from the neighborhoods?

bradh
08-27-2015, 08:37 AM
I live out towards Deer Creek (in OKC city limits) north of Kilpatrick, and even though Teo has essentially called people of my kind racist in this thread, he's absolutely right on why this "MAPS for Neighborhoods" is a terrible idea. mkjeeves from what I gather you own and run a business along NW 10th (or in that area) so of course this is a passionate subject for you.

mkjeeves
08-27-2015, 08:46 AM
I live out towards Deer Creek (in OKC city limits) north of Kilpatrick, and even though Teo has essentially called people of my kind racist in this thread, he's absolutely right on why this "MAPS for Neighborhoods" is a terrible idea. mkjeeves from what I gather you own and run a business along NW 10th (or in that area) so of course this is a passionate subject for you.

No secret, I've posted it here before, I live and work east of Lake Overholser. Not on 10th, same ward, but not that far away from 10th. I've lived and my primary workplace has been in the same area for decades, but my work takes me all over the metro and the state. Once in a blue moon, downtown even. My situation isn't much different than most residents in that way.

I'm not pushing for anything in my hood at the expense of all other parts. As I said, Lantana is a poster child. A maps for neighborhoods would be for all neighborhoods. I do like the idea to split money into each ward as a possibility for discussion.

Don't let Teo beat you up, downtown is the new white flight zone. Just ask him, or read his post about it upthread. It's the typical well known result of gentrification. This isn't really the thread for that discussion though. IMO.

bombermwc
08-27-2015, 08:51 AM
The only way maps for neighborhoods is going to work, is if you put a little money into all areas for some sort of work. A lot of people get annoyed at seeing so much of the city ignored by maps programs and so much focused on downtown. I would argue that downtown's revitalization is a MAJOR player in bringing OKC to where it is today. But I can also appreciate the fact that even driving down roads in some sectors, is a major hassle because they're so bad. There are areas guaranteed to flood when there isn't much rain. We've got water and sewer lines that are still made from clay. The list goes on and on. These are the things that are TOTALLY unsexy to do, but are absolutely necessary to keep the city functioning. The same story is being told all over the U.S. with our aging infrastructure. All the pretty lipstick on downtown doesn't mean anything if the water lines can't keep your crapper flowing at home or your house floods when there's an inch of rain.

bradh
08-27-2015, 08:52 AM
I'm perfectly comfortable in my decision, no one is "beating me up." We love downtown (and other inner loop neighborhoods as well) and spend a good chunk of our free time down there, despite living 18 miles or so out. Despite not living there I'm a firm believer that an attractive and strong core is a bigger plus (and better return) than trying to spruce up pockets around town.

(sidenote: we should have an OKCTalk business directory on here of posters who own/operate their businesses so we support our own, like yourself)

mkjeeves
08-27-2015, 08:56 AM
I love downtown too. What I don't love is the downtown zealots it's brought out of the woodwork. Public votes are a good thing and we approved of the MAPS programs so far. But the public can only do as much as what the leadership puts in front of them or what they force through grass roots efforts.

betts
08-27-2015, 09:11 AM
The only way maps for neighborhoods is going to work, is if you put a little money into all areas for some sort of work. A lot of people get annoyed at seeing so much of the city ignored by maps programs and so much focused on downtown. I would argue that downtown's revitalization is a MAJOR player in bringing OKC to where it is today. But I can also appreciate the fact that even driving down roads in some sectors, is a major hassle because they're so bad. There are areas guaranteed to flood when there isn't much rain. We've got water and sewer lines that are still made from clay. The list goes on and on. These are the things that are TOTALLY unsexy to do, but are absolutely necessary to keep the city functioning. The same story is being told all over the U.S. with our aging infrastructure. All the pretty lipstick on downtown doesn't mean anything if the water lines can't keep your crapper flowing at home or your house floods when there's an inch of rain.

I think roads and sewer lines are better served by bond issues. To me, MAPS is quality of life/leisure time projects. Park creation and/or improvements and creation of gathering spaces in neighborhoods is a better use of the MAPS brand, IMO. And listening to Pete White, David Greenwell and Ed Shadid talking about an RTA in Council, I fully expect transit to be a big budget item on the next MAPS. Good transit is even better for neighborhoods than it is for downtown, especially with the streetcar covering the CBD, Auto Alley, Midtown and Deep Deuce.

bradh
08-27-2015, 09:31 AM
I think roads and sewer lines are better served by bond issues. To me, MAPS is quality of life/leisure time projects. Park creation and/or improvements and creation of gathering spaces in neighborhoods is a better use of the MAPS brand, IMO. And listening to Pete White, David Greenwell and Ed Shadid talking about an RTA in Council, I fully expect transit to be a big budget item on the next MAPS. Good transit is even better for neighborhoods than it is for downtown, especially with the streetcar covering the CBD, Auto Alley, Midtown and Deep Deuce.

Good point, good transit from neighborhoods that brings people to the core that connects people to the attractions (via streetcar) is basically an extension of downtown to the neighborhoods. That's a win.

hoya
08-27-2015, 09:55 AM
and yet, OKC suburbia is so poor it's been able to cough up a billion dollars to spend on its amusement park; has most of the jobs; residents and tax base that runs the city. How many more billions in subsidy does downtown want from the neighborhoods?

The suburbs, collectively, have a lot of people and money. No suburb individually is all that influential. And that's the deal.

mkjeeves, what makes you think that the voters in this city care about your neighborhood? Most of them never go over there, ever. Those that do just drive though it, and they make sure not to stop. Why should some people in Deer Creek want to spend their tax dollars fixing up an area they will never go? The answer is, they won't.


The only way maps for neighborhoods is going to work, is if you put a little money into all areas for some sort of work. A lot of people get annoyed at seeing so much of the city ignored by maps programs and so much focused on downtown. I would argue that downtown's revitalization is a MAJOR player in bringing OKC to where it is today. But I can also appreciate the fact that even driving down roads in some sectors, is a major hassle because they're so bad. There are areas guaranteed to flood when there isn't much rain. We've got water and sewer lines that are still made from clay. The list goes on and on. These are the things that are TOTALLY unsexy to do, but are absolutely necessary to keep the city functioning. The same story is being told all over the U.S. with our aging infrastructure. All the pretty lipstick on downtown doesn't mean anything if the water lines can't keep your crapper flowing at home or your house floods when there's an inch of rain.

The problem is, putting "a little money into all areas" won't fix any of the problems you name. It's going to cost billions to replace that much sewer and water pipe, and repave that much road. Multiple billions.

mkjeeves
08-27-2015, 10:08 AM
The suburbs, collectively, have a lot of people and money. No suburb individually is all that influential. And that's the deal.

mkjeeves, what makes you think that the voters in this city care about your neighborhood? Most of them never go over there, ever. Those that do just drive though it, and they make sure not to stop. Why should some people in Deer Creek want to spend their tax dollars fixing up an area they will never go? The answer is, they won't.



The problem is, putting "a little money into all areas" won't fix any of the problems you name. It's going to cost billions to replace that much sewer and water pipe, and repave that much road. Multiple billions.

This has been asked and answered about a dozen times and dozen ways. Here's another way, everyone lives in their neighborhood. Log roll them like every other maps log roll, such that everyone gets something.

And, count on votes from good citizens who want to do the right thing. I voted for Maps money for downtown primarily because it needed doing. I voted for Maps for Kids primarily because it needed doing. I knew my only child wouldn't benefit at the time. Crazy huh?