The MAPS 4 Citizen Advisory Board is set to approve a $33 million beautification master plan for various improvements throughout Oklahoma City.

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify1.jpg


MAPS 4 was approved by voters on September 14, 2021. Part of the anticipated $1.1 billion budget was allocated to help transform the appearance of Oklahoma City with targeted investments in beautification.

The projects will cost approximately $28 million while $5 million will be placed in an operating fund to provide permanent staff dedicated to beautification and ongoing maintenance.



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify2.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify3.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify4.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify5.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify6.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify7.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify8.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify9.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify10.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify11.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify12.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify13.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify14.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify15.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify16.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify17.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify18.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify19.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify20.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify21.jpg



HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify22.jpg

Sorely needed.

Ambitious but VERY exciting. I just hope they keep up with it all too. That's a lot of plants to keep properly maintained so they don't just get grown over by grass.

Definitely an amazing way to spruce up the blah look of all of these concrete areas.

:congrats::congrats::congrats:

Ambitious but VERY exciting. I just hope they keep up with it all too. That's a lot of plants to keep properly maintained so they don't just get grown over by grass.

Definitely an amazing way to spruce up the blah look of all of these concrete areas.

Maintenance. . . X1000!! Does anyone know if there is any $ committed to maintenance?

Maintenance. . . X1000!! Does anyone know if there is any $ committed to maintenance?

From the original post:


The projects will cost approximately $28 million while $5 million will be placed in an operating fund to provide permanent staff dedicated to beautification and ongoing maintenance.

Oklahoma City should implement a policy that mandates tract house neighborhood developers to plant trees along the roads within these neighborhoods, similar to the requirements for commercial projects. This is everywhere and so painful to look at.19120

Oklahoma City should implement a policy that mandates tract house neighborhood developers to plant trees along the roads within these neighborhoods, similar to the requirements for commercial projects. This is everywhere and so painful to look at.19120

What are the policies for new neighborhoods? I know sidewalks have to be installed, but is that about it?

From the original post:

This is one of the most important projects the city is undertaking. Freeways, expressways, medians etc. are the front porch to any city and we've sorely lacked in these areas. Living out of state now, any time I drive in, the lack of attention to these areas is astonishing relative to the momentum this city has. A task force needs to be assigned to weed control, trash pick, transient clean up along the interstates, exits and medians. Just off the top of my head, the I-44 and Penn exit is such a blight. Should be a showcase as it leads to Penn Square Mall, Oak etc. yet the city has never attempted to remedy it. Look at the below pics I just took from google maps that were shot last month. Looks like something you'd see from Southside Chicago. City can and must do better.


1912119122

These beautification projects will really hit the spot; especially the Route 66 overhang.


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify3.jpg

This is one of the most important projects the city is undertaking. Freeways, expressways, medians etc. are the front porch to any city and we've sorely lacked in these areas. Living out of state now, any time I drive in, the lack of attention to these areas is astonishing relative to the momentum this city has. A task force needs to be assigned to weed control, trash pick, transient clean up along the interstates, exits and medians. Just off the top of my head, the I-44 and Penn exit is such a blight. Should be a showcase as it leads to Penn Square Mall, Oak etc. yet the city has never attempted to remedy it. Look at the below pics I just took from google maps that were shot last month. Looks like something you'd see from Southside Chicago. City can and must do better.


1912119122

It's not precisely what this beautification is for but that old gas station lot at Penn and 44 really needs something to happen to it. I assume soil remediation would have to happen on account of the gas tanks, so presumably an expensive issue.

It's not precisely what this beautification is for but that old gas station lot at Penn and 44 really needs something to happen to it. I assume soil remediation would have to happen on account of the gas tanks, so presumably an expensive issue.

I'm 99% sure it was built after the Great Gas Tank Replacement Project of the late 1980s. So, soil remediation shouldn't as big an expense. Homeless population by the creek is a bigger issue, IIRC. Although Pete would know much better than I.

It's not precisely what this beautification is for but that old gas station lot at Penn and 44 really needs something to happen to it. I assume soil remediation would have to happen on account of the gas tanks, so presumably an expensive issue.

I don't think remediation is the issue.

7-11 had it under contract but the City let the ridiculous situation at I-44 & Penn go on for so long, they backed out.

A much better job has been done in the last year or so, but the City let that go and continue to build for decades. I live nearby and was part of a neighborhood group that was all over this for many, many years.

It's actually pretty decent now so hopefully it will soon sell. It's owned by the eExpress people and don't know why they just don't build there. Frankly, they've been terrible property owners.

HTTP://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/beautify20.jpg



Surprised this says nothing about sidewalks. This stretch of Reno doesn't have sidewalks for some unknown reason.

Surprised this says nothing about sidewalks. This stretch of Reno doesn't have sidewalks for some unknown reason.

Sidewalks are a separate project, although I don't see anything under the Better Streets initiative for that area.

There may be another funding source.

Love this.

One of the cheapest ways to help dress things up, caulk. Caulking or sealing the cracks and joints along interstates to prevent the inevitable weeds and plants that will grow out of them.

Sidewalks are a separate project, although I don't see anything under the Better Streets initiative for that area.

There may be another funding source.

This is what l found under the 2017 bond issue. Sidewalks start on project 212, l believe.

https://data.okc.gov/portal/page/viewer?datasetName=PROP%20%201%20-%20Streets&view=table

From the original post: The projects will cost approximately $28 million while $5 million will be placed in an operating fund to provide permanent staff dedicated to beautification and ongoing maintenance.

While this would add jobs to the local economy, I feel that $28M is significantly under budget for the visions taking place. If they allocated something along the lines of $80M-$100M, They could completely go all out with this, such as the beautification of bridges along these roads and whatnot. But this seems like this is budgeted for disappointment. I want to be optimistic, but I can't see all of this happening with such a strict budget.

I'm with Oski.

Count me as disappointed with the scope here. I'm sure it was the "mission" that was handed to the design task force, but this initiative feels aimed at momentarily impressing people driving 60-70 mph. I wish the $28M could be directed solely at neighborhood and local corridor beautification (e.g., street trees, which are sorely needed in almost every neighborhood not named Heritage Hills or Mesta Park"). I couldn't care less about whether long haul truckers think OKC's overpasses and cloverleafs are appropriately landscaped. I want the City to create thriving, beautiful neighborhoods and local commercial corridors that make OKC a great place to live.

It's a start, just like sidewalks and trails and park improvements have been continuous and incremental.

OKC is massive geographically and you have to start somewhere.

I'm with Oski.

Count me as disappointed with the scope here. I'm sure it was the "mission" that was handed to the design task force, but this initiative feels aimed at momentarily impressing people driving 60-70 mph. I wish the $28M could be directed solely at neighborhood and local corridor beautification (e.g., street trees, which are sorely needed in almost every neighborhood not named Heritage Hills or Mesta Park"). I couldn't care less about whether long haul truckers think OKC's overpasses and cloverleafs are appropriately landscaped. I want the City to create thriving, beautiful neighborhoods and local commercial corridors that make OKC a great place to live.

The vast majority of people who visit OKC will be going through these areas. As we look to welcome the world in 2028 for the Olympics, these projects are going to be front and center. Maybe they will even entice a few folks to move here, at which point they can begin agitating for better neighborhood beautification.

This is very strategic in allocating funds - gussy up the areas with highest throughput/where first impressions are most likely to be formed. That "Airport Approach" project in particular seems really well planned and aligned with targeting visitors to OKC.

[QUOTE=Oski;1275372]Oklahoma City should implement a policy that mandates tract house neighborhood developers to plant trees along the roads within these neighborhoods, similar to the requirements for commercial projects. This is everywhere and so painful to look at.19120[/QUOTE

South May Avenue tree canopy was devastated recently with Asplundh shearing half the tree canopy of each tree. Most trees left were so damaged they had to be removed entirely. My neighborhood was built 15 years ago and the requirement was one 2 inch diameter tree in the front yard.

What are the policies for new neighborhoods? I know sidewalks have to be installed, but is that about it?

I believe all new construction is required to have a minimum 2-3 inch caliper tree. I think two on corner lots

Problem is trees need watered heavily and maintained the first few years before it’s established and can survive. Many homeowners don’t then take proper care so they don’t live. I saw that play out in my last neighborhood where after 7 years only about 5 of the 70 homes had trees remaining

Same thing occurred along south western around 104th. Not only does it look terrible, but I’m not sure the trees will survive.

[QUOTE=Oski;1275372]Oklahoma City should implement a policy that mandates tract house neighborhood developers to plant trees along the roads within these neighborhoods, similar to the requirements for commercial projects. This is everywhere and so painful to look at.19120[/QUOTE

South May Avenue tree canopy was devastated recently with Asplundh shearing half the tree canopy of each tree. Most trees left were so damaged they had to be removed entirely. My neighborhood was built 15 years ago and the requirement was one 2 inch diameter tree in the front yard.

And that property owners nurture them and replace them when they die?

30 year ago, when I lived in the Heritage Hills area, I began to notice old and large trees planted close to sidewalks had grown up and either raised or fractured the walks. I think trees should be at least 5 feet inboard of the sidewalk. Also, the area of sidewalk to the street is usually easement and utility lines.

I respectfully disagree Dob. Street trees should absolutely go in the 5-6' wide planting strip between the sidewalk and curb. If one visits the most charming and beloved cities across the U.S. both large and small, this is the requirement in both urban and first ring historic suburb areas because its obvious how it changes the look of the neighborhood. Locally, compare Mesta Park (lots of street trees and therefore street canopy) and Jefferson Park (street trees very inconsistent) - one certainly "feels" better than the other even if folks have trouble describing why they feel that way (pssst....it's the tree canopy).

Dollar for dollar, I honestly don't think there is a single better investment that the City could make for improving its urban core neighborhoods than making sure they all had continuous sidewalks and consistent street trees in the planting strip between the sidewalk and the curb. My hypothesis is that over 10 years as those trees matured, the property values in some of the core neighborhoods that have seen less investment would more than double.

Trees should always go between the sidewalk and streets because they create psychological and physical barriers from cars that make pedestrians feel safe and thus walk more. Of course, there are cases where poor planning has resulted in infrastructure in the way, but that should be the exception. Otherwise, it should be standard practice.

To Dob and coates' points, the old brick pavers used for sidewalks in mature East Coast cities like Baltimore or Philadelphia react much better to root system growth. The bricks can move independently which creates a smooth, wavy path. Probably a nuisance if you're in a wheelchair but no trouble at all if you walk. Also makes the city feel established, lived in, timeless.

Typical concrete slabs can definitely get over time by tree roots. They crack, sit at weird angles, and sometimes create sharp drop-offs. Not saying one is better than the other (certainly concrete is cheaper) but just something interesting I've noticed.

It also depends on what tree you plant. Some are more likely than others to have roots that "pop" up out of the ground (bald cypress for example). I believe Oak does that a lot as well. But sweetgum, as an example, does not (if you dont mind all the seed pods). There's no perfect answer on this one. I think you'll find just as many hate the planting near the street as those that hate it being in the middle of the yard.

I love the look of the ones closer to the street and how they grow to create a canopy of sorts. But in Oklahoma weather, well that creates some issues for downed limbs a LOT more often than it does in the NE. They get a hurricane in the same area once every what 20 years? We get this stuff every year. Oklahoma is not the Northeast.

I remember talking to an architect about plans for the potential new streetscape along 23rd and he said there are steel circles that can be put down into the ground around the tree so the roots don't grow out and mess up the street, but rather down. I am not sure of the cost associated with doing it that way, but I am sure it is cheaper than having to redo the street when the roots mess them up in the future.

This is a good start for OKC! In my opinion, however, it seems $28 million is a very low end for beautification. My perception being more like $90-100 million. If we are going to show off our city with tourists, we need to project a clean and kept city, especially if we are going to host a few of the 2028 Olympics events. I am a big advocate for continued growth in our city's tree canopy.

Yeah, it definitely seems like a couple of the examples they used alone could use up nearly the entire budget of the proposed beautification budget.

They are usually trimming limbs that might bring down a line in an ice storm.

i personally think they should have the gateway signs at the urban area boundaries vs city limits. it's a much better image to say "Welcome to OKC" where there's plenty of development to start/follow on vs. having it in the endless prarie even before some suburbs begin. ...

Also, I echo the earlier post about tree placement. At least in the urban area, we need trees to be placed between the street and sidewalk - to encourage pedestrianism while pushing the canopy out to cover more of the road/concrete. OKC should consider adding a city department dedicated to foliage/landscaping/canopy maintenance.

I mean this isn't just about tree replacement. When is OKC going to man the f@ck up and start spending bigger bucks on beautification because based on Pete's post how much of that can realistically get done under 30 mil. They did say maps 4 is now going to be over a billion dollar collection of projects after it was in the 900 millions. More money allocated to this would be nice.

I applaud this effort. Whenever I go home, it's always one of the most jarring things to me, the general shoddiness of things in many parts of OKC.

With respect to these particular projects, I can't argue with any of them. Although I wonder if the limited money available would be better spent on slightly less ambitious projects that are spread out in more places rather than simply a few marquis projects here and there.

The other aspect to this though really is the private sector and private businesses. I know there is only so much the city can do but better landscaping in front of buildings, more plantings, more trees (many, many more trees), and just general maintenance of shopping centers and parking lots would work wonders for the overall civic psyche.

I mean this isn't just about tree replacement. When is OKC going to man the f@ck up and start spending bigger bucks on beautification because based on Pete's post how much of that can realistically get done under 30 mil. They did say maps 4 is now going to be over a billion dollar collection of projects after it was in the 900 millions. More money allocated to this would be nice.

I think an area to start with would be raising building OKC commercial permit landscaping percentages or commercial sign ordinances. Despite some of the negative things that have been said about Edmond, the sign ordinance and required landscaping really does help certain business districts look nicer compared to some of the commercially zoned areas of OKC.

Ideally, look at the Lowes/Uptown Grocery shopping center on Covell and Kelly in Edmond, compared to the some of the "grandfathered" shopping districts in Edmond with standard signage and seas of asphalt for parking.

Essentially, try to hold commercial entities to a higher standard to help compliment landscaping and appearance efforts by the City of OKC.

^^^^ yep

Every bit of beautification throughout our city will help--looks as though they have identified some high traffic areas in
immediate need of attention.

Prompts to our city.

It'll be nice to see most of this done before the olympics folks come to visit in 2028 too.

Every bit of beautification throughout our city will help--looks as though they have identified some high traffic areas in
immediate need of attention.

Prompts to our city.

I am more of a quality over quantity type guy.

When MAPS 4 was first introduced, this was one of the things I was looking forward to the most. I feel like our city has just given up on landscaping and upkeep especially along freeways.

I am more of a quality over quantity type guy.

I agree on this front. We can't fix the world all at once. But if we start a trend with some good quality projects done now, then the next time, we can add more, then more, then more.

I also agree the putting requirements in for development would be better. Fix the signs and landscaping ordinances. It would be nice to find a way to "encourage" existing businesses to similarly spend a little to make some headway into that same effort. Like with anything, it depends on where the business is too. If you're in the middle of an industrial park, it dont think it matters. But if you face a main artery, well i think you can put some effort into sprucing it up a bit. Native plants, drought tolerant, etc. That way we're also not then spending millions watering tropical annuals that aren't meant to be here that then die off in the winter too. Landscaping isn't all plants.

Offer tax incentives to property owners for city beautification efforts.

I agree on this front. We can't fix the world all at once. But if we start a trend with some good quality projects done now, then the next time, we can add more, then more, then more.

I also agree the putting requirements in for development would be better. Fix the signs and landscaping ordinances. It would be nice to find a way to "encourage" existing businesses to similarly spend a little to make some headway into that same effort. Like with anything, it depends on where the business is too. If you're in the middle of an industrial park, it dont think it matters. But if you face a main artery, well i think you can put some effort into sprucing it up a bit. Native plants, drought tolerant, etc. That way we're also not then spending millions watering tropical annuals that aren't meant to be here that then die off in the winter too. Landscaping isn't all plants.

Well said, We don't have a planting problem, but we have a serious maintenance problem!

One suggestion l would have to the city and/or state is that they spend $ up front to cover small grassy sections with landscape tarp and rock so they don't have to ever mow it. See Phoenix highways.

The amount of trees is the one thing i desperately miss about Tulsa. I moved to OKC 3 years ago and I love it so much and would never move back to Tulsa. But when I go home to Tulsa to visit family, I’m always amazed at the difference! Tulsa is much prettier and I really hope okc improves in this area!!

The amount of trees is the one thing i desperately miss about Tulsa. I moved to OKC 3 years ago and I love it so much and would never move back to Tulsa. But when I go home to Tulsa to visit family, I’m always amazed at the difference! Tulsa is much prettier and I really hope okc improves in this area!!

Two different climates, despite only 100 miles in separation?

Look at a terrain map of Oklahoma from above and Tulsa and eastern Oklahoma supports many more trees and I would assume on average receive more rainfall. I-35 is literally the dividing line of the plains and OKC is right on the edge, or jumping off point to the west. It's almost the opposite in Arkansas, as the western half of the state has many more trees and overall more "green" compared to the eastern half

OKC being on the plains doesn’t excuse it from having such large sections of the city be so profoundly fugly. The aesthetics of the city weren’t a priority for a very long time and it shows. Hopefully this begins to turn the tide. The city obviously wants to make a good impression for the Olympic events.

Two different climates, despite only 100 miles in separation?

Look at a terrain map of Oklahoma from above and Tulsa and eastern Oklahoma supports many more trees and I would assume on average receive more rainfall. I-35 is literally the dividing line of the plains and OKC is right on the edge, or jumping off point to the west. It's almost the opposite in Arkansas, as the western half of the state has many more trees and overall more "green" compared to the eastern half

Sure, but OU planted a bunch of trees when the university was founded and they look great. OKC could definitely beautify the city by planting more trees.

19161

I’m excited to have this improvement! I really think they could work with the 39th Street District and make this a really cool gateway into our city’s LGBT District - thinking rainbow lighting / signage on the bridge.

Sure, but OU planted a bunch of trees when the university was founded and they look great. OKC could definitely beautify the city by planting more trees.

A little to unpack with this.

OKC is on a transition line. That's why NW OKC is flat and no trees while Choctaw has lots of them. When you rely on nature to maintain a plant, then it has to fit with the climate zone its in. NW OKC is drier than SE OKC...that's just how it is. For OU, it's closer to the river (think water TABLE, not just the river path) and also has OU watering the plants. There's enough water to grow the thing. So just saying OU planted trees 100 years ago, doesn't mean that they would just grow and OKC is way behind on that. We had the "up with trees" campaign and some of those are still around. But it's not just that easy. You have to plan what nature can maintain unless WE maintain it. meaning, you have to water those things. In those first 5 years or so, if you dont water them regularly ALL YEAR (not just summer), they tend to die. Just check how many trees die in new neighborhoods even with sprinkler systems.

Trees are fickle pickles. And you have to have the right thing. And please do not plant Bradford Pears...omg.

^^^^^^

And along with this, windstorms, and ice storms.......

Really informative post, bomber. Thanks for educating me on it.

I first started coming to OKC from Ponca City where there were great towering Pecan trees, Elm Trees, Sycamores and other great trees. I thought the drive to OKC and OKC/Norman were the most tree barren places I'd ever seen. After college I moved to Tulsa and again enjoyed great tree landscape. However, now when I drive OKC and 35 North from here it is amazing the amount of coverage and maturity the trees show from 60 years ago. If you could compare pictures you see that we have greened considerably. OKC is much greener and prettier than it ever has been, but it will never be timberland.

Had the opportunity to drive from OKC through Wichita, KC, Des Moines, Madison, to Milwaukee to see family. Holy smokes, I know the geography, topography, and climate don't do OKC any favors but it was such a stark contrast. Everything just seemed so much better maintained.

Most notable was the lack of trash/junk in the medians of those places. Maybe it's because there hasn't been rain in like 2 1/2 months, but there's just a ton of loose trash seemingly everywhere within the metro. I work near the airport and the drive to and from downtown is honestly depressing. If I were a first-time visitor to OKC and saw that I would think the city is a dump. Just so many plastic bags stuck against chain link fences. Should be the city flag.

Again, there are so many things working against OKC that the city has no control over, so you can't blame anyone. You can't blame the city for people littering, either. However, you don't have to plant a forest of trees to maintain a certain level of aesthetic appeal for your city. Having some native grasses/hardscape that is actually maintained along roadways/overpasses would go a long way. I don't know, something would be nice.

I'm so proud of OKC and the city has come so very far in a ton of areas. But aesthetically the city has lagged way behind its peers and even cities much smaller than itself. Looking forward to the beautification projects but these should just be the tip of the iceberg.

^

This is an area where OKC should be ashamed of itself.

I walk a ton throughout the city and going at that speed along sidewalks (where there are any) you really see all the weeds and trash and neglect. And speaking of sidewalks, my neighborhood had them installed about a decade ago and there has been absolutely zero maintenance since; weeds splitting the pavement, tree limbs blocking the way.

A big part of the issue is we keep our sales tax artificially low to accommodate MAPS and now the new arena. Even with that extra penny, the OKC sales tax is about average in the state.

That means the billions put towards MAPS and now the arena is basically taken from City operations, and sales tax is their only funding mechanism. It shows.

^

This is an area where OKC should be ashamed of itself.

I walk a ton throughout the city and going at that speed along sidewalks (where there are any) you really see all the weeds and trash and neglect. And speaking of sidewalks, my neighborhood had them installed about a decade ago and there has been absolutely zero maintenance since; weeds splitting the pavement, tree limbs blocking the way.

A big part of the issue is we keep our sales tax artificially low to accommodate MAPS and now the new arena. Even with that extra penny, the OKC sales tax is about average in the state.

That means the billions put towards MAPS and now the arena is basically taken from City operations, and sales tax is their only funding mechanism. It shows.

I assume the giant size of the metro doesn't help things. But yes, I would be willing to have my taxes pay to keep our city not looking like trash all the time. I think that's a worthwhile cause.

On a positive side note. Milwaukee and Madison rock. Most of Wisconsin in general was really nice and was overall beautiful to spend time in. The city/state could learn a thing or two from them.