Maps 4 Neighborhoods

[Plutonic Panda]

I want to see a metro-wide BRT network with dedicated lanes in some spots.

[OKCRT]

Well darn. I was just getting all excited about these ideas and then a few negative comments dampened my enthusiasm. I don't necessarily mind criticism but not when it is caustic, overly critical and ridicules ideas of well intentioned citizens.

Not a good idea to hand out = money to all wards. I think it should be done by income level. The wards with the lowest income levels prob. need the most help. Far north and south OKC don't need near as much help as the central areas as they are doing just fine. Use the money in the areas that need the most help. But handing 62 mil to every ward is an unfair process IMO and would not be the best use of the money.

[Pete]

Just to be clear, nothing will be handed out.

Most likely, there would be a city-wide sidewalk initiative -- for example -- and each ward would get a good chunk of that.

Some wards may need more sidewalks, some may need more lighting or bus shelters or bike lanes or parks...

There seems to be the misconception that there will be a $62 million check cut to each councilperson and they'll have some sort of slush fund.

Just like in all MAPS, there will be specific projects with budgets and oversight committees.

[Spartan]

As a reminder, there will be a big general obligation bond that may be voted on concurrently with MAPS 4 next year.

Some streets and infrastructure will be covered but even with half a billion and a big G.O. Bond, we won't come close to touching all the needed sidewalks, bus shelters, lighting and just basics that the huge majority of this city is lacking.

I find it embarrassing and even shameful to see someone in a wheelchair going down Classen because there is no sidewalk (witnessed this several times). I also saw a blind school-aged kid walking in the street on Western near 23rd, banging his cane against the curb. Just minutes later, I saw a young mother with her stroller in the street with a toddler trailing behind. It made my stomach hurt.

And this is in the areas that are supposed to now be much improved. Take a little trip to the NE side or Capitol Hill or even big parts of NW OKC.

This is tax money paid by everyone with the fundamental idea of improving ALL of OKC, not just the core. That was the original mission and remains to this day.

I agree but you need to decide are we doing just downtown (no, we agree there), all of the city, or something in between? ALL of OKC isn't the same as the little trip you recommended to Capitol Hill, NE OKC, and parts of NW OKC. I agree that is where the need is.

I would be in favor of "MAPS 4 Neighborhoods" apportioned to each ward proportionately based on low-income residents. That's not the only thing that would work, but at the end of the day, this absolutely has to have some guiding mission AND specific qualifying standards. There HAS to be a strategy about where we invest. All wards equal is NOT a strategy.

By the way, here's why in the past we focused on downtown: It is neither north nor south. Downtown is everyone's, and actually, when jobs are moving north, strengthening jobs downtown benefits the south side and all other sides of town equally.

Also, is downtown working for everyone? Most of the investment has been all energy headquarters (great basket in which to put all our eggs) and housing. Has anything been left behind, perhaps? What about these bike "lanes" that the latest edition of VeloCity brags about? Did VeloCity suddenly become a publication for another city that has bike lanes, because I was confused by this. Especially considering the chamber's advocacy role in actually uprooting the recently-finished bike lanes on Walker because of the multiple new parking garages. But just read VeloCity for more about how pro-bike they are and the amazing abundance of bike infrastructure that should make someone want to move to OKC and bike!

[Pete]

All wards are not equal in terms of each project.

As stated, some may need a bigger percentage of sidewalks, others may need park improvements.

The idea is that all wards deserve an equal share of the pie although how they use it -- within the pre-approved categories -- will vary by need and what better way to determine that than by the people who actually live in these areas?

[Spartan]

I'm confused as to what way that is.

[Just the facts]

What overarching public need is MAPS for Neighborhoods trying to address?

[OKCinsomniac]

Reminder that the next MAPS 4 meeting is tonight ...

I'd just like to gently point out that these are not "MAPS 4" meetings. These are "MAPS for a particular group's agenda" meetings.

Every MAPS has been "for neighborhoods." What would your neighborhood be like if it weren't for MAPS, MAPS for Kids, MAPS 3? It's completely disingenuous to say that any part of MAPS' success has been at the "expense" of any particular neighborhood or neighborhoods.

MAPS and its various incarnations have worked because they have given us large, game-changing debt-free public projects / amenities that in turn attract private investment and people / talent that allow our companies and businesses to grow so we can, you know, have better jobs 'n stuff.

[Pete]

^

For what it's worth, no one involved in this is claiming neighborhoods haven't benefited.

I'd encourage everyone to listen to that podcast I posted before rushing to judgement; or better yet listen then go to the next meeting.

[Laramie]

Keep this process simple... Give those Wards the money ($62. 5 million) and let them decide what they want to do with it. If they want to pave their streets & side walks in cobblestone, go for it.

Those Wards who need or want to invest in sidewalks, boardwalks, neighborhood planters, lighted hood streetscape or an elaborate peer across the creek with a spillover--let them decide.

The City can take the other $400 million & decide if they want to expand streetcar transit & canal river walk, spruce up the south banks of the Oklahoma River with a Skydance Tower to complement the Skydance Bridge (just ideas).

Let's not turn this process into a damsels-in-distress living in melancholy waiting on a government WIC food voucher.

You know your neighborhood better than any outsiders. Let's the individual Wards (neighborhoods) along with their counsilmember vet through this process with their own creativity.

[Just the facts]

Those pictures are all examples of "place making". What place are they going to make in each Ward?

[David]

I like the idea of sidewalks everywhere, that would be a significant quality of life increase for everyone, the poor on up.

I'm a bit less in favor of each ward getting a chuck of cash to spend as they will. Sounds like a great way to potentially waste 500 million dollars. Just because someone lives in an area it doesn't mean they have the slightly clue what would be good for that area. Residence does not equal local expertise, and it definitely doesn't mean sound financial management.

[Pete]

Just to be clear, there is absolutely no talk of giving each ward an allotment of discretionary funds.

Rather, it would be more like:

$100 million for sidewalks
$100 million for bike lanes and trails
$100 million for parks
$100 million for schools
$100 million for mass transit

Then, each ward would get $62 million worth of those things and the percentages by category would vary as needed.

The people in each ward may get a say in what they want more of and less of, but I doubt it would go much farther than that.


I'm just using this as a broad example to steer away from some of the concerns expressed about how MAPS funds may end being used.

[Laramie]

Those pictures are all examples of "place making". What place are they going to make in each Ward?

What examples would you suggest?

Just examples of what some wards may want to do with their allocation.

Now, you could give each Ward a minimum of $50 million x8 ($400 million total) and allocate $100 million according to needs assessment, population and/or sq. mile areas in those wards...

...or whatever formula used.

[Laramie]

just to be clear, there is absolutely no talk of giving each ward an allotment of discretionary funds.

Rather, it would be more like:

$100 million for sidewalks
$100 million for bike lanes and trails
$100 million for parks
$100 million for schools
$100 million for mass transit

then, each ward would get $62 million worth of those things and the percentages by category would vary as needed.

The people in each ward may get a say in what they want more of and less of, but i doubt it would go much farther than that.


I'm just using this as a broad example to steer away from some of the concerns expressed about how maps funds may end being used.

Got it!

[Laramie]

I like the idea of sidewalks everywhere, that would be a significant quality of life increase for everyone, the poor on up.

I'm a bit less in favor of each ward getting a chuck of cash to spend as they will. Sounds like a great way to potentially waste 500 million dollars. Just because someone lives in an area it doesn't mean they have the slightly clue what would be good for that area. Residence does not equal local expertise, and it definitely doesn't mean sound financial management.

What does?

At least the wards/neighborhoods would be the one's to waste it; it's their money. Doesn't mean that you totally disregard the experts. Would hope that some levels of expertise would be used to advise & counsel each wards' preliminary drafts--for what the funds could or couldn't be used.

The main theme is getting the people within those wards involved in the wants & needs process; they'll overwhelmingly approve a model in which they have input vs. Mother Hen knows best.

[hoya]

I would prefer if the money were allocated in a way where the closer you were to downtown, the more money you got. There are wealthy neighborhoods, and poor neighborhoods, that shouldn't get a single dime of MAPS 4 money. It isn't about being equal. It's about maximizing our investment in our city.

We shouldn't be spending any MAPS money up on NW 150th. I don't care if they need sidewalks or not. It's too far away from the center of the city. It would be a drop in the bucket and people would never even notice it. I agree with Spartan here -- this is a good way to waste $500 million.

What we should do is spend money on increasing connectivity to downtown. Let's extend the streetcar down into the Capitol Hill area, and then up to 23rd and OCU. Put two pedestrian bridges over the river. Expand the sidewalks so that they start in downtown and go out from there. We want a continuous connection the entire way.

[Just the facts]

Jacksonville tried this very thing and for the most part it was a large waste of money. We got a couple of large capital projects out of it (new County Courthouse, downtown baseball stadium, Veterans Memorial Arena, and downtown Library) - but the rest just went to subsidizing sprawl...which all ready takes a disproportionate share of subsidies and tax resources.

COJ.net - Better Jacksonville Plan

[gopokes88]

I would prefer if the money were allocated in a way where the closer you were to downtown, the more money you got. There are wealthy neighborhoods, and poor neighborhoods, that shouldn't get a single dime of MAPS 4 money. It isn't about being equal. It's about maximizing our investment in our city.

We shouldn't be spending any MAPS money up on NW 150th. I don't care if they need sidewalks or not. It's too far away from the center of the city. It would be a drop in the bucket and people would never even notice it. I agree with Spartan here -- this is a good way to waste $500 million.

What we should do is spend money on increasing connectivity to downtown. Let's extend the streetcar down into the Capitol Hill area, and then up to 23rd and OCU. Put two pedestrian bridges over the river. Expand the sidewalks so that they start in downtown and go out from there. We want a continuous connection the entire way.

Well if you want nw 150th to keep voting for maps it might be a good idea to throw them a bone once in a while. There's political realities to deal with other then everything just being #urbanism. If you want maps 5, don't create a revolt in maps 4.

[bradh]

Well if you want nw 150th to keep voting for maps it might be a good idea to throw them a bone once in a while. There's political realities to deal with other then everything just being #urbanism. If you want maps 5, don't create a revolt in maps 4.

Yes and no. I voted specifically for Stonecipher because the one 15 minute conversation I had with him I believed that he got that a strong core lifted the entire city, and he talked to me about he and his wife as ward 8 residents spent a lot of time in the inner city taking advantage of amenities down there that my wife and I also enjoyed.

Would I love some more stuff up here? Sure. However, I work down the street from the boathouses, and I love that all that stuff is right down the street from my work.

[SouthSide]

If you add the TIF dollars to the Maps projects that is an enormous amount of money directed at one area of town - north of the river. It is unrealistic to keep expecting individuals to continue to vote dollars away from their self-interest for the benefit of a small portion of the city.

[hoya]

If you add the TIF dollars to the Maps projects that is an enormous amount of money directed at one area of town - north of the river. It is unrealistic to keep expecting individuals to continue to vote dollars away from their self-interest for the benefit of a small portion of the city.

This is ridiculous.

1) It is very much in their self-interest to have a strong core for the city. It makes the city significantly more competitive for new business and new residents, as well as giving the city a stronger economy.

2) While downtown is a small part of the city, area-wise, it is the single most significant part of the city. It is also the part that is shared by all of us.

[SouthSide]

In your opinion.

[ljbab728]

In your opinion.

And my opinion.

[SouthSide]

Just because it is endlessly repeated on this site that downtown is the most significant part of the city and that it is the one part shared by us all, doesn't mean it is true. This is an opinion not a fact.