Beautification Projects

[Rover]

[QUOTE=SouthSide;1275432]

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.Attachment 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?

[Dob Hooligan]

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.

[coatesindc]

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.

[dankrutka]

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.

[ABCOKC]

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.

[bombermwc]

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.

[warreng88]

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.

[progressiveboy]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[Bellaboo]

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

[HOT ROD]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[stlokc]

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.

[scottk]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ yep

[Laramie]

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.

[bombermwc]

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

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[Dustin]

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.

[bombermwc]

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.

[Oski]

Offer tax incentives to property owners for city beautification efforts.

[rcjunkie]

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!

[Mountaingoat]

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.

[Watermelonsugar]

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!!

[scottk]

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