$750K... how big of a surface parking lot can you build with that? :-P
the 1.5 to OPUBCO is the only "different" payment the 2.9 mil to the building owner (2.1 TIF 800k loan) is to help support the 27 mil renovation of the building and add to 2 parking decks
the 1 mil for parking (split between CC and sante FE) will only go to the parking decks that COPTA will still own
Dismantling suburban sprawl is expensive, but it is a one-time up front cost.
Urban sprawl?
Ah, come on man. I read, watch, and listen (when I have time). ;P lol
I'm sorry ..what was that?
Ayyyy you talkin' to me rezman? (said in a Newyorker accent) lol...
Wouldn't this type of financing be the best source to finally get a Quiet Zone? Looking at the list of projects, it really seems like a quiet zone would outpace all of them in return on investment.
Here's a Gazette article that provides the background for the funding of these projects -- namely, the stellar performance of TIF 2:
Oklahoma Gazette News: TIF funds
Some movement on the quiet zone:
Funding plan approved for downtown railway quiet zone | News OK
Ward 4 Councilman Pete White cast the only “no” vote, citing concerns that surrounding property owners and developers were not contributing enough to the cost.I'll have to remember that when bonds are floated for infrastructure improvements in ward 4.Mickey Clagg, a partner in MidTown Renaissance Group and leader of the private fundraising effort, presented a list of 28 contributors pledging to pay $668,700 toward the $2.9 million project.
I can see why they'd want to shut down SE 23rd. It's located on the curve. You should see the amount of flashers at that crossing. They should just have a 360 degree swirling red beacon.
An interesting commentary by Steve about this subject.
Living and Working by the Tracks ? Without Investment Downtown | OKC Central
As I mentioned in another thread – a large number of people are living with a world-view that is rapidly disappearing and they seem to have a hard reconciling with that despite all the evidence around them.
The 60 year experiment with suburbia is ending and it will be gone in a generation. A recent magazine article here in Jax points out that 77% of the Millennial generation wants to live in walkable urban neighborhoods. As the baby boomers themselves opt for traditional neighborhoods in their retirement years it is going to leave a lot of housing stock vacant. Throw in the fact that in the next 20 years more than 80% of all families will not have children (50% today) and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the demand for 4 bedroom houses on cul-de-sacs is going to vanish – which happens to be the largest housing inventory in suburban America.
As further proof, gasoline consumption and miles driven peaked 6 years ago and has been declining ever since – which leads to a whole other problem; who is going to pay the maintenance tab for all of the infrastructure we created that made urban sprawl possible? Or do we just let it continue to slowly decay?
Data released last week shows that the suburbs have the fastest growing population of poor and that is a trend that is only going to continue. While some will deny that is happening, we have 10,000 years of human urbanization and the vast majority of the modern world as evidence that sprawl and poverty go hand in hand. America spent vast (and I mean vast) sums of money trying to counter-act human nature and in the end – we couldn’t do it. As Steve pointed out, sprawl is nothing more than rolling ghetto.
So if Pete White thinks that not providing the housing options that current and future generation demand then he is as squirrely as the day is long.
Just because a minority percent of people what something, doesn't mean they can afford it. We and they can't for the most part. Massive subsidies again? I thought you were against that.
There was a recession. I guess you forgot. Correlation does not equal causation, and you haven't even really established correlation.
As further proof, gasoline consumption and miles driven peaked 6 years ago and has been declining ever since – which leads to a whole other problem; who is going to pay the maintenance tab for all of the infrastructure we created that made urban sprawl possible? Or do we just let it continue to slowly decay?
Yep. Much of the movement to downtown is our generations version of "white flight" only it's not race, it's class. Move or drive the poor out and vilify them. In some world views, if that all gets done before the End of World, I guess they would go ahead and wall the downtown with their horde of gold and guns creating a city state, cut off whatever resources they control and let the poor they have pushed out fight it out.
Data released last week shows that the suburbs have the fastest growing population of poor and that is a trend that is only going to continue. While some will deny that is happening, we have 10,000 years of human urbanization and the vast majority of the modern world as evidence that sprawl and poverty go hand in hand. America spent vast (and I mean vast) sums of money trying to counter-act human nature and in the end – we couldn’t do it. As Steve pointed out, sprawl is nothing more than rolling ghetto.
The fastest way we can kill the maps brand and downtown subsidy is to continue to try to co-opt it into a war on the burbs, AKA 90% of the working, taxpaying and most importantly, voting citizens of the city.
I think it's time I reconnected with my councilman again and remind him who he represents.
mkjeeves - I am going to put you down in the Pete White camp. Good luck with that. The rest of us are moving on.
You and others of you who are in a small (yet vocal) minority can do whatever you want. You don't even live here so good luck with getting representation on the council.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Bookmarks