Kilpatrick Turnpike to be widened

[Popsy]

So after the Turnpike Authority pays for the widening of the turnpike, who pays for construction and lifetime maintenance of all the new city streets, waterlines, water treatment plant expansion, traffic lights, street lights, electricity for said lights, new police station, additional police cruisers, additional fire stations, additional fire trucks, additional firefighters, new sewer lines, new libraries, new library books, library staff, etc... that the expanded capacity will result in?

This reads like you are blaming the turnpike for growth in the City and makes it appear that you are against growth in OKC. Am I reading this correctly?

[OKCisOK4me]

I think Kerry prefers to have OKC de-annex much of their suburban land and concentrate the population near the core.

[mcca7596]

This reads like you are blaming the turnpike for growth in the City and makes it appear that you are against growth in OKC. Am I reading this correctly?

The thing is, I believe there have been a number of instances where the projected sales tax growth to pay for new city services has not met expectations in the far flung areas.

[metro]

Is it that difficult to respond in normal sentences?

He thinks people actually enjoy his rhymes

[rcjunkie]

Is it that difficult to respond in normal sentences?

I agree, his responses which probably contain valuable information are so hard to read that I just skip them.

[Just the facts]

The thing is, I believe there have been a number of instances where the projected sales tax growth to pay for new city services has not met expectations in the far flung areas.

The City calculated that they fall $18 million short every year. The strategy of expanding infrastructure to spur development at the fringes is clearly not working. Growth should be focused where existing infrastructure already exists and is underutilized instead of building new infrastructure every few years.

[Popsy]

The City calculated that they fall $18 million short every year. The strategy of expanding infrastructure to spur development at the fringes is clearly not working. Growth should be focused where existing infrastructure already exists and is underutilized instead of building new infrastructure every few years.

Could you point me to City documents that reference that the City falls short by $18 million every year? I have never seen that before. Also, what does the City have to do with adding lanes on the Kilpatrick? Seems to me that was a Turnpike Authority decision.

[Richard at Remax]

I know some people get butt hurt about the suburb areas, but how can you say that the turnpike, esp in NW OKC, has not increased development? There used to be literally nothing up there except Mercy. The decision to widen is clearly because there is no people driving on it and no development surrounding it

[Just the facts]

Could you point me to City documents that reference that the City falls short by $18 million every year? I have never seen that before. Also, what does the City have to do with adding lanes on the Kilpatrick? Seems to me that was a Turnpike Authority decision.

I can't find it now but there was a stroy about it in the Oklahoman last year. Somewhere on OKCTalk there is a link to it. And while yes, the Turnpike Authority adds the lanes, the City is responsible for everything else the added capacity leads to, and they are responsbile for it forever. Imagne if all the growth along Memorial since 1980 had instead taken place where infrastructure was already in place. Imagine how many hundreds of millions - if not billions - would have been saved.

[Just the facts]

This might be the story but someone with archive access would have to look.

http://newsok.com/cost-of-oklahoma-c...rticle/3564528

Cost of Oklahoma City growth could surpass city revenues by 2016
By Michael Baker
Published: May 4, 2011


Oklahoma City can’t sustain the level and direction of current growth unless something is done to offset costs of developing the city’s outer regions, city officials were warned Tuesday.
People continue to move away from Oklahoma City’s core to outlying areas, Oklahoma City Planning Director Russell Claus said. Because those areas are undeveloped, it costs more to provide basic city infrastructure and services



Read more: http://newsok.com/cost-of-oklahoma-c...#ixzz1kPdkE0yl

[ljbab728]

This might be the story but someone with archive access would have to look.

http://newsok.com/cost-of-oklahoma-c...rticle/3564528

Kerry, you're whistling in the wind here. Your cowpath theory will never force people to live where they don't want to live. There may be and should be many other reasons why the population may decide to live more centrally but that is not one of them.

[Just the facts]

I don't want to force anyone to live anywhere. If people want to live 5 miles past Memorial Road in the country then more power to them. They just shouldn't expect City services out there. If they want rapid police response, adequate fire protection, non-well water, a sewer system, paved roads, and street lights then they should move to town.

[ljbab728]

I don't want to force anyone to live anywhere. If people want to live 5 miles past Memorial Road in the country then more power to them. They just shouldn't expect City services out there. If they want rapid police response, adequate fire protection, non-well water, a sewer system, paved roads, and street lights then they should move to town.

And do they get a pass on paying taxes too? You're absolutely wasting your time with that logic, Kerry. It's just not going to happen. We've had this discussion many times about suburbs, city limits, and annexation. What you prefer will not change anything in development patterns. It will happen in incorporated areas whether it's in OKC or Edmond or Piedmont and those services will be provided by someone and if it's not OKC someone else will be receiving tax benefits. Is it an ideal situation? No, but it's going to happen anyway.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

I don't want to force anyone to live anywhere. If people want to live 5 miles past Memorial Road in the country then more power to them. They just shouldn't expect City services out there. If they want rapid police response, adequate fire protection, non-well water, a sewer system, paved roads, and street lights then they should move to town.

Okay...But you shouldn't expect their tax dollars to fund all the cool new stuff downtown.

[Just the facts]

Okay...But you shouldn't expect their tax dollars to fund all the cool new stuff downtown.

They don't - that is the whole point. The taxes collected on the suburban fringe don't even cover the expenses of the suburban fringe so there isn't "left over" tax dollars to funnel downtown (except for MAPS which is dedicated sales tax). That is why downtown has TIF districts - to keep tax dollars generated there from moving out of there like they did for 60 years.

The irony is that suburbia is made up of my fellow conservative who have no trouble complaining about welfare recipients, but have no problem being subsidized when it comes to where they live.

It would be very interesting to see a delta map that showed the difference between revenue collection and spending.

[mcca7596]

I don't want to force anyone to live anywhere. If people want to live 5 miles past Memorial Road in the country then more power to them. They just shouldn't expect City services out there. If they want rapid police response, adequate fire protection, non-well water, a sewer system, paved roads, and street lights then they should move to town.

This.

[SoonerDave]

The irony is that suburbia is made up of my fellow conservative who have no trouble complaining about welfare recipients, but have no problem being subsidized when it comes to where they live.

So a homeowner in an area where $2-$4K in annual property taxes isn't at all unusual, who pays the nearly 9% city sales tax on every transaction in the city - including MAPS - and dutifully pays city utility bills every month, is fiscally the same as a welfare recipient? Really?

Wow. Just wow.

[OKCisOK4me]

This thread should be renamed "Talk About Anything Other Than Kilpatrick Turnpike Widening"

[Just the facts]

So a homeowner in an area where $2-$4K in annual property taxes isn't at all unusual, who pays the nearly 9% city sales tax on every transaction in the city - including MAPS - and dutifully pays city utility bills every month, is fiscally the same as a welfare recipient? Really?

Wow. Just wow.

When it cost the city more to provide service to you than you pay in taxes/fees what do you call it? Perhaps you would like to pay a tax rate that reflects the actual expenditures necessary to sustain suburbia.

[rcjunkie]

They don't - that is the whole point. The taxes collected on the suburban fringe don't even cover the expenses of the suburban fringe so there isn't "left over" tax dollars to funnel downtown (except for MAPS which is dedicated sales tax). That is why downtown has TIF districts - to keep tax dollars generated there from moving out of there like they did for 60 years.

The irony is that suburbia is made up of my fellow conservative who have no trouble complaining about welfare recipients, but have no problem being subsidized when it comes to where they live.

It would be very interesting to see a delta map that showed the difference between revenue collection and spending.

Oh no, something that Just the Facts and I agree on. LOL

[Just the facts]

Oh no, something that Just the Facts and I agree on. LOL

Surely this is one of the signs of the apacolypse.

[OKCisOK4me]

They don't - that is the whole point. The taxes collected on the suburban fringe don't even cover the expenses of the suburban fringe so there isn't "left over" tax dollars to funnel downtown (except for MAPS which is dedicated sales tax). That is why downtown has TIF districts - to keep tax dollars generated there from moving out of there like they did for 60 years.

The irony is that suburbia is made up of my fellow conservative who have no trouble complaining about welfare recipients, but have no problem being subsidized when it comes to where they live.

It would be very interesting to see a delta map that showed the difference between revenue collection and spending.

Kilpatrick

So a homeowner in an area where $2-$4K in annual property taxes isn't at all unusual, who pays the nearly 9% city sales tax on every transaction in the city - including MAPS - and dutifully pays city utility bills every month, is fiscally the same as a welfare recipient? Really?

Wow. Just wow.

Turnpike

When it cost the city more to provide service to you than you pay in taxes/fees what do you call it? Perhaps you would like to pay a tax rate that reflects the actual expenditures necessary to sustain suburbia.

To

And do they get a pass on paying taxes too? You're absolutely wasting your time with that logic, Kerry. It's just not going to happen. We've had this discussion many times about suburbs, city limits, and annexation. What you prefer will not change anything in development patterns. It will happen in incorporated areas whether it's in OKC or Edmond or Piedmont and those services will be provided by someone and if it's not OKC someone else will be receiving tax benefits. Is it an ideal situation? No, but it's going to happen anyway.

Be

The City calculated that they fall $18 million short every year. The strategy of expanding infrastructure to spur development at the fringes is clearly not working. Growth should be focused where existing infrastructure already exists and is underutilized instead of building new infrastructure every few years.

Widened

What does the above have to do with the direct involvement of the reason this thread was started? Next post should be a picture after they've started construction. Too bad they spent all that money putting up the cable barricade system. How much did that cost the OTA?

[Just the facts]

It didn't cost OTA anything - the people driving on the Kilpatrick paid for it.

[rcjunkie]

Surely this is one of the signs of the apacolypse.

Thought about running for the hills, but decide to stick around and see what happens.

[bluedogok]

Too bad they spent all that money putting up the cable barricade system. How much did that cost the OTA?

The last that I recall the Brifen system ran about $150,000-200,000 a mile for complete engineering and installation, that was many years ago before they became more common. For comparison the last time that I heard a price concrete Jersey Barriers run roughly $1,000,000 a mile. I remember when there seemed to be a crossover fatality every few months on LHP. The Briffen system had been used in Europe for many years and the installation on LHP (up near Memorial) was the first test in the US of a cable barrier system which was paid for by the Briffen USA distributor (now based in OKC). It was very successful and led to the adoption of the cable barrier system where cost per mile is an issue since it can do 5 miles for the price of 2 mile of Jersey barrier.

I have heard many gripes about cable barriers, mainly from motorcycle riders and the "cheese slicer" imagery that they have in their mind. All I know is that just north of NW 63rd the barrier caught a crossing Suburban and that kept them from coming into my lane, I was in an RX-7...I think we know what the likely outcome of that would have been. I also had a car come over a Jersey Barrier in Austin (on Mopac just south of 183) on a Saturday afternoon. If I would have been in my F-150 I would have hit them, since I was on the motorcycle I had more room for avoidance maneuvers and missed them after they landed in the two inside lanes by about 6 feet. I have had more close calls when it comes to crossover accidents coming my way than I ever have being forced into the median, it 44 years of driving/riding I can't think of when I have been pushed that far into a barrier.

Since many people seem to lack the ability to control their vehicles things like this need to be around to protect us from the idiots out there.