Southside Blight
I just drove home from visiting a friend who lives in South OKC. Having grown up in East Norman, I can appreciate living on the non-snobby side of town, but lack of snobbery can only go so far. We have a serious blight problem in many areas of OKC, but Southside is in particular trouble. I felt like I was driving through an encyclopedia entry on the Modern Great Depression. So many empty strip malls! Bargain stores, check cashing centers, "cheap cigarette" stores, broken up by a few chain drug stores and clusters of chain restaurants on I-240.
Bricktown is great. Oklahoma City is coming into its own. But what can we do to help our decaying, sprawling city? Why is it that there is so much new building on the periphery with the very large center of the city languishing? Can't there be tax incentives for restoration of the decay, and additional fees for the additional infrastructure needed for peripheral growth? (Such as new police and fire stations, new schools, new roads, new traffic lights, new water lines, new power lines.) I like growth and I like new growth, but there ought to be a way to encourage revitalization of our city's para-center. Otherwise we will have Bricktown surrounded by a donut of decay, that in turn will be surrounded by suburbs that will eventually merge with the dead donut, until we run out of periphery to develop.
Are developers in the way of this? And on the subject of developers, why do they clear-cut all the trees (as if we had that many to begin with!)? Don't they know people prefer neighborhoods with parks and green spaces? People in places like Boulder, Colorado know this. Why don't we? Is the rumor true that we had a city planner who advocated green spaces and controlling sprawl a few years ago, and that this person was run off by developers who control the Chamber of Commerce? Nasty rumor or truth?
Bricktown is great. Oklahoma City is coming into its own. But what can we do to help our decaying, sprawling city? Why is it that there is so much new building on the periphery with the very large center of the city languishing? Can't there be tax incentives for restoration of the decay, and additional fees for the additional infrastructure needed for peripheral growth? (Such as new police and fire stations, new schools, new roads, new traffic lights, new water lines, new power lines.) I like growth and I like new growth, but there ought to be a way to encourage revitalization of our city's para-center. Otherwise we will have Bricktown surrounded by a donut of decay, that in turn will be surrounded by suburbs that will eventually merge with the dead donut, until we run out of periphery to develop.
Are developers in the way of this? And on the subject of developers, why do they clear-cut all the trees (as if we had that many to begin with!)? Don't they know people prefer neighborhoods with parks and green spaces? People in places like Boulder, Colorado know this. Why don't we? Is the rumor true that we had a city planner who advocated green spaces and controlling sprawl a few years ago, and that this person was run off by developers who control the Chamber of Commerce? Nasty rumor or truth?
posted by OKPartisan at 2:57 PM
1 Comments:
You really bring up some good points, one in particular drives me crazy too-- please leave the trees! I honestly believe most of this has to do with whoever is on the City Council for that Ward, and if there will be any benefit to the Councilmen. Some really do try to keep their areas going. For instance, I think Ann Simank in Ward 6 has really tried to keep an important area of OKC looking good. But she has had to fight to do it for very little money. Maybe these areas where the trees have been razed are getting ready to have the zoning laws change.
I also like your metaphor of OKC becoming a donut of decay-- very appetizing!! Keep it up Okla-rama.
Post a Comment
<< Home