Government subsidized development

[Teatownclown]

TulsaNow will be offering tours of the recently-remodeled former City Hall building on April 11th, starting at 5pm. You will get to see the ins-and-outs of the new Downtown Aloft Hotel before it opens. These tours are open to the public, but reservations are required.

Reservations are on a first come, first served basis. Click here to make your reservation.

You'll see what a true tax shelter looks like! And is Tori Avenue finished? You gotta love municipal welfare.

[Teatownclown]

Now that we have heard from the resident naysayer...

I want to go on this tour. This family brought the Mayo hotel back to life after more than a decade of sitting dormant. Now they are building another hotel in another vacant building.

They are stepping up and spending millions to renovate this building and adding new restaurants at the same time.

I thank them for doing it. The fact that tax dollars are being spent to open the street for access is irrelevant to me. The Fire department insists on it to make it a hotel.

I think you mean resident realist, but you should keep that negative name calling out in the open so we can understand you are not all prim and proper.

They are spending millions canabilizing their own room count. Tulsa has way too many hotel rooms.

And thank you for making the distinction between yourself, a liberal who believes in government handouts, and myself, a progressive who believes affluence should not merit getting tax breaks and handouts from government.

BTW RM, why did the fire marshals not require city hall have access for that building? Perhaps, the head of public works could manipulate them?

[Teatownclown]

What would you have done with the property?

PS - Made a reservation for two, may just be me, but I'll see you guys there regardless.

I would have made city hall stay there and find a high tech national company for that building they are in....

[TheArtist]

I think you mean resident realist, but you should keep that negative name calling out in the open so we can understand you are not all prim and proper.

They are spending millions canabilizing their own room count. Tulsa has way too many hotel rooms.

And thank you for making the distinction between yourself, a liberal who believes in government handouts, and myself, a progressive who believes affluence should not merit getting tax breaks and handouts from government.

BTW RM, why did the fire marshals not require city hall have access for that building? Perhaps, the head of public works could manipulate them?

I am glad you are like me and don't believe the city, state or federal government should be in the road building/transportation business. Things would be much more compact and a LOT less sprawling if that were the case.

Lets see, the Snyders have built... two hotels, 70 homes (with another 82 slated for the old Y along with retail), several restaurants and a coffee house, a bar, event spaces, a small parking garage and only one tiny strip of additional road built that will also need to be maintained, snow shoveled, policed, etc.   Not perfect, but much better than any other typical south Tulsa development with as many new homes, restaurants, hotels, etc.  Urban infill can be quite cost effective infrastructure wise, more people and businesses paying for X amount of road versus fewer and fewer paying for it like our usual development trend has seen (more and wider roads, with more lanes, and ever fewer people per mile paying for it and people have the gall to wonder why the same amount of their tax dollars sees the streets deteriorate?).    

[RecycleMichael]

I am glad you are like me and don't believe the city, state or federal government should be in the road building/transportation business.

Who builds the roads in your world? They would be toll roads paved by the rich as investments?

[TheArtist]

Who builds the roads in your world? They would be toll roads paved by the rich as investments?

Who builds homes in your world?  And where?

My parents bought a lot in an area near Beaver Lake in Arkansas.  At first it was just a gravel road that led for miles out to their home.  But over time as dues were collected and as more people have moved in to pay those dues, more and more of the roads have been paved.  It's not a toll road, anyone can use it, and as more and more people reside and work along it, the better it gets.

As for longer roads and roads/rail between cities, well we already see toll roads, toll bridges,  and corporate rail lines and corporate airlines, parking garages and parking lots, and once upon a time, private trolley lines.  And remember, less of us would be using or have any need for cars, and there would be fewer roads over all.  

[RecycleMichael]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but "dues" collected from residents did not pave all those roads.

[TheArtist]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but "dues" collected from residents did not pave all those roads.

Did to start with.  They later did vote to have the county take over and charge a tax.  Dues, taxes, whats the difference?  There was also a deal that they could have worked out with the county whereby the residents paid for the materials and then had the county lay the asphalt and do maintenance.  Not sure of the exact specifics of what they have now, but they could have voted to keep or turn over as much autonomy as they liked, and most of the roads out there are still not paved, though each year they do add a bit more.  Some of the property owners have private "driveways" out there that stretch on forever and are better than the road leading up to them lol. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

Who builds the roads in your world? They would be toll roads paved by the rich as investments?

Every housing addition (5) I have lived in was built and paid for by the person doing the building.  Then the cost recovered in the lot price.  After the build out, the roads were turned over to the cities involved for ongoing maintenance.  Mostly built very badly to start, but the next to most recent was neglected by the city for 35 years and was finally given a 2" skim coat of asphalt about 2 years ago.  Still crappy road, but slightly better....

A slightly older one built in early 50's made it through by going with a gravel road - larger lots of about 3/4 acre.  In 1962 the city paved it and since we were on a corner - two sides - we paid double the amount of everyone else along the street.  $1,900 - a lot of money on a $6,000 a year income and a house valued at $17,000. 

One from late 20's had one time been brick, then most of that torn out and replaced by asphalt in the 50's.  At homeowner expense.

Not sure how Tulsa does it today, but I bet the city won't pay for the first time.

[RecycleMichael]

Dues, taxes, whats the difference? 

Dues are voluntary. Taxes must be paid or you go to jail.

This is your earlier statement..." don't believe the city, state or federal government should be in the road building/transportation business". I think that you are naïve or delusional if you think all roads would magically appear and be maintained with just darn good neighbors working together.

[Gaspar]

RM,
There are now many ways you can go to prison for disagreeing with the government.  In the future there will be many more.  That's how progress works. 

Hereon,
You are correct.  Developers are responsible for construction of roads in subdivisions (the city of course approves the design, engineering, and materials). Those are then turned over to the city, but not always.

[rdj]

Dues are voluntary. Taxes must be paid or you go to jail.

This is your earlier statement..." don't believe the city, state or federal government should be in the road building/transportation business". I think that you are naïve or delusional if you think all roads would magically appear and be maintained with just darn good neighbors working together.

Homeowners dues in modern subdivisions aren't voluntary.  If you don't pay them they file a lien on your house.  You may not pay until the house is sold but you'll pay eventually.

[carltonplace]

I would have made city hall stay there and find a high tech national company for that building they are in....

This way both buildings are revenue producing. Your way...only one would be.

Not sure why you are so negative on downtown. I'm glad the Snyders have worked so hard to make it better, doesn't matter if you do or not, you are in the minority here.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I am not fond of windows that go all the way down to the floor.  I like the false sense of security that a bit of solid wall above the floor level gives.  It's a lot like guard rails on a bridge.  I've never hit one but a bridge with no side guards would be spooky.

Wait just one cotton-pickin' minute here....aren't YOU the guy who goes up inside a tiny little aluminum "soda-can" - thousands of feet in the air - with one little aluminum engine and a large bucket of extremely volatile hydrocarbons strapped to the truss right above your head....and presumably enjoys it??  And I bet, no parachute!!

And you think bridges with no side rails are spooky??

[TheArtist]

I think that you are naïve or delusional if you think all roads would magically appear and be maintained with just darn good neighbors working together.

I don't think that at all.  That's just a negative idea that came out of your own mind, don't put it on me.


The whole point of what I was saying was to take what the clown was saying and take it to it's most absurd conclusion.  He was against the government putting that road in front of the Hotel... so unless he is the sole arbiter of "where to draw the line" what roads deserve to be built and where, or whether he has some set of rules that should be followed to govern such descisions, the only other conclusion is that it's a notion based on the Repuclican argument you hear over and over "government shouldn't be in the transportation business".  Again, otherwise where do you draw the line and what are the rules for where the line is to be?  

Republicans often frustrate me with their arguments saing things like "Government shouldn't tell businesses what they can and can not do or put on harmful regulations etc."  But then while at a Republican convention last year was approached by a guy with a petition he was asking me to sign against a casino being built in BA?  What happened to the principed Republican argument of keep government out?

Basically it's "Government is fine doing things I want but not what you want".    The Republican want roads and autos and zoning to support that, the Democrat wants transit and pedestrian friendly streets and zoning to support that.   So whenever the Democrat asks for rail funding or zoning changes to support transit,,, the Republican chimes in "Government shouldn't be in the transportation business"  but by golly if the Republican wants a new highway or road built, well that's a perfectly sound place for government spending and intervention.  So in order to knock them down I take the principal to its logical conclusion and say "The government shouldn't be building any roads or rails period." Otherwise it's just them getting what they want and making up excuses for the other guy to not get theirs.  Zoning is fine if it helps autocentric living (you have to have minimum parking), zoning is "the government telling people what they can and can not do with their property (you have to build up to the sidewalk)" if we want it to help pedestrian/transit friendly living.

They hate government welfare and think that should be left to the private sector and non-profits and religious institutions.  Government has waste and corruption and should show proof that what they are doing works so as not to waste my tax dollars.  Giving away free cell phones, really?  The other day I saw this church group giving away bicycles.  I couldn't help but wonder "where is the proof that this is helping anyone?" "Where are the statistics?"  They demand statistics from the government, do they also demand statistics from the churches?  Waste and accountability, they demand it from the government, do they demand it from the churches?  We have "less government" in Oklahoma and more "giving" more churches and church going people... where are the statistics showing that it's reducing crime, drug abuse, homelessness, improving health, etc? People make up the institutions of both churches and government.  Both are prone to the same ills and I think we should doing both better.

If you make a principled argument, you have to stick by it... all the way.  You can't just pick and choose when YOU think the principle should and should not be applied.

You can't say the government should not interfere with businesses and regulating their pollution (Democrats saying the pollution hurts people and we must protect them from the pollution "thats the Nanny State") and then turn right around and interfere with a business (like the casino) regulating where it can and can not go (Republicans saying gambling hurts people and we must protect them from it "and that's not the Nanny State?").


And on and on we could go.