We're house hunting in the OKC area and we've covered almost all the 800 square miles from north to south and east to west. We don't want a regular neighborhood house with the open plan that has become so popular. Yesterday we found two houses for sale in the area of NW44th and Portland. It looks to be an old (mid-1920's) upscale area and seems to have been well-maintained.

We lived in the Tinker AFB area for almost 40 years before moving to NW Washington state for eight years. We know the SE OKC and Edmond areas pretty well, but know nothing about the area where these houses are. Do you have any suggestions/ideas/warnings about that part of town?

Thanks.

I am assuming you are on the west side of Portland...sounds like you are referring to Bush Hills. IMO that area is one of OKC's really hidden gems. Its not particularly cheap--the wealthiest person I personally know actually lives here. The only thing I could think of negative is some of the commercial corridors and apartment complexes in that area have seen better days. At the same time, there does seem to be some reinvestment going on, and most of the nearby owner occupied neighborhoods are aging well.

If you are looking for an upscale area with a big yards and non-cookie cutter homes while still being in the city, Bush Hills is a good place to start. And if that is an area that interests you, I would expand my search to include Meridian Hills (SW/c of 36th and Ann Arbor), Mayfair Heights, and Twin Lakes in Warr Acres. If you have a moment, you should take a Google Street View tour of these areas.

I know a lady who has a home on 42nd just East of Portland (and West of I-44) and just loves the area. She moved there from Norman and just loves the centralized location.

There are cute neighborhoods but generally WNW Oklahoma City is full of charming, "traditional ranch" neighborhoods and is still going downhill fast. NW 10 Portland to Council has become the city's top crime zone. It's bad. And PCO and PCW have become dangerous schools. And yes Putnam City used to be a nice, but the problem is we replaced it (by building Deer Creek) before it's time was due.

You can find otherwise cheap neighborhoods in NE Houston, NW St Louis, N Kansas City, E Dallas, NE Cleveland, Central Jersey/Staten Island.

PCO and PCW have become dangerous schools.

I have a niece who is a senior at PC and we've had someone in my family there for pretty much the last 40 years.

It's changed to be sure, but it's very far from "dangerous".

"Dangerous" is just hyperbole to support a point.

There are cute neighborhoods but generally WNW Oklahoma City is full of charming, "traditional ranch" neighborhoods and is still going downhill fast. NW 10 Portland to Council has become the city's top crime zone. It's bad. And PCO and PCW have become dangerous schools. And yes Putnam City used to be a nice, but the problem is we replaced it (by building Deer Creek) before it's time was due.

You can find otherwise cheap neighborhoods in NE Houston, NW St Louis, N Kansas City, E Dallas, NE Cleveland, Central Jersey/Staten Island.

Ha ha, comparing Putnam City area to NE Houston? Not even close.

Just about anywhere closer to the urban core is more dangerous than 10th Portland to Council and NW especially as you move farther out.

Cite: Oklahoma City crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout (http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ok/oklahoma-city/crime/)

I know a lady who has a home on 42nd just East of Portland (and West of I-44) and just loves the area. She moved there from Norman and just loves the centralized location.

I have family that bought just two blocks north of there. It's a nice & tidy little neighborhood, they love it, and have already won "landscape of the month" award. I feared that the highway noise would be a problem, but it isn't. A nice little neighborhood pocket that I think you'd enjoy.

Bush Hills is a wonderful area. Im waiting for the right house there to open up at the right time....

can also recommend Windsor Hills (south of NW 36th between Meridian and Ann Arbor). We can even walk to Crest as well as several restaurants!!

Just about anywhere closer to the urban core is more dangerous than 10th Portland to Council and NW especially as you move farther out.

Cite: Oklahoma City crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout (http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ok/oklahoma-city/crime/)

Not in violent crimes. Rape, robbery and murder is far higher on that very strip he mentioned.

I have a niece who is a senior at PC and we've had someone in my family there for pretty much the last 40 years.

It's changed to be sure, but it's very far from "dangerous".

Precisely. Pete as a non-resident you have a fairly good pulse on OKC. Unlike the others who do not live here and think they know something about OKC. The poster you quoted is one of the worst of the non-residents who think they know OKC but really have NO CLUE.

The high crime areas of W and NW OKC are centered around a few high concentrations of apartments.

Unless you are planning on moving into one of those complexes, those neighborhoods are not only plenty safe, they are pretty nice and very reasonable.

Frankly, if I moved back I would live in that area. Some great housing deals.

can also recommend Windsor Hills (south of NW 36th between Meridian and Ann Arbor). We can even walk to Crest as well as several restaurants!! Their are some nice, well maintained older homes in Windsor Hills, however, the area is surrounded by increasing blight and run down businesses. Long term, I question if the home values would remain consistent or would they decrease over time?

Not in violent crimes. Rape, robbery and murder is far higher on that very strip he mentioned.

He pooped on all of WNW Oklahoma City because he has an urbanista agenda, not because there's any facts to back it up or that he has any idea what he's talking about. There isn't. He doesn't.

I have an agenda too, I live, own property and have a business WNW. He doesn't. Get off my lawn.

He pooped on all of WNW Oklahoma City because he has an urbanista agenda, not because there's any facts to back it up or that he has any idea what he's talking about. There isn't. He doesn't.

I have an agenda too, I live, own property and have a business WNW. He doesn't. Get off my lawn.

While I agree that NW 10th from Portland and Council is less than desirable, for him to (from afar) compare the entire area to some of the areas he did is fallacy. It's that kind of attitude and speech that does nothing but help strengthen that erroneous viewpoint and hold down those that do live there that do their part to make it still a desirable place to live.

There is a pretty big difference between 10th/Portland and 44th/Portland. Not really even comparable.

There is a pretty big difference between 10th/Portland and 44th/Portland. Not really even comparable.

Thats what I'm thinking as well.

Unfortunately, a lot of intellectually lazy people automatically assume the entire westside is bad. "OMG did you here about 10th and Portland on the news? That whole side of town must be GHETTO then. Lets all move to Yukon!" This is how otherwise nice areas start to decline. It happens way too much in this city.

Unfortunately, a lot of intellectually lazy people automatically assume the entire westside is bad. "OMG did you here about 10th and Portland on the news? That whole side of town must be GHETTO then. Lets all move to Yukon!" This is how otherwise nice areas start to decline. It happens way too much in this city.

About five years ago, I caught up with an old friend on Facebook and I asked if his parents still lived in Lansbrook (MacArthur just south of Britton). He has been living in Edmond for quite a while and said, "Oh God no. Things there got REALLY bad and I encouraged them to move out here."

Mind you, Lansbrook is still a pretty little neighborhood with a private lake, pool and tennis courts; I have family that lives very nearby.

I didn't even bother to ask more.

And I know someone pretty prominent who just moved to silver lake from rose creek

I'm about 1 1/4 miles west of 44th and Portland and if it was even medium crime let alone high crime I wouldn't be there.

About five years ago, I caught up with an old friend on Facebook and I asked if his parents still lived in Lansbrook (MacArthur just south of Britton). He has been living in Edmond for quite a while and said, "Oh God no. Things there got REALLY bad and I encouraged them to move out here."

Mind you, Lansbrook is still a pretty little neighborhood with a private lake, pool and tennis courts; I have family that lives very nearby.

I didn't even bother to ask more.

I had a girlfriend that lived in Lansbrook (well her parents did) in the really early 70s. It was a pretty upscale neighborhood then. I've heard people say similar things about Quail Creek too. That it is nothing like it was in the 70s and 80s.

My family nearly bought a house in Ski Island (up near Lansbrook) back around 2000 - was a good deal but would've required more renovation than you'd recoup through appreciation especially if the area continued downhill which it did. This was back when I first joined OKC Talk as a kid who loved OKC and extolled the virtues of suburbanization. The homes in Lansbrook and Ski Island are at least pretty cool 60s/70s California Contemporary.


The high crime areas of W and NW OKC are centered around a few high concentrations of apartments.

Unless you are planning on moving into one of those complexes, those neighborhoods are not only plenty safe, they are pretty nice and very reasonable.

Frankly, if I moved back I would live in that area. Some great housing deals.

Unfortunately I don't know that this is realistic. It makes sense that things aren't as bad as it seems and that crime would be confined to bad complexes, but actually there has been a lot of interesting research lately on where criminals come from and where they go to commit crimes. Almost always they move from better areas into worse areas to do the deed bc the environment of lawlessness makes it easier and criminals are essentially just lazy. This migratory pattern results in diffusion and spread of crime from just the hotspot.

To relate this back to OKC the crime zone that OCPD have narrowed down goes from Melrose Lane up to NW 27th. This zone contains most of the crime but the zone will surely require redefinition as trends grow or otherwise change. It seems NW 10th is at that urban abyss point of using grant money to just tear down structures to erase bad memories.

I'd support Maps to Revitalize the 10th street corridor.

^

Perhaps for the next MAPS one key corridor in each ward could be identified for improvements with seed money for an on-going citizens group.

Good idea. I think 10th deserves some special consideration though, probably both directions. It runs right through the urban core, including to the doorstep of Saint Anthony's.

I just had to respond because I live at this very intersection so it was a shock to see my address as the title of a thread. I have lived in my house for 15 years now and have not had any problems. There was one time when I forgot to lock my door when I went to bed and the previous owner walked into my house and started eating my husband's leftovers at 2 in the morning after the bar down the street closed and he forgot he had not lived in this house for 20+ years. I love the location. It takes me 15 minutes at most to get almost anywhere in OKC being so close to I-44. When my children were young they went to school at St John's Episcopal School at 51st and Brookline. I worked, went to church, grocery shopped, banked, exercised, went to Target, got gas for my car all within 1 1/12 miles of where I live. Everything was very convenient. I say all of that in the past tense because now that I own a business that offices downtown I spend the majority of my time in Midtown and am planning to move when I can find time to fix up our house.

My father is involved with the West Tenth Street Neighborhood association, they are trying to improve the area but as others have stated, the run down apartment complexes are the large part of the problem. If those could be dealt with most of the neighborhoods could be decent, middle income areas and would help the schools greatly.

As far as the NW 44th & Portland area, I lived in Mayfair West (50th & Independence) before moving to Austin and have friends who live SW of 50th & Portland and have found the area to be pretty nice for an older area.

I'd support Maps to Revitalize the 10th street corridor.

To revitalize what? Crappy ranch style apartment complexes?

^

Perhaps for the next MAPS one key corridor in each ward could be identified for improvements with seed money for an on-going citizens group.

Or support CDCs in each ward that qualifies for CDBG funds.

My father is involved with the West Tenth Street Neighborhood association, they are trying to improve the area but as others have stated, the run down apartment complexes are the large part of the problem. If those could be dealt with most of the neighborhoods could be decent, middle income areas and would help the schools greatly.

As far as the NW 44th & Portland area, I lived in Mayfair West (50th & Independence) before moving to Austin and have friends who live SW of 50th & Portland and have found the area to be pretty nice for an older area.

I spent most of my grade school years at Mayfair 1963-1967:)

To revitalize what? Crappy ranch style apartment complexes?

Spartan, what a ridiculous condescending statement. It's very unlikely that was what was meant and there was no reason for such a snarky comment.

There are pockets of fine, older neighborhoods in many parts of the city. It's been my experience flawed, negative perceptions by those living outside such neighborhoods are both innacurate and common.

Spartan, what a ridiculous condescending statement. It's very unlikely that was what was meant and there was no reason for such a snarky comment.

So then what would we be revitalizing there?? Details matter.

By the way mkjeeves, I know you hate downtown and think that's the only place public funds are spent (which is virtually the complete opposite of reality) but the city recently did extensive, multi-million dollar streetscape improvements along NW 23rd from I-44 to a Lake Overholser.

The reality is some streets really are just better than others. 23rd is a better street to work with than 10th which you may have to just demolish and move on. 23rd and 16th go through actual neighborhoods.

Their are some nice, well maintained older homes in Windsor Hills, however, the area is surrounded by increasing blight and run down businesses. Long term, I question if the home values would remain consistent or would they decrease over time?

don't know. . . but there are many great neighborhoods in the City that are surrounded by similar "circumstances". . . and seem to be doing fine/reviving. But, what I DO know is that there are a lot of "old timers" as well as new young families (who are excited to be here!!) moving into these areas and a lot of "re-vitalization" efforts are taking place. Home values can come and go. . .and they do. . . but I didn't move here (necessarily) for the potential for increased property value (although I wouldn't be pleased if I sell at a loss when the time comes). I personally chose an older area when I moved. . . I love (in this order) the diversity of the overall area, the quality construction of my home (built in the early 60s), the accessibility to pretty much everything within 20 minutes (Penn Square 7 min, downtown 15, extrapolate from there), the trees, my neighbors, an active neighborhood association. . . we are certainly not perfect. . but we are a great place to live!!

So then what would we be revitalizing there?? Details matter.

By the way mkjeeves, I know you hate downtown and think that's the only place public funds are spent (which is virtually the complete opposite of reality) but the city recently did extensive, multi-million dollar streetscape improvements along NW 23rd from I-44 to a Lake Overholser.

The reality is some streets really are just better than others. 23rd is a better street to work with than 10th which you may have to just demolish and move on. 23rd and 16th go through actual neighborhoods.

Speaking of non reality. It seems to be a common affliction for some people who claim to love OKC to actually hate 99 percent of it and really only care about the myth of the urban utopia they've built in their head in place of reality.

Based on your comments, you've never looked at a map, much less visited any of that part of the city in any recent history. Tenth has housing just beyond the frontage when it isn't on the frontage. Also is already four lane with much commercial on the frontage. 16th isnt' and doesn't have that. Tenth runs through the urban core. 23rd is far north of that. And tenth has blight. As far as having upgraded 23rd 44th to lake Overholser, at least a couple of miles of that is Bethany and what other improvements have been made by OKC east from there to 44 are unmemorable. I'll shoot you some photos next time I make the drive.

I don't hate downtown. I hate the urbanistas who have tried to co-opt it to suit their shortsighted elitist agenda that doesn't speak to the interests of the 99% of the taxpaying citizens who make up OKC.

I don't understand how you call us shortsighted when our neighborhoods are improving dramatically and yours are going downhill fast.

You mean downtown where we, the 99%, have voted to send our money to fix it. For now.

Good idea. I think 10th deserves some special consideration though, probably both directions. It runs right through the urban core, including to the doorstep of Saint Anthony's.

I could be wrong, but I believe there are already streetscape enhancements planned for NW 10th as a result of the 2007 bond issue.

So then what would we be revitalizing there?? Details matter.

By the way mkjeeves, I know you hate downtown and think that's the only place public funds are spent (which is virtually the complete opposite of reality) but the city recently did extensive, multi-million dollar streetscape improvements along NW 23rd from I-44 to a Lake Overholser.

The reality is some streets really are just better than others. 23rd is a better street to work with than 10th which you may have to just demolish and move on. 23rd and 16th go through actual neighborhoods.

These improvements are not completed, they are just under way, but they are going to be a dramatic improvement. As a resident of the area, I'm very appreciative and excited.

Thanks for clarification, and btw to clarify on my end I am bullish on the Musgrave Pennington, Linwood, Drexel, etc area. Great traditional, mid century etc., homes with character. It's not wealthy and doesn't need to be in order to have character, sense of place, and be worthy of preservation.

But some things, like ranch style apartment complex, abandoned strip centers, and gas stations just aren't worthy of preservation.

But some things, like ranch style apartment complex, abandoned strip centers, and gas stations just aren't worthy of preservation.

Don't disagree. . .but just because some of those things "surround" an area, doesn't meant the whole area is beyond . . . ummm. . . redemption/rehabilitation/rejuvenation!!

Yesterday we found two houses for sale in the area of NW44th and Portland. It looks to be an old (mid-1920's) upscale area and seems to have been well-maintained.
Mid 1920s? This is a post-ww2 subburban neighborhood, mid-1960s for the most part.

Its not bad, I have a friend in the area, its not that bad for the price. Some houses are run-down but quite a few have been well kept, probably depends on the street. Make sure to have an asbestos/lead paint inspection before closing though.

But some things, like ranch style apartment complex, abandoned strip centers, and gas stations just aren't worthy of preservation.

And that's exactly why you are not understanding. You equated revitalization with preservation. Those are not the same.

Ok, then why revitalize? That's even more involved.

Perhaps because if one fails to revitalize an area, either a slow decline or a rapid decline to decay, rot and eventual abandonment is the assured result.
One could always choose to leave a ring of building corpses around a renewed urban core and a shiny outer ring of sprawl, but eventually, that will be an awful big boneyard.

I agree with future MAPS projects (assuming the brand is still viable going forward) targeting key corridors in the city. Originally after the first MAPS I hoped for precisely this approach going forward, but that was because I didn't understand the depth of need in schools throughout the city. Fortunately Kirk Humphreys and others at the time were wiser than I would have been, and MAPS for Kids raised $700 million+ and transformed school facilities city-wide.

Unfortunately we are so sprawled that if you spread a $500 to $700 (depending on length) pool of money equally throughout the city on capital improvements it would be too thin to make a real impact. But if you targeted corridors that everyone in a particular part of town uses for hardscape improvements and backed it up with intensive planning assistance I believe it would create change that would spread deeper into the respective neighborhoods via the private sector.

Combined with a citywide recasting of our transit system I believe both would help stabilize and renew our struggling inner suburban areas. Find a way to limit unrestricted growth at the fringe and we could eventually really transform the entire community.

I agree with future MAPS projects (assuming the brand is still viable going forward) targeting key corridors in the city. Originally after the first MAPS I hoped for precisely this approach going forward, but that was because I didn't understand the depth of need in schools throughout the city. Fortunately Kirk Humphreys and others at the time were wiser than I would have been, and MAPS for Kids raised $700 million+ and transformed school facilities city-wide.

Unfortunately we are so sprawled that if you spread a $500 to $700 (depending on length) pool of money equally throughout the city on capital improvements it would be too thin to make a real impact. But if you targeted corridors that everyone in a particular part of town uses for hardscape improvements and backed it up with intensive planning assistance I believe it would create change that would spread deeper into the respective neighborhoods via the private sector.

Combined with a citywide recasting of our transit system I believe both would help stabilize and transform our struggling inner suburban areas. Find a way to limit unrestricted growth at the fringe and we could eventually really transform the entire community.

Exactly.

We could also challenge and engage each councilperson to present the best corridor then take responsibility for forming and keeping active a citizen group that would decide how the money would be spent and improvements maintained.

Would help get the support of the various wards and the council member that represents them.

And tying in a better bus/transit system is a fantastic idea.

Yeah without question each ward should have project corridors.

A master plan that embraces the tent-pole urbanism JTF and others keep talking around seems appropriate to me. 10th seems like a no-brainer for a tendril with some spacing of such new tents maybe out up to 7 miles or so. Upgrade the corridor in general, plan for some logical placing of nodes that make sense in the long term, condemn some blighted property for the nodes and add whatever new infrastructure, then let it rip.

I don't have a problem with doing that equally around the different wards but it would behoove us to think about the big long term picture, even if we can't do it all at the same time.

I have no problem with this, as what it really does is make the unsustainable, sustainable. Those areas are currently unsustainable by design, and the prevailing wisdom for decades has been - once things become less-than-perfect - to simply move on to the next new area at the fringe and let the older areas rot. Areas that already have services which we will instead have to add on to for the next round of neighborhoods in the new "nice" part of town. If instead we find ways to surgically reinvest in these older, established areas and encourage density we can reverse that trend.

But another leg to that stool MUST be finding ways to curb unchecked development at the fringe without stifling real, HONEST growth. Building new homes in a pasture 20 miles from the center of the city isn't real growth unless everyone moving in to that neighborhood is from outside of the OKC metro, and we all know that they are not. Besides, there is enough undeveloped land within the footprint of our developed infrastructure to provide decades' worth of new development without adding to the taxpayer burden by requiring new services be established at the fringe. THAT is where we create unsustainable growth.

We have to make the EXISTING, inner portions of OKC (both urban and suburban) more livable and desirable to encourage this.

^

There have already been a ton of PUD's approved north of the Kilpatrick Turnpike off MacArthur, Rockwell and Council and even further west / northwest.

There isn't even a thought as to coming up with a criteria of declining such applications. And as far as I know, there isn't even a discussion.

If just the approved PUD's get built-out, sprawl is going to get much worse before it gets better.

Yep, more of the same-old-same-old. These are city-defining, generational decisions we are making in allowing that type of development unchecked, but the problem is that there is no real decision-making going on. The "decision" was codified years ago, and now we just rubber stamp. At the very least we should find ways to level the playing field, price-wise, between greenfield development at the fringe and new development in established parts of the city.

There is lots of feuding on here about urban vs. suburban and who subsidizes whom, but I will respectfully submit that both sides usually get it wrong. The REAL subsidization in the city is that ALL OF US chip in to pay for new services demanded by the exurban lifestyle of a few. If you live in an area where City services are already well established, I'm totally good with it and want your little corner of OKC to be the best it can be.

Wasn't Russel Claus' predecessor pretty much run out of office for just bring up the issue of curtailing sprawl?

The biggest problem is that too many private business benefit (home builders, commercial developers, construction companies, road builders, etc.) and it's very difficult to even slow down the train, let alone stop it and turn it around.

Can you imagine the outrage is this was attempted? Many people have bought expensive property under the assumption they can easily get their AA property rezoned to R-* and C-*. There is simply nothing that allows the planning department or City Council to even consider denying such applications.

Honestly, I haven't even heard this idea for OKC (some sort of parameters) discussed anywhere but here. I don't even know how it would be begin because the mere mention seems to be political suicide.

Perhaps because if one fails to revitalize an area, either a slow decline or a rapid decline to decay, rot and eventual abandonment is the assured result.
One could always choose to leave a ring of building corpses around a renewed urban core and a shiny outer ring of sprawl, but eventually, that will be an awful big boneyard.

That's a point where you really HAVE to triage bc you can't take on every street and every neighborhood and if someone says you can, run far far away.

^

Perhaps for the next MAPS one key corridor in each ward could be identified for improvements with seed money for an on-going citizens group.

A mentioned something like this a few years ago.
Next MAPS campaign could be called "MAPS 4 ME".

Each ward could use a proportioned amount of money however they thought would best improve their nearby community.

A mentioned something like this a few years ago.
Next MAPS campaign could be called "MAPS 4 ME".

Each ward could use a proportioned amount of money however they thought would best improve their nearby community.

MAPS is for everyone and always has been.

The entire IDEA of characterizing something as "MAPS 4 ME" is incredibly divisive.