I was talking about mass transit TO the suburbs, not within them. That's the choice/responsibility of the local municipality regardless, not OKC.

I would really like to see commuter rail built from downtown into Quail Springs Mall. I would like to see OKC be really forward thinking and incorporate the rail station into the mall itself as part of an expansion. Wouldn't that be nice, for instance, to convert the AMC theater into a mall expansion that includes the boarding station for commuter rail to downtown?

I would really like to see commuter rail built from downtown into Quail Springs Mall. I would like to see OKC be really forward thinking and incorporate the rail station into the mall itself as part of an expansion. Wouldn't that be nice, for instance, to convert the AMC theater into a mall expansion that includes the boarding station for commuter rail to downtown?

You'd have better luck including it into Chisolm Creek I would think, or somewhere in south Edmond along the existing tracks.

Commuter rail, by its definition, carries commuters usually from suburb center to city center. Most commuter rail systems don't deviate too much from old existing railroad ROW (think Metra in Chicago, LIRR in NYC, Trinity Railway in DFW, etc.) That is usually the job of light rail or other intercity trains.

Why? What's the downside of a train running from OKC to Norman daily? Or a fixed wheel line, or even the bussing that we have now? When I was living in Edmond and working in Norman I was dreaming of being able to drive to the farmers market downtown, park, and ride a train.I meant having buses that serve the entire Edmond area and or buses that serve NW OKC. I would be all for having a commuter rail to downtown Edmond and Norman.

Commuter rail, by its definition, carries commuters usually from suburb center to city center. Most commuter rail systems don't deviate too much from old existing railroad ROW (think Metra in Chicago, LIRR in NYC, Trinity Railway in DFW, etc.) That is usually the job of light rail or other intercity trains.

Yeah I think it's pretty obvious the northern commuter rail would run along the existing line following Santa Fe.

Commuter rail, by its definition, carries commuters usually from suburb center to city center. Most commuter rail systems don't deviate too much from old existing railroad ROW (think Metra in Chicago, LIRR in NYC, Trinity Railway in DFW, etc.) That is usually the job of light rail or other intercity trains.

I wasn't aware there was a difference between light rail and commuter rail. I think in a small city like OKC, light rail would be plenty good enough to serve all of the mass transit demand that can be supported here for at least the next quarter century. Charlotte is much larger than OKC and is served quite well by light rail. True commuter rail, in my opinion, would be overkill in a metro area this small.

I wasn't aware there was a difference between light rail and commuter rail. I think in a small city like OKC, light rail would be plenty good enough to serve all of the mass transit demand that can be supported here for at least the next quarter century. Charlotte is much larger than OKC and is served quite well by light rail. True commuter rail, in my opinion, would be overkill in a metro area this small.

Light rail refers to new rail lines for trains traveling at much higher speeds. Commuter Rail is heavy rail, basically the trains we see now on the tracks taking commuters. I think you have it backwards.

Light rail refers to new rail lines for trains traveling at much higher speeds. Commuter Rail is heavy rail, basically the trains we see now on the tracks taking commuters. I think you have it backwards.I thought commuter rail was faster, and light-rail was slower, but smoother and had more stops?

I wasn't aware there was a difference between light rail and commuter rail. I think in a small city like OKC, light rail would be plenty good enough to serve all of the mass transit demand that can be supported here for at least the next quarter century. Charlotte is much larger than OKC and is served quite well by light rail. True commuter rail, in my opinion, would be overkill in a metro area this small.


I thought commuter rail was faster, and light-rail was slower, but smoother and had more stops?

This one's on me, fellas. The difference between the various modes on rail transit in one easy-to-follow guide:
http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/bestpractice175.pdf

This one's on me, fellas. The difference between the various modes on rail transit in one easy-to-follow guide:
http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/bestpractice175.pdfThank you. That is awesome. I would love to see dedicated bus lanes added on Classen and NW Expressway for a BRT route.

I don't want mass transit in the suburbs.

Stingy. :)

I'd be quite happy if the currrent Sooner Express had a couple of extra runs in it, say one departing Norman at 11ish and going back from OKC at noon. this would split in half the current waits.

Add in an evening bus run from Norman at say 7 or 7:30 with a return at 11:30 pm or later.

Yeah, local business would hate that, but it would open a lot of business for folks who might want an evening in OKC but not have to fret/fuss over driving the distance after.

Stingy. :)

I'd be quite happy if the currrent Sooner Express had a couple of extra runs in it, say one departing Norman at 11ish and going back from OKC at noon. this would split in half the current waits.

Add in an evening bus run from Norman at say 7 or 7:30 with a return at 11:30 pm or later.

Yeah, local business would hate that, but it would open a lot of business for folks who might want an evening in OKC but not have to fret/fuss over driving the distance after.If you want access to adequate mass transit, you should live closer to the city.

I cannot say I agree with you. Most people, even younger people, would rather have their own car than take the bus. Even in Charlotte a majority of people I knew who took the bus only did so as a last resort. People who want to live a completely car-free lifestyle probably aren't going to consider a city like OKC in the first place.

I do agree that having a streetcar and commuter rail are good investments, but I still wonder if OKC has a high enough population density for those options to be successful.

We can create the population density required to sustain a streetcar and other forms of mass transit. If we don't build it that way, mass transit is a nonstarter. But you follow downtown pretty closely - look at the rents and prices people are paying for real estate here. It sure seems as though there's enough demand, whether from current OKC residents, or from people moving to OKC, to live in an urban setting.

Your evidence that everyone still wants to use a car seems purely anecdotal. Sure, there will always be people who want to drive. When we meet friends for dinner in midtown, some of them are astounded that yes, we would actually have the nerve to walk a mile-plus to dinner. What a novel concept! But there sure are a great many like us who enjoy a nice walk. Assuming we don't get run over by one of the many inconsiderate drivers here.

I didn't say nobody wants to live downtown or in an urban setting and that there is no demand for mass transit. I believe the city's downtown resurgence will only accelerate as more amenities are offered in the core. However, I believe more are still choosing suburbia. In fact, if I had to guesstimate 3 out of 4 people under age 30 I've meet since living in OKC either live north of 63rd or south of I-240. I know a lot of people in their early twenties buying homes in Edmond, something you don't see in a lot of other metropolitan areas. I think it's because of a combination of low real estate costs and the OKC culture that encourages people to settle down young. I also hang out almost exclusively downtown. I think the streetcar will be successful and really spur development but the bus is a transit form of last resort for a lot of people and I don't see that changing.

However, I believe more are still choosing suburbia.You don't have to believe it, it's true. Look at Dallas, when given a great light-rail system or a great highway system, people are opting for the highways because cars are a better form of transit.

Cars are frequently not a better mode of transit. My daughter had an hour and 45 min. commute in Atlanta until I convinced her to try MARTA, which took her home in 45 min. That's two hours a day she had to spend doing something other than driving and polluting. Safer too! If I lived in Dallas, there is no way I would drive if I could use mass transit.

I didn't say nobody wants to live downtown or in an urban setting and that there is no demand for mass transit. I believe the city's downtown resurgence will only accelerate as more amenities are offered in the core. However, I believe more are still choosing suburbia. In fact, if I had to guesstimate 3 out of 4 people under age 30 I've meet since living in OKC either live north of 63rd or south of I-240.

Of course you probably only see 3 out of 4 people, because the inner loop makes up less than 20% of the metro total population. That's like saying in NYC metro the majority of millennials live outside of Manhattan...no **** Sherlock, Manhattan is less than 2 million out of a population of over 20 million. But most people would agree that the excitement of Manhattan, rather than White Plains or NJ, is what will lure young people the NYC area. Actually by your own observations, young people are over represented in the inner loop. Half my circle lived in the inner loop...but that is my own anecdotal experience.

I'm getting burnt out on the discussion of millenials as one monolithic group. When you are talking about millenials in the economic sense, we are not talking about random people who just so happen to be under the age of 30. We are talking about educated, ambitious, mobile, and likely without kids. Companies like Devon fight over these people because they are their future workforce as boomers finally start retiring. In OKC, a lot of these are transplants. I can guarantee you that very few of these types are living in Edmond or Yukon (maybe Norman). Hell, Chesapeake's own recruitment video plugs Deep Deuce hard, even though their HQ is on 63rd and Western.

Why? People want to live where they can enjoy themselves . And I'm going to say this as nice as I can....if you desire an upscale young suburban lifestyle, i.e. Addison Texas or Scottsdale Arizona where you can run up your credit card at Shoppes of Towne Centre and stuff your face at TGI Fridays, you simply won't find that in OKC. That is not and may never be this city's strength.

The young people who live here and already have their circle of friends may be okay with a new Home Creations box and Baker Street on Memorial, but for young professionals who can live anywhere else, that won't cut it.

Of course you probably only see 3 out of 4 people, because the inner loop makes up less than 20% of the metro total population. That's like saying in NYC metro the majority of millennials live outside of Manhattan...no **** Sherlock, Manhattan is less than 2 million out of a population of over 20 million. But most people would agree that the excitement of Manhattan, rather than White Plains or NJ, is what will lure young people the NYC area. Actually by your own observations, young people are over represented in the inner loop. Half my circle lived in the inner loop...but that is my own anecdotal experience.

A lot of urbanists, yourself included, act like all millennials want to live downtown, without a car, and be reliant on public transportation. All I am saying is that is not the case. In fact, in OKC a majority of Gen Y are still opting for the suburbs. Your comparison to New York is pretty ridiculous. New York has just about as much comparison to OKC as Hong Kong or Mexico City. Truth is, I don't disagree with you that a lot of millennials want a vibrant, urban, walkable area. OKC is headed in the right direction and it will only snowball as more amenities are offered downtown. However, that isn't everyone and a lot of millennials, possibly even a majority, are choosing suburbia.



I'm getting burnt out on the discussion of millenials as one monolithic group. When you are talking about millenials in the economic sense, we are not talking about random people who just so happen to be under the age of 30. We are talking about educated, ambitious, mobile, and likely without kids. Companies like Devon fight over these people because they are their future workforce as boomers finally start retiring. In OKC, a lot of these are transplants. I can guarantee you that very few of these types are living in Edmond or Yukon (maybe Norman). Hell, Chesapeake's own recruitment video plugs Deep Deuce hard, even though their HQ is on 63rd and Western.

Millennials, by their narrowest definition, is anyone born between 1982 and 1996. That includes the young, active, single professional but it also includes the blue collar worker or the young couple that got married at 18 and had three kids by 20. This thread is about millennials as a whole, not young professionals. It isn't one monolithic group like the media tries to paint it as.



Why? People want to live where they can enjoy themselves . And I'm going to say this as nice as I can....if you desire an upscale young suburban lifestyle, i.e. Addison Texas or Scottsdale Arizona where you can run up your credit card at Shoppes of Towne Centre and stuff your face at TGI Fridays, you simply won't find that in OKC. That is not and may never be this city's strength.

The young people who live here and already have their circle of friends may be okay with a new Home Creations box and Baker Street on Memorial, but for young professionals who can live anywhere else, that won't cut it.

I am a little confused by this and could really derail the thread if I wanted to but I don't. I think OKC is ready for a cool suburban alternative to downtown and will have one within the next five years unless something changes.

A lot of urbanists, yourself included, act like all millennials want to live downtown, without a car, and be reliant on public transportation. All I am saying is that is not the case. In fact, in OKC a majority of Gen Y are still opting for the suburbs.

Excuse me? I have never said or alluded to such a thing. I am very careful about threads related to transportation because I myself am a bit of a car enthusiast. I have been very vocal about the major financial costs of roads but that does not mean I believe all people want the same thing. You clearly missed where I said "millenials are not a monolithic group." Do NOT put words in my mouth to make a point, please.

Also, my NYC example sailed over your head. I agree that that majority of millenials in OKC live outside the core, because the vast majority of the total population lives outside the core. Its a function of math more than anything.


Millennials, by their narrowest definition, is anyone born between 1982 and 1996. That includes the young, active, single professional but it also includes the blue collar worker or the young couple that got married at 18 and had three kids by 20. This thread is about millennials as a whole, not young professionals. It isn't one monolithic group like the media tries to paint it as.

I'm quite aware what this thread was discussing, but I am referencing an economic development angle. When Mick Cornett does his spiel about OKC's growth, he uses the plug, "highly educated twenty-somethings," not just "twenty-somethings." That is what OKC and other cities are fighting for. These are the types that are making the most income (unlike the blue collar worker) while impacting the least on social services (unlike the 20 year old with 3 kids).

Yes, I am quite aware that OKC's economy has a large sector of energy service and aerospace workers, largely considered "blue collar," but these generally require some advanced education and pay well. For better or worse, these jobs are the exception in this country. No cities are out actively courting 18 year old brides or blue collar factory workers because they simply don't bring enough to the table to in terms of returned tax revenue. I know that's rather cold but in the 21st century, its the truth; that's why they call it "human capital."


I am a little confused by this and could really derail the thread if I wanted to but I don't. I think OKC is ready for a cool suburban alternative to downtown and will have one within the next five years unless something changes.

We could have something like that, but we don't. You work with what you have, not with what you wish you had. Most young people and entrepreneurs are very excited about downtown or the surrounding core neighborhoods. I see little that will change this. Unless you are talking about Chisholm Creek...it seems like a nice development but it would be very generous to consider that a "suburban alternative to downtown."

I'm quite aware what this thread was discussing, but I am referencing an economic development angle. When Mick Cornett does his spiel about OKC's growth, he uses the plug, "highly educated twenty-somethings," not just "twenty-somethings." That is what OKC and other cities are fighting for. These are the types that are making the most income (unlike the blue collar worker) while impacting the least on social services (unlike the 20 year old with 3 kids).

I had a long, elaborate rant on this typed up but I am just going to say that if OKC wants to be competitive with highly educated twentysomethings who could move anywhere, its politics need to moderate. Most people in this demographic are socially progressive and even the religious are usually not cold hard fundamentalists. Politicians like Sally Kern are going to repel the people this state is trying to attract and retain.



We could have something like that, but we don't. You work with what you have, not with what you wish you had. Most young people and entrepreneurs are very excited about downtown or the surrounding core neighborhoods. I see little that will change this. Unless you are talking about Chisholm Creek...it seems like a nice development but it would be very generous to consider that a "suburban alternative to downtown."

Its ironic that a city that is so oriented towards its suburbs doesn't even do suburbia that well. To be fair, the upscale suburban lifestyle can be had, almost, in Edmond. There are a few things missing but most of the ingredients are there. Norman in the area around Campus Corner is already a suburban alternative to downtown. Personally I think Campus Corner blows Bricktown completely out of the water as an urban entertainment district. Chisholm Creek definitely could be the start of creating a more vibrant suburban area in north OKC, an area badly needing such a thing. It should bring what is missing to the Edmond area. Even though its close to the core, I might even consider the Wheeler district to be a separate entity. It's a suburban style development, just master planned. It will be a slam dunk with young, educated professionals.

I'm not sure exactly what qualifies as highly educated, but my wife and I both have masters and work in white collar jobs, and we definitely don't want to live downtown.

I'm not sure exactly what qualifies as highly educated, but my wife and I both have masters and work in white collar jobs, and we definitely don't want to live downtown.

Well its already been clearly explained. If you don't want to live downtown, you're family is old fashioned, outdated, uneducated Jesus freaks with 5 kids, and are upside down in a mortgage. You obviously are a slave to your cars, and only eat pre packaged plastic foods from chain restaurants on memorial, all the while living in an 1,200 sq ft modular Home Creations home.

Well its already been clearly explained. If you don't want to live downtown, you're family is old fashioned, outdated, uneducated Jesus freaks with 5 kids, and are upside down in a mortgage. You obviously are a slave to your cars, and only eat pre packaged plastic foods from chain restaurants on memorial, all the while living in an 1,200 sq ft modular Home Creations home.

Seems about right.

Well its already been clearly explained. If you don't want to live downtown, you're family is old fashioned, outdated, uneducated Jesus freaks with 5 kids, and are upside down in a mortgage. You obviously are a slave to your cars, and only eat pre packaged plastic foods from chain restaurants on memorial, all the while living in an 1,200 sq ft modular Home Creations home.

lol. I see what you did there.

Not that it matters, but I actually got such a good deal on my 'custom home,' mostly because it was a foreclosure, I'm actually able to refinance for 15 and have about the same payment. I hate to disappoint people but this young professional doesn't fit the mold.

Seems about right.

Edmond and Norman are among the most educated municipalities in the state. In Edmond, 51.1% of the population has a bachelors degree or higher and in Norman it is 43.5%. Compare that to OKC at 28.1% and the state average of 23.5%.

Edmond and Norman are among the most educated municipalities in the state. In Edmond, 51.1% of the population has a bachelors degree or higher and in Norman it is 43.5%. Compare that to OKC at 28.1% and the state average of 23.5%.

That's really interesting. Everyone in my family has at least a bachelors except my sister, and that includes one set of grandparents. I guess I just grew up thinking that everyone had to get a degree, although I know a lot don't.

Edmond and Norman are among the most educated municipalities in the state. In Edmond, 51.1% of the population has a bachelors degree or higher and in Norman it is 43.5%. Compare that to OKC at 28.1% and the state average of 23.5%.

I was being sarcastic. But I'm curious why you didn't include the statistics for every other suburb of OKC.

I'm not sure exactly what qualifies as highly educated, but my wife and I both have masters and work in white collar jobs, and we definitely don't want to live downtown.

Do you work downtown? I wouldn't want to live downtown if I didn't even work within two blocks or had easy access to public transportation.

Do you work downtown? I wouldn't want to live downtown if I didn't even work within two blocks or had easy access to public transportation.

Nope, I work in the suburbs.

Nope, I work in the suburbs.

Well that makes sense. Living downtown would be kind of pointless.

Do you work downtown? I wouldn't want to live downtown if I didn't even work within two blocks or had easy access to public transportation.

So, why wouldn't you? Do you think the only ones that you want to live downtown are those that work downtown?

So, why wouldn't you? Do you think the only ones that you want to live downtown are those that work downtown?

That's me. I don't work in the suburbs but I do work at I-40 and Meridian.

So, why wouldn't you? Do you think the only ones that you want to live downtown are those that work downtown?

If I'm going to still have to drive to work, grocery store, etc, I'm going to want to get more house/apartment for my money.

Also, I would say the vast majority of people who live downtown also work downtown or perhaps the HSC.

I can say that the vast majority of people in my building at Deep Deuce Apartments don't work downtown. Two of my coworkers live in Deep Deuce and like I said earlier, I work at I-40 and Meridian. The parking lot to my building is empty during the day and full at night. Same thing when I lived in Midtown. A large portion of DD residents work at Tinker.

That's me. I don't work in the suburbs but I do work at I-40 and Meridian.

I guess you could live in a hotel over there :)

I think what you'll find in cities of over a million people is that there are trends, but obviously different people want different things and make different choices. One person posting here is just that - one person who is an incredibly small percentage of any demographic. On a message board, we post as individuals with an individual point of view that sometimes coincides with other people posting here but all we are posting is our opinion. If, as BDP noted, 10% of our population would like to live downtown, that is a seismic shift from 10 years ago, but still a small percentage of the total population. Not everyone with a doctorate or PhD is going to want to live downtown.

Being a 'Millenial', I live in Deer Creek. I'm single, as are both of my roommates who fall in the category.

I would love to live downtown.... But I also wanted to buy a house and have plenty of space. I couldn't justify spending the same to get far less near downtown/midtown.

and that's perfectly okay, the city needs all types

I used to be hung up on the $ / sq. ft. issue. I bought a house with a big yard and trees and a deck and thought it would be so great.

Five years later, sick of yard work, skyrocketing insurance rates and having to drive everywhere to everything, I bought a smaller place downtown - and my only regret is I didn't do it sooner.

Re: the grocery store issue -- I find that between Native Roots, The Medicine Cabinet, Amazon (and even a service like Urban Essentials, which I have yet to try) I don't find myself needing to take other grocery trips that often (maybe once or twice a month). Hell, if I get hungry I can always just walk down to grab a burrito from Fuzzy's (and maybe stop off for a beer at Skinny Slim's on the way back).

Suburban tract homes with yards tend to be a bit more insular and protective of the resident from their neighbors and community at large; in urban areas the recreational space tends to be more communal and really extends to the entire neighborhood.

People searching for community and who enjoy regular casual interaction with new people tend to be drawn to urban areas; people who are more satisfied limiting their social interactions to family, known friends and places you drive to tend to gravitate to the suburbs.

One lifestyle choice is not more valid than the other, and often the same person will be drawn to both types at various stages of their lives.

I used to be hung up on the $ / sq. ft. issue. I bought a house with a big yard and trees and a deck and thought it would be so great.

Five years later, sick of yard work, skyrocketing insurance rates and having to drive everywhere to everything, I bought a smaller place downtown - and my only regret is I didn't do it sooner.

Re: the grocery store issue -- I find that between Native Roots, The Medicine Cabinet, Amazon (and even a service like Urban Essentials, which I have yet to try) I don't find myself needing to take other grocery trips that often (maybe once or twice a month). Hell, if I get hungry I can always just walk down to grab a burrito from Fuzzy's (and maybe stop off for a beer at Skinny Slim's on the way back).

This is actually starting to become a big issue nationwide. Homes nowadays are simply not "right-sized" anymore. You have builders cranking out McMansions that are getting bigger and bigger, while the average family size is getting smaller and smaller. Post-housing bust, people in general do not want to deal with the added maintenance and cost, and they want to live in areas that are compact, or at a minimum an area with convenient access to amenities.

This disconnect is one of several reasons the home ownership rate has been plunging, even as the economy and foreclosures has improved somewhat and interest rates are super low. IMO I believe the next correction in housing prices will come in about 5-10 years when retired baby boomers start unloading their oversized homes onto the market en masse.

I've been pretty vocal on here about OKC's lack of housing diversity so I won't rehash it here. I don't think its so much a city vs suburbs argument; a lot of suburban areas around the country you will generally find a decent supply of townhouses and condos. But good for you for finding a place close to DT that you enjoy.

Personally, I am now almost double the space than I was in my OKC rental condo and I hate it. My last electric bill this past month was $300; I never had a bill over $110 in my old place. Not to mention it's a pain to clean for one person. I'm considering hiring a maid service, so more money out of my pocket. Also, my "spare space" stays empty and unused 95% of the time, unless you count collecting dust as a use. Give me a smaller, quality space in a good location over "more bang for your buck" any day of the week.

Suburban tract homes with yards tend to be a bit more insular and protective of the resident from their neighbors and community at large; in urban areas the recreational space tends to be more communal and really extends to the entire neighborhood.

People searching for community and who enjoy regular casual interaction with new people tend to be drawn to urban areas; people who are more satisfied limiting their social interactions to family, known friends and places you drive to tend to gravitate to the suburbs.

One lifestyle choice is not more valid than the other, and often the same person will be drawn to both types at various stages of their lives.

I think that paints a pretty broad brush, and really depends on the neighborhood. Plenty of newer neighborhoods have shared spaces, communal pools, etc where there is tons of interaction. I'm thrilled about the place we're building now because every time we drive through there I see tons of people (young and old) out running, walking dogs, kids shooting hoops by the pool, etc. The social interaction is more about the people than the setting.

One thing that is very noticeably different about DFW compared to OKC is the fact there are medium-density developments - developments on par with the Edge and Level - all over the suburbs. Charlotte is the same way. In OKC there is virtually no diversity in housing styles at all. That's something else I am excited about for Chisolm Creek. It's supposed to include a residential component but from what we know it will be different from the typical suburban OKC apartment complex and more like what is being built in other cities.

One lifestyle choice is not more valid than the other, and often the same person will be drawn to both types at various stages of their lives.

This is probably the most understated, yet at the same time, one of the more valid points made in this entire thread.

One thing that is very noticeably different about DFW compared to OKC is the fact there are medium-density developments - developments on par with the Edge and Level - all over the suburbs. Charlotte is the same way. In OKC there is virtually no diversity in housing styles at all. That's something else I am excited about for Chisolm Creek. It's supposed to include a residential component but from what we know it will be different from the typical suburban OKC apartment complex and more like what is being built in other cities.

Las Colinas (north of 114) could be so much better, but the apartments are all too isolated from the offices/bars/dining

One thing that is very noticeably different about DFW compared to OKC is the fact there are medium-density developments - developments on par with the Edge and Level - all over the suburbs. Charlotte is the same way. In OKC there is virtually no diversity in housing styles at all. That's something else I am excited about for Chisolm Creek. It's supposed to include a residential component but from what we know it will be different from the typical suburban OKC apartment complex and more like what is being built in other cities.Norman is getting several Edge style urban living developments and I believe Moore is getting one soon with the Fritts Farm deal. Chisholm Creek is likely going to offer several like it.

Edmond, as usual, is behind the game here. I believe it is only a matter of time before Edmond gets something like it, but we had a really cool development(18 on Park) that the developer withdrew due to high opposition. The only thing Edmond has is some lofts on Fritz.

The Old Town Lofts are pretty cool.

I agree. I like them.

Ironically, I just ran into this article.

The Mansion Backlash: 10 hottest home trends shoot down gaudy palaces - CultureMap Houston (http://houston.culturemap.com/news/real-estate/01-27-15-the-mansion-backlash-10-hottest-homebuilding-trends-prove-that-excess-is-no-longer-in/)

Of particular note, and how this relates to this thread:


2). Millennials, contrary to popular opinion, want to buy a home. They just can’t afford big ones, says NAHB researcher Rose Quint. The answer? Smaller, more affordable homes. Expect builders to design more and more smaller houses with smaller price tags.

I'm not surprised OKC is higher than all those surrounding areas. Having grown up in DFW and lived in Austin for a few years, OKC has way more to offer for the average millenial than those two cities if you don't take jobs into account. Austin really caters to a specific type of person, and Dallas is a corporate/sterile environment. OKC seems to bridge the gap between those two.

The kids who grew up in Dallas and actually want to stay in the DFW area, but want all the millenial-focused lifestyle amenities likely have moved to Fort Worth. I bet if you looked at Fort Worth's millenial migration statistics, it would probably be pretty close to OKC's.

What specific amenities do you mean?

It depends on the person. Dallas and Ft Worth, despite only being 30 minutes apart have two distinct personalities. Dallas to me feels like a larger Charlotte and when I go there I almost feel like I am back in Charlotte. It's very corporate, polished, and cosmopolitan. Uptown Dallas is a mecca for young, urban professionals. It's also somewhat sterile which can turn certain types of people off. Fort Worth on the other hand is a lot more gritty, a lot slower, and a lot more "authentic" if you will. Fort Worth has a few things that really impress me, such as high-rise residential, a lot more historic architecture, and the sensors for pedestrians at intersections, but I didn't see anything there that won me over. I think OKC has a lot more energy. I don't see why millennials would prefer Fort Worth over Dallas, Austin, or OKC.

Millennials living with parents: We just can't leave the nest apparently. (http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/01/28/millennials_living_with_parents_we_just_can_t_leav e_the_nest_apparently.html)

It's totally excusable to live with mom and dad for a few months post college, but if it gets to a year you got to get the hell up outta there

My little sister stayed with my parents for a long time, hell she even moved her husband in for awhile, little over a year. Of course she dropped out of college and never really did much. When she did move out a year ago she moved down a few blocks, and sometimes still goes and spends the night at home. I've always thought this odd.

This is completely anecdotal, but I witnessed an interesting moment related to this topic last week. At the DowntownOKC developers luncheon the speaker was Brad Segal, a very-respected downtown development consultant from Denver. Since his presentation leans heavily on generation living trends, at one point he asked the audience to identify itself by generation. The audience (probably around 200 people) was understandably heavy with Boomers and GenX, but Brad was genuinely surprised that maybe 1/4 of the room raised their hands to identify as Millennials. He said nationally most of the time when he asks that question something like 3 hands go up.

This is a bit of a hot button issue for me as there has been a local narrative in recent years that Millennials were responsible for all of the "cool" development in urban OKC - especially in places like Plaza and Midtown - while marginalizing, ignoring or even outright denying contributions made in these areas by Boomers and especially GenX.

But I did find it interesting and worth noting that Millennials are indeed heavily connected, involved, motivated and in OKC, apparently more so than many other cities. There were of course other reasons for the great representation in that room, but I think the point is salient.

Without question there are occasional community squabbles related to things like the boulevard and urban design issues that tend to fall along generational lines to some extent. But I think the real story is not how one generation is driving things, but how in OKC all generations have become involved and invested in the city's renaissance, and how well they work together. I don't think it works that way in many other communities.

Less talk, more action. Better Block OKC is making it happen:

https://twitter.com/betterblockokc

#LOVEyourcity

I really wish I was going to be in town this weekend.

It's totally excusable to live with mom and dad for a few months post college, but if it gets to a year you got to get the hell up outta there

I lived at home through college (OCU commuter) and purposely stayed at home the first year after I graduated. It allowed me to shove almost a full year's worth of salary into the bank before I moved out, giving me a security padding of savings. That money helped with my first home purchase, avoided any loans for my wedding, and has allowed me to stay quite comfortably ahead of things ever since.

-------------

Something I'm very interested in with the millennial crowd, is to see how it changes the political make-up of the state as they start to become interested in voting. I'm 33 and make it a point to vote in everything that I'm aware of (although sometimes it's difficult to know when you don't get a newspaper), but I even have difficulty convincing my wife to vote in the non major stuff. I think you'll find that millennials are far more moderate to liberal than the current voting trends in Oklahoma. Personally, I feel like to we stand to "blue up" the state quite a bit. Oklahoma has flopped between R and D over the years and we're in a heavily R world right now. But I think that's going to change over the next 10-15 years.