OKC gets low marks in recent study on sprawl

[Plutonic Panda]

That is awesome.

[Just the facts]

You can have your cake and eat it too. This is a great message because (1) it's true and (2) so much of the angst about urbanism stems from misunderstanding what it is. Someone here mentioned that he did not want to live packed on top others, which is what people think when they hear density (and that is unfortunate). Yet single family detached residential is an essential part of urbanism. Built properly, SFDR neighborhoods can achieve aesthetic loveliness, connectivity, and high densities. There are some prominent examples are new urban neighborhoods in Atlanta and Calgary. There is even a suburb of Tokyo called Seijo that is predominantly SFDR, with a density approaching 40,000 people per square mile.

I think the takeaways are you can live within a range of home styles in a correctly built urban environment, and densities can be scaled to suit local needs.

This is the part the frustrates me the most. New Urbanism run the entire range of environments from national parks to Manhattan, but for some reason most people think it is only Manhattan. Are the people in Heritage Hills living on top of each other? Answer, nope but it is a T3 Suburban Residential category and it is in such demand that most people can't even afford to live there.

[Just the facts]

It would be interesting know how much the City of Charlotte spends on electricity for the street lights.

[HangryHippo]

It would be interesting know how much the City of Charlotte spends on electricity for the street lights.

I'd prefer bio-luminescent trees or sidewalks painted with glow in the dark paint. I'll see if I can't dig up the project I saw reported on that showed these.

[Plutonic Panda]

You can have your cake and eat it too. This is a great message because (1) it's true and (2) so much of the angst about urbanism stems from misunderstanding what it is. Someone here mentioned that he did not want to live packed on top others, which is what people think when they hear density (and that is unfortunate). Yet single family detached residential is an essential part of urbanism. Built properly, SFDR neighborhoods can achieve aesthetic loveliness, connectivity, and high densities. There are some prominent examples are new urban neighborhoods in Atlanta and Calgary. There is even a suburb of Tokyo called Seijo that is predominantly SFDR, with a density approaching 40,000 people per square mile.

I think the takeaways are you can live within a range of home styles in a correctly built urban environment, and densities can be scaled to suit local needs.

So let me guess....

you're talking about this:





in an area such as this:



I like those pictures and want that here in OKC for people to be able to live there if desired.

I however, would not want to live in that kind of environment and prefer this:





In these environments



I like the Dallas layout better though

[Plutonic Panda]

It would be interesting know how much the City of Charlotte spends on electricity for the street lights.

Why? Would you be asking that same question if that street was in your beloved new urbanism environment?

[Just the facts]

I'd prefer bio-luminescent trees or sidewalks painted with glow in the dark paint. I'll see if I can't dig up the project I saw reported on that showed these.

Like this?

Glowing trees could light up city streets - environment - 25 November 2010 - New Scientist

[Plutonic Panda]

I'd prefer bio-luminescent trees or sidewalks painted with glow in the dark paint. I'll see if I can't dig up the project I saw reported on that showed these.

Those are cool, but LED's cost almost nothing to run and last for years and years. So, for a realistic option, LED's would work great. That is where Edmond screwed up big time on Covell, and putting in way more street lights than needed.

Also, have there been any long term test to show what the effects might be on the trees?

[Just the facts]

It would be interesting know how much the City of Charlotte spends on electricity for the street lights.

Why? Would you be asking that same question if that street was in your beloved new urbanism environment?

The cost is WHY I became a New Urbanist. I am not opposed to street lights. In fact, they are key ingredient in making neighborhoods walkable. The question comes down to how many streetlight do you need to power. The lower the density the more you need. The more you need the more it cost. The more it cost the more taxes it requires. The more taxes it requires the less there is to spend on other things.

Also, the pictures you posted. I'll bet the smallest urban house you posted cost 3X the most expensive suburban home you posted. Do you ever wonder why that is?

[Plutonic Panda]

The cost is WHY I became a New Urbanist. I am not opposed to street lights. In fact, they are key ingredient in making neighborhoods walkable. The question comes down to how many streetlight do you need to power. The lower the density the more you need. The more you need the more it cost. The more it cost the more taxes it requires. The more taxes it requires the less there is to spend on other things.

I understand that, but with new LED technology, that argument is becoming invalid because the operating costs are extremely low.

[Plutonic Panda]

Also, the pictures you posted. I'll bet the smallest urban house you posted cost 3X the most expensive suburban home you posted. Do you ever wonder why that is?

That has to do with the market. I'll bet the most expensive house in downtown OKC isn't much more(if it even is more) than the average suburban home is most California cities. So it all depends. The more dense the city, the more the houses become. Those smaller houses I posted were likely located in dense areas which increases the land value; for some, the land value isn't what drives them, it is about being in an open environment having privacy, more square footage, and the overall suburban experience(can't wait to hear the puns on that one ). It's what you make of it.

[bchris02]

I understand that, but with new LED technology, that argument is becoming invalid because the operating costs are extremely low.

Agree. The streetlights, at least on Matthews-Township Pkwy in Charlotte (the picture I posted) are LED powered.

[Plutonic Panda]

Also, the pictures you posted. I'll bet the smallest urban house you posted cost 3X the most expensive suburban home you posted. Do you ever wonder why that is?

interesting

Edmond/OKC suburban



OKC Urban



Now, having showed that, I fully expect and hope those urban land values to increase dramatically over the next 5-10 years.

EDIT: Pete or MMM, can you make those pictures smaller? Flickr is acting up and I can't resize the pictures there or get the image address, so all I'm working with is Facebook. Sorry about that large pictures

[Plutonic Panda]

Agree. The streetlights, at least on Matthews-Township Pkwy in Charlotte (the picture I posted) are LED powered.

That is such a beautiful street, better than Campbell Rd actually. Charlotte must have a ton of trees.

[bchris02]

JTF's statement would be correct somewhere like Portland, Seattle, or any other established urban city where it's possible to live completely without a car. OKC isn't quite there yet.

[bchris02]

That is such a beautiful street, better than Campbell Rd actually. Charlotte must have a ton of trees.

Yeah. Most of suburban Charlotte looks similar to that. One of the most difficult thing to adjust to about OKC is how barren and ugly everything is. However, this city could be more attractive than it is with some beautification and better planning. While climate differences prevent OKC from ever being able to look like Charlotte, roads here could totally look like Campbell Rd and it would be much nicer.

[Plutonic Panda]

JTF's statement would be correct somewhere like Portland, Seattle, or any other established urban city where it's possible to live completely without a car. OKC isn't quite there yet.

I am well aware. I even stated as such that it depends on the situation. Small houses near downtown Austin are going for stupid prices and you could get a house 4x the size of one near the core for half of the price. I would choose larger house outside of the core in the suburbs; that's just me though.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah. Most of suburban Charlotte looks similar to that. One of the most difficult thing to adjust to about OKC is how barren and ugly everything is. However, this city could be more attractive than it is with some beautification and better planning. While climate differences prevent OKC from ever being able to look like Charlotte, roads here could totally look like Campbell Rd and it would be much nicer.

Yeah, even if you took Scottsdale, AZ and removed the mountains, it would still look nice because of how they landscape the city. It is beautiful and there is no reason OKC can't do the same.

[Buffalo Bill]

Here is my street in Charlotte. Median, streetlights, sidewalks, landscaping, and buried utility poles. This is virtually non-existent in OKC.

Looks a lot like 10th Street through Classen-Ten-Penn.

[bchris02]

Looks a lot like 10th Street through Classen-Ten-Penn.

I disagree. That area is one of the nicer landscaped areas in OKC proper, well above the typical standard here, but its no Campbell Rd or Matthews Township Pkwy. For one, it only is like that for one mile and directly to the west is one of the ugliest areas in the metro. I am not downplaying it though. I like Classen Ten-Penn and think its a charming neighborhood. We are comparing apples and oranges though.

[bluedogok]

This is the part the frustrates me the most. New Urbanism run the entire range of environments from national parks to Manhattan, but for some reason most people think it is only Manhattan. Are the people in Heritage Hills living on top of each other? Answer, nope but it is a T3 Suburban Residential category and it is in such demand that most people can't even afford to live there.

Because that is what is mostly touted as the desired density. Condos are what is being built in Downtown Denver, LoDo and Capitol Hill, the single family small lot homes are existing stock in the Capitol Hill area. I work in LoDo and my wife works in Capitol Hill managing an apartment complex. The streets are packed with cars because there is very little parking off the alleys or at the smaller apartment buildings. While some of the amenities are nice (neighborhood restaurants, stores, etc.) in those areas it just isn't where we want to live anymore. Like I stated earlier, "urban living" isn't compatible with my hobbies such as cars/motorcycles and woodworking, even the suburban area we live in isn't all that conducive to the car hobby but it was a temporary place until we find some land and build something. I do think that the closer you get to downtown the denser it needs to be, what I want now really shouldn't be close in to downtown.

[windowphobe]

I heard an ice cream truck today and I wondered to myself how they stay in business when the kids are inside on their xboxes rather than playing outside.

I can tell you that an ice cream truck showed up on my block this week and kids were lined up ten deep.

[Spartan]

Did plutonic panda just making the following argument:

Oak Tree has higher home values than inner NE OKC, therefor suburban properties are more valuable.

I'm confused as to what is actually happening here. Of course bchris is going on about Charlotte's amazing wide roads and low density...

[Just the facts]

Like I stated earlier, "urban living" isn't compatible with my hobbies such as cars/motorcycles and woodworking, even the suburban area we live in isn't all that conducive to the car hobby but it was a temporary place until we find some land and build something.

Urban living might not be compatible with your hobby, but new urbanism living is. At its base function all new urbanism is, is a guide to ensure building materials, site planning, street geometry, scale, and lot size fit the T zone the building is in. There is nothing worse than driving out to the country and seeing 100 townhomes stuck on 2 acres when there is nothing else around them for a 1/2 mile, or a rural 5 acre estate with a brick and wrought iron fence. Every item has it's place on the transect. For the record, a T2 5-acre estate should have a wooden fence (if it has one at all).

[Plutonic Panda]

Did plutonic panda just making the following argument:

Oak Tree has higher home values than inner NE OKC, therefor suburban properties are more valuable.

I'm confused as to what is actually happening here. Of course bchris is going on about Charlotte's amazing wide roads and low density...

oh boy... Was wondering when you'd chime in with your typical "I know it all" post.

Oak Tree wasn't even in the picture amigo, I'm referring to the new suburban development. Those house pictures I showed, JTF clearly said take the smallest urban house and it would be more expensive than the biggest suburban house and showed him that wasn't the case. Biotrich also made claim I didn't understand what type of housing I was talking about and I made that post showing him I did.

Now we have you trying to make twist my post to make it seem I am taking the richest urban areas and comparing it to the poorest urban area and that is bs dude. Stop trolling and get a life. That crap gets annoying.

As for Bchris rambling about wider roads in Charlotte?????? Are you for real? That road was no wider than the roads we have here yet looks like a comparison of Beverly Hills and Compton, want to guess which one OKC is? If anything, it would've made more sense to say I am the one ranting about not having wider roads seeing as the road I posted was six lanes.... Do you think before you post?