OKC gets low marks in recent study on sprawl

[bluedogok]

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).

I know what it is, I have sat through some DPZ seminars and it was the main planning principle used in the military family housing privatization projects that I worked on. It has some good elements but it is not the ultimate solution. One thing that I mainly want is no home owners association, I just want a plot of land.

[Plutonic Panda]

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).

Damn dude, so in order to conform to your rules the fence has to be wooden? Not trying to be hard on you, really asking..... The picture you posted was beautiful, but how do you know that isn't the product of sprawl as we can't much other development around it

[boitoirich]

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?

I did? O.o

Pretty sure I did nothing of the sort. But whatever helps you make bad arguments...

[Plutonic Panda]

I did? O.o

Pretty sure I did nothing of the sort. But whatever helps you make bad points...

You playing dumb now? Come on dude, I wasn't born yesterday my friend.....

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.

omeone here mentioned that he did not want to live packed on top others

I mentioned it, no one else here did.... so who else would you be referring to? Then you say:

which is what people think when they hear density (and that is unfortunate).

So really, who else would you be referring to then? My post was directly in response to that line. Even if you weren't referring to me, my point still remains valid. You claim I am making bad points, yet not you nor anyone else has challenged them with anything legit, so come on man, I'm waiting.

[Plutonic Panda]

Oh, and as for Seijo, what in the world are you taking about? That is about as urban as it gets.




United cubes???? Are you seriously trying to sell off cities that have people living in residential units like these??????




Pretty city, but I honestly don't know what point you were trying to make with that... that is people living right on top of each other. I don't ever see a true suburban environment having 40,000 people per square mile, that is insanity. But hey, whatever helps you make bad points I guess

[boitoirich]

Wow.

Shouldn't have to do this, but OK... Let's take everything point by point. First, you don't want to live on top of others (no problem there). I brought up that good density comes in different forms than just vertical density -- including single family detached, your preference. I then cited examples, which you apparently ignored.

Second, "which is what people think when they hear density (and that is unfortunate)" is pretty clearly a general statement not directed at anymore. It laments that urbanists, in my opinion, haven't done a good enough job of showing people that density does not need to look radically different than they are used to, but the benefits are compelling.

Who said anything about you not knowing what type of house you were talking about? No one.

[boitoirich]

As for those pictures of Seijo, horror of horrors, those single family detached homes and townhomes have a density that allows-- gasp -- convenience stores and libraries within a walking distance of home. Shut that down before a grocery store thinks about setting up shop.

You are correct though -- it is as urban as it gets for a SFDR neighborhood

That was kind of my point.

[Plutonic Panda]

... Let's take everything point by point.

Alright, we'll do it...

First, you don't want to live on top of others.

Ultimately, no, I don't. Would I like to try it someday, maybe, I don't know where life will take me, we'll see.

I brought up that good density comes in different forms than just vertical density -- including single family detached, your preference

That's fine, no disagreement here, what was the problem?

I then cited examples, which you apparently ignored.

I most certainly did not ignore them.... again, please explain where you disagree with because I having a very hard time figuring it out.

Second, "which is what people think when they hear density (and that is unfortunate)" is pretty clearly a general statement not directed at anymore.

Ok, fine, whatever, I know you referring to me because you brought that point up with the opening statement of

Someone here mentioned that he did not want to live packed on top others

. So tell me: who else "HERE" were you talking about then?

It laments that urbanists, in my opinion, haven't done a good enough job of showing people that density does not need to look radically different than they are used to, but the benefits are compelling.

ok

Who said anything about you [I]not knowing what type of house you were talking about?[I] No one.

No one, huh? You were talking about no one? But you clearly said "someone here stated something--I and only I--said", so who the hell else were you talking about man?

[Plutonic Panda]

As for those pictures of Seijo, horror of horrors, those single family detached homes and townhomes have a density that allows-- gasp -- convenience stores and libraries within a walking distance of home. Shut that down before a grocery store thinks about setting up shop.

You are correct though -- it is as urban as it gets for a SFDR neighborhood

That was kind of my point.

What!? Dude, stop with this crap man. I said it looks like a beautiful city.... where did I insinuate any kind of horrors about the city's environment??????????

I am not arguing this is a bad place to live, just arguing that is exactly what people have in mind when they say people living on top of each other which is not extreme density. Edmond is dense in certain areas, but doesn't equate to people living on top of each other. There are different levels of density, and even if a city hits critical mass, it could still be less dense than another city that has hit critical mass.

I'm starting to think New Urbanism is all about the numbers and figures of a city that has hit critical mass and wants to dictate nearly every feature and design of a city that has done so. They should nearly all be the same, at least in scale. That sucks if the case.

[boitoirich]

Each rooftop in the aerial you have shown is a detached single family home or a towhnouse. In one square mile, there are about 40,000 people living in that place -- in SFDR and townhouses. I used that as an example to say you can have your detached home and density. I also said density can be scaled to local needs, so it would not have to be 40,000 here. And for the last time, I was not calling you out -- I was making a general statement. Seems pretty clear.

[Plutonic Panda]

Each rooftop in the aerial you have shown is a detached single family home or a towhnouse. In one square mile, there are about 40,000 people living in that place -- in SFDR and townhouses. I used that as an example to say you can have your detached home and density. I also said density can be scaled to local needs, so it would not have to be 40,000 here.

ok... I understand that and I really don't disagree with that to an extent.

And for the last time, I was not calling you out -- I was making a general statement. Seems pretty clear.

Ok, my mistake. I don't who you were referring to though when you said

someone here mentioned that he did not want to live packed on top others

, seeing as I'm the only one that mentioned it and I'm a guy(and you know that as I told my name in pm), but that's okay. I only point that out as your recent post phrasing me pointing you out and you denying my claim, but that's fine.

Either we don't disagree much or we in two separate ball parks, either way, I still stick by my points and these last few posts have been pretty pointless.

[Zuplar]

That many people in one area is my nightmare.

[hoya]

That many people in one area is my nightmare.

I had a nightmare that I was being hunted on a rich guy's private island by his pet T-Rex.

[boitoirich]

That many people in one area is my nightmare.

Try living there and you'll soon see that it's not the nightmare you imagined.

[Mississippi Blues]

I had a nightmare that I was being hunted on a rich guy's private island by his pet T-Rex.

I had an incredibly similar dream....

[Spartan]

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?

Still confused as to what point you're trying to make.

[catch22]

^ it's usually a moving target.

[Mississippi Blues]

n/m

[Plutonic Panda]

Still confused as to what point you're trying to make.

that's because you don't think before you post dude

And yes... I get the smart-ass remark that has absolutely no meaning to it and is liked by the very people who disagree with meh.... I understand, Spartan, that is apparently all you have and no one would blame you

[Plutonic Panda]

^ it's usually a moving target.

oh yeah man, you got it

[Plutonic Panda]

n/m

n/m

[Plutonic Panda]

Try living there and you'll soon see that it's not the nightmare you imagined.

I know people who have lived in those kind of places and are very glad they are out

[Plutonic Panda]

I had a nightmare that I was being hunted on a rich guy's private island by his pet T-Rex.

color me dumb on this one, I am getting the reference, if there is one

[Just the facts]

Plutonic Panda - make sure you look me up when you come to Jax. I think once you see high density single family homes it might surprise you.

[PWitty]

Once again, PluPan feels the need to quote and reply to every post even when he has nothing to say.

And yes, I realize I'm stooping to your level. But it's funny.