OKC gets low marks in recent study on sprawl

[Plutonic Panda]

Metropolitan Areas and Metropolitan Divisions

For the second time in a decade Smart Growth America has assigned a "sprawl" rating to what it calls metropolitan areas. I say "what it calls," because, as a decade ago, the new report classifies "metropolitan divisions" as metropolitan areas (Note 1). Metropolitan divisions are parts of metropolitan areas. This is not to suggest that a metropolitan division cannot have a sprawl index, but metropolitan divisions have no place in a ranking of metropolitan areas. Worse, metropolitan areas with metropolitan divisions were not rated (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Philadelphia, Washington, Miami, San Francisco, Detroit, and Seattle).

This year's highest rating among 50 major metropolitan areas (over 1,000,000 population) goes to part of the New York metropolitan area (the New York-White Plains-Wayne metropolitan division) at 203.36. The lowest rating (most sprawling) is in Atlanta, at 40.99. This contrasts with 2000, when the highest rating was in part of the New York metropolitan area (the New York PMSA), at 177.8, compared to the lowest, in the Riverside-San Bernardino PMSA portion of the since redefined Los Angeles metropolitan area, at 14.2. Boston is excluded due to insufficient data (Note 2)

- Focusing on People, Not Sprawl | Newgeography.com

*this should of been posted here. got mixed up though

[AP]

http://m.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-...publican/8832/

And perhaps most importantly for those who argue that the benefits of sprawl – including large home sizes and big swathes of land for each family – outweigh the costs, we found a positive association (.21) between compactness and the happiness and well-being of residents. This reinforces the findings of the Smart Growth America report, which found that residents of compact metros tended to live longer, perform better on a number of health and obesity metrics, and have a better chance at true economic mobility. In contrast, those living in sprawling metros tended to spend more on transportation and housing, exercise less, and experience far less social capital in their communities.

[bchris02]

America's Most Sprawling Cities Are Also the Most Republican - Richard Florida - The Atlantic Cities

Not surprising. It's kind of a catch-22 situation. Suburban areas lean Republican pretty much nationwide with the exception of in "Ecotopia", especially where they are WASP. Likewise, conservative people generally shy away from urban environments. They want their 40 acres and a mule. They want as much of the postwar lifestyle they can still get in 2014 and that is in the suburbs. There are exceptions to this stereotype though.

[pickles]

Not surprising. It's kind of a catch-22 situation. Suburban areas lean Republican pretty much nationwide with the exception of in "Ecotopia", especially where they are WASP. Likewise, conservative people generally shy away from urban environments. They want their 40 acres and a mule. They want as much of the postwar lifestyle they can still get in 2014 and that is in the suburbs. There are exceptions to this stereotype though.

This is like catnip for you.

[Plutonic Panda]

This is like catnip for you.

[PWitty]

This is like catnip for you.

Well played.

[bchris02]

I don't get it. All I stated was the suburban areas tend to be more Republican nationwide which is a fact. I didn't even say anything OKC specific though given how suburban-heavy OKC's population is its obvious why its such a conservative city.

[Just the facts]

I don't get it. All I stated was the suburban areas tend to be more Republican nationwide which is a fact. I didn't even say anything OKC specific though given how suburban-heavy OKC's population is its obvious why its such a conservative city.

Historically it wasn't always this way. Prior to about 1950 urban areas were Republican. Just look at Detroit as an example. Until the early 50s they had Republican mayors. Then 2 things happened - the 1949 Housing Act and the 1956 Highway Act. The white middle class left the city and suburbia was created. Instead of all political persuasions living side by side, we physically located to different areas. Today, statisticians can deduce almost everything about you based solely on your zip code. Why, because housing is built that way. Of course, by returning to mixed-use and mixed-income racially divers traditional neighborhoods it is confusing the hell out of the bean counters at banks, development companies, and government officials - which is why it is still hard to get financing for urban redevelopment.

[Urbanized]

...Of course, by returning to mixed-use and mixed-income racially divers traditional neighborhoods it is confusing the hell out of the bean counters at banks, development companies, and government officials - which is why it is still hard to get financing for urban redevelopment.

That and the fact that there are actually FHA/VA lending rules in place that specifically favor single-family dwellings over multi-family and mixed use condominium-type product. We have institutionalized the suburban model to the point of government mandate.

[Just the facts]

That and the fact that there are actually FHA/VA lending rules in place that specifically favor single-family dwellings over multi-family and mixed use condominium-type product. We have institutionalized the suburban model to the point of government mandate.

That is why I get just one more notch depressed every time I hear someone defend the suburban model by saying the free market established it. The free-market established walkable mixed-use neighborhoods and government established suburbia, but every time I try to tell that to my fellow tea partiers they are 100% convinced new urbanism IS central government control, when it is the other way around. I just don't understand how/why they have it 180 degrees wrong and refuse to get it right. I mean, I figured it out all my own and I don't know why other people can't.

"Sprawl is built for capitalism, urban is built for communism" - freaking perfect. Now excuse me while I put on my 'cone of silence' and scream.

[PWitty]

I don't get it. All I stated was the suburban areas tend to be more Republican nationwide which is a fact. I didn't even say anything OKC specific though given how suburban-heavy OKC's population is its obvious why its such a conservative city.

The majority of EVERY metro's population base is found in their suburban areas.

[Zuplar]

Not surprising. It's kind of a catch-22 situation. Suburban areas lean Republican pretty much nationwide with the exception of in "Ecotopia", especially where they are WASP. Likewise, conservative people generally shy away from urban environments. They want their 40 acres and a mule. They want as much of the postwar lifestyle they can still get in 2014 and that is in the suburbs. There are exceptions to this stereotype though.

I want my 40 acres and a mule. I've been waiting and still haven't received it. Someone at one point said Obama was going to help with this, but I haven't seen much progress.

[windowphobe]

The majority of EVERY metro's population base is found in their suburban areas.

With the exception of San Antonio: 1,382,951 city, 2,234,023 metro. (2012 estimates)

[Plutonic Panda]

With the exception of San Antonio: 1,382,951 city, 2,234,023 metro. (2012 estimates)

What about Manhattan?

[bluedogok]

That and the fact that there are actually FHA/VA lending rules in place that specifically favor single-family dwellings over multi-family and mixed use condominium-type product. We have institutionalized the suburban model to the point of government mandate.

Lawsuits and legislation can also drive it, condo development is all but dead here in Colorado. A few years ago the legislature passed a condo construction defects law which pretty much the first step is a lawsuit with no right-to-repair available. That caused the builders insurance to go up drastically and made financing harder to obtain. It has pretty much put a chill on development as metro areas were trying to ramp up mixed use TOD construction.

Denver Business Journal - Lawsuit risk slowing condo development; defects law a target

[PWitty]

What about Manhattan?

You mean NYC? NYC as a whole (all 5 boroughs) is about 8.5 million. The full NYC MSA is just under 20 million. Manhattan itself is only about 1.7 million of the full CITY population of 8.5 million.

[PWitty]

With the exception of San Antonio: 1,382,951 city, 2,234,023 metro. (2012 estimates)

True. I knew there were probably a couple outliers somewhere out there.

[Rover]

With the exception of San Antonio: 1,382,951 city, 2,234,023 metro. (2012 estimates)

That doesn't mean the majority isn't suburban. Just means the city incorporation covers the suburbs. Go to visit the city.

[Plutonic Panda]

You mean NYC? NYC as a whole (all 5 boroughs) is about 8.5 million. The full NYC MSA is just under 20 million. Manhattan itself is only about 1.7 million of the full CITY population of 8.5 million.

Didn't really think about it that way I suppose.

[Just the facts]

Of course most of America is suburban. That is all we have built since 1932.

[Plutonic Panda]

Of course most of America is suburban. That is all we have built since 1932.

Paris has sprawling suburbs from what I've heard and I recently found out Sydney has them as well. China is forcing suburbs to be built as ghost cities, if you haven't already seen them, I'd suggest looking them up, pretty incredible stuff.