OKC Boulevard

[heyerdahl]

The Geography Of Aging: Why Millennials Are Headed To The Suburbs - Forbes

As always, every time you see an article supporting the idea that driving and the suburbs are the way of the future, check the author.

90% of the time, it will be written by Joel Kotkin.

This is no different.

[AP]

That happens a lot here. They always post an article written by someone who has an obvious bias toward the suburbs and claim it is evidence that urbanists are wrong and stupid.

[Rover]

It is very easy to find published documentation to support whatever position you desire. Most people make up their minds about an issue and spend time finding things to support their opinion. A few actually take the time to do real and balanced research and be objective and open minded when reaching their conclusions. Most are easily swayed by 50,000 ft views and over simplification of complex issues because we haven't the backgrounds to truly understand the perspectives. This is the danger of adhering strictly to a tight dogma and never swaying. You only see what you want to see. And that is true usually for the PROS and the CONS of any subject.

[Rover]

That happens a lot here. They always post an article written by someone who has an obvious bias toward the suburbs and claim it is evidence that urbanists are wrong and stupid.

Why don't you refute the points of the argument instead of trying to discredit it because you just don't like it. You can't claim that any article that doesn't support your particular view is biased. That would be very arrogant. When we read both sides of an argument and make our own decisions we are better for it.

[AP]

nm

[adaniel]

Out of 10,000+ registered users on this forum, there is probably only a single poster who would try to tell you that the suburbs are going away. I can't believe that people get so wound up like someone is actually trying to take away the option to live in the 'burbs. Heck, statistically it remains practically the ONLY option in OKC, and will for the foreseeable future.

Never understood this line of thinking on here. The vast majority of OKC is made up of low density suburban areas (and people who prefer that lifestyle, which is fine btw) and people get offended because this site somewhat skews urban. Are people that seriously thin skinned? Do these people not realize they are in the majority? There's definitely a bit of a persecution complex going on.

[heyerdahl]

It is very easy to find published documentation to support whatever position you desire.

However, in the case of urbanism, you could compare sprawl-supporters to climate change deniers. Those who research urban growth patterns have concluded that higher density urbanism is better- from an environmentalist perspective, from a government finance perspective, from a public health perspective... list goes on.

That's why sprawl-supporting articles usually focus on what people are actually buying, rather than what's "empirically best"- Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to say that people are buying a particular type of urbanism because they want or like it, because only one type of urbanism is widely available: sprawl.

[ljbab728]

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/539...n%20Commission

The state Transportation Commission voted Monday to award a $40.6 million contract for continuing work on the Oklahoma City Boulevard.

Work will include a ramp from northbound Interstate 35 to the boulevard, in the same interchange where other work is underway to connect the freeway and the east end of the new road.

About 1.2 miles of pavement will be extended from the interstate along the south edge of Bricktown to E.K. Gaylord Boulevard. A short tunnel will carry traffic beneath the elevated BNSF Railway tracks.

[Plutonic Panda]

Those who research urban growth patterns have concluded that higher density urbanism is better- from an environmentalist perspective, from a government finance perspective, from a public health perspective... list goes on.

I'm not going to deny that in any way. If every single person in OKC were to live in 100 story towers within just several blocks of each other, think of how much money we'd all save... Think of all the pollution that would be stopped...

Thing is, I don't care. I don't want to live like that. With new techniques in highway and road construction, we are getting better roads and highways that are lasting longer. With newer cars that get better fuel mileage and fuels like hydrogen that are made virtually from water and emit water vapor, or batteries that get electricity from windmills, the pollution and smog is becoming less and less of an issue even when more and more cars are getting on the road. Many older cars are starting to reach the end of their lifespan.

As far as public health, that is a joke because Japan has incredibly dense urban cities, yet extremely poor health in a lot of areas and high suicide rates. Yes, I am aware they have longer lifespans than the US.

The urbanist and anti-sprawl supporters will use any means to shoot down sprawl supporting articles while undoubtedly supporting pro-urbanist articles every time. Comparing people like me who support serving the NW part of OKC with sufficient highways of 8-10 lanes or what need be to climate change deniers is a joke and nothing short of laughable.

In the suburbs of Dallas, health is great! People are walking around, always active, and as with a lot of the US, are eating healthier now.

As time goes on, new technologies are going to be unveiled that pioneer new techniques or materials for highway and road surfaces that are cheaper and last longer than traditional cement or asphalt and the same is said for water, sewer, and other infrastructure. So all of those arguments you have used, are quickly loosing their validity.

Of course, it will always be more efficient to have 1,000,000 people living in the core than spread around the city with nice open suburban areas of their choosing, but I prefer the latter. Sometimes, you spend a little extra money to give people better options. The single problem I have, is the environmental aspect, but again, with alternative fuel and power, that argument is becoming irrelevant. Yes, I believe in climate change.

[betts]

We also seem to forget that the city itself is certainly big enough to offer a lot of living options besides high density. If I wanted a yard, I'd live in Edgemere, Gatewood or, most likely, SoSA. There's Putnam Heights and a bunch of other reasonably close in neighborhoods that make city amenities close at hand, while offering more space. You don't have to live in the suburbs of you want a yard and reasonable prices per square foot. Regardless, we don't realize how good we've got it compared to most cities, even for housing we consider expensive. My daughter rents in San Francisco, but a one bedroom apartment in her very ordinary building was recently listed for $1.7 million.

[Urbanized]

Yeah, so many here try to make their cases in absolutes, as if the only living options are on a cul de sac or in a high rise. There are LOTS of options in between, including big houses in the center of the city with big yards on quiet, leafy streets but still walkable to dining/entertainment/essential services (I owned and lived in one of these, in Gatewood).

Another in-between option is a great suburban neighborhood, built in such a way that it is also walkable to goods/services/entertainment; that is, an option that doesn't require a car for ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING. Unfortunately, this is an option that for the time being is completely unavailable in metro OKC.

[Architect2010]

You don't have to live in the suburbs of you want a yard and reasonable prices per square foot.

This. MOST of Oklahoma City is built in this manner but you would think only the suburbs offer green lawns and quiet streets from some of the posters on the board. FWIW I love dense urban areas and prefer them, but I've always lived in the central city on a street with *gasp* big lawns and cars in every driveway. It doesn't have to be either or.

We have far more trees than the suburbs too... Okay. Now I'm just teasing.

[turnpup]

This. MOST of Oklahoma City is built in this manner but you would think only the suburbs offer green lawns and quiet streets from some of the posters on the board. FWIW I love dense urban areas and prefer them, but I've always lived in the central city on a street with *gasp* big lawns and cars in every driveway. It doesn't have to be either or.

We have far more trees than the suburbs too... Okay. Now I'm just teasing.

Actually, you may not be teasing. I know *some* of the suburbs have mature trees (such as the cool black jack oaks in some of the neighborhoods in Edmond), but many of them are just a bunch of houses on land that has been completely scraped. All the landscaping is brand-new and will take years to fill in.

Our older, historic, neighborhoods in the core of the city have the most amazing large trees, many of which form canopies across the streets. You really can't buy that with new construction. But of course I'm biased, because I live in one of those neighborhoods. And, by the way, I, too, have a large yard even though I am only 5 minutes from downtown.

I will say that it's going to be more difficult for people to find a house with a great yard really close to downtown if they don't want an older house, say, pre-1950s. Unless we're going to call Windsor Hills the central core. If that's still central core, then many newer options can be found. I am kind of thinking of a border of Broadway Extension/I-40/I-44. Not scientific, just my personal idea of the boundary.

[Zorba]

This. MOST of Oklahoma City is built in this manner but you would think only the suburbs offer green lawns and quiet streets from some of the posters on the board. FWIW I love dense urban areas and prefer them, but I've always lived in the central city on a street with *gasp* big lawns and cars in every driveway. It doesn't have to be either or.

We have far more trees than the suburbs too... Okay. Now I'm just teasing.

The problem with the central part of the city is the school district. A huge reason people move to the suburbs is for good schools. Every time I think about moving closing into town, my wife shoots it down due to schools. Maybe instead of urbanist trying to block good infrastructure they should focus on improving the inner city schools.

[ljbab728]

The problem with the central part of the city is the school district. A huge reason people move to the suburbs is for good schools. Every time I think about moving closing into town, my wife shoots it down due to schools. Maybe instead of urbanist trying to block good infrastructure they should focus on improving the inner city schools.

Urbanists are trying to block good infrastructure? What in the world does that mean?

Maybe you haven't noticed but there has definitely been a great focus on trying to improve inner city schools. I have no idea what you are saying in trying to relate those two concepts. Do you think that urbanists can only think about one thing to the exclusion of everything else?

[betts]

The "goodness" of city schools is usually related to the perception of what "type" of children attend. The teachers are trained at the same colleges and universities, the books are the same. Beyond that, what you get from an education is what you and your parents put into it. Testing reveals more about IQ, which you can't teach, and training the students for testing than it does about their education. Gentrification is an ugly word these days, but as you get more people choosing not to move to the suburbs, you get more diverse populations in schools. Diversity is actually educational and humanizing, I think. It's good for children from disadvantaged homes and those from advantaged homes to learn from each other. All my children went to private school here. Being a city girl when I moved here, there was no way I was moving to the suburbs. But all my neighbors said,"Oh you can't send your children to public school in Oklahoma City!" So I didn't. Interestingly, all 4 of my children have said they will absolutely not send their children to private school. Only one of them is married, but she and her husband picked a Chicago neighborhood that has a good public school and that's where their children will go. It has a diverse population and they like that. It also has a huge amount of parent involvement, which has been shown to be very beneficial. I see that happening at some of our OKC schools as well.

[Mr. Cotter]

Cleveland Elementary (B): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455I089154.pdf
Wilson Elementary (B-): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455I089480.pdf
Classen Middle (B+): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455I089508.pdf
Belle Isle Middle (A+): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455I089503.pdf
U.S. Grant HS (B): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455I089712.pdf
Harding Charter Prep HS (A+): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455E010980.pdf
Harding Fine Arts HS (A+): http://afreportcards.ok.gov/Files/Re...455E008978.pdf

My children will attend OKC Public Schools. I'm excited they will meet, interact with, and become friends with children who are different than they are. My house was purchased because the districted elementary school is excellent.

[borchard]

Wow... I've just had the "pleasure" of reading over the last two pages of this thread. Maybe someone should change the name from "Crosstown Blvd Updates", to "Bitching About Suburban vs. Urban". Is there any ACTUAL news about the boulevard to report?

[jccouger]

The news is this : The left lane closure on I40 going eastbound to finish up the ramp to the boulevard has been a major pain in my ass on my commute home from work. Hopefully that is finished soon.

[hoya]

It is very easy to find published documentation to support whatever position you desire. Most people make up their minds about an issue and spend time finding things to support their opinion. A few actually take the time to do real and balanced research and be objective and open minded when reaching their conclusions. Most are easily swayed by 50,000 ft views and over simplification of complex issues because we haven't the backgrounds to truly understand the perspectives. This is the danger of adhering strictly to a tight dogma and never swaying. You only see what you want to see. And that is true usually for the PROS and the CONS of any subject.

Pete should make this post a sticky in the politics section.

[hoya]

Regardless of who is "right" in the urban vs suburban argument, Oklahoma City is about 99.5% suburban at the moment. We need a much better balance than we have right now. It will be much better for the city economically, it will attract more people (a lot of people want an urban lifestyle), it will improve our schools, and it will give us a lot more amenities that the city doesn't currently have. There is literally zero downside.

My dream of OKC in 25 years is that we have a built up urban area, Deep Deuce level density, from 13th down to Capitol Hill, and from maybe Penn over to the OUHSC. Connect all of that with the streetcar. Throw in a dozen more highrises. Then connect Edmond, Norman, Moore, Del City, MWC, Tinker, and Will Rogers with a light rail system. Each of the suburbs has a block or four of transit-oriented development at the rail stops. Think if there was something like Campus Corner in each of these suburbs, except with some housing added in.

Will that happen exactly? Probably not as I'm envisioning. But we could make it happen, and the city would be significantly better for it. Of the maybe 1000 square miles of the metro area, you'd be taking up like 30 or 40 with real urban development. The rest can continue to be big houses with big yards and big freeways. Everybody is happy.

[bchris02]

Regardless of who is "right" in the urban vs suburban argument, Oklahoma City is about 99.5% suburban at the moment. We need a much better balance than we have right now. It will be much better for the city economically, it will attract more people (a lot of people want an urban lifestyle), it will improve our schools, and it will give us a lot more amenities that the city doesn't currently have. There is literally zero downside.

My dream of OKC in 25 years is that we have a built up urban area, Deep Deuce level density, from 13th down to Capitol Hill, and from maybe Penn over to the OUHSC. Connect all of that with the streetcar. Throw in a dozen more highrises. Then connect Edmond, Norman, Moore, Del City, MWC, Tinker, and Will Rogers with a light rail system. Each of the suburbs has a block or four of transit-oriented development at the rail stops. Think if there was something like Campus Corner in each of these suburbs, except with some housing added in.

Will that happen exactly? Probably not as I'm envisioning. But we could make it happen, and the city would be significantly better for it. Of the maybe 1000 square miles of the metro area, you'd be taking up like 30 or 40 with real urban development. The rest can continue to be big houses with big yards and big freeways. Everybody is happy.

This x1000.

[Plutonic Panda]

Wow... I've just had the "pleasure" of reading over the last two pages of this thread. Maybe someone should change the name from "Crosstown Blvd Updates", to "Bitching About Suburban vs. Urban". Is there any ACTUAL news about the boulevard to report?

it always ends up like this. Every damn time.

[Plutonic Panda]

2/11/2015

[Zorba]

Urbanists are trying to block good infrastructure? What in the world does that mean?

Maybe you haven't noticed but there has definitely been a great focus on trying to improve inner city schools. I have no idea what you are saying in trying to relate those two concepts. Do you think that urbanists can only think about one thing to the exclusion of everything else?

First, I am not against urban development at all I am very pro urban development and especially improving inner city schools. But there are some in this thread and others that are against new highway development/expansion because it will encourage suburban development. So my comment was meant to be, instead of trying to block infrastructure that helps the suburbs, focus on fixing one of the biggest reasons people move to the suburbs.

I don't know a whole lot about OKC inner city schools, except their overall rankings, which are poor in a poor performing state. And I have two teacher friends that took (small) pay cuts to get out of OKC school district.

Really it isn't even just an inner city school thing, look at northern OKC where there are huge holes in the development, then you hit Edmond School District and the development starts again.