General Urban Development

[Mr. Cotter]

Are you talking about TransMilenio? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransMilenio I think this is one of the better models for transportation infrastructure. It's almost as cheap as a bus route, with most of the advantages of rail.

[Just the facts]

Yes, TransMilenio. I am no fan of BRT, but that system is pretty good. As you said, as close to rail as you can get without actual rail. Even the 'bus stops' look and function like a rail stop. Sadly, not very good for TOD or development oriented transit though. Bogota is the city. The Mayor they interviewed in the documentary Urbanized was awesome. When asked about parking he said show me where there is a constitutional requirment to provide parking (once again just to be clear, I know you can't do this in OKC because there is no regional transit system). I need to watch the video again to see what city it was that bsically stopped making roads and now only makes sidewalks and bicycle paths. Cars driving in dirt and mud and bikes on nice 4 lanes paved paths. That might have been Bogota as well.

[Rover]

Sometimes I can't decide if you guys are promoting fascism or communism, but it sure goes beyond urbanism in a free society. When your ideals are more like South America, Africa or Russia I have to wonder.

The idea that you make cities more livable by taking away choices vs making intelligent infrastructure decisions is puzzling. The idea that you are going to force eliminate cars in the city is silly. I have been to many cities which have tried it and failed miserably...cities like Athens. But the cities who took the positive route of building world class mass transit systems found people would CHOOSE to use them. They didn't have to FORCE people by taking away all other choices.

[Architect2010]

Sometimes I can't decide if you guys are promoting fascism or communism, but it sure goes beyond urbanism in a free society. When your ideals are more like South America, Africa or Russia I have to wonder.

The idea that you make cities more livable by taking away choices vs making intelligent infrastructure decisions is puzzling. The idea that you are going to force eliminate cars in the city is silly. I have been to many cities which have tried it and failed miserably...cities like Athens. But the cities who took the positive route of building world class mass transit systems found people would CHOOSE to use them. They didn't have to FORCE people by taking away all other choices.

Why must you always inject into a conversation, the most cut-and-dry responses? LORD. Heaven forbid a couple posters have a small conversation on what other cities in the world are doing to uniquely combat overuse of the automobile versus the pedestrian or mass-transit. There is nothing wrong with that at all and yet, you somehow manage to get offended by it. I found it very interesting and not once did I think that they were actually advocating turning OKC into Bogota. Actually though, I like the idea of getting rid of MOST of the parking spaces downtown for automobiles. Obviously that won't work now or any time soon, but in the future I could see this being possible with a good mass-transit system. Thataway, we aren't "FORCING" people to choose, instead they can choose whether or not they want to visit downtown or the Shoppes at Moore. Lol. Of course, this would have to at a time when Downtown is well-supported by the local urban population and the inner-city and NOT by suburbanites. It's definitely an interesting topic that doesn't have to be confined by the principles of our country versus another.

[Spartan]

Sometimes I can't decide if you guys are promoting fascism or communism, but it sure goes beyond urbanism in a free society. When your ideals are more like South America, Africa or Russia I have to wonder.

Have you ever been to any of those dark, distant places??

I agree with your caveat that you provide the choice, not the decision for people.. but I cringed at your first paragraph. My god. Suburban sprawl is derived from the ideals of socialists and communists like Le Corbusier... for the record Moscow is one of the coolest cities I've ever been to, and St. Petersburg one of the most cultured. In fact I'm not aware of many cities that are more cultural than SPB.

As for Latin America, the Bogota mayor is in fact awesome (as Kerry correctly pointed out) and was directing transit spending toward the highest utility. Far more people utilized his TransMilenio system than what comparable funding for traffic lanes would have done. Far more people whizzed by on bicycles on the newly-redesigned bicycle pathways that also enhanced safety in many areas of Bogota, than on the mud roads beside them.

Anti-internationalism is cut from the same cloth as anti-intellectualism, and I don't see the point in resorting to either. There is no such folly in consulting people who have studied a topic just as you can't go wrong in studying how other peoples have confronted similar urban problems. I'd argue that only through drawing inspiration from elsewhere can our beloved American exceptionalism be preserved. I also think people are people everywhere.. just because someone comes from a part of the world that has struggled with corruption or ideology shouldn't discredit good urban solutions. That's heinous.

[Rover]

Actually I have been to many of the cities and done business on site in about 30 different countries, mostly in their most urban cities. I know businessmen in many, if not most of them. None of them have been successful in eliminating autos. Most of the most urban cities in the world are full of cars and have huge requirements for parking. The idea that you are not going to affect commerce by strangling parking is an odd notion.

I think St. Petersburg is great...but you might want to learn how the wealth, art and culture actually was accumulated there. And the people I have known from Moscow think of it as anything but a cool city. When we visit we see a totally different side to it than when we actually live in it.

And, suburban sprawl is NOT advocated by communists. Communal living IS. Control of movement between communities is also a long standing way to control populations.

I in no way support either practically or ideologically the idea of urban sprawl. It is inefficient and in many, many ways unsustainable. It can be controlled and should be, but it will not be eliminated unless the population decreases or stays the same. I am on the same side as many, if not most, of the urbanists on this site. However, I bristle at the notion that we should start forcing the changes on the population. I also see a lot of things stated as fact on here that simply are not true. Some is manipulation of information/data, and some is simply myopathy. I actually respect Spartan's views greatly because he not only has read about it but has made the sacrifices and effort to go SEE what is happening in the world. I also respect many on here who are putting their money where their words are...taking the risks to prove their points. I hope they are amply rewarded for it.

[CaptDave]

I in no way support either practically or ideologically the idea of urban sprawl. It is inefficient and in many, many ways unsustainable. It can be controlled and should be, but it will not be eliminated unless the population decreases or stays the same. I am on the same side as many, if not most, of the urbanists on this site. However, I bristle at the notion that we should start forcing the changes on the population. I also see a lot of things stated as fact on here that simply are not true. Some is manipulation of information/data, and some is simply myopathy. I actually respect Spartan's views greatly because he not only has read about it but has made the sacrifices and effort to go SEE what is happening in the world. I also respect many on here who are putting their money where their words are...taking the risks to prove their points. I hope they are amply rewarded for it.

I think most people would agree with you on this Rover. I strongly believe we should redirect some of our resources to facilitate the rebirth of our American urban centers. I do not think we should continue to encourage further sprawl as we have nearly exclusively over the past 4 or 5 decades. I do not view living in an urban environment any more communal than living behind a wall in a suburban development.

There are no silver bullet solutions, nor are there any short term fixes. We have completely lost balance in our urban development and transportation policies; I think restoring balance is what many people would like to see. If we do this, we restore the choice of suburban or urban living. This will be a 10 year or longer process if it was started today - and the suburbs would still be available for those that choose that lifestyle.

[Just the facts]

To paraphrase the former Mayor of Bogota, a bus with 100 people is entitled to the same transportation funding and consideration as 100 single occupancy cars. Anyone else see the irony of calling Bogota socialist or fascist because it is easier to move around in than OKC? I imagine Rover isn't happy the government is making him buy health insurance but doesnt think twice about being forced to buy a car.

[metro]

I think most people would agree with you on this Rover. I strongly believe we should redirect some of our resources to facilitate the rebirth of our American urban centers. I do not think we should continue to encourage further sprawl as we have nearly exclusively over the past 4 or 5 decades. I do not view living in an urban environment any more communal than living behind a wall in a suburban development.

There are no silver bullet solutions, nor are there any short term fixes. We have completely lost balance in our urban development and transportation policies; I think restoring balance is what many people would like to see. If we do this, we restore the choice of suburban or urban living. This will be a 10 year or longer process if it was started today - and the suburbs would still be available for those that choose that lifestyle.

Well said.

[catch22]

Holy crap. It would be "urban"



This, if it were just more Browntones or something similar in form, it would feel extremely European. I think that in itself would be quite a view, even if it's just a narrow view.

I don't know why you think I am not in support of urbanism. Yes it'd be urban, but if you have a 3 story house. And you are paying extremely good money, as these cost. A view of the back of an apartment complex (literally feet away) or the view of an alley. Those two views are non starters for the price point. But what do I know?

[OKCisOK4me]

I don't know why you think I am not in support of urbanism. Yes it'd be urban, but if you have a 3 story house. And you are paying extremely good money, as these cost. A view of the back of an apartment complex (literally feet away) or the view of an alley. Those two views are non starters for the price point. But what do I know?

Then the price point needs to decrease.

[Spartan]

Well maybe we should consult Rogers Marvel Architects on what to do to get these apartments a view that is required for urban living...

[catch22]

Well maybe we should consult Rogers Marvel Architects on what to do to get these apartments a view that is required for urban living...

In reality... If all the land in the downtown area is taken. You must build on less desirable lots if you want to keep developing. But not all of our land is taken, far from it actually. If you have a lot of money to spend on a house. Where you can get street frontage and a good view for the same price as an alley view that is not directly connected to the sidewalk. Which one would you buy, Spartan?

[Spartan]

I don't think the view is as essential as you're making it out to be. If it is, then fine - these lots don't develop for a while.

But here are some photos I took in Amsterdam once. I don't know why you don't think this wouldn't sell in a prosperous American downtown:




While the Brownstones definitely look Dutch (brownstones by nature are either an Amsterdam or New Amsterdam "thing"), the alley we're talking about in Deep Deuce is actually much wider than the one above...which I guarantee you the equivalent square footage there would be at least $3M.

Otherwise don't call them the Brownstones. Call them the Tall Narrowish Estates at Maywood Park or something else ridiculous, maybe even get a "Morning Woods" or "Weeping Willows" joke in there too..and a gate

[catch22]

It may not be a HUGE deal but it definitely will be a factor as long as we have vacant parcels in the downtown area. And the Core to Shore area is about to bring a lot of them into the picture.

But which would you buy? I still like having questions answered.

[Spartan]

Which would I buy - I would buy the Brownstone that is in a beautiful, quaint, albeit cramped space, over a unit in C2S with a view because it is surrounded by nothing. I couldn't even believe that was posed as a real question.

I think the open range form is not what people are looking for in urban living. More than just an unobstructed view, I think people are looking for something that feels "complete." Arguing against completeness because it obstructs the view is very anti-urban. I bet there are a lot of folks who won't pay the downtown premiums on space just because the product is a facade, however they would purchase a unit were it authentically urban.

[catch22]

Which would I buy - I would buy the Brownstone that is in a beautiful, quaint, albeit cramped space, over a unit in C2S with a view because it is surrounded by nothing. I couldn't even believe that was posed as a real question.

I think the open range form is not what people are looking for in urban living. More than just an unobstructed view, I think people are looking for something that feels "complete." Arguing against completeness because it obstructs the view is very anti-urban. I bet there are a lot of folks who won't pay the downtown premiums on space just because the product is a facade, however they would purchase a unit were it authentically urban.

Nowhere did I say open range view. You are grasping at straws. I said a view of an alley won't be a selling point. A view of the street would be preferred by many not only for aesthetics but also for access issues and sense of safety concerns.

Don't put words in my mouth. My point is this: As long as there are more desirable open lots to develop that have street frontage, the more an alley view becomes a negative. Not saying it can't or won't sell, but it will definitely make it more difficult to sell at this point in time. If you think people would pick alley view over street frontage for the same price point and comparable construction, is hard to believe.

[Spartan]

You're talking about the kind of living space that doesn't even exist at all anywhere in Oklahoma. I'm sorry, but where's your expertise in urban development from? Wheres your market analysis homework?

[catch22]

I was not aware those were prerequisites to participate in this forum. Excuse me, wise one.

[Spartan]

Well its just absurd for you to categorically bemoan development of what could be a very, very unique "alley" as you call it

[catch22]

Well perhaps a fair solution is to have all posts run by a board of enlightened members such as yourself to make sure all analysis studies have been thoroughly reviewed by the poster. I apologize if I have offended you in any way because I do not hold the qualifications required to express my opinion.

[Spartan]

It's not that, this is just like fighting with people who said downtown will never ever ever have the density for streetcar circa 2006.. See the bigger picture goddam

[catch22]

Don't curse at me.

[Spartan]

$;(\% you little >~£{%#? person...

Just kidding. Cheers

[catch22]

$;(\% you little >~£{%#? person...

Just kidding. Cheers

Yes these lots will be developed and yes they will sell. That's not my argument.
These lots would not be considered prime, but secondary. This is a lot like the middle seat on an airplane. People do not book the middle seat when other options at the same price point are available. Window and aisle seats sell first. And once those sell the middle seats start to sell. They still sell though.

So moving that argument to this topic. These lots do not have direct sidewalk access (aisle seat) or a good view of the street (window seat). We still have plenty of supply of window and aisle seats so it will be hard to get a market premium from the middle seats.

That is my argument. Yes i do want these lots developed and yes I do think they will be developed and yes I do think they will sell. Just too soon IMO to capture a market premium off of them at this point in time. In the future when Deep Deuce and AA really start to mesh these will be fantastic lots.

I hope that makes sense. I waited until today to reply so we could both cool off a little bit and perhaps explain our perspectives a little better.