Population Growth for OKC

[Urbanized]

And for the record, I'm not saying people who relocate to Dallas are dim. There are all sorts of legitimate reasons to move there; jobs, education, family, entertainment options... ...but to move to from OKC to Dallas in search of "progressivism" and enlightenment is like moving from Buffalo to Boston to escape cold winters.

[Plutonic Panda]

Are those somehow mutually exclusive?

i think you are missing my point.

I'm saying people don't travel to those cities just because they're walkable. Out of all the people I know who have been to those cities, nowhere did they say how awesome it was to walk everywhere.

Listen, walking is cool. I have nothing against walking. I walk for about 5-10 miles/day and jog for almost 3. Depending on how I get placed in my school and what route I choose, I have multiple cities across the world I can live in for a year and I'm probably going to choose Paris. Will I walk there? Hell yes I will. But that is not what makes that city great.

[Urbanized]

sorry, I should have clarified. Dallas is not a city I have seen people go there to just move for a change. Austin, Portland, Seattle, Miami, NYC, and LA are cities that I've seen just pack up and move. Heck, I'm doing it, but I have school there.

I don't disagree that people move there for change. I've known a few who've moved from there to here for similar reasons, but obviously a larger city generally has more pull on a smaller city rather than the other way around.

[Plutonic Panda]

And for the record, I'm not saying people who relocate to Dallas are dim. There are all sorts of legitimate reasons to move there; jobs, education, family, entertainment option... ...but to move to from OKC to Dallas in search of "progressivism" and enlightenment is like moving from Buffalo to Boston to escape cold winters.

I agree with that.

[bchris02]

If OKC wants to attract people like me it needs to this one thing REALLY WELL -- create ONE truly walkable, dense, neighborhood that is vibrant, has a couple great schools, and is incredibly mixed use. But I've yet to see the commitment and frankly training within the planning department, to see that come to pass or seem possible. Many of the neighborhoods that are trendy are good, but are plateauing out (Plaza District, ), lack real development control and identity (Deep Deuce), or have already sold their soul (Core to Shore [see the Boulevard]).

OKC does have one district that could be all of that and more. Bricktown. Unfortunately, today its only a shell of its overall potential. Slowly but surely things are improving, but mid-rise condo towers could and should be proposed on the canal rather than mini-golf. The upper floors of all the historic buildings should be converted into housing or businesses. Imagine a Bricktown with all historic space in use, and all surface parking developed. Imagine Lower Bricktown "fixed." Imagine family-oriented attractions like a Ripley's House of Wax in Lower Bricktown. Imagine a canal with businesses, bars, and restaurants at all levels. Imagine all the roads repaved in brick and narrowed to give a more pedestrian feel. It could be truly amazing.

It's really easy to appreciate all that is happening in OKC. Some of the projects are really cool and the energy is just amazing. But there is a VERY palpable, even good old boy, system still in place that can't seem to help itself take great projects and opportunities and water them down or sell OKC short. I travel a lot for work and I can't stress enough how obvious it is that other cities have a much, much higher design and planning standard. And I can't even see that we've moved an inch forward on that. Projects that were proposed 10 years ago look the same as those approved today.

I would like to think OKC has inched forward since 10 years ago. I doubt Randy Hogan's abomination would be approved so quickly if proposed today. The good-ole-boy system is still in many ways living in the 1980s though as seen with the 499 Sheridan debacle. There are standards but variances are granted to almost anyone who asks for them so what's the point in having them?

[bchris02]

You are right, Bricktown could pull it off....

This is also why I personally am against Core 2 Shore. Instead of trying to create a new district out of nothing that may or may never take off (and if it does is still 30+ years from becoming mature), why not put that money and investment into a district that is already on its way like Bricktown or Midtown? OKC will be much better with a few great urban districts than too many half-baked ones. At the end of the day this is still a small city and even under the best of circumstances there is only so much that can be supported.

People are fooling themselves to think that the Core2Shore park is going to be surrounded by NYC-style highrises with NYC-style living recreated in the district surrounding it. At best, it will probably end up looking more like the Wheeler district.

[josh]

You clearly misunderstood me. They are recording population growth because of immigrants and a high birth rate. Native born residents are leaving. Over 12,000 in Miami/Ft Lauderdale and over 61,000 in LA/OC. That's just in one year.

When it comes to in migration and out migration,it has nothing to do with being a native or a transplant or whatever. It's the simple fact of leaving that city/county/metro.

[josh]

Nobody relocates to Dallas from OKC for ideological reasons. The relocate for economic reasons.

That seems to be an absolute statement that you nor anyone else could ever prove.

[hoya]

OKC's future has not yet been written. If you want a complete, walkable neighborhood with every amenity right now, then no, OKC doesn't have that. It probably won't have that for another 10 to 15 years, at the earliest. If you are looking for growth rates similar to Austin, you aren't going to get that either. This city has a lot of work to do and a long way to go before we become one of the "it" cities.

Real life isn't "She's All That". A city can't just take off its glasses, change its hairstyle, and then suddenly be the coolest girl in school. This is going to take time and effort, but the city has seen tremendous improvements over the past 15 years.

[bchris02]

And can OKC afford to be that careful in all of its neighborhoods? Nope, not at all. But it needs to pick at least one and really focus on world-class planning and design best practices. That's really my point and why I feel comfortable predicting that even in 15-20 years, OKC wont have a competitive neighborhood.

I wish you weren't right about this but I feel you are. I wish the city would pick one neighborhood and focus on making it a truly awesome urban neighborhood but nobody seems to be talking about that. All the talk seems to be on jumpstarting Core 2 Shore or Film Row or Capitol Hill when the city still does not have a single urban district that has reached maturity. The city also needs to ditch the "take what we can get" mentality. This city is beyond the point where it is so desperate for any kind of downtown investment that it has to grant variances to developers proposing things that would be laughed at in other cities. OKC in 2015 is at the point where it CAN say no. Question is, will it?

[Bunty]

None of my friends like Mary Fallin. None of my friend voted either.

I voted for Dorman. If I choose not to vote, it's usually the city elections.

[Bunty]

They problem is the politics in the state of Oklahoma people complain about fallin but don't vote. If u got a bad rep things like the hoodie bill don't help. Also its the little things that would help like sidewalks. Selling liquor in stores. The public transportation system. Lack of good housing stock in the city.

Speaking of liquor, I was surprised, since it's not such a real small and remote place, when Shawnee last Nov. narrowly voted against allowing liquor by the drink on Sunday. At least Stillwater and Enid didn't have that problem when they earlier voted on the same issue and passed it by around 70%. Oklahoma is so silly with so much irony and surprises, such as the earthquakes, I wonder if it works just as much to draw in people, who have to come see, maybe even move here, to believe the nonsense that goes on, as much as it draws people away.

[Urbanized]

That seems to be an absolute statement that you nor anyone else could ever prove.

Why do you care?

[dankrutka]

I wish you weren't right about this but I feel you are. I wish the city would pick one neighborhood and focus on making it a truly awesome urban neighborhood but nobody seems to be talking about that. All the talk seems to be on jumpstarting Core 2 Shore or Film Row or Capitol Hill when the city still does not have a single urban district that has reached maturity. The city also needs to ditch the "take what we can get" mentality. This city is beyond the point where it is so desperate for any kind of downtown investment that it has to grant variances to developers proposing things that would be laughed at in other cities. OKC in 2015 is at the point where it CAN say no. Question is, will it?

How is no one talking about "that?" People constantly talk about Deep Deuce (and other neighborhoods) and their urban potential. Does OKC have the strict design standards being sought in this discussion? No, but Deep Deuce is also OKC's first attempt at a serious urban neighborhood in quite a while. I'm not disregarding Sid's serious concerns (maybe bchris' piggybacking on any negative comments about OKC), but Deep Deuce is doing a lot right too. It's laying a good foundation that might connect to a more fully developed Bricktown neighborhood some day (imagine the parking lots separating the two filled with urban mixed use developments)... Already, Deep Deuce has:
- Several high quality restaurants (Urban Jonnie's, DD Grill, Slaughter's, Wedge, Urban Roots)
- An upscale cigar bar
- A hotel with bars, a restaurant, another restaurant space, etc.
- OKSea with a restaurant and retail
- A small grocery store and deli
- A salon
- A gym
- A coffee shop coming soon
- A variety of for lease and sale residential units at different price points
- And this is all just blocks from tons more amenities

90% has been built in the last 5 years. That's pretty damn quick to put together a decent (maybe not world class) urban neighborhood. It's hard to not be ecstatic about what's happened there and a heck of a lot of people have been talking about it. It's easy to get wrapped up in what people, places, and things aren't... and forget to see what they are.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yet it still feels like a half ass district that is light years away from what a true mixed use high density urban neighborhood should be. At least from my perspective. It has come a long ways though.

[RickOKC]

I really couldn't disagree with you more on this, bchris. The "limited good" argument is so repressed and outdated. All you're espousing is an even more limited version of the core vs. suburbs diatribe. These interests don't have to compete or be an either/or proposition. The same group who is presenting these mindsets also said 10 years ago that we couldn't sustain DD, Bricktown, Midtown, and the CBD. But all that--and more--is doing just fine. Not one of us knows what OKC will look like in 20 years, but I imagine it will far exceed the expectations you currently have for it. It will exceed your expectations, in part, because their are enough people who don't hold to the dated "limited good," fight for what's left approach to development and planning.

This is also why I personally am against Core 2 Shore. Instead of trying to create a new district out of nothing that may or may never take off (and if it does is still 30+ years from becoming mature), why not put that money and investment into a district that is already on its way like Bricktown or Midtown? OKC will be much better with a few great urban districts than too many half-baked ones. At the end of the day this is still a small city and even under the best of circumstances there is only so much that can be supported.

People are fooling themselves to think that the Core2Shore park is going to be surrounded by NYC-style highrises with NYC-style living recreated in the district surrounding it. At best, it will probably end up looking more like the Wheeler district.

[Spartan]

By the way, I haven't fully looked at the numbers yet, but here's a possible explanation for lower-than-expected numbers: A, it's possible that the metro numbers aren't that different, and B, that the year before reflected a large influx of people that moved from Moore into OKC after the tornado. Cleveland County is obviously a growing area... Norman's growth numbers are very strong. Moore had very strong growth as well, before the most recent bad tornado.

Another disparate impact of OKC's vast sprawl is that our "high-intensity sprawl" with no geographic constraints means that we put a lot of people in the way of tornadoes every year. Central Oklahoma experiences the region's highest-intensity of tornadoes. As we keep packing more subdivisions into former farmland, more development is in the way of more tornadoes.

I'm not sure I buy into the theory that tornadoes can't develop as well over urbanized areas, but it's interesting that the southwest edge of town experiences an indisputable frequency of tornadoes.

[RickOKC]

It can be hard to give your opinion on this subject when the truth is closer to the line rather than extreme. I love Deep Deuce and enjoyed living there. You've listed some good amenities. I'm not seeing the neighborhood as a whole have that "livability" fabric though. Several awesome establishments doesn't a livable neighborhood make. We're talking deeper issues, I think and admittedly, these issues that can be somewhat open for debate. As my discussions with Dwell in another thread, illustrated. I see some things are not representing a strong, positive livable vibe. He sees it another way.

I've gone to amazing restaurants and explored neighborhoods in cities that have many of the right parts. This isn't an all or nothing kind of thing here. I never said Deep Deuce wouldn't be a good place to live. I'm submitting that if you want to attract people who can choose to live where they want, and are looking for a very livable, urban lifestyle, Deep Deuce, even with what it has to offer today and likely will offer in the future, wont be competitive.

Come a long way? Of course. Can it attract families with kids who want to put their kids in the school there (and can walk just a few blocks to get to school safely)? Nope. A gym? Where's the community center, aquatic center, outdoor parks, fields, trails, gardens, copious amounts of sidewalks? All that's going into Deep Deuce? Naw man. The land is almost all claimed and bought up and it's going to bit apartment complexes and condos on the east. Let's not kid ourselves. That neighborhood will be dense, but a far cry of a complete, livable, sustainable neighborhood.

I'm going to be incredibly generous because I love the area so much, but as I've actually seen (and may not be the case with you), SO MANY people in OKC actually just don't know what a livable neighborhood looks like. I'll never forget being scolded for stating that a large, multi-block park couldn't exist in a neighborhood without a parking lot (the one across me street has ZERO parking and hundreds of people use it each day. Or how every building going in along commercial corridors ALWAYS has commercial on the ground floor and housing above. Or that parks aren't programmed but instead are safe, clean, green space that is used by community. Where's the nearest one of those from Deep Deuce? Literally MILES AWAY.

I can't imagine some people aren't going to read this and think I'm being pretentious. But I really just want to see OKC put a neighborhood on the map and kill it. Force people who have options to consider it. Force them to come up with a damn good excise for not entertaining OKC as an option. Right now, all the neighborhoods we love in OKC are in fact good, but don't come close to competing at that level. Happy to share more and again, I really am not putting down OKC or Deep Deuce. I'm just hoping it finds a way to do something even better.

And you don't have to take my word for it. Just use tools like StreetAdvisor | Best Cities to Live in, Best Neighborhoods and Streets or https://www.walkscore.com/. I only live in the 10th best neighborhood in Seattle and man, there's not a neighborhood in OKC that even comes close. I know that because I've lived in both now. Without a car. With kids. With a passion for both places.

Is OKC going to start acting like Seattle today? Nope? Should it be displaying a progressive planning nature if one is to expect it will some day? Which is my central point and I still haven't seen any evidence, even with your list of cool establishments, that OKC is making the necessary admin and planning changes to actually get there anytime soon.

So well presented, Sid. And I don't see how anyone would question your love and appreciation for OKC. Seattle has more going for it than well-planned individual neighborhoods. It has a culture that values what you are describing in a way that is simply not present here--as much I may wish it were. That's where I just disagree on the best way to move the city forward in what is feasible for it to accomplish. The culture has to change, and I think it has to change by a greater number of people being drawn into "marginally" livable and urban environments--as opposed to "killing it" in what proves to be one urbanist-elite neighborhood. I would really love to see it your way if you can help me see it, but I'm currently for C2S, Wheeler, and any other simultaneous developments that will draw people into an environment where mindsets can then change. But again, honestly, planting the most amazing neighborhood in America in the middle of OKC still wouldn't cause a prevailing cultural shift in the city at large; many wouldn't leave their suburban lifestyle to even drive (walk) through it.

[dankrutka]

It should go without saying Sid that your contributions to OKCTalk (and OKC) are beyond reproach. I've learned a ton about urban living from you and other posters here... at least enough to the point that my wife finds my incessant urbanism critiques intolerable. Lol.

You're probably correct that Deep Deuce is not reaching it's full potential as a livable urban neighborhood. I guess I'm just thinking about the context. What are the chances OKC was going to move directly from having absolutely no urban sensibilities as a city to creating what you're describing? Deep Deuce may not be the urban option that exists elsewhere, but, it's incredibly quick creation could lead OKC closer to that ideal somewhere nearby. I just think Deep Deuce has been a big step in the right direction. Does that make sense?

[AP]

I've learned a ton about urban living from you and other posters here... at least enough to the point that my wife finds my incessant urbanism critiques intolerable.

The running joke in my friend circle is how much I talk about urbanism and walkability and they all hate it.

[hoya]

Agree with all of this. I was even willing to wait that long. But if Deep Deuce, for example, fills up with a bunch of developments over the next 10 years that doesn't make it that kind of neighborhood, then it doesn't take waiting that long to see its future.

I can tell if she's going to be all that by the fact that she keeps reaching for the purple eye-liner and the costume jewelry. We're not going to just tear down the LEVEL in 10 - 15 years when DD fills up and add ground-floor commercial all the way around it. Or tear down the parking garage at Aloft. See what I mean? The steps getting these neighborhoods there are just as important now as they will be in a decade if we expect to achieve that kind of a neighborhood.

Deep Deuce is the first real urban neighborhood in OKC. It has built up very quickly. You can see how much developers here have learned during the course of the neighborhood's growth. Compare LEVEL to the Steelyard and the improvements are obvious. But the presence of an apartment complex without enough ground floor retail doesn't forever doom Deep Deuce. I've been to Seattle and there plenty of apartment buildings there just like that.

[bchris02]

I really couldn't disagree with you more on this, bchris. The "limited good" argument is so repressed and outdated. All you're espousing is an even more limited version of the core vs. suburbs diatribe. These interests don't have to compete or be an either/or proposition. The same group who is presenting these mindsets also said 10 years ago that we couldn't sustain DD, Bricktown, Midtown, and the CBD. But all that--and more--is doing just fine. Not one of us knows what OKC will look like in 20 years, but I imagine it will far exceed the expectations you currently have for it. It will exceed your expectations, in part, because their are enough people who don't hold to the dated "limited good," fight for what's left approach to development and planning.

I would agree with this except that all of those districts are still a long way from potential, which kind of proves my point. Deep Deuce is the farthest along and even it, for reasons explained by Sid, isn't quite there. OKC needs just one or two neighborhoods that can compete with urban districts in places like Austin and Seattle. It's possible, but in a city as small as OKC it's going to take real vision and a concentrated effort to get there.

[RickOKC]

I would agree with this except that all of those districts are still a long way from potential, which kind of proves my point. Deep Deuce is the farthest along and even it, for reasons explained by Sid, isn't quite there. OKC needs just one or two neighborhoods that can compete with urban districts in places like Austin and Seattle. It's possible, but in a city as small as OKC it's going to take real vision and a concentrated effort to get there.

Why is just one or two neighborhoods that compete with Austin what is best for Oklahoma City? Other than the extremely limited audience that would care and would go to the trouble to make a comparison, how is the strategy you are describing the best option to forward the interests of Oklahoma City? I really am on board with you on the value of New Urbanism benefits; where we split is on a purist idealism at all costs and a realism and pragmatism that yields attainable progress for the environment.

[adaniel]

Deep Deuce is the first real urban neighborhood in OKC. It has built up very quickly. You can see how much developers here have learned during the course of the neighborhood's growth. Compare LEVEL to the Steelyard and the improvements are obvious. But the presence of an apartment complex without enough ground floor retail doesn't forever doom Deep Deuce. I've been to Seattle and there plenty of apartment buildings there just like that.

Here's where conversations like this bother me. Deep Deuce was the first real experiment this city (and state, frankly) had in creating a true urban neighborhood, much like Bricktown was the first true dense, walkable entertainment districts. BT was not flawless and still isn't but wet the appetite enough for other people/groups/businesses to form their own little urban nodes made in their image that they felt BT lacked. I imagine the same will happen with Deep Deuce. Rest assured, if not for Bricktown, there'd be no Auto Alley, no Midtown, no Film Row, and no Plaza District. Someone just had to be first, and unfortunately they will get the brunt of the criticism, but it could have easily been anywhere else.

And lets touch on logistics. Deep Deuce isn't even that big; only 15 blocks at my best count. Are we really to assume that it will have EVERYTHING an urban neighborhood can/should have?

[adaniel]

By the way, I haven't fully looked at the numbers yet, but here's a possible explanation for lower-than-expected numbers: A, it's possible that the metro numbers aren't that different, and B, that the year before reflected a large influx of people that moved from Moore into OKC after the tornado. Cleveland County is obviously a growing area... Norman's growth numbers are very strong. Moore had very strong growth as well, before the most recent bad tornado.

Given the fact that Cleveland County *technically* recorded an out migration of 1,700 this is highly likely. There is no other explanation for this except for the fact that there was about 1,000 housing units taken out by the storm. These estimates are just that--estimates. Based largely on housing units, utility hookups, IRS data, etc. These are not sophisticated enough to pick up on large but temporary migrations of people displaced from a natural disasters and who might be living with family, friends, hotels, shelters, etc.

If you look at the estimates by county, you'd see with the exception of Cleveland County, they are largely growing in line with what they have over the past 5 years or so. Which is why I try to parse everything out in my initial post. It seems to have fallen of deaf ears though.