Urban Vs. Suburban

[Plutonic Panda]

I want to live out in the sticks. With butt eating dogs and my choice of weapons. Coded gate with camera. Ready for the walkers, and salesmen.

Now imagine someone in this juggernaut suit walking up to your door after you shot them saying this: "sir, do you have moment to talk about Jesus Christ and possibly buy some Vacuum Cleaners"

btw, couldn't tell whether you were serious or not. The way you worded it made it sound like you were being sarcastic.

[ljbab728]

I want to live out in the sticks. With butt eating dogs and my choice of weapons. Coded gate with camera. Ready for the walkers, and salesmen.

Not me. I grew up and lived on a farm until I was 19. It had it's moments but I want no part of that any more.

[MWCGuy]

I think my ideal place would be rural on the outside edge of the city. I want be close enough to where I can get the essentials if I need them at the last minute. I would be happy with 5-10 acres with a house right smack dab in the middle. I would like to have a descent sized back yard with a garden and front yard where me and the wife can sit on a porch swing and watch the sun set at night. I don't expect the city to bring services to me. I will pay for everything on my little piece of the world. I would be willing to help pay to maintain the street too. After all I believe the city should focus on the main routes, the side streets should be the responsibility of the home owners and the businesses on that street.

I grew up suburban however, I don't like today's version of suburban it's too close for comfort and too cookie cutter for my taste. I like to more than a few feet between my walls and my neighbors. Right now I'm doing the apartment thing I don't care to be so close that I know when my neighbors flush.

[betts]

I've lived on 24th and Shartel, in a slighter nicer neighborhood in inner outer Oklahoma City, in Quail Creek, in Deer Creek on 3 acres, in Nichols Hills and now downtown. So I've experienced pretty much everything available here but farm or ranch living. The only one in which I ended up unhappy was Deer Creek. I hated driving, I hated taking care of all that land, I hated the close communication with undesirable wildlife that happened quite frequently ( possums in the garage, snake in the bathtub, scorpion in the sink, skunks on the deck). I now have no children at home and didn't want to care for a big yard and I wanted all the restaurants and activities downtown. I would be blissfully happy if I had a 10' x 25' yard. A tiny bit of green is really all I crave. But, when I had kids, Nichols Hills was the best place I lived, primarily because of its close proximity to the Plaza. I loved having Crescent Market so close, loved that my kids could bike or walk to the drugstore for lunch with friends, loved the shopping in the Plaza and restaurants and shops on Western. I loved bumping in to friends when I was put shopping or dining. I think neighborhood retail pockets, like what's happening in the Plaza district, the Paseo, 23rd St. and Capitol Hill make for the best type of living for people who do want a bit of yard. There's just nothing like having a bikeable or walkable center for dining, retail and grocery shopping close by. It makes you feel so much less isolated, so much more connected to your little community. A bit of yard is nice for kids, gardening, pets. If I were younger, I'd buy a house near the Plaza District and get super involved with the schools in that neighborhood. It's amazing what effect parents can have on schools.

Right now though, even though I'd love a tiny yard, I love being close to Bricktown, downtown and Midtown more.

[flintysooner]

I think my ideal place would be rural on the outside edge of the city. I want be close enough to where I can get the essentials if I need them at the last minute. I would be happy with 5-10 acres with a house right smack dab in the middle. I would like to have a descent sized back yard with a garden and front yard where me and the wife can sit on a porch swing and watch the sun set at night. I don't expect the city to bring services to me. I will pay for everything on my little piece of the world. I would be willing to help pay to maintain the street too. After all I believe the city should focus on the main routes, the side streets should be the responsibility of the home owners and the businesses on that street.

Pretty much the way I feel about it.

I grew up suburban however, I don't like today's version of suburban it's too close for comfort and too cookie cutter for my taste.

Exactly!

I like to more than a few feet between my walls and my neighbors. Right now I'm doing the apartment thing I don't care to be so close that I know when my neighbors flush.

I experienced that and disliked it immensely. I also was amazed at how violent and angry my neighbors could be with each other. Made me appreciate all the places I'd ever lived before that.

If I ever get to build an apartment building - and I hope to someday - then one of my goals for the project is to have the units quiet. And I'd like to do something to individualize the doors so as to help other tenants find their own places and not mine.

[flintysooner]

I've lived on 24th and Shartel, in a slighter nicer neighborhood in inner outer Oklahoma City, in Quail Creek, in Deer Creek on 3 acres, in Nichols Hills and now downtown. So I've experienced pretty much everything available here but farm or ranch living. The only one in which I ended up unhappy was Deer Creek. I hated driving, I hated taking care of all that land, I hated the close communication with undesirable wildlife that happened quite frequently ( possums in the garage, snake in the bathtub, scorpion in the sink, skunks on the deck). I now have no children at home and didn't want to care for a big yard and I wanted all the restaurants and activities downtown. I would be blissfully happy if I had a 10' x 25' yard. A tiny bit of green is really all I crave. But, when I had kids, Nichols Hills was the best place I lived, primarily because of its close proximity to the Plaza. I loved having Crescent Market so close, loved that my kids could bike or walk to the drugstore for lunch with friends, loved the shopping in the Plaza and restaurants and shops on Western. I loved bumping in to friends when I was put shopping or dining. I think neighborhood retail pockets, like what's happening in the Plaza district, the Paseo, 23rd St. and Capitol Hill make for the best type of living for people who do want a bit of yard. There's just nothing like having a bikeable or walkable center for dining, retail and grocery shopping close by. It makes you feel so much less isolated, so much more connected to your little community. A bit of yard is nice for kids, gardening, pets. If I were younger, I'd buy a house near the Plaza District and get super involved with the schools in that neighborhood. It's amazing what effect parents can have on schools.

Right now though, even though I'd love a tiny yard, I love being close to Bricktown, downtown and Midtown more.

Great post. I think you definitely made the right move and found the sweet spot for your tastes.

I also have no kids at home although we still are caring for a parent which is a significant restraint. But I don't buy much stuff anymore and a lot of what I do buy comes from Amazon or other Internet based suppliers. So in my rural vision I'd be loathe to give up Internet.

Also I don't intend to have a "real" farm and, since money is no object, I would hire what work I needed done. I don't want to be enslaved to anyplace I live.

And I do think that is one of the issues that is causing suburban areas to decline. We've all learned that owning a home and grounds is expensive in terms of time and money. And our construction hasn't provided much in the minimal maintenance area.

[Just the facts]

For those who say they want to live in the country, which of these two options are closer to what you envision?

Nearest store miles away


Small rural village

[flintysooner]

I personally want the first.

However, I am thinking about developing something like the second where the homes are clustered and actual farming and ranching is undertaken on the balance but the residents have access to the agricultural area.

[mkjeeves]

With money no object, I'd have some of each...apartment in Chicago near my kids and sprawling beach house in Florida, somewhat close to other family. However, I'd dump the Chicago place if my kids moved, it isn't that big of a draw for me on its own.

Otherwise, I'm pretty content for now with my acre about 7 miles out from middle of downtown in Council Grove down the street from Overholser. Barn that could have and has had a horse, a garage full of big boy toys, lots of room outside for the domestic animals to hang out and the wild ones to come and go. A good bit of my house is floor to ceiling windows without curtains and we enjoy having the outside part of our daily lives. Studio/workshop space and office at my business is just a few blocks away. I could have some but not all of that downtown for about ten times the money. Can't think of a reason why I would do that even if money were no object.

[betts]

Additionally, I'd like a basement apartment in Lakeview (Chicago) to give me that bit of yard I crave and to be close to 2 of my kids - at least for the summer. Too bad my daughter likely thinks her basement is a wee bit too close.

[PennyQuilts]

I personally think that if I didn't have grass under my feet and wildlife in abundance, I'd shrivel up and die. Concrete, to me, looks like a crypt for nature. I can't look at it without thinking of how the creatures who used to be there were wiped out to make room for malls and dental offices. I realize not everyone feels that way. Where we live is perfect for us - five acre lots situated so our view gives us more like twenty unimproved acres with a small stream for deer, fox, bobcats, owls, coyotes, etc. We can see the DT skyline off in the distance on a clear day but "going to town" is left for specific errands. The grocery store/Lowes/restaurants, etc are less than ten minutes away.

[Just the facts]

I can't look at it without thinking of how the creatures who used to be there were wiped out to make room for malls and dental offices. I realize not everyone feels that way. Where we live is perfect for us - five acre lots situated so our view gives us more like twenty unimproved acres with a small stream for deer, fox, bobcats, owls, coyotes, etc. We can see the DT skyline off in the distance on a clear day but "going to town" is left for specific errands. The grocery store/Lowes/restaurants, etc are less than ten minutes away.

Urban sprawl is the worst thing that ever happened to animals. We destroy sq. mile after sq. mile to build suburbia, pollute the environment along the way, and allow private ownership of waterfront land. When you get to that grocery store 10 minutes away how big is the parking lot?

[heyerdahl]

Urban vs. suburban is a false question.

City/Town vs. Sprawl is the real question.

A city or town can offer suburban neighborhoods with nice homes and yards, as with most parts of Oklahoma built before 1930, and a few built up until the 1940s.

The difference is that cities and towns can provide those options:
- Efficiently for better infrastructure
- Without isolating social groups and land uses
- While allowing a choice between driving/walking/biking depending on the trip or preference

Sprawl provides those options by:
- Isolating land uses to make them far away from each other
- Isolating social groups to keep income levels separated
- Taking away all transportation options other than personal car

The point is, both city and sprawl can offer high and low density options, but a spatial arrangement as a city provides both high and low density options with greater efficiency, flexibility, and adaptability.

[Just the facts]

[Anonymous.]

Post #12 summed it up perfectly.

The issue is what most people in OKC want, is the inefficient lifestyle. OKC is too far gone on the scale of pro suburbia. We have only just begun to pull that line on the scale back towards urban. Obviously the people on this forum are not a representation of the overall population in OKC.

But it starts somewhere, as a city we have left the starting line; I am excited to be a part of the beginning of what the new OKC will become.

[Just the facts]

I've said before, people want their acreage but they don't want to pay the tax rate necessary to provide services to that acreage.

[mkjeeves]

Everyone should be charged accordingly. On that note...we should assess a tax on every new downtown OKC resident to pay suburbia back for all the money we've handed over to revitalize downtown for them. $1 million a year per resident wouldn't begin to cover it for some years to come but it would be a good start.

[Anonymous.]

Everyone should be charged accordingly. On that note...we should assess a tax on every new downtown OKC resident to pay suburbia back for all the money we've handed over to revitalize downtown for them. $1 million a year per resident wouldn't begin to cover it for some years to come but it would be a good start.

I know you are joking, but the problem with your theory is that people of OKC voted. People vote on what they want, sometimes without realizing what they actually want. In effect, OKC is voting in favor of new urbanism over suburbanism. And with the obvious success of downtown, this want is only going to grow.

[Just the facts]

If you could come up with a way to charge people for the lifestyle/landuse decisions I would be all for it. Any idea what the real cost of a gallon gasoline is?

[mkjeeves]

I know you are joking, but the problem with your theory is that people of OKC voted. People vote on what they want, sometimes without realizing what they actually want. In effect, OKC is voting in favor of new urbanism over suburbanism. And with the obvious success of downtown, this want is only going to grow.

^That's what I can't stand. The arrogance to believe when I voted for a ballpark that it was a license to co-opt that into a far reaching agenda. You're part of what's wrong with politics in OKC.

[heyerdahl]

^That's what I can't stand. The arrogance to believe when I voted for a ballpark that it was a license to co-opt that into a far reaching agenda. You're part of what's wrong with politics in OKC.

Maybe your vote has changed, but 'the people' continue to vote for downtown improvements.

Those improvements to downtown in turn have increased property values and economic activity throughout the region.

[mkjeeves]

Maybe your vote has changed, but 'the people' continue to vote for downtown improvements.

Those improvements to downtown in turn have increased property values and economic activity throughout the region.

The last vote taken and every vote taken I have voted for downtown improvements. Are you saying that's all the last round of maps is?

Because some keep trying to tell us there was more than that spread around the city.

I voted for a streetcar and a convention center. That's not a like it or lump it, screw the burbs New Urbanism mandate.

[Just the facts]

^That's what I can't stand. The arrogance to believe when I voted for a ballpark that it was a license to co-opt that into a far reaching agenda. You're part of what's wrong with politics in OKC.

Do you think the City leaders in 1993 picked a downtown location totally by accident? Whether you knew it or not, you were voting for higher density and walkability way back in 1993. MAPS I had 9 projects:

Downtown Baseball Stadium
Downtown Arena
Downtown Canal
Downtown Library
Downtown Transit Link
Downtown River
Downtown Convention Center Rehab
Downtown Civic Center Rehab
Fairground Improvement

Did you ever wonder why 8 of 9 these were centered around downtown?

[mkjeeves]

You're telling us Mick's neighborhood BS is election year BS and his real plan is to let the burbs rot?

[Anonymous.]

The last vote taken and every vote taken I have voted for downtown improvements. Are you saying that's all the last round of maps is?

Because some keep trying to tell us there was more than that spread around the city.

I voted for a streetcar and a convention center. That's not a like it or lump it, screw the burbs New Urbanism mandate.

Which is why my original post I said "By effect, OKC is voting in favor of new urbanism".

I do not see how you can even argue against this, it is simply a fact. Voting for things that embrace new urbanism is actually voting for new urbanism.

Again, the - younger, newer, the future - of OKC wants new urbanism when they don't even realize it (yet).


It sounds more like you have an issue with MAPS and the way the packages are presented?