Started to get into this topic on another thread and I'm sure it's been discussed here before, but I'm new so please indulge me!
Yes, most cities have this problem but none to the extent of OKC. Yes, it is geographically huge but annexing hundreds of square miles of adjacent land is actually a great way for a city to control urban sprawl... You can keep a tight rein on how that land is used, which can be a good thing.
But, OKC has done just the opposite. The powers that be rubber stamp every single building permit that comes across their desks, which is a far different process than many cities employ. Typically, their are areas that are identified as priority areas for development and other areas are kept generally undeveloped until there is need.
Simply put, there have been way too many houses built considering the growth of the population.
Not only is urban sprawl ugly, it greatly dillutes the resources of the city and subtracts from the community feel. How connected do you think people that live at 150th & May feel to downtown OKC and all the other common resources that have to be developed and maintained for the greater good of the entire community?
I grew up in the Putnam City area in the 60's and 70's, which was the Edmond of it's time. Just a couple of decades later, the area has really gone downhill in much the same way that much of the OKC school district took a dive some time ago.
Most of the people I went to HS with (and their parents) now live in Edmond or far, far NW OKC. And why wouldn't they? Brand new houses being built by the hundreds and for the most part they are pretty reasonable.
But the consequence is that the city rots in concentric circles when you keep building further and further out. Why stay in an area that is aging? Just discard it and move on. Obviously, this is bad for the entire community but I can't blame individual home buyers.
I can blame, however, city leadership.
How can we make the city attractive with landscaping if we've spread 500,000 people over a huge area? How can we efficiently maintain roads and provide police and fire? You can we begin to approximate a community?
Is this issue even beind discussed among city leaders? If so, I haven't heard it mentioned.
I would also say the city has done a very poor job in terms of minimum landscape requirements, set-backs, etc.
Bookmarks