Hallelujah! Exurban migration may be coming to an end...

[soonerguru]

This is an outstanding development predicted by many sage contributors here.

Census Finds Record Low Growth in Outlying Suburbs

http://newsok.com/article/feed/367714?click_action=1

[Just the facts]

This trend is only going to accelerate. I feel sorry for these poeple that bought homes so far out. They will never be able to sell them regardless of how low prices go and they will be stuck paying $5, $6, $7, and $8 gas.

[Spartan]

It's hard not to see how rising fuel costs could do anything but improve American communities. Hopefully fuel and all other sprawl factors won't even be subsidized, but alas, I'm not that hopeful.

[Dulahey]

That's a national article, and I'm willing to bet the stats wouldn't match Oklahoma.

Just one example I know, but Newcastle grew about 42% the last 10 years.

[adaniel]

That's a national article, and I'm willing to bet the stats wouldn't match Oklahoma.

Just one example I know, but Newcastle grew about 42% the last 10 years.

Newcastle is still within 20 miles of several large employment bases (Dell, FAA, downtown OKC, OU) so its not an exurb in the truest sense. The commute there is comparable distance wise to the Northern half of Edmond.

The trends are happening here, maybe just not to the extent you see in much larger cities. You can drive around newer neighborhoods on the outskirts of town with a ton of still-empty lots.

When I think of exurbs in OKC, I'm usually thinking of areas north of Edmond, east of Choctaw, south of Norman, and west of Yukon. I can only speak from experience but I know of at least 3 people that have put off moves to areas near Wellston, McCloud, and Blanchard respectively due to gas prices/commuting issues.

[Bellaboo]

In todays paper, I thought I read where Canadian County is the fastest growing county in the state, percentage wise ? So much for an urban trend........

[Just the facts]

In todays paper, I thought I read where Canadian County is the fastest growing county in the state, percentage wise ? So much for an urban trend........

Some people do claim Oklahoma is 20 years behind though

The reality is high gasoline prices and limited federal dollars are going to force the issue whether the people want it to or not. Mankind simply cannot afford to sprawl all over the planet in a low density fashion. Cars made that possible for 50 years but those days are coming to an end - rapidly.

[BoulderSooner]

It's hard not to see how rising fuel costs could do anything but improve American communities. Hopefully fuel and all other sprawl factors won't even be subsidized, but alas, I'm not that hopeful.

Except for the loss of jobs and increased inflation.

[Dubya61]

Right! Yea! rising fuel costs. Now lets cram people into the city! I only hope we can be come as dense as other metropolitan areas, like, say, Naples, Italy. Now that's a metropolitan area to emulate! Stack e'm DEEP!

[Just the facts]

Except for the loss of jobs and increased inflation.

Brought on by the near 100% dependency on gasoline that is going up in price.

[Architect2010]

That's a national article, and I'm willing to bet the stats wouldn't match Oklahoma.

Just one example I know, but Newcastle grew about 42% the last 10 years.

Yeah, 42% growth because they added 7 people. Lol. Jk.

[Spartan]

Except for the loss of jobs and increased inflation.

Prove it. The nation switched from an urban to a suburban model for the purpose of manufacturing and construction jobs, building those cars and freeways, which fueled our post-war economic boom. Trust me, there's plenty of work that could be commissioned in the name of switching us back to healthy communities...

Somebody has to build those streetcars, light rail lines, and bicycles--and it's not as if personal vehicle ownership will ever go away.

As for inflation, as long as dependency for personal transport is on cheap fuel, that will be a competitive resource that will be a rising cost factored into groceries and consumer goods, so that will hit hardest the people who do not react personally to utilizing alternative transit. That will be the incentive--cutting down your fuel consumption on your own. This means cutting down on unneeded driving (joy rides), carpooling, combining errands, and not just alternative transit.

We'll survive it and be much better off for it. This is not something that we as a country need to be fearing and trying to do everything to prevent. We need to be finding ways to be innovative and make sure that the change over creates opportunities rather than eliminates opportunities.

[metro]

It's hard not to see how rising fuel costs could do anything but improve American communities. Hopefully fuel and all other sprawl factors won't even be subsidized, but alas, I'm not that hopeful.

Improvement is subjective. It may help "sustainability" and reduce sprawl, but what's still great about this country is mans freedom of choice.

[Just the facts]

Improvement is subjective. It may help "sustainability" and reduce sprawl, but what's still great about this country is mans freedom of choice.

Where is the choice to not own a car?

[metro]

Where is the choice to not own a car?

NYC, SF,Miami, Boston, the whole NE, Seattle, SD, Portland, Atlanta

[Just the facts]

NYC, SF,Miami, Boston, the whole NE, Seattle, SD, Portland, Atlanta

I don't see OKC on that list.

[metro]

Kerry, I thought you were a free market capitalist.

1.) you could still choose to be careless in OKC, thousands are, it's just not ideal
2.) in a free market, you can move to a place that meets your lifestyle, the government shouldnt have to create it for you

[Snowman]

Right! Yea! rising fuel costs. Now lets cram people into the city! I only hope we can be come as dense as other metropolitan areas, like, say, Naples, Italy. Now that's a metropolitan area to emulate! Stack e'm DEEP!

Bad news for exurbs does not necessarily equal great news for city cores, an article a few months ago had only a handful of US cities with more total dollars in development underway in the core than suburbs.

[Spartan]

Bad news for exurbs does not necessarily equal great news for city cores, an article a few months ago had only a handful of US cities with more total dollars in development underway in the core than suburbs.

That's interesting, do you have a link for that article? I'd like to read about the ones where that is the case.

[Snowman]

That's interesting, do you have a link for that article? I'd like to read about the ones where that is the case.

I do not have a link, New York was the only one I am totally sure about. OKC was mentioned but I do not remember if we were one of the cities or just had aspects that went with the subject.

[oneforone]

If you want to live the urban life all you have to do is move to an urban city. If you like the suburban life, Oklahoma City is one of the places you can live and enjoy it. Urban living comes with a high price, try renting a descent apartment or owning a descent home for that matter for less then $1000 a month. Anything that is in the neighborhood of what people in OKC are used to paying is going to be a dump or located in a high crime area in New York City or Los Angeles.

I think some of you have been watching too much television. A person working a median income job is not going to live in a posh apartment in a nice neighborhood. Most people living at or below the median income are living with several roommates or they are living in an apartment or home that has been passed on to them through family relations.

Personally I like what Oklahoma City has become, I don't want it to be another New Jersey, New York or Los Angeles. I have been around in my 30 going on 40 years by comparison Oklahoma City is cleaner and much safer then most of the larger cities I have lived in or visited.

[Just the facts]

Kerry, I thought you were a free market capitalist.

1.) you could still choose to be careless in OKC, thousands are, it's just not ideal
2.) in a free market, you can move to a place that meets your lifestyle, the government shouldnt have to create it for you

I am, that is why the vast automobile subsidy concerns me. It isn't sustainable. 4 miles of interstate through cheap land in OKC cost nearly a billion dollars. The federal government is $15 trillion in debt and in 2019 interest payments on the debt are going to surpass defense spending to move into the #3 position on government spending list. When are we going to admit out method of development since 1945 isn't working?

[BoulderSooner]

I am, that is why the vast automobile subsidy concerns me. It isn't sustainable. 4 miles of interstate through cheap land in OKC cost nearly a billion dollars. The federal government is $15 trillion in debt and in 2019 interest payments on the debt are going to surpass defense spending to move into the #3 position on government spending list. When are we going to admit out method of development since 1945 isn't working?

development spending .. has about .00001% to do with our national dept

[Just the facts]

development spending .. has about .00001% to do with our national dept

That was just but one example. Do you have any idea how much we spend on car payments, insurance, auto bailouts, gasoline, oil changes, medical expenses from auto accidents, national defense to protect oil fields, public services to support suburbia (created because the automobile exists), repairs, raw material extraction, road construction, court costs related to traffic, lives lost to DUI, garage door openers, ... the list could go on forever. Where does all this money come from and what else could we be spending it on?

We spend nearly $1.5 trillion per year just on gasoline.

[BoulderSooner]

and we use oil for much much more than just gasoline