I just got back to Ohio after spending a week back home. While there are some rare bumpy spots, the roads were all so incredibly smooth in OKC, even to an extent that I didn't quite recall. When you consider how much money OKC spends on road pavement maintenance (almost all of its bond projects), it makes sense. Living in a state where potholes are the norm, not the exception, also puts things into perspective. In fact I think OKC's roads are far smoother than those of any city north of it...even very affluent ones like Boston which has potholes you wouldn't believe.

And so there we have it. I just wanted to start an appreciation thread for how smooth OKC's roads are, and perhaps next a fan club if there should be enough interest. There should be because OKCers spend so much time on them..

Though, perhaps one thing we could improve on is everything between the road and the building face. Our development doesn't interact at all with these beautifully paved ribbons of excellence that we drive on. Maybe the occasional landscaping would also improve the driving experience and soften the harsh plains landscape we have.

But despite the harshness surrounding the roads, the pavement itself is a sight to behold. Perhaps we should shift our focus...

It is amazing a difference when you compare the two areas. Of course OKC benefits from not having the constant assault of salt on the pavement and the longer duration freeze/thaw season they get back north.

Overall though...the roads here are in really good shape in most cases.

The roads are great.

The interstates are finally getting there. When I first moved here in 2009 (before all the money influx into I-35) driving through Oklahoma was ALMOST as bad as driving through Louisiana.

I have to say driving back from my parents house in Dallas this weekend, I definitely noticed that, aside from a small section of rough pavement north of Pauls Valley, it was surprisingly smooth. I really can't think of any interstate in OKC that is exceptionally rough. If we can just get the interchanges fixed we'd be in business.

I think a lot of it does depend on your perspective. I remember driving some friends who were from Long Island across the 235/44 interchange. I muttered something like, why is this road so rough? They both laughed and said "where we are from this is normal!"

I really can't think of any interstate in OKC that is exceptionally rough. If we can just get the interchanges fixed we'd be in business.


Don't drive to Fort Smith ever? Or out just west of town on I-40? Accordion is the best way to describe parts of those stretches, but they are in the process of being remedied.

^
Well to be fair I did say OKC...there are plenty of corners in this state outside the metro where the roads are atrocious.

And yes I definitely agree that 40 in the eastern part of the state is bad. I have to take it sometimes when I go to McAlester. They have fixed it up to about a mile or 2 before the Indian Nation Turnpike interchange and its by far the least favorite part of that drive...terrible pothole patches everywhere!

Don't drive to Fort Smith ever? Or out just west of town on I-40? Accordion is the best way to describe parts of those stretches, but they are in the process of being remedied.

I drove to Sallisaw 2 weeks ago. It's actually pretty smooth other than a patch or two around Okemah.

If we're broadening our perspective, Tulsa's roads are much rougher than ours. I believe Dallas, also, unless they've rebuilt many of them since 2011.

These things are cyclical.. I remember OKC's roads being awful for a while, esp on the southside. We're in such good shape there that we should now take time to notice it, and also point out that Tulsa's roads have always been a mess.. :Smiley122

Remember that highways are ODOT's responsibility, not City Hall's.

I-235/I-44 is by far the worst interstate stretch in OKC. And I am not speaking of traffic, but road quality as well.

I contacted ODOT several times about specific problems on this stretch and they don't even reply. I just replaced a front driver's side hub assembly and I don't doubt this area has a lot to do with it.

I-235/I-44 is by far the worst interstate stretch in OKC. And I am not speaking of traffic, but road quality as well.

I contacted ODOT several times about specific problems on this stretch and they don't even reply. I just replaced a front driver's side hub assembly and I don't doubt this area has a lot to do with it.

No offense but don't waste your time, they're not ignoring you. That entire interchange is under redevelopment. Just because you don't see a specific portion of the interchange already being worked on, doesn't mean they haven't been in planning/design for that for years.

I-235/I-44 is by far the worst interstate stretch in OKC. And I am not speaking of traffic, but road quality as well.

I contacted ODOT several times about specific problems on this stretch and they don't even reply. I just replaced a front driver's side hub assembly and I don't doubt this area has a lot to do with it.

At least it is in the process of getting redone. 35/240 keeps getting pushed back. ODOT enjoys watching the blood flow there after the daily accidents. Some day they'll do something about it.

If we're broadening our perspective, Tulsa's roads are much rougher than ours. I believe Dallas, also, unless they've rebuilt many of them since 2011.

These things are cyclical.. I remember OKC's roads being awful for a while, esp on the southside. We're in such good shape there that we should now take time to notice it, and also point out that Tulsa's roads have always been a mess.. :Smiley122

Remember that highways are ODOT's responsibility, not City Hall's.

I'll cut most of Eastern Oklahoma a bit of a break since it is so much wetter in that part of the state. Doesn't let ODOT off the hook but I can understand why.

As far as Tulsa is concerned, that's just mismanagement by their city government. The highways are decent now that 44 is getting a needed upgrade, but it doesn't help the average Tulsan since their freeway system is pretty useless for getting around town (although its great for getting through the city).

I've always been impressed by Dallas's freeways, and they are actually doing a good job fixing the main arterials. They were much worse back when I was growing up there.

What they heck on they doing to 635 on the north side? Just drove through there between 75 and 35E for the first time in a while last weekend.

No offense but don't waste your time, they're not ignoring you. That entire interchange is under redevelopment. Just because you don't see a specific portion of the interchange already being worked on, doesn't mean they haven't been in planning/design for that for years.


I know it is scheduled to be redone, but they still do patch work on it. THey just replaced one of the concrete barriers in the middle a couple weeks ago. The area I am talking about is actually where asphalt has raised against concrete creating a speedbump. This is in the southbound lanes, south of I-44 interchange. It needs to be ground down, that is all.

Every time I go to Tulsa I remember Spartan how true this is. OKC seems to have a really good handle on resurfacing.

Like adaniel said, it's just a different city management competency (or lack thereof).

What they heck on they doing to 635 on the north side? Just drove through there between 75 and 35E for the first time in a while last weekend.

$3.0B (+ or -) worth of improvements. A couple years budget for ODOT.

http://www.newlbj.com/documents/I635ManagedLanes-ProjectOverview.pdf

They finally fixed the stretch of 23rd between Meridian and May. That was awful for years. They still haven't painted the lines a month later, but I'll take what I can get.

$3.0B (+ or -) worth of improvements. A couple years budget for ODOT.

http://www.newlbj.com/documents/I635ManagedLanes-ProjectOverview.pdf

Thanks, I could tell it was gonna be some below grade lanes, but that helps.

Thanks, I could tell it was gonna be some below grade lanes, but that helps.

Don't know where I read it, but I am pretty sure this is currently the biggest road construction project in the US right now. Its being financed by Spanish company Cintra, who will be collecting tolls on it for 50 years.

When its done, you'll be able to drive in toll lanes (called TEXpress lanes) that adjust their price according to congestion while the masses idle in gridlock on the main lanes. Screwy, but probably the future of highway construction in this country.

The worst part of construction is only now getting started so I would avoid the area for at least the next two years.

What they heck on they doing to 635 on the north side? Just drove through there between 75 and 35E for the first time in a while last weekend.
Is that the 26 lane monstrosity that was proposed (or variant of) a plan that was announced when I lived there in 1992. I lived off of 635 (Forest/Abrams area) so I was pretty familiar with it there.

Keep in mind the Dallas metro has 7 million inhabitants.

OKC has 1 million.

I know it is scheduled to be redone, but they still do patch work on it. THey just replaced one of the concrete barriers in the middle a couple weeks ago. The area I am talking about is actually where asphalt has raised against concrete creating a speedbump. This is in the southbound lanes, south of I-44 interchange. It needs to be ground down, that is all.



Feel the need to update this as credit is due.

ODOT actually ground down this exact section I informed them about. They must have done it Sunday night. They never replied to my inquiries, but it is great to see they're listening still.

For what it is worth, it took about a little over a month from notification of the problem, to solution. That is some good turnaround considering the conditions of interstates/highways around here.

i don't know where you folks are experiencing all of these smooth roads (we do have some, but they are the exception and not the rule). The resurfacing work in recent years, I have experienced has been very shoddy and not any better than before it was done. Wasting hundreds of thousands if not millions in the process. We are not getting what we are paying for with the shoddy work and will end up paying for it to have to be done again years before they should.

I wish they would do the roads in cement and do it right!

i don't know where you folks are experiencing all of these smooth roads (we do have some, but they are the exception and not the rule). The resurfacing work in recent years, I have experienced has been very shoddy and not any better than before it was done. Wasting hundreds of thousands if not millions in the process. We are not getting what we are paying for with the shoddy work and will end up paying for it to have to be done again years before they should.

I agree, but I have to know if Spartan's title for his thread was tongue in cheek.

UnclePete: That is a possibility but his original post (oh, now I get it... "OP") read as being sincere...Spartan???

I agree, but I have to know if Spartan's title for his thread was tongue in cheek.

Not in the slightest. Every single city in the world has citizens complaining about bumpy roads, it's like the go-to angry citizen thing. Since living in Ohio for the time being, and spending a lot of time in Chicago and NYC lately, I just wanted to frame a discussion about how smooth the roads really are.

It shocks me to no end when I see the Pete White segment of society say things like, "You guys need to stop investing in downtown and support areas where the people live, our roads are in disrepair, crime is out of control, the services are so bad etc etc." OKC actually scores higher than almost any other major city in quality of services and the pavement the citizens drive on is also extremely well-maintained, compared to other cities.

The problem in OKC is that there isn't any well-maintained pavement for anything other than cars, pedestrians and bicyclists are being mowed over on the daily, and our sprawl is still continuing to make it more difficult and more expensive to provide top-notch services.


The biggest problem now facing OKC is that we have a huge chunk of 1970s suburbia, directly commensurate in size to the newly-built 2000s suburbia, that is now deteriorating into lower-income neighborhoods. The Putnam City area is perfectly set up for a firestorm of social conditions and adverse demographic change for a number of reasons, and it's happening fast. The Pete White mentality wants to stop investing in the center city in order to do whatever possible to keep the 1970s neighborhoods afloat for a little longer. They want to sacrifice our ability to stay ahead of this, fight the root problem, and build a future that isn't driven by sprawl cycles just to win a few suburban votes in a time when we don't need this kind of divisiveness being thrown at us by Pete White.

So that's the moral to the story that I'm getting at. Essentially stop complaining about roads that are extremely smooth to drive on already and let's tackle real problems facing this city.

At least it is in the process of getting redone. 35/240 keeps getting pushed back. ODOT enjoys watching the blood flow there after the daily accidents. Some day they'll do something about it.

Whew....that's quite a way to put that buddy!

The biggest problem now facing OKC is that we have a huge chunk of 1970s suburbia, directly commensurate in size to the newly-built 2000s suburbia, that is now deteriorating into lower-income neighborhoods. The Putnam City area is perfectly set up for a firestorm of social conditions and adverse demographic change for a number of reasons, and it's happening fast. The Pete White mentality wants to stop investing in the center city in order to do whatever possible to keep the 1970s neighborhoods afloat for a little longer. They want to sacrifice our ability to stay ahead of this, fight the root problem, and build a future that isn't driven by sprawl cycles just to win a few suburban votes in a time when we don't need this kind of divisiveness being thrown at us by Pete White.

So that's the moral to the story that I'm getting at. Essentially stop complaining about roads that are extremely smooth to drive on already and let's tackle real problems facing this city.

I live in the PC area and you're no doubt correct about it's deterioration. My question to you is, how do you fix that? I'd love to stay put where we are, send our kids to Dennis/Hefner/PC North but as you said, the decline is rapidly happening.

I live in the PC area and you're no doubt correct about it's deterioration. My question to you is, how do you fix that? I'd love to stay put where we are, send our kids to Dennis/Hefner/PC North but as you said, the decline is rapidly happening.

The fixing it is not the problem, Pahdz.

The REAL question, is why should OKC invest the money to clean up Warwick/PC-North/73162 instead of Capitol Hill, Crossroads Mall, East of State Capital, PC West: 10th/23rd/39th area, Western Heights, OCCC, OSU-OKC, Classen-Ten-Penn, Millwood...

Keep in mind, your area (the area I grew up in...I spent my 13 years of public education in the 3 schools you listed...) is in much much better shape than all the areas I listed, and there are plenty of other areas left unlisted.

To be sure, I actually would be an advocate of trying to preserve the integrity of the 73162+ area because I think it is still salvageable and it's as good of a suburban-OKC area as anywhere else. If I were running the city, I'd sell off some land to Bethany/Warr Acres/The Village/Moore and focus on some of the areas that are either something we could keep relatively nice or something that has some good bones for redevelopment (like Capitol Hill). But, just because that's what I think, doesn't mean that's what the constituents of other parts of the city want (and why would they?)

I'm not arguing with you, but it's an endless cycle chasing areas that need "cleaning up." You clean up the areas you listed, and in 20 years 73162 might need the same thing (I doubt it, but you get where I'm going). 73162 doesn't need any additional funds for cleaning up right now, what it needs is some people who live there who give a damned about the area and schools.

I know 73162 is fine. Unfortunately I'm not zoned to Dennis, but Wiley Post. Going to have to get creative to get our kid to Dennis if we stay.

There is a lot of good stock in 73162: Warwick's, Blue Stem, Ski Island, Lakehurst, Cobblestone (close enough). That should help.longevity, but instead of balling at the lower income and less pride moving into the area, those who have the means in the area need to start community projects that help alleviate some of the issues that these lower income families have, especially including programs at all the schools so thar the relatively good name that North had for 30 years can stay there.

Trust me, I'd love nothing more than to stay in Camden Place, but it's incredibly tough because when our friends across the street move to Edmond this year, my daughter is going to have zero kids on her street to play with.

It's a tough dilemma, I certainly don't want to leave, but the vibe I get from the people my parents age in our neighborhood is "get out while you can."

That sucks

Unfortunately I'm not zoned to Dennis, but Wiley Post. Going to have to get creative to get our kid to Dennis if we stay.Could be worse; you could be in the Tulakes area, which is even worse (two of my grandchildren started there). Of course that's south of Wilshire and consequently in 73132, but the problems are the same in both zones: too much poverty and too few concerned parents. Unfortunately I don't see any immediate solution to either cause...

Wiley Post would be fine if it wasn't for the apartment complex adjacent to it.

Trust me, I'd love nothing more than to stay in Camden Place, but it's incredibly tough because when our friends across the street move to Edmond this year, my daughter is going to have zero kids on her street to play with.

It's a tough dilemma, I certainly don't want to leave, but the vibe I get from the people my parents age in our neighborhood is "get out while you can."

That sucks

Really...Camden Place?

I have family members in the adjacent neighborhood (Whitehall) and that seems like a very nice area. I'm a bit floored people would be so willing to abandon what is, at least visually, a well kept neighborhood.

Just to be clear, I'm not criticizing you for wanting to move. Everyone has to do what's best for their family. But I sometimes wonder if just the mere perception of an area's decline matters more than what is actually going on? I used to live in that area and I've always felt that most of the SFH neighborhoods north of NWX were holding up well. Its the rental properties that is the issue. Maybe I was missing something?

Really...Camden Place?

I have family members in the adjacent neighborhood (Whitehall) and that seems like a very nice area. I'm a bit floored people would be so willing to abandon what is, at least visually, a well kept neighborhood.

Just to be clear, I'm not criticizing you for wanting to move. Everyone has to do what's best for their family. But I sometimes wonder if just the mere perception of an area's decline matters more than what is actually going on? I used to live in that area and I've always felt that most of the SFH neighborhoods north of NWX were holding up well. Its the rental properties that is the issue. Maybe I was missing something?

Lots of low income or section 8 apartments in a school district usually does not normally make for a better school district.

It's a great area, I'm not arguing that. We don't want to leave, trust me. I know Dennis is still a great school. We have friends that teach at Hefner and they say "I wouldn't send my kids there." On the flip side, we have other friends who love it and their kids did very well. Not to brag, but my daughter is going to have great parental guidance and a strong homelife, so she's not going to be a problem child wherever she goes (fingers crossed, right?).

Our subdivision is great, lots of folks our parents ages who are on top of their stuff and have houses paid off for the most part, and take care of things.

The big thing for my wife is the schools, she's not willing to jeopardize education just for the fact of "staying put and not contributing to more decline." I can't argue. Sure it's a selfish view, but having kids sometimes does that :)

Lots of low income or section 8 apartments in a school district usually does not normally make for a better school district.Well, I didn't want to point the finger quite so directly, but that's precisely what I meant by "too much poverty and too few concerned parents." I've seen it happening to PC North over the past dozen years or so, and it's beginning to affect Will Rogers elementary and Hefner as well. My grandchildren went to Cooper and then PC Central, and their parents stayed quite active in school events, so they didn't have so many problems. However they did have to take in a few friends from time to time...

Really...Camden Place?

I have family members in the adjacent neighborhood (Whitehall) and that seems like a very nice area. I'm a bit floored people would be so willing to abandon what is, at least visually, a well kept neighborhood.

Just to be clear, I'm not criticizing you for wanting to move. Everyone has to do what's best for their family. But I sometimes wonder if just the mere perception of an area's decline matters more than what is actually going on? I used to live in that area and I've always felt that most of the SFH neighborhoods north of NWX were holding up well. Its the rental properties that is the issue. Maybe I was missing something?

Not to be critical, but it was the "get out while you can" hype that led to the development of the above mentioned neighborhoods in the first place. This paranoia leads to further sprawl and deterioration.

Don't get out, do what everyone else in city neighborhoods have to do: form an active neighborhood association, get to know your neighbors, report problems to law enforcement, keep your own house up, and fight for your neighborhood! Decline is not a guarantee, but change is. Some change can be good. Embrace it.

The big thing for my wife is the schools, she's not willing to jeopardize education just for the fact of "staying put and not contributing to more decline." I can't argue. Sure it's a selfish view, but having kids sometimes does that :)

Nope...won't argue with that! I have no kids, but I understand. My parents endured brutal commutes in Dallas to make sure we were in the best school district.

I'll say this. I was very close to buying a home in Crestwood (for a myriad of personal reasons I decided not to). I liked the neighborhood and it is indeed gentrifying, but it is still quite a bit "rougher" than anything you would find on the NW side. But from just making small talk with folks, you could see how much pride everyone has in the neighborhood, and people committed to make it better. I imagine this caused a lot of people to maybe overlook the warts of living in that area. Likewise if you lived in an area where people just don't give a F, eventually the neighborhood will start to meet up with the attitudes.

My apologies in advance for completely derailing a thread on street smoothness.

We can blame Spartan for the thread jack :)


Not to be critical, but it was the "get out while you can" hype that led to the development of the above mentioned neighborhoods in the first place. This paranoia leads to further sprawl and deterioration.

Don't get out, do what everyone else in city neighborhoods have to do: form an active neighborhood association, get to know your neighbors, report problems to law enforcement, keep your own house up, and fight for your neighborhood! Decline is not a guarantee, but change is. Some change can be good. Embrace it.

Not to be critical, but when you have kids it's not paranoia, it's a legitimate family concern. All the grassroots neighborhood stuff you mention (which by the way, we do in our small addition of 75 homes) is great, but it does not guarantee warding off continuing decline. We're not giving up, just saying that's a something we're having to contemplate.

We can blame Spartan for the thread jack :)



Not to be critical, but when you have kids it's not paranoia, it's a legitimate family concern. All the grassroots neighborhood stuff you mention (which by the way, we do in our small addition of 75 homes) is great, but it does not guarantee warding off continuing decline. We're not giving up, just saying that's a something we're having to contemplate.

I understand, and have a kid, and live in the inner city, so I'm aware of the issues.

We can blame Spartan for the thread jack :)
Since Spartan started the thread, I don't see a problem...LOL

Tbh I'm just sort of enjoying everyone else's responses here

glad we could help Spartan, and great point Larry!

For a slightly different take - when I first moved to OKC I bought a house in the Northridge area. Kids walked to school and life was pretty good. Northridge Elementary was a great environment and the kids liked having their school in the neighborhood. Then some things happened - oldest child was at Cooper MS and kids would have gone to PCO instead of PC North. (My fault on that one, I assumed incorrectly and didn't check the district lines close enough.)

So we decided to move to Edmond School District - north OKC but Edmond Schools. With the location we selected, kids had to ride a bus to school - even the brand new elementary school less than 3/4 of a mile away. Two kids graduated and the youngest starts high school this fall. No complaints about the education - Edmond Schools are as good as advertised.

But still, I sometimes wonder if we would not have been better off with the smaller home with the neighborhood school down the street. The kids' brains have the same capability regardless of the location the are educated. We are engaged parents and would notice if the course of instruction was inadequate. I won't say I regret the move, but sometimes I think we would have been just fine not moving.

And the roads are better in both districts than most places in the US - no frost heaving and minimal snow/ice helps.

A lot of people are coming to the same conclusions as you, CD. Subdivisions at Cherokee Crossing and Glenhurst are taking shape at a steady clip. I believe cyclists looking for convenient access to Lake Hefner are behind the Cherokee Crossing momentum and families with children are moving into Glenhurst to take advantage of the new 122nd St. library. Also a Firehouse Subs opened up along the bike trail. Its cool to see some development taking place around these public investments, a trend I expect to continue.

Where did they build the Firehouse Subs?

That library really is a great facility. That whole area, including the booming development along Memorial between Meridian and Council, is helping keep the area attractive.

There has been a trail connecting lake Hefner to the south entrance of Lansbrook for many years (Wilshire and NW highway). When they built the bike lanes on Wilshire it connected the Hefner trails with the Wiley Post ones. The sub shop is behind the building that has been virtually every flavor of music store over the years on the expressway.

You mean where City Bites was, for so man6y years?

Yep, forgot about that. I was a Jason's devotee as soon as they moved in.

I live in the PC area and you're no doubt correct about it's deterioration. My question to you is, how do you fix that? I'd love to stay put where we are, send our kids to Dennis/Hefner/PC North but as you said, the decline is rapidly happening.

I will say, this is a market-driven problem. Supply and demand. We have built a million Camden Places and Whitehalls so that there is no lasting value. There weren't a million Mesta Parks built, and those neighborhoods also all fell victim to the sprawl cycle.

Putnam City area residents might want to look into how a growth boundary, preventing new Camden Places from being built over every farm between Edmond and Guthrie, might benefit homeowners who aren't looking to move further out every 15 years. Even a less rigid fiscal boundary for city services and infrastructure would do wonders the retaining value in existing communities.

Maybe you are referring to a demand-driven problem? Because markets don't create problems, they solve them. The extent to which markets create problems is the extent to which they are interfered with by governments and made inefficient by corruption. For instance my grandparents, and probably yours, paid a 15 year mortgage they could barely afford despite being a two-income household. It would have been considered folly to take out a 30 year mortgage back then. It probably wouldn't have even been possible, considering that without the government guarantee, interest rates were much higher.

The market is producing more suburban spec housing supply than there is demand for absorbing. That's why the slightly older housing stock is disposable.

This isn't a problem that faces the inner city so much as suburbia, because the inner city has a different marketplace with a different set of buyers with different values. S what I mean to say there is that it's really not my fight or anything I care to argue for, I just feel for the people in the PC area who are going to lose the value of their homes. Sprawl cycles are vicious to a lot of families.

It's also one reason that low-growth markets like many Midwestern metros have much nicer, more stable suburban regions. I would say a significantly larger proportion of land in OKC is comprised of trashy areas due to the disposable nature of our real estate, which is directly caused by the fact that OKC is a relatively high-growth metro.

That's why I think some kind of growth boundary, even in its mildest form, would be an especially good idea for an area seeing growth. This isn't just Portland, either. Boulder, CO may be the best example.

I will say, this is a market-driven problem. Supply and demand. We have built a million Camden Places and Whitehalls so that there is no lasting value. There weren't a million Mesta Parks built, and those neighborhoods also all fell victim to the sprawl cycle.

Putnam City area residents might want to look into how a growth boundary, preventing new Camden Places from being built over every farm between Edmond and Guthrie, might benefit homeowners who aren't looking to move further out every 15 years. Even a less rigid fiscal boundary for city services and infrastructure would do wonders the retaining value in existing communities.

How are residents of the Putman City area going to have any influence over Edmond and Guthrie, it seems they would have a hard time even getting OKC which they are a part of to not build others.

Well the majority of the sprawl is actually in OKC proper to the west of Edmond, secondly it could be a county solution, an MPO solution, or state solution like in Oregon.

Of course, I never said it was a possibility, either. I'm just offering commentary on what COULD be done to save the 1970s suburban areas. We all know they're just going to tank, if anyone lives there now, you probably should GT out now while your home values are mostly in tact (if they still are).

My dad bought a home in Lawton as an investment property in 1990 for $80,000 and homes on that street are now selling for $30,000s. Thats probably more extreme than this, but the long term housing market for these disposable cookie cutter homes is not pretty.

The market is producing more suburban spec housing supply than there is demand for absorbing. That's why the slightly older housing stock is disposable.
So where are all these empty suburban homes?


This isn't a problem that faces the inner city so much as suburbia, because the inner city has a different marketplace with a different set of buyers with different values. S what I mean to say there is that it's really not my fight or anything I care to argue for, I just feel for the people in the PC area who are going to lose the value of their homes. Sprawl cycles are vicious to a lot of families.
If there are "sprawl cycles" there can just as easily be "urban renaissance" cycles.


It's also one reason that low-growth markets like many Midwestern metros have much nicer, more stable suburban regions. I would say a significantly larger proportion of land in OKC is comprised of trashy areas due to the disposable nature of our real estate, which is directly caused by the fact that OKC is a relatively high-growth metro.

You should be most worried about houses at the fringes of the metro, not Putnam City. OKC isn't high growth, it is high consumption in terms of land.

So where are all these empty suburban homes?

If there are "sprawl cycles" there can just as easily be "urban renaissance" cycles.

You should be most worried about houses at the fringes of the metro, not Putnam City. OKC isn't high growth, it is high consumption in terms of land.

15-20% growth is actually very high growth if you ask someone NOT from Texas lol. The problem with our growth is we compare ourselves to Texas and want everything Austin has. There are sooooo many cities that look at us and would kill for what is going on here!

I'm not going to be too adversarial because we usually have a similar mind and you always have reasonable points as you do now, but this isn't my opinion. I am really not that interested in suburban issues nor is it my cup of tea, but I think my strength here is that I'm less biased. This is a nationwide problem and the national planning establishment's best solution so far is that of the growth boundary, which isn't a perfect solution only bc of how difficult it is to accomplish in a lasting regional framework.

The reason I am worried for PC is because those neighborhoods aren't going to be attractive for the renaissance cycle 40 years from now unless our values change in ways I don't think they will. Mesta Park and similar neighborhoods work bc the homes are unique, beautiful, and well built - the neighborhoods have extremely short, pleasant commutes to downtown or the NW Expressway, and most importantly the grid system lends itself well to neighborhood vitality.

I just don't think that the post war fad of limited access and culdesac sprawl will be easy to do much with, and a lot of those older sprawl hoods like Ski Island (which btw I was always a sucker for!) are actually deed restricted (before the now defunct academic "school" of advocacy planning enforced social justice in real estate) in some crazy ways which will make creative real estate redevelopment almost impossible should it come time for that in 40 years.

But on the bright side at least you've got great, smooth roads out there...