Data shows migration to Oklahoma County from around the country, world | News OK (http://newsok.com/data-shows-migration-to-oklahoma-county-from-around-the-country-world/article/3931286)

Well that explains the traffic. :)

"The drive ability of our market"

I just hate seeing that, too bad we aren't promoting walkability more.

Just look at all the construction around Quail Springs Mail and north. Also look at the number of new lots that have been approved by the City of Edmond as of late. I'm not even saying anything about other parts of the metro. Where are all the people coming from and what are they doing for jobs? The metro is growing. I'm wondering if a lot of them are retirees looking for a low cost of living/low tax state to live in.

"The drive ability of our market"

I just hate seeing that, too bad we aren't promoting walkability more.

I saw that line and cringed, along with most of this board, I'm sure.

I take it none of you have cars right?

I take it none of you have cars right?

Yes. But I'd love to not be so dependent on it.

Yes. But I'd love to not be so dependent on it.

Right there with you. I love having the freedom to drive somewhere if I need to, but I would much rather be able take a train to work and save the wasted 2 hours per day on the road. Time is money of course, as we are always told, and that is wasted money. I don't get why this is such a hard concept for some to understand.

Why not move closer to your job?

Why not move closer to your job?

The whole city needs revamped pedestrian infrastructure to encourage people to want to walk places. Or we could all just "move closer to our job", which isn't economically realistic for about 99% of people. Building sidewalks and pedestrian amenities is definitely feasible however.

Even if I moved next door to my job, there is no walking infrastructure. There is no transit service.

It's unwise to put all of your eggs in one basket.

Why not move to a city that already has this stuff in place. What keeps you in Oklahoma ?

Why not move to a city that already has this stuff in place. What keeps you in Oklahoma ?

This kind of attitude will only promote brain-drain and will hamper any attempts at OKC to grow and mature in the future. No one is saying you can't own a car, so quit making this a "if you don't like how it is, then why are you here" discussion. Having a reliable transportation system (consisting of multiple kinds) with actual walkable neighborhoods will do amazing things for this city and its future.

I only sY this because for the last couple of years I have watched sidewalks be built up and down s.Penn and s. May and you literally only see a hand full of people using them each day. It seems like a big waste of money. People in Oklahoma drive cars they don't walk,ride bikes, or take the bus. Even if these systems were in place I don't think people would use it.

Because sidewalks don't make something walkable. When you have a street with cars zippigg past at 50 mph just 2-3 feet beside you, seas of parking lots, huge distances between points of interest, and huge 1/2 mile long continuous brick wall on every subdivision; you just don't create an environment where walking is even pleasant. Using your God given legs is actually quite dangerous in this city; even downtown.

The only walkable part of the city really only needs to be downtown. This isn't Chicago or NYC, this is OKC. I am perfectly fine with having the majority of the streets having cars going 50MPH and brick lined walls for subdivisions. It seems some just won't be happy unless every inch of the city is urbanized.

Also, I don't know of very many airports that are walkable, meaning you could just walk to one with "walkable" infrastructure. Dallas will have an airport that you can access via light-rail pretty soon.

Chicago, New York City and San Francisco can fit inside OKC with room to
spare for another major city.

The only walkable part of the city really only needs to be downtown. This isn't Chicago or NYC, this is OKC. I am perfectly fine with having the majority of the streets having cars going 50MPH and brick lined walls for subdivisions. It seems some just won't be happy unless every inch of the city is urbanized.

Also, I don't know of very many airports that are walkable, meaning you could just walk to one with "walkable" infrastructure. Dallas will have an airport that you can access via light-rail pretty soon.

I totally disagree, plupan. I live near NW 63rd and Meridian and I'm very excited about the new sidewalks being built near me. I would love for my area to be walkable. I'll soon be able to walk to Dolese Park without trudging through the grass or walking in the street on Meridian.

I totally disagree, plupan. I live near NW 63rd and Meridian and I'm very excited about the new sidewalks being built near me. I would love for my area to be walkable. I'll soon be able to walk to Dolese Park without trudging through the grass or walking in the street on Meridian.I support the sidewalks, I don't support urbanizing the whole city like it seems some want to do at times. I think there should be a sidewalk on nearly every street.

How people could still say "blah blah blah we don't need sidewalks" with the massive amount of worn paths in grass throughout this city is beyond me. Newsflash: most cities of our size have sidewalks. OKC is an outlier. At a minimum, it is an extreme safety issue. Way too many kids walking in the street here.

In any event, glad to see OK County growing so much.

I support the sidewalks, I don't support urbanizing the whole city like it seems some want to do at times. I think there should be a sidewalk on nearly every street.

I that case, please say what you mean, plupan. You said only the downtown area needs to be walkable and that is what I disagree with.

I that case, please say what you mean, plupan. You said only the downtown area needs to be walkable and that is what I disagree with.The term "walkable" is often described on this site and by urbanist in a different fashion than just having a sidewalk on a street.

The term "walkable" is often described on this site and by urbanist in a different fashion than just having a sidewalk on a street.

True, but it's hardly a reason to say that only the downtown area need to be walkable. I still totally disagree with that statement. I would love for the area where I live to be walkable in every sense of the word.

True, but it's hardly a reason to say that only the downtown area need to be walkable. I still totally disagree with that statement. I would love for the area where I live to be walkable in every sense of the word.Ok, I see how I could've worded that better. What kind of walkability are you wanting, something like Deep Deuce? I'm confused though, if you want that, why do you live out in the suburban areas(assuming you do).

You can have a less dense walkable environment than Deep Deuce. You always take the extreme view. Either 100% urban or 100% suburban, and there are in-betweens.

You can have a less dense walkable environment than Deep Deuce. You always take the extreme view. Either 100% urban or 100% suburban, and there are in-betweens.

Exactly right, catch. It doesn't have to be Deep Deuce. It's just nice to have something interesting to look at when you're walking besides cars or a brick wall.

Ok, I see how I could've worded that better. What kind of walkability are you wanting, something like Deep Deuce? I'm confused though, if you want that, why do you live out in the suburban areas(assuming you do).

I hardly consider 63rd and Meridian to be suburban and I live there because it's very close to my job.

Why not move to a city that already has this stuff in place. What keeps you in Oklahoma ?

If you don't like the direction the country is moving, why don't you move to Somalia?

See how that works?

That attitude is why young educated people once automatically left. With less of the attitude you demonstrated, more of them are staying in OKC and the city is better for it.

You can have a less dense walkable environment than Deep Deuce. You always take the extreme view. Either 100% urban or 100% suburban, and there are in-betweens.Again, I want options. Deep Deuce was not the most extreme view. I'd say downtown Manhattan would take that title. Anyhow, if you had a development that was 100% urban, it would be praised by a bunch on here, if it was 100% suburban, yeah..... you know the routine.

Exactly right, catch. It doesn't have to be Deep Deuce. It's just nice to have something interesting to look at when you're walking besides cars or a brick wall.I'm not understanding this, so what do you want? This is moving towards living in car free environment then. How are you going to have sidewalks without having to look at cars and the brick walls that provide privacy to homes surrounding them?

It never seems to stop. First the argument will be, I want sidewalks just so I can walk..... then I want to not see the cars or they are moving to fast, so narrow the lanes and lower the speed limit.... then the buildings are set too far back from the street.... then the layouts are too suburban... i mean this is how it all starts. I'm not saying this is what YOU are saying, but this is how it starts.

So please describe what you want here when it is all said and done. A sidewalk with something else to look at besides cars and brick walls, is that it? How can that be achieved in a suburban area?

I hardly consider 63rd and Meridian to be suburban and I live there because it's very close to my job.https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/t31/1025952_10202276782113485_1541354119_o.jpg

Maybe that isn't 100% suburban, but it sure isn't anywhere close to urban, or at least in my opinion.

No plupan, you are not understanding at all. That area is not exactly urban and I didn't say it is, but it is not in the suburbs no matter how you define it. I didn't say I would want to walk without seeing cars, LOL. Not every area with sidewalks can be totally engaging to walkers but building brick walls facing the streets certainly isn't the answer and,even then, it's still better to have sidewalks than not. The area that sidewalks are being added to along Meridian will actually be a very nice walk and I will enjoy when it's finished.

Obviously we aren't going to totally rebuild every neighborhood and street to that standard but having sidewalks are a start and it's a good start.

I see what you are saying now, makes sense to me. I want sidewalks and people to feel comfortable walking on them, not just placed in the middle of a high-speed road with no protection or sense of protection.

I don't know how many times people have pointed out the difference between suburban sprawl and traditional suburbs. But it seems relevant again.

Low density, car-friendly developments can also be walkable- but it's not just sidewalks. It's a combination of urban form qualities, especially street network. Walkable means more than a sidewalk but it does not imply Deep Deuce or Manhattan.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/pedbike/05085/images/fig61.gif

I don't know how many times people have pointed out the difference between suburban sprawl and traditional suburbs. But it seems relevant again.

Low density, car-friendly developments can also be walkable- but it's not just sidewalks. It's a combination of urban form qualities, especially street network. Walkable means more than a sidewalk but it does not imply Deep Deuce or Manhattan.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/pedbike/05085/images/fig61.gifI think that picture is just fine, I like it. Don't see whats wrong with not one bit.

I think that picture is just fine, I like it. Don't see whats wrong with not one bit.

The top half represents a suburb designed according to traditional patterns that allow automobile and pedestrian use.

The bottom half represents a sprawl suburb designed with sprawl patterns that allows only automobile use.

There is unequivocally something wrong with the bottom half, because it handles all forms of transportation, sense of place/community, etc, worse than the top half, and probably costs more to maintain.

Hmmmm, well both halves look okay to me. A lot of cities have halves, so again, I don't see the problem.

Hmmmm, well both halves look okay to me. A lot of cities have halves, so again, I don't see the problem.

I said the problem.

The bottom half has less efficient transportation networks, a worse sense of community and place, makes its residents obese and unhealthy, uses more resources, and costs more to maintain.