This message is hidden because CaptDave is on your ignore list.

That lawsuit was more about money than water, they can take the same water they went to court over at the Texas boarder the water flows to, if they had won it would have been much cheaper to process and likely taste better.

That's right, not all water is the same.....
Anyone spending any time traveling in Texas knows that their water taste like crap in some parts of that state.

But Texas does have a state wide water plan that would ship plentiful sources of water to points generally to the dryer western part of the state.. They plan on building expensive water treatment plants to clean up water they have been unable to use. They plan on using some of the revenue from massive new oil deposits to help fund their states water projects....
But I would bet that their water rates will be pretty high and higher than ours.
That gives Oklahoma an advantage in attracting certain types of new industry if only we would develop our own untapped water resources.

This message is hidden because CaptDave is on your ignore list.

Ohh, you showed him. Haha

Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/19/texas-begins-replacing-paved-roads-with-gravel-due-to-lack-of-funding/)

Yes they do and as I said its in the wrong places of not good quality. They have used the cheap water.
Just like the roads, as an Austin American Statesman article from 5 or so years ago all the "cheap and easy" roads in Texas have been built, it is now time for the difficult and expensive roads. One reason why DFW and Houston has road construction all the time is because there is so little of that money spent elsewhere in the state, namely in Austin or San Antonio because the rest of the state feels enough money is spent there. Again, much of the road work there to affect traffic is the difficult and expensive variety, of course the "don't build it and they won't come mentality" that infects many Austinites has exacerbated the problem and had control of the city council for most of the tech boom.

Ohh, you showed him. Haha

I'm still wiping the tears away....not sure I can go on. Sniff.

Dallas is opening up it's newest attraction this month. $62 million dollars for the new "Dallas Childrens Garden" attraction. Very interactive and hands on for children and over 150 exhibits all outdoor sitting on 9 acres! The evening news stating there is even tree house exhibits. Should be interesting and gives Big D another attraction for it's residents and out of towners. It is located within the Dallas Arboretum.

Is Dallas the happiest city in the country? I'm always happy when I'm there. I love the big D, not as much as OKC, but Dallas might be my second fav! It's just a list from Yahoo though, doesn't mean much; thought I'd post anyways.

''1. Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas (38% "very happy")

These happy Texans are most likely to say their spiritual beliefs are a positive guiding force to them (75%) and that they rarely worry about their health (59%), as well as being among the least likely to feel their voices are not heard in decisions that affect them (67%).

But even America's happiest city shows room for improvement. Dallas/Fort Worth residents are among the Americans least likely to agree that they have positive relationships with their family members (though it's worth noting that 83% do agree with this sentiment), and they are among the most likely to agree that they rarely engage in hobbies and pastimes they enjoy (34%)''

Yahoo! (http://homes.yahoo.com/photos/why-is-this-the-happiest-city-in-america-slideshow/)

Dallas/FW continues it's quest to conquer the world of sprawl traffic and being a business friendly city! I personally think it is time for Dallas to slow down. Maybe they are trying to prove something, lol.




Jones Lang LaSalle panel: Dallas-Fort Worth?s dramatic growth is continuing | Dallas Morning News (http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2013/09/jones-lang-lasalle-panel-dallas-fort-worths-dramatic-growth-is-continuing.html/)

Dallas/FW continues it's quest to conquer the world of sprawl traffic ...

from the article:

Southern Methodist University economist Bernard Weinstein said that last year the D-FW area population grew by 132,000 people.

“That’s like adding a Richardson in one year,” Weinstein said.

Much of the increase is due to migrants to North Texas.

adding a "Durant" a year and migrants to OKLAHOMA, more likely.
IIRC, the DFW population count now includes Durant therein.

Dallas/FW continues it's quest to conquer the world of sprawl traffic and being a business friendly city! I personally think it is time for Dallas to slow down. Maybe they are trying to prove something, lol.




Jones Lang LaSalle panel: Dallas-Fort Worth?s dramatic growth is continuing | Dallas Morning News (http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2013/09/jones-lang-lasalle-panel-dallas-fort-worths-dramatic-growth-is-continuing.html/)

Hate to say this, but DFW is small potatoes............ I just spent a week in Paris, 10 million population is what i was told. OMG

Hate to say this, but DFW is small potatoes............ I just spent a week in Paris, 10 million population is what i was told. OMG

Dallas is doing something right. ...it's a boom'n again.

OKC needs to market itself as the "other" alternative. Ex. 2 hours not in traffic, means more quality family time. ...and without the stress.

Hate to say this, but DFW is small potatoes............ I just spent a week in Paris, 10 million population is what i was told. OMG Too funny, lol. Merci Beaucoup!

Hate to say this, but DFW is small potatoes............ I just spent a week in Paris, 10 million population is what i was told. OMGYeah, if you compare London to Dallas, of course. But, that is not really fair. In general, Dallas is still a huge mega city.

Compare London to Tokyo, and see what you get. Then you can say London is also small potatoes.

Yeah, if you compare London to Dallas, of course. But, that is not really fair. In general, Dallas is still a huge mega city.

Compare London to Tokyo, and see what you get. Then you can say London is also small potatoes.

You're very defensive of Dallas. Lol

Yeah, if you compare London to Dallas, of course. But, that is not really fair. In general, Dallas is still a huge mega city.

Compare London to Tokyo, and see what you get. Then you can say London is also small potatoes.

I was comparing Paris to Dallas. I bet I saw 40 cranes along the road from the Arc of Triumph to the airport, incredible. But I went to London too, and it didn't seem to be near as large as Paris.

Hey, we're a wide spot in the road compared to the afore mentioned places.

You're very defensive of Dallas. LolI might be lil biased at times :p

I really do think that is unfair though to compare Dallas to Paris. Paris is a world class tier one city, Dallas is a tier 2 city. The only cities like that in America, are NYC and Los Angeles, imo. Paris, London, Hong Kong, Tehran, Tokyo, Mumbai, Rio De Janeiro, are a few examples of what I consider tier 1 cities.

Houston, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, and Dallas(if you include the metro area), would be part of tier 2 cities. It is not really fair to compare Dallas to Paris, at least in my book.

I was comparing Paris to Dallas. I bet I saw 40 cranes along the road from the Arc of Triumph to the airport, incredible. But I went to London too, and it didn't seem to be near as large as Paris.

Hey, we're a wide spot in the road compared to the afore mentioned places.Oh, my bad, I'm not sure how I got London lol. . . I agree with you that Dallas has nothing on Paris. I just don't think it is fair to say Dallas is small potatoes though. It's the same thing when comparing OKC to Dallas, it just isn't fair. I think OKC is a better city than Dallas, but Dallas is a freakin beast compared to OKC. Dallas is tiny compared to Paris.

I might be lil biased at times :p

I really do think that is unfair though to compare Dallas to Paris. Paris is a world class tier one city, Dallas is a tier 2 city. The only cities like that in America, are NYC and Los Angeles, imo. Paris, London, Hong Kong, Tehran, Tokyo, Mumbai, Rio De Janeiro, are a few examples of what I consider tier 1 cities.

Houston, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, and Dallas(if you include the metro area), would be part of tier 2 cities. It is not really fair to compare Dallas to Paris, at least in my book.

It's all good. I'm the same way with Atlanta. I love Atlanta, it's an amazing city in my eyes. The only city that I like as much or better than Atlanta is Oklahoma City. OKC is home.

I might be lil biased at times :p

I really do think that is unfair though to compare Dallas to Paris. Paris is a world class tier one city, Dallas is a tier 2 city. The only cities like that in America, are NYC and Los Angeles, imo. Paris, London, Hong Kong, Tehran, Tokyo, Mumbai, Rio De Janeiro, are a few examples of what I consider tier 1 cities.

Houston, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, and Dallas(if you include the metro area), would be part of tier 2 cities. It is not really fair to compare Dallas to Paris, at least in my book.

Chicago is a Tier I city.

Chicago is a Tier I city.Yeah I thought about that, I just don't know. I've heard Houston is going to surpass Chicago in terms of population in the near future, I think it was in the decade or so. If that is the case, then Houston would become a tier 1 city as well as Chicago. For me, I just think of the only tier 1 cities in the US as NYC and Los Angeles.

It's all good. I'm the same way with Atlanta. I love Atlanta, it's an amazing city in my eyes. The only city that I like as much or better than Atlanta is Oklahoma City. OKC is home.Yeah, ATL is a great city. A lot of my family lived there for awhile and I've been a few times. Really cool place.

Yeah I thought about that, I just don't know. I've heard Houston is going to surpass Chicago in terms of population in the near future, I think it was in the decade or so. If that is the case, then Houston would become a tier 1 city as well as Chicago. For me, I just think of the only tier 1 cities in the US as NYC and Los Angeles.

What's the criteria for your rankings? Just population of the city proper? Chicago is bigger than Paris in that case...

What's the criteria for your rankings? Just population of the city proper? Chicago is bigger than Paris in that case...Well, I try and take into account of the metro. For me, a tier 1 city should have at least 15 million people in the metropolitan area. I never really take into account just the city, because if that were the case, Dallas and OKC aren't much different in terms of population, seeing as Dallas has 1.2 million people and OKC has 600,000.

If OKC were to hit a serious population boom, we could easily have 1.2 million people living here in ten years, as long as the boom lasted. Yes Dallas could grow, but Dallas is pretty much tapped out at this point, the majority of the growth will happen in the suburbs, not in the Dallas city proper. With all of the land inside the OKC city limits, I think we could easily catch up to Dallas, in terms of population city wise. As far as the metro area, I don't think OKC will get to 7 million people anytime soon. I don't think it is unrealistic to say if a major population boom, similar to Austin's, that we could see a possibility of a combined metro population of 4 million in a decade or two.

Well, I try and take into account of the metro. For me, a tier 1 city should have at least 15 million people in the metropolitan area. I never really take into account just the city, because if that were the case, Dallas and OKC aren't much different in terms of population, seeing as Dallas has 1.2 million people and OKC has 600,000.

If OKC were to hit a serious population boom, we could easily have 1.2 million people living here in ten years, as long as the boom lasted. Yes Dallas could grow, but Dallas is pretty much tapped out at this point, the majority of the growth will happen in the suburbs, not in the Dallas city proper. With all of the land inside the OKC city limits, I think we could easily catch up to Dallas, in terms of population city wise. As far as the metro area, I don't think OKC will get to 7 million people anytime soon. I don't think it is unrealistic to say if a major population boom, similar to Austin's, that we could see a possibility of a combined metro population of 4 million in a decade or two.

LA has a 13 million MSA, Paris 12 million, London just barely 15, Berlin 5, Rome 4, Madrid 6.5, Dublin 1.75

Chicago 9.5, DFW 6.75, Houston 6

LA has a 13 million MSA, Paris 12 million, London just barely 15, Berlin 5, Rome 4, Madrid 6.5, Dublin 1.75

Chicago 9.5, DFW 6.75, Houston 6LA is something like 17 million people living it's metro area.

Wether or not Paris has 15 million people, there is still more than traveling in the metro area at any given time. It is world destination and as such, I include it as a tier one city.

Now, having said, places like Las Vegas and Washington D.C. have their own category with me, they are a special case.

LA is something like 17 million people living it's metro area.

LA is 18 million CSA, it's metro is 13 million.

Downtown Dallas in store for new iconic skyscraper?

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/commercial-real-estate/headlines/20131106-perot-buys-downtown-dallas-corner-hints-at-grand-plans.ece

I love the new LBJ highway. Here are a few highlights that I think could eventually work here:

'Dallas-area drivers about to face new concept: fluctuating toll prices

By BRANDON FORMBY Transportation Writer bformby@dallasnews.com
Published: 13 November 2013 11:35 PM
Updated: 14 November 2013 07:47 AM


The opening of a portion of LBJ Freeway’s tolled lanes next month will usher in a new way area drivers pay to get around North Texas.

The concept is meant to manage congestion by relying on dynamic pricing — toll rates that fluctuate every few minutes based on traffic conditions.

LBJ will be the first highway in Texas to use dynamic pricing on what’s being branded as TEXPress lanes. They run parallel to LBJ’s reconstructed main lanes, which will remain free. TEXPress lanes, eventually, will be the first dynamic-priced lanes in America to offer a guarantee (of sorts) that motorists can drive at least 50 mph — even during rush hour.

At least four other planned highway expansions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area — including Interstate 35E and State Highway 183 — will feature toll lanes with dynamic pricing alongside updated free main lanes.

Without the tolled managed lanes to generate money, officials say, highway construction that’s needed to keep pace with population growth would stall.

“This is the type of transportation project that’s going to drive the economy of 10 million people,” said Michael Morris, transportation director for the North Central Texas Council of Governments.

Morris and a bevy of state and regional officials discussed the concepts at a media event Wednesday in an office building that overlooks a portion of LBJ that will open Dec. 14.
The long-congested highway is undergoing a $2.6 billion redevelopment. Developer LBJ Infrastructure Group, which will operate the highway for 52 years, financed the bulk of construction costs. Money collected from tolls will be used to pay back that investment.

The first phase to open will be a 3.2-mile stretch from Preston Road to Greenville Avenue. The recently reconstructed DFW Connector north of Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport is expected to use TEXPress lanes starting next year.

-----


After the first four weeks, the minimum and maximum toll rates could change. After motorists have had six months to get used to dynamic pricing, it’s likely there will be no caps on how much the rates could be. That means traffic — and what the project developer thinks people are willing to pay — will determine the cost.

The toll rates will be posted on electronic signs. If the rates change while driving that segment, motorists will be charged the rate posted when they entered.


Carpoolers and motorcyclists with TollTags will receive a 50 percent discount during rush hour on the base TEXPress lanes. But they must use a smartphone app that hasn’t been released yet to register as a high-occupancy vehicle every time they want the discount.

These motorists’ TollTags will notify police officers that they are registered as an HOV vehicle. Officers will ticket HOV-registered drivers who don’t actually have more than one person in the car, similar to the way they already ticket single-occupancy drivers on free HOV lanes throughout the region.

Motorists without TollTags or who drive large trucks will pay higher prices, officials said.


LBJ Freeway is undergoing a $2.6 billion reconstruction that includes tolled lanes, rebuilt main lanes that will remain free and redone access roads. The project will roll out in three major phases:

*Dec. 14: From Preston Road to Greenville Avenue

*Mid-2014: LBJ interchange with Interstate 35E

*December 2015: Josey Lane to Preston Road


TEXPress lanes in North Texas

Texans are about to be introduced to fluctuating toll prices. The concept is meant to manage traffic flow and, like previous tollways, help finance needed construction projects. The following five highway projects will have tolled TEXPress lanes in addition to reconstructed main lanes that will remain free:

*LBJ Freeway

*DFW Connector

*Interstate 35E

*Interstate 35W

*State Highways 121 and 183

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/transportation/20131113-dallas-area-drivers-about-to-face-new-concept-fluctuating-toll-prices.ece

This is an amazing piece of infrastructure and I hope ODOT will one day build a model off of it, to scale with out needs. The concept is awesome and Texas continues to impress with their highway system! While TxDot continues to push forward and plan for the future with a possible HSR, amazing interchanges, highways geared towards building a better city by allowing people whom choose to live with cars and the pride of car ownership, continuing to improve mass transit despite the stereotypes, and rolling out innovative concepts, ODOT is busy taking 30 years to complete a 6 lane highway, building crappy cloverleaf interchanges, opposing rail and not giving it the chance it deserves, keeping the small time--short term thinking mentality.

Saw this article in the DMN. Great publicity and accolades for the DFW area.




D-FW leads in U.S. metro job growth rate | Dallas Morning News (http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20131205-d-fw-leads-in-u.s.-metro-job-growth-rate.ece)

Dear Dallas, enjoy your ice.

Dear Dallas, enjoy your ice.

Uh no, unfortunately all of the ice in Dallas affects us in a major way for those who are flying.

Uh no, unfortunately all of the ice in Dallas affects us in a major way for those who are flying.

Best of luck trying to get in or out of Dallas.

New housing neighborhood in the works for Dallas? medical district | Dallas Morning News (http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2013/12/new-housing-neighborhood-in-the-works-for-dallas-medical-district.html/)

Yeah I thought about that, I just don't know. I've heard Houston is going to surpass Chicago in terms of population in the near future, I think it was in the decade or so. If that is the case, then Houston would become a tier 1 city as well as Chicago. For me, I just think of the only tier 1 cities in the US as NYC and Los Angeles.

Chicago is definitely T1, there's no question about that.

And I believe the talk of Houston soon surpassing Chicago in population has to do with city population, not metro population. Chicago metro population is nearly 10 million. Houston at about 6.5 million.

Chicago is definitely T1, there's no question about that.

And I believe the talk of Houston surpassing Chicago in population has to do with city population, not metro population. Chicago metro population is nearly 10 million. Houston at about 6.5 million.Yeah, Houston metro population is actually not very big, something like 4 or 5 million. I think Chicago's is something like 7 million, isn't it?

The Houston reference was for city proper.

Yeah, Houston metro population is actually not very big, something like 4 or 5 million. I think Chicago's is something like 7 million, isn't it?

Houston metro is in the range of 6.3 million & Chicago metro is about 9.5 million.

The Dallas metroplex will hit 7 Million by 2014.

Houston metro is in the range of 6.3 million & Chicago metro is about 9.5 million.So I was a couple million off ;)

So I was a couple million off ;)

Nah, they just grew by a couple million in between our posts. :)

Nah, they just grew by a couple million in between our posts. :)

In all seriousness, I wish I owned a piece of that land along the 75 corridor between McKinney, through Sherman-Denison, right up to Durant. It's like an economic explosion went off a few decades ago around Plano and all the $hrapnel was thrown in that general direction. It's happening so fast now it makes the head spin.

I think as OKC crosses the 1.5 million population mark and approaches the 2 million mark, reliance on and envy towards Dallas will diminish. At that point, OKC should offer enough amenities/services that people will not need to make regular trips to Dallas. Even today, the trip probably isn't near as popular as it was 15 years ago but there are still numerous reasons I can think of that somebody in OKC would need to go to Dallas.

-Upscale shopping
-Luxury cars
-Upscale or niche nightlife (EDM is huge)
-Six Flags Over Texas
-Arts/culture/museums
-Live music/concerts
-The airport

The above list gets smaller each passing decade and will continue to do so as OKC gets larger.

Upscale shopping will quickly appear and become more prevalent and Dallas will likely loose that edge soon...

Bob Howard is looking to secure a Bentley-Maserati-Lotus franchise here in OKC and hopefully that comes to fruition. I would like one day build a Ferrari dealership here in OKC likely in Northwest OKC close to Edmond along Kilpatrick Turnpike and way down the road build a joint classic auto with a Rolls Royce dealership attached to it in Automobile Alley. I would like to make this a multi story dealership with used luxury cars and rare classic cars that would ship out to other states. I would have a clear glass showroom fronting Broadway with an elevator for cars and people to look at them..... maybe one day :roll eyes:

The nightlife will have quite a bit of catching up to do as a whole, but Dallas will quickly loose its edge on this too. You don't have to be a huge city to have good nightlife. That allies in the demographics and its edge.

Building a big theme park is another dream of mine here in OKC. Unless I ever achieve my dream or OKC takes off(and I mean big time), this is unlikely. :(

I really don't see how Dallas has that much of an advantage for the arts and museums. They have a better Science Museum, but there is really no museum there that is really worth driving down there for.

Bigger cities will likely get better concerts. I really don't know too much about this, though.

OKC will never have an airport like DFW. 20 story hotels, sky train, 10 lane highway w/ four stack interchange, multiple detached terminals, I highly doubt Will Rodgers will get anywhere close to being as big as DFW, unless the airline industry has something miraculous happen to it and OKC's economy booms bigger than Dubai's. Venture knows this better though; Venture, will Will Rodger ever get as big as DFW Airport? ;) lol

I think as OKC crosses the 1.5 million population mark and approaches the 2 million mark, reliance on and envy towards Dallas will diminish. At that point, OKC should offer enough amenities/services that people will not need to make regular trips to Dallas. Even today, the trip probably isn't near as popular as it was 15 years ago but there are still numerous reasons I can think of that somebody in OKC would need to go to Dallas.

-Upscale shopping
-Luxury cars
-Upscale or niche nightlife (EDM is huge)
-Six Flags Over Texas
-Arts/culture/museums
-Live music/concerts
-The airport

The above list gets smaller each passing decade and will continue to do so as OKC gets larger.

At 1.3 million and at its current and historical pace of growth, OKC won't hit the 2 million mark for another 30-35 years. By then, Dallas will be over 10 million easily and there will probably be a DFW-OKC-TULSA mega CSA. lol

At 1.3 million and at its current and historical pace of growth, OKC won't hit the 2 million mark for another 30-35 years. By then, Dallas will be over 10 million easily and there will probably be a DFW-OKC-TULSA mega CSA. lol

A lot of people are hoping OKC sees a growth spurt that pushes it above the historical average for a while. Charlotte did it in a decade - in 2000 they were comparable with OKC but today they are above even Austin and San Antonio. Personally, I think there is a lot of wishful thinking and believe there are some negative forces pushing against the possibility of OKC becoming a boomtown. Nonetheless, I would LOVE to be proven wrong on that and hope the growth does accelerate.

duplicate

A lot of people are hoping OKC sees a growth spurt that pushes it above the historical average for a while. Charlotte did it in a decade - in 2000 they were comparable with OKC but today they are above even Austin and San Antonio. Personally, I think there is a lot of wishful thinking and believe there are some negative forces pushing against the possibility of OKC becoming a boomtown. Nonetheless, I would LOVE to be proven wrong on that and hope the growth does accelerate.

Charlotte became a CSA during the 2000s which greatly increased its population. Its own MSA also added more counties to its boundaries in 2012, which also increased its population. It wasn't some amazing growth spurt as you put it. The same MSA region in 2000 that had 1.3 million, had 1.85 million in 2012 (http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/pop/popm/cbsa16740.asp). But now because the Census will add more counties to its MSA region, its population for 2013 was 2.2 million.

Essentially, what happened during the 2000s for Charlotte would be as if OKC added Tusla to its MSA and formed a CSA. OKC would go from 1.3 million to 2.4 million during a decade. But 1.1 million people wouldn't have moved there during that time.

Charlotte didn't have a net gain of 1.1 million people over 12 years either, or 92,000 a year growth. To figure out the actual yearly growth, you have to calculate all the counties now making up the current MSA and current CSA for Charlotte, in 2000 and then again in 2012, and compare the difference. It's probably closer to 30,000 a year annual growth.

At 1.3 million and at its current and historical pace of growth, OKC won't hit the 2 million mark for another 30-35 years. By then, Dallas will be over 10 million easily and there will probably be a DFW-OKC-TULSA mega CSA. lolOKC could hit boomtown status and we could be over 2 million within the next two years. All it takes is a boom. Look at Charlotte, Nashville, and Austin--what were their projected populations before they boomed?

Also, OKC has had the biggest population jumps ever recorded in the country.

2 million within the next 2 years?

That's 700,000 people in 2 years. That's close to 1,000 new residents each day. That kind of boom is quite literally impossible. We would have to have about 4 apartment complexes the size of the Edge opening every single day to absorb that.

OKC could hit boomtown status and we could be over 2 million within the next two years. All it takes is a boom. Look at Charlotte, Nashville, and Austin--what were their projected populations before they boomed?

Also, OKC has had the biggest population jumps ever recorded in the country.

As I've said and shown, Charlotte didn't have a "boom", it added already populated counties to its MSA and CSA boundaries.

Nashville isn't really booming either.

That word booming. I don't think it means what you think it means.

P.S.

OKC could hit 2 million in two years...

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a379/billy2dbob/GIFs/What.gif

2 million within the next 2 years?

That's 700,000 people in 2 years. That's close to 1,000 new residents each day. That kind of boom is quite literally impossible. We would have to have about 4 apartment complexes the size of the Edge opening every single day to absorb that.The point I was making, was that OKC could experience a population boom that could blow projections out of the water.

BTW, I meant OKC's metro pop. growing to over 2 million, not 2 million new people moving into the city.

As I've said, Charlotte didn't have a "boom", it added already populated counties to his MSA and CSA.

Nashville isn't really booming either.

P.S.

OKC could hit 2 million in two years?First off, Charlotte is/was known as a boomtown and Nashville is a boomtown to. Nashville is growing pretty fast and is looking at a super tall being built with a fabulous new convention center with TONS of downtown development.

Secondly, I am not stating OKC will hit 2 million within the next two years. My statement was, if OKC has a population boom, we could easily exceed anyones projections. Perhaps adding 400,000 people a year is was an extreme comparison, but I was just making a point.

The point I was making, was that OKC could experience a population boom that could blow projections out of the water.

BTW, I meant OKC's metro pop. growing to over 2 million, not 2 million new people moving into the city.

Yes growing to 2 mil means an added 700k people, or 1,000 a day. Not going to happen

The point I was making, was that OKC could experience a population boom that could blow projections out of the water.

BTW, I meant OKC's metro pop. growing to over 2 million, not 2 million new people moving into the city.

Oklahoma metro is at 1.3 million. That's 700,000 short of 2 million.

First off, Charlotte is/was known as a boomtown and Nashville is a boomtown to. Nashville is growing pretty fast and is looking at a super tall being built with a fabulous new convention center with TONS of downtown development.

Nashville has not been a population boomtown. Never has been. Sorry. Here are Nashville's numbers (http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/pop/popm/cbsa34980.asp). Nashville has only added 40,000 or more people once since 2000. Just once. Also, from just looking, that year seemed to be the result of Hurricane Katrina, when many southern cities saw large gains of new residents from New Orleans.

Nashville also only added 30,000+ three times since 2000.

It's growing nicely, but its not a "boomtown". A boomtown has to achieve atleast 25% or higher growth during a decade.

Yes, downtown/urban development wise, yes, it's having a boom.

You're right, Charlotte is a boomtown, and I should have said a misunderstood boomtown instead of saying it isn't a boomtown. Again, Charlotte's big jump in population occurred from the addition of new populated counties added to its defined metro area and then gaining CSA recognition.

As an example, it would be like OKC and Tulsa forming a CSA and the OKC metro overnight jumped to 2.4 million people. 1.1 million people didn't relocate to OKC overnight. You get it?

On a yearly basis, Charlotte adds about 35-40,000 people a year. That's not bad.


Secondly, I am not stating OKC will hit 2 million within the next two years. My statement was, if OKC has a population boom, we could easily exceed anyones projections. Perhaps adding 400,000 people a year is was an extreme comparison, but I was just making a point.

Sure, but it could also start raining candy next year too but historically and from what we know, that's not going to happen.

Charlotte became a CSA during the 2000s which greatly increased its population. Its own MSA also added more counties to its boundaries in 2012, which also increased its population. It wasn't some amazing growth spurt as you put it. The same MSA region in 2000 that had 1.3 million, had 1.85 million in 2012 (http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/pop/popm/cbsa16740.asp). But now because the Census will add more counties to its MSA region, its population for 2013 was 2.2 million.

Essentially, what happened during the 2000s for Charlotte would be as if OKC added Tusla to its MSA and formed a CSA. OKC would go from 1.3 million to 2.4 million during a decade. But 1.1 million people wouldn't have moved there during that time.

Charlotte didn't have a net gain of 1.1 million people over 12 years either, or 92,000 a year growth. To figure out the actual yearly growth, you have to calculate all the counties now making up the current MSA and current CSA for Charlotte, in 2000 and then again in 2012, and compare the difference. It's probably closer to 30,000 a year annual growth.

This is one of the main reasons I hate the CSA metric. If including only the counties that were included in 2000, the Charlotte MSA population would be 1.8 or 1.9 million. They were at 1.1 million in 1990 and 1.5 million in 2000. So not quite as fast as I originally thought, but still very brisk. If OKC grew as fast as Charlotte we could be looking at a metro area of 1.7-1.8 million in 2020, which would put it very close to Charlotte today. I don't see that happening though for various reasons, but its cool to speculate. I usually don't pay any attention to CSA metrics.

The point I was making, was that OKC could experience a population boom that could blow projections out of the water.

BTW, I meant OKC's metro pop. growing to over 2 million, not 2 million new people moving into the city.

If OKC say the same rate of population growth Charlotte did, 2 million would be hit sometime between 2020 and 2025. I am however going to predict more tepid population growth and say OKC will reach 1.4 million by 2020 and 1.6 by 2030.

OKC could hit boomtown status and we could be over 2 million within the next two years. All it takes is a boom. Look at Charlotte, Nashville, and Austin--what were their projected populations before they boomed?

Also, OKC has had the biggest population jumps ever recorded in the country.
Greater Austin population from 1960.



Year Population Growth
1960 301,261 --
1970 398,938 32.4%
1980 585,051 46.7%
1990 846,227 44.6%
2000 1,249,763 47.7%
2010 1,716,289 37.3%
Est. 2012 1,834,303 6.9%

No offense to Plutonic, but I get the vibe that he's incredibly young,

If you guys also haven't heard Dallas is starting it's 2nd signature bridge. This one will be on I 30 crossing the Trinity River. The bridge frame is already hard at work at their Florida facility and will be shipped to Dallas once they have all there pieces made.

From a steel plant in Tampa, Florida, a very, very early look at Dallas? second Calatrava bridge | Dallas Morning News (http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2013/07/from-a-steel-plant-in-tampa-florida-a-very-very-early-look-at-dallas-second-calatrava-bridge.html/)