In the paper today it was stated that Mustang is debating about trying to annex land that currently OKC has. The land in question is South of SW89th street along SH4. The landowners apparently have already signed that they would be okay with this and since OKC doesn't have much of any infrastructure in this area, OKC's city manager has seemed receptive of the idea.

Of note apparently Yukon is in similar negotiations with OKC currently. Not sure what land is in question, but that may be a topic for another thread. Attached are the articles from the paper along with a quick map and idea of where this land is for reference.

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/Annex2_zpsnvfsw5p9.jpg (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/zuplar/media/Annex2_zpsnvfsw5p9.jpg.html)

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/Annex1_zpsr5qidjyn.jpg (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/zuplar/media/Annex1_zpsr5qidjyn.jpg.html)

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/Annex3_zpsbxxzvnus.jpg (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/zuplar/media/Annex3_zpsbxxzvnus.jpg.html)

Because Mustang is sure running out of land to develop. That's what we need is giving more land to municipalities who's main source of revenue is tickets. I'm against this.

I wish multiple municipalities would annex parts of land from us. 600+ sq miles is just way too big.

Because Mustang is sure running out of land to develop. That's what we need is giving more land to municipalities who's main source of revenue is tickets. I'm against this.

no one cares about where you can and can not speed. grow up.

I wish multiple municipalities would annex parts of land from us. 600+ sq miles is just way too big.

agreed, just as long as it's not land that's providing good tax revenue :)

On the contingency that they agree to sign-on with the RTA...

Because Mustang is sure running out of land to develop. That's what we need is giving more land to municipalities who's main source of revenue is tickets. I'm against this.

Of course you are.... Hey I have an idea on how we can save that Moore water tower you are so fond of.... You come and drive real fast around town until you get about $100k in speeding tickets and I'll go to the next City Council meeting and propose that source of revenue be used to save the tower.... It's a win-win for you. You get to drive fast and save the tower!

no one cares about where you can and can not speed. grow up.Where did I say I want to speed? You have no idea what I'm even talking about so think before you respond.

BTW, do you have something else to say about my points? Guessing not... It's just the typical "oh plupan just wants to speed" and blah blah blah

Of course you are.... Hey I have an idea on how we can save that Moore water tower you are so fond of.... You come and drive real fast around town until you get about $100k in speeding tickets and I'll go to the next City Council meeting and propose that source of revenue be used to save the tower.... It's a win-win for you. You get to drive fast and save the tower!i have not received one speeding ticket from Mustang. I could care less about the Water Tower in Moore. Just more bs from you because you are a typical backwards Oklahoman who drives like a 80 grandma coming back from her eye doctor. Get out of here with that crap.

Moore doesn't want to retain their history? Fine with me. It's a crap place to live and with less history preserved it will be even Moore crap(see what I did there ;)).

Mustang wants to annex land when it hasn't even used the land it has and be like the rest of Oklahoma towns that are sprawled out with 2-4 lane country roads with single family houses butting the roads, fine by me. I never go those places unless I have to and when I do, you better believe I mind the speed limit vs. other cities where the police actually do police work and not hide behind signs like cowards.

Past history has no relevance to the future in this case with me and the fact that you attempted to say as much shows you have nothing else behind he same sh!t you spew every time.

It's laughable at best that your only argument here is I want this small stretch of 12sq. Miles to speed on and that's why I want this land to stay in OKC. Lol

Go back to posting about you little BBQ adventures.

I wish multiple municipalities would annex parts of land from us. 600+ sq miles is just way too big.Why? Why not establish a code that governs land use instead of getting rid of land we might need in the future to grow into?

We'll probably need it since half of the people on here don't want tall buildings and instead want smaller buildings that take up more space for urban infill.

I think one thing to note here is that the land in question hear is directly South of what is quickly becoming Mustang's main corridor of commerce. It has long been a neglected part of OKC (not the only though) and I'm for this. I think a lot of the suburbs should look at negotiating with OKC to annex land that is being underutilized. Most of the people in these areas don't consider themselves Oklahoma Citians anyways and spend most of their dollars in the suburbs, so really OKC isn't losing much IMO.

I think one thing to note here is that the land in question hear is directly South of what is quickly becoming Mustang's main corridor of commerce. It has long been a neglected part of OKC (not the only though) and I'm for this. I think a lot of the suburbs should look at negotiating with OKC to annex land that is being underutilized. Most of the people in these areas don't consider themselves Oklahoma Citians anyways and spend most of their dollars in the suburbs, so really OKC isn't losing much IMO.
I understand what you're saying, but I think more is a good thing as long as you use it properly, which sometimes means not using it at all until you need it. If Mustang was completely built out, then I'd understand it a little better, but at this point, I think OKC would be wise not to get of land even if it's just small peices and keep it undeveloped for the next 100 years. We need to be smart about our planning.

agreed, just as long as it's not land that's providing good tax revenue :)

Yeah for sure. There is just a lot of land that OKC has annexed for God know what reason and it doesn't really make sense.

I understand what you're saying, but I think more is a good thing as long as you use it properly, which sometimes means not using it at all until you need it. If Mustang was completely built out, then I'd understand it a little better, but at this point, I think OKC would be wise not to get of land even if it's just small peices and keep it undeveloped for the next 100 years. We need to be smart about our planning.

The problem with what you are proposing with utilizing current land is that would at some point create sprawl in Mustang. By solidifying the corridor as 'the commerce' corridor, it helps keep development from going elsewhere. Now you can make the argument that just because it's OKC doesn't mean it can't be developed as commercial. The argument there is valid, but the people that want to develop want the development to benefit Mustang directly, not indirectly like what's happened in Yukon. OKC has plenty of land, and realistically aren't going to run out anytime soon, even by giving away some underutilized portions on the outskirts of their city limits.

Why? Why not establish a code that governs land use instead of getting rid of land we might need in the future to grow into?

We'll probably need it since half of the people on here don't want tall buildings and instead want smaller buildings that take up more space for urban infill.

We will never grow into 600 sq miles.

It's leverage OKC has, and needs to get something out of it. Don't just give away land you'll never get back for nothing.

It's leverage OKC has, and needs to get something out of it. Don't just give away land you'll never get back for nothing.

What would Mustang have to give?

What would Mustang have to give?

He suggested committing to being part of the RTA.

What would Mustang have to give?

Maybe a Braum's and/or a Wal-Mart? Oh, wait. We already have a bunch of those. Carry on...

What would Mustang have to give?

Future happy Mustang residents that will venture to OKC from time to time. It would cost OKC a lot more to make this land useful because it has to expand the reach of all of its services.

We want our surrounding neighbors to be successful too.

He suggested committing to being part of the RTA.

I don't know what RTA is.

Future happy Mustang residents that will venture to OKC from time to time. It would cost OKC a lot more to make this land useful because it has to expand the reach of all of its services.

That's kind of a gimme. FWIW I live in OKC, but do most all of my shopping in Mustang, for when I have to do anything else that's not within the city, I shop OKC. I'd say most around me are the same way.

I don't know what RTA is.

Regional Transit Authority

Regional Transit Authority

Yeah that's not going to happen.

Where did I say I want to speed? You have no idea what I'm even talking about so think before you respond.

BTW, do you have something else to say about my points? Guessing not... It's just the typical "oh plupan just wants to speed" and blah blah blah

Because a lot of the time you post like a kid with spare time to troll the entire forum with wildly opposing view points. You don't need to state "I want to speed," you make it pretty clear by humble bragging all over the place about "going 100mph safely" and griping about slow drivers (I get it, I speed too and hate the people driving 10 below).

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/download_zps1bd06v5z.jpg (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/zuplar/media/download_zps1bd06v5z.jpg.html)

Because a lot of the time you post like a kid with spare time to troll the entire forum with wildly opposing view points. You don't need to state "I want to speed," you make it pretty clear by humble bragging all over the place about "going 100mph safely" and griping about slow drivers (I get it, I speed too and hate the people driving 10 below).Wow man. Sorry you think that. My point had nothing to do how fast I go. The only reason I say that is to make a point across from idiots who think it's fine to hog the left lane doing 10-15 under the limit. I guess when you come from a real city, where traffic moves and the police are more lenient on speeding because there are bigger things to worry about and they aren't pressed for revenue collection, it opens up a perspective and it's irritating when people act like going faster is not safe.

The point of saying you can go 100MPH safely is not to suggest everyone should be going that fast in the cities. If that's what you're thinking I'm saying, you are incorrect. I guess I don't understand why it can be done in one place but another. Comes down to education I suppose, something Oklahoma lacks.

:ot:

The problem with what you are proposing with utilizing current land is that would at some point create sprawl in Mustang. By solidifying the corridor as 'the commerce' corridor, it helps keep development from going elsewhere. Now you can make the argument that just because it's OKC doesn't mean it can't be developed as commercial. The argument there is valid, but the people that want to develop want the development to benefit Mustang directly, not indirectly like what's happened in Yukon. OKC has plenty of land, and realistically aren't going to run out anytime soon, even by giving away some underutilized portions on the outskirts of their city limits.You are correct, OKC has tons and tons of land. I'm not disagreeing there.

If anything, Mustang should focus on how to urbanize it's core and worry about developing the land it has and making itself attractive to employers so it can become something more than a bedroom community. The only special suburbs I see are Norman and Guthrie. Those cities are going places and can set themselves apart. Right now, Edmond, Moore, Yukon, Mustang etc... are all bland cities that don't need anymore land and should develop what they have. Sometimes having boundaries that restrict growth make for better quality developments and produce more tax revenue.

Moore is running out of room and it will be interesting to see if better constructed, high dense projects get going there.

I am well aware of the mentality shared by the majority of OKCTalk that the city has too much land. That is well known. I still in this case more is better and OKC should hold onto it. Tons of things can be done with super large tracts of land. I'd start to suggest things, but then I might have PAHDZ come out and say I'm being absurd and childish. I will say, there is more to it than urban development and farmland if OKC can market itself as being more attractive to high-tech companies and research.

We will never grow into 600 sq miles.You are probably right... but what about other things like solar fields? How about large industrial projects like a Tesla battery plant? Spaceport? Maybe a particle smasher. Racetrack. Football stadium. Theme Park. Maybe market the large swaths of land to Elon Musk(I almost said Nikola Tesla ;P) to build a test hyperloop track. Maybe testing farms for more sustainable farming techniques in drought conditions or urban farming. Maybe lure companies like Google or Apple to build miniature test cities like the one in New Mexico to test different self driving cars among other technologies.

I don't understand why that is too far to reach? A hyperloop test track is being considered literally less than 300 miles to our south, why can't be here?

What would Mustang have to give?They might not have anything right now, but if they wait and grow into their current land, they could contribute money towards city wide light rail.

You are correct, OKC has tons and tons of land. I'm not disagreeing there.

If anything, Mustang should focus on how to urbanize it's core and worry about developing the land it has and making itself attractive to employers so it can become something more than a bedroom community. The only special suburbs I see are Norman and Guthrie. Those cities are going places and can set themselves apart. Right now, Edmond, Moore, Yukon, Mustang etc... are all bland cities that don't need anymore land and should develop what they have. Sometimes having boundaries that restrict growth make for better quality developments and produce more tax revenue.

Moore is running out of room and it will be interesting to see if better constructed, high dense projects get going there.

I am well aware of the mentality shared by the majority of OKCTalk that the city has too much land. That is well known. I still in this case more is better and OKC should hold onto it. Tons of things can be done with super large tracts of land. I'd start to suggest things, but then I might have PAHDZ come out and say I'm being absurd and childish. I will say, there is more to it than urban development and farmland if OKC can market itself as being more attractive to high-tech companies and research.

Nobody moves the Mustang, America because they want an urban environment. They move here cause they want a suburban environment and are fine with that. I just don't see the point in forcing people into something they don't want. The reason why places like Guthrie and Norman can get by with that kind of stuff is because they are just far enough from OKC. Bedroom communities like Mustang have a place in this world and there is no sense turning it into something people in Mustang don't want.

Zuplar, I understand that, but when you choose to live next to a major city, you're playing with fire if you don't like city life. One day, and if OKC hits a boom like Austin, there will be continuous suburban development throughout OKC from the airport all the way through Mustang. I am not opposed to that. I am just saying the city should grow into what it has now.

I am not saying Mustang should completely urbanize itself. I have no problem with it being a suburban city like Plano or Frisco.

no one cares about where you can and can not speed. grow up.

No to defend him but you have to agree that Mustang cops are over the top on hiding out and giving speeding tickets.

Unless I'm reading this wrong... Mustang wants to annex one square mile?

No to defend him but you have to agree that Mustang cops are over the top on hiding out and giving speeding tickets.

I've lived in Mustang since like 1998, went to college in Edmond, and hung out in Yukon quite a bit over that time period. Of the 3 I always thought Yukon was the worst. Been pulled over once by a Mustang cop in that time period, and I got a warning. I just don't see that it's that bad.

Unless I'm reading this wrong... Mustang wants to annex one square mile?

You are reading that right.

I've lived in Mustang since like 1998, went to college in Edmond, and hung out in Yukon quite a bit over that time period. Of the 3 I always thought Yukon was the worst. Been pulled over once by a Mustang cop in that time period, and I got a warning. I just don't see that it's that bad.If I had to rank the worst, I'd put it like this

1.Arcadia
2.Mustang
3.Yukon
4.Moore

Edmond, OKC, OKC Sheriff, Logan County, OHP, Norman, etc.. usually aren't that bad. I have no one to blame but myself when/if I've received tickets from any of those police officers. From personal experience, witness, and from what I've heard, the ones on that list as well as a few, are just straight up douchebags.

You are reading that right.
I feel like an idiot then. I have no problem with that.

I feel like an idiot then. I have no problem with that.

How does that change your opinion. Cause now I'm confused...

Yukon recently annexed 11 acres from OKC. It was in the cause of renaming Mustang Road to Yukon Parkway for about a mile and a half. Yukon only annexed the portion of the Eastern half of the street that was in OKC. Yukon assumed maintenance responsibilities for the road whereas before it was shared, but OKC kept the land next to the road. If anything is built that would generate tax revenue, OKC would get it.

How does that change your opinion. Cause now I'm confused...It's one square mile. That's hilarious. I don't know how that is going to make or break what Mustang is trying to achieve here. Why would the guy who owns the property want Mustang to annex it so it can developed? The land directly to the north in Mustang city limits is completely undeveloped and ripe for development yet the land right to the north has to be developed so the city can sprawl out leaving vacant chunks of land in between neighborhoods.

If it is a good suburban neighborhood and development that is being held up because it's in Oklahoma City, it one single square mile, so yes, annex it into Mustang.

I was under the impression Mustang wanted everything south to the river.

Yukon recently annexed 11 acres from OKC. It was in the cause of renaming Mustang Road to Yukon Parkway for about a mile and a half. Yukon only annexed the portion of the Eastern half of the street that was in OKC. Yukon assumed maintenance responsibilities for the road whereas before it was shared, but OKC kept the land next to the road. If anything is built that would generate tax revenue, OKC would get it.

That was several years ago now, and what I referenced in the first post actually has to do with a new annexation negation with Yukon for a baseball complex on the west side of town. But possibly to your point, you're right it has been done recently.

It's one square mile. That's hilarious. I don't know how that is going to make or break what Mustang is trying to achieve here. Why would the guy who owns the property want Mustang to annex it so it can developed? The land directly to the north in Mustang city limits is completely undeveloped and ripe for development yet the land right to the north has to be developed so the city can sprawl out leaving vacant chunks of land in between neighborhoods.

If it is a good suburban neighborhood and development that is being held up because it's in Oklahoma City, it one single square mile, so yes, annex it into Mustang.

I was under the impression Mustang wanted everything south to the river.

They are small, and if this is developed into commercial, the big sucking sound of tax dollars to OKC start. Like someone said in a previous post, it would cost OKC a lot of money to essentially route infrastructure around Mustang to support this and they really don't have any long term plans for the area (according the city manager of OKC confirmed by the article. In the end Mustang would probably do more with it in the next 100 years than OKC will probably ever do with it. I really think OKC should allow Mustang to annex everything south of Mustang to the river.

I really think OKC should allow Mustang to annex everything south of Mustang to the river.

I do too. It doesn't make any sense for OKC to have this land.

They are small, and if this is developed into commercial, the big sucking sound of tax dollars to OKC start. Like someone said in a previous post, it would cost OKC a lot of money to essentially route infrastructure around Mustang to support this and they really don't have any long term plans for the area (according the city manager of OKC confirmed by the article. In the end Mustang would probably do more with it in the next 100 years than OKC will probably ever do with it. I really think OKC should allow Mustang to annex everything south of Mustang to the river.I'm not arguing against this, but what is the issue with people driving through Mustang to get to the development? The main road in Mustang is a state highway anyways and correct me if I'm wrong, but it is maintained by ODOT. If they want to pay for improvements, it isn't much because ODOT contributes to it. In Dallas you drive through other municipalities and end up back in Dallas all the time to get to shops and such.

Man, I just give up trying to debate this kind of stuff. If that's what Mustang wants, then they can have it. I spend too much time looking up maps, thinking of ideas, and placing sht together of what I think should be done on here. It's your community not mine. Sorry I said anything about it and I hope you guys are successful in what you want to do.

I'm not bashing you buddy, I'm definitely not as harsh as some people on here, but hey, we are all different. Can't we all just get along, lol?

Anyways. I fee like this is a good way for OKC to trim some fat. They've been holding this land since like the 50's or 60's, cause, why not? But over time they've grown to realize realistically they are probably never going to do anything with this land, and I mean why should they? They've got tons and tons of rural undeveloped land as it is for a large city. I'm not saying every instance of trimming rural land from OKC is fair game, but this certain situation it makes a lot of sense. People in this area already consider themselves Mustang anyways, and enjoy the lifestyle of Mustang. So to me it's a more natural fit. Honestly I'd be happy if Mustang annexed where my house is as well, as I'm not to far from where all this is talking about. But that's never going to happen because OKC has a little bit more infrastructure out by me. I'd rather OKC focus on downtown, and keeping up with existing areas, than continue to add utilities and infrastructure in these far out remote sections of the city. South and Southwest of Mustang is one of the most rural areas of OKC and I just don't ever see OKC doing anything with this land in my lifetime.

If I had to rank the worst, I'd put it like this

1.Arcadia
2.Mustang
3.Yukon
4.Moore

Edmond, OKC, OKC Sheriff, Logan County, OHP, Norman, etc.. usually aren't that bad. I have no one to blame but myself when/if I've received tickets from any of those police officers. From personal experience, witness, and from what I've heard, the ones on that list as well as a few, are just straight up douchebags.

Wow, by your own admission you have not personally received any tickets from any Mustang officers but they along with these other cities on your list are all douche bags? Makes sense.

Go for it I say.

Before everybody says "Let's do this" Mustang is super small and OKC stands to benefit immensely from Mustang "bursting at the seams". Mustang is growing rapidly and they will quickly run out of area to expand forcing expansion into OKC territory and increasing tax revenues.

I'm very serious about the RTA thing. Hold onto the land and when it comes time to push for the RTA, make some guarantees that they will receive viable transit service to other parts of the metro especially to downtown, and then just give them the land (exceedingly more than they're currently asking for) for their agreement to participate in the x% sales-tax revenue that goes toward the RTA.

I remember when we all got excited about finally getting our first stop light at Mustang Road and Hwy 152. It has grown a bit.

I think they're playing small ball. Annex all the way to the river!
Whatever the amount though, put a clause in there to prohibit building any not for profit, tax free organizations.

Of note apparently Yukon is in similar negotiations with OKC currently.

The most logical place I could see Yukon annexing land would be near i40 & Frisco, since Yukon is thinking about funding entrances & exits to i40 there 2020-ish.

South of 10th around Garth Brooks might be a place they might try but I think OKC may already have enough infrastructure there it would not be as plausible.

I say we set up a Thunderdome, OKC City Council versus Mustang's, whoever wins takes some land.

I think they're playing small ball. Annex all the way to the river!
Whatever the amount though, put a clause in there to prohibit building any not for profit, tax free organizations.

I think a lot of resident in that area would be on board honestly.

Moore doesn't want to retain their history? Fine with me. It's a crap place to live and with less history preserved it will be even Moore crap(see what I did there ;)).
.

Just curious....have you ever lived in Moore? Or, are you just spouting off crap that you have no clue about? Moore has all the basic things a person needs and the people who live in Moore are resilient when faced with overwhelming tragedies. My parents chose to live in Moore and are quite happy. I live in S OKC and my kids go to Moore Schools and although I would like a few more locally owned restaurants, living down here is great. I can well afford to live anywhere in OKC or the burbs and this is where I choose. I lived in Heritage Hills before moving here and have lived 20 different places in two different continents, three different countries and 7 different states so I have a little bit of life experience to be able to know that the people living in the communities are what makes a great community. There are reasons I don't want to live in Edmond, Gallardia, Deer Creek, etc but those are based on my wants, needs, and current lifestyle. It does not make those communities crap communities just because I don't want to live there.

Just curious....have you ever lived in Moore? Or, are you just spouting off crap that you have no clue about?

He was just lashing out at me egging him on about speeding.... I thought it was pretty funny myself.

He was just lashing out at me egging him on about speeding.... I thought it was pretty funny myself.


I caught that. I rather enjoy your postings about your "little BBQ adventures". I mean, it isn't as it didn't take you multiple weekends researching and visiting the places and hours compiling the data before you just whipped it out. Not like you haven't been to judging schools or anything like that. :cool:

I normally just rack up most everything said as lack of experience but that one comment was more than immaturity showing through.