Very Tepid growth. Nothing to crow about

500K added in under 25 years not tepid by any means, especially considering that US population growth as a whole is decelerating. It is certainly more than what OKC has added the previous 25 years.

Do some of y'all even think before you post?

It is almost laughable how often it seems articles play up how much work goes into showing almost linear growth of recent years continuing, then miss any trend shift that actual analysis should have seen coming

Yea, it's clear they can't factor in certain intangibles. The core population in OKC will grow tremendously itself over the next 10 years when downtown and Bricktown are becoming more fleshed out with the park, rail system, more housing, etc.


500K added in under 25 years not tepid by any means, especially considering that US population growth as a whole is decelerating. It is certainly more than what OKC has added the previous 25 years.

Do some of y'all even think before you post?

Yea, I don't see how OKC metro being projected to be just under 1.9 million in 24 years is that bad. That's basically 200,000+ per the next two censuses(?). Plus, like I said earlier I'd wager that estimate may even be low all things considered.

Wow... Austin on pace to double by 2040. That is insane.

Wow... Austin on pace to double by 2040. That is insane.
That's real growth, also see Raleigh,NC
OkC growth is mostly natural more births than deaths some internal movement. To experience hyper growth a place needs to be viewed as desirable across the country which drives people to want to move their from other States in large numbers. Oklahoma is not that place

Doubling in growth, while it'd have benefits obviously, would seem like a headache. I couldn't even imagine our infrastructure with all those people...

And Austin is paying for it...
The infrastructure is struggling to keep up and many long time locals say they can't recognize the Austin of old and they aren't too happy about it.

Plus, not every city doubles growth. Those are exceptions to the rule, so to expect OKC to keep stride with them and hold OKC to THAT standard isn't fair.

OKC doubling in growth over that time period would be amazing. It isn't like one day you wake up and there is twice as many people here. More people is more money, which is better infrastructure.

We should 100% be jealous of that type of growth. Austin is experiencing something phenomenal.

OKC doubling in growth over that time period would be amazing. It isn't like one day you wake up and there is twice as many people here. More people is more money, which is better infrastructure.

We should 100% be jealous of that type of growth. Austin is experiencing something phenomenal.
Yes

We should 100% be jealous of that type of growth. Austin is experiencing something phenomenal.

As someone who lives in a super fast growing area, you really shouldn't. Have you been to Austin lately? You okay with 10-15% yearly increases in housing costs? Like seeing your commute time double every 5 years? Lots of native Austinites have left...of course it doesn't matter when 5 Midwestern transplants take their spot, but still.

I frankly have my doubts about Austin doubling given the very precarious water situation there.

I have absolutely zero desire for that kind of growth. OKC will have a hard time keeping up with an additional 500K people. Forgive my bluntness, but we don't need to grow any faster for the sake of winning a d*ck measuring contest.

Yes, I have been to Austin lately and I think it is tremendous the way the various districts there have taken off. The entire layout of the city makes me jealous. The capitol, the university, the river.

It isn't a d!ck measuring contest, I am simply saying that the growth there is something to envy here in OKC along with basically every other city in America. Frankly, I don't understand what is wrong with envying somewhere like Austin. I think it is inspirational for somewhere like us even though we are in a much different league.

The reasons you mentioned for disliking the growth are that of nuisances rather than actual issues. The water thing has some weight, but lately NW/W TX watersheds are becoming very replenished.

^ agree completely with adaniel. I've lived in two fast growing cities and the costs and problems associated with it are not good

Just pulling some quick numbers:

OKC metro median income: $51,635
Austin metro median income: $63,572

OKC metro median price per square foot: $105
Austin metro median price per square foot: $151

OKC in land area: 601 square miles
Austin in land area: 297 square miles


In terms of housing cost, OKC is definitely cheaper, but not by extraordinary amounts, especially when you compare the flourishing area prices like both city's downtowns.

In terms of commute, just ballparking based on numbers (infrastructure and layout means a lot here) - but OKC you likely need to travel twice the distance to get to your destination, so while it may be less chaotic of a commute, the time spent commuting is likely comparable.

In Austin you travel half the distance and it takes twice as long. Traffic is horrendous down there.

Remember these are just projections and 2040 is a long ways off. Lots can and will happen between now and then that can skew the numbers. I'd be interested to see the same projection for Las Vegas and Phoenix 20 years ago where they were experiencing Austin-level growth and where they are now or will be in 10 years. Growth is still strong in both places but not what it was before the recession.

Did you also see the DFW projection for 2040? 10.9 million. Incredible growth there along with Austin and San Antonio on the I-35 corridor. I think eventually the Oklahoma cities pick up growth just due to our location and connections to Texas.

As a side note I was flying out of Dallas recently and was looking out the window. We were flying almost directly north from Love along the North Tollway and I saw where it currently ends at TX 380. New development all along it in that area and dirt work starting for even more where it looks like the tollway will be extended even further north. Maybe 40 miles north was Lake Texoma so the metroplex is definitely getting ever closer to the state line which is crazy.

I think eventually the Oklahoma cities pick up growth just due to our location and connections to Texas

I've wondered this as well. The Metroplex is so gigantic, there has to be some spillover at least eventually.

Durant is already part of the DFW CSA

OKC is just fine. You don't want to grow at a pace at which you can't keep up with that growth.

Austin is off the charts with growth they may not be able to manage; however, do you think that is a good thing?

I personally want to see OKC grow as fast as possible. We have space, unlike many other metros, to fit A LOT of people without worrying about some of their infrastructure issues.

The issue we need to worry about most is how we are going to manage that growth if it does come. If we do it intelligently, we shouldn't see too many pains. If we continue to push the edges further and further, we'll have some problems.

I can't foresee the major pains in terms of infrastructure that a place like Austin is seeing. The highways are pretty well set up to handle a lot of traffic. The biggest problem in that regard is getting the interchanges fixed so that they're not constant bottle necks. Once that happens, it seems as though the transportation network of OKC could actually handle an immense amount more traffic before becoming impossible.

Beyond that, OKC has a lot of space and a lot of places close enough to the core that both redevelopment and new development can thrive.

OKC will hit those massive growth numbers if we can keep speeding up the momentum we've had for the past 5-10 years. An uptick an oil and if our banking situation can stay in shape, then I think the next 5/10 years are going to be a finishing of the foundation for incredible growth between 2020/25 and 2040.

I'm not disappointed in it, I just want it to be better. We out performed a vast majority of the metros.

I actually want to OKC grow so fast it outgrows its infrastructure. The problems Austin are good problems, imo, for the most part. Extreme traffic and congestion are good things for cities. I've never been real excited to hear OKC constantly boost its low traffic and housing costs especially around the core.

I'm not disappointed in it, I just want it to be better. We out performed a vast majority of the metros.

I actually want to OKC grow so fast it outgrows its infrastructure. The problems Austin are good problems, imo, for the most part. Extreme traffic and congestion are good things for cities. I've never been real excited to hear OKC constantly boost its low traffic and housing costs especially around the core.

While being able to hang your hat on something that is known for the low cost of living can seem self deprecating, it is definitely an incentive for today's young professionals. What OKC needs is young entrepreneurs wanting to launch startup companies for low cost/labor in a place where you can get great bang for buck (See OKC).

I think OKC is headed in a great direction in that regard, we just need more people willing to spend big money here. I would love to see more marketing for OKC in this regard, the NBA has done the city a tremendous amount of this.

I understand. I also think OKC will grow a lot faster than that list claims it will.

That's real growth, also see Raleigh,NC
OkC growth is mostly natural more births than deaths some internal movement. To experience hyper growth a place needs to be viewed as desirable across the country which drives people to want to move their from other States in large numbers. Oklahoma is not that place

According to the Census, most of the metro's growth is net migration.

From 2010 to 2015, the metro had a natural change (births - deaths) of +41,900 and a net migration (foreign + domestic) of +62,400.

From 2014 to 2015, the metro had a natural change of +8,400 and a net migration of +12,400.

What OKC needs is young entrepreneurs wanting to launch startup companies for low cost/labor in a place where you can get great bang for buck (See OKC).

The problem isn't the low cost of living and doing business it's that the labor pool isn't adequate for many of the jobs in technology and science. OU and OSU are fairly average as far as state universities go and we know all too well that the state doesn't fund education like it should which causes problems in this area.

You have to create an environment where lots of young and educated transplants come in to make up for those shortcomings. Colorado has been successful doing that (similar average universities and low funding for public schools). Of course the more people that move in the higher the cost of living though with lots of land (unlike CO) Oklahoma would fare better.

I personally want to see OKC grow as fast as possible. We have space, unlike many other metros, to fit A LOT of people without worrying about some of their infrastructure issues.

Then if that happens, I hope you don't complain about the higher cost of living:

COL:
Austin 94.8
Oklahoma City 85.9

National Average 100

The problem isn't the low cost of living and doing business it's that the labor pool isn't adequate for many of the jobs in technology and science. OU and OSU are fairly average as far as state universities go and we know all too well that the state doesn't fund education like it should which causes problems in this area.

You have to create an environment where lots of young and educated transplants come in to make up for those shortcomings. Colorado has been successful doing that (similar average universities and low funding for public schools). Of course the more people that move in the higher the cost of living though with lots of land (unlike CO) Oklahoma would fare better.

But Oklahoma doesn't have the fabulous skiing that Colorado does for a super attraction for young people. So providing better support for education is more important for Oklahoma than for Colorado. How much, if any, did Colorado cut higher education in 2016? Oklahoma cut it by nearly 16%. Please vote out Oklahoma legislators who have been cutting education. They advertised that cutting taxes and offering incentives would force tax revenues to go up. Doing that didn't work.

Sitting in traffic for hours a day and paying outrageous rent are the two worst things that come with massive growth. It's NOT fun.

I am stuck on this a bit. I am jealous of the positive attention places like Austin and Portland are getting as they have grown astronomically over the last 10-15 years, but the growing pains are terrible. I frequent Portland and have been for going on 18 years now. The difference in quality of life in the last, say, just 6 years has gone down quite a bit due to growth out-pacing infrastructure development. It is just a pain in the rear to get ANYWHERE in that city at virtually ANYTIME of the WEEK/DAY. It is awful. Pretty place...some really great neighborhoods with interesting culture, architecture, recreation opportunities, but, man, it is a pain to get around and the costs are through the roof. I DON'T want to see OKC get like that. However, I don't think it will any time soon.

Honestly, as I travel around and talk to people, our severe weather is a HUGE negative for people. And, unlike California and Florida where (as we have seen lately with FL) they also have major natural disasters--there are no perceived trade-offs with living in Oklahoma--"Wait, you have tornadoes, but no mountains and no ocean--then why would I live there?" People will accept a certain amount of risk in CA with earthquakes, drought, wildfires and massive tropical storms in FL because of the perceived trade-offs with certain natural/cultural/economic advantages in those places. Oklahoma just does not have the perceived trade-offs that makes our perceived negatives worth the move/risk.

I have come to peace with the fact that we will always be overlooked and sneered at--that's okay--more quality of life for me and my family! I can travel to those places anytime for a taste of what they have to offer and then come home to a relatively stress-free day-to-day life in a city that offers a lot, really.

One of the things I just don't understand is why we are not promoting Oklahoma as a great place to retire. We have the $10K single/$20K couple tax break on pensions/401K or other pension money, we have cheap home prices/utilizes/property taxes, we have cheap grocery prices and have a climate that never stays cold for long. Basically a place to make your pension money go farther. Also not bad traffic and low crime in decent areas. I just think the metro and cities like Edmond, are missing the boat on this one.

Sitting in traffic for hours a day and paying outrageous rent are the two worst things that come with massive growth. It's NOT fun.They might not be fun while sitting in traffic or having to pay rent, but I will take sitting on the 14 lane 405 in LA rather than driving down a desolate 6 lane highway I-35 through Edmond at 8pm.

In my personal opinion, the problems you listed are good problems to have. Not that you should overly excited or want them, but they are good problems to have. Having a city that is dead on the weekends which I noticed OKC was even the last time I was there, are bad problems to have.

However the trade offs you will get are worth it. Better culture. More diversity. More liveliness. More activity. Expanded hours for businesses. More tax monies for the city to work with. More shopping options. etc.

The growth is nice to see in OKC, but it is lousy. I don't compare it to St. Louis or Kansas City. I compare it cities that are actually exciting to me. Austin, Portland, LA, NYC, etc. Even though cities like NYC and LA are waaaaay out of OKC's league, holding OKC up to LA is better than holding it up to a standard like St. Louis or Tulsa. So I want OKC to experience growth like Austin. Los Angeles is already massive and even though OKC's percentage numbers beat LA's, the growth here is unbelievable. 50+ story high rises announced every other week. But as an established city, it's hard to get massive growth spurts. OKC however, would greatly benefit by a massive boom similar to Austin or Denver that pushes it's population from 2.5-3 million by 2040. I would love to see that. I don't expect that, but I do expect the number to be at least 2 million with a good boom and a massive boom we could hit 2.5.

I am stuck on this a bit. I am jealous of the positive attention places like Austin and Portland are getting as they have grown astronomically over the last 10-15 years, but the growing pains are terrible. I frequent Portland and have been for going on 18 years now. The difference in quality of life in the last, say, just 6 years has gone down quite a bit due to growth out-pacing infrastructure development. It is just a pain in the rear to get ANYWHERE in that city at virtually ANYTIME of the WEEK/DAY. It is awful. Pretty place...some really great neighborhoods with interesting culture, architecture, recreation opportunities, but, man, it is a pain to get around and the costs are through the roof. I DON'T want to see OKC get like that. However, I don't think it will any time soon.

Honestly, as I travel around and talk to people, our severe weather is a HUGE negative for people. And, unlike California and Florida where (as we have seen lately with FL) they also have major natural disasters--there are no perceived trade-offs with living in Oklahoma--"Wait, you have tornadoes, but no mountains and no ocean--then why would I live there?" People will accept a certain amount of risk in CA with earthquakes, drought, wildfires and massive tropical storms in FL because of the perceived trade-offs with certain natural/cultural/economic advantages in those places. Oklahoma just does not have the perceived trade-offs that makes our perceived negatives worth the move/risk.

I have come to peace with the fact that we will always be overlooked and sneered at--that's okay--more quality of life for me and my family! I can travel to those places anytime for a taste of what they have to offer and then come home to a relatively stress-free day-to-day life in a city that offers a lot, really.

Portland is a largely anti-highway city and that doesn't help traffic at all. Austin just gets overshadowed by Houston and Dallas from TxDOT and hopefully that will be solved in the coming years,

I sat in traffic for a year in Portland and hated it. Cost of living (due to massive growth) meant no money to enjoy the cultural benefits. I just can't agree with you that sitting in traffic is enjoyable at all. It sucks when you do it every day.

A little better in Denver, still expensive.

What do you see bringing all of these people to OKC for the population to be 2+ million? Where will they work?

I sat in traffic for a year in Portland and hated it. Cost of living (due to massive growth) meant no money to enjoy the cultural benefits. I just can't agree with you that sitting in traffic is enjoyable at all. It sucks when you do it every day.

A little better in Denver, still expensive.

I completely agree with you that it isn't enjoyable, but I would rather have that sight than a ghost town, something OKC surely is not.

What do you see bringing all of these people to OKC for the population to be 2+ million? Where will they work?In Oklahoma City lol. I mean I get what you're saying. I want the entire economy to grow.

As a population grows, the number of businesses tends to grow. Where to work is a self solving problem. I can tell most people here aren't from a city or metro area that hasn't grown in decades. I'm originally from Canton, Ohio. It's a small city, but part of a metro area of 400,000. It hasn't experienced real growth in decades. The principle cities, Canton and Massillon have either been stagnant or have shrunk in population. Canton has thousands of abandoned houses from when it's population was 115,000. It's at 70,000 today. You drive down the Lincoln Highway and you think the chief drivers of the economy are used car lots, gas stations, and drug stores. The projected growth for Oklahoma City is off the charts compared to what will happen where I'm from. I'd like it to pick up some, but OKC is blessed to have that in it's future.

What do you see bringing all of these people to OKC for the population to be 2+ million? Where will they work?

Clean Energy Jobs! Infrastructure projects! Deficit Spending!

I know quite a few people that live in these high growth cities (Denver, Austin, Portland, Seattle) that don't hate their lives. I have to admit, most of them live in the core from what I remember. Maybe they just don't drive as much so they don't experience that issue? Which, IMO, is why people are moving there. To live in the vibrant core of these great cities. Maybe not. I have looked at neighborhoods in Denver pretty extensively, as I have wanted to move there for a while now, and I don't remember it being too expensive to consider.

I know quite a few people that live in these high growth cities (Denver, Austin, Portland, Seattle) that don't hate their lives. I have to admit, most of them live in the core from what I remember. Maybe they just don't drive as much so they don't experience that issue? Which, IMO, is why people are moving there. To live in the vibrant core of these great cities. Maybe not. I have looked at neighborhoods in Denver pretty extensively, as I have wanted to move there for a while now, and I don't remember it being too expensive to consider.

Median single family home price in Denver just shy of $400,000. Up nearly 11% over last year.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/03/denver-median-home-sold-price-nears-400000/

And median 1 bedroom apartment for rent is $1400 and median 2-bed is $1800.

https://www.apartmentlist.com/co/denver#rental-price-monitor

For comparison median single family home in OKC is $130,000. Median one bedroom rent is $768 and two bedroom $900.

For full disclosure, I think you would have to add median household incomes as well...

The 2015 median household income for the Denver metro was $70,283. Oklahoma City was $48,568.

Sure. $45,700 OKC and $63,000 Denver. 27% greater in denver despite houses costing 3 times as much.

Median single family home price in Denver just shy of $400,000. Up nearly 11% over last year.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/03/denver-median-home-sold-price-nears-400000/

Yes, it is a metrowide problem in Denver, not just near the core. My wife and I bought new construction and closed last September, we are doing a refi and the home appraised for over 15% more than we paid for it a year ago. We live far closer to the airport than downtown.

^Why don't you move back to OK then where it's cheaper? What's keeping you in CO?

I know quite a few people that live in these high growth cities (Denver, Austin, Portland, Seattle) that don't hate their lives. I have to admit, most of them live in the core from what I remember. Maybe they just don't drive as much so they don't experience that issue? Which, IMO, is why people are moving there. To live in the vibrant core of these great cities. Maybe not. I have looked at neighborhoods in Denver pretty extensively, as I have wanted to move there for a while now, and I don't remember it being too expensive to consider.

The problem in comparing cities like those to OKC is that they are "lifestyle" towns (although maybe a bit less so for Seattle). They attract a certain type of demographic that is perfectly okay sacrificing certain comforts and economic opportunities in exchange for some level of amenity or lifestyle. I can only speak for Austin but from what I know, salaries are much lower and housing costs are higher there than both Dallas or Houston. Let me just say that I love OKC but this town will *never* achieve that level, at least on a large scale. As someone said earlier, our climate alone would scare off most.

And in discussions like these I feel like the only options are to be an Austin/Portland-light or be doomed to die slow death, which is an outrageous assumption. There is a lot of grey on that scale. Personally, I would look to cities like Fort Worth, Nashville, or Columbus OH as a model for our future. All cities a bit bigger than OKC but not by much. These places don't get attention from the Williamsburg/Silver Lake crowd and probably never will. But they are every bit as vibrant as the Austins and Portlands of the World and growing, but far more diverse and accessible to middle income people.

^Why don't you move back to OK then where it's cheaper? What's keeping you in CO?

We moved here in 2008, before the huge run up in home prices so we were fortunate. We still enjoy the city and access to the mountains, though the traffic is becoming pretty awful. We do plan to retire somewhere cheaper, probably not Oklahoma though.

The problem in comparing cities like those to OKC is that they are "lifestyle" towns (although maybe a bit less so for Seattle). They attract a certain type of demographic that is perfectly okay sacrificing certain comforts and economic opportunities in exchange for some level of amenity or lifestyle. I can only speak for Austin but from what I know, salaries are much lower and housing costs are higher there than both Dallas or Houston. Let me just say that I love OKC but this town will *never* achieve that level, at least on a large scale. As someone said earlier, our climate alone would scare off most.

And in discussions like these I feel like the only options are to be an Austin/Portland-light or be doomed to die slow death, which is an outrageous assumption. There is a lot of grey on that scale. Personally, I would look to cities like Fort Worth, Nashville, or Columbus OH as a model for our future. All cities a bit bigger than OKC but not by much. These places don't get attention from the Williamsburg/Silver Lake crowd and probably never will. But they are every bit as vibrant as the Austins and Portlands of the World and growing, but far more diverse and accessible to middle income people.

Nashville really is on fire!! Like others have mentioned, I'm not sure OKC will ever be a huge population magnet for a myriad of reasons, but Nashville would be a great model to aspire towards.

Nashville really is on fire!! Like others have mentioned, I'm not sure OKC will ever be a huge population magnet for a myriad of reasons, but Nashville would be a great model to aspire towards.

I would add Charlotte and Indianapolis as well.

Does Austin have even a single pro sports franchise?

OKC will become a huge population magnet.

OKC will become a huge population magnet.

I will inherit a billion dollars.

This is a fun game!

I still believe our location along I-35 is key. We're just a couple hours away from Dallas. We're also relatively close to Wichita and Kansas City. This entire corridor is more or less a megaopolis. Not to mention being at the intersection of 40/35/44. It's still key to our development. Most people move for economic opportunity. If we continue diversifying the economy and bringing more and more business to the city, we could potentially see a boom. That also being potentially fed by Dallas to some degree. I work for Hobby Lobby. Our freight is off loaded in California, shipped to Dallas, and brought up to OKC in shipping containers every day. We aren't the only company that does that. Though we do it in the most grand fashion.

I would add Charlotte and Indianapolis as well.

Charlotte is a good model for sure, though IMO it offers little in the way of character. Basically a mini Atlanta that drew a few big companies from the NE with CEOS that tried to bring a piece of NYC with them by building beautiful skyscrapers. Uptown is definitely heading in the right direction though.


I don't think OKC is terribly far behind Indy. OKC lacks the retail that Circle Centre Mall brings but overall the downtown is pretty small and compact
OKC just needs a shot in the arm with its retail.

The new areas on the White River do offer a lot of potential.

I will inherit a billion dollars.

This is a fun game!

It's not a game. Whatever you want to say. Time will tell.

It's not a game. Whatever you want to say. Time will tell.

Fair enough, I think OKC is a nice place and should be proud of its recent accomplishments, but I don't see that is has the characteristics that have made other cities boom in recent years. Movement to cities is taking place across the globe but the cities that are truly booming have something unique to offer, what about OKC will spur a huge growth?

Fair enough, I think OKC is a nice place and should be proud of its recent accomplishments, but I don't see that is has the characteristics that have made other cities boom in recent years. Movement to cities is taking place across the globe but the cities that are truly booming have something unique to offer, what about OKC will spur a huge growth?

It's different than all of those cities you mentioned or alluded to. It is the crossroads of America. Oklahoma does have a uniqueness that could be branded to it and be the cool place to be. It is within hours of beautiful wilderness a days drive of the ocean or mountains. Tons and tons of lakes around. An economy that if positioned right, could see major aeronautical growth. Future energy growth beyond O&G. The state could also take initiative to lead in agricultural innovation. Atmospheric research is also a great field that could work here. Tons of open land to create a tech field in Norman as an alternative to Silicon Valley and Austin. Tons of cool towns around to create great main streets(Guthrie, Norman, Edmond, El Reno, etc.). Distribution hub for both ground and air transport. A lot of these are up to the city to implement.

But I can see Oklahoma becoming something of a symbol for young people to associate to, but the government has to change and the city landscape has to change. I can see great things for Oklahoma City. I don't think small and I don't make sure my thinking is within someone else's concept of realistic. A couple of days ago I was potentially offered something that could make acting career take off and you can believe I will invest as much as I can to make my dream for OKC come true. OKC needs the right leadership and right people to want to actually make the city better and not just worried about every penny they spend if they're going to make it back or not.

I mean there are plenty and plenty of smaller towns that offer the exact same thing Portland, Austin, or Denver do that make them "unique" cities minus the big city obviously. I can't think of one city like OKC that is centrally positioned right on the crosstimbers of America where you can be in one part of the city and be in forest resembling eastern US or be in a place like El Reno and get a southwest vibe. Once again, Oklahoma is part of a group of states that, at least to me, stand out from the rest. There is rich history here in terms of native Indians and the state itself in how the country developed.

Plenty of things like a massive airport hub opening up at Will Rodgers... or FedEx moving to OKC from Memphis... or a massive agriculture company opening a huge research facility in SW OKC... or Disney or someone proposing a huge billion dollar theme park along highway 9 by New Castle... or vertical farming taking off in the core... an ivy leauge college being built by Linwood BLVD... someone attempting to build New Alexandria, a high end mixed-use suburb sprawling around a lake connected with canals to Lake Thunderbird with 40-50k residents... and I'm sure you can make a lot of cases as to why those things won't happen or that kind of engineering won't work even though this country built an interstate system and went to them moon and every other amazing thing we did, but I would rather put my thoughts towards trying to make those things happen instead of just making up reasons why they won't and settling for anything less. Not that you should be disappointed in anything less, but always keep trying to make it better. Quite honestly, I don't see OKC doing that right now. All I see is people saying how far OKC has come since 10 years ago or how this or that is going to be so cool to see in OKC like BOK Tower that everyone on here seems obsessed with. :P Not that I don't like the tower, buuuuuuuuut...