New Census Bureau data released today with population estimates of metro areas as of July 2011:

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2011/index.html

They estimate a population of 1.278 million, growth of almost 20,000 from the prior year. Over half that growth was estimated to be due to migration to OKC, with about 8,800 moving to OKC from within the country. Looks like OKC's growth is maintaining its momentum and if it continues at this rate, the MSA population could approach 1.5M by 2020.

OKC has now passed Richmond, VA, to become the 43rd largest MSA in the country.

By comparison Tulsa remained 52nd largest, growing by about 6,800 people with domestic migration numbers barely in positive territory (+189). Its 2011 population was estimated to be 947,000. At this rate the Tulsa MSA could hit 1 million by 2010, but it will be close.

DFW and Houston were the two greatest gainers at 126,000 and 111,000 respectively. DFW will probably break 7M by 2015 and Houston will likely get there by decade's end. DFW and Houston are the 4th and 5th largest MSAs in the country.

Thanks very much for the information.

That growth represents a rate of about 15.6% if extrapolated over 10 years. By way of comparison, from 2000-2010 OKC's MSA grew by 14.4%.

Solid growth but hardly in boom town category, which is 20%+. The much bigger cities of Dallas, Houston, Phoenix and Atlanta as are still well north of 20%. Charlotte and Austin are both well over 30%.

It might be more as of late, I am noticing a lot of people moving here from out of state. We hired some new people at my job, one lady that was hired just moved here from Illinois, and a guy and his family just moved here from Virginia. He said he moved to Oklahoma City based on his research as the best place to start over and raise a family. They are a fairly young couple (late 20's) , with a brand new baby, I thought it was interesting.

I also live in a fairly new middle-class subdivision in Moore, and it seems every new home built, I see cars with out of state tags moving in.

I love information like this, Is there any statistic that show which metro cities are growing the fastest? IMO think Mustang and Yukon are growing the fastest.

So can we sort of estimate Oklahoma City's population from that data or is it already presented somewhere? Maybe 590,000?

I love information like this, Is there any statistic that show which metro cities are growing the fastest? IMO think Mustang and Yukon are growing the fastest.

According to the 2010 census, Moore grew a whopping 34% from 2000-2010, fastest growth in the metro area, I am sure the trend in continuing for Moore...

So can we sort of estimate Oklahoma City's population from that data or is it already presented somewhere? Maybe 590,000?

I read an article around the end of last year and it said that Oklahoma City was well over 580,000 so based on that I would think we're approaching or have already passed 590,000.

According to the 2010 census, Moore grew a whopping 34% from 2000-2010, fastest growth in the metro area, I am sure the trend in continuing for Moore...

Really? Moore? I'm honestly surprised but not surprised, if that makes sense. LOL

So can we sort of estimate Oklahoma City's population from that data or is it already presented somewhere? Maybe 590,000?


I love information like this, Is there any statistic that show which metro cities are growing the fastest? IMO think Mustang and Yukon are growing the fastest.

US Census Bureau population estimates for municipalities will be released in May. The most recent data for individual cities is from the 2010 Census.

Believe it or not, Yukon is actually one of the slower-growing suburbs of OKC. Mustang is much faster-growing than Yukon, but still lags behind a few others (see below).


According to the 2010 census, Moore grew a whopping 34% from 2000-2010, fastest growth in the metro area, I am sure the trend in continuing for Moore...

Actually if going by strictly the growth rate, Blanchard smoked all the other cities (over 5,000 population) in the metro with 172% growth from 2000 to 2010. In fact Blanchard grew more just in raw numbers (4,800) than Mustang (4,200). Piedmont, Newcastle, and Tuttle were all over 40% growth as well.

If you're talking "major" suburbs/cities in the OKC metro, then yes, Moore posted the fastest growth rate.

Really? Moore? I'm honestly surprised but not surprised, if that makes sense. LOL

Yep, Moore went from 41,000 to 55,000 from 2000-2010, 34% growth.

US Census Bureau population estimates for municipalities will be released in May. The most recent data for individual cities is from the 2010 Census.

Believe it or not, Yukon is actually one of the slower-growing suburbs of OKC. Mustang is much faster-growing than Yukon, but still lags behind a few others (see below).



Actually if going by strictly the growth rate, Blanchard smoked all the other cities (over 5,000 population) in the metro with 172% growth from 2000 to 2010. In fact Blanchard grew more just in raw numbers (4,800) than Mustang (4,200). Piedmont, Newcastle, and Tuttle were all over 40% growth as well.

If you're talking "major" suburbs/cities in the OKC metro, then yes, Moore posted the fastest growth rate.

When I think of cities in the metro area, Blanchard, Piedmont, Newcastle and Tuttle don't come to mind, lol....I really don't consider them part of the metro area...

When I think OKC metro, I think of Norman, Moore, Del City, Midwest City, Edmond, Yukon, Mustang....

When I think of cities in the metro area, Blanchard, Piedmont, Newcastle and Tuttle don't come to mind, lol....I really don't consider them part of the metro area...

You may not think of them that way, but they most certainly are! All of them are within the metropolitan area boundaries. They are indeed disconnected from the urban area of OKC somewhat, but I think it's fair to attribute their rapid growth to the overall economic expansion of greater OKC. In my experience, growing up not far from Piedmont, many families in that area work in OKC proper but choose to live farther out simply to have more space.

[ In my experience, growing up not far from Piedmont, many families in that area work in OKC proper but choose to live farther out simply to have more space.

Like it's so crammed once you get south and east of the Kilpatrick Turnpike... lol

I read these posts every time the census releases new population projections and although OKC is growing, the growth is no where near the level that warrants unsupported enthusiasm or attention. OKC's population is still less than 100K greater than N.O. which experienced a horrific natural disaster. Truth is OKC is not a super growth metro, the reasons why can be debated by the facts don't lie.

I read these posts every time the census releases new population projections and although OKC is growing, the growth is no where near the level that warrants unsupported enthusiasm or attention. OKC's population is still less than 100K greater than N.O. which experienced a horrific natural disaster. Truth is OKC is not a super growth metro, the reasons why can be debated by the facts don't lie.

Hold on there. I think we can all feel supportive of the progress that has been made over the past 2-3 years, particularly as the recession has been stalling growth elsewhere. The "growth of our growth" is what is promising. I agree, we need more growth. But our economy has been one of the nation's strongest, our quality of life is no longer repelling people from taking our jobs, and NET in-migration from elsewhere around the nation has been strong.

Hold on there. I think we can all feel supportive of the progress that has been made over the past 2-3 years, particularly as the recession has been stalling growth elsewhere. The "growth of our growth" is what is promising. I agree, we need more growth. But our economy has been one of the nation's strongest, our quality of life is no longer repelling people from taking our jobs, and NET in-migration from elsewhere around the nation has been strong.

Don't disagree with any of your posts, however none of those stats you mentioned has resulted in skyrocketing growth( 20% or greater). OKC rate of growth is improving over its historical averages, but, those have not been great and still trails many peer cities ( well, several formally peer cities have long since outgrown us). Some progress but still 43rd?

Don't disagree with any of your posts, however none of those stats you mentioned has resulted in skyrocketing growth( 20% or greater). OKC rate of growth is improving over its historical averages, but, those have not been great and still trails many peer cities ( well, several formally peer cities have long since outgrown us). Some progress but still 43rd?

dc, OKC will never be a top ten population center in the US. IMO good sustainable growth is much better than a population explosion like that which has taken place in cities like Phoenix or Las Vegas. At some point growth which is too fast can deminish the quality of life (smog, traffic congestion, crime, etc.). OKC could certainly handle growth which is a little faster but I see no reason to be disappointed with where we have been going in that regard.

The OKC-Shawnee Combined Statistical Area population estimate is just over 1.348 million. The Tulsa-Bartlesville CSA estimate is 998,438, so close to that 1 million mark!

IMO these are very solid growth numbers, and have been for at least the past 3 or 4 years. I'm quite frankly surprised how many people here are poo-pooing them.

I think one needs to understand that the pre-2008 notion of a "boom town" is over; both the overall growth of the US and and the internal movement around the country are at multi-decade lows. And yet our growth has accelerated over the same time. No OKC is not a boom town, but its the biggest confirmation yet that we are making progress in building a better community.

Not calling out any posters, but its incorrect that we are somehow getting left behind. Through a little excel magic here some things to ponder. Out of the 360ish metro areas, we rank 35th in percentage of growth (or top 10 percent). Of the 52 metros with at least 1 million, OKC ranks 10th in percentage growth (or top 20 percent). In regards to peer metros, which I regard as those between 1 to 2 million people, only Charlotte and Austin are growing faster. Granted I used MSA numbers, the CSA may change this rank slightly but probably not much.

Of course it means nothing to grow for growth's sake if the rest of the community is going to hell. I personally think its nuts that Charlotte is growing as fast as it is given that area's unemployment rate is still over 10 percent and its major industry (banking) is still in tatters; the same can be said for a lot of FL metros which are seeing their growth rebound.

It surprises me that in all the posts that I read when these stories come out that Memphis is never included as peer cities when they are most likely the first major city that we will pass. I have noticed that each census that comes out, we get closer to them and now we are only about the city of Moore away from passing them. I think that would be a major breakthrough.

Also we keep hearing that we have the smallest NBA market but look at Salt Lake City. Our metro is already past theirs.

It surprises me that in all the posts that I read when these stories come out that Memphis is never included as peer cities when they are most likely the first major city that we will pass. I have noticed that each census that comes out, we get closer to them and now we are only about the city of Moore away from passing them. I think that would be a major breakthrough.

Also we keep hearing that we have the smallest NBA market but look at Salt Lake City. Our metro is already past theirs.

I was born and raised in the SLC metro city of Layton. What most people don't realize about the SLC metro is that the SLC CSA or what we Utah natives call Wasatch Front Metro is 2.2 million!

I was born and raised in the SLC metro city of Layton. What most people don't realize about the SLC metro is that the SLC CSA or what we Utah natives call Wasatch Front Metro is 2.2 million!

or 1,744,886 which is from the 2010 census

or 1,744,886 which is from the 2010 census


I am talking more about the Wasatch Front, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasatch_Front

CSA: is 1.7 million, but the greater urban area of the Wasatch Front is 2.2 million...

I am talking more about the Wasatch Front, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasatch_Front

CSA: is 1.7 million, but the greater urban area of the Wasatch Front is 2.2 million...

i know but you sited the SLC CSA by name

By 2020, we will probably surpass Louisville, Memphis, Jacksonville in metro area population, putting us at the 40th largest. But we will probably stay there for a awhile as Milwaukee is ahead of us by about 250,000, at 1.5M right now.

Speaking of people moving to Oklahoma City:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-05/need-a-job-go-to-oklahoma-city

I will take quality growth over quantity growth. Right now that is what Okc is doing, building a strong quality foundation.

Build the foundation that is necessary in order for Okc to become a super growth type of city.

It surprises me that in all the posts that I read when these stories come out that Memphis is never included as peer cities when they are most likely the first major city that we will pass. I have noticed that each census that comes out, we get closer to them and now we are only about the city of Moore away from passing them. I think that would be a major breakthrough.

Also we keep hearing that we have the smallest NBA market but look at Salt Lake City. Our metro is already past theirs.

Our metro is not past theirs. SLC should include ogden,UT which is approx 500K. sorta like adding shawnee to OKC. I am pro growth and would like to see OKC experience super-heated growth for about a decade. I think the momentum is there with all the infrastructure and entertainment improvements. I just don't characterize the numbers and percentages that started this thread is more than to be expected growth for a city not in decline.

Speaking of people moving to Oklahoma City:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-05/need-a-job-go-to-oklahoma-city

simply great news that will only help change the perception of OKc and lead to even greater movement of people from out of state

Our metro is not past theirs. SLC should include ogden,UT which is approx 500K. sorta like adding shawnee to OKC. I am pro growth and would like to see OKC experience super-heated growth for about a decade. I think the momentum is there with all the infrastructure and entertainment improvements. I just don't characterize the numbers and percentages that started this thread is more than to be expected growth for a city not in decline.

ogden is not part of the SLC MSA

Don't disagree with any of your posts, however none of those stats you mentioned has resulted in skyrocketing growth( 20% or greater). OKC rate of growth is improving over its historical averages, but, those have not been great and still trails many peer cities ( well, several formally peer cities have long since outgrown us). Some progress but still 43rd?

So, I guess you're a "glass-half-empty" kinda person, eh? OKC is experiencing great, solid growth; absolutely nothing to be negative about. No, it's not boom-town growth, but as others point out above, boom-town growth can lead to lots of problems (e.g. OKC does not want Austin's traffic issues).

Which formally [sic] peer cities have long since outgrown OKC?

I am talking more about the Wasatch Front, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasatch_Front

CSA: is 1.7 million, but the greater urban area of the Wasatch Front is 2.2 million...

Well, in that case, I guess we could make up a name for the OKC-Tulsa area and declare ourselves to have a metro area of 2.3 million people. ;-)

What is unique about the Oklahoma City metro area is that is a single metro area, and not combined MSA's like most metro areas. For example you have Dallas-Ft.Worth, Austin-Round Rock, etc...If there was a major city between Oklahoma City and Tulsa on I-44, we could have had a Oklahoma City-?????-Tulsa CSA since Tulsa is only 90 miles away, pushing us to over 2 million.

Well, in that case, I guess we could make up a name for the OKC-Tulsa area and declare ourselves to have a metro area of 2.3 million people. ;-)

but they have major cities linking them together, we don't...as soon as you leave OKC on I-44 its all rural until you get to Tulsa...

What is unique about the Oklahoma City metro area is that is a single metro area, and not combined MSA's like most metro areas. For example you have Dallas-Ft.Worth, Austin-Round Rock, etc...If there was a major city between Oklahoma City and Tulsa on I-44, we could have had a Oklahoma City-?????-Tulsa CSA since Tulsa is only 90 miles away, pushing us to over 2 million.

Norman is approaching it's own metro area....I imagine in the coming years Norman will have it's own MSA I bet. Maybe OKC can be a suburb to Norman :P

Like I stated earlier, I used to to live in Layton, UT, pop around 60,000....traveling I-15 from Ogden to Provo, you just drive through one city to the next, if you didn't see the signs letting you know you have entered a new city, you would think you have never left the previous city, it crazy.

New Census Bureau data released today with population estimates of metro areas as of July 2011:

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2011/index.html

They estimate a population of 1.278 million, growth of almost 20,000 from the prior year. Over half that growth was estimated to be due to migration to OKC, with about 8,800 moving to OKC from within the country. Looks like OKC's growth is maintaining its momentum and if it continues at this rate, the MSA population could approach 1.5M by 2020.

OKC has now passed Richmond, VA, to become the 43rd largest MSA in the country.

By comparison Tulsa remained 52nd largest, growing by about 6,800 people with domestic migration numbers barely in positive territory (+189). Its 2011 population was estimated to be 947,000. At this rate the Tulsa MSA could hit 1 million by 2010, but it will be close.

DFW and Houston were the two greatest gainers at 126,000 and 111,000 respectively. DFW will probably break 7M by 2015 and Houston will likely get there by decade's end. DFW and Houston are the 4th and 5th largest MSAs in the country.

Not sure what happened, but I think a bunch of your numbers are incorrect.

OKC grew almost 26,000 from 2010-2011 (not "almost 20,000"), for a 2% growth rate.
Tulsa grew by about 9,500, for 1.1% rate.

I presume you meant to say Tulsa should hit 1 million by 2020, not 2010.

DFW grew by approximately 155,000 (not 126,000), for a 2.43% growth rate.
Houston grew by approximately 140,000 (not 1110,000), for a 2.35% growth rate. At this growth rate, Houston will break 7 million in 2018.

but they have major cities linking them together, we don't...as soon as you leave OKC on I-44 its all rural until you get to Tulsa...

Apparently not very linked together, other than being physically sprawled together along a highway. If they were linked together, economically, they would constitute either an MSA or a CSA.

More info backing up the foundation that Okc is putting down for continual growth.

Energy sector jobs headed to Oklahoma City
The Oklahoma energy industry has created more than 12,000 jobs during the recession.

Read more: http://newsok.com/energy-sector-jobs-headed-to-oklahoma-city/article/3663907#ixzz1rHCudWt8

By 2020, we will probably surpass Louisville, Memphis, Jacksonville in metro area population, putting us at the 40th largest. But we will probably stay there for a awhile as Milwaukee is ahead of us by about 250,000, at 1.5M right now.

This is all true. However, Raleigh, at its current growth rate, will likely surpass OKC. So we end up at 41st, instead of 40th.

I could see the Oklahoma City metro area increasing in population by 30,000/yr from 2015-2020.

Norman is approaching it's own metro area....I imagine in the coming years Norman will have it's own MSA I bet. Maybe OKC can be a suburb to Norman :P

No it won't. It will more than likely ALWAYS be a part of OKC's MSA. If anything it might be like Dallas-FortWorth in some far-off future. With Norman very clearly Fort Worth. ;P

This is all true. However, Raleigh, at its current growth rate, will likely surpass OKC. So we end up at 41st, instead of 40th.

You are correct, I forgot about Raleigh!

No it won't. It will more than likely ALWAYS be a part of OKC's MSA. If anything it might be like Dallas-FortWorth in some far-off future. With Norman very clearly Fort Worth. ;P

Residents in Oklahoma/Cleveland County make up roughly 1 million, pretty dense.

I could see the Oklahoma City metro area increasing in population by 30,000/yr from 2015-2020.

??? Why would you see such a dramatic drop in OKC's growth rate? (OKC metro just increased by 26,000 in the 15 months from the 2010 census to July 1, 2011... at that numerical rate, the growth in 5 years should be 104,000.)

??? Why would you see such a dramatic drop in OKC's growth rate? (OKC metro just increased by 26,000 in the 15 months from the 2010 census to July 1, 2011... at that numerical rate, the growth in 5 years should be 104,000.)

I said 30,000 a year...

I said 30,000 a year...

Oops. sorry about that. In that case, I think you're getting a little carried away. ;-)

What about Edmond population in the last 10 years?

Not sure what happened, but I think a bunch of your numbers are incorrect.

OKC grew almost 26,000 from 2010-2011 (not "almost 20,000"), for a 2% growth rate.
Tulsa grew by about 9,500, for 1.1% rate.

I presume you meant to say Tulsa should hit 1 million by 2020, not 2010.

DFW grew by approximately 155,000 (not 126,000), for a 2.43% growth rate.
Houston grew by approximately 140,000 (not 1110,000), for a 2.35% growth rate. At this growth rate, Houston will break 7 million in 2018.

LOL. None of my numbers are "incorrect." You are taking the difference of the 2011 population estimate and 2010 Census count. I took the difference of the 2011 population estimate and 2010 population estimate. My numbers represent the year-over-year change in population of the MSAs. Your analysis represents the change since the 2010 Census count--about 15 months.

If anything, the calculations you provided are misleading as they do not truly represent an estimate of annual growth.

Dp

LOL. None of my numbers are "incorrect." You are taking the difference of the 2011 population estimate and 2010 Census count. I took the difference of the 2011 population estimate and 2010 population estimate. My numbers represent the year-over-year change in population of the MSAs. Your analysis represents the change since the 2010 Census count--about 15 months.

If anything, the calculations you provided are misleading as they do not truly represent an estimate of annual growth.

Gotcha. I thought there must have been a good reason. I was focused on the numbers the Census Bureau presented in their press release.

I don't mean any disrespect to anyone but I think using these Combined MSA's are an irrelevant attempt to make a cities look larger than they are. This is not directed at Salt Lake City but any city including ours. I know people want to count Shawnee but honestly, there are 30 miles of open land before you get there. I would like to count them as well but where do you draw the line? Once you count Shawnee, then you can make the argument that Seminole is only 30 miles to Shawnee, and then Checotah. While you are at it, Tulsa is not that far.

I don't even look at that statistic because it is not a true picture. As far as Salt Lake City, I have never been there so I was only quoting what the Census page said. No disrespect there.

I don't mean any disrespect to anyone but I think using these Combined MSA's are an irrelevant attempt to make a cities look larger than they are. This is not directed at Salt Lake City but any city including ours. I know people want to count Shawnee but honestly, there are 30 miles of open land before you get there. I would like to count them as well but where do you draw the line? Once you count Shawnee, then you can make the argument that Seminole is only 30 miles to Shawnee, and then Checotah. While you are at it, Tulsa is not that far.

I don't even look at that statistic because it is not a true picture. As far as Salt Lake City, I have never been there so I was only quoting what the Census page said. No disrespect there.

Its not just about how the cities have developed or how close they are to each other. MSA's are defined in regards to how cities interact with each other. Shawnee is very much within the sphere of influence of OKC, although maybe not to the extent of other places like Norman or Yukon (which is probably why it is its own micropolitan area). Lots of people in Shawnee shop and do business in OKC, certainly more than you find in Seminole or Checotah.

More importantly, a lot of people in Pott County work in Oklahoma and Cleveland Counties. Tons of people live in Shawnee and Tecumseh and work at places like Tinker and OU, and a few even work in downtown, even though that is close to a 40 mile drive. Go to Interstate 40 and Choctaw Road at about 730 am and you'll be surprised how heavy traffic is.

Its not just about how the cities have developed or how close they are to each other. MSA's are defined in regards to how cities interact with each other. Shawnee is very much within the sphere of influence of OKC, although maybe not to the extent of other places like Norman or Yukon (which is probably why it is its own micropolitan area). Lots of people in Shawnee shop and do business in OKC, certainly more than you find in Seminole or Checotah.

More importantly, a lot of people in Pott County work in Oklahoma and Cleveland Counties. Tons of people live in Shawnee and Tecumseh and work at places like Tinker and OU, and a few even work in downtown, even though that is close to a 40 mile drive. Go to Interstate 40 and Choctaw Road at about 730 am and you'll be surprised how heavy traffic is.

Actually I live at I-40 and Choctaw Road and you are right. I leave for work at 5:30 AM and have merge into traffic even then. I'll be glad when they finally widen I-40 on this side of town. I guess I can see your point.

So where are the county figures?

So where are the county figures?

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/counties/totals/2011/CO-EST2011-01.html

Based on that data, it appears that Oklahoma and Cleveland counties are the biggest winners.

The 2011 population estimate for Oklahoma and Cleveland counties combined was 993,652. Think it's passed 1 million now?