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.

Lol. See Washington DC.

I caught that. I rather enjoy your postings about your "little BBQ adventures".

Thanks! ...... Now to get us half way back on track..... Maybe someone will open a new Q-raunt in this area so I can write another silly little BBQ adventure about it.... Hopefully one not named Billy Sims or Rib Crib. :wink:

Well, it's often brought up about how large OKC land area is, and how much of it isn't utilized.
Second, if there isn't infrastructure already out there on OKC's behalf, it only makes sense that this would be a better fit to be accounted into Mustang limits.

Thanks! ...... Now to get us half way back on track..... Maybe someone will open a new Q-raunt in this area so I can write another silly little BBQ adventure about it.... Hopefully one not named Billy Sims or Rib Crib. :wink:

I Can always talk BBQ. I have 45 lbs of brisket on the Fast Eddy right now. Trying one with Kozmo's rub with the dehydrated honey. But...back to Mustang. I am surprised that there really isn't a good Q joint over there. If there is...I have missed it as all I see is Swadleys, Rib Crib and Billy Sims. I haven't even seen a good BBQ trailer set up over there.

Mustang talks about being out of room but I still see plenty of areas along 152 coming into town that could be filled.

Looks like the land they want has now expanded in some areas and other areas have changed. Here is the most recent article in the paper.

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/Annex4_zpsddghcw1l.jpg (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/zuplar/media/Annex4_zpsddghcw1l.jpg.html)

I go down HWY 4 to catch the turnpike spur into Norman. This is some low lying area and I thought it was a farm. I know the decedents of many a old time family farm are selling out because the profit margin is shrinking for smaller farms and developers walk in talking major money. I am not anti-religion but please, no more Churches. Unless it's the fried chicken place.

What I find ironic is the original area they wanted to annex is completely absent from this latest area.

What I find ironic is the original area they wanted to annex is completely absent from this latest area.

It looks like the more recent area proposed is entirely farmland (from the article sounds like owned by one guy), the original proposed area has a small development with some buildings and the property probably split among several owners, it is almost surely a longer process if that is even what everyone who owns property there and both cities want.

Yet more in the paper about this, Mustang passed the resolution.

10852
10853

Been awhile since I've seen anything about this, but I noticed it showed up on the council agenda for OKC finally. Looks like recommendation is to deny it. I'm guessing OKC doesn't want to lose out on the potential for businesses going in which I know is the long term goal along Sara road.

::cough*RTAINCLUSION*cough::

Been awhile since I've seen anything about this, but I noticed it showed up on the council agenda for OKC finally. Looks like recommendation is to deny it. I'm guessing OKC doesn't want to lose out on the potential for businesses going in which I know is the long term goal along Sara road.

If so, how very "big league" of Oklahoma City.

Been awhile since I've seen anything about this, but I noticed it showed up on the council agenda for OKC finally. Looks like recommendation is to deny it. I'm guessing OKC doesn't want to lose out on the potential for businesses going in which I know is the long term goal along Sara road.

Oklahoma City needs MORE of this, not less! We have wayyyy too much incorporated land and yes, there are business considerations, but along with that come expenses that OKC should begin cutting back on. Just my opinion, but I know it's shared by many at City Hall.

it'll be interesting to see what comes of this.

That's intriguing, seems as if OKC is being greedy at a point where they really don't need to be. Just give the small tract of land to Mustang already, it'll only benefit both cities.

I think OKC should keep the land. But I've already made that clear.

Let them have it. Oklahoma City is already sprawled disaster. It has too many roads it can't even take care of. Slice everything off at the county lines.

Let them have it. Oklahoma City is already sprawled disaster. It has too many roads it can't even take care of. Slice everything off at the county lines.

That's exactly what I thought too. I know OKC wants all the money they can get but I think they're too big to actually care for all the land they have.

Developer seeks Mustang annexation of 1,000 OKC acres | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2016/03/25/developer-seeks-mustang-annexation-of-1000-okc-acres-real-estate/)

It's 1.5ish sq miles out of what, 600+ ??

Let it go okc, just let it go.

yeah I said earlier that OKC should keep it and I'd stick to it though the developer has plans and if means whether or not they can connect to Mustang, I think this would benefit the metro as a whole. As long as the developer has plans in place and can't access utilities any other way, I'd just say give it to Mustang so it can be developed.

Anyone with a subscription able to give us a summary? Interested to see some specifics on this development.

http://www.theyukonreview.com/2016/11/03/okc-still-holding-on-to-land/

In a nutshell, OKC is willing to work with Mustang if the latter is willing to accept a more rectangular shape of land. If the deal goes through as proposed, Mustang will increase in size by two square miles.

Apparently, size matters, but only if it's in the right places.

Sounds like they would be willing to let it happen if it was more like what I showed in my original rendering before they came up with what is shown in the paper. Makes sense they'd want it that way, although I don't see OKC expanding services around Mustang on either the East or West side anytime soon.

http://www.theyukonreview.com/2016/11/03/okc-still-holding-on-to-land/

In a nutshell, OKC is willing to work with Mustang if the latter is willing to accept a more rectangular shape of land. If the deal goes through as proposed, Mustang will increase in size by two square miles.

Apparently, size matters, but only if it's in the right places.

That makes sense, it seemed both small and oddly specific shape

(for reference from earlier in this thread)
http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii122/zuplar/Annex4_zpsddghcw1l.jpg

It looks like this is not happening for now.

http://m.newsok.com/article/5545170


The city council on Tuesday rejected a plan to allow Mustang to annex land*within the borders of Oklahoma City for a commercial and residential development.

Obviously there are 2 sides to this, but basically it seems selfish that OKC doesn't want to de-annex. OKC says we can't support it, but we don't want to lose out on the money if people build, so you can't have it. I mean I get it from their perspective but what it basically comes down to is nothing's going to get built there because there aren't services, but services won't get installed because there isn't anyone there. Which basically means it's going to stay raw land.

I thought much the same, except I would say short-sighted (and several other words) instead of selfish. Basically what's going to happen is Mustang will take note of the people who said no and will watch the elections, when those people are out the issue will be revisited. Eventually either OKC will change their minds on their refusal to extend services or Mustang will get the land. In the meantime OKC still isn't going to get the precious sales/property tax they claim they are missing out on. What they will miss out on is the people who would be living there who obviously would be coming into OKC and spending money at OTHER locations on a daily basis.

And aren't there other sources of income OKC would have even if Mustang had that land? Am I incorrect in my understanding that Mustang currently buys water from OKC? Does it not stand to reason that if Mustang were the one to run water/sewer there, then Mustang would be buying MORE water from OKC? OKC gets the income, didn't have to spend the money running pipe.

Yeah Mustang currently buys most of their water from OKC. So that's definitely a good point, although I know Mustang along with several other West suburbs have been trying to drill to find their own water source so they aren't so dependent on OKC.

To my way of thinking OKC should let go all land that is both West of County Line road and South of Mustang. For that matter just extend Mustangs North border (59th st) to Gregory rd (OKC Limit) all the way down to the river. Most all of these people rely on Mustang for PO and School anyways and already consider themselves Mustang residents over OKC, so let's just make it official.

Just did a quick map, this is what I think should be annexed. Most all of this is pretty rural anyways, but more likely to get utilized if it was Mustang.

The red is Mustang now, green is what I'd propose.

http://i.imgur.com/qdf4MZr.png

What they will miss out on is the people who would be living there who obviously would be coming into OKC and spending money at OTHER locations on a daily basis.
That's not a very good argument unless you think it would only refer to people who were planning to move to the OKC area and decided not to because that area was not developed. It's likely they would just move somewhere else and continue to spend money in OKC.

Depends where 'somewhere else' is. If they bought a house THERE, I stand by my statement that they would be in OKC pretty much daily. Since they cannot buy a house THERE and must look elsewhere, if they land in, for example, Bethany, then yeah, not much change. But if they were to land in El Reno, then maybe the trips to OKC aren't quite as frequent. Wherever they do end up however, it doesn't change the original point of where we know they do not end up. The opportunity to gain income from the people there is lost if there are no people there.