How does the growth in Texas and its larger cities compare to Oklahoma and its larger

[ETL]

How does the growth in Texas and its larger cities compare to Oklahoma and its larger cities in general?

[Swake2]

Growth in Oklahoma is pretty bad, Texas has good growth.

Tulsa's 5 year growth estimate was 3.3% and OKC's was 5.6%

[metro]

Growth in Oklahoma is pretty bad, Texas has good growth.

Tulsa's 5 year growth estimate was 3.3% and OKC's was 5.6%

Swake, you say Oklahoma is pretty bad but you didn't provide any comparitive figures for Oklahoma. Also, you failed to mention OKC and most of Oklahoma is growing above the national average.

[the pledge]

from the standpoint of the cities themselves, Oklahoma City fares well in 2005 population projections by the Census Bureau:

Oklahoma City- 531,324 (from 506,132; a 5% increase from 2000)
Tulsa- 382,457 (from 393,120, a 2.7% decrease from 2000)
Austin- 690,252 (from 656,562, a 5.1% increase)
Dallas- 1,213,825 (a 2.1% increase)
Houston- 2,016,582 (a 3.2% increase)
San Antonio- 1,256,509 (a 9.8% increase)

but when you consider metropolitan area figures (which are a much better indicator of true city growth), things slant heavily in our southern neighbor's favor:

OKC: 5.6% increase to 1,156,812
Tulsa: 3.3% increase to 887,715
Dallas: 12.7% increase to 5,819,475
Houston: 12% increase to 5,280,077
San Antonio: 10% increase to 1,889,797
Austin: 16.2% increase to 1,452,529

double digit percent increases for the four major Texas metropolitan areas. OKC and especially Tulsa are experiencing slow growth compared with most of the cities in the southwest (consider Phoenix, with an estimated 600,000+ new inhabitants since the 2000 Census--a 19% increase). OKC should easily hit 1.2 million in the Census Bureau defined MSA by 2010, but that growth is embarassed by similarly-sized cities like Austin.

[traxx]

So what's the answer? How do these Texas cities get such growth? And what about the other cities that you talk about, how are they getting such good growth? What are they doing to get this, what are they doing different?

What do we need to do? Can we make this happen without selling our soul so to speak. Growth is nice but there are aspects of these cities that I'm sure we wouldn't want in ours or things we wouldn't be willing to do to get this growth. Example: OKC has very low traffic congestion (even with all the construction), we wouldn't want to have traffic like LA just so we could have growth. We would have to offset it somethow in order to keep what we like about our metro.

[writerranger]

Well, let's look at the cities involved and it really speaks for itself. Dallas and Houston are both what most would call world-class cities. Austin continues to be one of the hottest areas in the country in just about every category.

The bottom line is that comparing Oklahoma City and Tulsa to Dallas and Houston in growth is apples and oranges. Growth comes through economic expansion by way of new corporate investment by way of moving to these cities and/or expanding existing business; throw in entrepreneurial activity and you have job and economic growth which equals a growing population.

Comparing cities like this - even by percentage - just doesn't work. Quite honestly, the northern Dallas suburbs alone have a bigger population and larger economic engine than the entire metropolitan Oklahoma City area. I'm not going to go running the figures, but Collin County and Denton County (all north Dallas suburbs which includes Lewisville, Richardson, Plano, Frisco, etc.) are bigger than Oklahoma City. The suburbs alone! Much the same is going on in Houston and Austin.

----

[adaniel]

I don't post much but as an ex-Texan I can post some insight here. Don't get so hung up on the numbers. Those statistics don't recogize the demographic makeup of that growth. In Texas most it is coming from a surge of new immigrants, largely Hispanic, and their tendency to have lots of kids. Because of that Texas is getting strained economically. I think I recently read in the Dallas Morning News that Texas produced nearly a quarter of the US job growth last month and the unemployment rate still went up. That means that even this high job growth can't keep up with the population. So growing at light speed isn't always a great thing. Besides, I think the pieces are falling into place for Oklahoma to start growing at a good but steady clip.

[Karried]

adaniel, those were my thoughts exactly. I do believe the close proximity to the border is influencing a high percentage of growth in Texas.

A side note about Texas. I recently drove from Galveston to Edmond... I'm not sure if it was my OK License plate or what, but what a bunch of rude drivers in Texas! I don't care how popular they are, I would never, ever want to live there.

I was going along at 75-85 mph the whole way.. but any time I was in the fast lane, if I wasn't approaching 100 mph - drivers were on my butt like you wouldn't believe. Of course, I got over.. but I felt like I was on the German Autobahn speedway! Now, I'm used to traffic and fast drivers ( lived in CA my entire life) but this was amazing to me - such rude, obnoxious people .. I always thought most Texans were well mannered, but not this trip. I was never happier to get home. Anyway, just another casuality of population growth.. they can keep it.

[okcpulse]

A side note about Texas. I recently drove from Galveston to Edmond... I'm not sure if it was my OK License plate or what, but what a bunch of rude drivers in Texas! I don't care how popular they are, I would never, ever want to live there.

Yupp, Karried. What you experienced is what I have to put up with on a daily basis... for now. If you recall the widening happening on I-45 just north of Houston in Conroe... that is where I now live.

[adaniel]

Wow Karried, I'm sorry for your taste of Texas drivers but I can't really say I'm surprised. I can imagine you have the worst trouble going in and out of Houston. I don't know what makes those folks down there such psychos behind the wheel. I guess the humidy and poullution can drive a person crazy!!

On a side note about growth, I maybe should have clarified that not all growth is bad. Fayetteville Arkansas has good growth because people are moving there for the jobs and quality of life. McAllen Texas has bad growth because people are just escaping the crushing poverty and corruption of Mexico.

[Kerry]

What to make Oklahoma grow - eliminate the state income tax. Fastest growing states - Florida, Texas, Nevada, Tennessee, and Washington - no state income tax. Not hard to figure out.

california is fast growing but it is mostly low-income growth. I worked in San Jose for a part of 2004 when a new 1% rich tax was being proposed (eventually passed). According to the radio California had 200,000 people making over $1 million per year in 1990. By 2000 the number dropped to 20,000. That is a 90% decrease. In a survey of the "wealthy" most cited taxes as a reason for leaving the state. I only worked in CA for 10 days in 2005 and I still owed the state $900. Will never work in CA again!

[adaniel]

Kerry, I don't know if eliminating the state income tax will usher in a wave of people like some people make it. You should rember that several fast growing states- Georgia, Colorado, Arizona, North Carolina, Virginia among others- have income taxes. Some have income taxes significantly higher than Oklahoma's. As for Texas being a low tax state, just ask my parents who recently recieved their property tax statement whether that is true or not. Fast growing states are the ones that invest in their education and infrastructure. Oklahoma is starting to do that but its only been in this decade. It took many years for OK to dig itself into a slow growth hole, and its not going to be overnight that its going to get itself out. I'm an optimist though and I think it will happen.

[Swake2]

Swake, you say Oklahoma is pretty bad but you didn't provide any comparitive figures for Oklahoma. Also, you failed to mention OKC and most of Oklahoma is growing above the national average.

Wow, you really mean OKC is beating the national average?? Wow!

FYI, the national average is 5%, so Oklahoma City is really shattering that number. But wait, the national average for growth in Metro areas is 5.6%, OKC only grew by 5.4% so OKC is NOT growing faster for the average for cities. OKC in fact ranked a stunning 136th in growth among the 361 MSAs.

OKC did however beat Tulsa's 226th ranking, but then Tulsa did have a complete economic melt down in 2001-2003, a melt down that is now over. And, in fact it seems like Oklahoma City's economy may be starting to melt down now.

But, no matter how you look at it, growth in Oklahoma is meager. We must do better, and anyone that says otherwise is kidding themselves and needs to get out of Oklahoma more. If you don't agree with me, then OKC should be congratulated on beating the growth numbers (barely) of Joplin and Billings, but, it's going to take some work over the next five years to match the growth of Omaha and Fargo.

http://www.census.gov/population/www...ges_final.html

[Easy180]

population growth stats really get some riled up

OKC is right around the national average so what is there to get worked up about?

[The Old Downtown Guy]

Personally, I could care less about growth in the suburbs because I don't live there or go there very often. My interest is the urban environment and what changes are happening; from a general growth standpoint and what the new development looks like and how it functions.

The jury is still totally out on urban development in OKC. the lack luster apartment project in Deep Deuce has attracted a lot of tenants and Bricktown is a bustling entertainment district, but we don't have a new urban neighborhood yet and IMO, that's the important part. Very walkable, highly functional, mixed use urban neighborhoods.

I was in Dallas last weekend and areas like the West Village, McKinney Avenue, Turtle Creek, Inwood and many others without obvious neighborhood IDs were absolutely alive with auto, mass transit and pedestrian traffic. Streets lined with service businesses and resturants and sidewalks full of people. There is absolutely nothing in OKC that has a similar look and feel to these neighborhoods, and there may never be. But that doesn't mean that OKC isn't enjoying reasonably good growth. What's going on in Dallas and many other large metro areas right now didn't start yesterday and what can be seen today is the crest of a wave that has been building for fifteen or twenty years.

OKC is barely into its urban redevelopment. Whether or not it will be successful is dependent on lots of variables. Some of which can be measured statistically, but most can only be experienced first hand.

[metro]

And, in fact it seems like Oklahoma City's economy may be starting to melt down now.

How do you figure this. Economy is great, construction everywhere, oil is booming, Riata an oil and gas company poised for a lot of growth just moved to OKC, MG motors is moving to OKC, aviation is huge. And you're just upset that Tulsa got lagged behind, yes thankfully they are out of it now, but by the time Vision 2025 is done, OKC will be far advanced, probably mass transit in place.

[Swake2]

Kerr McGee, AOL, GM, Dayton, it's not been a good year. Not that it can't be overcome, but you can't ignore facts.

As for MG, that's a really long shot, the last attempted Chinese car import set records for the number of ways it failed safety tests. And how many people work at Riata?

[jbrown84]

Kerr McGee, AOL, GM, Dayton, it's not been a good year.

True, but this doesn't compare to the impact that the meltdown of Williams and WorldComm and loss of Citgo had on Tulsa. There's plenty of other places laid off workers can find jobs in manufacturing and call centers, and Kerr-McGee had only a couple hundred jobs still here. And even those people should have little trouble moving to Devon, Chesapeake, and Riata.

[BDP]

Haha. Look at that. Swake posts and an OKC/Tulsa pissing match breaks out. Imagine that!

Comparing cities like this - even by percentage - just doesn't work.

And actually the percentages make it look better than it is. A 5% increase in Dallas is much bigger than a 5% increase in OKC, because the base of that percentage is so much bigger.

I think OKC is becoming a nice alternative for people in the Southwest who do want city amenities, but not city stress. Old Downtown makes some good points on areas where OKC could grow and avoid some of those problems, or at least give residents the option of eliminating those things from their daily lives. Much of the problems mentioned here, like traffic congestion, are cause by the expanse and sprawl of the cities we're discussing.

Live/work type neighborhoods give people the opportunity to avoid the traffic problem on a daily basis. OKC can grow, but the key to not walking into the Dallas/Houston/LA/Phoenix model is planning for that growth. OKC needs to be thinking about how it can plan infrastructure and development to both encourage growth and do it in a way that doesn't create the same waste and stress that define a lot of the largest cities in the Southwest. If we can set and achieve that goal not only will we have "good" growth, but also provide a nice alternative to the other cities in the region.

OKC has always had a tendency to follow and has failed to achieve any broad competitive advantage because of it. We are at a point where sensible planning could create such an advantage. We always talk about the cost of living as an advantage, but as inexpensive as Oklahoma is, it still hasn’t been able to compete that well with cities with 3 times the cost in terms of growth and quality jobs. That should tell us something. It’s not just the bottom line. People aren’t just looking for a nice house, they are looking for a nice life with lots of quality things to do, good education and services for their family, and a wide selection of good job opportunities that enables them to choose that best way they can maximize the return on their knowledge and skills.

[The Old Downtown Guy]

. . . It’s not just the bottom line. People aren’t just looking for a nice house, they are looking for a nice life with lots of quality things to do, good education and services for their family, and a wide selection of good job opportunities that enables them to choose that best way they can maximize the return on their knowledge and skills.

I totally agree B. The question that still remains is if there is a sufficiently large market (aka people with the means) in OKC to establish the kind of urban, pedestrian friendly neighborhoods that provide the quality of life you describe. We will know a lot more this time next year.