News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Tulsa has passed the one million people mark

Started by swake, April 05, 2012, 09:58:42 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

jacobi

The growth seems to have been in the burbs though.  With the increased demand for housing in the core though (and supply VERY slowly coming along) I think we will see the trend reversed soon.
ἐγώ ἐλεεινότερος πάντων ἀνθρώπων εἰμί

swake

the census number for cities for July 2011 come out in June. I don't know what RM's numbers are, but they aren't census numbers.

SXSW

The SW side likely accounted for much of that growth.  Midtown seems to be growing with infill and singles/young couples but families still overwhelmingly prefer the suburbs due to the better schools.
 

erfalf

Quote from: SXSW on April 05, 2012, 10:23:50 PM
The SW side likely accounted for much of that growth.  Midtown seems to be growing with infill and singles/young couples but families still overwhelmingly prefer the suburbs due to the better schools.

Better schools and more affordable/newer housing stock.
"Trust but Verify." - The Gipper

AquaMan

Maybe better school facilities but not necessarily better schools. Just like churches, its the people that make the church, not the buildings.

All cities expand to suburbs just like waistlines in middle age. In my lifetime that is a given. Even if downtown becomes wildly successful it won't reverse that practice unless something catastrophic happens like midtown being walled off and its school system privatized by Jesuit Priests. :)

And really, who cares about the city population when the cities and counties are so closely situated. It just leads to false assumptions about growth and movement of populations. For instance I read a headline a few days ago about how crime had dropped in one of the outlying cities. I think it was Glenpool. Yet upon reading the individual stats the city really only had a decrease in larceny which is a pointless crime as far as successful arrest and prosecution. People just give up on reporting a theft of bicycles, mowers etc. because they know the futility of ever getting the stuff back. It goes on C-list or Pawnshops and disappears quickly. So, larcenies dropped. Otherwise the city had an increase in murders (from 0 to 1) while everything else stayed static. City/county/metro population figures are prone to the same false assumptions.
onward...through the fog

Oil Capital

Quote from: Hoss on April 05, 2012, 06:08:10 PM
Difference is that OKC has a lot more fenceline to fill in than we do.  We can't really expand much more than we are now.

We're talking metropolitan area population here.  Tulsa's and OKC's city limits are not relevant.

For the record, according to the just-released Census estimates.  Tulsa MSA's growth rate was 1.1%.  OKC MSA's growth rate was 2%.
 

DTowner

Quote from: Oil Capital on April 06, 2012, 11:21:14 AM
We're talking metropolitan area population here.  Tulsa's and OKC's city limits are not relevant.

For the record, according to the just-released Census estimates.  Tulsa MSA's growth rate was 1.1%.  OKC MSA's growth rate was 2%.

That was the point I was trying to make.  For a host of reasons, MSA size matters.  We are not only smaller than OKC, but the gap is widening every year.  I think that is a problem and it should be a concern.

Hoss

Quote from: Oil Capital on April 06, 2012, 11:21:14 AM
We're talking metropolitan area population here.  Tulsa's and OKC's city limits are not relevant.

For the record, according to the just-released Census estimates.  Tulsa MSA's growth rate was 1.1%.  OKC MSA's growth rate was 2%.

But the point I'M making is that there is more developable land within the OKC city fenceline, so they can accelerate growth more, since we have to depend more on infill as it pertains to OUR city limits.  You do know that the city populations are included in the metro, right?

carltonplace

Quote from: AquaMan on April 06, 2012, 10:03:05 AM
Maybe better school facilities but not necessarily better schools. Just like churches, its the people that make the church, not the buildings.


Perfectly stated.

Oil Capital

2012 metropolitan area population estimates were released by the Census Bureau today:

Tulsa Metro
2010 Census (April 1, 2010):  937,478
2010 Estimate (July 1, 2010): 939,968 
2011 Estimate (July 1, 2011): 945,386  +0.6%
2012 Estimate (July 1, 2012): 951,880  +0.7%
 

swake

Quote from: Oil Capital on March 14, 2013, 10:24:38 AM
2012 metropolitan area population estimates were released by the Census Bureau today:

Tulsa Metro
2010 Census (April 1, 2010):  937,478
2010 Estimate (July 1, 2010): 939,968 
2011 Estimate (July 1, 2011): 945,386  +0.6%
2012 Estimate (July 1, 2012): 951,880  +0.7%

More interesting, Tulsa's CSA passed one million and now the US Census has expanded the CSA to include Muskogee. The new Tulsa-Muskogee-Bartlesville CSA now has a population 1,122,259.

With the same numbers Oklahoma City's CSA is closing in on 1.4 million with 1,367,325 and the Dallas Ft Worth CSA has now grown into Oklahoma and has 7,095,411.

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2012/index.html

Townsend

Quote from: swake on March 14, 2013, 10:27:55 AM

Dallas Ft Worth CSA has now grown into Oklahoma and has 7,095,411.



So I do live in North Dallas.

Oil Capital

Quote from: swake on March 14, 2013, 10:27:55 AM
More interesting, Tulsa's CSA passed one million and now the US Census has expanded the CSA to include Muskogee. The new Tulsa-Muskogee-Bartlesville CSA now has a population 1,122,259.

With the same numbers Oklahoma City's CSA is closing in on 1.4 million with 1,367,325 and the Dallas Ft Worth CSA has now grown into Oklahoma and has 7,095,411.

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2012/index.html


That is interesting.   I look forward to the seeing the population density of the Tulsa CSA from those of you who think the only population density numbers that matter are the ones that follow political boundary lines.  ;-)
 

swake

Quote from: Oil Capital on March 14, 2013, 12:11:09 PM
That is interesting.   I look forward to the seeing the population density of the Tulsa CSA from those of you who think the only population density numbers that matter are the ones that follow political boundary lines.  ;-)

Considering it includes Osage county which is nearly the size of Rhode Island it won't be real high.

TheArtist

Thats some pretty tepid growth.  Barely growth at all.  Bout 6 thousandish per year for the entire metro?

Wonder what the city proper part of that is?  One would hope to see at least 1 thou a year in and around downtown.

Course even slow growth is ok as long as average incomes/educational levels also continue to climb relative to other areas.  Kind of a "quality over quantity" sort of thing. 


"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h