Encompass 2050 Scenario Survey
Encompass 2050 Scenario Survey
We want to hear from you!
Central Oklahoma is growing, and the choices we make today will shape how the region looks, feels and moves in 2050. Encompass 2050 is the long-range transportation plan for the Oklahoma City metro area, led by the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG). It will guide how the region invests in streets, highways, transit, sidewalks and bike infrastructure over the next 25 years.
Earlier this year, community members, local leaders and planning specialists developed and analyzed three possible patterns, or scenarios, for how Central Oklahoma could grow. Each scenario shows what our region could look like depending on where new homes and jobs are located, which is important because land use and development decisions have a big impact on how people get around.
In this survey, you will read a short description of each scenario, share your reactions, and tell us which one comes closest to the region you want. The survey takes about five to ten minutes, and your responses are anonymous.
Scenario 1: Continuation of Current Trends
In this scenario, Central Oklahoma keeps growing the way it has for the past several decades: outward. New highways and roads open up vacant land at the edges of the metro, existing suburbs expand and new ones emerge. Most new homes are traditional single-family houses in suburban neighborhoods, alongside shopping centers and office parks.
More than 90 percent of new residents would settle outside areas that are already developed. Because growth spreads out, this scenario uses the most land of the three scenarios, roughly 145 square miles of new development, and requires the most new roads, water lines and sewer lines to serve it.
The Current Trend scenario is the most expensive of the three because it requires the most new infrastructure for the amount of economic growth expected. Homes, jobs and daily destinations tend to be farther apart, so most trips happen by car.
Complementing this residential growth are power centers, retail commercial areas, and office parks. Most new population and employment growth occurs outside of established urban centers, facilitated by continued investment in major highway and freeway infrastructure.
What is your overall impression of this scenario?
How well does this scenario match the kind of place you want to live in 2050?
How much do you agree or disagree with this statement: "More space and traditional suburban neighborhoods are worth extending roads and utilities farther out."
Scenario 2: Back to the Cities
In this scenario, growth returns to the neighborhoods, downtowns and small towns Central Oklahoma has already built. Instead of expanding outward, new homes and businesses fill in vacant lots and replace underused properties in existing communities. Housing becomes more varied, from traditional houses to townhomes, duplexes and small apartment buildings, giving people more choices at different price points.
More than two-thirds of new residents would live in areas and towns that are already developed, where streets, water lines and schools are already in place. This scenario uses the least land of the three options, and brings the most growth to small towns across the region. With jobs, schools and daily needs closer together, trips get shorter and options like walking, biking and transit become more practical.
The Back to the Cities scenario is the least expensive of the three because it requires the least amount of new streets, water lines, and sewer lines for the amount of economic growth expected.
What is your overall impression of this scenario?
How well does this scenario match the kind of place you want to live in 2050?
How much do you agree or disagree with this statement: "I would support more homes and businesses being added within existing neighborhoods if it means shorter trips and more services nearby."
Scenario 3: All Aboard
In this final scenario, Central Oklahoma builds its growth around a stronger transit system. New homes, jobs and shops cluster near bus and rail stations, so people can walk to a station and reach much of the region without a car. Suburbs farther out stay connected through commuter rail and bus routes that link them to jobs and attractions.
About one in three new residents and more than half of new jobs would be within walking distance of a major transit station. Of the three scenarios presented, this scenario creates the most homes in walkable areas of the three and puts the most people, homes and jobs near parks, schools and transit. Growth is denser and more concentrated, prioritizing access over expansion into open land.
The All Aboard scenario is slightly more expensive than Back to the Cities because it requires more new streets, water lines, and sewer lines while expecting a similar amount of economic growth.
What is your overall impression of this scenario?
How well does this scenario match the kind of place you want to live in 2050?
How much do you agree or disagree with this statement: "I would support focusing new growth and investment around bus and rail transportation, even if those areas become denser."
Comparing the Three Scenarios
Now that you have seen all three scenarios, tell us how they stack up against each other.