I just felt left out since I haven't started a MAPS thread. Now that it's over, will people stop arguing about it?

Well, we can now argue about where the convention center will be sited.

south of the ford center. discussion over.

I think the convention center should span the river. Ha..Ha..

Cotton gin!

Cotton gin!

I think the convention center should span the river. Ha..Ha..

Haha! Can't do that. Then we'd prove the people who were sure this was all planned to help out the Humphreys and/or McClendon right. We can't have anything built with MAPS that touches their property!

:bright_idWe must construct the convention center atop the giant oil derek that spans the river.:bright_id

Convention Center goes right where the OLD County Jail is !!

Cotton Gin, with a canal extension to the Ford Center, Myriad Gardens and New Convention Center in MAPS4.

Cotton Gin, with a canal extension to the Ford Center, Myriad Gardens and New Convention Center in MAPS4.

We'll need a new Ford Center by then....arghhh, it never ends!

I think it will be quite a while before we need a new Ford Center. I think it will be at least 15 years before we start hearing about it, and 20 to 25 before a new one is built. There may need to be upgrades or refurbishing between then, but that's all I expect. So maybe MAPS 5.

We need to get the current canal fully developed before we extend it.

MAPS is kinda like Rocky movies...

-Chris-

we need to get the current canal fully developed before we extend it.

+1

i would think that after these renovations the ford center should be good for 15+ years ..

so until 2025 at least ....this maps will end in 2018 Maps 4 should end in 2025 or so ... so i would guess a new downtown arena on the site of the cox will come in maps5 .. to be built in 2026-2028 ...

maps 4 .. expand the street car .. pay for our part of a regional light rail maybe a downtown outdoor 50k stadium?? . don't know what else ...

Lol up the t-pike:


Tax and spend....classic. Some pollster might want to correlate the votes from a partisan Federal election and compare attitudes of those who voted on Maps. Just guessing, but more of the same slush fund for the elite to manipulate taxes from the low end to the high end. What income groups turned out to vote? Who voted no and why? Do the voters generally vote republican because they fear tax and spend government?

With unemployment still climbing in this state, one would hope the government would be giving a hand up. Instead, drastic cuts and further hits to health, education, and local municipalities. Do you think those that can least afford it are paying a greater price than those who voted this in?

The OKC tax was for the banks and real estate investors but mostly their shill Chamber of Commerce.
OK****ty always was and always will be. The best thing going for them is Norman.

Tulsa sets a better example letting private foundations and philanthropic people who believe in giving back to their community take the lead with government assistance.

Oklahoma City voters say ‘yes’ to MAPS 3 proposal (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=14712.msg149817#msg149817)

Lol up the t-pike:



Oklahoma City voters say ‘yes’ to MAPS 3 proposal (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=14712.msg149817#msg149817)

Absolutely ridiculous. I see it's working real well in Tulsa. :LolLolLol

Tulsans can be very delusional.

He's right. Tulsa is now in the big leagues with a WNBA team headed their way.
Where are the team owner's from? Can't seem to remember...oh yeah, OK*.

Absolutely ridiculous. I see it's working real well in Tulsa. :LolLolLol

So well that people are fleeing Tulsa in droves. I just read through that chat board....I remember when OKC citizens were envious of Tulsa for its growth....how things have changed. Sounds like a lot of bitterness to me, maybe they should start worrying about passing bond issues and stop whining. But then again they do have a WNBA team now!!!

OKC's population:

Historical populations
Census Pop. %±
1890 4,151 —
1900 10,037 141.8%
1910 64,205 539.7%
1920 91,295 42.2%
1930 185,389 103.1%
1940 204,424 10.3%
1950 243,504 19.1%
1960 321,599 32.1%
1970 368,164 14.5%
1980 404,014 9.7%
1990 438,922 8.6%
2000 506,132 15.3%
Est. 2007 547,274 8.1%

and Tulsa

Historical populations
Census Pop. %±
1900 1,390 —
1910 18,182 1,208.1%
1920 72,075 296.4%
1930 141,258 96.0%
1940 142,157 0.6%
1950 182,740 28.5%
1960 261,685 43.2%
1970 331,638 26.7%
1980 360,919 8.8%
1990 367,302 1.8%
2000 393,049 7.0%
Est. 2007 384,037 −2.3%

Looks alot a lot of Tulsans are fleeing to the burbs to get away.

So well that people are fleeing Tulsa in droves. I just read through that chat board....I remember when OKC citizens were envious of Tulsa for its growth....how things have changed. Sounds like a lot of bitterness to me, maybe they should start worrying about passing bond issues and stop whining. But then again they do have a WNBA team now!!!

OKC's population:

Historical populations
Census Pop. %±
1890 4,151 —
1900 10,037 141.8%
1910 64,205 539.7%
1920 91,295 42.2%
1930 185,389 103.1%
1940 204,424 10.3%
1950 243,504 19.1%
1960 321,599 32.1%
1970 368,164 14.5%
1980 404,014 9.7%
1990 438,922 8.6%
2000 506,132 15.3%
Est. 2007 547,274 8.1%

and Tulsa

Historical populations
Census Pop. %±
1900 1,390 —
1910 18,182 1,208.1%
1920 72,075 296.4%
1930 141,258 96.0%
1940 142,157 0.6%
1950 182,740 28.5%
1960 261,685 43.2%
1970 331,638 26.7%
1980 360,919 8.8%
1990 367,302 1.8%
2000 393,049 7.0%
Est. 2007 384,037 −2.3%

Looks alot a lot of Tulsans are fleeing to the burbs to get away.

These numbers are somewhat fascinating. Look how close the populations of the two cities were to each other in 1970. They were practically the same.

However, since 1970 Tulsa has only added 50,000 residents, if the numbers above are correct. During the same period, OKC has added about 180,000 people to its population (within city limits).

Also, OKC growth has outpaced that in Tulsa during every decade except one, 1950 to 1960.

Perhaps these numbers are skewed by Tulsa's growth mainly appearing outside city limits. Fascinating nonetheless, particularly when you consider that in past eras a lot of us in OKC thought we weren't growing as fast, when we were actually growing faster.

Pretty sad that they are looking at a population decrease for the decade compared to 8% increase here.

Probably a mix of people fleeing to BA and Owasso as well as some leaving all together. It's not been a good decade for Williams, Semgroup, etc.

The Tulsa MSA actually has seen a population increase, so it is definitely people leaving the city proper for the 'burbs. This just illustrates pretty starkly how MAPS and related initiatives have succeeded for OKC. In my opinion (and lots of other non-Tulsans, I'd guess), downtown Tulsa has far better building stock than OKC and even better "pockets of cool" than downtown OKC does.

The biggest difference (and reason that OKC proper and Tulsa proper are on on opposite trajectories right now) is that Tulsa's fragmented politically, has a hard time passing pro-city initiatives, and is feasted upon by cannibalistic suburbs. Without as much attracting people to the core, the city of Tulsa suffers. OKC's suburbs are still growing, but not at the expense of the city itself, for the most part.

Although the locations and funding mechanisms are a little suspect, the projects that brought the BOK Center and are bringing baseball downtown are really going to help T-town in the long term, and it will be back. Unfortunately they still have really divisive politics, so they'll have a tough go in getting people to partner together the way they have over the past two decades in OKC.

What is MAPS?

What is MAPS?

Really..?

What is MAPS?

Paper things that were popular before the invent of Global Positioning System's.