OKC happens to have a wider swath of styles. Starting way back at the First Nation era, there really hasn't been a decade that didn't have at least 1 building in it (was Renaissance 99 or 00?).

It doesn't matter, the IRS building in downtown OKC was built in '94. Downtown OKC has every decade covered.

I would have to say downtown OKC's skyline is diverse in the realm of architectural styles. Take the current five tallest buildings...

Chase Tower - International
First National Tower - Art Deco
City Place - Art Deco / Art Moderne
Oklahoma Tower - Modern
Sandridge Center - International

The exterior of the BOK Center is the only thing worth anything. The arena bowl itself is pretty lame. It's drab and dark, with only two levels.

I only like one of Tulsa's skyscrapers and it's the older one with green on the top.

Mid-Continent Tower... the top 20 floors of which (including the green) were constructed after 1980.

OKC wins for this one reason.

Random TNT announcer: "We are at the Ford Center, in downtown Oklahoma City, for game 1 of the Western Conference Finals..."

On the TV screen will be an inside shot of the Ford Center. What goes on inside the building IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT than what the outside looks like.



Hmmm...maybe not a good point to point out. BOK is one of the top musical venues in the country.

Facts:

Tulsa skyline is more impressive. Probably always will be.
Tulsa is a "prettier" city. Always will be. OKC is flat and ugly.
OKC is a much much better run city.
OKC is prospering
Tulsa, is not prospering
OKC is adding jobs
Tulsa is not

I lived in both places, and OKC now. I ain't moving back to Tulsa. :)

Hmmm...maybe not a good point to point out. BOK is one of the top musical venues in the country.

So is the Ford Center - But I will take an NBA playoff game before any concert - even if included the Beetles crawling out of the grave and playing Jason and the Argonauts style.

http://notesfromthebartender.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/jasonandtheargonauts1.jpg

Hmmm...maybe not a good point to point out. BOK is one of the top musical venues in the country.

Facts:

Tulsa skyline is more impressive. Probably always will be.
Tulsa is a "prettier" city. Always will be. OKC is flat and ugly.
OKC is a much much better run city.
OKC is prospering
Tulsa, is not prospering
OKC is adding jobs
Tulsa is not

I lived in both places, and OKC now. I ain't moving back to Tulsa. :)

^^The following years after The Ford Center was opened it also was in The top 10 venues,and top 10 grossing venues in The World! SO WHAT wait <5 years and The BOK will cool down,big time! then you can watch The Shock! LOL but yeah I agree that Tulsa is much prettier to the eyes,but to say The Tulsa skyline will ALWAYS be more impressive than OKC's is nonsense!

^^The following years after The Ford Center was opened it also was in The top 10 venues,and top 10 grossing venues in The World! SO WHAT wait <5 years and The BOK will cool down,big time! then you can watch The Shock! LOL but yeah I agree that Tulsa is much prettier to the eyes,but to say The Tulsa skyline will ALWAYS be more impressive than OKC's is nonsense!

Please read again. I said "PROBABLY". It's going to take a lot more than one tall building to out do the Tulsa Skyline.

And yes, I would take a NBA playoff game as well. however, I don't mind the short drive to Tulsa for the concerts. Too bad everything else Tulsa's downtown blows! There is NOTHING to do after a concert!

I actually think Tulsa downtown is very run-down looking compared to OKC. They have some very nice areas as well, but it's not the looker of a city it once was. It's a city in decay.

The BOK Center might not exist if it weren't for the success of the Ford Center.

^ And especially a winner for Houston, the New Oil Capitol of the World. That's a horrible picture of Tulsa compared to an awesome picture of OKC. Bias, much?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1385/1362728482_54642048b8_b.jpg

^^ Spartan thats my fav. Tulsa skyline pic! Love it!

Someone said "OKC just has a bunch of boxy buildings." I think the First National Bank Tower (or whatever it's called now) is an example of very impressive art deco architecture. I mean, come on, that's an amazing building!

I actually think Tulsa downtown is very run-down looking compared to OKC. They have some very nice areas as well, but it's not the looker of a city it once was. It's a city in decay.

BOTH downtowns have rundown areas that are embarrassing. In OKC go just south of the Ford Center or east of Bricktown, or west of the Arts District. Within downtown itself are empty buildings and empty lots, especially around Harvey and Walker just north of the CBD and including large swaths of Midtown OKC from NW 9 to NW 13. In the heart of Bricktown itself, on the canal across from the ballpark, is a grass lot! In downtown Tulsa there are rundown areas around downtown as well. The areas that stand out as rundown are north of the BOK Center towards the west end of Brady (near the county jail), parts of Brady itself that resemble Bricktown before the ballpark and canal, and most of east downtown with the exception of the area around 3rd & Kenosha which has seen new development recently.

Both cities have a lot of work to do in their respective downtowns. However I would say both are on the right track. There are cool things development-wise in the downtowns of each city. Film Row (which the Devon Tower should help jumpstart) and Midtown are cool, organic developments in downtown OKC that are similar to Tulsa's Blue Dome and Brady districts.

Both cities have a lot of work to do in their respective downtowns. However I would say both are on the right track. There are cool things development-wise in the downtowns of each city. Film Row (which the Devon Tower should help jumpstart) and Midtown are cool, organic developments in downtown OKC that are similar to Tulsa's Blue Dome and Brady districts.

Back in the day I used to spend more than a few nights visiting friends in Tulsa and we'd often go to the Hofbrau at 18th and Boston. Is that little area called anything? Is that a named district? Lots of memories from that place and a couple of other clubs close by. That little corner was really hopping at one time, is anything going on now? I haven't been anywhere near there in probably 18 years or so.

Geography and location cannot be chosen or changed from what we are given as a city, so what is the point of saying Tulsa has hills and OKC is flat? I'm pretty sure that's not going to change and everyone is aware of the terrain differences. I feel that it's kind of a fail safe that cities fall back on. "Well we aren't adding jobs, our downtown is dead, our crime rate is raising, but OH! We have beautiful trees!" Besides, for the flat terrain that OKC does have, the city uses it to its advantage. I personally think OKC is very beautiful. It may not have mountains and a beachfront but it does substantially better with what it has been given compared to most cities that have the fortune of just being located in beautiful scenery.

Geography and location cannot be chosen or changed from what we are given as a city, so what is the point of saying Tulsa has hills and OKC is flat? I'm pretty sure that's not going to change and everyone is aware of the terrain differences. I feel that it's kind of a fail safe that cities fall back on. "Well we aren't adding jobs, our downtown is dead, our crime rate is raising, but OH! We have beautiful trees!" Besides, for the flat terrain that OKC does have, the city uses it to its advantage. I personally think OKC is very beautiful. It may not have mountains and a beachfront but it does substantially better with what it has been given compared to most cities that have the fortune of just being located in beautiful scenery.

Wow! It started out seemingly innocent enough, as an effort to find common ground, but ..didn't... quite ...get there. There are endless rebutals, but who cares on a fanboi....Now back to just reading.

918Town thinks: Wow! I just made my incredibly stupid 5th post popping up out of no-where and calling another poster a 'fanboi' based on no preconceived knowledge of what city he may favor.

It's alright Ttown. We all make mistakes. I forgive you. XD

I personally think OKC is very beautiful. It may not have mountains and a beachfront but it does substantially better with what it has been given compared to most cities that have the fortune of just being located in beautiful scenery.

Architect2010 does have a good point. In Houston, they have to clear out large swaths of forest to build subdivisions and retail strip malls.

In Oklahoma City, any new development on prairie land involves planting trees, so in a sense, "forestation" is practiced as opposed to "deforestation".

Not all of Tulsa is trees town either...much like how not all of OKC is flat nothing. Take Midwest City, it's been a Tree City USA town for 27 years now. Pauls Valley is the only other one in the state that has held the honor longer....28 years. OKC also has Edmond, Guthrie, Nichols Hills, yes OKC, Shawnee, and Tinker. There are several Tulsa burbs on the list as well...including TTown, but my point is that we're not as treeless down here as people think.

OKC is right on that line of two different zones. East OKC....freaking forrest and rolling hills. West, more flat, less trees.

You know what flat land does give you? Some absolutely spectacular sunsets. You can see all the way to the horizon in some places and it's absolutely amazing.

Not all of Tulsa is trees town either...much like how not all of OKC is flat nothing. Take Midwest City, it's been a Tree City USA town for 27 years now. Pauls Valley is the only other one in the state that has held the honor longer....28 years. OKC also has Edmond, Guthrie, Nichols Hills, yes OKC, Shawnee, and Tinker. There are several Tulsa burbs on the list as well...including TTown, but my point is that we're not as treeless down here as people think.

OKC is right on that line of two different zones. East OKC....freaking forrest and rolling hills. West, more flat, less trees.

You know what flat land does give you? Some absolutely spectacular sunsets. You can see all the way to the horizon in some places and it's absolutely amazing.

The two different zones you mentioned marks the boundary of the Rocky Mountain rain shadow. If you look at an aerial view of the United States on Bing Maps with the labels turned off, you can see the boundary stretch from Texas all the way to Canada, and it follows the pattern of the Rockies.

You can clearly see that OKC is the only city in the country that sits right on the boundary. Wichita sits just inside the rain shadow, and Lincoln, Nebraska sits just outside the rain shadow.

You know what flat land does give you? Some absolutely spectacular sunsets. You can see all the way to the horizon in some places and it's absolutely amazing.

Ride a bicycle from Norman to Chickasha and tell me if you think it is flat. Most of western Oklahoma is an undualting plain

Florida is flat. The highest point in Florida is only 345' above sea level and is on the Georgia stateline between Pensacola and Tallahassee. If you start in Miami and drive north you climb 345' in over 500 miles. South Florida is so flat water doesn't flow.

Back in the day I used to spend more than a few nights visiting friends in Tulsa and we'd often go to the Hofbrau at 18th and Boston. Is that little area called anything? Is that a named district? Lots of memories from that place and a couple of other clubs close by. That little corner was really hopping at one time, is anything going on now? I haven't been anywhere near there in probably 18 years or so.

That is SoBo (South Boston) and still has several bars, a club owned by the OKC Rok Bar people, and a few restaurants including the excellent Oscar's. It has lots of room to grow to the west in the Uptown-Riverview area south of downtown. I would compare SoBo to OKC's Midtown around Plaza Court. Both have loads of potential for being cool near-downtown neighborhood districts.

LOL ... sorry... I lived in Boston several years and have NEVER heard anyone say SoBo... they say "Southie" if anything. Just made me laugh.

South Boston Speedway, on the other hand, sometime is called SoBo..... but that's in VA BTW.

Ride a bicycle from Norman to Chickasha and tell me if you think it is flat. Most of western Oklahoma is an undualting plain

Florida is flat. The highest point in Florida is only 345' above sea level and is on the Georgia stateline between Pensacola and Tallahassee. If you start in Miami and drive north you climb 345' in over 500 miles. South Florida is so flat water doesn't flow.

The area southwest of Norman and south of Newcastle is fairly hilly, as are parts of east Edmond and out toward Choctaw and eastern sections of Norman around Lake Thunderbird. Tulsa does have taller hills especially west of the city. The Osage Hills northwest of Tulsa just north of Sand Springs up around Lake Skiatook are pretty impressive rising 400-500 ft. above the Arkansas river valley, very similar to the Hill Country west of Austin except we have post and blackjack oaks and they have live oaks and mesquite.

Sorry... just realized you're talking about Boston Ave... but even still if they call that SoBo.... grasping.

LOL ... sorry... I lived in Boston several years and have NEVER heard anyone say SoBo... they say "Southie" if anything. Just made me laugh.

South Boston Speedway, on the other hand, sometime is called SoBo..... but that's in VA BTW.

Yeah you won't hear anything referred to as 'southie' in Oklahoma. :smile:

Some call it South Boston or SoBo but a lot of people just say 18th & Boston..

It's alright Ttown. We all make mistakes. I forgive you. XD

Nope, no mistake! I was reffering to the forum as fanboi, and after reading Spartan's forum for years and now this one, I do have a pretty good grasp of the players without having to post.

I forgive you.

Quote:
4 Their inner city neighborhoods. There is a 3-mile radius centered around 21st and Utica that is probably by far the nicest area of Oklahoma. In this little area you've got Utica Square, Cherry Street, Brookside, Maple Ridge, and many more awesome areas as well as the downtown districts. It's also the state's #1 income ZIP code. The #2 income ZIP code is far south Tulsa. Tulsa places a major emphasis on each neighborhood. Even less significant neighborhoods have a decorative logo sign at every entrance identifying that neighborhood.

Yes, I'm amazed at how beautiful and expansive midtown Tulsa is. Block after block of beautiful mansions, hills, trees, bimmers, benzes, etc.

I hate the comparisons, but Okc needs to step it up in the beautiful neighborhood department. There's one, maybe 2 areas in okc (NH doesn't count) on par with midtown Tulsa, and those areas are tiny by comparison.
HAHAHAHA. And why is that? You cannot pick and choose when comparing two cities. And yes, while Nichols Hills is considered a city, it is part of the Oklahoma City metropolitan area and is served by OKC public schools.

Quote:
4 Their inner city neighborhoods. There is a 3-mile radius centered around 21st and Utica that is probably by far the nicest area of Oklahoma. In this little area you've got Utica Square, Cherry Street, Brookside, Maple Ridge, and many more awesome areas as well as the downtown districts. It's also the state's #1 income ZIP code. The #2 income ZIP code is far south Tulsa. Tulsa places a major emphasis on each neighborhood. Even less significant neighborhoods have a decorative logo sign at every entrance identifying that neighborhood.

Yes, I'm amazed at how beautiful and expansive midtown Tulsa is. Block after block of beautiful mansions, hills, trees, bimmers, benzes, etc.

I hate the comparisons, but Okc needs to step it up in the beautiful neighborhood department. There's one, maybe 2 areas in okc (NH doesn't count) on par with midtown Tulsa, and those areas are tiny by comparison.

Well, OKC has been stepping it up. These are private properties. It takes time, and the revitalization that is happening right now isn't getting enough credit.

Well, OKC has been stepping it up. These are private properties. It takes time, and the revitalization that is happening right now isn't getting enough credit.

Agreed the inner north neighborhoods of OKC are much better than they were a decade ago. The key is young people investing in and fixing up older homes instead of buying cookie cutter in the suburbs. The city needs to make that an easier choice. Same goes for developers and blighted properties.

There is a midtown 'culture' in Tulsa that makes the area highly desirable and make the shopping/dining districts like Brookside, Utica Square and Cherry Street the cool places they are. I sense that a similar 'culture' is building in OKC along Western from Heritage Hills/Mesta Park up to Crown Heights/Putnam Heights over to around OCU. It's just not as established as Tulsa's midtown just like Brady/Blue Dome is not as established as Bricktown.

Agreed the inner north neighborhoods of OKC are much better than they were a decade ago. The key is young people investing in and fixing up older homes instead of buying cookie cutter in the suburbs. The city needs to make that an easier choice. Same goes for developers and blighted properties.

There is a midtown 'culture' in Tulsa that makes the area highly desirable and make the shopping/dining districts like Brookside, Utica Square and Cherry Street the cool places they are. I sense that a similar 'culture' is building in OKC along Western from Heritage Hills/Mesta Park up to Crown Heights/Putnam Heights over to around OCU. It's just not as established as Tulsa's midtown just like Brady/Blue Dome is not as established as Bricktown.

Exactly. I think a lot of people forget that very desirable areas are well established. They don't magically appear out of nothing like cookie-cutter subdivisions do.

Hey Kerry, have you ever been out to Wyoming? It's so weird how you can be in mountains one minute and then in an area as flat as Kansas the next. That's a state I expected a COMPLTEY different look from.

Agreed the inner north neighborhoods of OKC are much better than they were a decade ago. The key is young people investing in and fixing up older homes instead of buying cookie cutter in the suburbs. The city needs to make that an easier choice. Same goes for developers and blighted properties.


To expand on that, maybe I'm wrong but I just don't see a lot of residential infill in some of OKC's older neigborhoods. I can think of a couple of houses in and around midtown and some in Nichols Hills that have been built recently, but that's it. Its not like there's a shortage of empty, weedly lots. The level of contruction is nowhere near the scale of Tulsa.

If I'm wrong, please correct me. But its been my personal observation.

To expand on that, maybe I'm wrong but I just don't see a lot of residential infill in some of OKC's older neigborhoods. I can think of a couple of houses in and around midtown and some in Nichols Hills that have been built recently, but that's it. Its not like there's a shortage of empty, weedly lots. The level of contruction is nowhere near the scale of Tulsa.

If I'm wrong, please correct me. But its been my personal observation.

Well, to be honest there are not a lot of empty, weedy lots in Nichols Hills. Now, if you're speaking of MidTown near St. Anthony's Hospital, I wouldn't expect a lot of home construction on those lots. Low-rise condos, perhaps, but not the homes we're speaking of.

Now, just west of Nichols Hills, people have been buying up two lots, bulldozing the smaller, older homes and building a single, large home. Sort of a spill-over from Nichols Hills.

Hey Kerry, have you ever been out to Wyoming? It's so weird how you can be in mountains one minute and then in an area as flat as Kansas the next. That's a state I expected a COMPLTEY different look from.

I have not been to Wyoming but I have been to parts of Utah like that. Eastern Oregon is another oddity. When you think of Oregon you think rain and forest. Eastern Oregon is a desert because it on the rainshadow side of the Cascades. There is still nothing flatter than Florida - nothing.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1159/1263785866_d15326ae14.jpg

How the heck did we get fom OKC vs Tulsa to eastern Oregon?

Well, to be honest there are not a lot of empty, weedy lots in Nichols Hills. Now, if you're speaking of MidTown near St. Anthony's Hospital, I wouldn't expect a lot of home construction on those lots. Low-rise condos, perhaps, but not the homes we're speaking of.

Now, just west of Nichols Hills, people have been buying up two lots, bulldozing the smaller, older homes and building a single, large home. Sort of a spill-over from Nichols Hills.

Nichols Hills and surrounding areas seem to be the primary neighborhoods experiencing new construction on existing lots. You see some in Crown Heights too and possibly more in the future. The counterpart to Western in Tulsa, Brookside, experienced a huge boom in teardowns/new construction homes over the past few years to the point that nearly half of that neighborhood between Peoria and Utica around 36th is new construction or extensively renovated. The same goes for north of Cherry Street where lots of new contemporary lofts were built where old houses used to be.

OKC wins for this one reason.

Random TNT announcer: "We are at the Ford Center, in downtown Oklahoma City, for game 1 of the Western Conference Finals..."

On the TV screen will be an inside shot of the Ford Center. What goes on inside the building IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT than what the outside looks like.

That's not at all the case. You want the exterior of a building to in some way convey the importance of what goes on inside.. and we're talking about aesthetics, not history and not pro-sports so playoffs and "BOK wouldn't have happened without the Ford" or whatever statement of not admitting the BOK is better OKC can come up with, is completely irrelevant. When talking about looks alone there is no comparison between BOK and the Ford, the two are just in entirely different leagues.

And as much as it pains me to say, A TNT announcer will never (this year) announce that we are at the Ford Center for game 1 of the Western Conference Finals because even if the miraculous does happen and OKC is in the Finals (which will be the longest shot of all) game 1 will still never be in OKC because we have officially played ourselves out of home court contention with back-to-back losses against Utah and Denver. OKC is now cemented in seeds 6-8.

Spartan... I just have to correct you on the "back-to-back lossess"

...it's one loss... ONE ROBBERY!!!! :doh:

That's not at all the case. You want the exterior of a building to in some way convey the importance of what goes on inside.. and we're talking about aesthetics, not history and not pro-sports so playoffs and "BOK wouldn't have happened without the Ford" or whatever statement of not admitting the BOK is better OKC can come up with, is completely irrelevant. When talking about looks alone there is no comparison between BOK and the Ford, the two are just in entirely different leagues.

And as much as it pains me to say, A TNT announcer will never (this year) announce that we are at the Ford Center for game 1 of the Western Conference Finals because even if the miraculous does happen and OKC is in the Finals (which will be the longest shot of all) game 1 will still never be in OKC because we have officially played ourselves out of home court contention with back-to-back losses against Utah and Denver. OKC is now cemented in seeds 6-8.
The difference is the Ford Center was built to a very tight budget even when it's contemporaries in other cities (like The Pepsi Center in Denver) were built costing 2 to 3 times more. The budget for the BOK Center was around 2x the cost of the original Ford Center and still came in $62 million over budget. If the Ford Center had a $200-300 million dollar budget at the time there is no doubt that it could have been much "nicer" and something more in line with BOK, Sprint Center in KC, etc.

It just isn't a fair comparison, I know what pains were taken to make sure that the Ford Center came in as close to budget as possible and there were a lot of compromises made to achieve that goal, it evidently wasn't as big of a deal to the City of Tulsa to remain withing budget. The main focus of the city was to build an icon which was not the same task for the Ford Center. The Ford Center was the best "bargain" of all the arenas built in the past 20 years and serves its purpose well. I still think both are better than the American Airlines Center in Dallas, that is just a poorly laid out facility with a lot of flash, kind of like Dallas itself.

Pepsi Center/Denver - Opened 1999
160 million

American Airlines Center/Dallas - Opened July 2001
420 million

Ford Center/OKC - Opened June 2002
89.2 million

AT&T Center/San Antonio - Opened October 2002
186 million

Toyota Center/Houston - Opened 2003
202 million

BOK Center - Opened August 2008
196 million

Sprint Center/KC - Opened October 2007
276 million

Money does matter when it comes to the upgraded finishes used in the other arenas. The Alamodome (opened May 1993 for 196 million) reminds me of the Ford Center when it comes to an enclosed stadium built on a tight budget. There is nothing fancy about it but I found it a better place to watch a game than the billion dollar JerryWorld which seemed like nothing more than a supersized arena.

I think the discussion is addressing two distinct areas. The first being the actual downtown, and the second being surrounding neighborhoods. As someone who grew up in Tulsa, I am very familiar with the neighborhoods of Tulsa.

When looking at the actual downtown, OKC is far ahead of Tulsa. The level of activity during the day and night in Tulsa pales in comparison to OKC. Also there is a major difference between Tulsa and OKC in downtown is that since WilComm there have been no major expansion of employers. If anything there has been a steady loss, downsizing at Williams, WilCom, Parker Dilling left, if you talk to any of the restaurant owners in DT Tulsa they will tell you that they have noticed for years the steady decline in downtown employment. In Tulsa housing is merely being used to absorb office space off the market. In OKC you have employers expanding like Devon, and others like SandRidge filling in for the loss of K-M. Of interest is the last major private construction is now City Hall. BOk and ONEOK are the last major headquarter employers left in dt Tulsa, while OKC is booming comparatively. As a young person, I don't want to live in a downtown if their are not any good jobs there.

As far as the neighborhoods Tulsa has always had an advantage as it has historically been wealthier, so the inner city neighborhoods are better looking. This is nothing new, what is new the revitalization of midtown neighborhoods in OKC. Maple Ridge has been solid for over 20years now so its nothing new. Also as far as the wealth disparity with job losses continuing to mount in Tulsa, and replacements not filling in for CITGO, SemGroup, Parker etc. The wealth of the neighborhoods cannot be maintained at these levels.

And as far as arenas, and maybe I am biased as a sports fan, its the product inside that matters more. While Tulsa was bickering about perfection OKC hosted the Hornets and set itself up for the Thunder. Yes the BOk center is beautiful, but in a few years when the music acts die down, the 500 people that attend the WNBA games, and the few thousand going to a CHL or AFL game will be a shame for that nice of a building. OKC gotta a better bang for its buck!

I doubt any city has had close to the return OKC has had on the Ford Center. Build dirt cheap by modern standards, it was completely responsible for landing first an NBA loaner team then making OKC a major league town. How can you begin to quantify the exposure? (Especially now with KD and the playoffs awaiting.)

Now, it's being upgraded at a still reasonable outlay and will serve the Thunder and citizens for quite some time.

Quite possibly the shrewdest arena deal in a very long time and that's a lot to be proud of in itself.

I doubt any city has had close to the return OKC has had on the Ford Center. Build dirt cheap by modern standards, it was completely responsible for landing first an NBA loaner team then making OKC a major league town. How can you begin to quantify the exposure? (Especially now with KD and the playoffs awaiting.)

Now, it's being upgraded at a still reasonable outlay and will serve the Thunder and citizens for quite some time.

Quite possibly the shrewdest arena deal in a very long time and that's a lot to be proud of in itself.

Very true, the BOK is better looking and nicer to walk around inside. But the actual arena is as nicer or nicer in the ford center and the sound system is infinately better in the ford center.

Exactlly Pete and OUGrad. OKC got a lot more bang for the buck. We got a bargain basement deal with the opening of the thing, but kept it up to date over the last 10 years with wise investments from the citizens of OKC. We've got a debt free building while places like Seattle are still paying off a stinking renovation. We've brought a so-so building up to the upper echelon. The buidling will only be adequate for about another 15 years at most, but by then, we'll be ready to put it's replacement on the footprint of the Myriad anyway.1

We couldn't have asked for a better location for the arenas, because we will now forever have the side-by-side option. As one ages, it will be good timing for the other to bulldoze. I don't know of another city that planned that well in their downtown. Even Kansas City, which is as close as you get, demoed the wrong facility to keep their close arenas together....crap, they tossed Kemper but kept Municipal???? what the crap?


But back to OKC - Tulsa. Yeah the BOK is flashy, but what is the city going to get out of it? The 66ers are at the convention center, and I gurantee that the wnba will be there in a year. And the NBA won't be coming to town, so unless they get NHL, all they have will be the Oilers...and to be honest, they could probably go back to the convention center too...it would be a better financial decision for that team. Very soon, the "new car smell" will be gone, and it will be treading water, all the while the Ford Center will continue to fork out the cash. Remember the city gets tax dollars from out of town folks to all these events that help fill our pockets. If all you have is concerts and minor league hockey....honey you aren't getting crap. That's simply taking money that a person would have spent elsewhere in the city of tulsa and putting it in a restaurant downtown...it's redistribution, not new funds like an out-of-town visitor gives you (hotel/food/etc).

If there was ever going to be another pro team in Oklahoma it would be NHL at the BOK Center. But I don't see that happening for a long time unless an investor buys a team and brings them to Tulsa. I've always hoped the Blues would relocate from St. Louis to OKC (before the Thunder) or Tulsa, or one of the cities gets an expansion team.

Exactlly Pete and OUGrad. OKC got a lot more bang for the buck. We got a bargain basement deal with the opening of the thing, but kept it up to date over the last 10 years with wise investments from the citizens of OKC. We've got a debt free building while places like Seattle are still paying off a stinking renovation. We've brought a so-so building up to the upper echelon. The buidling will only be adequate for about another 15 years at most, but by then, we'll be ready to put it's replacement on the footprint of the Myriad anyway.1

We couldn't have asked for a better location for the arenas, because we will now forever have the side-by-side option. As one ages, it will be good timing for the other to bulldoze. I don't know of another city that planned that well in their downtown. Even Kansas City, which is as close as you get, demoed the wrong facility to keep their close arenas together....crap, they tossed Kemper but kept Municipal???? what the crap?


But back to OKC - Tulsa. Yeah the BOK is flashy, but what is the city going to get out of it? The 66ers are at the convention center, and I gurantee that the wnba will be there in a year. And the NBA won't be coming to town, so unless they get NHL, all they have will be the Oilers...and to be honest, they could probably go back to the convention center too...it would be a better financial decision for that team. Very soon, the "new car smell" will be gone, and it will be treading water, all the while the Ford Center will continue to fork out the cash. Remember the city gets tax dollars from out of town folks to all these events that help fill our pockets. If all you have is concerts and minor league hockey....honey you aren't getting crap. That's simply taking money that a person would have spent elsewhere in the city of tulsa and putting it in a restaurant downtown...it's redistribution, not new funds like an out-of-town visitor gives you (hotel/food/etc).
Why do you assume the BOK is going to be "treading water" right now its one of the better facilities in north america and from what i have read its 38th in the world. That is impressive.

Sure the new car smell will wear off but its a nice facility that will continue to attract visitors for probably 15 years with no major renovations.

Just because its in Tulsa doesn't automatically mean it will suck in two or three years ;)

Keep in mind the BOK center got several shows there because the Ford Center was being upgraded and not available. That helped BOK get the 38th ranking. When the Ford opened, it was one of the top 10 in the world if I remember correctly.

Keep in mind the BOK center got several shows there because the Ford Center was being upgraded and not available. That helped BOK get the 38th ranking. When the Ford opened, it was one of the top 10 in the world if I remember correctly.

Yeah thats true, BOK picked up some shows because OKC was booked...
Ford center was top 10 in the nation not the world...but still top 10 in the US is good :)

I think the discussion is addressing two distinct areas. The first being the actual downtown, and the second being surrounding neighborhoods. As someone who grew up in Tulsa, I am very familiar with the neighborhoods of Tulsa.

When looking at the actual downtown, OKC is far ahead of Tulsa. The level of activity during the day and night in Tulsa pales in comparison to OKC. Also there is a major difference between Tulsa and OKC in downtown is that since WilComm there have been no major expansion of employers. If anything there has been a steady loss, downsizing at Williams, WilCom, Parker Dilling left, if you talk to any of the restaurant owners in DT Tulsa they will tell you that they have noticed for years the steady decline in downtown employment. In Tulsa housing is merely being used to absorb office space off the market. In OKC you have employers expanding like Devon, and others like SandRidge filling in for the loss of K-M. Of interest is the last major private construction is now City Hall. BOk and ONEOK are the last major headquarter employers left in dt Tulsa, while OKC is booming comparatively. As a young person, I don't want to live in a downtown if their are not any good jobs there.

As far as the neighborhoods Tulsa has always had an advantage as it has historically been wealthier, so the inner city neighborhoods are better looking. This is nothing new, what is new the revitalization of midtown neighborhoods in OKC. Maple Ridge has been solid for over 20years now so its nothing new. Also as far as the wealth disparity with job losses continuing to mount in Tulsa, and replacements not filling in for CITGO, SemGroup, Parker etc. The wealth of the neighborhoods cannot be maintained at these levels.

And as far as arenas, and maybe I am biased as a sports fan, its the product inside that matters more. While Tulsa was bickering about perfection OKC hosted the Hornets and set itself up for the Thunder. Yes the BOk center is beautiful, but in a few years when the music acts die down, the 500 people that attend the WNBA games, and the few thousand going to a CHL or AFL game will be a shame for that nice of a building. OKC gotta a better bang for its buck!

This is a rational approach to comparison, and I appreciate someone saying something other than, "OMG OKC > Tulsa no contest."

Just like urbanism is without a doubt OKC's biggest issue right now, I think you correctly identified Tulsa's big issue..jobs. Economy. More practical things, things OKC isn't worrying about right now.

Tulsa is steadily hemorrhaging major corporations, one by one. And it's been a really bad last two months up in T-Town. They lost Arena Energy (bought by SandRidge, 500 jobs moving to OKC), HBSC Accounting or whatever (500 jobs lost) and TPD laid off a thousand officers..one of the hardest police layoffs in the country. Look at it in the grander scheme of Downtown Tulsa.. downsizing at IBM, WilTel, Williams, losing Parker, SemGroup going bankrupt, and elsewhere in the Tulsa metro.. Great Plains Airlines going bankrupt, Whirlpool leaving, WorldCom going bankrupt, CITGO leaving..I could go on and on. It's been bad.

But somehow it hasn't been that bad. Overall in January, OKC added 6,000 new jobs remarkably. Top category: Government. Does Tulsa get any government jobs? Of course not, one in almost four (over five) jobs in OKC is government..nowhere near that in Tulsa. However while Tulsa added 6,000 jobs, Tulsa added 2,000--more modest, but it is ALL private jobs in small companies that can grow. Also Tulsa sustained 2-3 years at the beginning of the decade with population loss, but has since backed back and currently Tulsa's population is at 399,000...so it will probably finally go over 400,000 in the 2010 census. The difference though is all of Tulsa's ankle-biting suburbs which are also Oklahoma's 3 fastest-growing cities..Bixby, Jenks, and Owasso, and Jenks has everyone in Oklahoma in its dust in terms of retail development. Broken Arrow is also newly Oklahoma's 3rd largest city, recently eclipsing Norman, and Lawton a few years ago.

So Tulsa isn't "loosing jobs" it's just not adding any high-profile companies, and those high-profile companies are absolutely essential to building community support for downtown. I think for Tulsans, seeing all of the corporations leave left and right, has played a huge role in somewhat turning Tulsans against downtown. What's interesting is how in Tulsa private benefactors, like the Hamm family, Kaiser family, etc etc..keep supporting the local causes, like the river, the ballpark, the arts, etc.

In fact Tulsa has these some sort of resemblances to France, in my opinion, in this way. It's remarkable how Tulsa can basically not "create" economic wealth, not add innovative jobs at the same pace as the competition, and basically be economically stagnant and still retain and even continue to enhance its aesthetic and cultural edge. Why is Tulsa continuing to clean up its inner city, now focusing on the downtown, and still maintaining its excellence elsewhere in the inner city? Simply because that's the way it's always been. Just like how France is economically stagnant and still somehow maintains its high standard of living and cultural "superiority," Tulsa in my opinion is similar in this regard..so they're still a trendsetter culturally and aesthetically even if they're definitely not a trendsetter economically. Economics is Tulsa's shortfall, even if they have a significantly higher average income than OKC (and slightly lower cost of living, actually).

Broken Arrow is also newly Oklahoma's 3rd largest city, recently eclipsing Norman, and Lawton a few years ago.



Actually, unless Broken Arrow has added around 10,000 people since January, it's just the fourth largest city.

Tulsa World: BA growth second in state (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100105_11_A1_Carsfi238693&archive=yes)

Those numbers are surprisingly low..I remember discussions on my old forums where we talked about BA having over 100,000 and projected to be over 110,000 by 2010. Also ranking 2nd in growth is disingenuous because they're looking at total number..not percentage growth. The article also cites Owasso at 27,000...that is not true. Owasso is over 40,000 within the Owasso fence line. Tulsa suburbs are different from OKC suburbs in that they really control any open land. They have all annexed a thin ring of land beyond the corporal city limits to allow them to expand over Tulsa..Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, BA, and Glenpool have fencelines..I think Skiatook does too. So sometimes you see "fenceline" population numbers and "corporal limits" numbers which is what the census will reflect, not including those unincorporated areas 100% surrounded by the suburb, and part of that suburb for all intents and purposes.

Those numbers are surprisingly low..I remember discussions on my old forums where we talked about BA having over 100,000 and projected to be over 110,000 by 2010. Also ranking 2nd in growth is disingenuous because they're looking at total number..not percentage growth. The article also cites Owasso at 27,000...that is not true. Owasso is over 40,000 within the Owasso fence line. Tulsa suburbs are different from OKC suburbs in that they really control any open land. They have all annexed a thin ring of land beyond the corporal city limits to allow them to expand over Tulsa..Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, BA, and Glenpool have fencelines..I think Skiatook does too. So sometimes you see "fenceline" population numbers and "corporal limits" numbers which is what the census will reflect, not including those unincorporated areas 100% surrounded by the suburb, and part of that suburb for all intents and purposes.

Spartan, I'm sure when the census bureau makes estimates they take everything into account being within the city limits. City populations aren't figured differently for OKC suburbs as compared to Tulsa suburbs. It is based strictly on what is in the city limits. Having discussions about what a city's population may be at some point doesn't make it so. Percentage population growth versus exact numbers will always be two different issues. I guess we won't have to wait too long to find out what is accurate since the new census is under way. If you want to include unincorporated areas within city limits in that city's population you are free to do that but it will never be done that way officially. Making that argument would mean that OKC could include Bethany, Warr Acres, and Mustang within it's "fenceline limits" if it wanted to. I don't see the difference. The areas surrounded by Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, Broken Arrow, etc., aren't any more a part of the city population than those cities are in relation to OKC.

This is a rational approach to comparison, and I appreciate someone saying something other than, "OMG OKC > Tulsa no contest."

Just like urbanism is without a doubt OKC's biggest issue right now, I think you correctly identified Tulsa's big issue..jobs. Economy. More practical things, things OKC isn't worrying about right now.

Tulsa is steadily hemorrhaging major corporations, one by one. And it's been a really bad last two months up in T-Town. They lost Arena Energy (bought by SandRidge, 500 jobs moving to OKC), HBSC Accounting or whatever (500 jobs lost) and TPD laid off a thousand officers..one of the hardest police layoffs in the country. Look at it in the grander scheme of Downtown Tulsa.. downsizing at IBM, WilTel, Williams, losing Parker, SemGroup going bankrupt, and elsewhere in the Tulsa metro.. Great Plains Airlines going bankrupt, Whirlpool leaving, WorldCom going bankrupt, CITGO leaving..I could go on and on. It's been bad.

But somehow it hasn't been that bad. Overall in January, OKC added 6,000 new jobs remarkably. Top category: Government. Does Tulsa get any government jobs? Of course not, one in almost four (over five) jobs in OKC is government..nowhere near that in Tulsa. However while Tulsa added 6,000 jobs, Tulsa added 2,000--more modest, but it is ALL private jobs in small companies that can grow. Also Tulsa sustained 2-3 years at the beginning of the decade with population loss, but has since backed back and currently Tulsa's population is at 399,000...so it will probably finally go over 400,000 in the 2010 census. The difference though is all of Tulsa's ankle-biting suburbs which are also Oklahoma's 3 fastest-growing cities..Bixby, Jenks, and Owasso, and Jenks has everyone in Oklahoma in its dust in terms of retail development. Broken Arrow is also newly Oklahoma's 3rd largest city, recently eclipsing Norman, and Lawton a few years ago.

So Tulsa isn't "loosing jobs" it's just not adding any high-profile companies, and those high-profile companies are absolutely essential to building community support for downtown. I think for Tulsans, seeing all of the corporations leave left and right, has played a huge role in somewhat turning Tulsans against downtown. What's interesting is how in Tulsa private benefactors, like the Hamm family, Kaiser family, etc etc..keep supporting the local causes, like the river, the ballpark, the arts, etc.


Not sure where you got your job loss numbers but you're wrong. TPD at its highest never even had a thousand officers to layoff. They laid off about 145 officers, hired back 29 of them and could hire back some more.

HSBC was a call center, we lost over 400 jobs on that one. Additionally American Airlines is relocating some maintenance jobs to DFW area so that will be another 200 higher paying jobs lost.

Arena Resources did not have 500 employees, not even close. They had about 70 employees. All told the last couple months we've lost about a thousand jobs that have been made public.

TPD did not layoff a thousand officers.

Those numbers are surprisingly low..I remember discussions on my old forums where we talked about BA having over 100,000 and projected to be over 110,000 by 2010. Also ranking 2nd in growth is disingenuous because they're looking at total number..not percentage growth. The article also cites Owasso at 27,000...that is not true. Owasso is over 40,000 within the Owasso fence line. Tulsa suburbs are different from OKC suburbs in that they really control any open land. They have all annexed a thin ring of land beyond the corporal city limits to allow them to expand over Tulsa..Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, BA, and Glenpool have fencelines..I think Skiatook does too. So sometimes you see "fenceline" population numbers and "corporal limits" numbers which is what the census will reflect, not including those unincorporated areas 100% surrounded by the suburb, and part of that suburb for all intents and purposes.

What's your source on this "fenceline" vs. "corporal limits". I've never heard of it before... Also, what does "in that they really control any open land" mean? When you say "expand over Tulsa", do you mean on Tulsa's land, or outside of Tulsa?

The Mayo is having a very tough time. They've just lost their GM and Director of Sales and some other staff. The opening of the Atlas-Life Courtyard and the Holiday Inn will not help...


that is just a poorly laid out facility with a lot of flash, kind of like Dallas itself.

Love it!

What's your source on this "fenceline" vs. "corporal limits". I've never heard of it before... Also, what does "in that they really control any open land" mean? When you say "expand over Tulsa", do you mean on Tulsa's land, or outside of Tulsa?

Tulsa World: Settling near Owasso: Stone Canyon builders plan up to 2,100 homes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070805_5_E1_Story21612)

Here's a good look at Owasso growth/fenceline strategy.

Tulsa World: Settling near Owasso: Stone Canyon builders plan up to 2,100 homes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070805_5_E1_Story21612)

Here's a good look at Owasso growth/fenceline strategy.

It mentions that some of this area will eventually be annexed into Owasso and then it will be provided with city services. At that point it can be included in Owasso's population. You're prevous point was that areas included within a "fenceline" should already be included in the population. Oklahoma City made this type of development basically irrelevant in our area many years ago by annexing massive amounts of land before the suburban areas could grab it in this manner.

a HUGE mistake on OKC's part. ....

Arena Resources did not have 500 employees, not even close. They had about 70 employees. All told the last couple months we've lost about a thousand jobs that have been made public.


Arena employs 30 at their corporate office in south Tulsa. Most of these people have been offered jobs in OKC, or they will take other jobs in Tulsa. The CEO has not decided if he will relocate to OKC or stay in Tulsa (and possibly start a new company). They have around 100 employees in the field in TX and NM.

The 600 call center employees at HSBC Finance will either move to the other HSBC facilities or move to one of several Tulsa call centers most of which are hiring according to the TW article.

None of the layoff in the past two months have affected employment in downtown Tulsa.

Arena employs 30 at their corporate office in south Tulsa. Most of these people have been offered jobs in OKC, or they will take other jobs in Tulsa. The CEO has not decided if he will relocate to OKC or stay in Tulsa (and possibly start a new company). They have around 100 employees in the field in TX and NM.

The 600 call center employees at HSBC Finance will either move to the other HSBC facilities or move to one of several Tulsa call centers most of which are hiring according to the TW article.

None of the layoff in the past two months have affected employment in downtown Tulsa.

Friend of mine works for arena and said there were 54 that worked in the Tulsa office so I put 70 to be generous in case he was wrong.

And yes they were all offered positiosn in OKC.

And I never mentioned downtown tulsa, I work downtown and like it a lot :)

Never got an exact number at HSBC, all I read and saw on tv was 400+

Friend of mine works for arena and said there were 54 that worked in the Tulsa office so I put 70 to be generous in case he was wrong.

And yes they were all offered positiosn in OKC.

That's great for us. New residents.

Or for Edmond, or wherever they live..