I mean how long are we going to ride the white horses of Devon and Chesapeake?


I vote forever. Devon and CHK arent exactly bad for the city.

I vote forever. Devon and CHK arent exactly bad for the city.

Investing Billions into our city and building an 850ft tall skyscraper and re doing our dt streets is LUDACRIS!I vote to kick them both out of OKC!

It's actually a very good question posed by G. Walker. Why aren't new companies moving their operations to Oklahoma City? If they can move to Omaha, like Gallup, etc. - why not Oklahoma City? Perfectly valid question.

Gallup moved from Lincoln to be closer to a decent airport. AND Omaha is not their HQ, it's in Washington D.C. Omaha is the location of the "Operations Center".


SandRidge, Devon, Chesapeake and Continental are true HQ's offering lots of very high-paid jobs and great work environments while investing literally billions into our community. If there are competing cities that have been getting more of these types of employers in the last decade, I'd like someone to cite specific examples.

I said they are peers, not that they are similar, they obviously are not very similar.


I think there are a lot of similarities between Austin and Oklahoma City, but they are no longer peers.


Oklahoma City relative to Indy has almost no convention industry. And Nashville is not a state capital.


No, Oklahoma City is not similar to Charlotte in the amount of recent downtown development. Charlotte is far outpacing Oklahoma City in and out of the core growing by 40% in the last decade adding over 400k people.



Good lord, Ft Worth is not a peer city of Oklahoma City, not remotely, Tarrant County alone has over 1.7 million people. The Ft Worth section of the Metroplex is nearing 3 million and will have four million long before Oklahoma City hits 1.5 million. Sacramento has over 2.6 million people and is booming. Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Austin have growth rates triple that of OKC and all three will have over 2 million people in the next few years. Columbus has over two million people. These cities, except for few like Buffalo and SLC are all much larger than Oklahoma City than OKC is larger than Tulsa or Omaha.



Oklahoma City is doing some really nice things, but there's a long way to go, and growth remains lackluster. Here's hoping that changes.

Let me just first say that your trademark abrasive style is really showing, and it is sooo tempting to reply in kind, especially since you apparently don't know your state capitals...

I agree that OKC's growth is lackluster. This is nothing we don't all know. OKC has been stuck around 10-15% for the last half decade. You didn't seem to want to address Salt Lake, Memphis, Jax, or Buffalo. Oh well. Yes, some of the cities I suggested are growing more, some less, some are bigger, some are slightly smaller. The important thing is that they are peer cities, they are competition for OKC for the most part, and they do have similar story lines.

If you're looking for a city that is very similar to OKC, you won't find one more similar than Ft. Worth. OKC would kill for some of their Museum District development somewhere outside the downtown area, BUT right now it's vital that OKC keep focusing on downtown, which has turned out very well for us.

I wouldn't say these cities are outpacing OKC. In terms of attracting jobs and investment, OKC is keeping up. You can't just look at population figures because if that was the most important thing, we would just pass a civic order banning rubbers, and the problem would be solved...the hospitals would be full of new Oklahoma Citians, regardless of any "brain drain." OKC is doing very well in attracting and maintaining quality jobs right now, and when it comes to core development, I think you underestimate the sheer dollar figure of everything going on in OKC. It is in the billions and billions of dollars.

Tulsa is a really nice city, and everyone on here knows I'm usually an ardent supporter of Tulsa, and one of its biggest fans. But Tulsa is not a peer city of OKC's, plain and simple as that. Tulsa is content with where it is, partly because I think it's plainly obvious that Tulsa isn't going to be a "big league city" any time soon, and because Tulsa isn't exactly in a make-or-break situation. Tulsa will just continue to be a nice place to live with a lot of other things going for it.

OKC is completely different. OKC is a city that was in a hard situation not long ago, and persevered through it. OKC has completely reinvented itself, and I don't think that's typical hyperbole from me either. OKC is a new and different city than it was 20 years ago. It's striving to be something bigger and better than it is now. That alone makes it a completely different kind of city than Tulsa.

I realize that OKC is making progress in developing downtown as a real community, but the slow pace makes me wonder whether downtown will ever see a boom in residential or retail infill construction. Of course Deep Deuce saw a considerable amount of infill in recent years, but it has taken much longer than expected for them to become occupied. If the arrival of an NBA team, Devon Tower, and anticipation of future projects isn't causing a construction boom, what will?

In-fill are always smaller projects usually by smaller developers. OKC has had a ton of them proposed (many, many examples on this board) that never came off. The economy is the main culprit, especially the lenders.

And in fairness, there have been literally dozens of these completed already, we just tend to forget about them because there are still large holes.

Because of urban renewal and horrible planning, OKC started this push in a much bigger hole than most others.

Spartan, I think it's fine to focus on rentals. However, remember how long it takes to go from concept to existing development. The current excitement over rentals exists at least partially because of the current economic conditions. By the time rentals are constructed, there will be streetcar plans and cars ordered, a new downtown park and potentially a completely different economic climate. Enthusiasm may have shifted to an entirely different type of housing. There are many cities that have overbuilt rentals. The housing market is faddish and personally, I think it's important to have a nice mix. I also know that in most cities currently downtown has the most expensive housing and it gets cheaper as you get farther away from the CBD. If you're an entry level buyer you understand that you need to live a bit further out until you've worked awhile, made some money and can afford to move closer in. I don't think OCURA was necessarily wrong to slant it the way they did. Imagine Deep Deuce filled with EIFS faced, quickly thrown up cheap housing units that focus on inexpensive price rather than quality construction. What do you think we'd be saying about housing in Deep Deuce 10 years from now? Yes, we might have density, but how do you even renovate that or appeal to a different income group from the entry level purchasers? Again, what makes downtown housing appealing in other cities is either very old, very high quality housing or new high quality housing. Not Memorial Road type apartment units that someone happened to put up for sale instead of rent. I think, just like in Bricktown, we need to be very careful what we accept in the name of development and sometimes empty lots are better than a low quality development.

Well you know how I feel about building standards, so I won't even go there since we are so in agreement. I think the only thing we disagree on is the need to rebut the "condos suck" argument. It's not that condos suck, it's just that apartments become occupied much faster. No need to rebut. And anyone trying to make this into a moral or ethical argument can't be serious. The real moral or ethical argument is whether the built environment is a healthy or unhealthy place to live, it doesn't get much more basic than that. What price point the market appeals to is just not a relevant consideration because I just want the market to appeal to some group, any group, whoever it is, however much money they have..

You know, a really funny thing I just realized is that the crappiest suburbs in the whole metro (think Moore or Del City) still have building standards for tract housing. Typically a city will require at least 40-60% of new homes have masonry in the...exterior walls (can't bring myself to call them facades/edifices). That's just commonly accepted. Actually, building standards are very good for when it comes to these crackerboxes in the burbs (it's just too bad that they're so devoid of character that they'll predictably deteriorate anyway). In Oklahoma, they have to withhold high winds, tornadoes, hail storms, blizzards, floods, droughts, now earthquakes, and more. So the EIFS crap we build in commercially-zoned areas is kind of funny, in that way..

If you compare tract housing in OKC to the siding crackerboxes of Kansas (i.e., all of Wichita or KCK burbs), obviously the materials used in Oklahoma are superior. Brick tract housing is nowhere near as prevalent elsewhere as it is in Oklahoma and to an extent TX and AR. Because there's a lot of clay in our soil, it's a local option for building materials, just as stucco is a local option for Arizona. But the point I want to bring home is that here is a prime example of getting better building materials for less. So it's hard for me to understand why/how brick could not be affordable in Oklahoma.

So I'm not concerned about the "you get what you pay for" argument. You can have affordable housing that isn't EIFS. It just depends on your definition of affordable (I think Deep Deuce is affordable), and you have to be willing to accept a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment. If you can't think in urban terms, and use space efficiently, then perhaps some people do just belong in a ranch house in Mustang, because they wouldn't be happy downtown. That's perfectly fine, and I would seriously hope nobody is arguing to wipe these places off the map. It's just that the bottom line is, we need some viable alternatives.

Mike, the reason cities like Omaha (and Louisville and Milwaukee and Pittsburgh and even Des Moines) can feel more urban is that they were developed along navigable waterways that not only provided a concentrated origin but continues to be a focal point for development / re-development and recreation. And usually, these cities grow in one or two primary directions because of the same feature, so that also focuses the perimeter areas just outside the core.

It's a bit of an unfair comparison... It's not really anything those cities did that we can copy, it's just different geography. At least OKC is trying to change this and it's already happening with the Oklahoma River and the development that is going on now and the tons more that is proposed.

Very cogent points. The point made about the development of cities out from a focal point such as a river, etc. is brilliant, and is just not something we can replicate exactly and have it feel natural...but we are getting closer. I moved from Orlando, and it has the same issue. It just seems to spring from nowhere around...nothing, and its development has radiated out from several different focal points, making it harder to get density and a natural progression of development over time. OKC is one of what seems like just a few major cities that have grown in the same urban developmental pattern.

Overall, I think most people on here are excited about what the future holds...but just want to see it all built in a day! I understand, I can hardly wait either! We just have to be patient and trust that OKC's brightest days are ahead...that we'll be there someday and be able to look back and marvel at our progress.

The western gateway into downtown is Midtown Crossing, a $325-million-mixed-use development with more
than 1 million square feet of space, which includes upwards of 225,000 square feet of restaurant and retail
space. At the center of it all is an expanded and revitalized Turner Park, a space that hosts a series of outdoor
markets, concerts and community-wide events

http://www.bradwilliamsphotography.com/images/MTC_AERIAL2.jpg

When I first saw this pic I thought this would be perfect for Core to Shore.

I'm thinking more like 63rd and Western for the above, if you know the background..Midtown Crossing is actually the redevelopment of Mutual of Omaha's campus. You can see their headquarters behind the development. They owned all that land and the development was their project. You'll notice that the new buildings have sort of a beige-colored brick that plays off of the style of their HQ. The whole project utilizes sort of an interesting WPA Art-Deco style, with boxy buildings, prominent lines, vertical columns, and modernist ornamentation. Kind of a neat throw-back, but there are some who legitimately dislike the style of this project and think the MofO bldg is ugly. I like it though..

Can you imagine if something like THAT was what SandRidge decided to do for their campus instead? We all would have jumped for joy. Mutual of Omaha developed their own parking lots for this project. I guess in terms of finding somewhere in OKC that is similar, I'd say the 23rd/Classen area, with all those parking lots around American Fidelity and The Classen.

After visiting Omaha a year ago for the first time, I came away quite impressed. It is definitely smaller than OKC's metro area but it is significantly more affluent and home to more diverse, professional corporate offices. It is home to several multibillionairs - one being Warren Buffet - and you can see the influence certain benefactors are having in the city. It has a beatiful modern convention center and the ballpark, as shown above, will be a great complement to the CC. It also has a larger, busier airport than we do - due to several factors discussed in another thread. Its a vibrant, thriving city that isn't being destroyed by the credit crash and overbuilding of homes. On the other hand, there are things about OKC that I feel are superior to Omaha which are already being discussed. It is a very comperable city to OKC.

After visiting Omaha a year ago for the first time, I came away quite impressed. It is definitely smaller than OKC's metro area but it is significantly more affluent and home to more diverse, professional corporate offices. It is home to several multibillionairs - one being Warren Buffet - and you can see the influence certain benefactors are having in the city. It has a beatiful modern convention center and the ballpark, as shown above, will be a great complement to the CC. It also has a larger, busier airport than we do - due to several factors discussed in another thread. Its a vibrant, thriving city that isn't being destroyed by the credit crash and overbuilding of homes. On the other hand, there are things about OKC that I feel are superior to Omaha which are already being discussed. It is a very comperable city to OKC.

A funny thing about how the ballpark and CC interact is that they have a legitimate vision for the NoDo (North Downtown) area, which is very much their C2S. They got it jump-started with a development that features a music studio I believe and more interestingly, an Urban Outfitters. It should be studied.

I agree that Omaha's benefactor support is certainly unmatched by few cities, perhaps Tulsa (Kaiser & Co.), certainly not us. One thing Omaha doesn't really have that OKC really has (for now) is citizen support. For example, Omaha just closed the book on a 3-year push for streetcar. Not going to happen for them, in the current climate. With peer cities like Omaha and Ft. Worth giving up on their streetcar desires, it really shows just how special OKC's current situation is. We are really just so lucky to have citizen support for streetcar, and to have the funding and resources needed to make it happen ASAP.

One of a kind situation we find ourselves in. Proud to be in OKC.

My point wasn't that higher priced units are what we should be building. My point was that there has been rather strident criticism of price per square foot of what has been built, implying they are overpriced, not simply that they're not the price points people are looking for AND criticizing developers for thinking that people might be willing to pay those prices. But, when you look at places like Omaha that have prices that are significantly higher than what is being criticized here, it certainly makes one think perhaps people living here aren't necessarily being realistic about what it is costing developers for their developments. Or, perhaps a mistake was made thinking people who could pay those price points would be willing to gamble, buying downtown homes without a lot of reassuring surrounding development. Regardless, perhaps it may be presumptuous to expect better prices without a corresponding significant decrease in quality of building materials. It's hard to believe land costs, materials and labor are exorbitantly higher than here.

I think part of the problem is the developers. They claim the target audience for that area (and what okc is supposedly trying to attract) are young professionals straight outta college. Unfortunately many of us are in entry level and simply cannot afford many of the expensive luxury condos and such. So maybe they should change their focus from making expensive "I wish i could live there" places and invest more in what many people in that demographic can afford. I don't mean put in any projects or anyting, but some more AFFORDABLE housing could really help that area grow and prosper. Then as the area continues to grow add high-end luxury condos and such. But, my point is, many people would love to live downtown but just cannot afford the price of whats currently available. Maybe Omaha can support these types of developments but I don't think they are necessarily the right fit for okc right now.

I said they are peers, not that they are similar, they obviously are not very similar.


I think there are a lot of similarities between Austin and Oklahoma City, but they are no longer peers.


Oklahoma City relative to Indy has almost no convention industry. And Nashville is not a state capital.


No, Oklahoma City is not similar to Charlotte in the amount of recent downtown development. Charlotte is far outpacing Oklahoma City in and out of the core growing by 40% in the last decade adding over 400k people.



Good lord, Ft Worth is not a peer city of Oklahoma City, not remotely, Tarrant County alone has over 1.7 million people. The Ft Worth section of the Metroplex is nearing 3 million and will have four million long before Oklahoma City hits 1.5 million. Sacramento has over 2.6 million people and is booming. Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Austin have growth rates triple that of OKC and all three will have over 2 million people in the next few years. Columbus has over two million people. These cities, except for few like Buffalo and SLC are all much larger than Oklahoma City than OKC is larger than Tulsa or Omaha.



Oklahoma City is doing some really nice things, but there's a long way to go, and growth remains lackluster. Here's hoping that changes.

Wow, Swake. If you were aiming for a fact-free post, you did a mighty fine job. But if you look closely, I'm afraid a few actual facts may have snuck in there and ruined it for you.

One thing OKC has over Omaha is diversity, and when companys look to moving, thats a big deal. Ever been to Omaha? Its about as diverse as Canada. They are starting to get a little more diverse but their black and hispanic populations is well below 10% and prolly will be lucky to ever get higher than that. OKC has a good size of blacks and the hispanic population here is always gonna continue to increase, which is the future of America. So in that relation OKC is in way better shape than Omaha for growth. Some of you may not think thats a good thing, depending on your diversity views lol, just saying......

One thing OKC has over Omaha is diversity, and when companys look to moving, thats a big deal. Ever been to Omaha? Its about as diverse as Canada. They are starting to get a little more diverse but their black and hispanic populations is well below 10% and prolly will be lucky to ever get higher than that.

Canada is extremely diverse, or at least where all I've been. Toronto, Calgary, and esp Vancouver have huge Asian populations. Calgary's new mayor is south Asian, good guy (extremely progressive). Vancouver is called "Hongcouver" by everyone.

^^You mean Canada's Large cities are diverse,but overall Canada is WHITE!

Same with anywhere. Canada, United States, Europe, etc.

I guess places like Medicine Hat and Red Deer are pretty white..lol

Same with anywhere. Canada, United States, Europe, etc.

I guess places like Medicine Hat and Red Deer are pretty white..lol

Lol,OK I meant to say some places are MORE White than others!Omaha just doesnt have as much diversity as OKC!

Lol,OK I meant to say some places are MORE White than others!Omaha just doesnt have as much diversity as OKC!

A valid point.

Im not sure if I call Omaha a competitor to OKC, OKC obviously is in a different league of cities now. The postings from the ULI were comparing convention centres in Tier III - which OKC was and still somewhat is in but making big moves to get out of [notice after 'current competitors' it shows 'target profile - all Tier II cities'. This is particularly true with the NBA in town and doing well. Omaha was included as a peer/competitor because in the convention business it is currently a competitor. However, there isn't really much competition in other areas, either city has a niche that the other doesn't compare.

Also, as far a built form - I think people on here often forget that OKC is a western city, and comparing OKC to compact Midwestern ones is as frutal as comparing LA to Chicago. OKC is more comparable to other western cities - SLC, Portland, Sacramento, Vegas, and to some extent Phoenix and Denver. These are all auto centric cities with lots of land and built form consisting of wide streets and open spaces (aside from most of Portland). These are OKC's true peer cities, western capital cities and/or western mid-sized to large cities that really boomed post WWII following LA's lead as being automobile centric.

Omaha is clearly a midwestern city with it's eyes set to Chicago. It's economy also feeds off of Chicago, explaining the large number of flights and passengers obviously going between the two. There is a reason why Omaha has a compact, urban feel in similar ways as Tulsa, Des Moines, MKE, etc - all midwestern cities eyeing Chicago type neighbourhood and CBD form. OKC is obviously different than that.

I would also say that Louisville, Nashville, Memphis, Indy, MKE, and Charlotte are Eastern peers of OKC. These cities obviously have a head start on OKC and many have a local niche - but all are comparable in population and OKC is competing with these moreso than the Tier III club of cities anymore.

So to be fair - yes Omaha has lots going for it and there are definitely some takeaways that OKC can learn from, just like OKC can learn from many other cities. But to say Omaha is a peer or competitor, I disagree because the cities are different in economic focus, built form, racial diversity, and climate.

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

I'm not so sure. Omaha has done so much in the last few years that they are every bit as "urban" as Oklahoma City. A good case could be made that they have a more urban atmosphere and they are moving right along. Yes, it's smaller, but by margins that don't make that much difference in the real world of things we discuss here.

Lists. We see these silly lists all the time, but the one that is taken seriously every year by a lot of people (and business) is the Money magazine list. In case you missed this years list - it came out last week. Take a look at the 5 Best Big Cities (and be sure to read what they say about Omaha):

"MONEY crunched the numbers on urban centers with more than 300,000 residents—63 in all. As with our Best Places list, our city rankings put a premium on a robust job market, affordable housing, and *factors such as accessibility to health care, culture, and open space. We also gave extra points to places with low crime and strong public schools and selected the top city in the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, and West."

Northeast -- Pittsburgh
Southeast - Tampa
West -------- Denver
Midwest ---- Omaha
Southwest - Mesa (Phoenix Area)

Best Places to Live 2015: The 5 Best Big U.S. Cities (http://time.com/money/3989171/best-big-cities-2015/)
Be sure to click on "show as list" so you don't have to click through one at a time.

Omaha punches above its weight and is ahead of Oklahoma City in a lot of ways. Old Market is what Bricktown could/should be if it was a people-first neighborhood instead of a cars-first neighborhood. Midtown Omaha is incredible. Omaha has done a lot of things right recently and I think they are a good example for OKC to look to as it continues to revitalize its core. To be fair, I don't think Omaha's urban core was ever in as dire condition as OKC's was in the 1990s, so in essence they were in a better position when they started.

I'm not so sure. Omaha has done so much in the last few years that they are every bit as "urban" as Oklahoma City. A good case could be made that they have a more urban atmosphere and they are moving right along. Yes, it's smaller, but by margins that don't make that much difference in the real world of things we discuss here.

Just because Omaha is just as "urban" as us doesn't mean they still compete with OKC economically or even population wise. Having said that, Omaha always seems to always have solid, healthy growth the last 10 years, much like OKC.

Just because Omaha is just as "urban" as us doesn't mean they still compete with OKC economically or even population wise. Having said that, Omaha always seems to always have solid, healthy growth the last 10 years, much like OKC.

I guess I was speaking perception-wise. Omaha has always had the same problem Oklahoma City has had when it comes to the urban atmosphere that surprises people when they visit. A lot of people here at OKCTalk, if they haven't been to Omaha would probably be surprised - much the same as we hear all the time here in OKC.

I think the Money ranking reflects the reality of a booming city. Many just don't realize.


Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City.

I don't agree with this at all. No way is Wichita or Lincoln peer cities with Omaha. People in Omaha joke about the "suburb" 45 minutes to the SW, and Omaha is leaps and bounds over Wichita. Back to Lincoln, it is definitely a nice little city in its own right, but it's no peer to Omaha.

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

Preface: I don't think OKC and Omaha are competitors for anything really. OKC is much larger and growing very fast, while in the same region we don't overlap spheres of influence, we don't compete for retailers, culturally even Omaha is very much rooted in the Midwest while OKC has a little more western flare still some MW influences though.

I do think there are a couple interesting connections that at the end of the day also don't mean much. A shared love and support of college athletics ex: WCWS/CWS Sooners and Huskers/Creighton, strong growing plains cities, both doing a lot of good stuff in the core yet still sprawling out wide, undeserved national ridicule, interesting warehouse districts, stockyard history.

When it comes to peers I think it is odd to not include SLC in the OKC peers. It is a much similar size metro and has NBA. SLC kicks ass by the way.

As for Omaha's peers. They aren't a struggling Wichita or a city like Lincoln that is a third the size. I mean Omaha is closer to OKC's metro pop than Lincoln is to Omaha's. Omaha's "peers" would probably be the likes of Madison, Tulsa, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Birmingham ect. That level just below pro sports cities.

In the end it doesn't really matter. My participation on OKCTalk was never meant to suggest that Omaha does anything better or worse than OKC. I think there is much more to be gained by learning from other places rather than competing with them. The insistent comparing of locals kind of tires me anymore. Dallas isn't a peer of Austin, but I love Austin and have trouble seeing myself in Dallas. Chicago can't hold NYC's jock, but I would much rather live in the Windy City. Live where you are happy, if you don't like your town work your ass off to make it better or find a way to get somewhere you want. Life is too short to waste in places you don't like and with people you don't like.

Preface: I don't think OKC and Omaha are competitors for anything really. OKC is much larger and growing very fast, while in the same region we don't overlap spheres of influence, we don't compete for retailers, culturally even Omaha is very much rooted in the Midwest while OKC has a little more western flare still some MW influences though.

I do think there are a couple interesting connections that at the end of the day also don't mean much. A shared love and support of college athletics ex: WCWS/CWS Sooners and Huskers/Creighton, strong growing plains cities, both doing a lot of good stuff in the core yet still sprawling out wide, undeserved national ridicule, interesting warehouse districts, stockyard history.

When it comes to peers I think it is odd to not include SLC in the OKC peers. It is a much similar size metro and has NBA. SLC kicks ass by the way.

As for Omaha's peers. They aren't a struggling Wichita or a city like Lincoln that is a third the size. I mean Omaha is closer to OKC's metro pop than Lincoln is to Omaha's. Omaha's "peers" would probably be the likes of Madison, Tulsa, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Birmingham ect. That level just below pro sports cities.

In the end it doesn't really matter. My participation on OKCTalk was never meant to suggest that Omaha does anything better or worse than OKC. I think there is much more to be gained by learning from other places rather than competing with them. The insistent comparing of locals kind of tires me anymore. Dallas isn't a peer of Austin, but I love Austin and have trouble seeing myself in Dallas. Chicago can't hold NYC's jock, but I would much rather live in the Windy City. Live where you are happy, if you don't like your town work your ass off to make it better or find a way to get somewhere you want. Life is too short to waste in places you don't like and with people you don't like.

I was hoping you would chime in. I always enjoy your Omaha Development posts in that thread. The above made some very good points.

This was kind of a fun read though. A The Oklahoman sportswriter blogged about her trip to Omaha to cover OSU for the NCAA Tournament this March. I did enjoy seeing the city through another's eyes.

Welcome to Nebraska ... where they have Arbor Day, green buildings and mobster steakhouses | News OK (http://newsok.com/welcome-to-nebraska-...-where-they-have-arbor-day-green-buildings-and-mobster-steakhouses/article/5402737)

Day 2 in Omaha: Lots more basketball than Day 1 | News OK (http://newsok.com/day-2-in-omaha-lots-more-basketball-than-day-1/article/5403089)

Day 3 in Omaha: A long run, weird 80s music and a game to cover | News OK (http://newsok.com/day-3-in-omaha-a-long-run-weird-80s-music-and-a-game-to-cover/article/5403571)

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRHX5wHtvAsewf2YFFw1pjGP3cDUUqJ 9Atnk6pLH2FzEtVlP43
Omaha hasn't gotten bigger, it has gotten better. Nebraska's largest city has done some impressive developments.

Just think about it. They built a new convention center-arena complex, baseball stadium and Midtown Crossing.


https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTdLb0KIQLMf9IUboY9mDxoUtvZiIdw1 XCrpOBTkyAPckudldoUmg
Oklahoma City voters invested in our city:


$350 million MAPS I
$700 million MAPS II for Kids (included 23 suburban school districts): https://www.okc.gov/ocmaps/
$110 million MAPS (extension) for Hoops (NBA practice facility; upgrades to Ford Center)

The previous MAPS initiatives have pumped $1.160 billion sales tax investments into Oklahoma City; that triggered close to $4 billion in additional private economic development.


$777 million MAPS III (in progress)...

The biggest difference between Oklahoma City & Omaha is that OKC is debt-free.

I don't think OKC and Omaha really compete for anything. They are far enough apart, distance-wise, that I'd say they don't really interact much. It's not like there's some company out there saying "We're gonna relocate, and it'll be either OKC or Omaha. Let's figure this one out..."

Size-wise, they're close enough. OKC is a little bigger, and has the NBA, but that's a pretty new thing. The cities aren't that different. It's not like someone from Omaha is gonna come here and feel like a country bumpkin. Honestly both cities are normal, mid-sized US cities. The difference in size and in amenities really isn't all that much, especially when you compare it to larger cities.

Old thread... back from the dead! lol

I don't think OKC and Omaha really compete for anything. They are far enough apart, distance-wise, that I'd say they don't really interact much. It's not like there's some company out there saying "We're gonna relocate, and it'll be either OKC or Omaha. Let's figure this one out..."

I agree with this. Omaha and OKC aren't really competitors. OKC's primary competitors are and always will be Tulsa and DFW.

Omaha is a peer city of OKC however and is a great example of how built environment can make a city desirable and attractive without geographical advantages such as mountains or a coast.

I agree with this. Omaha and OKC aren't really competitors. OKC's primary competitors are and always will be Tulsa and DFW.

Omaha is a peer city of OKC however and is a great example of how built environment can make a city desirable and attractive without geographical advantages such as mountains or a coast.

Just curious, do you spend a lot of time in Omaha driving and walking around? You sound pretty sure Omaha is clearly better...but then again, you seem to think all cities are better than OKC

UrbanNebraska, do you have any good images of Omaha's airport terminal and the area around it?

UrbanNebraska, do you have any good images of Omaha's airport terminal and the area around it?

I'm not UrbanNebraska, but here are a few I found very easily.
11332113331133411335

UrbanNebraska, do you have any good images of Omaha's airport terminal and the area around it?

Eppley isn't much to write home about. Its best asset is that it is really close to downtown.

http://www.flyoma.com/images/homepage/8.png
http://www.flyoma.com/images/homepage/3.png
http://www.flyoma.com/images/homepage/2.png

There is a plan for a major expansion when the passenger numbers hit certain thresholds. The first phase includes a parking garage expansion.

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/omaha.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/f/dc/fdcd1e7e-b6d2-11e4-8256-636d00f65bc5/54e388f50ac68.image.jpg

Further improvements are a long ways out. Our passenger numbers peaked pre-recession at 4.4 million and have settled around 4.2 million the last couple years. These next phases would kick in at 4.8, 5.4 and 7 million. So a long long ways off.

http://content.omaha.com/media/maps/graphics/0103lseppley.jpg
http://necoyote.ipower.com/images/random2/OmaMP2.jpg

Eppley is bad. I've flown in or out of it four times now. It's probably the worst airport I have seen.

Eppley is bad. I've flown in or out of it four times now. It's probably the worst airport I have seen.

Flying home from College Station soon. I'll sure be disappointed if Easterwood is better than Eppley!

Get to fly into Love direct on SW for that trip though, thank goodness for the Wright Amendment going away. No more pesky stops in STL.

to answer the original question titled of this forum: No. Omaha is not OKC's new competitor. OKC's size and scale is larger (or equal) in most every regard.

HOWEVER, Omaha is a great mid-sized middle-of-the-nation city that IMO packs well above its weight. Omaha seems to know how to capitalize on its strengths so much so that you don't even 'remember' its weaknesses. Omaha seems to 'get' urban living and has a better grip on downtown development than does OKC; I think OKC has more in terms of scale but Omaha's fits a downtown environment better (historic restoration, new projects built to the property line with retail on the bottom). It would be interesting to hear what Omaha is doing on the parking front? Is OKC 'alone' with developing all above grade, monster garages?

As for airport, despite arguably being worse Omaha's airport is better used than the more desireable WRWA. Some of this is expected since OMA is the ONLY major airport in NE and its catchment area is quite large going into surrounding states; not to mention OMA's primary sector requires LOTS of travel to Chicago and New York. But the one thing I do like about Omaha's airport is there is a plan to make it better/modern (like a huge Wichita airport) and not just a facelift like what we did. Something tells me that OMA will be well positioned to grow above it's 4.5M annual mark with the new terminal while OKC likely may continue to sit around 4-5M pax even with the East expansion and TSA reconfiguration; the downstairs (and back-end) is what really needs to be fixed and there is no plan for it.

One can argue over who has this or that store or bigger freeways; but I'd say that OKC's infrastructure is better all in all since OKC is a bigger city/metro even though it might be sexy if OKC's new I-40 had Omaha's 14 lanes (including HOV exits for the downtown section); now that would have been forward planning and explicative of a $660M (or whatever cost it ended up being) highway relocation. One can argue about bigger/more skyscrapers in OKC.

But my biggest takeaway from Omaha is despite being a middle city that in many ways is worse than OK/OKC, Omaha shrugs it off and packs well above its weight such that we're even having this conversation. That's what I think OKC can learn the most from Omaha - who cares there is a major city 200 miles away, be the best OKC can be and don't settle for 2nd best. Be more like Omaha - set the trend for your own self, do what will make YOU successful. OKC is doing this with MAPS but I wish the private sector and the boys-in-charge would adopt this strategy along with the civic leadership - just think if the same effort that went into getting the OKC Thunder was common place with OKC development? OKC would definitely be leagues ahead of most everywhere else around here in terms of development, quality and quantity of said development, and Omaha might be writing on their forum how they could become more like OKC (than the other way around).

to answer the original question titled of this forum: No. Omaha is not OKC's new competitor. OKC's size and scale is larger (or equal) in most every regard.

HOWEVER, Omaha is a great mid-sized middle-of-the-nation city that IMO packs well above its weight. Omaha seems to know how to capitalize on its strengths so much so that you don't even 'remember' its weaknesses. Omaha seems to 'get' urban living and has a better grip on downtown development than does OKC; I think OKC has more in terms of scale but Omaha's fits a downtown environment better (historic restoration, new projects built to the property line with retail on the bottom). It would be interesting to hear what Omaha is doing on the parking front? Is OKC 'alone' with developing all above grade, monster garages?

As for airport, despite arguably being worse Omaha's airport is better used than the more desireable WRWA. Some of this is expected since OMA is the ONLY major airport in NE and its catchment area is quite large going into surrounding states; not to mention OMA's primary sector requires LOTS of travel to Chicago and New York. But the one thing I do like about Omaha's airport is there is a plan to make it better/modern (like a huge Wichita airport) and not just a facelift like what we did. Something tells me that OMA will be well positioned to grow above it's 4.5M annual mark with the new terminal while OKC likely may continue to sit around 4-5M pax even with the East expansion and TSA reconfiguration; the downstairs (and back-end) is what really needs to be fixed and there is no plan for it.

One can argue over who has this or that store or bigger freeways; but I'd say that OKC's infrastructure is better all in all since OKC is a bigger city/metro even though it might be sexy if OKC's new I-40 had Omaha's 14 lanes (including HOV exits for the downtown section); now that would have been forward planning and explicative of a $660M (or whatever cost it ended up being) highway relocation. One can argue about bigger/more skyscrapers in OKC.

But my biggest takeaway from Omaha is despite being a middle city that in many ways is worse than OK/OKC, Omaha shrugs it off and packs well above its weight such that we're even having this conversation. That's what I think OKC can learn the most from Omaha - who cares there is a major city 200 miles away, be the best OKC can be and don't settle for 2nd best. Be more like Omaha - set the trend for your own self, do what will make YOU successful. OKC is doing this with MAPS but I wish the private sector and the boys-in-charge would adopt this strategy along with the civic leadership - just think if the same effort that went into getting the OKC Thunder was common place with OKC development? OKC would definitely be leagues ahead of most everywhere else around here in terms of development, quality and quantity of said development, and Omaha might be writing on their forum how they could become more like OKC (than the other way around).

I completely agree with this.

Other than live music (which OKC should improve in drastically within the next few years) and better retail, I can't really think of actual amenities Omaha has that OKC doesn't. The difference is the way those amenities are packaged in Omaha. They really have the urban design and placemaking thing down. They have done a better job, in my opinion, of building a city for people instead of for cars. While OKC was building Lower Bricktown, Omaha was building Midtown Crossing.

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/02/8b/33/ec/filename-36539-101004190366892.jpg

http://www.midtowncrossing.com/Post/sections/72/Images/Jazz01.jpg

Honestly, Midtown Crossing doesn't have anything OKC doesn't have. Myriad Gardens is a much nicer urban gathering place in my opinion than Turner Park. However, the way its packaged together in such a compact, cohesive urban setting creates an amazing vibe and is something for OKC to strive for. There is mixed-use development including retail and luxury housing surrounding Turner Park. Why not front Myriad Gardens with retail and housing? Like the canal, Myriad Gardens is such a valuable asset that isn't being used to its potential.

What OKC really needs to do is create a vision for what kind of downtown the city wants and then put standards into place to guide development in that direction. Variances should not be granted. Downtown OKC needs to be a human-centered environment. Something like Lower Bricktown should not be allowed to happen again. The city needs to stop accepting mediocre developments that detract from the overall vision of a more vibrant, urban downtown, which the city has a long history of doing for one reason or another. A lot of people here and on OKCTalk understand that but things will not change until City Hall and people with weight like Larry Nichols understand it.

Omaha seems nice and underrated, from what I'm able to discern.
Hopefully I can make it up there one day.

I will say this: it'll be cities like Omaha that pressure and even catch right up to OKC if OKC doesn't keep it's momentum over the coming years. Again, from what I'm able to discern here and browsing around about it.

Omaha doesn't stand a chance catching up with OKC, not now not never

Omaha doesn't stand a chance catching up with OKC, not now not never

Likely so for OKC, if it keeps growing at the same rate, but if anybody said the same thing about Tulsa in 1990 or 2000, he or she got proven wrong.

Competitor for what?

What defines “catching up?”

Omaha doesn't stand a chance catching up with OKC, not now not never
Omaha has 4 Fortune 500 companies, Berkshire Hathaway, Mutual of Omaha, Union Pacific Corporation and Kiewit Corporation. Also, Omaha is home to five Fortune 1000 companies which include TD Ameritrade, Valmont Industries, Werner Enterprises , Green Plains, and Intrado. Omaha has a worldwide fantastic zoo, Henry Doorly along with an aquarium ranked in the Top 5. Even though the population of Omaha is not as large as OKC, it seems to have a lot more corporate headquarters and companies doing business in Omaha. It seems that OKC is the one that needs to catch up!

Source wikipedia.

Omaha has 4 Fortune 500 companies, Berkshire Hathaway, Mutual of Omaha, Union Pacific Corporation and Kiewit Corporation. Also, Omaha is home to five Fortune 1000 companies which include TD Ameritrade, Valmont Industries, Werner Enterprises , Green Plains, and Intrado. Omaha has a worldwide fantastic zoo, Henry Doorly along with an aquarium ranked in the Top 5. Even though the population of Omaha is not as large as OKC, it seems to have a lot more corporate headquarters and companies doing business in Omaha. It seems that OKC is the one that needs to catch up!

Source wikipedia.

Omaha also has a better art museum in the Joslyn.

Omaha has 4 Fortune 500 companies, Berkshire Hathaway, Mutual of Omaha, Union Pacific Corporation and Kiewit Corporation. Also, Omaha is home to five Fortune 1000 companies which include TD Ameritrade, Valmont Industries, Werner Enterprises , Green Plains, and Intrado. Omaha has a worldwide fantastic zoo, Henry Doorly along with an aquarium ranked in the Top 5. Even though the population of Omaha is not as large as OKC, it seems to have a lot more corporate headquarters and companies doing business in Omaha. It seems that OKC is the one that needs to catch up!

Source wikipedia.
Not to mention their medical system, which is turning into a monster.

Nm,

Omaha doesn't stand a chance catching up with OKC, not now not never

The last post on this thread was seven years ago.


Love to see other American cities improving, especially in terms of new urbanism. Omaha is a city hope to visit in the near future along with Des Moines.

If there is any competition with OKC (which is hard to see) that's a good thing. We always need to be upping our game.

The last post on this thread was seven years ago.


Love to see other American cities improving, especially in terms of new urbanism. Omaha is a city hope to visit in the near future along with Des Moines.

If there is any competition with OKC (which is hard to see) that's a good thing. We always need to be upping our game.


Thank you for your sense of discernment, Pete.

Just clicked on this thread because I assumed there must be some new news, otherwise why "reopen" something like this long since forgotten?

I find that I don't understand the meaning of the word "compete" in the context of these discussions. Omaha and OKC aren't really in the same orbits. I would assume Omaha positions itself alongside Kansas City, Des Moines, maybe Minneapolis, the Midwest cities with whom it shares more population patterns and history. I can't believe that Omaha and OKC are really ever "competing" for very many things.

I will say this. I've only ever driven through Omaha (twice), so have little experience with the town proper, but in the last ten years of work in three different fields (health care, hospitality, franchise development) I have encountered many more corporate "players" at conferences and the like in all three fields from Omaha than from OKC. Looking at their corporate headquarters and economic vitality, I would say Omaha punches above the weight of what its population would suggest.

OKC is the larger city and has some strengths but Omaha continues to innovate and grow and good for them. As Pete says, we should always be looking at what other cities are doing. There are always lessons that can be learned.

I saw the old thread and I have a lot of family in Omaha and Sioux City so I thought I would talk some smack about Omaha.

It gets so cold in Omaha in the winter and it sticks around.

Our new downtown parks renovation is the same architect as Myriad Gardens, our new tallest tower is the same architect as Devon Tower, and our new streetcar will connect our Midtown to our warehouse district.

I wouldn't imagine that we are directly competing for all that many jobs or people, but we may be copying your notes a bit.

Omaha and Oklahoma City:


https://www.unmc.edu/psychiatry/residency/Omaha-Daytime.jpg
Omaha (4 Fortune 500 companies) Riverfront Park (72 acres)


https://okcfox.com/resources/media2/16x9/full/1015/center/80/ae6a672b-ba89-40b3-a75c-032daa1c50e2-large16x9_GettyImages1200022459.jpg
Oklahoma City (2 Fortune 500 companies) Scissortail Park (70 acres)


NBA Oklahoma City Thunder: Valuation - 1.63 billion U.S. dollars

The difference population wise is Omaha and Oklahoma City is one city boasts MSA population of 971,637 and the other 1,441,647; with inner city populations of 487,300 and 687,725 respectively.

Omaha's Charter established a Mayor-Council form of government, with an elected Mayor as chief executive and an elected legislative body known as the City Council.

Omaha's Revenue:

Revenue is responsible for the daily administration of the General Fund, Debt Service Fund, special revenue funds, and general obligation bond funds. The division also coordinates the City's centralized billing procedures, and collects monies pertaining to permits, fees, licenses, various taxes, and other miscellaneous revenues that are not assigned to the City Treasurer by law. It also collects fines for non-moving Traffic Code violations, including parking tickets and administers the Keno-Lottery game.


What is the sales tax rate in Omaha, Nebraska?

The minimum combined 2022 sales tax rate for Omaha, Nebraska is 7%. This is the total of state, county and city sales tax rates. The Nebraska sales tax rate is currently 5.5%. The County sales tax rate is 0%. The Omaha sales tax rate is 1.5%.


Oklahoma City has a Council-Manager government. This form of government combines the strong political leadership of elected officials with the strong managerial experience of an appointed manager. All authority to set policy rests with a nonpartisan Mayor and City Council.

Oklahoma City's Revenue:

Sales tax (4.125%) is the primary source of revenue for the City of OKC's General Fund, which pays for the City's day-to-day operations. Use tax is also an important source of revenue.

Oklahoma City's overall sales tax rate, which stays the same under MAPS 4, is 8.625% (8.975% in Canadian County and 8.875% in Cleveland County, because of county sales taxes). Of that, 4.125% belongs to the City. The rest belongs to the state or county.

MAPS penny sales tax Initiatives: By funding the projects with a limited term, one-cent sales tax, the projects were built debt free. The U.S. Conference of Mayors noted, “Using a pay-as-you-go structure allowed Oklahoma City to build world-class facilities without the burden of debt for future generations and city leaders. Oklahoma City citizens made the historic decision to invest their own money in the city they called home.”

Attractions:

Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo and Aquarium (Area: 130 acres): 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. daily The Zoo is open year-round except Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Face masks are encouraged.


Admission: Adults (ages 12 and over): $29.95
Children (ages 3-11): $22.95
Seniors (65 and over): $28.95
Children (2 and under): FREE
Military Adult (12 and over): $28.95
Military Child (ages 3-11): $21.95

Oklahoma City Zoo & Botanical Gardens (Area: 130 acres):


Adult Ticket Price: $28 (ages 12-64)
Child Ticket Price: $25 (ages 3-11) Children two and under are FREE, a ticket is required for entry.
Senior Ticket Price: $25 (ages 65 and older)
The Oklahoma City Zoo offers a 50% discount on general admission to military members
and up to 4 family members with valid military ID.


Omaha's NCAA Men's College World Series ($88.3 million)


Entering Saturday’s Game 1 of the College World Series Final, the men’s College World Series was averaging 1.04 million viewers across the ESPN family of networks — up 17% from last year. That includes an audience of 1.35 million for Mississippi-Arkansas on Wednesday, the largest for the men’s CWS prior to the Final since 2018 (Oregon State-Mississippi State: 1.57M).


Oklahoma City's NCAA Women's College World Series ( $25 million economic impact)


ESPN’s viewership, according to a company spokesperson, has been consistently strong for much of the past decade. Last year, when the University of Oklahoma won its fourth title in the past decade, full series viewership was 1.2 million and the best-of-three finals was watched by an average of 1.9 million people. Those figures were 12% and 16% higher, respectively, than in 2019 — and 41% and 34% above 2018.

.

those and perhaps airports are the only areas where OKC and Omaha are competitors. Otherwise, Tulsa is more of a competitor to Omaha than OKC.