Completely different scenario.

They have simply given their money as a sponsorship deal with the Ballpark.

To operate any sort of casino or other tribal owned enterprise, they must be on tribal owned land. There is no tribal owned land of any sort in OKC proper, or the vast majority of Oklahoma and Cleveland County for that matter.

Not just tribal owned land. A tribe can own land outside of their national boundaries or even inside but not in trust. But then that land has no special status and all state and local laws apply. The Chickasaw tribe owns Remington Park but Remington is still not an Indian Gaming site, all state laws regarding gambling apply there. The tribe is simply the owner.

A tribal casino has to on BIA reserved land and reserved land has to be within the tribes national boundaries. A tribe can apply to change those, but it’s highly unlikely to succeed. The tribe would have to show a strong historical link to the land to even make the application. Oklahoma City is not inside of any tribe national boundaries. Maybe the Kiowa or Wichita tribes could show such a link. Probably no other tribes could.

Great information everyone!

Well Panda, if you actually read what I've said... you'll see in fact see I haven't left Chisholm Creek out. I even said I wouldn't be surprised if they were able to get their act together before Glimcher and land a Trader Joe's there.

I'd love to see your list. Post it an a separate thread though. Brookside is the only place that boasts "high-end" retail huh? Guess Utica Square doesn't count right?

If your standards are that high after living in almighty Dallas... then you'd think everything in Oklahoma sucks including Western and Chisholm Creek. Addison Circle and Legacy Park are two examples that are considerably nicer and more urban than Chisholm Creek will be.and if you read my post, you would see that I specifically stated "one of" which refers to their being a few places around Tulsa.

Yes, after coming from a city like Dallas that higher standards than a city like Tulsa, which is full of itself and quite frankly one of the sh!ttiest, most depressing cities I've ever been to, I would say I have that right to have higher standards that what Tulsa offers.

With Film Row, Core To Shore, Nichols Hills Plaza area(Glimcher, Classen Curve), Penn Square(which is a ton better than Woodland Hills yet still an average mall), Midtown, Deep Deuce, a CBD that actually has some life, not great, but its something compared to Tulsa which pretty much dies unless there's a concert at the glorified BOK Center, Auto Alley, Boathouse Row, Capitol Hill, Quail Springs area, Campus Corner in Norman, the up and coming downtown Edmond/UCO area, OUHSC, Adventure District, NW 23rd, up and coming east side, Bricktown, Paseo, Stockyards, Plaza District, Sosa, and eventually Linwood BLVD. connecting with May and the area around the fairgrounds. There is no comparison.

Tulsa has what? Brookside, Blue Dome, Cherry St. Brady District, CBD, Utica Square... I'm missing a couple I think.

Yeah, I'd consider Tulsa a competitor to OKC right now. At current trends and assuming realistically increased growth for both cities, 5 years the debate is over and OKC will be almost unrecognizable, 10 years the city is unrecognizable and we'll be widening I-44 to six lanes to handle all of the people coming from Tulsa for a weekend getaway... 20 years? Well, comparing OKC to Tulsa would be like comparing OKC to Houston.

Give me a break. Tulsa sucks.

BTW, OKC is far from a perfect city. There is still tons of blight that needs to be addressed, but it is changing and I suspect the current change will induce even faster change in the future. Tulsa has some nice projects going on, but they are nowhere near the vast size and scope of what is occurring here.

I hope you are right, PluPan. I want to play devil's advocate here though. One thing that always comes up in these OKC vs Tulsa debates is where OKC will be compared to Tulsa in five or ten years. Right now, in 2014, the one thing that clearly sets OKC ahead of Tulsa is having an NBA team. Outside of that, its much more evenly matched and Tulsa is still ahead in a few key areas.

Once we see the following in place.

-Current commercial and residential development proposals in place
-Film Row, Capitol Hill, and the Wheeler District developed
-Infill to critical mass in Midtown
-Quality grocery store in the urban core of OKC
-Improved retail scene
-MAPS3 projects complete including streetcar and convention center

THEN it will be indisputable to say that OKC a tier above Tulsa. It will be interesting to revisit this debate in 2020 to see how things played out.

Do you think Tulsa (or Dallas) would have the reservations and debates that are going on about Preftakes and Clayco or would they embrace them without regard to the buildings they are replacing?

Do you think Tulsa (or Dallas) would have the reservations and debates that are going on about Preftakes and Clayco or would they embrace them without regard to the buildings they are replacing?

It wouldn't suprise me. I'm not sure about Tulsa, but Dallas isn't exactly the most conservative city out here in terms of saving old buildings.

Considering Tulsa is the "Parking Lot Capital of America", it would not surprise me at all.

I believe the Dallas newspaper recently had an article about the loss of old buildings in downtown. And not to pile on Tulsa too much, but I can imagine they would be hyped about the projects, if only to rub in OKC's face.

The comments here crack me up. They are not objective what so ever.

Motley, people it Tulsa are actually happy for Oklahoma City, but at the same time wishing they could somehow complete these projects in a more urban manner. No matter what you all think.. what is good for one city is good for the other. The majority of Tulsan on TulsaNow and what I've spoke to in person about these developments are glad nothing like this is happening in our downtown. We have so far done a great job at not demoing the building stock we have left for new development. If we could just run Kanbar out of Tulsa the downtown office market would take off, that group is a mess so be thankful you don't have anyone like that involved in Downtown OKC.

Panda, you are missing several areas. I thought you come to Tulsa all the time? And know exactly how ****ty it is? If you really do (as I suspect you don't) then you could speak to your prejudice against Tulsa in a more tactful and believable way, instead of coming off insecure and jealous. It's just a Trader Joe's - the sky isn't falling.

To say the CBD has no life is a joke. When's the last time you were there again (tell the truth)? Boston Avenue has a presence unlike any other in the state. There has been so many new retailers in the CBD in the last year that they had to cancel the annual "pop-up shops" during Christmas because there is no retail space left. You have the Blue Dome, East Village, Brady Arts District, and the SOBO areas all in the downtown core that are full of all types of retail. There is also approximately 1,000 housing units that will be under construction and complete by the end of 2016. There's also several out of state developers circling the downtown area looking to add 200-400 units each, so that number could easily increase to closer to 2,000 if any can acquire the land needed.

Tulsa has a really interesting developing neighborhood called the Pearl District just outside of the downtown core. Cherry Street is also slowing running over, and you're seeing interest grow on 15th Street east of the Broken Arrow Expressway. Brookside, the main section of Cherry Street, and Utica Square are obviously the well established urban areas outside of downtown. Woodland Hills still has the state's nicest and largest Dillard's and nicest Macy's. Woodland Hills and Penn Square are both basically the same square feet, but Penn Square does have high sales per square foot. I could honestly care less about mall's though, as I rarely visit them and if I go I generally go to a department store (Macys, Dillards, Von Maur) and leave as fast as I can. Who brags about malls anyways? No one. Because they are obsolete and a dying segment of American real estate.

I'd also rather spend that money you think will be spent to widen I-44 to 6 lanes on high speed rail between the cities. If you really think that in 20 years comparing OKC and Tulsa will be like comparing OKC and Houston now... well I'd love to have whatever you are smoking because it must be very strong.

I wouldn't get too high on new developments that haven't stated in either city. The oil bubble has seemingly burst and the Saudi's are intended on killing new exploration in the US to preserve their own market share. With the added ancillary benefit of hurting Syria, Iran and Russia.

The comments here crack me up. They are not objective what so ever.

Motley, people it Tulsa are actually happy for Oklahoma City, but at the same time wishing they could somehow complete these projects in a more urban manner. No matter what you all think.. what is good for one city is good for the other. The majority of Tulsan on TulsaNow and what I've spoke to in person about these developments are glad nothing like this is happening in our downtown. We have so far done a great job at not demoing the building stock we have left for new development. If we could just run Kanbar out of Tulsa the downtown office market would take off, that group is a mess so be thankful you don't have anyone like that involved in Downtown OKC.

Panda, you are missing several areas. I thought you come to Tulsa all the time? And know exactly how ****ty it is? If you really do (as I suspect you don't) then you could speak to your prejudice against Tulsa in a more tactful and believable way, instead of coming off insecure and jealous. It's just a Trader Joe's - the sky isn't falling.

To say the CBD has no life is a joke. When's the last time you were there again (tell the truth)? Boston Avenue has a presence unlike any other in the state. There has been so many new retailers in the CBD in the last year that they had to cancel the annual "pop-up shops" during Christmas because there is no retail space left. You have the Blue Dome, East Village, Brady Arts District, and the SOBO areas all in the downtown core that are full of all types of retail. There is also approximately 1,000 housing units that will be under construction and complete by the end of 2016. There's also several out of state developers circling the downtown area looking to add 200-400 units each, so that number could easily increase to closer to 2,000 if any can acquire the land needed.

Tulsa has a really interesting developing neighborhood called the Pearl District just outside of the downtown core. Cherry Street is also slowing running over, and you're seeing interest grow on 15th Street east of the Broken Arrow Expressway. Brookside, the main section of Cherry Street, and Utica Square are obviously the well established urban areas outside of downtown. Woodland Hills still has the state's nicest and largest Dillard's and nicest Macy's. Woodland Hills and Penn Square are both basically the same square feet, but Penn Square does have high sales per square foot. I could honestly care less about mall's though, as I rarely visit them and if I go I generally go to a department store (Macys, Dillards, Von Maur) and leave as fast as I can. Who brags about malls anyways? No one. Because they are obsolete and a dying segment of American real estate.

I'd also rather spend that money you think will be spent to widen I-44 to 6 lanes on high speed rail between the cities. If you really think that in 20 years comparing OKC and Tulsa will be like comparing OKC and Houston now... well I'd love to have whatever you are smoking because it must be very strong.Tulsa sucks. I go there about 2-3 times a month. I hate it and can't wait to leave when I'm there.

Oh, I forgot the Pearl District... knew I forgot one. Oh, and it sucks ass.

Oh, I forgot the Pearl District... knew I forgot one. Oh, and it sucks ass.

Come on, if you are going to troll you can do better than that.

Come on, if you are going to troll you can do better than that.Dude, are you seriously saying the Pearl District is a good district? It's almost as if when you're driving, there's a single sign that says beer and that's it. All you really see on Google. It's even worse in person. Not trolling bro, I don't do that. There are very few cities I dislike and Tulsa is one of them.

"My team is better than your team."

"My team is better than your team."
Damn straight. If you believe the other team is better than yours, do you think you'd win?

Come on, if you are going to troll you can do better than that.

Seriously. This is the internet though, so troll on Panda.


Dude, are you seriously saying the Pearl District is a good district? It's almost as if when you're driving, there's a single sign that says beer and that's it. All you really see on Google. It's even worse in person. Not trolling bro, I don't do that. There are very few cities I dislike and Tulsa is one of them.

Forgot one? You missed the Blue Dome, Brady, East Village, SOBO. Here's a few more for you Kendall Whittier, Red Fork, and Route 66.

Feel free to Google Streetview them ... oh I mean "visit them/Tulsa 2-3 times a month"

If you've actually visited the Pearl you would know there is more than a building with a Beer sign. It has one of the states nicer urban parks, nearly 100 townhouses that sell for over $300K, and almost a dozen new retailers at 6th and Peoria with several others in the planning stages.

Damn straight. If you believe the other team is better than yours, do you think you'd win?

I know you are young and have made a number of serious mistakes.

When do you choose to grow up?

Damn straight. If you believe the other team is better than yours, do you think you'd win?

Nobody cares how much you hate Tulsa. I don't see what makes Tulsa vastly different from most other mid sized American cities, but perhaps there is something that only you can see that is truly awful about it.

If you have to go on complaining about Tulsa, you should do it in a more intelligent way than simply declaring that everything just "sucks."

Seriously. This is the internet though, so troll on Panda.



Forgot one? You missed the Blue Dome, Brady, East Village, SOBO. Here's a few more for you Kendall Whittier, Red Fork, and Route 66.

Feel free to Google Streetview them ... oh I mean "visit them/Tulsa 2-3 times a month"

If you've actually visited the Pearl you would know there is more than a building with a Beer sign. It has one of the states nicer urban parks, nearly 100 townhouses that sell for over $300K, and almost a dozen new retailers at 6th and Peoria with several others in the planning stages.

Yeah, I would hardly consider those real districts, but whatever. In that case, I'll go ahead and list a ton more "districts" tomorrow when I wake up.

I know you are young and have made a number of serious mistakes.

When do you choose to grow up?

Define "growing up." I could be 60, and I'll still be what society considers "growing up."

Nobody cares how much you hate Tulsa. I don't see what makes Tulsa vastly different from most other mid sized American cities, but perhaps there is something that only you can see that is truly awful about it.

If you have to go on complaining about Tulsa, you should do it in a more intelligent way than simply declaring that everything just "sucks."

No one cares? Well, I somehow disagree with that. I have landarchepoke who is going out of his/her way to come up with insignificant districts, some of which are ghetto af, and for whatever reason is trying to say I never visit Tulsa, which is fine. I don't have to prove myself. People don't want to believe me, I could care less. The thing is, I find it funny how this guy seems to think Brookside is better than Western. On street view it might look nice, in person, it's a pretty small stretch of semi dense development and that's it. Then he flat out lies and says I missed Brady and Blue Dome, which those districts are garbage as well aside from a couple nice venues.

You want me to go in depth on Tulsa, I will tomorrow, even though I already have and no one was able to say anything or " chose not to."

No one cares? Well, I somehow disagree with that. I have landarchepoke who is going out of his/her way to come up with insignificant districts, some of which are ghetto af, and for whatever reason is trying to say I never visit Tulsa, which is fine. I don't have to prove myself. People don't want to believe me, I could care less. The thing is, I find it funny how this guy seems to think Brookside is better than Western. On street view it might look nice, in person, it's a pretty small stretch of semi dense development and that's it. Then he flat out lies and says I missed Brady and Blue Dome, which those districts are garbage as well aside from a couple nice venues.

You want me to go in depth on Tulsa, I will tomorrow, even though I already have and no one was able to say anything or " chose not to."

I don't understand the personal thing you have against Tulsa. And that's what it is, some kind of personal bias against the city. It isn't rooted in fact. If you think that the Brady, Brookside and Cherry Street districts suck, then that's your opinion, but it isn't reality, especially in comparison to OKC.

The lack of disrespect you have for other people is incredible. Conduct yourself respectfully and others might consider what you have to say.

Well, I'm the one he was attempting to argue with regarding Brookside, and I just want to be on the record that I really like Brookside. I'll also stipulate that for the short stretch that is primary Brookside, it IS better than Western. He's just completely missing my point, probably because he's wearing his Tulsey glasses.

My point is that if you are willing to look at the much longer stretch of developed Western as an aggregate, it's pretty comparable from an amenities standpoint. In either place you'll have to use a car to get from one location to the next, so what does it really matter? Frankly, because of this sprawl Western has more longterm potential, due to much greater infill opportunities. But no question, Brookside currently (and for decades) enjoys much more development and sense of place if you look at a compact area.

That said, none of it is really walkable in the urbanist sense, and the idea that it has a "street wall," as mentioned in a previous post in the Trader Joe's thread, is laughable. At best it is a really great suburban-type strip. Sometimes people talk about it in reverent tones like it's a great urban district, and that is a MASSIVE stretch.

What I personally dislike about Tulsa is the fact that people there continually assert its superiority above OKC. That has given me a strong distaste for the place. I will concede that Tulsa is ahead of OKC in a lot of ways. Their greater urban core is a good deal ahead and more developed (though actual downtown OKC is ahead of actual downtown Tulsa). Their Gathering Place park looks like it will blow OKC's Central Park out of the water. Tulsa has done a better job in some areas of placemaking and beautification than OKC has. Of course, Tulsa completely dominates in terms of live music and concerts. They have the retail edge as well at all levels from high-end down to grocery stores. Tulsa already has by far the best museums in the state and it will be even better if they get the pop culture museum. Tulsa's casino-resorts make the ones in the OKC area look tiny.

What Tulsa does NOT have is an NBA team. What they are NOT is a true big league city like Memphis, Jacksonville, Austin, or Charlotte despite the fact they think they are. Tulsa still compares pretty unfavorably to those major cities in other states. When Tulsans try to say they are the Dallas of Oklahoma its difficult to take them seriously. They also are NOT significantly more sophisticated and cosmopolitan than OKC is despite what they think. It's important for OKC to not use Tulsa as its measuring stick of what a great mid-sized city should be because it falls very short.

As for the future, their growth and proposed projects are on a level much lower than what OKC has been experiencing. Providing the bottom doesn't fall out of the local economy, in 5-10 years OKC will be in a league above Tulsa.

What I personally dislike about Tulsa is the fact that people there continually assert its superiority above OKC. That has given me a strong distaste for the place. I will concede that Tulsa is ahead of OKC in a lot of ways. Their greater urban core is a good deal ahead and more developed (though actual downtown OKC is ahead of actual downtown Tulsa). Their Gathering Place park looks like it will blow OKC's Central Park out of the water. Tulsa has done a better job in some areas of placemaking and beautification than OKC has. Of course, Tulsa completely dominates in terms of live music and concerts. They have the retail edge as well at all levels from high-end down to grocery stores. Tulsa already has by far the best museums in the state and it will be even better if they get the pop culture museum. Tulsa's casino-resorts make the ones in the OKC area look tiny.

What Tulsa does NOT have is an NBA team. What they are NOT is a true big league city like Memphis, Jacksonville, Austin, or Charlotte despite the fact they think they are. Tulsa still compares pretty unfavorably to those major cities in other states. When Tulsans try to say they are the Dallas of Oklahoma its difficult to take them seriously. They also are NOT significantly more sophisticated and cosmopolitan than OKC is despite what they think. It's important for OKC to not use Tulsa as its measuring stick of what a great mid-sized city should be because it falls very short.

As for the future, their growth and proposed projects are on a level much lower than what OKC has been experiencing. Providing the bottom doesn't fall out of the local economy, in 5-10 years OKC will be in a league above Tulsa.

Why does it bother you so much that someone that has chosen to live in another city thinks that city may be superior in ways to another city that you have chosen to live in? Isn't that part of the way you decide where to live? Why is that bad or threatening? I would kind of assume that nearly all or at least most people that have chosen to live in Oklahoma City feel they have made the right choice and that for them it's the better city. Talk about inferiority complex.

Well, I'm the one he was attempting to argue with regarding Brookside, and I just want to be on the record that I really like Brookside. I'll also stipulate that for the short stretch that is primary Brookside, it IS better than Western. He's just completely missing my point, probably because he's wearing his Tulsey glasses.

My point is that if you are willing to look at the much longer stretch of developed Western as an aggregate, it's pretty comparable from an amenities standpoint. In either place you'll have to use a car to get from one location to the next, so what does it really matter? Frankly, because of this sprawl Western has more longterm potential, due to much greater infill opportunities. But no question, Brookside currently (and for decades) enjoys much more development and sense of place if you look at a compact area.

That said, none of it is really walkable in the urbanist sense, and the idea that it has a "street wall," as mentioned in a previous post in the Trader Joe's thread, is laughable. At best it is a really great suburban-type strip. Sometimes people talk about it in reverent tones like it's a great urban district, and that is a MASSIVE stretch.

Then why not look at a longer stretch of Peoria for the Brookside District? You want to consider three miles of Western Ave to three blocks of Peoria, but most people actually consider Brookside to extend from 31st all the way to I-44, the 33rd to 36th section is just the core of the area.

Honestly, I know very few OKC folks who dislike Tulsa. Personally I love spending time there. I have lots of friends there, favorite haunts, etc.. In a lot of ways it feels like part of the same community in which I live.

I think if anything OKC residents are puzzled and irritated by the negative attitude many Tulsans have toward OKC. But that is an attitude that comes from many decades of ingrained cultural arrogance, which was sometimes even deserved. I think many Tulsans are getting past that now and are recognizing that OKC has great momentum and some advantages here and there, just as Tulsa does.

Part of Tulsa's problem is that people there have long felt that they have already arrived and are defensive when others think they have a ways to go. And, after years of feeling superior to OKC they are particularly defensive when compared. Tulsa has under achieved for decades now and only recently have allowed themselves to admit they need to step up their game. Places like Brookside are quaint, but not exactly a leader in cool urban. It has some cool little bookstores and restaurants, but also lots of surface parking, stretches of neglect and tiredness. Hopefully, TJs, the park and some other things will help it actually become as cool as Tulsans think it already is.

Why does it bother you so much that someone that has chosen to live in another city thinks that city may be superior in ways to another city that you have chosen to live in? Isn't that part of the way you decide where to live? Why is that bad or threatening? I would kind of assume that nearly all or at least most people that have chosen to live in Oklahoma City feel they have made the right choice and that for them it's the better city. Talk about inferiority complex.

It's the old saying "Tulsa class...OKC trash." I get tired of hearing how much better Tulsa is all the time. Even people living in OKC who are from Tulsa (there are more and more all the time) feel the need to point out that Tulsa is better in casual conversation. Urbanized is correct in that most people in OKC have a positive impression of Tulsa. Many take regular trips up there for shopping, nightlife, parks, live music, the casinos, etc. Why then do people in Tulsa have to run down OKC as a backwards, uncultured cowtown? Having read many of your posts on City-Data Swake, I know you are guilty of that probably more than anyone.

Then why not look at a longer stretch of Peoria for the Brookside District? You want to consider three miles of Western Ave to three blocks of Peoria, but most people actually consider Brookside to extend from 31st all the way to I-44, the 33rd to 36th section is just the core of the area.

OMG, when did I ever say 3 blocks? Or that Western was better? If you're confining it to 3 blocks that must mean that YOU think that's the only part worth talking about. I even said that I would stipulate that Brookside is currently much better-developed. My only point was to say that there were reasonable comparisons to be made, though Western was much more sprawled out.

Here, let me just admit that Brookside is one of the coolest districts in America. Dramatically urban, brimming with culture. Best street wall this side of Manhattan. Every city should be jealous and use it as the new standard for urban development. On its best day Western is a weak (and failed) attempt at imitation, and will never, EVER reach the apex of cool upon which Brookside rests. There...have you and the other guy recovered from your butthurt yet? Jesus.

Honestly, it's a nice little old-city suburban-style commercial strip, near some other delightful stuff. It's worth going to, and worth being happy to have, but still could use some work. Good grief.

By the way, the type of work that I'm referring to is the type that will hopefully soon be done on Western Avenue, as the City of OKC just accepted a streetscape plan from the OU Institute for Quality Communities. Should give Western a major shot in the arm, and I would expect to see more development quickly follow, as it did streetscapes in places like Automobile Alley and Plaza District. Hopefully one day Western will be 10% as amazing as Brookside.

http://iqc.ou.edu/project/western

Honestly I think the negative attitude Tulsans have is in most of your heads. You've all told yourselves that for so long you believe it. I have not said one negative thing about OKC. Honestly to me the cities are so different it's hard to compare them. We both have similar neighborhoods (Western - Brookside) but they really aren't anything alike. I just simply compared and showed facts, everyone else seems to just spout off and say it's "fact" "so in so is better than so and so". It's not a fact, it's an opinion. Brookside is denser than Western, that's a fact. Does that mean you like Brookside better? No, you don't have to. Western has a different charm to it, as most of it is 2 lanes and it has the pockets of retail. Brookside is more commercialized, and outside of that denser area from 41st to 31st, it's rather suburban and ordinary arterial street. I happen to have a fondness for Brookside because I did grow up in Tulsa, and it was really my escape from the suburbs. My friends and I would always go to the coffee houses and stroll the different retailers then walk over to Riverparks in my high school years (this was back in the day when the CBD was in fact dead, as Spaghetti Warehouse was pretty much it in the Brady). This was again started by posters on here that instead of being excited a new retailer is entering the State, started bemoaning themselves. Wake up and realize there is no attitude from the other side of the turnpike and be happy about where you live.

I actually love OKC, and the fact when you look at both cities they complement each other very well. I love everything that is going on in the Midtown - AA Alley area. I happen to frequent the food truck park as well as Elemental Coffee (one of my favorite coffee places outside of Foolish Things in Tulsa). You all should spend more time talking about how amazing the State of Oklahoma is with Tulsa and OKC's neighborhoods. How many state's when you put up both OKC/Tulsa against has as many cool things? If we can ever get the state on the same page we could do a lot of great things.

Here are a few things I think makes OKC great...

1. Your mayor. Hands done he has done a great job, and he's really helped change a lot of misnomers about OKC nationally.
2. Bricktown was really were the downtown renaissance in the State started. It does a great job of bring in tourism to the city as well.
3. NBA team because it has in a media standpoint brought a lot of attention to the city.
4. Universities, with UCO, OCU, OU all in the metro area OKC see in influx of young professionals that many cities can only dream they had.

There’s more, but I’m not going to continue to list them off. Get the point? Be proud of your city, and do it in a positive way. Doing it negatively and trying to tell every other city how much they suck just makes you look like you have the complex. There’s probably a reason way a Tulsan has given you attitude (if they in fact have), because I would imagine you told them something about how their city sucks which no one enjoys.

OMG, when did I ever say 3 blocks? Or that Western was better? If you're confining it to 3 blocks that must mean that YOU think that's the only part worth talking about. I even said that I would stipulate that Brookside is currently much better-developed. My only point was to say that there were reasonable comparisons to be made, though Western was much more sprawled out.

Here, let me just admit that Brookside is one of the coolest districts in America. Dramatically urban, brimming with culture. Best street wall this side of Manhattan. Every city should be jealous and use it as the new standard for urban development. On its best day Western is a weak (and failed) attempt at imitation, and will never, EVER reach the apex of cool upon which Brookside rests. There...have you and the other guy recovered from your butthurt yet? Jesus.

Honestly, it's a nice little old-city suburban-style commercial strip, near some other delightful stuff. It's worth going to, and worth being happy to have, but still could use some work. Good grief.

Here are a few quotes from you. By the way, you were the one who out of the blue started trashing Brookside. As always, it's someone on here that starts bashing Tulsa and then someone try's to say come back to reality and then everyone goes well Tulsa's just snobby.

"If Western's amenities were more compact and not stretched 36th to Wilshire it would frankly be superior. They're both good places as far as strips are concerned, but let's not get carried away with the Brookside platitudes."

- If you took Brookside from I-44 and 37th and condensed them in a more walk-able format, you can say the same thing. You'd triple the size of that small urban section. If you took OKC and condensed everything, the city would be as walk-able as Portland... see how that doesn't make an argument?

"But that doesn't disagree with the point I made. Western has similar (and in some cases superior) amenities"

- This is when I compared the two densest areas. I was just wondering where the superior amenities were? If you like the more cozy feeling of Western vs. Brookside, fine. That's something based in reality, and is your opinion. See?

"Brookside certainly isn't dense/walkable in an urbanist sense"

If we are judging everything by this, then the entire State of Oklahoma is a wasteland compared to a true urban experience. Let's come back to reality, and admit that Brookside (for Oklahoma/Texas standards of urban) is very walk-able. Compared to NY, DC, Chicago, San Fran? Yeah no it's not, but nothing here is.

I would agree that OKC folks are tainted by the view Tulsans had for years about OKC. In many ways, OKC earned that label. We were begging on the side of the road for a while and it if weren't for MAPs, we'd be in just as bad of a place now. OKC was able to make such a strong recovery because of how far we had fallen. OKC leapfrogged Tulsa, but T-Town did earn itself a reputation over its life for income, which is still good. Oil treated Tulsa well, as it has more recently for OKC. OKC died by oil, and we live by it now. We're one bust away from going back into recession. Don't, for a second, think our economy has diversified enough to absorb that. Would it be like the 80's again, no. Regulations have corrected a lot of what happened then AFTER the bust (savings and loan). When you don't have far to fall, up is the only way you can go, which is what OKC did. Tulsa hadn't fallen so hard and so the feeling that something has to be done, just never surfaced. Population growth isn't as high in Tulsa, but it is still growing in the metro there.

Tulsa still has some nice aspects to it, just like any other town. OKC has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 20 years on so many fronts. Tulsa has made some strides, but continues to fight with itself on the big projects (which happen to be the ones that attract attention). Being those couple hundred thousand people smaller also changes markets. Tulsa has been able to maintain the lead in chain store development (whoopee for them...sarcasm) and mostly in the upper scale areas. To be honest, with the limited markets they serve, I don't really care. But lets not for a minute act like it fell off the face of the planet. It's still an economic strong point and Oklahoma's numbers MUST Include Tulsa as part of the big picture. OKC tends to think of itself as the entire state now, and that's not really true either. It's become the cultural/population/economic capital it should be. But lets not make up some story that Tulsa all of a sudden sucks either. It's far more similar to OKC than OKC would care to admit...even if I would hate living there.

I don't understand the personal thing you have against Tulsa. And that's what it is, some kind of personal bias against the city. It isn't rooted in fact. If you think that the Brady, Brookside and Cherry Street districts suck, then that's your opinion, but it isn't reality, especially in comparison to OKC.

The lack of disrespect you have for other people is incredible. Conduct yourself respectfully and others might consider what you have to say.It's incredible meaning it can't be credited and as such isn't true, eh?

If you want to just leave it at it being my opinion, I am more than happy to do so. I am not going to conform to your ideal conversation of what you would consider respectful. I am stating it as nice as I can. I DO NOT LIKE TULSA. I have been to quite a few cities in my life and that will only continue and Tulsa has to be one of the most dull and bland cities I have ever seen. Yes, that is my opinion.

I have stated this before, I have a great aunt that lives in Tulsa and she loves it. Absolutely loves it. She moved there from L.A. after coming from Iran. She couldn't be happier. That's awesome. If Tulsa is her niche, then more power to her. I go there multiple times a month to help her our--as I said she is very old--and if some random poster who just joined doesn't believe me, then that is his/her problem.

Tulsa has some nice areas such as Cherry St. and Utica Square and they're fine for what they are. I suppose it might be the fact that after living in Dallas, and you have a city like Tulsa that is very run down for the most part, yet they still act like Dallas, it is a turn off. Dallas can act the way Dallas does because it's an amazing city with a lot to offer.

Anyways, this will play out the same way it always does: I'll say how much I hate Tulsa, some other poster will be "rationality master" followed by a series of other posters discussing how Tulsa is just fine and what is going on there and blah blah blah... happened a few times before and it'll happen again. Bring up Tulsa, and I'm going to give my 2 cents about it. Don't like it? I don't know what to tell you.

One thing that I don't like about Tulsa is that they dump their sewage into the Arkansas River. Even though treated, it still dirties it up to a degree. I have good friends who live in the Tulsa area that make a living from the river, and they complain about it.

By the way, the type of work that I'm referring to is the type that will hopefully soon be done on Western Avenue, as the City of OKC just accepted a streetscape plan from the OU Institute for Quality Communities. Should give Western a major shot in the arm, and I would expect to see more development quickly follow, as it did streetscapes in places like Automobile Alley and Plaza District. Hopefully one day Western will be 10% as amazing as Brookside.

http://iqc.ou.edu/project/western

So how serious is that? That is awesome for that part of Western. I understand they 'accepted it' but does that mean they accepted it as what they eventually want to do for the area or something they funded and is ready to start soon?

It's incredible meaning it can't be credited and as such isn't true, eh?

If you want to just leave it at it being my opinion, I am more than happy to do so. I am not going to conform to your ideal conversation of what you would consider respectful. I am stating it as nice as I can. I DO NOT LIKE TULSA. I have been to quite a few cities in my life and that will only continue and Tulsa has to be one of the most dull and bland cities I have ever seen. Yes, that is my opinion.

I have stated this before, I have a great aunt that lives in Tulsa and she loves it. Absolutely loves it. She moved there from L.A. after coming from Iran. She couldn't be happier. That's awesome. If Tulsa is her niche, then more power to her. I go there multiple times a month to help her our--as I said she is very old--and if some random poster who just joined doesn't believe me, then that is his/her problem.

Tulsa has some nice areas such as Cherry St. and Utica Square and they're fine for what they are. I suppose it might be the fact that after living in Dallas, and you have a city like Tulsa that is very run down for the most part, yet they still act like Dallas, it is a turn off. Dallas can act the way Dallas does because it's an amazing city with a lot to offer.

Anyways, this will play out the same way it always does: I'll say how much I hate Tulsa, some other poster will be "rationality master" followed by a series of other posters discussing how Tulsa is just fine and what is going on there and blah blah blah... happened a few times before and it'll happen again. Bring up Tulsa, and I'm going to give my 2 cents about it. Don't like it? I don't know what to tell you.

You didn't just say that you "don't like" Tulsa. You know what you said and I won't repeat it. I do not care at all whether or not you like Tulsa. What annoys me is that you completely trash the city any chance you get. Do you interact with people like this face to face? Respect matters.

I love living in Tulsa, and know many others who do. I like OKC a lot, too. But it's different than Tulsa. To me, OKC feels more corporate and big time. Tulsa feels smaller and more intimate. I like that. If you like OKC better, great. Live there.

You didn't just say that you "don't like" Tulsa. You know what you said and I won't repeat it. I do not care at all whether or not you like Tulsa. What annoys me is that you completely trash the city any chance you get. Do you interact with people like this face to face? Respect matters.

I love living in Tulsa, and know many others who do. I like OKC a lot, too. But it's different than Tulsa. To me, OKC feels more corporate and big time. Tulsa feels smaller and more intimate. I like that. If you like OKC better, great. Stop consistently stomping on Tulsa whenever you can.I tell you what, I'll never talk ill of Tulsa again on here if that will make you happy. I've spoke my peace and know what I know.

Oh, and as for the respect issue, I get told nearly everyday, multiple times a day, people are surprised that I'm so respectful and have as much common courtesy as I do at 20 years old. I'll let that speak for itself. I'm not going to say whether or not I think I'm respectful and refuse to critique myself, but one thing I will say and make it known that words on a screen have no emotional context. That is why trolls are able to make people so mad. That is why sarcasm is so hard to detect. That is why I think humans are starting to become more disconnected than we think and there is an illusion that we are becoming more connected. I do not like texting either, but I will text if I have to. So comparing how respectful you think I am because of my wording how I feel with a particular city on a talk forum is strange, but whatevs. If you felt I was rude to you, then I apologize as that was not my intention. There are a very select group of posters on here(less than 5 or so) who I could care less about and question their true intentions, and you are not one of them, so again, sorry if I came off as rude.

I don't care if you have criticisms. I just expect to be able to have a civil conversation.

And I understand that tone is difficult to convey through text. It didn't seem to me as though you were being sarcastic. I guess I misread your posts.

I've decided that they both suck...

http://onebigphoto.com/uploads/2013/06/seattle-from-air.jpg

Geez. Again, nothing I said was not based in fact, and certainly I wasn't trashing Brookside. I only said that Brookside and Western were more comparable than Tulsans would like to admit, and that people sometimes assign value to Brookside that isn't really reality-based. It's a great place, and certainly one of the best places in Oklahoma. But - just like Western - it is just a nice commercial strip, and there is still much room for improvement. The fact that you equate my pretty mild (and still mostly complimentary) statements to the "trashing" of Brookside is pretty telling.


Here are a few quotes from you. By the way, you were the one who out of the blue started trashing Brookside. As always, it's someone on here that starts bashing Tulsa and then someone try's to say come back to reality and then everyone goes well Tulsa's just snobby.

"If Western's amenities were more compact and not stretched 36th to Wilshire it would frankly be superior. They're both good places as far as strips are concerned, but let's not get carried away with the Brookside platitudes."

Again, either way it is an unfair comparison. If you look at ANY 3 blocks of Western, Brookside is clearly superior. But if you look at several miles of Western it clearly does have more TOTAL amenities. That's just math. But it's not fair to either place to do an apples-to-apples comparison. My point stands that if you squashed all of Western into the area that comprises what most people think of as Brookside, there is more stuff. Doesn't make Western better; just different.

- If you took Brookside from I-44 and 37th and condensed them in a more walk-able format, you can say the same thing. You'd triple the size of that small urban section. If you took OKC and condensed everything, the city would be as walk-able as Portland... see how that doesn't make an argument?

I don't think you understand the definition of walkable, from a planning/urbanist standpoint. Both Brookside and Western are bad examples of walkability. Blue Dome, Greenwood, Brady, others? FAR more walkable.

"But that doesn't disagree with the point I made. Western has similar (and in some cases superior) amenities"

And in many cases Brookside has superior amenities. The two are not mutually exclusive. Sorry if the idea that Western might actually have a few things here and there that Brookside might also like to have gave you such butthurt.

- This is when I compared the two densest areas. I was just wondering where the superior amenities were? If you like the more cozy feeling of Western vs. Brookside, fine. That's something based in reality, and is your opinion. See?

Not really looking to get into a bunch of scorekeeping (though it seems that you are), but the area around Classen Curve/Triangle/NHP/CHK certainly holds more long-term promise than anything in Brookside. Not really my scene up there, but when complete it should be about like taking Utica Square and relocating it to Brookside. Western has some great little pockets, but again, sprawled.

"Brookside certainly isn't dense/walkable in an urbanist sense"

If we are judging everything by this, then the entire State of Oklahoma is a wasteland compared to a true urban experience. Let's come back to reality, and admit that Brookside (for Oklahoma/Texas standards of urban) is very walk-able. Compared to NY, DC, Chicago, San Fran? Yeah no it's not, but nothing here is.

Again, even OKC and TULSA have areas that are far more walkable. Walkability isn't a concept limited to major cities. In fact, some of the best walkability in the U.S. can be found in small towns. You might try reading "Walkable City" by Jeff Speck, to develop a better understanding of what the term means in a planning/urbanist sense.

At the end of the day, both places are suburban commercial strips. They both look, act and feel that way, regardless of the fact that one enjoys more density. Lots of other places in the region and country are comparable...Lower Greenville in Dallas for instance. If you can accept the fact that it's just an extra nice, old-city suburban commercial strip, there is no reason that you can't enjoy the fact that Brookside is a great place nevertheless. And I agree that it is.

guys, I think PluPan is being a little facetious. Don't read too much into his 'stated' hatred of Tulsa. ...

One thing that I don't like about Tulsa is that they dump their sewage into the Arkansas River. Even though treated, it still dirties it up to a degree. I have good friends who live in the Tulsa area that make a living from the river, and they complain about it.


This is inane. What exactly do you think Oklahoma City does with it's treated water? Or any city?

This is inane. What exactly do you think Oklahoma City does with it's treated water? Or any city?So correct me if I'm wrong here, but the treated water is turned into drinking water. Dallas and Atlanta do the same thing. I believe L.A. shoots its water far out into the ocean.

One thing that I don't like about Tulsa is that they dump their sewage into the Arkansas River. Even though treated, it still dirties it up to a degree. I have good friends who live in the Tulsa area that make a living from the river, and they complain about it.

To be fair the "Oklahoma" river west of the stockyards gets pretty ripe.

By the way, the type of work that I'm referring to is the type that will hopefully soon be done on Western Avenue, as the City of OKC just accepted a streetscape plan from the OU Institute for Quality Communities. Should give Western a major shot in the arm, and I would expect to see more development quickly follow, as it did streetscapes in places like Automobile Alley and Plaza District. Hopefully one day Western will be 10% as amazing as Brookside.

http://iqc.ou.edu/project/western

This is what Western needs and I'm glad to see that happening. Maybe Brookside can be their next project. It is true that the stretch of Peoria from 33rd to 35th is pretty decent from a retail and restaurant density standpoint and walkable with a relatively recent streetscape improvement. The part south of this corridor though from 35th to roughly 39th has some walkable areas with on-street parallel parking and sidewalk facing retail but also several businesses with parking out front, car shops, etc. if Trader Joe's is indeed going in between 37th and 38th then this is an opportunity to make that stretch more like its northern counterpart. The OU ICQ could be a help in that regard.

This is inane. What exactly do you think Oklahoma City does with it's treated water? Or any city?

I myself have hunted the Arkansas River for ancient artifacts. If you walk out into the middle of the Arkansas River just South of the Creek turnpike bridge by Jenks, you will find a car out there, engine blocks, etc. The refinery does not do it any favors either. The Arkansas is known for heavy metals also, but my friends from Tulsa that does the same thing I do complain greatly about the sewage recycle.
I love the artifacts though.
I'm not sure where OKC dumps it's processed water, the Deer Creek facility may be the primary water source for Deer and Cottonwood creeks, but I'm sure it doesn't go to the Oklahoma River.

What I've learned recently about OKC is the people here are more down-to-earth; they are not caught up in this dilemma where one city views itself as superior.

I've lived briefly in a number of cities (Tulsa, St. Louis, Dallas, Ft. Worth, Arlington, Houston), people who live in the bigger cities don't engage in that conversation. There has always been a rift between our two largest cities.

Post MAPS era, Oklahoma City appears more mature about who she is. I love Tulsa, she's smaller than OKC; has a lot of things that cities larger than itself doesn't possess.

OKC's development shows signs that the area is braced for significant progress as we approach 2020. Maybe this kind of sibling rivalry is good for both cities in that in makes for competition

Tulsa has resources. Tulsa's metropolitan area possesses great water resources: Keystone, Tenkiller, Oologah, Yahola, Grand Lake, Arkansas & Illinois Rivers along with the most inland canals in the U. S. ((Ports of Muskogee & Catoosa) that leads to America's largest port in New Orleans.

The mystery question to me: Why haven't you experienced a progressive boom?

I myself have hunted the Arkansas River for ancient artifacts. If you walk out into the middle of the Arkansas River just South of the Creek turnpike bridge by Jenks, you will find a car out there, engine blocks, etc. The refinery does not do it any favors either. The Arkansas is known for heavy metals also, but my friends from Tulsa that does the same thing I do complain greatly about the sewage recycle.
I love the artifacts though.
I'm not sure where OKC dumps it's processed water, the Deer Creek facility may be the primary water source for Deer and Cottonwood creeks, but I'm sure it doesn't go to the Oklahoma River.

The water going into the river from the waste water treatment plant is cleaner than the water in the river naturally. The refineries claim the same, but they have been fined for water quality violations in the past. The Arkansas River is safe for human contact but has not always been safe for fishing. From what I have been told the biggest pollutants in the water is yard chemicals from water runoff from the surrounding residential areas that drain into the river. The city, RPA and the Corp try to keep people out of the river because the existing low water dam is just plain dangerous and the water level can change quickly when the Keystone Dam opens and closes for power generation. It’s a pretty regular thing for people to have to be rescued from the river. Junk that gets exposed in the riverbed has always been a problem.

There has always been a rift between our two largest cities.


I think there would be less of a rivalry between OKC and Tulsa if Tulsa was located about 50 miles farther up the turnpike, near the Missouri border. The cities would be far enough apart that their distinct identities would be more pronounced. There would also be less instances of amenities going to Tulsa that otherwise would go to OKC or vice versa. It would be more like Memphis vs. Nashville or Kansas City vs St. Louis.

I think there would be less of a rivalry between OKC and Tulsa if Tulsa was located about 50 miles farther up the turnpike, near the Missouri border. The cities would be far enough apart that their distinct identities would be more pronounced. There would also be less instances of amenities going to Tulsa that otherwise would go to OKC or vice versa. It would be more like Memphis vs. Nashville or Kansas City vs St. Louis.


The "rift" between Tulsa and OKC is minor compared to the one between Kansas City and St Louis. And then St Louis and Chicago.

And I simply don't get the idea that Oklahoma City and Tulsa being completely distinct markets 100 miles apart share "amenities", the only time I have ever seen an example of that was when the NBA was being sold on Oklahoma City as a viable market. The state of Oklahoma has deemed Tulsa not worthy of rail service, a real four year university, non-toll interstate access and a number of other things, but that has everything to do with the state not giving a crap about Tulsa and nothing to do with Tulsa's proximity to Oklahoma City. Von Maur going to Oklahoma City had nothing to do with Tulsa just like Belk going to Tulsa had nothing to do with Oklahoma City.

Do you want to know why Tulsa has some store OKC doesn't? Or why Tulsa often gets a chain first? Demographically Tulsa's per capita income is 8.4% higher and has about 10% more college graduates with a cost of living that is about 5% less. And Tulsa's wealth is more concentrated so those 3 and 5 mile rings that retailers love look better. It's really that simple and has nothing to do with hating Oklahoma City. You want better retail in Oklahoma City, improve the demographics, which is something that seems to be happening.

Oh, I forgot the Pearl District... knew I forgot one. Oh, and it sucks ass.

When people criticize Dallas you throw a fit, yet you repeatedly post how "Tulsa sucks ass." It comes off as immature. Quit insulting places and just stick to critiquing what you like/don't like. No one is opposed to critiques, but insults prevent any kind of reasonable dialogue.

I personally love Tulsa. The Brady District is a vibrant, sophisticated district with great, new urban options and districts like Brookside and Cherry Street have been charming areas for a long time. If you don't like these areas then just critique them, but please quit insulting the entire city.

Do you want to know why Tulsa has some store OKC doesn't? Or why Tulsa often gets a chain first? Demographically Tulsa's per capita income is 8.4% higher and has about 10% more college graduates with a cost of living that is about 5% less. And Tulsa's wealth is more concentrated so those 3 and 5 mile rings that retailers love look better. It's really that simple and has nothing to do with hating Oklahoma City. You want better retail in Oklahoma City, improve the demographics, which is something that seems to be happening.

The economics are changing quickly. If you compare metro areas, as of the latest end of year statistics, the average pay in the metro areas, OKC average wage is about 5% higher. If you take the entire metro, and not Tulsa proper and OKC proper, the per family median income in OKC is much higher. But, you are correct that OKC is more diversified in its socio-economics across the metro. Tulsa's wealthy tend to segregate themselves from everyone else. But overall, OKC is outpacing the state by a bigger margin than Tulsa and Tulsa is falling back. OKC earning average is higher and unemployment rates are better. There is way more spendable money in OKC and the gap is growing. But, in OKC it isn't easy for outsiders to figure out where to locate to take advantage of it.

When people criticize Dallas you throw a fit, yet you repeatedly post how "Tulsa sucks ass." It comes off as immature. Quit insulting places and just stick to critiquing what you like/don't like. No one is opposed to critiques, but insults prevent any kind of reasonable dialogue.

I personally love Tulsa. The Brady District is a vibrant, sophisticated district with great, new urban options and districts like Brookside and Cherry Street have been charming areas for a long time. If you don't like these areas then just critique them, but please quit insulting the entire city.I'll disagree with your analysis on the Brady district and leave with the notion that this has already been addressed. By all means, if you feel compelled, continue to add more opinions of what you think about my comments. :)

I think there would be less of a rivalry between OKC and Tulsa if Tulsa was located about 50 miles farther up the turnpike, near the Missouri border. The cities would be far enough apart that their distinct identities would be more pronounced. There would also be less instances of amenities going to Tulsa that otherwise would go to OKC or vice versa. It would be more like Memphis vs. Nashville or Kansas City vs St. Louis.

Good comparison!

Probably would be a different scenario if they were farther apart or closer together like Fort Worth vs. Dallas or Minneapolis vs. St. Paul.

Good comparison!

Probably would be a different scenario if they were farther apart or closer together like Fort Worth vs. Dallas or Minneapolis vs. St. Paul.I used to frequently hear about Dallas Vs. Houston, but that seems to have calmed down in the recent years. It is clear however, Houston is the dominant city.

Out of those comparisons, I would guess St. Louis and Nashville would be the leading cities.

The economics are changing quickly. If you compare metro areas, as of the latest end of year statistics, the average pay in the metro areas, OKC average wage is about 5% higher. If you take the entire metro, and not Tulsa proper and OKC proper, the per family median income in OKC is much higher. But, you are correct that OKC is more diversified in its socio-economics across the metro. Tulsa's wealthy tend to segregate themselves from everyone else. But overall, OKC is outpacing the state by a bigger margin than Tulsa and Tulsa is falling back. OKC earning average is higher and unemployment rates are better. There is way more spendable money in OKC and the gap is growing. But, in OKC it isn't easy for outsiders to figure out where to locate to take advantage of it.

This just incorrect.
2013 BEA numbers:
Tulsa MSA per capita income - $47,279 Rank - 50th - Growth Rate - (2012) 8.2%, (2013) 1.2%
OKC MSA per capita income - $44,280 Rank 90th - Growth Rate - (2012) 5.2%, (2013) 1.0%

BEA: News Release: Local Area Personal Income, 2013 (http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/lapi/lapi_newsrelease.htm)

You are using a select set of figures. I am using ones from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing the avg. rate of pay in Tulsa area as $20.04 per hr and OKC area $20.47. And, OKC's growth rate of income continues to escalate relative to the state, while Tulsa's does not. This is a bitter pill for the Tulsan's to take, but there is a reason that employment is growing far faster in OKC, as are most other economic measures. Tulsan's will keep believing their own propoganda though. This has been their nature for the last decade.