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.

Per capita income =/= disposable income. Wages are actually a measure of whats going in people's pockets.

And then there's this:

9789

As as the retail thing is concerned, Tulsa will always have a bit of an advantage because wealth there is more "concentrated."But let's not ignore the city's rather brutal history of redlining and segregation. For the record, I like Tulsa, but you can make any city's demographics look good when you push your poor and/or disadvantaged citizens to the peripheral outskirts.

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.

Those numbers on count income from work and therefore and not a complete picture.

Just drive around both cities and see which one you think is growing most and is on a roll. It isn't hard to figure.

Look, I love Tulsa...used to live there. However, they have NOT maximized their asset. And, they are losing ground. But, they have unbelievable assets to work with and if they can ever get their city government more functional and the people out of denial, then what is possible is great.

I really went and explored Tulsa for the first time in awhile as opposed to sticking to the interstate and going right off of it. All I am going to say is I was completely wrong in my analysis that Tulsa is inferior. OKC is making huge strides and is the bigger and more dominant city, but as for what city has nicer amenities and such, I'm just going to say I used to think Edmond was the dominant suburb over Norman, and boy was I wrong. I am sorry for anyone I insulted and I'm going to leave it at the fact that what I saw in Tulsa didn't make me feel good about OKC. OKC has a long ways to go and Tulsa is really picking up new energy I never realized existed there.

BTW, I will add that as for new construction OKC has it beat. I didn't see too much new construction going on in the Tulsa area, but as for what city feels bigger and more cosmopolitan, I am going to come out and say Tulsa has that and leave it at that for now.

Panda, I appreciate that you've taken the time to get around and see Tulsa. Glad you enjoyed it as well. However, I think you're being a little harsh on OKC. It's a great city that's full of energy and new activity.

Tulsa should have much more new construction starting within the next 12 months. OKC is ahead of Tulsa in sheer amount, and likely will be, at least for the foreseeable future. However, I think the neighborhoods of Tulsa, urban and suburban, most definitely are as nice as anything offered in OKC, and will continue to be.

All of this talk about Tulsa and Costco caused me to go up to Tulsa recently to see for myself. Having spent a lot of time in major cities in different regions of the country I think I have pretty good perspective when it comes to judging urban feel. I was much more impressed by Tulsa than I expected to be.

This is a debate that will be interesting to see five years from now when all of the announced projects discussed on OKCTalk are built and open for business. As of right now, the major thing OKC has to hang its hat on is having Thunder basketball. However, I firmly believe there is more to being a vibrant city than a sports team and while sports is certainly a part of it, OKC should not be content to hang its hat on that alone. Fact is once pro sports is taken out of the equation, it's hard to find any criteria by which OKC is ahead of Tulsa. To argue in OKC's favor, you MUST take the discussion back to the Thunder and the announced projects, all of which aren't built yet and aren't guaranteed. As exciting as the prospect of the ClayCo towers, the streetcar, the convention center, Hall Capital, the Criterion theater, etc are, they are not yet adding to the urban fabric and energy of OKC. Five years from now once all of those are in place I am sure this will be a very different debate.

As of 2015 though, I can completely understand why so many people still perceive Tulsa to be the larger, more cosmopolitan of the cities. It all comes down to the neighborhoods, both urban and suburban, simply being more complete and mature with more attention paid towards beautification and placemaking. I really wish OKC would consider an aggressive campaign to clean up and beautify many areas of the city. The small details can make all the difference when it comes to perception.

As exciting as the prospect of the ClayCo towers, the streetcar, the convention center, Hall Capital, the Criterion theater, etc are, they are not yet adding to the urban fabric and energy of OKC. Five years from now once all of those are in place I am sure this will be a very different debate.

Tulsa doesn't have the economic momentum or a fraction of the major projects that OKC has in the pipeline besides the Gathering Place park. We will see what depressed oil prices do to both cities over the next couple years. Tulsa will likely vote on a river tax proposal that could be a game changer this November. Recent proposals to build dams and enhance the parks along the river, the city's top natural asset, have failed so we'll see what Tulsa voters do this time around.

Tulsa doesn't have the economic momentum or a fraction of the major projects that OKC has in the pipeline besides the Gathering Place park. We will see what depressed oil prices do to both cities over the next couple years.

OKC's momentum is why I think this will be a different debate in 5 years. Once all of the currently proposed developments talked about on OKCTalk are up and running, I think OKC will have a very different feel. OKC really needs the momentum to keep going. Hopefully depressed oil prices don't affect current proposals. Even if future proposals slow down, the stuff currently in the pipeline is enough to significantly change OKC.

All of this talk about Tulsa and Costco caused me to go up to Tulsa recently to see for myself. Having spent a lot of time in major cities in different regions of the country I think I have pretty good perspective when it comes to judging urban feel. I was much more impressed by Tulsa than I expected to be.

This is a debate that will be interesting to see five years from now when all of the announced projects discussed on OKCTalk are built and open for business. As of right now, the major thing OKC has to hang its hat on is having Thunder basketball. However, I firmly believe there is more to being a vibrant city than a sports team and while sports is certainly a part of it, OKC should not be content to hang its hat on that alone. Fact is once pro sports is taken out of the equation, it's hard to find any criteria by which OKC is ahead of Tulsa. To argue in OKC's favor, you MUST take the discussion back to the Thunder and the announced projects, all of which aren't built yet and aren't guaranteed. As exciting as the prospect of the ClayCo towers, the streetcar, the convention center, Hall Capital, the Criterion theater, etc are, they are not yet adding to the urban fabric and energy of OKC. Five years from now once all of those are in place I am sure this will be a very different debate.

As of 2015 though, I can completely understand why so many people still perceive Tulsa to be the larger, more cosmopolitan of the cities. It all comes down to the neighborhoods, both urban and suburban, simply being more complete and mature with more attention paid towards beautification and placemaking. I really wish OKC would consider an aggressive campaign to clean up and beautify many areas of the city. The small details can make all the difference when it comes to perception.

The problem with taking away OKC's "announced projects" is that while everyone has been talking about the construction in OKC, a lot of those projects have been finished. Downtown OKC has substantially more downtown housing, and a much stronger market for it - that's why regardless of the oil boom, downtown housing will remain strong as long as people live in OKC and need housing.

I'd be curious to hear how you reevaluate OKC once you too live downtown. Tulsa has its majority of folks who live their entire lives south of I-44. NW OKC is becoming a lot more like Midtown Tulsa than people realize because that development/infill boom has been overshadowed by downtown.

I've spent plenty of time in both and think it depends on what you like. Tulsa has an eastern climate and geography and if aesthetics are your primary criteria, Tulsa will always win. If you want a city that is starting to feel like it's breaking out of the small time (even without the Thunder), then OKC wins hands down. Having moved here from Denver, OKC feels far more like a little Denver (finally!) than Tulsa ever will. Except for the mountains in the distance, Denver is not that aesthetically pleasing either, but it's a fun, lively place to be.

Just the scale of everything in OKC is bigger, including growth and development rates.

A big part of this is the economic base where OKC has a bunch of employers of all types growing and growing. Tinker/Boeing, Hobby Lobby, Continental, Devon, American Energy, Enable and tons of others can scarcely build space fast enough. And then you have the State which always provides a rock-solid foundation and a ton of light industrial / manufacturing / distribution (Baker Hughes, Schlumberger and all the crazy stuff happening in far West OKC).

With everything OKC has in the pipeline and the ever-growing job creation, the gap is only widening, and at an increasing pace. Plus, OKC has all kinds of capacity to grow, with infrastructure and land everywhere, even a bunch of in-fill.


Won't change the fact that many will still view Tulsa as 'nicer' but by any objective measure OKC is leaving Tulsa behind, and that's been happening for about the last 20 years.

Just the scale of everything in OKC is bigger, including growth and development rates.

A big part of this is the economic base where OKC has a bunch of employers of all types growing and growing. Tinker/Boeing, Hobby Lobby, Continental, Devon, American Energy, Enable and tons of others can scarcely build space fast enough. And then you have the State which always provides a rock-solid foundation and a ton of light industrial / manufacturing / distribution (Baker Hughes, Schlumberger and all the crazy stuff happening in far West OKC).

With everything OKC has in the pipeline and the ever-growing job creation, the gap is only widening, and at an increasing pace. Plus, OKC has all kinds of capacity to grow, with infrastructure and land everywhere, even a bunch of in-fill.


Won't change the fact that many will still view Tulsa as 'nicer' but by any objective measure OKC is leaving Tulsa behind, and that's been happening for about the last 20 years.While I can agree with OKC is moving forward and extremely fast, OKC has nothing on the sheer scale of an upscale shopping center like Utica Square where you don't have any low end tenants in the mix. Their new I44 highway is also something that reminded me of Dallas, which I also drove to last night just to walk around Uptown for a couple hours. I-44 was an extremely impressive highway something I can't really say we have in OKC other than the part of I-40 west of 44 but Tulsa's has a bunch of mid-rises lining it with some awesome blue light rectangles on all of the intersection above the highway. OKC just doesn't have anything like that at this current point in time.

Tulsa's downtown has much to be improved, but it was full of street life at around 7pm as were all of their districts. I still stand by the notion the Campus Corner is my favorite walkable area trumping literally any other urban area in the state, but coming from someone who lived in a huge, cosmopolitan, beautiful metro like Dallas and just explored Tulsa in depth last night, I have to say, if I were bringing someone in from another major city, and I showed them Tulsa and OKC today, I think they would likely be more impressed with Tulsa.

While I can agree with OKC is moving forward and extremely fast, OKC has nothing on the sheer scale of an upscale shopping center like Utica Square where you don't have any low end tenants in the mix.

Utica Square has been there for what, 50 or 60 years? Not at all a sign of growth.

And they have plenty of lower-end tenants like Jos A Bank and Walgreens and then tons of services like dry cleaners and even a post office.

Just the scale of everything in OKC is bigger, including growth and development rates.

A big part of this is the economic base where OKC has a bunch of employers of all types growing and growing. Tinker/Boeing, Hobby Lobby, Continental, Devon, American Energy, Enable and tons of others can scarcely build space fast enough. And then you have the State which always provides a rock-solid foundation and a ton of light industrial / manufacturing / distribution (Baker Hughes, Schlumberger and all the crazy stuff happening in far West OKC).

With everything OKC has in the pipeline and the ever-growing job creation, the gap is only widening, and at an increasing pace. Plus, OKC has all kinds of capacity to grow, with infrastructure and land everywhere, even a bunch of in-fill.


Won't change the fact that many will still view Tulsa as 'nicer' but by any objective measure OKC is leaving Tulsa behind, and that's been happening for about the last 20 years.

I think it's fair to say that Tulsa's economy is not as hot as OKC's, not really even close. OKC is lucky to have so many large and growing employers in the energy industry, and to have several large universities in the metro. OKC also has much better and more visionary leadership in City Hall that is focused on providing the city with better infrastructure and civic amenities. Tulsa is far behind in civic leadership.

However, these do not discredit Tulsa's progress, or the fabric and character of the city. Tulsa will never be as big as Oklahoma City. Oklahoma City has a much higher chance of becoming an economic powerhouse than Tulsa. That is reality. It gets annoying, though, when certain posters on here dismiss everything in Tulsa with "OKC has more." Great, OKC is larger, and should have more. Tulsa has a lot of progress to make. Leadership is a large part of that. We will see what the citizens of Tulsa stand for come the next mayoral election.

Pete, thank you for the effort you put into this website. It is truly incredible how much info is readily available here. I check in nearly every day to see what's going on in OKC.

Utica Square has been there for what, 50 or 60 years? Not at all a sign of growth.

And they have plenty of lower-end tenants like Jos A Bank and Walgreens and then tons of services like dry cleaners and even a post office.I don't know how long Utica Square has been there for, I all I know is went there yesterday and went there and walked around, and OKC has nothing like that on the size. I love this city as much as anyone else, but that is a fact. I do recall something new going up near or right by Utica, I'm going to drive back in a week or so and take some pictures this time, so I'll check and see what it was.

You are correct, there are some lower end tenants, but not very many.

I'm not trying to say either Tulsa is an amazing world class city, but OKC definitely learn of couple things from Tulsa.

"OKC has more." Great, OKC is larger, and should have more. Tulsa has a lot of progress to make.

Similarly San Antonio is a larger city/metro than Austin, has the NBA, amusement parks, more tourist attractions, etc. Does that make SA more desirable? Some would say yes. Same thing with OKC and Tulsa, to each their own.

Yes, certainly didn't mean to imply Tulsa doesn't have a lot going for it with tons of cool things happening.

It's a great town with some natural advantages over OKC, I just think the two cities are becoming more dissimilar with time, and that OKC's growth engine is much more significant.

I've spent plenty of time in both and think it depends on what you like. Tulsa has an eastern climate and geography and if aesthetics are your primary criteria, Tulsa will always win.

I can definitely second this. When I was in Tulsa I was thinking of how it felt like a larger Little Rock. Dallas feels like a much larger Charlotte in my opinion. Both are completely different cities but share a vibe that can be more closely matched with eastern cities. It was once said that Dallas was where the east ends and Fort Worth was where the West begins. I don't think that's as true as it once was but its still useful to make a statement about the difference in vibe between eastern and western cities.

Oklahoma City to me feels like a mixture of Ft Smith (Arkansas), Amarillo, and Fort Worth with maybe a touch of Phoenix. Those are all towns more associated with the rugged individualism of the American West.

I'm not trying to say either Tulsa is an amazing world class city, but OKC definitely learn of couple things from Tulsa.

Very true. A lot of people in Tulsa overhype it. Though I was impressed by the city I don't think its a Dallas or Austin, even on a smaller scale. However, there are a few things OKC could learn from Tulsa and putting them into practice would result in a nicer, more attractive OKC. A lot of people, on this site especially, completely write off Tulsa. I think its a mistake to do so, especially in 2015 where OKC isn't necessarily ahead yet. Once again, I will be so interested to see how this debate turns out in 2020.

I can definitely second this. When I was in Tulsa I was thinking of how it felt like a larger Little Rock. Dallas feels like a much larger Charlotte in my opinion. Both are completely different cities but share a vibe that can be more closely matched with eastern cities. It was once said that Dallas was where the east ends and Fort Worth was where the West begins. I don't think that's as true as it once was but its still useful to make a statement about the difference in vibe between eastern and western cities.

Oklahoma City to me feels like a mixture of Ft Smith (Arkansas), Amarillo, and Fort Worth with maybe a touch of Phoenix. Those are all towns more associated with the rugged individualism of the American West.

I'd throw Denver, Wichita and Indianapolis in there too for OKC. All don't have major rivers or much topography in the city limits which greatly affects overall historic development, and why Tulsa, Omaha, Little Rock or Kansas City with larger rivers running through them and more hills/trees look and feel somewhat different than OKC while still sharing many similarities, as opposed to the older eastern river cities like St Louis, Louisville, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, etc. which are completely different or even the river cities of the mid-South like Memphis and Nashville.

A lot of people, on this site especially, completely write off Tulsa. I think its a mistake to do so, especially in 2015 where OKC isn't necessarily ahead yet. Once again, I will be so interested to see how this debate turns out in 2020.

I haven't seen anyone here 'completely write off Tulsa'.

And what do you mean 'OKC isn't necessarily ahead yet'? What are you basing this on other than your own personal opinion?


It seems almost everyone here recognizes Tulsa was originally developed in a more compact and responsible manner but what exactly have they done over the last 20 years or are currently planning now that is bigger or better?

Tulsa has some really nice things, and I'm sure there are a few areas where they're still ahead of OKC. Live music, upscale shopping, etc. OKC will never have their scenery, not in this geologic era anyway. But OKC's sheer size and economic power is beginning to separate the two cities. In 2015 I'd put Oklahoma City well ahead of Tulsa, by my own standards. I'm much more likely to value professional basketball over a live music venue. It's just what I prefer. I can understand how some people would value things differently, and might put Tulsa ahead of us. Certain parts of Tulsa are really quite nice, and if you're looking to move into a completed upscale neighborhood with all the nice amenities just waiting for you, maybe Tulsa offers more of that than OKC does.

I think in 5 years, by 2020, Oklahoma City will be ahead of Tulsa in so many areas that only the most die-hard Tulsa snobs will try to maintain it is superior. With Midtown, Automobile Alley, Bricktown and Deep Deuce, Film Row, etc, all filling out, and with the new park, 5 new towers, the whitewater course, convention center, and streetcar all being completed about that time, OKC is going to explode over the next few years. Tulsa doesn't have anywhere near the momentum that we do at the moment.

By 2025 the differences will be even more exaggerated, unless Tulsa really gets their act together.

Can everyone quit framing this discussion in binary terms of which city is "better?" The best way to have this discussion is in terms of specifics (i.e., urban districts, shopping, economic growth). Both cities have a lot to offer. Which is better? Well, what's your criteria? There's not one right answer here.

I'd throw Denver, Wichita and Indianapolis in there too for OKC. All don't have major rivers or much topography in the city limits which greatly affects overall historic development, and why Tulsa, Omaha, Little Rock or Kansas City with larger rivers running through them and more hills/trees look and feel somewhat different than OKC while still sharing many similarities, as opposed to the older eastern river cities like St Louis, Louisville, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, etc. which are completely different or even the river cities of the mid-South like Memphis and Nashville.

OKC at its root is a western, frontier town, not unlike Denver, Ft. Worth, etc. It will never have the nuances of an eastern city, and that's fine. All cities have their place though, to each his own. I personally prefer western cities, they feel a lot more "free" and are culturally more dynamic even if they may lack the scenery. You are definitely right about the rivers though, I never thought about it. OKC actually did begin as a water stop at the North Canadian River, but once the city merged with Capitol Hill the river became something of an afterthought.

Personally, IMO OKC is starting to take on a feel of a small Houston. Most people consider Houston a southern city, but it is a western-ish, libertarian place at its core with some Gulf Coast/East TX influences thrown in. Now H-town is not my cup of tea, but if you can get beyond the climate and the traffic it is a nice city. Lots of sprawl and not the most scenic area, but it has a diverse population, its not really super segregated by income or race, and it has an energy/health/aerospace based economy that is outperforming its supposedly nicer, more cosmopolitan rival of Dallas (noticing a theme here?)

Oklahoma City's Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS-1993) has been the game-changer between the two cities.

Tulsa has lots of potential & advantages to spur growth:


University of Tulsa & Tulsa Community College.
Great Public School System (volunteer integration; OKC went the forced busing route which caused more flight from inner city schools.
Tulsa Port of Catoosa: 20-year, $1.3 billion inland water port (route: Minneapolis-St. Louis-Tulsa-New Orleans),
leads to world's largest port in New Orleans; dedicated by President Nixon in June 1971.
Tulsa Port of Catoosa (http://tulsaport.com/)
Area has plenty of clean man-made lakes, great water supply.

Population Growth: Oklahoma City vs. Tulsa; both cities have experienced healthy growth.

Year - Metropolitan Area, cumulative population growth separation change . . . Central City
Oklahoma City - Tulsa

1990 - 971,000 - 761,000 - Growth separation: 200,000 . . . OKC 445,000 - TUL 367,000
2000 - 1,095,000 - 860,000 Growth separation: 235,000 . . . OKC 506,000 - TUL 393,000

2010 - 1,253,000 - 937,000 Growth separation: 316,000 . . . OKC 580,000 - TUL 392,000
2013 - 1,320,000 - 962,000 Growth separation: 358,000 . . . OKC 611,000 - TUL 398,000
Last 3 year growth change 2010-2013: OKC +5.32% Tulsa +2.57%

And what do you mean 'OKC isn't necessarily ahead yet'? What are you basing this on other than your own personal opinion?


It isn't in every aspect but it is in a few key areas specifically pertaining to amenities.

Tulsa has more mature urban neighborhoods with more of the amenities you would expect to go with them. OKC will get there as Deep Deuce, Bricktown and Midtown fill in and other core neighborhoods continue to get makeovers but its still coming into its own. I guess the best way to put it is OKC's urban districts still have that emerging neighborhood vibe while Tulsa's have more of a fully gentrified vibe. Tulsa has several districts at critical mass while OKC only has one (though Midtown will get there in the near future).

Tulsa's downtown skyline is impressive from a distance, possibly moreso than OKC's at least at night because their buildings are lit up better. At street level I was not impressed and it felt like a dead or dying downtown. Tulsa's real strengths are its urban neighborhoods outside of its immediate downtown.

Tulsa wins on beautification. As PluPan said, there are certain areas of Tulsa that somebody who didn't know any better could think they were in Dallas. Also, compare I-40 through OKC to I-44 through Tulsa. Which drive do you think will leave a better impression?

Nobody can deny Tulsa wins for live music and upscale shopping. OKC really needs an upscale shopping center like Utica Square. Hopefully the new Bricktown Criterion theater is promoted well and can compete with Cain's and the Brady. Hopefully by 2020 OKC will have Costco, Trader Joe's, the Fresh Market, and more nicer mid-range grocers (Reasor's, Uptown Grocery, Crest Fresh Market) so Tulsa will no longer be able to claim that.

The streetcar and the new convention center will be a big plus for OKC, with Tulsa having nothing that compares. The Wheeler District as well will be above and beyond anything Tulsa has or has planned. OKC is currently experiencing a much faster rate of development, especially residential in the core. Growth is a lot faster and the economy has more momentum. As that continues, OKC should surpass any advantage Tulsa may currently have and should do it by 2020.

Utica Square has been there for what, 50 or 60 years? Not at all a sign of growth.

And they have plenty of lower-end tenants like Jos A Bank and Walgreens and then tons of services like dry cleaners and even a post office.

And Starbucks. And Gap. And Gap Kids. And Olive Garden.

It isn't in every aspect but it is in a few key areas specifically pertaining to amenities.

Tulsa has more mature urban neighborhoods with more of the amenities you would expect to go with them. OKC will get there as Deep Deuce, Bricktown and Midtown fill in and other core neighborhoods continue to get makeovers but its still coming into its own. I guess the best way to put it is OKC's urban districts still have that emerging neighborhood vibe while Tulsa's have more of a fully gentrified vibe. Tulsa has several districts at critical mass while OKC only has one (though Midtown will get there in the near future).

Tulsa's downtown skyline is impressive from a distance, possibly moreso than OKC's at least at night because their buildings are lit up better. At street level I was not impressed and it felt like a dead or dying downtown. Tulsa's real strengths are its urban neighborhoods outside of its immediate downtown.

Tulsa wins on beautification. As PluPan said, there are certain areas of Tulsa that somebody who didn't know any better could think they were in Dallas. Also, compare I-40 through OKC to I-44 through Tulsa. Which drive do you think will leave a better impression?

Nobody can deny Tulsa wins for live music and upscale shopping. OKC really needs an upscale shopping center like Utica Square. Hopefully the new Bricktown Criterion theater is promoted well and can compete with Cain's and the Brady. Hopefully by 2020 OKC will have Costco, Trader Joe's, the Fresh Market, and more nicer mid-range grocers (Reasor's, Uptown Grocery, Crest Fresh Market) so Tulsa will no longer be able to claim that.

The streetcar and the new convention center will be a big plus for OKC, with Tulsa having nothing that compares. The Wheeler District as well will be above and beyond anything Tulsa has or has planned. OKC is currently experiencing a much faster rate of development, especially residential in the core. Growth is a lot faster and the economy has more momentum. As that continues, OKC should surpass any advantage Tulsa may currently have and should do it by 2020.

Strongly disagree with the first assessment of urban neighborhoods. Deep Deuce currently has much more in terms of housing, hotels, retail, restaurants and bars than any compact area in Tulsa. And Tulsa has nothing that rivals Bricktown; it's CBD doesn't have any thing like Myriad Gardens. And OKC's Midtown will soon eclipse all of these.

On the point of beautification, this is all down to Tulsa's natural setting. OKC can improve for sure but it's not like this represents some sort of concerted plan on the part of Tulsa.

The upscale shopping point is just untrue. It's certainly not "better" in Tulsa, as has been discussed many, many times. Utica Square is nice but again, that is not indicative of anything other than it already exists. If you want to say Utica Square is nicer than anything in OKC, that's a fair point. But we're comparing communities, not individual projects.


I really should just stop debating you because you just continually change your arbitrary criteria and make the same false claims over and over.

If you want to say that you like Tulsa better, that's one thing. But you constantly state things as facts that are not.

It isn't in every aspect but it is in a few key areas specifically pertaining to amenities.

Tulsa has more mature urban neighborhoods with more of the amenities you would expect to go with them. OKC will get there as Deep Deuce, Bricktown and Midtown fill in and other core neighborhoods continue to get makeovers but its still coming into its own. I guess the best way to put it is OKC's urban districts still have that emerging neighborhood vibe while Tulsa's have more of a fully gentrified vibe. Tulsa has several districts at critical mass while OKC only has one (though Midtown will get there in the near future).

how does Tulsa have more mature urban neighborhoods than OKC? If you're making the comparison between the older parts of midtown Tulsa and OKC's historic districts, then I'm not sure mature is the right word. They just were never as decimated by white flight and sprawl in the 50s-70s as okc's historic neighborhoods and never had to rebound as much. However the fact that you throw deep Duece into the next sentence, confuses me as to what you consider an urban neighborhood. Tulsa has no true urban neighborhood that is anywhere near as mature as deep duece or even midtown.

how does Tulsa have more mature urban neighborhoods than OKC? If you're making the comparison between the older parts of midtown Tulsa and OKC's historic districts, then I'm not sure mature is the right word. They just were never as decimated by white flight and sprawl in the 50s-70s as okc's historic neighborhoods and never had to rebound as much.

This is key right here. Tulsa's urban neighborhoods were never decimated the way OKC's were so it hasn't had as far to rebound. OKC's development eclipses Tulsa many times over but the city is all but building an urban core from scratch. When I say Tulsa's neighborhoods are more mature, I am talking about the way things are today, on January 5, 2015...I am not taking into account how things WILL look in 1, 3, and 5 years.


However the fact that you throw deep Duece into the next sentence, confuses me as to what you consider an urban neighborhood. Tulsa has no true urban neighborhood that is anywhere near as mature as deep duece or even midtown.

I agree that Deep Deuce is becoming a mature urban neighborhood above anything Tulsa currently offers. I think Midtown still has a few years to go but I think it will eventually get there as well. It's already come a long way just in the past couple of years since I have been here.

This is key right here. Tulsa's urban neighborhoods were never decimated the way OKC's were so it hasn't had as far to rebound. OKC's development eclipses Tulsa many times over but the city is all but building an urban core from scratch.



I agree that Deep Deuce is becoming a mature urban neighborhood above anything Tulsa currently offers. I think Midtown still has a few years to go but I think it will eventually get there as well. It's already come a long way just in the past couple of years since I have been here.

What true urban neighborhood does Tulsa have that is more mature than midtown?

This is key right here. Tulsa's urban neighborhoods were never decimated the way OKC's were so it hasn't had as far to rebound. OKC's development eclipses Tulsa many times over but the city is all but building an urban core from scratch. When I say Tulsa's neighborhoods are more mature, I am talking about the way things are today, on January 5, 2015...I am not taking into account how things WILL look in 1, 3, and 5 years.

I agree that Deep Deuce is becoming a mature urban neighborhood above anything Tulsa currently offers. I think Midtown still has a few years to go but I think it will eventually get there as well. It's already come a long way just in the past couple of years since I have been here.

The first paragraph is utter BS. Have you seen a recent aerial of Tulsa's core?

And Deep Deuce is ALREADY well beyond anything in Tulsa, as is Bricktown.

This is key right here. Tulsa's urban neighborhoods were never decimated the way OKC's were so it hasn't had as far to rebound. OKC's development eclipses Tulsa many times over but the city is all but building an urban core from scratch. When I say Tulsa's neighborhoods are more mature, I am talking about the way things are today, on January 5, 2015...I am not taking into account how things WILL look in 1, 3, and 5 years.


I usually try not to be so blunt on here, but you really have no clue what you are talking about. Your posts are literally making my head hurt.

We are talking about a city that recently was named having the worst 'parking crater' of any downtown in America, although in their defense there's a lot of young entreprenuers that are trying to reverse this (they have a looooong way to go).

Also, clearly you have never been to East Tulsa, Red Fork, North Tulsa, 61st/Peoria area, etc. They were just as decimated as anything in OKC or any urban area in America for that matter.

Deep Deuce, Bricktown, Paseo, Campus Corner, CBD and the upcoming Chisholm Creek, Wheeler Distric, & MAPS3 park/Core 2 Shore are all areas that are all or will be, better and bigger on a scale than anything Tulsa has or will have, but Tulsa still has urban districts that feel more complete, although they're intact and spread out(you can't walk from one to the other), Blue Dome, Brady District. . .etc.

Tulsa CBD has a ton of work to be done. They have a cool roundabout in the middle, but other than that, they need to spend some good money to get it going.

OKC's urban districts are bigger and will be much better, but you can walk to from the other and not feel outside of them like I felt in Tulsa, however, they aren't as dense, but they aren't separated by fields of surface parking.

I'm not quite sure how to put it without pissing both sides off, but I will just say one last thing about this whole deal, that I didn't mean to intentionally start up again, that Tulsa can learn from OKC and OKC can learn from Tulsa.

This is going to be my last post in this thread. OKC and Tulsa are both great up-and-coming cities with different strengths and weaknesses. OKC is where the development and momentum are at but Tulsa has a charm and vibe that I was impressed by. As far as which city is really better, it depends on what you prefer. Whether you prefer OKC or Tulsa, you can make a compelling case for either city and they actually complement each other quite well. High speed rail between them will be a huge hit. In OKC, it's the Thunder, Bricktown, the MBG, and the current and planned residential construction. In Tulsa it's the scenery, the aesthetics, the live music, and the nicely developed urban districts. The better OKC and Tulsa do the better the state of Oklahoma does.

Here are facts on just Deep Deuce. Please feel free to compare any single Tulsa district with similar data.

This does not include huge projects on the district's border, like Steelyard and Metropolitan.

Apartments, built: 677
Condos, built: 195
Apartments, under construction: 295
Condos, under construction: 30
Hotel rooms: 130
Grocery Store: 1
Retail businesses: 5
Restaurants / Bars, open: 8
Restaurants / Bars, under construction: 4

I go to Tulsa very infrequently. I have a friend who moved up there last year, and she said 1) OKC has a much better, more lively downtown, and 2) if you stay out of the poor areas, Tulsa is much prettier and has nicer neighborhoods than OKC.

That sort of meshes with what I've heard from other people about Tulsa. I've seen their downtown, they have massive surface parking lots all over the place. If Just The Facts saw that place he would weep tears of blood. OKC's downtown is a lot more dense and has a lot more stuff to do. I haven't been through a lot of the Tulsa neighborhoods so I can't really compare how they are versus OKC. Everything I've heard is that the nice parts of Tulsa are all together, whereas in OKC you have nice neighborhood/slum/nice neighborhood/slum.

Of course that's also why some parts of Tulsa have huge problems with crime and are worse than anything in OKC, and also why that city has bad segregation issues.

--

OKC has a few major opportunities that are coming up in the next 10-15 years, and depending on how we take advantage of them, we could leave Tulsa in the dust.

--A light rail project connecting Norman, Downtown, Edmond, Midwest City and Will Rogers airport

--The demolition of the Cox Center and replacing it with half a dozen skyscrapers, housing, restaurants, and retail

--The Core 2 Shore development portion north of the interstate

--The Wheeler District and its connection to downtown, including the Farmer's Market area

--The 21c hotel and the surrounding developments on Main Street

--The connection of the Health Science Center to the rest of downtown, and its urbanization

Every one of these projects has people working on it. They aren't just pie in the sky ideas, these are actively being pursued. Now while it's unlikely that all of them will meet JTF's gold standard, I expect most of them to actually happen. I understand that plans always change and not to count your chickens before they're fried, and some of these things may not pan out. But this is a very exciting time for OKC and I think we've got a lot of great momentum and reasons to be optimistic.

This isn't even considering Bricktown Towers, or the lumber yard, or the Cotton Mill, or the south Core 2 Shore area, or connections to Capitol Hill. Those things are possibilities as well. I think if the Wheeler District is successful, you could see attempts to duplicate it by other developers in other areas near downtown. I'm sure there will be dozens of other proposals in the next 5 years that haven't even been listed here. We still don't know what Steve's jealousy project is.

Not to pile on, but the notion that Tulsa's downtown was not decimated like OKC's isn't correct. Look at downtown Tulsa from Google Earth. The southern and eastern parts are all but gone, other than a few buildings, many of which are churches. The East End is, thankfully, now seeing a decent amount of investment, taking up several empty lots within the next 1-3 years, but my point remains. Much of downtown Tulsa is/was entirely empty. There is a lot of work still to be done to fully rebuild downtown Tulsa. If you would like to see what is being done about that, refer back to Swake's posts earlier in this thread.

In my opinion, the biggest advantage OKC has over Tulsa is leadership that recognizes the importance of good urban infrastructure. OKC is about to start construction on a streetcar loop, while Tulsa won't even try to implement a decent bus loop, for example.

Where I think Tulsa is ahead:

Outdoor recreation. Some of this is due to the natural topography, but Riverparks and Turkey Mountain (and in several years, the Gathering Place) provide opportunities for recreation not available (to my knowledge) in OKC.

Live Music: Tulsa has the Cain's, Brady Theater, and the Vanguard that consistently bring in great shows. And, of course, the BOK Center which brings in many of the big names, however the Chesapeake Arena also attracts these.

Anything else that Tulsa may be ahead in, that I can think of, is intangible. I love midtown, but it is hard to compare to anything in OKC. South Tulsa/Jenks/Bixby is also unlike any area that I've been to in OKC, although probably most similar to Edmond. The two are hard to compare, due to the more spread out nature of OKC and it's suburbs.

Oklahoma City is ahead of Tulsa in nearly every tangible measure. This does not mean that OKC is necessarily better than Tulsa, but the city is experiencing faster growth.

From the time I've spent in OKC, I really do like it. A lot. But I prefer Tulsa. Tulsa suits my personality better. Tulsa feels less corporate than OKC, and there are other intangible things that I can't quite discern that give the cities, at least for me, very different personalities. However, should I ever live in OKC, I'm sure that I would be happy there, and I'm sure I would find some things that I liked better.

As dankrutka said, it's not about one city being better than the other, it's about what an individual prefers.

Here are facts on just Deep Deuce. Please feel free to compare any single Tulsa district with similar data.

This does not include huge projects on the district's border, like Steelyard and Metropolitan.

Apartments, built: 677
Condos, built: 195
Apartments, under construction: 295
Condos, under construction: 30
Hotel rooms: 130
Grocery Store: 1
Retail businesses: 5
Restaurants / Bars, open: 8
Restaurants / Bars, under construction: 4

This proves nothing Pete. For someone who claims to be objective you have shown now proof how Deep Deuce is "superior" and better than any urban neighborhood in Tulsa.

If you were to in fact do this, shouldn't you analyze and compare other areas in Tulsa to see if, in fact, Deep Deuce is by your definition the best urban neighborhood?

Here's a few objective demographics for you:

Uptown/SOBO which is in reality Downtown Tulsa:
(Area south of the IDL to 24th Street - Riverside Drive to Midland Valley Trail) - 0.548 square miles

Population: 3,240
Estimated Households: 2,282
Estimated Housing Units: 2,665
Per Capita Income: $43,718
Average Income: $62,066
Average Household Value: $284,463

Downtown Tulsa:
(Area inside the IDL) - 1.27 square miles

Population: 4,203
Estimated Households: 1,223
Estimated Housing Units: 1,480
Per Capita Income: $15,060
Average Income: $51,758
Average Household Value: $147,527

Downtown OKC:
(Area from New I-40 to NW 6th St - Western to I-235) - 1.81 square miles

Population: 5,349
Estimated Households: 1,485
Estimated Housing Units: 1,860
Per Capita Income: $12,053
Average Income: $43,419
Average Household Value: $126,088

Midtown OKC:
(Area from Western/Classen to I-235 - NW 6th to NW 18th) - 1.03 square miles

Population: 2,725
Estimated Households: 1,428
Estimated Housing Units: 1,709
Per Capita Income: $31,492
Average Income: $42,284
Average Household Value: $208,484

Essentially, the IDL and Uptown have more than 2,000 residents than Downtown OKC. Midtown - Downtown OKC (an area about 50% larger) has similar population numbers to Downtown-Uptown Tulsa. If you took a swath of the area around Cherry Street - Utica Square area and add that in to comparable size of Midtown-Downtown OKC, what do you think the statistics would look like? I can do it if anyone would like.
_____________

Now since I know you'll probably come back and say well I was only talking about Deep Deuce and not the overall larger area. So I took the same standards for Tulsa. An urban neighborhood consisting of about 100 acres 0.25 miles away from the Center of the CBD. That leaves you 2 comparable neighborhoods in Tulsa, the East Village - Pearl Area and Brady District - Brady Heights. Let's compare them both shall we?

Deep Deuce

Population: 586
Estimated Households: 409
Estimated Housing Units: 550
Per Capita Income: $33,422
Average Income: $47,932
Average Housing Value: $184,803

Brady District

Population: 406
Estimated Households: 142
Estimated Housing Units: 174
Per Capita Income: $10,995
Average Household Income: $31,492
Average Housing Value: $106,795

East Village:

Population: 300
Estimated Households: 190
Estimated Housing Units: 239
Per Capita Income: $28,269
Average Household Income: $44,535
Average Housing Value: $203,502

(These are 2014 numbers I get from demographic software programs I use)

Do I need to go into the details of all the restaurants, bars, art galleries, parks and other amenities in these neighborhoods? Yes Deep Deuce is a great neighborhood in the state, and one of my favorite in Oklahoma City. Is it a clear winner, no. That is a fact. If you like it better than others, great. But I'll quote what you said, don't state a fact as fact if it is your opinion.

Then you might want to consider updating your software. Just look at the housing summary on this site, there are well over 800 units in Deep Duece, and that is not counting Mosaic which will probably open next month. The population is easily over 1,000. You shorted deep deuce by about half on both figures, probably a lot more on population.

Then you might want to consider updating your software. Just look at the housing summary on this site, there are well over 800 units in Deep Duece, and that is not counting Mosaic which will probably open next month. The population is easily over 1,000. You shorted deep deuce by about half on both figures, probably a lot more on population.

Well I'll be sure to email the Census Bureau and tell them how incorrect their figures are for Deep Deuce. I'm sure they'll get right on that. Census data is never fully accurate anyhow, especially in between the actual Census years, as they are just estimates.

The East Village in Tulsa has 300 units publicly announced, but no announced ground breaking date. Another 400-500 in the planning phase. 80 about to deliver in the next month. And 200 beginning construction in the next few months.

I have never stated either one is better than the other, because I think it's up to a personal preference. The facts however show that neither is blowing one or the other out of the water.

Not to derail the thread, but I've heard things here and there about the 300 unit project in the East End. What is that?

Not to derail the thread, but I've heard things here and there about the 300 unit project in the East End. What is that?

Hartford Commons (this is a Snyder development) will have between 250 - 300 units. This is the publicly announced project, there was a rendering of it in a video on Newson6 about a month ago. They are basically converted the old Hartford building into lofts and adding more units on the parking lot/grass lot to the immediate east of the building.

There's also another 300 units development that's been in the papers to be build around Archer & Elgin - this isn't the East Village though, but another large residential project to look forward to being built. You also have GreenArch Phase II that will be another 120 units or so at Greenwood and Archer.

There is also a much larger project in the works too, but it's not far enough along to really count as for sure (this is the planned units).

LandArchPoke, the numbers I provided tie directly back to articles on this site that verify every bit of that information. They also fall strictly within a defined boundary for the district; not an arbitrary distance/radius.

If you choose not believe them, I don't know what to tell you.

And unless you either have a source that has already done the same for Tulsa or want to spend a ton of time doing it on your own (with confirming links), you are not comparing apples to apples.

And BTW, I did not list any "planned" or "announced" projects. Just things open, occupied or well under construction.


As stated, already 800+ open and occupied units in Deep Deuce (so easily over 1,000 people) so your number of 586 people is way, way off and therefore the rest of the data has to be considered equally out of date / suspect.

My numbers are real and tracked in great detail. They aren't just pulled from another site on an ad hoc basis.

LandArchPoke, the numbers I provided tie directly back to articles on this site that verify every bit of that information.

If you choose not believe them, I don't know what to tell you.

And unless you either have a source that has already done the same for Tulsa or want to spend a ton of time doing it on your own (with confirming links), you are not comparing apples to apples.

And BTW, I did not list any "planned" or "announced" projects. Just things open, occupied or well under construction.


As stated, already 800+ open and occupied units in Deep Deuce (so easily over 1,000 people) so your number of 586 people is way, way off and therefore the rest of the data has to be considered equally out of date / suspect.

My numbers are real and tracked in great detail. They aren't just pulled from another site on an ad hoc basis.

"And Deep Deuce is ALREADY well beyond anything in Tulsa, as is Bricktown."

Direct quote from you ^. For someone who claims to be objective, where is your data to support that it is better than anything in Tulsa? It's laughable.

I used Census data. If that's not good enough for you because it disproves your opinion that is stated as a fact, then dig your head deeper into the sand.

Is it off? Yes. Like I said, Census data is only so accurate. It's equally inaccurate no matter how to compare it anywhere, which means the numbers are the same everywhere. Do I need to explain Statistics 101? I'm sure this is some conspiracy in Washington, D.C. though to promote Tulsa over OKC right?

Example: You could have someone who goes to OU, say from Dallas, who lives in Deep Deuce. They may never establish residency in Oklahoma City, so they are never accounted for in Census data as they are counted in their parents residence in Dallas. Same can be said about someone who goes to TU and would live in the East Village, and is from Dallas.

You have done nothing to prove your opinion as fact. If you are going to call other people out, then you should be held equally accountable. If you don't like my facts and data, disprove it.

Okay, let me put it another way. I can prove Deep Deuce has the numbers I listed.

I welcome anyone who can show a single, clearly defined district in Tulsa that has better numbers.

If they can, I will gladly admit I was mistaken.


Census data isn't a good tool because we are talking about clearly defined districts, not a radius or zip code. Plus, it's way out of date when you are talking about emerging areas.

So, feel free to document and post a challenge to my assertion. I've already demonstrated OKC has a full realized urban district with large numbers and amenities.

Okay, let me put it another way. I can prove Deep Deuce has the numbers I listed.

I welcome anyone who can show a single, clearly defined district in Tulsa that has better numbers.

If they can, I will gladly admit I was mistaken.


Census data isn't a good tool because we are talking about clearly defined districts, not a radius or zip code. Plus, it's way out of date when you are talking about emerging areas.

So, feel free to document and post a challenge to my assertion. I've already demonstrated OKC has a full realized urban district with large numbers and amenities.

Not trying to be a jerk, but did you read the boundaries of the areas I pulled the information for? I did them by drawing polygons along the streets by the defined districts. Census data goes much smaller than by square mile.

What defines an urban district to you?

To me, I would say the SOBO/Riverview area has better stats then Deep Deuce. You have University Club Tower, Mansion House, and Lincoln Park on Riverside. Those 3 combined have the same amount units in 3 blocks that exist in the the entire district of Deep Deuce. Just down 18th Street you have wine bars, amazing bbq, gay bars, biker bars, pizza, Veterans Park, and more.

I'm sure this probably isn't an urban district though right?

Hartford Commons (this is a Snyder development) will have between 250 - 300 units. This is the publicly announced project, there was a rendering of it in a video on Newson6 about a month ago. They are basically converted the old Hartford building into lofts and adding more units on the parking lot/grass lot to the immediate east of the building.

There's also another 300 units development that's been in the papers to be build around Archer & Elgin - this isn't the East Village though, but another large residential project to look forward to being built. You also have GreenArch Phase II that will be another 120 units or so at Greenwood and Archer.

There is also a much larger project in the works too, but it's not far enough along to really count as for sure (this is the planned units).

Hartford Commons, to my understanding, is actually the development going just south of that block, and will have 162 units. The project involving the Hartford building is separate.

The East End (or Village) is seemingly coming out of nowhere all of a sudden. It will be very interesting to see in a couple years.

Hartford Commons, to my understanding, is actually the development going just south of that block, and will have 162 units. The project involving the Hartford building is separate.

The East End (or Village) is seemingly coming out of nowhere all of a sudden. It will be very interesting to see in a couple years.

That area will really bloom soon that's for sure. If the BigMo Parking lot, KOTV's old studio, and the Greyhound station are redeveloped too (as I highly suspect they will be soon) this area is going to be something very special.

The ARG project is going to be named something different (I think it was using the name Hartford Commons too). They've been quoted in the paper saying that haven't named this project officially yet. The Synder project will be much larger than the ARG project. Keep in mind you have the Hogan Assessments HQ under construction at Greenwood and 1st too.

http://suzie81.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/29zcyeh.jpg

http://suzie81.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/29zcyeh.jpg

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/540/PdaAgk.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/f0PdaAgkj)

Your amazing whit is overpowering. Care to add anything relevant to the discussion?

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/540/PdaAgk.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/f0PdaAgkj)

Your amazing whit is overpowering. Care to add anything relevant to the discussion?

Care to make a comment that is not derogatory about a fellow poster? You could have certainly made your point without that.

I don't know that LandArchPoke is going to be with us for that long.

Your amazing whit is overpowering. Care to add anything relevant to the discussion?
I guess have your fun here. I came on here trying to admit I was wrong about Tulsa, however since this fired back up and you are acting like an ass putting out incorrect and outdated numbers by the census, we'll just have to let you feel king of the world until the 2020 census is taken and raw numbers and updated figures are posted to Google Earth Pro with new district counts and we'll see what happens.

And who posted the derogatory meme first? Yeah not me. If what I posted offends you Cuatrode, send me a private message. However, I feel like you saw the sarcasm in it and moved on.

Fellow posters were able to make accusations and defamatory statements against Tulsa Chamber members without so much of a glance or apologizes in that regards. Seems to be a bit of a double standard around here.

And who posted the derogatory meme first? Yeah not me. If what I posted offends you Cuatrode, send me a private message. However, I feel like you saw the sarcasm in it and moved on.

Fellow posters were able to make accusations and defamatory statements against Tulsa Chamber members without so much of a glance or apologizes in that regards. Seems to be a bit of a double standard around here.
No double standard at all. Making direct derogatory comments about fellow posters here is a fast way to get banned. A comical meme is fairly innocuous and non-offensive unlike a direct comment about the poster.

I guess have your fun here. I came on here trying to admit I was wrong about Tulsa, however since this fired back up and you are acting like an ass putting out incorrect and outdated numbers by the census, we'll just have to let you feel king of the world until the 2020 census is taken and raw numbers and updated figures are posted to Google Earth Pro with new district counts and we'll see what happens.

Ah yes, I can be called an ass... but I can't say that someone whit is overpowering?

Did I say anything to you about your comments. I came on here to try an contribute to the overall sight, and when I tried to offer insight and ideas in threads like 499 W Sheridan you attacked me on there. So I dropped it.

You and several other people seem to think I'm out to get OKC. I have not ever said that either Tulsa or OKC is better than one another. I try to post relevant information and stats to help people think more critically about what they are saying. Don't like it, well that's unfortunate.

I'm glad you got to experience more of Tulsa, and hopefully you get a chance to explore more of it and find it's hidden gems that gives you something to look forward to when you are there.

No double standard at all. Making direct derogatory comments about fellow posters here is a fast way to get banned. A comical meme is fairly innocuous and non-offensive unlike a direct comment about the poster.


Haha ok. Me being called an ass by Panda is probably comical to you as well.

Ah yes, I can be called an ass... but I can't say that someone whit is overpowering?

Did I say anything to you about your comments. I came on here to try an contribute to the overall sight, and when I tried to offer insight and ideas in threads like 499 W Sheridan you attacked me on there. So I dropped it.

You and several other people seem to think I'm out to get OKC. I have not ever said that either Tulsa or OKC is better than one another. I try to post relevant information and stats to help people think more critically about what they are saying. Don't like it, well that's unfortunate.

I'm glad you got to experience more of Tulsa, and hopefully you get a chance to explore more of it and find it's hidden gems that gives you something to look forward to when you are there.

Name calling isn't appropriate here no matter who is doing it. Your pertinent comments are appreciated but you have to be prepared for those who will challenge what you say without getting too offensive.

Haha ok. Me being called an ass by Panda is probably comical to you as well.

Obviously you didn't read what I said.