Not knowing the districts in OKC quite as well (more recently), my opinion has always been that Cherry Street is probably the most urban district in the entire state. Once efforts are made to calm traffic a bit, the district will be even more pleasant. What it has that most others don't is a variety of housing options in the immediate area, most of the necessities one would need to live on a day to day basis (Reasor's full service grocer is only a half mile away as well in addition to smaller markets on Cherry Street). The most popular farmer's market calls it home as well. It has some of the best restaurants and bars in town. Churches. School. Banks. It's a true neighborhood. To boot Utica Square is just to the south as well.

I can definitely agree with this, and this is one thing that I really like about Tulsa and other older urban cities. I really like self-contained neighborhoods where you rarely have to go very far for every day necessities. Little Rock's Hillcrest district is the same way as Cherry Street but on a smaller scale. It's an urban district but its also a complete neighborhood with a full-sized grocery store, beautiful historic churches, banks, etc in addition to the trendy bars and restaurants.

To me, this is the big difference, and it's probably over magnified for us on this board. OKC pretty clearly has more momentum than Tulsa, but when you know all the development that is coming up in one city, but relatively little about the other city, that's when the rhetoric starts to go overboard a little.

This is true also. How many OKC folks know about all the developments happening in Tulsa: 20 downtown development projects you should know about (http://www.tulsaworld.com/photovideo/slideshows/downtown-development-projects-you-should-know-about/collection_2e50248b-80c7-57a5-aa0d-5668c2f1d07b.html) There's some info in the Tulsa Development Summary thread, but it's not nearly as comprehensive as what's on this site for OKC: http://www.okctalk.com/tulsa-suburbs/39546-tulsa-development-summary-6.html That few people have mentioned the Brady District is surprising, considering I think the momentum in that district is similar to what's happening in OKC's emerging district. You could make an argument that the Brady District has the most potential of any Tulsa districts (even over Brookside, Cherry Street, Utica Square, Blue Dome).

Oklahoma City (as a whole) being a much larger metro obviously will continue to have more "things to do" than Tulsa ever will. Outside of moving the capital to Tulsa, I don't see how Tulsa could ever truly catch up in that respect. Both cities excel at different things. The saying "to each his own" is appropriate.

I would say not having the state's flagship public university and hospital/medical research center is the biggest disadvantage Tulsa has compared to OKC, followed by state government offices and Tinker AFB. It is difficult for a city to have significant growth without one or more of those employment clusters especially in the high tech economy where college graduates and research associated with universities are such big economic drivers. If TU was more like a Vanderbilt or even TCU/Baylor it could fill part of that void but while its a respected private university it's currently not anywhere near the size or level needed to be a major force for Tulsa.

The problem with these comparisons is that there is no perspective; no objective measurements to contrast.

Every single American city has existing urban districts and most have lots of activity, due to the larger New Urbanism movement.

So, anyone can say, "We have so much going on! So much more than xxx" but virtually no one has the facts or stats for a meaningful comparison.

That is one reason I created the Urban Project Summary, the Downtown Hotel Summary and Downtown Housing Summary. Those are real metrics but do little good without compiled data from other cities.

Not knowing the districts in OKC quite as well (more recently), my opinion has always been that Cherry Street is probably the most urban district in the entire state.

It all depends on how you want to define "most urban".

Again, Bricktown and directly adjacent Deep Deuce have way more of everything than anywhere else in the state. Not even close, actually.

If you say you prefer a district for various reasons, that's one thing but if you get into these "most urban" statements then you have to look at everything from housing to shopping to restaurants to recreation to offices and transportation, etc.

If you want to get down to measurements there is simply nothing that is going to compare with Bricktown and Deep Deuce -- not by miles. Personal preferences aside.

11 hotels, thousands of living units, 50+ restaurants and bars, many large employers, multiple street car stops, grocery store, ballpark, dog park, retail and service stores, on and on.

This is true also. How many OKC folks know about all the developments happening in Tulsa: 20 downtown development projects you should know about (http://www.tulsaworld.com/photovideo/slideshows/downtown-development-projects-you-should-know-about/collection_2e50248b-80c7-57a5-aa0d-5668c2f1d07b.html) There's some info in the Tulsa Development Summary thread, but it's not nearly as comprehensive as what's on this site for OKC: http://www.okctalk.com/tulsa-suburbs/39546-tulsa-development-summary-6.html That few people have mentioned the Brady District is surprising, considering I think the momentum in that district is similar to what's happening in OKC's emerging district. You could make an argument that the Brady District has the most potential of any Tulsa districts (even over Brookside, Cherry Street, Utica Square, Blue Dome).

It would seem that way at the outset, but a majority of the development is civic/museums/stadiums. There really is little in terms of rooftops. Blue Dome has a long LONG way to go to catch up with Cherry Street and Brookside. Blue Dome is still a place that necessitates a drive (or a bus trip).

^

Since both those Tulsa districts are surrounded almost exclusively by single family housing, I'm sure very few people are not using their cars to get there.

Not sure how truly urban a district can be when in all directions there are nothing but houses.

It all depends on how you want to define "most urban".

Again, Bricktown and directly adjacent Deep Deuce have way more of everything than anywhere else in the state. Not even close, actually.

If you say you prefer a district for various reasons, that's one thing but if you get into these "most urban" statements then you have to look at everything from housing to shopping to restaurants to recreation to offices and transportation, etc.

If you want to get down to measurements there is simply nothing that is going to compare with Bricktown and Deep Deuce -- not by miles. Personal preferences aside.

11 hotels, thousands of living units, 50+ restaurants and bars, many large employers, multiple street car stops, grocery store, ballpark, dog park, retail and service stores, on and on.

I agree my statement was a bit vague (urban), however I think bchris02 caught it in that I meant a self contained, "urban" has everything a local would ever need or want. As much as Bricktown is infinitely larger than Cherry Street, they are two completely different animals. It's like comparing Times Square to Greenwich Village. Apples and Oranges.

So in summary, whatever the terminology for it is, I believe Cherry Street is the most it. While Walkscore is not the end all be all, this is kind of the direction/point I am trying to make.

1232512326

^

Right, but there are very few people who live close enough to walk to and from either place!

In that respect, it's the antithesis of an urban neighborhood and essentially a shopping / dining strip.

A true urban neighborhood has *density* and neither of these two neighborhoods come anywhere close. Not only no dense housing, no office workers and no real public transportation.

Is anything in either district you are promoting even over 2 floors?

The issue with Cherry St. and Brookside (and Western Ave. and The Plaza) is that they are urban corridors in otherwise non-urban settings. Not all non-urban settings are unwalkable, especially if there is an urban focal point that operates inside of the non-urban fabric. Tulsa is better at these types of areas than OKC, for the moment.

Bricktown is a decidedly urban area, just as Blue Dome and Brady are decidedly urban areas (because surface parking essentially counts as neutral in urban/non-urban). The difference between OKC and Tulsa in relation to Urbanism is that OKC has focused on creating thriving fully urban settings for over a decade now and it's paying dividends. Bricktown/Deep Deuce is the most flushed out 16-20 block conglomerate in the state.

As 918Towner noted, OKC's "midtown" centers (or more correctly "non-downtown corridors") are decidedly more urban and better developed at this point in time…but that has to do with (and this is an assumption on my part) the surrounding historical residential neighborhoods maintaining their historical value better or at the very least gentrifying much sooner than OKC's versions (Crown Heights, Heritage Hill/Mesta Park, Gatewood, etc.)

Tulsa will absolutely get there. They have a major challenge in that their downtown is strangled by highways, but if they focus on making downtown a super special place, then it should be able to spill over into the other areas that are just on the other sides of those barriers.

The issue with Cherry St. and Brookside (and Western Ave. and The Plaza) is that they are urban corridors in otherwise non-urban settings. Not all non-urban settings are unwalkable, especially if there is an urban focal point that operates inside of the non-urban fabric. Tulsa is better at these types of areas than OKC, for the moment.

Completely agree with this, with the exception that I still consider these neighborhoods to be urban even if they are comprised of mostly single family homes as opposed to multistory, multifamily housing, as long as the layout of the neighborhood is urban (grid streets, sidewalks, etc) and feeds seamlessly into the commercial focal point of the neighborhood. Another thing to look for is if the homes are oriented towards the street or the backyard. In urban single-family neighborhoods, the living room will have a large window overlooking the street. In the suburbs, usually a bedroom will be facing the street and the living room will be oriented towards the backyard.

OKC's best chance for these types of neighborhoods are the Plaza, Western Ave, and Uptown 23rd. All three of those places have really taken off in terms of trendy bars/restaurants, but still have a ways to go when it comes to other amenities that will truly make them self-contained neighborhoods.

Both those areas are just commercial strips along one main road.

Might be fun for bar-hopping and some light shopping but absolutely not urban neighborhoods.

One more thing, I think what Deep Deuce really needs to complete it is a commercial corridor as its focal point. As is, there is a little retail and a few restaurants scattered throughout it but it lacks a central commercial focal point.

Almost everything in Deep Deuce is on 2nd Street, or just off it, so I don't know what you are talking about.

Almost everything in Deep Deuce is on 2nd Street, or just off it, so I don't know what you are talking about.

it would probably help if they changed the name of the district to reflect that focus. -M

Almost everything in Deep Deuce is on 2nd Street, or just off it, so I don't know what you are talking about.

2nd St has a few businesses but it is not a commercial corridor. The picture below is a commercial corridor. It can be mixed use, but everything at street-level needs to be commercial. Retail feeds off synergy and developing it in this manner benefits both the neighborhood and the businesses.

Auto Alley is this, as is Sheridan in Bricktown. Western, the Plaza, and Uptown/23rd are commercial corridors as well. Film Row will become one as it continues to develop and mature. 10th St in Midtown is another opportunity as it continues to fill in. Commercial corridors are an important part of an urban neighborhood because they serve as a focal point, regardless of the density of the surrounding development. Developing Oklahoma going north out of Deep Deuce towards the Metropolitan similarly would go a long way towards completing the neighborhood, in my opinion.

http://www.sustainable-chicago.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Andersonville.jpg

On 2nd or just off it in Deep Deuce:

Flux Salon
Slim Men's Wear
Bella Vici home accessories
Lumen light bar
Dental Office
KoKo FitClub
Anchor Down
Belle Kitchen
Leaf + Bean
Urban Johnnie
Native Roots
Spokies bike station
Aloft Hotel
WXYZ bar
WSKY
Slaughter's Hall
Deep Deuce Grill
and soon to be a new place in the old Urban Roots space

That is a fair bit more than "a few" and all within 3 blocks AND in a setting with 3 to 8 level buildings all built right up to the street:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8619/16833260826_6883ce4423_c.jpg

at the iron maiden concert in tulsa last friday night, the singer's first words when he addressed the crowd were "hello, oklahoma city". oof.

On 2nd or just off it in Deep Deuce:

Flux Salon
Slim Men's Wear
Bell. . .
. . .
. . .ghter's Hall
Deep Deuce Grill
and soon to be a new place in the old Urban Roots space

That's actually a more impressive list than I thought.

It's amazing how much the built environment leads one to think otherwise. We've really got to do a better job of developing to the corner and we have to be careful with not building too many monoliths. In Buenos Aires, they call blocks "Manzanas" (literally apple). We need more apple slice development and less whole-apple development.

Deep Deuce's single biggest weakness? Signage. I love the district, and it's on my list once my youngest graduates in a few years. But you wouldn't realize half the businesses on 2nd were there if you're not paying attention.

On 2nd or just off it in Deep Deuce:
That is a fair bit more than "a few" and all within 3 blocks AND in a setting with 3 to 8 level buildings all built right up to the street:
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8619/16833260826_6883ce4423_c.jpg

I still stand by my observation. Cherry Street is the most complete (urban) neighborhood in the state. And many more people walk in this neighborhood than you would imagine. It is the neighborhood people generally move to for that type of lifestyle. It's one of the most dense and diverse areas. And has a little bit of everything, outside of a hotel. There are many more appartments than it seems at first glance. It's just that none really front the main street. They are all right behind. It's not a destination. It's a home. And it is void of "monoliths". Tall buildings do not dictate an urban environment (BOK Plaza anyone). I think that is the difference in our point of views on this.

For some perspective:

Cherry Street:
12328 12329 12330

Like I said, once they work on calming traffic and some street beautification it will be a real powerhouse.

I still stand by my observation. Cherry Street is the most complete (urban) neighborhood in the state. And many more people walk in this neighborhood than you would imagine. It is the neighborhood people generally move to for that type of lifestyle. It's one of the most dense and diverse areas. And has a little bit of everything, outside of a hotel. There are many more appartments than it seems at first glance. It's just that none really front the main street. They are all right behind. It's not a destination. It's a home. And it is void of "monoliths". Tall buildings do not dictate an urban environment (BOK Plaza anyone). I think that is the difference in our point of views on this.

For some perspective:

Cherry Street:
http://www.okctalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=12328&stc=1 http://www.okctalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=12329&stc=1 http://www.okctalk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=12330&stc=1

Like I said, once they work on calming traffic and some street beautification it will be a real powerhouse.

Regardless of your opinion, using actual definitions of Urbanism...Deep Deuce and Bricktown are much more urban than Cherry St. It isn't an argument.

Goodness, this thread blew up from the last time I looked.
Anyway, I was at Dilly Diner on Sunday as well, I wonder if fate had us there at the same time and we didn't even know it haha.

Blue Dome and the Brady were bustling with all kinds of traffic. Weather was nice so that probably helped out quite a bit. In some areas it was difficult to find parking, so it was definitely busy.

As for your waitress, firstly, I must say the service was awful that day. They were all running around here and there and it'd be 15 minutes before you'd get help again. But, regarding her comments, she's obviously ignorant of what's going on in OKC and is stuck in the Tulsa paradigm that is most certainly prevalent. But, to you OKCers, surely you can understand and recall that Tulsa was Oklahoma's gem for decades and decades. People thought of Tulsa, not OKC. Tulsa had the money, the class, etc. Obviously that died off in the 80s and 90s, and OKC has taken the crown, but there's definitely context to it that needs to be understood.

I would have kindly told her to take a trip down the turnpike and see if she says the same thing when she comes back.

But, I found some of the related comments on the first page interesting, because growing up I always heard the opposite: Tulsa stinks, it has nothing; it's boring, etc.

Only now is that perception changing, I think. But I will say I think most of it had to do with immaturity of these people. Some moved away to the West coast, Texas, or OKC, and most of those some have since moved back to Tulsa. I find that funny.

I still stand by my observation. Cherry Street is the most complete (urban) neighborhood in the state. And many more people walk in this neighborhood than you would imagine. It is the neighborhood people generally move to for that type of lifestyle. It's one of the most dense and diverse areas. And has a little bit of everything, outside of a hotel. There are many more appartments than it seems at first glance. It's just that none really front the main street. They are all right behind. It's not a destination. It's a home. And it is void of "monoliths". Tall buildings do not dictate an urban environment (BOK Plaza anyone). I think that is the difference in our point of views on this.

For some perspective:

Cherry Street:
12328 12329 12330

Like I said, once they work on calming traffic and some street beautification it will be a real powerhouse.

Beautiful pictures. Cherry Street is awesome and I agree there is nothing else quite like it in the state. In OKC, it should be compared with Western Avenue, not Bricktown/Deep Deuce. Western Avenue isn't as far along as Cherry St but some pretty cool developments are set to happen there over the next 5 years and one day it could come into its own as a similar type of neighborhood. It's already one of the cooler places in OKC in my opinion.


Okc will be hard pressed to ever develop anything like Utica. Aside from the quality of shopping the walkability of that place is top notch. It doesn't have roads like grand, Classen, or western mixed in like the curve + triangle area does, which in my eyes will keep that place from ever being quite like Utica.

In thinking more about this, I really think its selling OKC short to say that it could never have anything like Utica. If the Glimcher development happens, while it won't be exactly like Utica, I think it will be comparable.

Oklahoma City ranked #31 and Tulsa ranked #33 in the latest US News and World Report rankings of the top 100 places to live(metro areas) in the US. Basically a push and I think very impressive that a state with a small population would have both major cities ranked that high. JMO

Downtown Tulsa is in desperate need of something like Project 180. Lots of one-way streets in bad shape and no real streetscape that I noticed.

Ok, I do not understand OKC's hatred of one-way streets in Downtown. Literally every other metro in the US has one-way streets in their downtown areas. The reason is one-way streets are much more efficient for traffic flow when there are a lot of intersections. For example, in Tulsa, you can drive the entire length of downtown on Cincinnati and never stop at a stop light, if you drive the speed limit, same for every other one-way street in Tulsa. The roads in DT Tulsa also provide great highway access, within the downtown area itself, unlike OKC where you have to leave the DT area to get on a highway.

Any ways, every major urban area that we should be modeling ourselves after has one-ways, such as Seattle, Chicago, NYC, etc. all of which have better walk-ability than OKC as well.

^

Due to recent studies and updated thinking on one-way streets, they are largely being eliminated / converted.

They were all the rage in the 70's but it's well established that restoring 2-way aids new urbanism principles.

One way streets allow a very slightly more efficient drive, and hurt businesses, cyclists, and pedestrians. On the whole the negligible benefits of one-way streets, are far outweighed by the negative effects. Jeff Speck's Walkable City does a nice job of walking through all the downsides of one-way streets (and everything else concerning walkability).

Tulsa is converting most downtown streets to 2-way except the ones with major IDL exits/entrances. Boston and 6th Street are done with 5th Street, Boulder and Cheyenne being converted now. The rest will be done in phases eventually leaving only 1st, 2nd, 7th, 8th , Detroit and Cincinnati as one way streets. Streetscaping is ongoing on Boulder and Cheyenne and has more money allocated for it in the new Vision plan.

The two big parking lots in the Blue Dome area aren’t going to last much longer. The largest, a two square block superblock between 1st and 2nd is being replaced with the mixed use Santa Fe Square being developed by Eliot Nelson’s Nelson-Stowe Developers. This project goes to the city council for final approval of the related TIF next month.
http://x.lnimg.com/attachments/AB8716BB-3952-469A-965E-A634B8E5900A.pdf

The other is the Performing Arts Center lot that an Indianapolis developer won a bidding process on and they are now in final contract negotiations with the PAC to develop. This is the project that has a Reasor’s location attached. A final vote on the contract could happen this month.
Development Plans Advance For Downtown Tulsa Parking Lot - NewsOn6.com - Tulsa, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports - KOTV.com | (http://www.newson6.com/story/31059564/development-plans-advance-for-downtown-tulsa-parking-lot)

Oklahoma City ranked #31 and Tulsa ranked #33 in the latest US News and World Report rankings of the top 100 places to live(metro areas) in the US. Basically a push and I think very impressive that a state with a small population would have both major cities ranked that high. JMO

Not to change the subject but I believe you were referencing this article: Oklahoma City, OK | U.S. News Real Estate (http://realestate.usnews.com/places/oklahoma/oklahoma-city) and Tulsa, OK | U.S. News Real Estate (http://realestate.usnews.com/places/oklahoma/tulsa)

Not a bad showing by either city. OKC bests a lot of cities we consider ourselves peers to (KC, Jacksonville, Louisville, Indy, etc.)

Swake, what do you think is holding Tulsa back more than anything else? It's impressive how much Tulsa has been able to accomplish despite its issues. It's downtown will be a real jewel once these projects get completed and as more surface parking continues to be filled in. I really think the city is one of the most underrated in the United States and if it could get itself in gear and diversify its economy and start attracting some non oil & gas corporate relocations, it has the potential to be one of America's next boom-towns. It already has many of the ingredients. The one thing it's missing is the job growth. Even during the oil boom, Tulsa didn't see the level of employment expansion that OKC saw. Why do you think that is?

Tulsa is converting most downtown streets to 2-way except the ones with major IDL exits/entrances. Boston and 6th Street are done with 5th Street, Boulder and Cheyenne being converted now. The rest will be done in phases eventually leaving only 1st, 2nd, 7th, 8th , Detroit and Cincinnati as one way streets. Streetscaping is ongoing on Boulder and Cheyenne and has more money allocated for it in the new Vision plan.

The two big parking lots in the Blue Dome area aren’t going to last much longer. The largest, a two square block superblock between 1st and 2nd is being replaced with the mixed use Santa Fe Square being developed by Eliot Nelson’s Nelson-Stowe Developers. This project goes to the city council for final approval of the related TIF next month.
http://x.lnimg.com/attachments/AB8716BB-3952-469A-965E-A634B8E5900A.pdf

The other is the Performing Arts Center lot that an Indianapolis developer won a bidding process on and they are now in final contract negotiations with the PAC to develop. This is the project that has a Reasor’s location attached. A final vote on the contract could happen this month.
Development Plans Advance For Downtown Tulsa Parking Lot - NewsOn6.com - Tulsa, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports - KOTV.com | (http://www.newson6.com/story/31059564/development-plans-advance-for-downtown-tulsa-parking-lot)

I love both of those developments, especially Santa Fe Square!

I just can't understate how much filling those two lots with quality developments will change that area. They're absolute game changers and long overdue.

Most definitely.

We're seeing downtown Tulsa finally emerge from a long coma and the people are loving it.
Only more to come.

Literally every other metro in the US has one-way streets in their downtown areas. The reason is one-way streets are much more efficient for traffic flow when there are a lot of intersections.

All of the reasons you mentioned (increased/better traffic flow) are reasons against one-way streets actually, because in a downtown area you want it to be the destination and not just a pass-through. Two way streets tend to be slower, allowing patrons to see the attractions which in downtown areas tend to be right next to each other and plentiful. Slower speeds also allow for integration of other modes of transit (pedestrian, bicycle, transit) and the best urban areas integrate these seamlessly. Finally, having two way streets make it easier for patrons to access downtown - again, as a destination, rather than having to circle back due to a one-way.


Any ways, every major urban area that we should be modeling ourselves after has one-ways, such as Seattle, Chicago, NYC, etc. all of which have better walk-ability than OKC as well.

A bit of info on Seattle, we have one-way streets because we have a somewhat longitudinal CBD that is not wide but is somewhat lengthy. This piece also has a significant amount of office blocks with not many pedestrian offerings. The idea was traffic flow because otherwise you will be stopping every street, un-necessarily for one mile or a little more if you need to go to one end of downtown. This actually worked for a bit during the 1990's and 2000's when Seattle didn't really have a population downtown, it was just offices and a little bit of shopping then; so it worked.

Today, Seattle looks unnecessarily busy all of the time due to the one-way streets AND the placement of entrances to I-5. Also, there is a healthy downtown population yet the streets do not provide for movement of people (so at every block, it is full of cars waiting to turn left - as people cross). So One Way streets in a pedestrian downtown is now working so much and I imagine at some point this idea might be revisited (or at least the street intersections need to have pedestrian only crossing time points).

Chicago and New York are different animals. Both have extensive subway, commuter rail, elevated subway, and other forms of transit (and tunnels - here's to you Chicago Pedway); in addition to SIGNIFICANT length of office blocks very very concentrated - meaning tons of office workers that you need to move quickly in and out. Also, both cities have very large downtowns so much so that they have their own neighborhoods/sections which help balance out the residential vs office. Point is, in world cities like NY and Chi pedestrian has many modes of travel that OKC will never achieve or hope to and has urban form in scale that necessitates One Way streets. You still have the pedestrians just due to sheer size of the city/downtown, not because this model is the best.

A better example would be to take Shanghai or Tokyo, I don't recall any one-way streets in those cities and both have significantly more urban use build in their cbd areas than New York and Chicago (which focus on Office Towers). I think the takeaway is - if your downtown is smaller and/or its focus is a mix of office and residential then a bunch of one-way streets dont work. If your downtown is larger or Office focused then one-ways might work and wont disrupt urbanism for the largest of downtowns (NY, Chi).

Seattle is on the borderline where it actually is not working - there's really not much reason for the traffic we have other than the design that worked in the 1990s doesn't today. I'm not saying get rid of all one-way streets and I do think OKC should have a couple for the office component but I wouldn't go beyond two N-S (Seattle has 3 major N-S) and perhaps one or two E-W that connect to the Interstates. Again, the risk is you move a lot of volume out of downtown quickly, which I think OKC is trying to avoid for the time being.