Urban Tulsa Weekly, "A Tale of Two Cities"

[HOT ROD]

it does have quite a bit of a Tulsa slant and some "equalization" of OKC's attractions to allow Tulsa to appear not have such a backward stand.

I would argue that OKC is definitely 15-20 years or more ahead of Tulsa and I don't see Tulsa ever catching up - unlike what the article says.

I also find it interesting they failed to mention Devon's new skyscraper or OKC's new rail transit projects (NE commuter rail/tourist train, MWC-Downtown commuter rail, AND Downtown OKC's streetcar) - all of which will surely pass and be built decades before anything Tulsa is discussing.

And yes, Bricktown is a much larger scale draw than the intimate Brady District, but they failed to mention downtown OKC's other neighbourhoods that rival or are better than theirs - like Midtown, AAlley, Deep Deuce, Triangle, and the upcoming Core 2 Shore.

OKC has a renaissance synergy about it that has taken OKC to the next level and actually OKC really no longer considers a rivalry with Tulsa, but now looking to rival Denver, Dallas (in some respects), and Seattle. Im not sure Tulsa could compete with that club, but OKC can and will even moreso in the coming years.

That said - I am very pleased with the bulk of the article, it does give a Tulsa prospective to the rivalry. It did show that OKC didn't care about segmentation of people in the past (and still doesn't) but that same anti-segmentation attitude actually helped OKC with civic projects and getting funding whereas Tulsa's arguments left them falling behind.

I also liked the ideas of cooperation - because frankly, Tulsa can not survive any longer unless they get on OKC's coat-tails. This is all the more frank and true if you look at their sports options; all copies of OKC or building on OKC.

but that's ok, because I think the state as a whole will be much more successful with OKC leading the development and Tulsa following, than the state did when Tulsa was the 'leader' and only cared about Tulsa and OKC cared about nothing.

As we move into the 2010 and beyond, I see Oklahoma City and Tulsa becoming more and more like Philadelphia and Pittsburg in the sense of sibling rivalries; both quite successful but moreso in one or more areas that the other lacks (and OKC being more open/diverse [which is cosmopolitan] like Philadelphia and Tulsa being more 'sophisticated' like Pittsburg; in their rivalry).

In fact, Pittsburg used to have their state's tallest skyscraper for the longest time, iirc, despite Philadelphia being much larger - yet this has recently changed. Also, Pittsburg once had a 'steel city' success swagger to it that 'common folk-immigrant' Philadelphia had a complex; yet now Pitts is in a decades long slump looking NOW to recover and Phila has reinvested and reinvented it's city (and status).

See something similar going on here in OK?

[feconi]

OKC has a renaissance synergy about it that has taken OKC to the next level and actually OKC really no longer considers a rivalry with Tulsa, but now looking to rival Denver, Dallas (in some respects), and Seattle. Im not sure Tulsa could compete with that club, but OKC can and will even moreso in the coming years.

I completely disagree that OKC can compete with the likes Denver, Seattle, and especially Dallas. Aspiring for OKC to be on the level of cities like Austin or Charlotte is more reasonable, but frankly even those cities are years ahead of OKC and are progressing more rapidly than OKC, too. Although I agree that OKC has decidedly surpassed Tulsa, it's not totally unreasonable to call it a "rival" city--but it's completely ridiculous to claim Dallas or Seattle as such. Let's be more levelheaded in assessing where OKC stands amongst the nation's cities.