Effect of the original MAPS on the OKC metro and Oklahoma

[bradh]

Is there a consensus that Houston is higher up on the totem pole than Dallas?

Depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about oil & gas (especially anything to do with offshore E&P), then yes.

[Snowman]

Is there a consensus that Houston is higher up on the totem pole than Dallas?

Possibly as a metro but surely as a city, Houston grabbed enough land they had much more control on the destiny of their region than Dallas. So they were able to keep themselves the center of most everything in their metro in a way Dallas could not and assures it to keep that spot. Houston is practically the king of it's region, where Dallas is more the first among equals in it's region.

[bradh]

Houston is unique in that there is a ton of unincorporated land that carries a Houston (or Katy, or Spring, etc.) mailing address but is not actually within the city limits of Houston (or another city). Harris county maintains those areas. In DFW when you leave one city you cross into another. Not that simple in Houston.

You could make an argument that The Woodlands is trying to separate itself as it's own big city, especially with Exxon coming in the future, but it'll still be seen as just part of Houston.

[Doug Loudenback]

I'm not sure if anything like this has been discussed on here before but if it has then just merge threads.
* * *
Coming back to my main point. Think of all the things we have now or coming up in the pipeline that we never would've had if it weren't for MAPS.

Traxx, the "punch" or "boost" that was given by the original MAPS to a very despondent Oklahoma City is a story that has been told too many times to bear or need repeating here. If you want documentation, read Steve Lackmeyer and Jack Moneys' book, "OKC: 2nd Time Around," as a starter. Beyond their excellent book, published in 2006, and notwithstanding any mark-timing that may have occurred beginning in 2008 when national economic issues took center stage, the city has far exceeded virtually any national measuring level for how cities are doing through the "great recession" period. Were it not for the original MAPS, not only would the original MAPS projects have not been done, neither would the city's progress during the 2008 recession have occurred, either.

While I and others do have some issues with parts of the way MAPS 3 has been developing (for me, particularly concerning the convention hotel matter), in the big picture and scheme of things, such issues only involve looking at some of the trees and not the forest.

If one looks only at the forest, the big picture, my sense is that Oklahoma City is in the early midst of one of its most historic economic binges, so to speak ... a time of unprecedented development and growth. If one looks back in time since the 1889 Land Run, there have only been a handful of those times, and, I'm glad to say, "Welcome back, burgeoning city ... you've been a long time coming." Or something like that.

I also take a historical pause for thought ... major economic events have in the past and will probably in the future cause interruptions in the city's development. That's just the way things seem to go. The Great Depression stifled perhaps Oklahoma City's greatest of its earlier booms. When the Depression finally hit the city full force in 1930-1931, after completing a handful of projects in 1931-1932, city development hit a virtual stone wall for more than thirty (30) years, until the Pei Plan developments during the 1960s-1970s came to fruition, and they were, of course, a completely mixed blessing. But, just looking at that hiatus, one sees that, aside from WPA funded projects (civic center, in particular), very little city development occurred from 1932 until the Pei Plan of the 1960s-1970s. One should not forget that history can repeat itself.

I guess that I'm saying that nothing should be taken for granted and that all euphoric expectations should be measured cautiously ... however, I'm also saying that there is nothing wrong with saying, "Hoo-rah" right now and for as long as the present-historic-period expansion lasts, PARTY ON ... but the party-time should be tempered with the knowledge, if history is the measuring stick, that no Oklahoma City boom period has lasted forever, and that today's present-day party will likely come to an end.

How long will the current boom last? Who can say. Will it someday end ... probably. But the cycle itself will continue on, and, in the end, whether during a down-side or not, an up-side will also come to pass. I'm 70. I'm hoping the present up-side continues on for at least one or two decades, so that I will die a happy man.

[Spartan]

Houston is unique in that there is a ton of unincorporated land that carries a Houston (or Katy, or Spring, etc.) mailing address but is not actually within the city limits of Houston (or another city). Harris county maintains those areas. In DFW when you leave one city you cross into another. Not that simple in Houston.

You could make an argument that The Woodlands is trying to separate itself as it's own big city, especially with Exxon coming in the future, but it'll still be seen as just part of Houston.

Is The Woodlands still being ceded back to Houston?

[Praedura]

That's how I'm here. When I was asked to transfer here, I called my wife and asked her what she thought of OKC. Her response was "to visit?" and I said "no, how about to live?" Her response was the human equivalent of the losing trombone on The Price is Right.

Now, 5 years later, we love it and are big advocates of the city to all our friends and family. We even have some friends looking at opportunities here to move and work.

LOL! That's one of the best humorous metaphors I've read in awhile.

[Praedura]

Houston's problems (over-population, expense, traffic, etc.) are perhaps the best possible opportunity for OKC to achieve rapid growth.
.....

I've never been to Houston. So I rely on other people's comments about it.

When I think of Houston, I always remember that scene from a movie years ago called "Local Hero". Peter Riegert's character returns to Houston after an almost magical time in a small Scottish village. He drives down a huge freeway in his expensive car, the massive Houston skyline ahead of him. Everything feels so vapid and soulless. And that's how I think of Houston: large, wealthy, thick with buildings and cars, and just kind of soulless. Since I've not been there, that may not be fair. It's just the image that I have in my mind.

[Teo9969]

It's definitely anything but soulless.

Houston is FILLED with diversity. I rode the bus 2 weeks ago from Dallas to Houston before I flew out for Europe...You could instantly tell that you were in Houston over Dallas just by seeing the people in the Starbucks.

Houston is also simply more interesting in the core and even in other areas. Sure: the Suburbs are the suburbs...but that's every city. Houston proper has quite a few interesting districts and just generally a more eclectic environment.

To be sure, Houston is still a S*%#hole, but it's endearing and more comforting to me than the sterility of Dallas. Houston is also gentrifying most of it's core...Dallas seems to still be more worried about its highways and suburbs.

[bradh]

Is The Woodlands still being ceded back to Houston?

What do you mean?

[adaniel]

Depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about oil & gas (especially anything to do with offshore E&P), then yes.

I'm a bit tardy to the party here, but in terms of cultural cache, I would say Dallas is probably "ahead." It still represents that Texas mindset, at least to big Hollywood types, and all that entails (big hair, bar-b-que, political conservatism, etc.)

In terms of economics though, I would say Houston is ahead as it is the center of a major American industry, energy. In that sense, it's on the same level as San Fran/San Jose is with tech or NYC is with finance. Dallas is an economic juggernaut but I can't really point to one thing it has the market cornered on.

I will definitely say that while Houston will always be the center of the energy industry, there is no reason that OKC couldn't play the role as a secondary hub, in the same sense with Austin is with tech or Charlotte is with finance. The de-emphasis on drilling in the GOM and more focus on shales and unconventional plays makes a location in Houston less important than it did in the past. I would say Denver is slightly ahead of us in that regard but I get the sense that a lot of companies up there are not happy with the direction CO is going in regards to oil and gas production.

To be sure, Houston is still a S*%#hole, but it's endearing and more comforting to me than the sterility of Dallas. Houston is also gentrifying most of it's core...Dallas seems to still be more worried about its highways and suburbs.

I'll always be a Dallas kid, but no doubt Houston has eaten Dallas's lunch in terms of redeveloping its core. The growth in the inner loop is has been crazy, although part of that is the insane traffic in Houston that has people looking into the city. Frankly, I think Houston provides a nice blueprint to OKC on how a sprawling city refocuses development into its core.

[traxx]

read Steve Lackmeyer and Jack Moneys' book, "OKC: 2nd Time Around,"

I've actually been meaning to get around to that for some time.

I just remember in the 80s and to some extent in the 90s, one would almost apologize for OKC. We built disposable buildings and strip malls etc. Now it seems we are taking pride in our home, how we represent it, what we build on it and what we do with it.