Why is Tulsa losing population?

[918Town]

You're arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The fact is, as lonestar said, the oft-heard excuse for no- or slow-growth, (that Tulsa is "completely developed") is simply not true. Whether it's "tons" or "plenty" or "a lot", the fact is, there is developable land.

Even you admit that there are large areas of land open for growth in north Tulsa. That rather steps on your point and closes the argument, doesn't it? Tulsa is not "fully developed."

(and I'm pretty sure if you look, you can find some undeveloped land inside Tulsa's city limits on the east, west and probably even south sides.)

I actually meant to put TONS in quotations. Such as "TONS", to emphasize the point that I do not agree with that assesment.

My argument is that there is not "TONS" of developable land in Tulsa. Furthermore, to clarify my argument is not that Tulsa is "completely developed", my claim is Tulsa is highly developed. I absolutely agree that there is developable land in Tulsa. And by large, meaning more than one or two adjacent parcels.

And I don't have to look or hunt to find the abundance of undeveoped land in OKC. That's my point.

[918Town]

Yes, there is land available in north Tulsa, even more when you consider the fenceline, but the problem there is that a lot of it is in the Bird Creek floodplain. Tulsa also has quite a bit of land available in Osage County, some in the southwest portions near Tulsa Hills, and lots of available land in east Tulsa. The corporate limits actually extend two miles or so east of the Creek Turnpike just south of 412. Out there, there is literally mile after mile of undeveloped land. Now, the whole rub with all of this available land is its current desirability in being developed. I think east Tulsa will see growth as Broken Arrow continues to move north, which is actually already occurring. Southwest Tulsa will likely see growth due to Tulsa Hills. When the Gilcrease Expressway gets built, Tulsa will likely see more growth in Osage County. I'm not sure about north Tulsa. The floodplain issue coupled with negative stereotypes (fact or fiction), make it less desirable for residential. I could see more industrial growth, especially in or near the Cherokee Industrial Park and points east of the airport.

Wait a minute, I thought the discussion centered around developable land in the incorporated urban core. Now, we're talking about fencelines and Osage county and the such. Please let me know if the paramiters of the discussion have changed.

East Tulsa, as other areas you have mentioned will not grow for one inherant reason or another. In East Tulsa its Limestone. Limestone makes a large portion un-developable. Hence, the demise of the Eastland Mall area. Further East around the Creek Turnpike as you mention, you're in Wagoner county. Until recently, Osage county land near Tulsa had been held in trust for years. There is development there now and will be more to come. (NW Passage) I don't see anyone developing in that Wagoner county area unless it receives services from BA

Developable Land is not merely the fact that there is currently nothing there.

But in any case I thought the discussion centered around developable land in the urban core. So if its not, then my bad.

[Urban Enthusiast]

Wait a minute, I thought the discussion centered around developable land in the incorporated urban core. Now, we're talking about fencelines and Osage county and the such. Please let me know if the paramiters of the discussion have changed.

East Tulsa, as other areas you have mentioned will not grow for one inherant reason or another. In East Tulsa its Limestone. Limestone makes a large portion un-developable. Hence, the demise of the Eastland Mall area. Further East around the Creek Turnpike as you mention, you're in Wagoner county. Until recently, Osage county land near Tulsa had been held in trust for years. There is development there now and will be more to come. (NW Passage) I don't see anyone developing in that Wagoner county area unless it receives services from BA

Developable Land is not merely the fact that there is currently nothing there.

But in any case I thought the discussion centered around developable land in the urban core. So if its not, then my bad.

No, we are still talking about incorporated City of Tulsa, which includes portions of Osage County, which is a stones throw from downtown (very much urban core, though very much under developed). I only mentioned the fenceline for north Tulsa because the city has dibbs on that land in the future.

East Tulsa is already seeing growth. There are new subdivisions at 41st and 129th East Ave, along 51st between 161st and 193rd East Ave, and at 41st and 193rd East Ave, all within the City of Tulsa. Now, I totally agree that the Wagoner County portions of east Tulsa won't see growth at least for a very long time. As for southwest Tulsa, there are houses being built at 81st and Elwood and there will probably be more to come. There is also room for growth in far south Tulsa and new subdivisions still being filled in that area. Plus there are lots of parking lots in downtown and uptown that could be converted to residential and/or mixed uses that incorporate residential. In essence, Tulsa has lots of room for growth, be it infill or greenfield development.