Is Omaha OKC's new competitor?

[Spartan]

Spartan, I think it's fine to focus on rentals. However, remember how long it takes to go from concept to existing development. The current excitement over rentals exists at least partially because of the current economic conditions. By the time rentals are constructed, there will be streetcar plans and cars ordered, a new downtown park and potentially a completely different economic climate. Enthusiasm may have shifted to an entirely different type of housing. There are many cities that have overbuilt rentals. The housing market is faddish and personally, I think it's important to have a nice mix. I also know that in most cities currently downtown has the most expensive housing and it gets cheaper as you get farther away from the CBD. If you're an entry level buyer you understand that you need to live a bit further out until you've worked awhile, made some money and can afford to move closer in. I don't think OCURA was necessarily wrong to slant it the way they did. Imagine Deep Deuce filled with EIFS faced, quickly thrown up cheap housing units that focus on inexpensive price rather than quality construction. What do you think we'd be saying about housing in Deep Deuce 10 years from now? Yes, we might have density, but how do you even renovate that or appeal to a different income group from the entry level purchasers? Again, what makes downtown housing appealing in other cities is either very old, very high quality housing or new high quality housing. Not Memorial Road type apartment units that someone happened to put up for sale instead of rent. I think, just like in Bricktown, we need to be very careful what we accept in the name of development and sometimes empty lots are better than a low quality development.

Well you know how I feel about building standards, so I won't even go there since we are so in agreement. I think the only thing we disagree on is the need to rebut the "condos suck" argument. It's not that condos suck, it's just that apartments become occupied much faster. No need to rebut. And anyone trying to make this into a moral or ethical argument can't be serious. The real moral or ethical argument is whether the built environment is a healthy or unhealthy place to live, it doesn't get much more basic than that. What price point the market appeals to is just not a relevant consideration because I just want the market to appeal to some group, any group, whoever it is, however much money they have..

You know, a really funny thing I just realized is that the crappiest suburbs in the whole metro (think Moore or Del City) still have building standards for tract housing. Typically a city will require at least 40-60% of new homes have masonry in the...exterior walls (can't bring myself to call them facades/edifices). That's just commonly accepted. Actually, building standards are very good for when it comes to these crackerboxes in the burbs (it's just too bad that they're so devoid of character that they'll predictably deteriorate anyway). In Oklahoma, they have to withhold high winds, tornadoes, hail storms, blizzards, floods, droughts, now earthquakes, and more. So the EIFS crap we build in commercially-zoned areas is kind of funny, in that way..

If you compare tract housing in OKC to the siding crackerboxes of Kansas (i.e., all of Wichita or KCK burbs), obviously the materials used in Oklahoma are superior. Brick tract housing is nowhere near as prevalent elsewhere as it is in Oklahoma and to an extent TX and AR. Because there's a lot of clay in our soil, it's a local option for building materials, just as stucco is a local option for Arizona. But the point I want to bring home is that here is a prime example of getting better building materials for less. So it's hard for me to understand why/how brick could not be affordable in Oklahoma.

So I'm not concerned about the "you get what you pay for" argument. You can have affordable housing that isn't EIFS. It just depends on your definition of affordable (I think Deep Deuce is affordable), and you have to be willing to accept a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment. If you can't think in urban terms, and use space efficiently, then perhaps some people do just belong in a ranch house in Mustang, because they wouldn't be happy downtown. That's perfectly fine, and I would seriously hope nobody is arguing to wipe these places off the map. It's just that the bottom line is, we need some viable alternatives.

[Celebrator]

Mike, the reason cities like Omaha (and Louisville and Milwaukee and Pittsburgh and even Des Moines) can feel more urban is that they were developed along navigable waterways that not only provided a concentrated origin but continues to be a focal point for development / re-development and recreation. And usually, these cities grow in one or two primary directions because of the same feature, so that also focuses the perimeter areas just outside the core.

It's a bit of an unfair comparison... It's not really anything those cities did that we can copy, it's just different geography. At least OKC is trying to change this and it's already happening with the Oklahoma River and the development that is going on now and the tons more that is proposed.

Very cogent points. The point made about the development of cities out from a focal point such as a river, etc. is brilliant, and is just not something we can replicate exactly and have it feel natural...but we are getting closer. I moved from Orlando, and it has the same issue. It just seems to spring from nowhere around...nothing, and its development has radiated out from several different focal points, making it harder to get density and a natural progression of development over time. OKC is one of what seems like just a few major cities that have grown in the same urban developmental pattern.

Overall, I think most people on here are excited about what the future holds...but just want to see it all built in a day! I understand, I can hardly wait either! We just have to be patient and trust that OKC's brightest days are ahead...that we'll be there someday and be able to look back and marvel at our progress.

[rondvu]

The western gateway into downtown is Midtown Crossing, a $325-million-mixed-use development with more
than 1 million square feet of space, which includes upwards of 225,000 square feet of restaurant and retail
space. At the center of it all is an expanded and revitalized Turner Park, a space that hosts a series of outdoor
markets, concerts and community-wide events

When I first saw this pic I thought this would be perfect for Core to Shore.

[Spartan]

I'm thinking more like 63rd and Western for the above, if you know the background..Midtown Crossing is actually the redevelopment of Mutual of Omaha's campus. You can see their headquarters behind the development. They owned all that land and the development was their project. You'll notice that the new buildings have sort of a beige-colored brick that plays off of the style of their HQ. The whole project utilizes sort of an interesting WPA Art-Deco style, with boxy buildings, prominent lines, vertical columns, and modernist ornamentation. Kind of a neat throw-back, but there are some who legitimately dislike the style of this project and think the MofO bldg is ugly. I like it though..

Can you imagine if something like THAT was what SandRidge decided to do for their campus instead? We all would have jumped for joy. Mutual of Omaha developed their own parking lots for this project. I guess in terms of finding somewhere in OKC that is similar, I'd say the 23rd/Classen area, with all those parking lots around American Fidelity and The Classen.

[mugofbeer]

After visiting Omaha a year ago for the first time, I came away quite impressed. It is definitely smaller than OKC's metro area but it is significantly more affluent and home to more diverse, professional corporate offices. It is home to several multibillionairs - one being Warren Buffet - and you can see the influence certain benefactors are having in the city. It has a beatiful modern convention center and the ballpark, as shown above, will be a great complement to the CC. It also has a larger, busier airport than we do - due to several factors discussed in another thread. Its a vibrant, thriving city that isn't being destroyed by the credit crash and overbuilding of homes. On the other hand, there are things about OKC that I feel are superior to Omaha which are already being discussed. It is a very comperable city to OKC.

[Spartan]

After visiting Omaha a year ago for the first time, I came away quite impressed. It is definitely smaller than OKC's metro area but it is significantly more affluent and home to more diverse, professional corporate offices. It is home to several multibillionairs - one being Warren Buffet - and you can see the influence certain benefactors are having in the city. It has a beatiful modern convention center and the ballpark, as shown above, will be a great complement to the CC. It also has a larger, busier airport than we do - due to several factors discussed in another thread. Its a vibrant, thriving city that isn't being destroyed by the credit crash and overbuilding of homes. On the other hand, there are things about OKC that I feel are superior to Omaha which are already being discussed. It is a very comperable city to OKC.

A funny thing about how the ballpark and CC interact is that they have a legitimate vision for the NoDo (North Downtown) area, which is very much their C2S. They got it jump-started with a development that features a music studio I believe and more interestingly, an Urban Outfitters. It should be studied.

I agree that Omaha's benefactor support is certainly unmatched by few cities, perhaps Tulsa (Kaiser & Co.), certainly not us. One thing Omaha doesn't really have that OKC really has (for now) is citizen support. For example, Omaha just closed the book on a 3-year push for streetcar. Not going to happen for them, in the current climate. With peer cities like Omaha and Ft. Worth giving up on their streetcar desires, it really shows just how special OKC's current situation is. We are really just so lucky to have citizen support for streetcar, and to have the funding and resources needed to make it happen ASAP.

One of a kind situation we find ourselves in. Proud to be in OKC.

[animeGhost]

My point wasn't that higher priced units are what we should be building. My point was that there has been rather strident criticism of price per square foot of what has been built, implying they are overpriced, not simply that they're not the price points people are looking for AND criticizing developers for thinking that people might be willing to pay those prices. But, when you look at places like Omaha that have prices that are significantly higher than what is being criticized here, it certainly makes one think perhaps people living here aren't necessarily being realistic about what it is costing developers for their developments. Or, perhaps a mistake was made thinking people who could pay those price points would be willing to gamble, buying downtown homes without a lot of reassuring surrounding development. Regardless, perhaps it may be presumptuous to expect better prices without a corresponding significant decrease in quality of building materials. It's hard to believe land costs, materials and labor are exorbitantly higher than here.

I think part of the problem is the developers. They claim the target audience for that area (and what okc is supposedly trying to attract) are young professionals straight outta college. Unfortunately many of us are in entry level and simply cannot afford many of the expensive luxury condos and such. So maybe they should change their focus from making expensive "I wish i could live there" places and invest more in what many people in that demographic can afford. I don't mean put in any projects or anyting, but some more AFFORDABLE housing could really help that area grow and prosper. Then as the area continues to grow add high-end luxury condos and such. But, my point is, many people would love to live downtown but just cannot afford the price of whats currently available. Maybe Omaha can support these types of developments but I don't think they are necessarily the right fit for okc right now.

[Oil Capital]

I said they are peers, not that they are similar, they obviously are not very similar.


I think there are a lot of similarities between Austin and Oklahoma City, but they are no longer peers.


Oklahoma City relative to Indy has almost no convention industry. And Nashville is not a state capital.


No, Oklahoma City is not similar to Charlotte in the amount of recent downtown development. Charlotte is far outpacing Oklahoma City in and out of the core growing by 40% in the last decade adding over 400k people.



Good lord, Ft Worth is not a peer city of Oklahoma City, not remotely, Tarrant County alone has over 1.7 million people. The Ft Worth section of the Metroplex is nearing 3 million and will have four million long before Oklahoma City hits 1.5 million. Sacramento has over 2.6 million people and is booming. Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Austin have growth rates triple that of OKC and all three will have over 2 million people in the next few years. Columbus has over two million people. These cities, except for few like Buffalo and SLC are all much larger than Oklahoma City than OKC is larger than Tulsa or Omaha.



Oklahoma City is doing some really nice things, but there's a long way to go, and growth remains lackluster. Here's hoping that changes.

Wow, Swake. If you were aiming for a fact-free post, you did a mighty fine job. But if you look closely, I'm afraid a few actual facts may have snuck in there and ruined it for you.

[kwash]

One thing OKC has over Omaha is diversity, and when companys look to moving, thats a big deal. Ever been to Omaha? Its about as diverse as Canada. They are starting to get a little more diverse but their black and hispanic populations is well below 10% and prolly will be lucky to ever get higher than that. OKC has a good size of blacks and the hispanic population here is always gonna continue to increase, which is the future of America. So in that relation OKC is in way better shape than Omaha for growth. Some of you may not think thats a good thing, depending on your diversity views lol, just saying......

[Spartan]

One thing OKC has over Omaha is diversity, and when companys look to moving, thats a big deal. Ever been to Omaha? Its about as diverse as Canada. They are starting to get a little more diverse but their black and hispanic populations is well below 10% and prolly will be lucky to ever get higher than that.

Canada is extremely diverse, or at least where all I've been. Toronto, Calgary, and esp Vancouver have huge Asian populations. Calgary's new mayor is south Asian, good guy (extremely progressive). Vancouver is called "Hongcouver" by everyone.

[dmoor82]

^^You mean Canada's Large cities are diverse,but overall Canada is WHITE!

[Spartan]

Same with anywhere. Canada, United States, Europe, etc.

I guess places like Medicine Hat and Red Deer are pretty white..lol

[dmoor82]

Same with anywhere. Canada, United States, Europe, etc.

I guess places like Medicine Hat and Red Deer are pretty white..lol

Lol,OK I meant to say some places are MORE White than others!Omaha just doesnt have as much diversity as OKC!

[Spartan]

Lol,OK I meant to say some places are MORE White than others!Omaha just doesnt have as much diversity as OKC!

A valid point.

[HOT ROD]

Im not sure if I call Omaha a competitor to OKC, OKC obviously is in a different league of cities now. The postings from the ULI were comparing convention centres in Tier III - which OKC was and still somewhat is in but making big moves to get out of [notice after 'current competitors' it shows 'target profile - all Tier II cities'. This is particularly true with the NBA in town and doing well. Omaha was included as a peer/competitor because in the convention business it is currently a competitor. However, there isn't really much competition in other areas, either city has a niche that the other doesn't compare.

Also, as far a built form - I think people on here often forget that OKC is a western city, and comparing OKC to compact Midwestern ones is as frutal as comparing LA to Chicago. OKC is more comparable to other western cities - SLC, Portland, Sacramento, Vegas, and to some extent Phoenix and Denver. These are all auto centric cities with lots of land and built form consisting of wide streets and open spaces (aside from most of Portland). These are OKC's true peer cities, western capital cities and/or western mid-sized to large cities that really boomed post WWII following LA's lead as being automobile centric.

Omaha is clearly a midwestern city with it's eyes set to Chicago. It's economy also feeds off of Chicago, explaining the large number of flights and passengers obviously going between the two. There is a reason why Omaha has a compact, urban feel in similar ways as Tulsa, Des Moines, MKE, etc - all midwestern cities eyeing Chicago type neighbourhood and CBD form. OKC is obviously different than that.

I would also say that Louisville, Nashville, Memphis, Indy, MKE, and Charlotte are Eastern peers of OKC. These cities obviously have a head start on OKC and many have a local niche - but all are comparable in population and OKC is competing with these moreso than the Tier III club of cities anymore.

So to be fair - yes Omaha has lots going for it and there are definitely some takeaways that OKC can learn from, just like OKC can learn from many other cities. But to say Omaha is a peer or competitor, I disagree because the cities are different in economic focus, built form, racial diversity, and climate.

[Econ00]

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

[zookeeper]

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

I'm not so sure. Omaha has done so much in the last few years that they are every bit as "urban" as Oklahoma City. A good case could be made that they have a more urban atmosphere and they are moving right along. Yes, it's smaller, but by margins that don't make that much difference in the real world of things we discuss here.

Lists. We see these silly lists all the time, but the one that is taken seriously every year by a lot of people (and business) is the Money magazine list. In case you missed this years list - it came out last week. Take a look at the 5 Best Big Cities (and be sure to read what they say about Omaha):

"MONEY crunched the numbers on urban centers with more than 300,000 residents—63 in all. As with our Best Places list, our city rankings put a premium on a robust job market, affordable housing, and *factors such as accessibility to health care, culture, and open space. We also gave extra points to places with low crime and strong public schools and selected the top city in the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Southwest, and West."

Northeast -- Pittsburgh
Southeast - Tampa
West -------- Denver
Midwest ---- Omaha
Southwest - Mesa (Phoenix Area)

Best Places to Live 2015: The 5 Best Big U.S. Cities
Be sure to click on "show as list" so you don't have to click through one at a time.

[bchris02]

Omaha punches above its weight and is ahead of Oklahoma City in a lot of ways. Old Market is what Bricktown could/should be if it was a people-first neighborhood instead of a cars-first neighborhood. Midtown Omaha is incredible. Omaha has done a lot of things right recently and I think they are a good example for OKC to look to as it continues to revitalize its core. To be fair, I don't think Omaha's urban core was ever in as dire condition as OKC's was in the 1990s, so in essence they were in a better position when they started.

[Architect2010]

I'm not so sure. Omaha has done so much in the last few years that they are every bit as "urban" as Oklahoma City. A good case could be made that they have a more urban atmosphere and they are moving right along. Yes, it's smaller, but by margins that don't make that much difference in the real world of things we discuss here.

Just because Omaha is just as "urban" as us doesn't mean they still compete with OKC economically or even population wise. Having said that, Omaha always seems to always have solid, healthy growth the last 10 years, much like OKC.

[zookeeper]

Just because Omaha is just as "urban" as us doesn't mean they still compete with OKC economically or even population wise. Having said that, Omaha always seems to always have solid, healthy growth the last 10 years, much like OKC.

I guess I was speaking perception-wise. Omaha has always had the same problem Oklahoma City has had when it comes to the urban atmosphere that surprises people when they visit. A lot of people here at OKCTalk, if they haven't been to Omaha would probably be surprised - much the same as we hear all the time here in OKC.

I think the Money ranking reflects the reality of a booming city. Many just don't realize.

Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City.

I don't agree with this at all. No way is Wichita or Lincoln peer cities with Omaha. People in Omaha joke about the "suburb" 45 minutes to the SW, and Omaha is leaps and bounds over Wichita. Back to Lincoln, it is definitely a nice little city in its own right, but it's no peer to Omaha.

[UrbanNebraska]

Oklahoma City and Omaha are on completely different levels. Omaha has a population of 446,599 people, and a metropolitan of 904,421, for comparison Oklahoma City has 631,462 people as of 2015, and a metropolitan of 1,360,160 as of 2015. The GMP of Omaha is around 57. 1 Billion dollars, while the Oklahoma City GMP is around 73.7 Billion dollars and growing at around 4 percent, Oklahoma City is one of the fastest growing cities in America economically and population wise. Oklahoma City is a peer city with Nashville, Austin, Memphis, Jacksonville, and San Antonio, Omaha is a peer city with Tulsa, Wichita, Lincoln, and Salt Lake City. In fact a much more respectable comparison would be between Tulsa and Omaha, Tulsa has Around 400,000 people, and it's metropolitan has 969,224 people.

Preface: I don't think OKC and Omaha are competitors for anything really. OKC is much larger and growing very fast, while in the same region we don't overlap spheres of influence, we don't compete for retailers, culturally even Omaha is very much rooted in the Midwest while OKC has a little more western flare still some MW influences though.

I do think there are a couple interesting connections that at the end of the day also don't mean much. A shared love and support of college athletics ex: WCWS/CWS Sooners and Huskers/Creighton, strong growing plains cities, both doing a lot of good stuff in the core yet still sprawling out wide, undeserved national ridicule, interesting warehouse districts, stockyard history.

When it comes to peers I think it is odd to not include SLC in the OKC peers. It is a much similar size metro and has NBA. SLC kicks ass by the way.

As for Omaha's peers. They aren't a struggling Wichita or a city like Lincoln that is a third the size. I mean Omaha is closer to OKC's metro pop than Lincoln is to Omaha's. Omaha's "peers" would probably be the likes of Madison, Tulsa, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Birmingham ect. That level just below pro sports cities.

In the end it doesn't really matter. My participation on OKCTalk was never meant to suggest that Omaha does anything better or worse than OKC. I think there is much more to be gained by learning from other places rather than competing with them. The insistent comparing of locals kind of tires me anymore. Dallas isn't a peer of Austin, but I love Austin and have trouble seeing myself in Dallas. Chicago can't hold NYC's jock, but I would much rather live in the Windy City. Live where you are happy, if you don't like your town work your ass off to make it better or find a way to get somewhere you want. Life is too short to waste in places you don't like and with people you don't like.

[zookeeper]

Preface: I don't think OKC and Omaha are competitors for anything really. OKC is much larger and growing very fast, while in the same region we don't overlap spheres of influence, we don't compete for retailers, culturally even Omaha is very much rooted in the Midwest while OKC has a little more western flare still some MW influences though.

I do think there are a couple interesting connections that at the end of the day also don't mean much. A shared love and support of college athletics ex: WCWS/CWS Sooners and Huskers/Creighton, strong growing plains cities, both doing a lot of good stuff in the core yet still sprawling out wide, undeserved national ridicule, interesting warehouse districts, stockyard history.

When it comes to peers I think it is odd to not include SLC in the OKC peers. It is a much similar size metro and has NBA. SLC kicks ass by the way.

As for Omaha's peers. They aren't a struggling Wichita or a city like Lincoln that is a third the size. I mean Omaha is closer to OKC's metro pop than Lincoln is to Omaha's. Omaha's "peers" would probably be the likes of Madison, Tulsa, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Birmingham ect. That level just below pro sports cities.

In the end it doesn't really matter. My participation on OKCTalk was never meant to suggest that Omaha does anything better or worse than OKC. I think there is much more to be gained by learning from other places rather than competing with them. The insistent comparing of locals kind of tires me anymore. Dallas isn't a peer of Austin, but I love Austin and have trouble seeing myself in Dallas. Chicago can't hold NYC's jock, but I would much rather live in the Windy City. Live where you are happy, if you don't like your town work your ass off to make it better or find a way to get somewhere you want. Life is too short to waste in places you don't like and with people you don't like.

I was hoping you would chime in. I always enjoy your Omaha Development posts in that thread. The above made some very good points.

[UrbanNebraska]

This was kind of a fun read though. A The Oklahoman sportswriter blogged about her trip to Omaha to cover OSU for the NCAA Tournament this March. I did enjoy seeing the city through another's eyes.

Welcome to Nebraska ... where they have Arbor Day, green buildings and mobster steakhouses | News OK

Day 2 in Omaha: Lots more basketball than Day 1 | News OK

Day 3 in Omaha: A long run, weird 80s music and a game to cover | News OK

[Laramie]

Omaha hasn't gotten bigger, it has gotten better. Nebraska's largest city has done some impressive developments.

Just think about it. They built a new convention center-arena complex, baseball stadium and Midtown Crossing.

Oklahoma City voters invested in our city:

$350 million MAPS I
$700 million MAPS II for Kids (included 23 suburban school districts): https://www.okc.gov/ocmaps/
$110 million MAPS (extension) for Hoops (NBA practice facility; upgrades to Ford Center)

The previous MAPS initiatives have pumped $1.160 billion sales tax investments into Oklahoma City; that triggered close to $4 billion in additional private economic development.

$777 million MAPS III (in progress)...

The biggest difference between Oklahoma City & Omaha is that OKC is debt-free.

[hoya]

I don't think OKC and Omaha really compete for anything. They are far enough apart, distance-wise, that I'd say they don't really interact much. It's not like there's some company out there saying "We're gonna relocate, and it'll be either OKC or Omaha. Let's figure this one out..."

Size-wise, they're close enough. OKC is a little bigger, and has the NBA, but that's a pretty new thing. The cities aren't that different. It's not like someone from Omaha is gonna come here and feel like a country bumpkin. Honestly both cities are normal, mid-sized US cities. The difference in size and in amenities really isn't all that much, especially when you compare it to larger cities.