OKC-Not world class

[Karried]

I spend a lot of time on the New Orlean's Hornet site because I've become obsessed with the team.. and I have no life.. :tweeted:


The latest article from Sport's Illustrated nominated our city as the Sportsman of the Year (which I thought was sooo cool!) but of course, you have the fans of NO suggesting we will never be a world class city.

We've gone back and forth, and I don't want to turn this into a NO bash.... but I want to know, what makes a city world class?

The point I made earlier was that the city of NO concentrated on tourism so much that they neglected the citizens and city.. the public schools and the crime rates are atrocious. The money they made from tourism wasn't allocated properly to the people..

But, what made NO a world class city drawing tourists and a major tourist attraction?

What can make OKC more of a world class city... since we have no huge body of water, does that discount any hope of ever becoming a tourist attraction/destination ?

I know MAPS and Bricktown have been amazing in our efforts to attract people .. any thoughts?

I tend to think that the citizens define the city and I feel we are a First class city all the way! But the tourism.... what can be done? More conventions, festivals?? What are your thoughts?

[Midtowner]

We could have built that giant indian statue.

The term is so subjective that it's difficult to even discuss. What makes a city "world class"? Does that mean that OKC will have a spot on my Palm Pilot when I'm selecting my time zone?

[Karried]

We could have built that giant indian statue.

I'm putting you in charge of that project - LOL
Wait, nevermind... we already have a giant indian on top of our Capitol Dome..

What makes a city "world class"?

That's exactly what I want to know... what do people think makes a world class city?

[fsusurfer]

Culture, history, location, attractions. Not to mention New Orlenas has about 300 years of development on us.

[BDP]

I think fsusurfer hit one big part of the equation: time. Culture and history, along with world importance, are usually the factors associated with a world class city. New Orleans is important historically because of it's role in the shipping trade for a couple hundreds of years. Along with the money and world importance, this brought in a lot of cultural influences, creating a cosmopolitan experience. One top of that, you have the Creole culture that makes it a unique destination. You're not going to find that anywhere else.

A city usually ascends to world class status on the heels of some sort of key role in commerce. New York. Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco, Chicago, New Orleans, all established themselves as America's early world class cities because they played such an important role in world trade. Culture and attractions kind of build up around that as it attracts all kinds of people. The cities character was often shaped by some sort of visionary person or persons at the time of their rise. I think this has been true of all important world cities in history, first came commercial significance and then a leader organized public resources to shape a city of unique character.

I think the things they have in common are unrivaled services and attractions supported by a public infrastructure, like great restaurants, spectator parks, unique places of historical significance, innovative architecture, competent public transit, arts provided by the world's best talent, all packaged in unique way that characterizes and distinguishes life in that city.

I don't think OKC is a world class city, but it is beginning to take steps and do the things that world class cities do. It is a young city, really, and very few cities we consider "world class" cities can claim that they were such in their first 100 years or so. And, honestly, for OKC to become a world class city, at least in the traditional manner, it will probably take an economic boom that is disproportionate to competing markets. In the end it really is relative and as long as OKC is a slow growth city, it probably won't achieve such status in our lifetimes. But all it really takes is one large economic boost to nudge it into that playing field.

That doesn't mean that it can't be a first class city, with first class amenities and attractions. I think we will see it regarded as such in the near future. I think as along as OKC continues the trend of doing quality things on a manageable and reasonable scale, it will continue to grow in quality of life and public stature. Are people going to begin talking about it alongside London, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, et al? No, but it is rapidly shaking its dusty image of a hick town with nothing to do and replacing it with an image of surprising attarctions and services with a good quality of life.

Did that rambling make any sense?

[floater]

Of course, we can find the definition in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_class_city

which reads reasonable enough.

People have too often confused this word to mean "top quality", when IMO it really means significance. Does the economy and culture affect other places? So I don't think OKC is world class -- but then again, 99.9% of American cities aren't. New Orleans is not world class, but Houston is. Indianapolis isn't but Chicago is.

[Karried]

Perfect sense..

[floater]

...but I agree with Midtowner, it's very subjective.

[BDP]

New Orleans is not world class, but Houston is.

I can agree with that, but I think, becuase of history, the eperception is not always the same. New Orleans has a lot of equity in its history as the world class city it once was, while many would hesitate to call Houston world class. I think you're getting into opinions there. I mean, there are people that wouldn't call Los Angeles world class, not becuase they see little world improtance, but becuase they see little class.

[floater]

I can agree with that, but I think, becuase of history, the eperception is not always the same. New Orleans has a lot of equity in its history as the world class city it once was, while many would hesitate to call Houston world class.

I agree with the culture and history with New Orleans. So unique. Culturally, it's important to the US; to the world, well....

Houston makes it IMO because of its centrality to oil. It's very diverse (there is a Philippine consulate there). It contributes not just oil, but western culture, aerospace (NASA), inland shipping, and medical innovation.

I think you're getting into opinions there. I mean, there are people that wouldn't call Los Angeles world class, not becuase they see little world improtance, but becuase they see little class.

haha.

[Jack]

I think world class also has to do with the type of people living in your city. The riff raff living in New Orleans brings the overall class of their city down to almost nothing.

Rednecks don't help our case out, but we have enough classy people around here to help our cause to some extent. Just stay away from the trailor parks.

[swake]

Much more inland shipping moves through New Orleans than does Houston, come on. And while New Orleans is (was, but hopefully will recover) a pretty small world class city, it still is one. And you also seem to be confusing New Orleans being poor with it's not being a world class city. There are a lot of poor world class cities.

And, New Orleans culture certainly is recognizable around the world, Creole and Cajun food, Mardi Gras, New Orleans's unique architecture. It's unique blend of cultures from France, England and Africa make it one more thing that is absolutely required of a World Class City. Unique.

It has to be Unique.

Is Houston unique, or does it just have a nice skyline?

[Patrick]

Is Tulsa unique, or does it just have a nice skyline?

[BDP]

There are a lot of poor world class cities.

That's very true. Rarely does a city of any real size not have poor people. A lot of small town and suburbs around large cities may be exclusively well to-do people, but you get over a million people in a community and they are not all going to be pulling down the big bucks.

And, I agree, New Orleans's cultural events definitely help it out. It's definitely smaller than most, but I think that helped it in a way. It's capability to maintain world attraction despite it's size says something about its strength of culture. However, I would still argue that it is largely living off its past. There's nothing wrong with that and it will always be cool to visit (if for nothing else, because of the food).

I'm not a big Houston fan, but it has grown into a very important world city and more and more cosmopolitan. New Orleans and Houston I think are a good contrast, showing the world class city of yesterday on one side, and the world class city of tomorrow on the other.

[HOT ROD]

What makes a city "world class"? Does that mean that OKC will have a spot on my Palm Pilot when I'm selecting my time zone?

New Orleans doesnt anchor a time zone (Chicago does), so I guess NO arent World Class either.

In my opinion, I think there are only a hand full of World Class cities on this continent and (sorry) none of them are in the SE/SC United States.

my top 10 list would include:

New York
Chicago
San Francisco
Boston
Toronto
Washington
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Mexico City
Montreal

Honourable mentions:
Philly (I think Montreal edges out Philly, but really they might be a tie for 10)
Baltimore (but could be included into Washington to make Wash/Bal)
Miami (moving up fast but really does not offer substance other than the high fashion and tourism industry). Way above NO i might add.
Dallas (trying, but way too suburban and vanilla)
Aspen (its aspen)

I definitely think OKC is a great, First Class city. Not World Class yet but thats ok. First Class might be good enough.

[Luke]

I didn't think New Orleans was world class to begin with. Oklahoma City, as much as I want it to be, is not (yet ) world class. When I think world class I think...

London, Paris, Rome, Moscow, Beijing, Sydney, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Cairo, Rio de Janiero, Mexico City. Perhaps some others, but just off the top of my head this is what I came up with.

[swake]

Is Tulsa unique, or does it just have a nice skyline?

The older parts of Tulsa are unique, Tulsa has a specific and unique history to it that few cities it's size and age can match. And a skyline that is far beyond it's size. Far beyond OKC's too. That's true in quality of historic buildings, sizes and height of buildings in downtown.

Tulsa's area has a lot of natural beauty too, which is rare for cities in this part of the country. Kansas City and Little Rock would be exceptions that I can think of.

But I was not talking about OKC, I said Houston. Houston's downtown is great looking, huge and new. Houston is a fast growing city in size and as a business center. To me the city really sucks, they have no zoning, traffic is awful and along with New Orleans, it's got to the hottest place on earth. I neither want to visit Houston if I can help it, much less ever want to live there. It's probably a world class city, but not to New Orleans level.

Tulsa is nowhere close to a world class city, nor is Oklahoma City.

And being a World Class City has nothing to do with having a NBA basketball team. Part of the reason that sports fare so poorly in New Orleans is that there is so much else there. that and the fact that it and it really is a poor city that was a very small market for pro-sports teams.

I really love New Orleans. It's a great place to visit and soak up the culture, the history. It's a hell of a lot of fun too. I hope it's back to something close to what it was before in a few years. I also, would never live there. Like Las Vegas, it's a great place to visit, but I would not want to live there.

[OUman]

I think Oklahoma City is one of the best cities in the U.S. now, sure there's plenty of improving to be done, but it definitely isn't the city it was 10-15 years ago. Actually, some people who came here during the Katrina evacuations liked it so much they're staying put.

OUman

[BDP]

And a skyline that is far beyond it's size.

It's okay. Maybe for the city's size, you're right. I don't see it's vertical skyline as all that striking. There are some great smaller buildings, though. But, that's generally where the detail shows up in most cities. I don't think the tall structures are all that impressive though.

[Patrick]

swake, I actually agree with you all the way. I agree that Tulsa is unique as well, especially the many historic buildings you guys have. I'd actually have to say that Tulsa is closer to being a world class city because of its history and arts, but I agree with you that neither Tulsa nor OKC are world class. As many others have said, history makes a city world class. Oklahoma simply isn't old enough to have the history needed to create world class cities. That's nothing bad against Oklahoma, just stating the obvious.

[fsusurfer]

I think OKC should be concerned with making the city a regional destination. When I say regional, I mean Texas, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas (the "southwest region"). We need attractions to draw people from our region, and even more so from other regions such as the south, north east, west. I'm origionally from Florida, lived here over 3 years now. Would I have ever thought about visiting Oklahoma City on a vacation before I moved here? Heck no. New Orleans, yes, went there many times as it was only a 4 hour drive. If we can attract tourists within a 4 hour range, the city is doing pretty dang good.

[BDP]

The surfer speaks the truth.

[floater]

Houston's downtown is great looking, huge and new. Houston is a fast growing city in size and as a business center. To me the city really sucks, they have no zoning, traffic is awful and along with New Orleans, it's got to the hottest place on earth. I neither want to visit Houston if I can help it, much less ever want to live there. It's probably a world class city, but not to New Orleans level.

And being a World Class City has nothing to do with having a NBA basketball team. Part of the reason that sports fare so poorly in New Orleans is that there is so much else there. that and the fact that it and it really is a poor city that was a very small market for pro-sports teams.

No, I'm not basing Houston's status on appearance. I think it's a monstrosity. It's a butt of jokes. But so is Mexico City. Again, it's based on its contributions. But there's no question it's not on the level of the obvious cities -- DC, NYC, LA, Chicago.

I couldn't agree more on the importance of sports. It has nothing to do with being a world class city.

I think if OKC just concentrates on doing everything first-class, then status and other positives will follow.

[swake]

swake, I actually agree with you all the way. I agree that Tulsa is unique as well, especially the many historic buildings you guys have. I'd actually have to say that Tulsa is closer to being a world class city because of its history and arts, but I agree with you that neither Tulsa nor OKC are world class. As many others have said, history makes a city world class. Oklahoma simply isn't old enough to have the history needed to create world class cities. That's nothing bad against Oklahoma, just stating the obvious.

You are exactly right.

[swake]

It's okay. Maybe for the city's size, you're right. I don't see it's vertical skyline as all that striking. There are some great smaller buildings, though. But, that's generally where the detail shows up in most cities. I don't think the tall structures are all that impressive though.

yeah becausae the midcon tower really sucks, and it's taller than any building in OKC.