Getting Tulsa back to 393,000 and beyond

[SXSW]

There is an article in today's TW about how Tulsa's suburbs have all gained people over the last decade with the big winner being Broken Arrow.  It states that Tulsa maxed out at 393,049 in 2000 and then fell to 380,624 in 2005 before rising to 385,635 by mid-2008 (estimated).  It will be interesting to see where we are in the 2010 Census.  I would imagine somewhere around 388,000 as growth has picked up in parts of east Tulsa and especially southwest Tulsa, in addition to some infill in midtown and other parts of the city.  Where do you see Tulsa's population going in the next 5-10 years?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100105_11_A1_Carsfi238693

[TheArtist]

  
     We seem to be pretty much stagnating.  I find some stats that say we will gain, some that say we will lose population. Found this from a 2009 Tulsa Chamber report for instance...  

 http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:47hV_oykFoAJ:ww3.tulsachamber.com/upload/file/Economic%2520Development/Tulsa%2520Demographics%25202009.pdf+Tulsa+racial+demographics&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Which shows that though we went up a bit around 2008, we have since lost and will continue to lose population for a while, 2013 pop projection = 380,851


I suspect we gained a bit last year, but with the recession finally starting to bite Tulsa now, we could once again be on the losing end.  When your average growth is so slow, you essentially end up stagnating with your population numbers being carried with the wind.... oil does well, population up a bit,,, recession hits, population down,,,, businesses come and go, etc. etc.   Seems we were happy with 2 and 3 % growth during the good times which gave us very little breathing room when things inevitably get worse.  

As for growth in parts of east and southeast, a good chunk of that could be redistribution of where people live.

Mid-town is an interesting case, we have both lost and gained housing. Lost housing where the Bomasada development was to go, several apartment complexes and homes where the highway is being widened, lost a small apartment complex behind Utica Square, gained Utica Place, lost some homes and such for a development behind the strip center on 41st and Peoria behind Lambruscos, got a few new homes before they stopped construction of that development, etc. etc.  I suspect we have gained in mid-town due to new neighborhood infill developments, but not as much as one might suppose at first glance.

Downtown will likely have gained a few hundred and will surely continue to gain. (I would suspect we need about 10,000 downtown residents within the IDL to make it a sustainable neighborhood and attractive to retailers.)  

My guess would be that we will languish for the first half of the decade, up a bit, down a bit, then once downtown starts to really take off and give the city a more positive image and outlook, then we will begin to see some real growth again.  Remember, Detroit still has some; great, beautiful, wealthy, suburbs with good schools, low cost of living, etc. but... its a hard sell getting companies, jobs, and people to move to the area with the central city in tatters. Even our suburban growth is paltry compared to many in Texas for instance.  Texas itself gained more people last year alone than all the people in Tulsa and Broken arrow combined. And many of the small cities there make BAs growth look absolutely pitiful and anemic.

Tulsa would have a LOT to offer if it were a real city with a good urban core. I know so many people, and businesses for that matter, that would have moved here in an instant IF it werent for them having experiences like this....  From City Data


(((  I visited both cities a couple of weeks ago, out of curiosity, just to compare the two. Two days in each city. Not a lot of time, but I didn't have a car so my judgements are based on staying in each of the downtown areas, and what was to be enjoyed there without a car, walking distances from a downtown hotel.

From that perspective, Oklahoma City won me over with their Bricktown area, and I feel OKC is ahead of Tulsa with adding more life and housing into their downtown core area.

Myself, I'm always on the lookout for small, neighborhood, organic pubs (not yuppie bars) and I found enough of those in OKC around Bricktown, but none in the downtown core itself, which was disappointing.

In Tulsa I only found one older pub called the Lounge downtown. That was it!
And, being a smoker, I could even smoke there, not so in the high-priced bar off the lobby at the Doubletree where I stayed.

If I were to live anywhere in this country, I'd live in the downtown area, as I hate being car dependent. Both cities have a long way to go to attract me to live in either. But OKC shows a lot more promise, to me, than Tulsa....

What's holding Tulsa up anyway? It's a beautiful city and has skads of potential. Too bad the river doesn't come closer to the downtown area.
That was quite a hefty walk on a very cold day from downtown to the river and back, and very little of anything to distract one along the way.

I had asked the hotel clerk if I could walk to this hyped-up Cherry Street area and she advised against it as too far to walk, but perhaps I was wrongly advised. I somehow got the impression that it was right off the downtown core area. Never saw it.  )))

   I have run into gobs of people having similar experiences in Tulsa and am sure everyone here has as well.  They fly in, get to downtown and feel trapped in desolation.  Just glad he was comparing Tulsa to OKC lol, at least there we still have a fighting chance, kinda.  But, I do believe that experience will change in the next 5 years.  

[SXSW]

While many of us dislike Tulsa Hills for being a typical suburban shopping center it may just be the key to reversing Tulsa's population loss, at least for now.  There were already a couple of new housing developments built along Elwood in between 71st and 81st east of Tulsa Hills and there are several more planned in this area along Elwood and near Hwy. 75 from 71st to 91st and westward to Union.  The City of Tulsa extends all the way to 91st to the south and 33rd W. Ave. to the west, all areas within the Jenks school district that are near Tulsa Hills, 71st St. for access across the river, and Hwy. 75 for access to downtown and I-44.  If a grocery store is built at Tulsa Hills it will really help this area grow, even though there is a new grocery not far in Jenks at 101st & Elm.  Too bad they didn't just build a Super Target.  More and more people will want to live in this area and it will be your typical suburban housing but at least it will be in the city of Tulsa and not too far from the rest of the city, unlike parts of Owasso, Bixby, and BA.

Another area that could help reverse our population loss with new housing is far east Tulsa east of 129th E. Ave. where there are a few new housing developments and it's within the BA school district.  I could see this area growing with middle class Hispanics and Asians due to its proximity to the existing Hispanic/Asian communities just to the west closer to Mingo and Garnett.  There is a LOT of room to grow in this part of Tulsa but I imagine it will be a lot slower than in the SW.

Of course there is NW Tulsa which has plenty of room to grow but no catalyst.  If the Gilcrease Loop is ever finished that could enhance growth in the area but it will still suffer from the north Tulsa stigma (even though many of the areas near the Loop would be several miles from the worst parts of north Tulsa) and not-so-great schools in that part of TPS.  Development in that area all depends on the Gilcrease Loop whose future is uncertain at this point.

Last, but not least, is urban infill which most of us advocate over suburban-type development.  Midtown has seen the majority of this type of redevelopment and will continue to see it for years to come as it's one of the top places to live in Tulsa, if you can afford it.  I think under-developed areas south of downtown, the 'uptown' area, and especially east of downtown in the Pearl and Forest Orchard north of the BA and Cherry Street will see more redevelopment in the coming years just like the area north of Cherry Street which was in a similar condition and is now desirable.  It will take people believing in the area though, and for the city to move forward with the Pearl District Master Plan drainage and street improvements.  The stretch of 11th between Peoria and Utica has the bones to be very similar to 15th and the main business corridor for the neighborhood, along with secondary business corridors along Peoria between 15th-3rd and also 6th Street between Peoria and Utica.  Getting businesses like retail shops and restaurants to locate along these corridors will go a long ways to helping the Pearl develop and densify into one of Tulsa's better urban neighborhoods with the revitalization hopefully then moving west into downtown itself and east towards Kendall-Whittier and TU.

[buckeye]

More housing doesn't make a place nicer to live in.  In my view, most people leave town for two reasons: crime and schools.

[USRufnex]

Very little of Tulsa is "walkable," and that's supposed to be the advantage to living in cities versus suburbs....

I just don't understand why you'd want to live in a high-rise or mid-rise in downtown Tulsa when you'd still have to drive everywhere.

That's why so many younger Tulsans move to bigger cities and older folks move outside Tulsa to retire.

[DolfanBob]

I live in the East part of B.A. that just 7 to 8 years ago, Family and friends complained about how far out we lived.
Now I have a new Wal-Mart 1 mile from my house. Not to sure how much of the progress that Im supposed to like.
If I was single and had the ability to get one of the new lofts in Downtown Tulsa. I would love it. The night skyline and the new things happening down there would appeal to me. Even in my advanced age. Sometimes you just dont want to grow up.

[TheArtist]

Very little of Tulsa is "walkable," and that's supposed to be the advantage to living in cities versus suburbs....

I just don't understand why you'd want to live in a high-rise or mid-rise in downtown Tulsa when you'd still have to drive everywhere.

That's why so many younger Tulsans move to bigger cities and older folks move outside Tulsa to retire.

There are plenty of examples of other small to medium sized cities being in similar situations and making a successful go of it.  Lots of people moved to their downtowns before there were grocery stores and gobs of walk-ability. I for one would just like the atmosphere... "Aaah, nothing like the smell of fresh skyscrapers in the morning    

[Red Arrow]

There are plenty of examples of other small to medium sized cities being in similar situations and making a successful go of it.  Lots of people moved to their downtowns before there were grocery stores and gobs of walk-ability. I for one would just like the atmosphere... "Aaah, nothing like the smell of fresh skyscrapers in the morning    

And wet concrete after a summer shower.

[cannon_fodder]

Here is the problems: most people in tulsa don't understand what an urban neighborhood is and they don't care. Oddly people like cherry street, brookside, and utica square, but have no desire to encourage or expand such development.  They don't know or care about sustainable development, quality, or being unique.   That has been caused by a generation of poor or non existant city planning.  Hence, the situation has become where "newer" = better.  First south tulsa, then ba, and now jenks and owasso are the hotbeds of growth.  When they age, they will have nothing unique or liveable to offer and will quickly decline (see, eg, much of east tulsa).  Which is great for developers who can sprawl further out and build more crap to be subsidized by new fire companies and public highways, but not so great for everyone else.

The neglect and continued poor planning now leaves us with a tulsa that is very hard to sell.  We don't have great schools, our roads consistently get graded a solid f, we have too much crime, we have assets scattered miles and miled apart and fragmented districts each almost making itself noteable.  Good planning could have and still could make tulsa great again, but our historical edge (sheer wealth) has long since gone away and we have done very little in the past generation to make tulsa a better place to live.

But for every step forward our leadership finds a way to hold it back. Sticking an arena between a physical plant, sheriffs office, abandoned lot, and a prison like federal building.  Using the new ballpark to actually destroy development.  Instead of lobbying to get basspro, the aquarium, and other development to kickstart a new downtown district we had no vision or didn't care.  We have a plan, but few really think leaders will implement zoning, variances, or use any other method to say no to the "build surface parking and stock strip mall" development lobby.  Hell, even the development authority is best known for its lack of granting authority to develope.

I'm a new comer, but the longer I pay attention the more disheartened I become.  If we want tulsa to be a better place to live and to grow our leaders had better figure out why people would choose to live in tulsa.  Its not for strip malls or the newest track housing.  Make tulsa something different, something better.  Then we will worry about building more schools and slowing our rising property values instead of losing population to whatever suburb is considered the newest.

[waterboy]

And now you arrive where many of us were when we started posting here. Expect considerable heat for your remarks even though they are pretty accurate. I would take issue with a couple of things though, notably, your last paragraph.

I'm not sure that being different is such an important factor in Tulsa's growth. Being different, being better,  in this era of super conformity is only a plus if you develop a culture that will support such a personality. People who are growing their families, businesses and wealth seem to want stable, boring cities that they understand and can feel safe in. They prefer to visit the "different" cities for fun or curiosity but they don't really embrace the diversity of thought, patience and committment they require.

We are very much like a lot of midwestern cities that chose to sprawl because of: profit in development, fear of a diversifying inner city community, inability to elect leaders that could deal with the attendant problems of a diversifying community, and leaders with little perspective outside of their own cultural identity. IOW, we're just what a lot of people nationally want. If we just had a good job base, we would be growing like burmuda grass in the burbs.

Our problems can't just be ascribed to education, crime, zoning and the related myths that surround those factors. Education is no better in the 'burbs, crime is similar and zoning is always controversial everywhere. Those are problems all cities are facing. You and others have consistently pointed out the fallacy of those assertions.

No, your most insightful thought is your first paragraph. Most of the current generation of Tulsan's grew up in suburbs. Not in sustainable neighborhoods like Tulsa once had till the late sixties. They simply can't conceive of or even care about the concept. But they love to visit them. Not pay for them, just visit them.

Ironic to me, that that the fuel that developed the smaller towns around us was the lower cost of home acquisition, the lower taxes and the chance to separate from minorities. As these small towns and school districts have to raise taxes to meet their obligations, these same factors are in play again. As these same populations move to cheaper, newer homes in rural counties, leave the area for a job, or fail to get new construction loans.....the value of inner city homes begins to look good again. They have no new school district to fund, static ad valorem taxes and the bonus.......lower transportation costs. The savings they get will pay for private schools or vigorous support of inner city schools. Amenities will follow and the cycle will right us again.

Good to have you back.