OKC Central: Too many districts, brands lead straight to confusion | News OK (http://newsok.com/okc-central-too-many-districts-brands-lead-straight-to-confusion/article/5429309)

Interesting article and I think some good points are made. I think the "Arts District" needs rebranding being that first and foremost, not much art happens there. Tourists go there expecting a legitimate arts district but are very underwhelmed by what they find.

Very surprised that the Cottage District / SoSA wasn't mentioned, since it's the one 'district' where there is active confusion and not full agreement.

Park Plaza is only used by Rick Dowell but SoSA and Cottage District are both used by all sorts of people. In fact, the City calls the area Cottage in conjunction with the alley improvement plan in the area.

The Oklahoman even had an article today where it referenced both names but failed to point out the development being discussed is tentatively named the Dwellings at SoSA.

When I first saw the headline I immediately thought of SoSA but the brand is starting to catch on. I would assume that SoSA should be lumped in with Midtown.

So many things wrong with branding in and around downtown that fixing it probably isn't possible at this point. Heck, there are a lot of people who don't even think there is a problem. We can't even get people to use the correct terminology.

So many things wrong with branding in and around downtown that fixing it probably isn't possible at this point. Heck, there are a lot of people who don't even think there is a problem. We can't even get people to use the correct terminology.

Where would you start as far as fixing it?

Personally, I would rebrand the Arts District. As I've said, not much art happens there and the current branding paints a poor perception of OKC to tourists who seek it out expecting a legitimate arts district. Beyond that, I would absorb SoSA into Midtown. I like the Film Row branding. What else should be done?

Just re-brand and merge others, shouldn't it be that simple?

Simple. It's downtown OKC. Period.

It's not large enough or clean cut enough to have or need a bazillion districts. Most of what is trying to be something else is so close to downtown in the larger picture of what is OKC, it's still simply downtown.

I think we had this discussion before in another thread.

To me, and I speak from an outsider's perspective, and I'm sure I'll be chastised, but when I hear the "Deep Deuce" and "Automobile Alley" and see their relationship to Bricktown (I'm sure some may argue there isn't one, but okay...), I seriously do wonder what benefit there could be in merging some of the "smaller" districts, or "less popular" with the others?

On that topic, does the Windsor District really warrant districting? I live there, and while I enjoy it for all it has to offer, it seems far too varied and disparate to qualify as a district. And it stretches for miles.

On that topic, does the Windsor District really warrant districting? I live there, and while I enjoy it for all it has to offer, it seems far too varied and disparate to qualify as a district. And it stretches for miles.

I agree with this. I think the outermost thing that really qualifies as a district would be Western Avenue, and that is only because of the recent improvements and investment the city is putting into the area.

The Arts District is pretty silly, especially when they try and gerrymander in the Cheseapeake Arena and other things that are in no way contiguous or interconnected. There is really no bigger concentration of arts in that area than several others in OKC. If anything, it should be the Civic District or something similar, due to the Civic Center and several other municipal buildings and offices.

Beyond that and Park Plaza (which is a non-issue) I don't see a problem. The remaining districts are pretty well delineated and have their own identities.

It's not large enough or clean cut enough to have or need a bazillion districts. Most of what is trying to be something else is so close to downtown in the larger picture of what is OKC, it's still simply downtown.


This is true. I think thus far OKC has gone a little overboard with districting for being such a small city. Bricktown is a well-established brand which should remain but could Deep Deuce possible be absorbed into it? I also believe there is a place for the Film Row branding. Beyond that, the CBD and the Arts District should be branded as one singular "downtown." I would then say Midtown should encompass everything from Classen to I-235 and from 6th St up to 13th St.

I have been advocating for a few years now that all the current branding needs to dumped in the trash and start over by mapping the 5 minute pedestrian sheds and building out all the transects to guide development. Neighborhoods like Deep Deuce would probably still apply but Bricktown is not a district anymore. AA is a corridor. Someone needs to decided if Film Row is going to be a neighborhood or corridor (it is not a district either). The Arts District needs to be trimmed down and renamed the Civic District.

And that is just for starters.

I feel like a lot of people don't even know the boundaries of Bricktown. I see and hear people refer to the CBD as Bricktown quite often, drives me crazy. Lol.

bchris while I agree the overbranding of some districts has gone to far you can't say OKC is a small city. Small in population sure but its giant in land mass and I think that is the reason the naming of districts is popping up more and more. 10 years ago anyone in edmond would say they were going downtown to the canal, now it fully has the identity of Bricktown. I went to Fassler a few months back and my friends had no idea of the difference between downtown, midtown and uptown when I was giving directions. Yet, I talked with another friend last week who was ecstatic she was moving into deep deuce and was surprised I actually knew where and what it was when for others she was having to explain that it was right next to bricktown. Point is, the districts that are filling in are truly becoming districts that in a city this time is needed for identification but it also has that new, next level city feeling like an upper east side in Manhattan. Yet, again like I started with, a lot has gone to far. The arts districts, like has been mentioned above, doesn't do much of anything for the arts but I don't think it will be hard to fix and incorporate it into downtown.

District: An area dominated by a single non-residential use.

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/s/shawg/courses/154/articles/TNU2.pdf

https://www.patternlanguage.com/townplanning/cnu-neighborhood.htm

To me, and I speak from an outsider's perspective, and I'm sure I'll be chastised, but when I hear the "Deep Deuce" and "Automobile Alley" and see their relationship to Bricktown (I'm sure some may argue there isn't one, but okay...), I seriously do wonder what benefit there could be in merging some of the "smaller" districts, or "less popular" with the others?

I think this is actually pretty common, from the people that I've taken 'downtown' the only distinction that ever gets made is Bricktown. Even in my family most don't even know what I'm talking about when I say things like Midtown, and Deep Deuce. 99% of the time I say downtown or Bricktown, and I use those pretty interchangeably and I know better, but people know what I'm talking about when I say that. As far as the people I 'run' around with, this seems to be the norm.

I feel like a lot of people don't even know the boundaries of Bricktown. I see and hear people refer to the CBD as Bricktown quite often, drives me crazy. Lol.

That is no joke. A woman came to visit someone in my office today and she looked out the window and asked the person she was here to see what they were doing to the street (Park Ave). He said he didn't know.

How the hell do you work downtown and not know what P180 is?

Then they started talking about FNC being redeveloped and the whole time they are looking at Leadership Sq.

We can't fix it until it's all contiguous. We simply don't know how things are going to overlap yet.

I don't know if it needs fixing. I doubt the city needs to be spending any money to promote the little districts/hoods/barrios/whatever, but I think it's great that there's a personality out there for the districts/hoods/barrios/whatever, whether organic or manufactured.

bchris while I agree the overbranding of some districts has gone to far you can't say OKC is a small city. Small in population sure but its giant in land mass and I think that is the reason the naming of districts is popping up more and more.


The urban core is small both in land area and population. I agree the entire city is massive in land area but I am not aware of any districting in the suburbs other than the Windsor District and the Founders District, both of which I think are unnecessary.


The arts districts, like has been mentioned above, doesn't do much of anything for the arts but I don't think it will be hard to fix and incorporate it into downtown.

It should ideally be absorbed into the CBD but if it has to remain its own district it should be the Civic District. I would like to see the city do more to promote the Paseo as a genuine arts district to visitors. While tourists are vastly underwhelmed by the current "Arts District", I think the Paseo would be a pleasant surprise and something many tourists would not expect to find in OKC. It isn't promoted very well so most tourists never see it unless they really do their research.

On that topic, does the Windsor District really warrant districting? I live there, and while I enjoy it for all it has to offer, it seems far too varied and disparate to qualify as a district. And it stretches for miles. Every part of the city has a unique history and identity. Branding should reflect what already exists, not what we would like something to be. With that said, the Windsor name is reflected in about about two-dozen neighborhoods and commercial developments along the corridor. It already has a history and story worth telling, so why not tell it? I think the choice of branding as an international district is appropriate with the diversity of residents and business owners in the area.

The urban core is small both in land area and population. I agree the entire city is massive in land area but I am not aware of any districting in the suburbs other than the Windsor District and the Founders District, both of which I think are unnecessary.

The neighborhoods west of Lake Hefner have coalesced to form a district of sorts. Why not encourage a sense of community and pride in various pockets of the city? The Wheeler District doesn't even exist yet and has already branded itself as such. Is there some official definition of a district that you are working from? I would rather let the residents, business owners, and stakeholders define their area than leave it up to the Chamber and Ackerman McQueen to come up with some branding master plan.

Every part of the city has a unique history and identity. Branding should reflect what already exists, not what we would like something to be. With that said, the Windsor name is reflected in about about two-dozen neighborhoods and commercial developments along the corridor. It already has a history and story worth telling, so why not tell it? I think the choice of branding as an international district is appropriate with the diversity of residents and business owners in the area.

This misses the point that there isn't enough to tie the area together that would make districting sensible. The only thing that ties it all together is that there's now a sidewalk running the length of 23rd St. from I-44 to Bethany. But that sidewalk simply runs alongside run down shopping centers, 50s/60s suburban style neighborhoods, and crappy apartment complexes. The other districts are tied together with a, more-or-less, contiguous theme. Yes, there's a multicultural presence with restaurants and grocers representing many parts of the world, but that's not unique to the area.

That said, I'm not opposed to its districting. I own a home there and if being considered a district leads to the area prospering, that'll benefit me in many ways, so I hope it's successful. But I still think it's pushing a square peg into a round hole.

This misses the point that there isn't enough to tie the area together that would make districting sensible. The only thing that ties it all together is that there's now a sidewalk running the length of 23rd St. from I-44 to Bethany. But that sidewalk simply runs alongside run down shopping centers, 50s/60s suburban style neighborhoods, and crappy apartment complexes. The other districts are tied together with a, more-or-less, contiguous theme. Yes, there's a multicultural presence with restaurants and grocers representing many parts of the world, but that's not unique to the area.

I agree with this. The Windsor District would make sense if it had a focal point of some kind or at least some sort of theme tying the area together, but all I see when driving through there is generic, post-war suburbia.

I totally agree about the Arts District. Pete said my exact thoughts as well when they often tried to gerimander the boundaries to get the arena and Cox and the Gardens. Excuse me, those are all part of the CBD or have their own Stadium/Convention district, lol. Really, the Arts District likely started to promote the OCMoA but really it is the only art thing in the local area. None of the other galleries chose to locate there (which to me spells the end of it as a district). I love the idea of Civic District (or just call it Oklahoma City Civic Center like it once was called), trimmed down to include the immediate OKC municipal campus area. Have specific design and beautification of that 3-5 square block area with vintage lighting, historic facts placards about the city, and housing to reflect a nod to OKC's history - then you'd have a district that means something.

As to the other districts; I disagree with those who want to combine Deep Deuce into Bricktown. DD was an actual district that has historic roots, the city should not back away from that and it is a SHAME that it has been gentrified to the effect that city residents forget its history as the city's black downtown neighborhood. Again, placards with historical fact or event would go a long way as well as a 'design standard' for buildings, streetscape, and lighting.

Bricktown is an established brand that the CVB capitalizes on for tourism and convention purposes. That isn't changing.

Automobile Alley is a corridor with a long standing history in OKC. Again, too bad people are forgetting what was actually there (and still is to a limited degree) due to the gentrification efforts and the 'takeoff' of nearby Midtown. One could argue that AA could be absorbed into Midtown but I would also argue that Midtown is not the Mid Town of Oklahoma City but that the NW Expressway Business District is (and other out of towners would agree).

There's likely not much that could be done with the branding of the MidTown district other than (again) to solidify it with branding to bring a sense of place. There aren't any historical facts worth promoting unlike AAlley, DD, Civic, and to a lesser extent Bricktown, but it is the hot area of OKC and has huge development potential. There needs to be a master plan put together to guide development and (again) come up with a brand for the district to differentiate the sense of place.

Film Row, was it called this back in the day? It does have some historic capability in the sense that it was the city's movie exchange. But out of AA, DD, Civic, and BT; Film Row is the least historic and while not as 'bad' as Midtown doesn't really have too much roots to stand on. Nevertheless, I think it is a wonderful brand for the area and IMO should be expanded to include most of W Downtown. I say again, placemaking - make it different than the other districts and you have something to stand on.

SoSA actually is a neighborhood IMO rather than a district. It is and can be the city's high end area but (again) planning needs to come up with what they want for the hood. I personally envision something similar to Near North Side of Chicago (much smaller scale though) when I think of SoSA's potential but that will need to be decided by the city.

River/Boat house district - like it or not, this is an actual downtown district and it isn't going to change.

C2S - this will likely be a district or result in one or more once development begins. The city should have stuck or reworked its development plan but now will have to deal with one or more hotel developments that likely may not have been what OKC desired for that particular location.

Farmer's Market - I'd say this is a district built around the historic Farmer's Market building. Again, needs a master plan and some sort of place making to differentiate it.

Central Business District - obviously, this is going to stay and obviously is the one district that really IS a district with placemaking done right. What I would like to see though, is exact boundaries with growth built in mind. Personally, I'd like Downtown OKC to drop the 'business district' name and just call it CBD like every other major city (business district sounds bush league to me, particularly when OKC has more than one high-rise business district already).

Conclusion: OKC does have real districts but the city needs to become more engaged from a planning and execution standpoint. It is almost as if developers and CVB have come up with these names and boundaries and there has been a varying level of success. What I think all of them need in general is city planning resulting in master plan for EACH district, placemaking effort to differentiate one district from the next, perhaps a review board for each that governs at least the architectural merit of development, sidewalks and lighting, and improved transit to enforce marketing and facilitate commerce among the districts. CBD, Bricktown, AAlley, Deep Deuce, Civic Center, Boathouse District, Film Row, Farmer's Market, Midtown are all districts that I think should stay (or be renamed to in some cases). SoSA is downtown's neighborhood IMO and if not for the history one could make the same claim of Deep Deuce (but it is indeed a historic district). I suspect C2S will result in one or more downtown neighborhoods rather than a district. There could be other neighborhoods.

I agree with this. The Windsor District would make sense if it had a focal point of some kind or at least some sort of theme tying the area together, but all I see when driving through there is generic, post-war suburbia.

That's more or less what it is. It's a great area, but I've spent enough time in proper districts (in OKC and PDX) to know that Windsor simply ain't one.

I agree with this. The Windsor District would make sense if it had a focal point of some kind or at least some sort of theme tying the area together, but all I see when driving through there is generic, post-war suburbia.

The section of 23rd street now known as Uptown used to be just as run-down and lacking in urban form, many parts of it still are. I believe the inner-ring postwar suburbs represent the true working class of our city. The Windsor area neighborhoods are ethnically and socio-economically diverse, which is less noticeable in the gentrifying neighborhoods. The sheer number of countries represented in Windsor IS unique to the area.

“I think Windsor is one of those neighborhoods that helps people experience a part of the American Dream. Windsor is a good, central, middle-class community, and that’s a part of our country that we are losing. It’s exciting to see Windsor coming back.”

The Windsor District is on the rise | Oklahoma Gazette (http://okgazette.com/2015/04/09/the-windsor-district-is-on-the-rise/)

District: An area dominated by a single non-residential use.

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/s/shawg/courses/154/articles/TNU2.pdf

https://www.patternlanguage.com/townplanning/cnu-neighborhood.htm

Thanks for sharing this. Under those definitions most neighborhoods in Oklahoma City wouldn't qualify as neighborhoods as they don't have a traditional neighborhood center. The Windsor District should more appropriately be called the Windsor Corridor, but that doesn't quite roll off the tongue in the same way.

It amazes me that most people seem to be equating art to mainly "visual art". The "Arts District" is absolutely the major area for performance art in OKC. I'm not arguing for it to be called the "Arts District", I'm just saying that putting down the area for not being a center for the arts is really off base. I attend more arts related events right there than in all of the rest of the city combined.

It amazes me that most people seem to be equating art to mainly "visual art". The "Arts District" is absolutely the major area for performance art in OKC. I'm not arguing for it to be called the "Arts District", I'm just saying that putting down the area for not being a center for the arts is really off base. I attend more arts related events right there than in all of the rest of the city combined.

I have always considered the hub of the Arts District to be OKCMOA and the Civic Center.

Thanks for sharing this. Under those definitions most neighborhoods in Oklahoma City wouldn't qualify as neighborhoods as they don't have a traditional neighborhood center. The Windsor District should more appropriately be called the Windsor Corridor, but that doesn't quite roll off the tongue in the same way.

Which makes it completely laughable.


The fundamental organizing elements of the New Urbanism...

Therein lies the rub. They are neighborhoods to everyone except a few.

It amazes me that most people seem to be equating art to mainly "visual art". The "Arts District" is absolutely the major area for performance art in OKC. I'm not arguing for it to be called the "Arts District", I'm just saying that putting down the area for not being a center for the arts is really off base. I attend more arts related events right there than in all of the rest of the city combined.

And how many places do you go for those Arts events? Cause if it's a legit art *district* in a city the size of OKC, you'd have no less than 20 options in walking distance of each other to go to enjoy art of any form on any night of the week, and you'd be able to do it for anywhere from $5 to $200.

The Art's District is OKC's corporate/wealthy art. There are so few spaces for occasional art that it's laughable. If it were an arts district, I'd be able to go any day or night of the week and find 5 to 10 different musical events, dozens of galleries of many sizes, dance studios. I'd be able to take classes, talk with arts organizations, and the place would be teeming 24/7 with, well, artists.

Of course there is some art in the district, but it's not an area dedicated to the Arts as much as it is a an area that houses a few important areas of art in the city.

I believe there is currently more square footage dedicated to the Public Justice system than the arts.

It's okay to call a spade a spade. It doesn't mean OKC sucks. It means OKC has some things to improve. We need Art in all areas of the city, so I'm not going to criticize things like the OK Contemporary ending up north of Auto Alley…but we have a lot of work to do and a lot of subsidies to provide if we really want to have a hub for the Arts located in that area of the city.

And how many places do you go for those Arts events? Cause if it's a legit art *district* in a city the size of OKC, you'd have no less than 20 options in walking distance of each other to go to enjoy art of any form on any night of the week, and you'd be able to do it for anywhere from $5 to $200.

The Art's District is OKC's corporate/wealthy art. There are so few spaces for occasional art that it's laughable. If it were an arts district, I'd be able to go any day or night of the week and find 5 to 10 different musical events, dozens of galleries of many sizes, dance studios. I'd be able to take classes, talk with arts organizations, and the place would be teeming 24/7 with, well, artists.

Of course there is some art in the district, but it's not an area dedicated to the Arts as much as it is a an area that houses a few important areas of art in the city.

I believe there is currently more square footage dedicated to the Public Justice system than the arts.

Perhaps you didn't read what I said which was that I wasn't arguing for it to be called the "Arts District". There is not anywhere in OKC that would qualify for your definition of an "Arts District" or even close to it. I stand by exactly what I said which is that there is more art of all kinds to be found in this area every day of the week than any other area of OKC.

I am hardly wealthy and I have no problem finding a very diverse offering there which I can afford.

The section of 23rd street now known as Uptown used to be just as run-down and lacking in urban form, many parts of it still are.


One thing 23rd St has that the Windsor district does not is a focal point, and that is the Tower Theater.


It amazes me that most people seem to be equating art to mainly "visual art". The "Arts District" is absolutely the major area for performance art in OKC. I'm not arguing for it to be called the "Arts District", I'm just saying that putting down the area for not being a center for the arts is really off base. I attend more arts related events right there than in all of the rest of the city combined.

A district should be properly branded for both residents and tourists alike. A lot of people seek out the "Arts District" expecting something very different than what they find. I think OKC still has a ways to go in this area but there are still places in the city, most notably the Paseo, that could be promoted better as arts districts and that actually offer arts.



The Art's District is OKC's corporate/wealthy art. There are so few spaces for occasional art that it's laughable. If it were an arts district, I'd be able to go any day or night of the week and find 5 to 10 different musical events, dozens of galleries of many sizes, dance studios. I'd be able to take classes, talk with arts organizations, and the place would be teeming 24/7 with, well, artists.


Completely agree with this. This is what an arts district should be and what people expect.

A district should be properly branded for both residents and tourists alike. A lot of people seek out the "Arts District" expecting something very different than what they find. I think OKC still has a ways to go in this area but there are still places in the city, most notably the Paseo, that could be promoted better as arts districts and that actually offer arts.


Again you'er equating arts only to visual arts and it is much more than that.

Perhaps you didn't read what I said which was that I wasn't arguing for it to be called the "Arts District". There is not anywhere in OKC that would qualify for your definition of an "Arts District" or even close to it. I stand by exactly what I said which is that there is more art of all kinds to be found in this area every day of the week than any other area of OKC.

I am hardly wealthy and I have no problem finding a very diverse offering there which I can afford.

Sorry lj, the comments, though I quoted you, were not necessarily entirely directed at you. So it's not whether or not you personally stand by it being called an "Arts District": the city has decided that for us.

And when I say wealthy art, I don't mean that you have to be wealthy to enjoy it. I'm talking about Art that takes a LOT of money to make and receives massive public/private subsidies from a wide range of sources. The OKC Philharmonic is a multi-million dollar enterprise, so is the MOA. Nothing in the Paseo is remotely close to that level, and there is more art DENSITY in the Paseo than anywhere else in the city (though it's nearly entirely dedicated to the visual arts).

Citizens and Tourists alike have expectations for something when that something has a name with an obvious connotative meaning. At this point this area is not a "hub" as much as it is an island. It's an important island. It's an incredibly neglected island.

Sorry lj, the comments, though I quoted you, were not necessarily entirely directed at you. So it's not whether or not you personally stand by it being called an "Arts District": the city has decided that for us.

And when I say wealthy art, I don't mean that you have to be wealthy to enjoy it. I'm talking about Art that takes a LOT of money to make and receives massive public/private subsidies from a wide range of sources. The OKC Philharmonic is a multi-million dollar enterprise, so is the MOA. Nothing in the Paseo is remotely close to that level, and there is more art DENSITY in the Paseo than anywhere else in the city (though it's nearly entirely dedicated to the visual arts).

Citizens and Tourists alike have expectations for something when that something has a name with an obvious connotative meaning. At this point this area is not a "hub" as much as it is an island. It's an important island. It's an incredibly neglected island.
And I did not say I stood by a comment about being called an "Arts District". I said I stand by my comment that there more art of all types available in that area every day of the week than in an other area of the city. Please get it right when you try to quote me. If I was a tourist looking for an area to look at or purchase local art, of course it's not where I would go. I don't, however, think that is necessarily what a tourist would always be looking for. When I have visitors from out of town, which I will have this week, I won't be taking them to Paseo for the arts. We are going to the "Arts District" for a performance of "Oklahoma".

There is also art in this area that comes no where close to your definition of wealthy. There are several local theater companies that operate here on a very modest budget.

I think if you are going to brand an area an "Arts District", it should be a hub for all types of art including visual arts. In OKC, the "Arts District" has the Museum of Art and the Civic Center. Both are great, important pieces of OKC's art scene but I don't think those two venues alone warrant branding the area the "Arts District," especially since there isn't even any retail or services over there to activate street life when there isn't a performance at the Civic Center. The two arts-oriented venues in the district are surrounded almost entirely by parking and the public justice system. The area really has a "cold" feel as opposed to the inviting feel of the Paseo.

I think if you are going to brand an area an "Arts District", it should be a hub for all types of art including visual arts. In OKC, the "Arts District" has the Museum of Art and the Civic Center. Both are great, important pieces of OKC's art scene but I don't think those two venues alone warrant branding the area the "Arts District," especially since there isn't even any retail or services over there to activate street life when there isn't a performance at the Civic Center. The two arts-oriented venues in the district are surrounded almost entirely by parking and the public justice system. The area really has a "cold" feel as opposed to the inviting feel of the Paseo.

I understand what you're saying but you can't argue that the Paseo is a hub for all types of art. Even with its warm feeling, the area around the Civic Center comes closer to that definition. Again I'm not arguing about the area being branded "Arts District". I'm just talking about the diversity of art available every day of the week.

And I did not say I stood by a comment about being called an "Arts District".

I never implied you did. Again, I quoted you in the original post, but I wasn't necessarily directing all of my comments as a reply/rebuttal to you.


I said I stand by my comment that there more art of all types available in that area every day of the week than in an other area of the city.

Not to be too snide, but that title actually belongs at 25th and Blackwelder, and it's really not even close.


If I was a tourist looking for an area to look at or purchase local art, of course it's not where I would go. I don't, however, think that is necessarily what a tourist would always be looking for. When I have visitors from out of town, which I will have this week, I won't be taking them to Paseo for the arts. We are going to the "Arts District" for a performance of "Oklahoma".

There is also art in this area that comes no where close to your definition of wealthy. There are several local theater companies that operate here on a very modest budget.

I'm not going to apologize for every little exception because it's not necessary. Of course you have a small company put something on in the Freede, or a small exhibition may occasionally make it to the MOA. But let me remove all doubt and be very clear here:

Regardless of the quality of the art that takes place in this city, we have a very poor offering in terms of quantity. And the quality is borne far more the way a great wine is developed (struggling on the vine) and far less the way the arts have traditionally grown strong: Epicenters of activity that have such a fierce amount of competition where only the best can shine.

We may never going to be an epicenter, but we don't even offer access to a diverse, compelling and sustainable arts-centered lifestyle to consumers. I mean, The Gaylord Concert Hall will sit vacant for 20 out of 31 days next month, according to their calendar (on that note, I'm happy your guests decided to come this week and not the following week.)

And the reason we can't offer that lifestyle, is because there's so little demand for it. I mean, we have one of the best performing arts universities in the United States and it essentially acts as a 2/4-year incubator for people to come in, get charged-up with some education, grab their diplomas, and promptly leave town.

Now, this is not the "Arts Districts" fault. Nor, and I want to be crystal clear, does that mean the art that does take place in this city is of a substandard quality. But please don't try and oversell what we offer.

There's a single Park Plaza District sign on a 6th street lamp post, north side, in front of the DEQ building, and it cracks me up every time I look at it while walking by. I guarantee if I told someone I lived in the Park Plaza District they would either say, "is that by McNellies"? or "is that near 16th"?

I never implied you did. Again, I quoted you in the original post, but I wasn't necessarily directing all of my comments as a reply/rebuttal to you.



Not to be too snide, but that title actually belongs at 25th and Blackwelder, and it's really not even close.



I'm not going to apologize for every little exception because it's not necessary. Of course you have a small company put something on in the Freede, or a small exhibition may occasionally make it to the MOA. But let me remove all doubt and be very clear here:

Regardless of the quality of the art that takes place in this city, we have a very poor offering in terms of quantity. And the quality is borne far more the way a great wine is developed (struggling on the vine) and far less the way the arts have traditionally grown strong: Epicenters of activity that have such a fierce amount of competition where only the best can shine.

We may never going to be an epicenter, but we don't even offer access to a diverse, compelling and sustainable arts-centered lifestyle to consumers. I mean, The Gaylord Concert Hall will sit vacant for 20 out of 31 days next month, according to their calendar (on that note, I'm happy your guests decided to come this week and not the following week.)

And the reason we can't offer that lifestyle, is because there's so little demand for it. I mean, we have one of the best performing arts universities in the United States and it essentially acts as a 2/4-year incubator for people to come in, get charged-up with some education, grab their diplomas, and promptly leave town.

Now, this is not the "Arts Districts" fault. Nor, and I want to be crystal clear, does that mean the art that does take place in this city is of a substandard quality. But please don't try and oversell what we offer.

You make some very valid points and some that I obviously disagree with.

The section of 23rd street now known as Uptown used to be just as run-down and lacking in urban form, many parts of it still are. I believe the inner-ring postwar suburbs represent the true working class of our city. The Windsor area neighborhoods are ethnically and socio-economically diverse, which is less noticeable in the gentrifying neighborhoods. The sheer number of countries represented in Windsor IS unique to the area.

“I think Windsor is one of those neighborhoods that helps people experience a part of the American Dream. Windsor is a good, central, middle-class community, and that’s a part of our country that we are losing. It’s exciting to see Windsor coming back.”

The Windsor District is on the rise | Oklahoma Gazette (http://okgazette.com/2015/04/09/the-windsor-district-is-on-the-rise/)

How has the majority of 23rd St that is branded as Uptown ever lacked "urban form" in any of our life times? Dilapidated in the past, yes, but it did not lack urban form...especially when compared to the Windsor District that centers around a strip mall fronted by a massive parking lot. I'm glad the Windsor District group is stepping up and improving the area, but to compare it to any urban district in the city is a major stretch at best.

Besides all the great hardworking families, it has a Crest! That trumps anything neighborhood related in the other urban districts IMO.

Thanks for sharing this. Under those definitions most neighborhoods in Oklahoma City wouldn't qualify as neighborhoods as they don't have a traditional neighborhood center. The Windsor District should more appropriately be called the Windsor Corridor, but that doesn't quite roll off the tongue in the same way.

Windsor Corridor would make a great deal more sense than trying to district it.

From my experience, a district is the kind of place you can drive to, park your car, and enjoy it for the day, or at least for several hours. All the great features of the district are tied together, you can park and walk from door to door and it's all contained in a clearly defined area. Windsor just doesn't have that. If you want to shop-hop in the Windsor area, you're driving from location to location. Even with the new sidewalks, it's just not compact enough to feel anything but tedious to walk between destinations, and there's at least one seedy apartment complex on your path to anywhere, from anywhere.

Don't think that I'm knocking the idea of putting money into Windsor to beautify it and promote business growth and such. My specific gripe is with the use of the term 'district' for a rather long expanse that reaches from I-44 to the Bethany border.

How has the majority of 23rd St that is branded as Uptown ever lacked "urban form" in any of our life times? Dilapidated in the past, yes, but it did not lack urban form...especially when compared to the Windsor District that centers around a strip mall fronted by a massive parking lot. I'm glad the Windsor District group is stepping up and improving the area, but to compare it to any urban district in the city is a major stretch at best.

Uptown 23rd was clearly built as a destination area, and it has the good bones of a district, ripe for full-blown gentrification. Tower Theater and the old buildings surrounding it, running for several blocks at least to Classen, and a bit farther even, are kind of the classic definition of urban form.

I'd love it if they could eventually build Windsor to have that kind of vibe to it, but that'd essentially require razing the 'district' as it is and rebuilding with that district coherence in mind.

A huge part of the Uptown area has the buildings right up on the street, which is one of the most important aspects of good urbanism.

A huge part of the Uptown area has the buildings right up on the street, which is one of the most important aspects of good urbanism.

Beyond the couple of blocks east and west of Tower Theater much of the urban form has been lost to suburban style restaurants, auto parts stores, and pawn shops. The Uptown District by definition stretches all the way to Penn. If that stretch can be considered a district then so can Windsor and others like it. There is a movement afoot to retrofit suburbia and the New Urbanists have developed form-based code to urbanize suburban strip malls and shopping centers, thereby creating a sense of place where it didn't exist before. It's only a matter of time before this takes off in various parts of the city, assuming the capital and demand is there.

Right on.

Maps 4 and 5. The Burbs Part 1 and 2.

Is it really a problem?

Is it really a problem?

Perhaps a champagne problem.

I am simple man so I just call everything between I44 & I 40 North to South and I44 & I235 East to West - the downtown/bricktown area

The Arts District is pretty silly, especially when they try and gerrymander in the Cheseapeake Arena and other things that are in no way contiguous or interconnected. There is really no bigger concentration of arts in that area than several others in OKC. If anything, it should be the Civic District or something similar, due to the Civic Center and several other municipal buildings and offices.

Beyond that and Park Plaza (which is a non-issue) I don't see a problem. The remaining districts are pretty well delineated and have their own identities.

I have been calling out our poseur Arts District for years... It's honestly one of the least impressive arts districts in OKC, which actually does have a pretty small arts scene.

What should we do to grow the arts scene? Certainly district branding doesn't hurt, but we lost the battle to save the "Arts District" long ago. What is emerging is a CBD expansion into the Arts District (which given its temporary status all along, now we know why it was such a subdued collection of properties), while the broader periphery around downtown is bursting with new arts venues. OKC is still just a bigger donut city, but now with just a few more layers of starbursts, if you will.

I suspect some of OKC's more redeeming cultural aspects (largest food truck festival?) don't necessarily generate arts-related jobs, but bigger picture, OKC needs to find a way to kickstart its creative economy. This goes back to branding, which for our city, we need to be more inclusive and open-ended.

^^ OKC is in no way lacking in having a creative class. In fact, the city comes in about average if not slightly above average compared to other cities its size. That said, the city has not done a very good job in capitalizing on and making the most of its existing potential. I think pushing for a proper arts district/hub would be a great place to start.

Arts, Culture, and Entertainment is an employment classification that the Census NAICS County Business Patterns survey tracks. For that employment sector, OKC has a location quotient of .85, implying 85% of the share we should have relative to our overall labor pool.