|
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: dsjeffries on October 18, 2007, 04:34:06 pm quote: Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: YoungTulsan on October 18, 2007, 08:46:10 pm Interesting. The addresses indicate that it would just be located on the north side of 41st place just west of Quincy. The south side of that street and the houses on the north side of 42nd street have also been cleared out. I wonder if it will take up all of that, or just the north of 41st place addresses (1339-1343) ?
I had heard that the person buying up and clearing out all the houses on 42nd was looking to build a subdivision (judging on the amount of space available it would be 4-6 mcmanshions shoehorned into a tight space). I like the lofts though, because they bring both higher income and density to the area. Big mansions dont really add density to anything. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: Conan71 on October 18, 2007, 09:45:44 pm I still got mixed emotions about the lofts along Cherry St. I'm less sentimental about '40's/'50's era construction out on Brookside. I think this might be a nice improvement.
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: YoungTulsan on October 18, 2007, 10:16:40 pm quote: Yeah, the stuff they hauled off on the Brookside site was nothing that will be missed. There are plenty of dilapidated old 1950 construction properties in the area that could be razed in the name of infill and density. Get more people in Brookside, then the "nice" part of Brookside can continue southward replacing ugly strip malls and blighted properties with walkable urban style shops/bars/restraunts like from 33rd to 36th. The problem I see with the Brookside neighborhoods is that they have lost population density over the years. The homes built in 1950 back in the day were homes to families of 4. Mom, Dad, and 2 kids. Nowadays, I would guess that half of the homes are now rentals. Instead of a full family in each house, you have random people, sometimes one to a house. Working families struggling to raise their kids have moved to cheaper areas where the same houses go for 30-50% less in rent/mortgage. Little 2 bedroom boxes in the Brookside area sometimes ask 700-800/month in rent - Most of them built in 1950 and of modest size - Some havent been maintained very well - Some arent very modernized nor are they energy efficient. Middle and upper-middle class family units have fled to the suburbs. Young 20-somethings who like the area will occupy entire houses because the apartment options in the area are not very attractive. Rent houses with 1 or 2 dudes in them are not very dense. These people are already paying a pretty penny to live on Brookside, so the demand is there. The proper housing for the context (urban entertainment district) is not currently there. If you are a developer, now would be a great time to purchase properties in Brookside to convert to dense lofts or new dense apartment developments. People want to live in Brookside and will pay for it. They occupy old housing not designed for 21st century living and pay a pretty penny to do so because that is the only good option right now. They want more options. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: T-Town Now on October 19, 2007, 09:02:14 am Property Company of America is a first class developer, they will do a nice job on these properties, and they will no doubt be an asset to the area as well.
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: tshane250 on October 19, 2007, 11:43:33 am The Retreat at Brookside (http://"http://www.theretreatatbrookside.com/")
St. Louis Lofts at Cherry St. (http://"http://www.loftsatcherrystreet.com/") Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 19, 2007, 12:23:57 pm quote: They both look nice. But I really like how the ones on Rockford keep with the architecture that is already in the area and add to it. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: carltonplace on October 19, 2007, 01:06:04 pm Did they tear down the house on St Louis or move it? I always liked that house.
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: pfox on October 19, 2007, 03:17:27 pm Ok...now I see where these are...behind the strip center that holds Lambrusco'z and the 41st and Peoria Mazzio's.
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: Double A on October 19, 2007, 05:50:03 pm Just out of curiosity, can any of you afford a $300,000 mortgage or even a $200,000 mortgage?
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 19, 2007, 08:27:46 pm quote: Yes. And so would most young people, and even empty nesters buying those small houses in Jenks and South Tulsa etc. Its still amazing how many homes are going in out there. However not everyone wants to live in the suburbs. Many would like to live in an area like Brookside, or what Brookside can become. And this can start to cater to that market. Plus many YPs will like these moderately priced lofts. They arent as expensive as those in other cities, but cost of living is generally less here. That particular area of Brookside is not the most attractive yet, but it will hopefully continue to get better. It may be good to get in now while prices are comparatively cheap to similar areas in other cities. A similar loft in even Dallas's uptown area, KC, Denver, etc. can easily go for double or triple that price. I would like to see that large vacant property just east of there on 41st have a midrise condo go in. If we want to attract YP's and if, as some say, we already are. They are going to want to have places like that to live in. If the Brookside and Cherry Street areas continue to grow, they will be able to offer the kind of "neighborhoods" those people like. Both areas are still tiny beginnner versions of their cohorts in other cities. But I think they will get there. As these areas grow and really start to take on the characteristics, start to obvously look, like the areas that YP's like, this will beging to encourage growth to move even faster. These are still "pioneer" developments. Once there is enough critical mass, things may really start to take off. We just have to hope things continue to keep going. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: CoffeeBean on October 20, 2007, 09:53:47 am Just to be clear - are these lofts located within the development where McGraw recently announced construction or elsewhere?
Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: YoungTulsan on October 20, 2007, 11:53:57 am quote: These lofts arent located inside any "development", they will be between some apartments that are already there (Village @ Brookside) and residential houses (42nd & Peoria neighborhood). Just east of there on the other side of those apartments is a cleared out field with roads already paved for an office development which as of yet has still not begun building. That is the site Artist was suggesting a midrise should be put. I think the plan is just for office space though. I think to start getting midrise in Brookside, perhaps the Crow Creek corridor plan would be the catalyst. Or someone could buy out the Shannonwood Park condos (1948 postwar housing turned into "condos") and have a large chunk of real estate to work with. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: dsjeffries on October 21, 2007, 01:09:44 pm quote: Bring on the midrises!!! Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 21, 2007, 03:35:40 pm quote: Yes the paper said in an article that they have now started construction of that office space that is off of 41st. I believe those buildings also have the same style as the Wild Oats Complex and the shopping center next to this new office development. I like areas of mixed architecture. But its also nice to see a few areas that keep and add on to an architectural style to create a coherant and pleasing, identity and feel. The cottages next to Harwelden are great examples of taking something nice that already exists and adding to it. They did a superb job on that development. One of the best infill projects I have seen in a while. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: cannon_fodder on October 22, 2007, 07:54:57 am quote: Can I afford it? Certainly. Do I want to allocate that much of my income to housing? No. Of course, I also drive cars I have paid for and general don't like spending money... For all the people driving around in a Mercedes spending way too much money per month on car payments there are an equal number of less visible people who spend that money on a house payment. A $300,000 mortgage with taxes and insurance will cost you ~$2,000 a month. A young couple each earning $50K could easily afford it if they chose to do so. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: FOTD on October 22, 2007, 03:08:35 pm quote: ah, but what is the cost to our society if both work while they have children? define "easily afford".... Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: Double A on October 23, 2007, 06:12:05 pm quote: Typical Republican "family values", don't forget the added cost of daycare, too. A young couple who are a teacher and a police officer would have to live on ramen noodles to afford one of these mortgages, if they could even qualify for one. Although, I doubt most of the elitists on this forum would consider them as "professionals". Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 23, 2007, 06:28:29 pm quote: What do you mean cost to society? My parents both worked throughout I and my sisters lives and they still work. All of my 3 sisters have children and they and their husbands work. Thats just normal. They are great parents and have great kids. What on earth are you talking about? Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: RecycleMichael on October 23, 2007, 06:59:12 pm quote: A teacher and a police officer who have each been in their careers for five years in Tulsa would be making a combined salary well in excess of $80,000 per year. They could easily qualify and afford a mortgage on a $200,000 house. Average teacher pay in Oklahoma for 2006/2007 was $42,124. Starting pay for a Tulsa police officer is now $42,470 and a corporal starting pay is $53,097. They would have to be frugal and not eat out every night and spend a lot on entertaining or clothing, but they could probably survive without eating Ramen noodles. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: dsjeffries on October 23, 2007, 11:35:21 pm I don't think the entire point is how affordable these or ANY lofts are for the average joe-schmoe or couple... It's increased density leading to further development and ultimately to one the first live-work-play, walkable, urban neighborhoods in Tulsa. It's one small development that adds to Tulsa's livability and attractiveness to the oft-sought Young Professional crowd...
I got my hair cut at iidentity this morning and traveled down 38th Street.. I noticed Shannonwood for the first time, and I agree that it would be a great benefit if someone with money came in and built the area up (density wise). Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: spoonbill on October 25, 2007, 07:01:23 am quote: DScott, You are absolutely right! Too many people are missing the point when it comes to "re-development" or "re-vitalization." I've lived in several cities and worked with several types of developer. When you get away from the "disposable architecture" that permeates our city now and build structures that increase the density of professional people and families in a desirable area you get a chain reaction that spills out to the surrounding areas and spreads economic growth like fire! It's so simple, but most Tulsa developers miss it. A desire to live in the area must exist first!!! A fancy building or pretty renderings will not create this! Proximity to negative influences (jail, trash, bad streets, no parking, bears, vampire bats) will negate this completely! Hint: The best way to test the waters if you feel like your "desireability" perception is wrong, is to get an agreement with the current land owner to put up a sign that says "future home of XXX street lofts, reasonably priced. Call now for information." Works every time. Can save you a bundle. You learn where your price point should be, and you also learn who your opponents will be. As a bonus, you can also get a lot of investment offers this way. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: CoffeeBean on October 25, 2007, 07:23:19 pm I drove by the area slated for this development. No doubt it will stand out among the neighbors. Hopefully the less than desirable property surrounding the development will undergo the same transformation.
On a related note - does anyone know the status of the loft project just to the east of Pei Wei? Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: pfox on October 25, 2007, 09:25:55 pm I am not sure the developers are "missing" it. I just think it is a combination of a few things: first, the cost of developing infill projects and making decent margins doing so, the market's general wariness of condos (here in Tulsa) as good investment property, and financing multifamily projects.
These projects are tricky to finance. Many lenders require you to have commitments for at least 50% of your units before they will release the loan. Also, Tulsa had a burgeoning condo market in the 80's, but the real estate market went upside down, and no one could sell their condo. Locally, lenders, builders and buyers are still a little gunshy about it. Should the market warm up to the condo, I think you will see it change. You need to account for the fact that places like the Dallas Metro add nearly 50000 jobs a year to their market. That is a huge boon for the housing industry. We need more jobs if we want more young people and more growth. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: YoungTulsan on October 25, 2007, 09:40:56 pm quote: They don't just have to be $400,000 condos to be good infill. New apartments, midrise, just any sort of modernized living that both improves quality of life and gets more people living in the area is needed for an area like Brookside. New apartment construction with amenities, good urban design, and close proximity to Brookside's entertainment district would go in high demand. The current slumlord properties are probably making a neat profit from the Brookside area since they can overcharge for substandard housing and basically get away with it. People are paying $400-600/month for apartments that are probably worth $300/month. I think demand would be great for $750/month apartments that are actually worth $750/month (in construction quality, maintainance, modern features, amenities, etc) Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: Double A on October 25, 2007, 09:45:16 pm Commentary: Garage Loft validates OKC's downtown housing
Journal Record, The (Oklahoma City), Apr 28, 2006 by Darren Currin As new housing development in downtown Oklahoma City has kicked into high gear with several projects either under way or planned to start construction this year, many developers and investors are continuing to keep a close eye out for signs as to how downtown housing is being accepted. Downtown housing has seen some early validation with the early success of such projects as The Montgomery, as well as the initial reaction to the Centennial condo project being developed by Stonegate-Hogan in Bricktown. Related Results * Competition heats up for... * Tulsa's Sager lofts project... * The Garage lofts still going... * Metro Lofts in OKC sees... Most Popular Articles in Business * If You Want More Sex ... * 10 things you should ... * Too Young to Rent a ... * Disney's Toontown ... * Smart investments for ... More importantly, investors and developers are watching for validation of the financial rewards downtown housing has promised. In May 2004, the market was given its first glimpse of the high values housing was affording downtown when the Deep Deuce at Bricktown apartments sold for around $75,000 per unit, which at the time set a record. Earlier this month, downtown housing values were given another boost when The Garage Loft apartments sold for a near record $2.4 million. While the 24-unit property did transact for $2.4 million, the actual price per unit was not approximately $100,000 as first surmised due to the fact that The Garage Loft contained 7,200 square feet of retail space that was included in the purchase price. As a result, the actual price-per-unit was probably closer to the $81,000- per-unit price paid for the Renaissance at Norman apartments in May 2005, which is currently listed as the highest price per unit ever paid for an apartment complex in the Oklahoma City metro area. Let's see, the lofts in Tulsa start around $200,000, yet the highest priced loft in that article was $81,000? For those moaning and groaning about OKC surpassing Tulsa, here's your sign. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: tulsa1603 on October 25, 2007, 10:06:33 pm quote: That's not an fair comparison- individuals aren't paying $81,000 per unit- that's the cost the buyer paid for the ENTIRE APARTMENT COMPLEX. If those were split up as condos and sold, i assure you they would not be selling for $81,000 per unit, it would be substantially more. I understand your desire for inexpensive housing. The problem is, it can't be provided, at least not in the package people want. Want a stylish condo? It will cost a lot to build. If they actually built those condos on Brookside to where they could be sold for $100,000 per unit, people would bemoan how cheaply built they were. Either that, or the developer would make $0 profit. The profit margins on projects like these is much tighter than you think, especially considering the work/risk involved. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 25, 2007, 10:36:00 pm Yes, apartments are very different from condos. There are "hard lofts" actual old buildings or warehouses converted to living, "soft lofts" new developments meant to somewhat emulate the hard loft look, "loft style homes" "loft style duplexes" "loft condos" and "loft apartments". "Loft" is generally used to mean a certain style, often a clean, sparse, open contemporary/industrial style. I am assuming these lofts on Brookside and Cherry street will each be sold like condos or homes, not rented. Unless someone buys the loft then rents it out lol.
Someone buying an apartment complex needs to rent those apartments for more than they bought them for, aka the monthly mortgage of the complex divided by the number of units,,, plus property taxes, plus insurance, plus over all property upkeep and paying someone to work at the complex to rent the units, collect rents, etc. The price the buyer pays per apartment in an apartment complex will only reflect part of the cost they charge a renter in order to make a profit each month. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: spoonbill on October 26, 2007, 09:17:48 am quote: All good points, but the job argument is only one facet. Dallas sees a boom in the condo and "urban living" market because the 50K new jobs bring people into a market where you have to drive an hour to find an affordable neighborhood. Their sprawl has reached it's limit, and people are looking for other options. In Tulsa the same $300,000 you would spend on a 1,800 sq.ft. "loft" or condo downtown 5 minutes from the office will buy you a very nice 3,000 sq.ft. home in South Tulsa, Jenks, or Broken Arrow with a big yard, neighborhood amenity package, great schools, and the promise of increased property value only 15 minutes from the office. We have a healthy home inventory and developers willing to continue expansion. Fast forward 20 years, at the current growth level, when we reach our limit on drive-times. At that time people will begin to recognize the value of urban offerings. This will outweigh the cost of in-fill development and make it a less risky endeavor. However, this is a double edge sword, most people with young families would choose the atmosphere of a South Tulsa "style" neighborhood over urban living. For many, Tulsa becomes a less attractive city. This is what we see happening in places like Dallas, where the commercial development in the surrounding cities is booming because companies are moving out of the city core to capture a work-force increasingly less willing to commute or relocate. We ignore the fact that cities go through evolutionary cycles just like living organisms. If one looks at the history and growth patterns of older communities and applies those patterns to Tulsa, the probability of success or failure of a development can be, for the most part, predicted. I don't understand why so many young cities like Tulsa ignore the lessons of the elder cities. We spend so much time, energy and money trying to put a check on development outside of the city core. We spend vast amounts of money funding projects designed to encourage people to move into the downtown area, and blocking those that move people out. All of this money would be better spent fixing the crumbling infrastructure and plugging the holes that cause our city to be less attractive rather than trying to stop evolution. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: tulsa1603 on October 26, 2007, 09:42:24 am quote: The promise of increased property value in the burbs is a joke. Go to Owasso, Jenks, or BA and ask people there what kind of increases they are seeing. Why would anyone want to buy a 5 year old house there when there are a dozen new ones being built around the corner? It's a stack 'em deep and sell 'em cheap mentality. Cities like Dallas are not known as good examples of urban design. They are getting better due to necessity, but the sprawl that they have created over the last 40 years is something they surely regret. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: spoonbill on October 26, 2007, 11:54:14 am quote: That's the flaw in the argument. A city does not create "sprawl." People do. I would argue that a city has no control over "sprawl." It's part of the natural evolution of a city that is not bound by geography. Academia has attempted to teach young aspiring planners and architects that there is such thing as sprawl, and that it must be contained through careful zoning and planning, but people will always find a way to overcome government regulation. Planning should serve the purpose of anticipating growth rather than containing it. Planners have to work with economic development officials to encourage the smart placement of businesses. I think Dallas did a wonderful job of anticipating and accepting growth. They built 6 lane highways when all they needed was 4. They incorporated surrounding land and built the infrastructure to accommodate the fact that geographically they were destine to expand quickly. They kept taxes low to funnel the growth into the city, and gave incentives for businesses to move into specific growth zones. I don't think Dallas regrets anything! Booming economy, great streets, wonderful parks and recreation areas, tons of new jobs every year, and some of the best quality of living in the country. Tulsa, on the other hand, is so behind on planning that when a 4 lane road is finished it is already obsolete. It then costs twice as much to make the improvements necessary to clear that artery. All because the city thinks that it will contain that area through strict zoning. Zoning is no more than an informed suggestion. It is easily changed with the stroke of a pen. The purpose of Planning is to anticipate! Planners that think they can rely on zoning to contain growth in an area will always produce flawed plans. You will never contain or control the people! "The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: tulsa1603 on October 26, 2007, 01:50:05 pm quote: I won't disagree with you on people creating sprawl rather than cities. But we're just going to have to disagree on this: Sprawl leads to decay in the core. Part of me feels like you are saying 'lets go ahead and sprawl away and let what happens happen naturally'. If a city can encourage redevelopment of it's core RATHER than encouraging it's residents to move to other cities in outlying areas by providing 6 lane roads to get them there, it's a good thing. Tulsa's situation is that we are encouraging people to move to Jenks, Owasso, and BA. That equals more infrastructure (which we can't afford), it moves sales tax generators to those cities rather than keeping them here, yet many of those same people still work in Tulsa, using our existing infrastructure which we can no longer afford to maintain due to the loss of tax revenue, etc. I'm not saying we need to create a moratorium on sprawl. I just think that Tulsa needs to figure out ways to redevelop areas within. I also think you are making an unfair comparison by saying that the $200,000 loft is competing with a $200,000 house in Jenks or BA - Most people don't look at those as comparable. Most people that want a loft would never consider living in the suburbs and vice versa. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 26, 2007, 01:53:48 pm The word sprawl itself carries a negative connotation. However there are good examples of suburban growth and bad. I think booming suburbs and suburban growth done well can defintiely be a positive. As for the lofts, and even the boom in midrise and highrise condos you see in places like Dallas and Denver, I dont think they are going for the young family with kids. A 300,000 dollar loft is not really competing with the 300,000 dollar house in the burbs. Single YPs, couples without kids and even empty nesters are more the market lofts and condos in the city are catering to. Usually when you do get the kids, then you often head to the burbs. Plus many people like living in an urban environment. I think Tulsa should be able to compete as a city with other cities by offering good urban lifestyle choices. Someone like me would rather rot in heck than live in the suburbs lol. No matter how cheap and nice the home was. Just not my thing.
Areas like Brookside and Cherry Street are just beginning to offer that more urban, walkable, dense, lifestyle. Part of its appeal is being around lots of other young people like yourself. When an area begins to look like an area lots of YPs live in with lots of trendy shops, restaurants, and a lot of loft and midrise condos, It begins to take on an energy and growth mode all its own. The larger it becomes the more appealing it becomes. Young entreprenures start setting up shop in the area, they create more jobs, a readily available large market of educated young people easily enables more businesses to enter and expand, etc. Those areas begin to become engines that grow the economy and make the city more attractive and lively, etc. It becomes a kind of reinforcing snowball effect, one thing helps another which helps the first thing and so on. Tulsa has been sorely lacking in this type of growth and lifestyle option. Thats not a judgment for or against suburban growth, its simply adding another attractive lifestyle choice for Tulsa to offer. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: spoonbill on October 26, 2007, 02:50:52 pm quote: I agree. Especially about the snowball effect, but currently Tulsa has a growing inventory of these offerings and they are slow to move. My point is that the market is not here yet. The YP market is currently very transient. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: cannon_fodder on October 26, 2007, 03:17:07 pm quote: The cost to our society if we both work is, ummm, some negative number (negative cost =...). Society gains a person educated in Elementary Education and Childhood Development in my wife and an Attorney with a business background in myself - both staying in the workforce. Society gains jobs for people who enjoy children as a profession in more aftercare programs. My child gets an opportunity to interact with other children outside of school for 2 hours a day. What in the hell am I supposed to do? We have a kid so I'm supposed to sit at home and clean my house while he is in school from 7:45 - 3:00 and then at Tae Kwon Do from 3:30-5:00? Man, that would be SOOO much better for society if I could keep up with Oprah. I guess I don't know, share with me the horrid and detrimental costs I am casting onto society by working instead of sitting at home. quote: If I so chose I could curtail spending in other areas and afford the aforementioned dwelling without detrimental effect on my livelihood. Who cares anyway? If the developer thinks their is a demand and I'm not getting hosed for the capital, good for him. Build as many luxury condos as you want. Title: $10 Million Lofts - Brookside Post by: TheArtist on October 26, 2007, 05:04:57 pm quote: Yes our YP market is very transient. The general sense I get is that there are more moving into the area, often because of jobs. But we are still losing a lot of young people to other cities as well. Our expanding college options help. The decent economy helps. Even the expanding population in general, including the suburbs, helps and will do more as some of those kids in the suburbs grow up and look to move to the city. We have actually come a ways in the last several years but are still walking the line, gaining some, losing some, still not enough critical mass to quite take off yet. If things keep plodding along in a positive direction over the next 2 or 3 years, I think we are going to be perched to get to that critical mass to see more rapid and secure growth start to take off. I remember Brookside and Cherry street being much the same for a looong time. Heck, since the 80s. It would fluctuate up a bit, some new business here and there, a little more life showing... then things would slow down and you would see businesses close, nothing new start, then another part of town would perk up a bit, then fall and so on in a repeating cycle of buzz and hope then sad let down. Same thing with downtown. These last few years have been the first time in my adult life when all of these areas have been slowly, steadily growing and improving. All at the same time! That in itself is amazing to me lol. Thats quite a change right there. I see these "signs of hope" and real growth but still cant help but feel that sinking feeling in my stomach warning me that it could all falter as it has before. Watching the national housing and job markets fall doesnt help that any lol. Each one of these small developments that actually happens brings us that much closer to those areas having that critical mass where they can either start to grow on their own or at least be able to weather the next downturn and not completely shutter down back to square one, once again. We are not there yet, but getting close. Thats why I have been pushing for some sort of project like the East End or the Tulsa Landing to happen. Something along those lines could push us across that psychological barrier and begin to create enough buzz, activity, and growth to get to that critical mass that can sustain itself and get the core of this city to take off. We can do it slow and steady... but ONLY if we can keep it going and we dont falter back to square one again as we have before. Lets hope those negative national trends dont start affecting Tulsa. |