Tulsa World Says We're Out of Step

[waterboy]

No, we committed the same sins as the rest of the country when it comes to lending abuses. We just didn't have the same effects because our community did not grow as fast. We didn't grow as fast because we lost major employers this last decade. Why that happened was somewhat out of our control but some of it was due to crooked businessmen who got caught. Anyway, less growth, less damage. Our crisis is simply unfolding slower.

I don't remember ANY comments or arguments that stopping bridges across the Arkansas would increase values inside its limits. That is a bogus logic you picked up somewhere else, maybe Portland. What I did hear was the fears that it would spur growth of both retail and road building expense in the Jenks, Bixby, Glenpool areas at the expense of other areas, notably downtown and inner city development. The burbs represent older lifestyle development that is more expensive and out of step with the rest of the country.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

No, we committed the same sins as the rest of the country when it comes to lending abuses. We just didn't have the same effects because our community did not grow as fast. We didn't grow as fast because we lost major employers this last decade. Why that happened was somewhat out of our control but some of it was due to crooked businessmen who got caught. Anyway, less growth, less damage. Our crisis is simply unfolding slower.

I don't remember ANY comments or arguments that stopping bridges across the Arkansas would increase values inside its limits. That is a bogus logic you picked up somewhere else, maybe Portland. What I did hear was the fears that it would spur growth of both retail and road building expense in the Jenks, Bixby, Glenpool areas at the expense of other areas, notably downtown and inner city development. The burbs represent older lifestyle development that is more expensive and out of step with the rest of the country.

Perhaps this will refresh your memory. The thread was “OH No…not again…Toll Bridge”.  Making property within a boundary more valuable will drive up the price.

Artist: Sorry to drag you into this but when someone tries to call my bluff when I am not bluffing, I feel compelled to respond.

City Father          Posted - 09/03/2008 :  10:17:16                
quote:  Originally posted by Red ArrowA new bridge could also be used by mass transit to the new neighborhoods. Adding mass transit while the neighborhoods are developing will be more successful than trying to add it later as most of Tulsa has proven. High density living has been the topic of many threads. Not everyone wants it for themselves. Even then, "high density" has different meanings for different folks. A bridge that saves 7 miles each way on a round trip is a gas savings on a trip that will probably be taken regardless of the miles. The IDL has been cited as a barrier to sensible development. I see the river as the same type barrier. Crossing that barrier could avoid duplicate retail development that only serves to dilute the customer base at both places and convert more land to parking spaces for cars. I see this particular bridge as making both places more efficient. I would like to agree with you about not "enabling" growth by adding roads and bridges but local history shows that the growth will happen even with insufficient infrastructure. I keep thinking of Portland and their urban growth boundaries when I think of doing or not doing this bridge. Our river can help act as such a boundary. It makes the property within that boundary more valuable and helps stem sprawl and too much driving. "Avoid duplicate retail development".... thats exactly what we get with sprawl, the never ending duplication of big box retail strips and people having to drive everywhere to get to everything. Instead think "nodal" with pockets of medium density scattered around. Suburbs as complete, seperate, mini cities surrounded by trees and farmland, connected with a few good roads and mass transit. Not one contiguous sprawling, inefficient mess. There would be less roads and infrastructure, and believe it or not, more nature and community for people to enjoy. One of the sad comments about typical suburban sprawl is that in the end it destroys the nature and "country feel" that people move out there for in the first place. By keeping the nodes more compact, the country feel is actually maintained. The ideal size for these nodes/small towns is about 100-150 thousand population. I am going to start a different thread to illustrate what I am trying to describe later. Its just a different paradigm for growth, an ideal, if you will. Not everyone will want it, not every place can be that way, but by understanding and having it as an option to consider when making development choices, I think better descisions can be made. Right now we just seem to think in the 2 terms that we understand, that we are used to seeing and see as the only choices of sprawl and urban, when there is actually a very interesting middle road that combines many of the pluses of both and gets rid of many of the negatives of both. Many places in Europe take for granted this type of growth. People there assume its the norm and like it, where as here we argue that somehow the suburban lifestyle as we know it is the norm. Its just a habit that we are familiar with. The way we are talking about this bridge shows that we dont even consider this other option, we continue ever onward with what we know and are familiar with, good or not.   
"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way his stomach growls for food."-Irving Stone   
 Edited by - TheArtist on 09/03/2008 10:26:11   
 
Country: USA | Posts: 3715   

[waterboy]

C'mon Red Arrow...No One reads Artists posts![]

Seriously, his remarks did not represent consensus out of the tons of posts on the matter. Artist has some thoughtful musings that even he would admit are free association thinking. He is more or less exploring concepts out loud. But, there was no movement to try and bolster property values by opposing the bridges. Most of the opposition was due to the unfairness of a private group proposal, the draining of retail revenues and taxes to the burbs and the disproportionate cost to the rest of the community for the growth of unsustainability. And thats a mouthful....

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

C'mon Red Arrow...No One reads Artists posts![]

Seriously, his remarks did not represent consensus out of the tons of posts on the matter. Artist has some thoughtful musings that even he would admit are free association thinking. He is more or less exploring concepts out loud. But, there was no movement to try and bolster property values by opposing the bridges. Most of the opposition was due to the unfairness of a private group proposal, the draining of retail revenues and taxes to the burbs and the disproportionate cost to the rest of the community for the growth of unsustainability. And thats a mouthful....

If you had read what I intended instead of what I wrote, it would be perfectly clear.

I started on 11/22/08; 00:45:45 by intending that we didn't see the BIG 200% housing cost bubble because we didn't do the same as some other areas.  Limited land availibility in a desirable living area will drive up housing costs.  Higher density will mostly be new build, expensive.   Some areas (Portland) may not have a lot of expansion choice due to geographic boundaries.  

I'm sure that some commuters in the Los Angeles area would like to live closer but they cannot find anything they can afford closer.

I was in Sunnyvale, CA in the late 1980s on a company trip.  As ususal, I drove around to see the area.  I came across a place called Los Gatos.  Nice enough but the houses all had Lincolns, Caddies, MB, BMW etc.  In Tulsa those houses would have had Chevies, Fords, and Dodges. I asked the next day at work and nearly fell down when I heard the "value" of those houses. There is(was?) some limitation on development there due to the hills not really being suitable for development.

A trip to Maui, HI in Dec 2004 (I know, another tough trip.) revealed more high costs. Maui does limit development to some areas except for native Hawaiians.  You could buy a fine 1200 square ft home in a small community part way up Haleakala (the big extinct volcano) for about $600,000 to $750,000 depending on the view.

Limited land availability can drive up housing costs.  There were certainly other factors in the 200% bubble.  I agree that Tulsa has not had a limited land issue.

[waterboy]

That's clear enough and quite true.

[Hometown]

My accountant said that historically real estate in Texas and Oklahoma doesn't appreciate as much as other parts of the country.

[Wilbur]

According to a buddy of mine in the banking industry (he's an executive VP), many of the banks in Oklahoma did not follow many of the nation's other banks into the risky loan business.  He contends BOK probably got into it the most (and, they have many mortgages here), hence some of their problems.  But, most of the other banks didn't, thus are on a sound footing.

[Hometown]

I don't know about OK Banks but according to the Tulsa World 33 percent of the homes in Tulsa were purchased with subprime loans and 44 percent of the homes in Oklahoma were purchased with subprime loans -- even where a standard loan could have been obtained.

Oklahoma No. 2 in pricey mortgages

By ROBERT EVATT World Staff Writer
9/6/2006

Oklahoma had the second-highest rate of high-interest mortgages in the nation last year, a recent survey has found.

The Consumer Federation of America estimated that 44.3 percent of all mortgages in Oklahoma were "subprime," or at least 3 percent higher than the prime rate. About 18 percent of home mortgages were 5 percent above prime, and 2.6 percent were 7 percent above prime.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=060906_Bu_E1_Oklah11455

High-cost loans pinch minorities


By GINNIE GRAHAM World Staff Writer
8/15/2006

Black homeowners in Tulsa have the 10th highest level of high-cost loan refinancing in the nation, according to a report analyzing data available under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.

About 33 percent of home purchases in Tulsa, regardless of race or income, are made with a high-cost loan. And Tulsa ranks eighth in the nation for the percentage of high-cost home loans in minority neighborhoods, according to the report.

"It was particularly noteworthy that these subprime lenders have an impact on homebuyers of all races in Tulsa," said mayoral aide Dwain Midget. "All races are affected, but it's particularly high among minorities and the poor. I'm not surprised, because that is tactic of unscrupulous lenders."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=060815_Ne_a1_highcost

[Breadburner]

Some of these post still make me laugh....

[Moderator]

Some of these post still make me laugh....

And that's great, but STOP REVIVING ANCIENT THREADS TO SHARE YOUR RANDOM THOUGHTS.