A grassroots organization focused on the intelligent and sustainable development, preservation and revitalization of Tulsa.
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 20, 2019, 07:27:34 am
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: $451M Streets plan on Nov. 4th General Ballot  (Read 9111 times)
OurTulsa
Guest
« Reply #30 on: September 07, 2008, 06:51:26 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by OUGrad05

quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

I'm really torn on this. With any kind of nod to improving transit I would've been on board.

But it's really, really difficult for me to get behind a plan that just assures we'll continue to fall farther behind other cities when it comes to non-car alternatives.


Can you name another city of tulsa's size and spread that has light rail and other forms of mass transit?  

BTW it needs to be in the US, NOT europe.




http://www.lightrailnow.org/success2.htm

New Rail Transit Systems Proposed, Planned, or in Development

USA

Albany - rapid LRT proposed
Albuquerque - regional rail under construction, LRT proposed
Arlington, Va - streetcar system planned
Atlanta - regional rail and streetcar projects in planning
Austin - light regional railway project under way, streetcar system proposed
Bayonne - streetcar in development
Birmingham - rapid LRT proposed, streetcar system in development
Boise - LRT (interurban, streetcar) proposed
Boulder - streetcar proposed
Charlotte - historic trolley upgrade under construction, modern LRT planned
Charlottesville - streetcar proposed
Cincinnati - LRT (interurban, streetcar) in planning
Columbus - LRT (interurban, streetcar) in planning
Corpus Christi - streetcar in planning
Dayton - streetcar proposed
Des Moines - LRT streetcar proposed
Detroit - interurban and streetcar LRT, regional passenger rail proposed
Denton - regional rail in development
El Paso - LRT streetcar system proposed
Fayette - LRT or regional rail proposed
Ft. Lauderdale - streetcar and rapid LRT proposed
Ft. Worth - regional passenger rail planned, streetcar proposed
Fresno - streetcar proposed
Glendale, Ca - streetcar proposed
Grand Rapids - streetcar proposed
Harrisburg - regional rail in development
Honolulu - rail rapid transit planned
Huntington, WV - heritage streetcar proposed
Huntington Beach, Ca - LRT proposed
Indianapolis - rapid LRT proposed, streetcar proposed
Jacksonville - light regional railway and LRT streetcar proposed
Kansas City - rapid LRT proposed
Lancaster - heritage streetcar proposed
Las Vegas - proposed
Louisville - LRT proposed
Madison - regional rail and streetcar proposed
Memphis - heritage streetcar in operation, modern LRT planned
Miami - streetcar projects in planning
Milwaukee - interurban and streetcar LRT, regional passenger rail proposed
Minneapolis - modern LRT in operation, streetcar proposed
Montgomery - heritage streetcar proposed
Nashville - regional "commuter" rail project under way
Norfolk - interurban LRT project under way
Ogden - modern streetcar proposed
Omaha - heritage streetcar proposed
Orange County (Ca) - LRT (interurban or streetcar) in planning
Orlando - regional passenger rail project under way, rapid LRT in planning
Phoenix - interurban LRT project under construction; regional rail and streetcar system proposed
Raleigh - regional rail system in planning
Reading, Pa - streetcar proposed
Richmond - heritage streetcar proposed
Roanoke - heritage streetcar proposed
Rochester - proposed
Salem, Or - streetcar proposed
San Antonio - proposed
Savannah - heritage streetcar (self-propelled) project under way
Seattle - Regional rail and modern streetcar in operation, interurban LRT project under way
Spokane - light railway proposed
Stamford - light rail streetcar proposed
Tampa - historic streetcar in operation, modern LRT streetcar proposed
Toledo - streetcar proposed
Tucson - heritage streetcar system being expanded, LRT proposed
Union County, NJ - LRT project under development
Washington - LRT in planning
Winston-Salem - streetcar project in planning
Yakima - heritage tourist streetcar system being expanded into transit line
 

Logged
OurTulsa
Guest
« Reply #31 on: September 07, 2008, 06:55:54 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by OUGrad05

quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

I'm really torn on this. With any kind of nod to improving transit I would've been on board.

But it's really, really difficult for me to get behind a plan that just assures we'll continue to fall farther behind other cities when it comes to non-car alternatives.


Can you name another city of tulsa's size and spread that has light rail and other forms of mass transit?  

BTW it needs to be in the US, NOT europe.



http://www.lightrailnow.org/success1.htm

Rail Transit Systems in Operation

USA – SYSTEMS

Electric Light Rail Transit (Interurban & Streetcar)
Modern & Heritage Urban & Interurban Transit Systems (See below for novelty heritage trolley systems)


Baltimore
Boston
Buffalo (modern LRT)
Charlotte (modern LRT, heritage streetcar)
Cleveland (legacy surface electric railway upgraded to modern LRT)
Dallas (modern LRT, heritage streetcar)
Denver
Houston
Hudson-Bergen, NJ
Kenosha, WI (heritage streetcar)
Little Rock (heritage streetcar)
Los Angeles
Memphis (currently heritage streetcar; modern LRT planned)
Minneapolis (Interurban LRT in operation, streetcar proposed)
Newark
New Orleans (entirely heritage streetcar)
Philadelphia (modern LRT, heritage streetcar)
Pittsburgh
Portland
Sacramento
St. Louis
Salt Lake City
San Diego
San Francisco (modern LRT, heritage streetcar)
San Jose
Seattle (currently heritage streetcar; modern LRT in development)
Tacoma, WA
Tampa (currently heritage streetcar; modern LRT planned)


Internally Powered Light Railway

Camden-Trenton, NJ
Galveston, TX

Metro (Rail Rapid Transit) and Regional Passenger Rail ("Commuter Rail")

Albuquerque
Atlanta
Baltimore
Boston
Camden
Chicago
Cleveland
Dallas
Ft. Lauderdale
Ft. Worth
Los Angeles
Miami
Newark
New York City
Oakland
Philadelphia
San Diego
San Francisco/Bay Area
San Jose
Seattle
Trenton
Washington


Novelty Heritage Trolley Systems

Colorado Springs
Ft. Collins
Ft. Smith
Seattle
Tucson  

Logged
OUGrad05
Civic Leader
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 169


WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 07, 2008, 08:44:00 pm »

OurTulsa you seem to have not read my post even though you quoted it twice.  Here's what I said...

Can you name another city of tulsa's size and spread that has light rail and other forms of mass transit?

BTW it needs to be in the US, NOT europe.


You posted list with MANY proposed cities and a whole list of cities that include Baltimore and SanFrancisco.  MUCH larger cities and much more dense.  

Only a couple are even remotely comparable like ABQ and even its more dense than Tulsa and still only has things in the proposal stage with absolutely ZERO track record of successful mass transit.  Even large cities tend to spend more on the mass transit then the systems bring in which means it costs the tax payers more to operate mass transit than the value they receive back from the system.  That isn't necessarily a bad thing but considering no one can provide any real examples with a city the size of tulsa and with the city spread of tulsa and effective mass transit is probably indictive of it not being efficient.  Only at 4 dollar gas did we as a nation get serious about mass transit but our cities still aren't designed for it and suburbs aren't going away anytime soon.


edit: and since when did a trolly system become mass transit?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2008, 08:45:36 pm by OUGrad05 » Logged

 
sgrizzle
Kung Fu Treachery
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16032


Inconceivable!


WWW
« Reply #33 on: September 08, 2008, 05:27:54 am »

Real Trolley (on rail) is mass transit.

Austin and Denver are larger than Tulsa but they're not NYC and if you look at density, Denver is very similar. Unlike Tulsa, both have very high barriers to entry in the light rail market. Denver is growing theirs like wildfire (thanks to a full 1c sales tax) and austin is having trouble getting theirs passed.
Logged
Wrinkle
Guest
« Reply #34 on: September 08, 2008, 07:03:51 am »

"Novelty Heritage Trolley Systems", at least you added the word "Novelty" appropriately.

In Tulsa, they call 'em "Rubber-Wheeled Trolley's". Have one now, but fleets twice in years' past.

It's almost a racket, we buy them at full value, minimally use them for a year or so, then sell them for $0.10/$1.00 to some amusement park.


Logged
Wrinkle
Guest
« Reply #35 on: September 08, 2008, 07:08:09 am »

quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

I have some major issues with the Mayor's plan.
Why are we not surprised?

quote:
I'll have to delineate them later, but it's too large and uses Ad Valorem unnecessarily.
Too large, huh?  Our streets will be in about the same condition that they are now, if not worse, when this thing is done.  So, are you saying that maintaining the streets is just not worth it?



No, I'd think you'd be putting words in my mouth.

Logged
Oil Capital
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #36 on: September 08, 2008, 07:09:41 am »

quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

Real Trolley (on rail) is mass transit.

Austin and Denver are larger than Tulsa but they're not NYC and if you look at density, Denver is very similar. Unlike Tulsa, both have very high barriers to entry in the light rail market. Denver is growing theirs like wildfire (thanks to a full 1c sales tax) and austin is having trouble getting theirs passed.



Not sure what you mean be "Unlike Tulsa, both have very high barriers to entry in the light rail market"
Logged

 
Friendly Bear
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2021



« Reply #37 on: September 08, 2008, 08:16:14 am »

quote:
Originally posted by Oil Capital

quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

Real Trolley (on rail) is mass transit.

Austin and Denver are larger than Tulsa but they're not NYC and if you look at density, Denver is very similar. Unlike Tulsa, both have very high barriers to entry in the light rail market. Denver is growing theirs like wildfire (thanks to a full 1c sales tax) and austin is having trouble getting theirs passed.



Not sure what you mean be "Unlike Tulsa, both have very high barriers to entry in the light rail market"



Over the weekend, the Lorton's World reported that Tulsa County Commissioner's Fred Perry and John Small-ego came out AGAINST the city road project, because it will grab the Four-to-Fix-the-County sales tax when it expires in 2011.

The Tax Vampires NEVER want to let go of a tax.

Never.

And, I just LOVE it when two different covens of Tax Vampires start arguing over the blood supply!

Their fangs are flashing.

[xx(]
« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 08:19:12 am by Friendly Bear » Logged
RecycleMichael
truth teller
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 12913


« Reply #38 on: September 08, 2008, 08:27:05 am »

Friendly bear is just making up facts again. There was not a story about two commissioners being against the road tax.

The story quoted Smaligo saying, "Right now, I just don't think I'm ready to lend support to this tax initiative," he said.

County Commission Chairman Fred Perry declined to comment on the issue Friday.

The Comissioner Miller quote was for the proposal. "The mayor's package is the best of all worlds, and I personally will vote for it," she said.

Stop making up facts friendly bear. Better yet, go away.


« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 08:27:24 am by RecycleMichael » Logged

Power is nothing till you use it.
Friendly Bear
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2021



« Reply #39 on: September 08, 2008, 09:53:17 am »

quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Friendly bear is just making up facts again. There was not a story about two commissioners being against the road tax.

The story quoted Smaligo saying, "Right now, I just don't think I'm ready to lend support to this tax initiative," he said.

County Commission Chairman Fred Perry declined to comment on the issue Friday.

The Comissioner Miller quote was for the proposal. "The mayor's package is the best of all worlds, and I personally will vote for it," she said.

Stop making up facts friendly bear. Better yet, go away.






Nice attempt at a half-truth.  Did you learn that technique working for the Lorton's World?

SATURDAY's article stated, and I quote:

"County Commission Chairman Fred Perry declined to comment on the issue Friday.

However, Perry has said that he understands and supports the city's efforts to fix its roads but has insisted that the county has needs of its own, including a new Juvenile Bureau facility."

Hardly sounds like he supports the City of Tulsa grabbing the expiring COUNTY Sales Tax...

Here's the entire article from Saturday:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080907_16_A5_Aesnon490810

« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 09:54:10 am by Friendly Bear » Logged
Conan71
Recovering Republican
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 29244



« Reply #40 on: September 08, 2008, 10:53:03 am »

quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

I'm really torn on this. With any kind of nod to improving transit I would've been on board.

But it's really, really difficult for me to get behind a plan that just assures we'll continue to fall farther behind other cities when it comes to non-car alternatives.



Not a personal attack, I've heard this said several times now.  I do understand your viewpoint and others with similar ones, but that's kind of like saying:

"Drilling for more oil won't solve all our problems...so we shouldn't do any new drilling"

So we do nothing about it at all and fall further behind in every aspect, including further deteriorating asphalt and concrete streets.

This is what I'm hoping for is that the five year plan turns into a phased improvement program.  First five years stabilizes the road problem, next five or seven, takes care of widening and other mass trans improvements.

We have to start somewhere, we can't keep ignoring this problem. Streets are one essential service we expect out of local government.  Doing nothing about the problem is excusing the municipality of one of it's core services.

Logged

"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first” -Ronald Reagan
TheTed
City Father
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1095


WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 08, 2008, 11:38:50 am »

quote:
Originally posted by Conan71

quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

I'm really torn on this. With any kind of nod to improving transit I would've been on board.

But it's really, really difficult for me to get behind a plan that just assures we'll continue to fall farther behind other cities when it comes to non-car alternatives.



Not a personal attack, I've heard this said several times now.  I do understand your viewpoint and others with similar ones, but that's kind of like saying:

"Drilling for more oil won't solve all our problems...so we shouldn't do any new drilling"

So we do nothing about it at all and fall further behind in every aspect, including further deteriorating asphalt and concrete streets.

This is what I'm hoping for is that the five year plan turns into a phased improvement program.  First five years stabilizes the road problem, next five or seven, takes care of widening and other mass trans improvements.

We have to start somewhere, we can't keep ignoring this problem. Streets are one essential service we expect out of local government.  Doing nothing about the problem is excusing the municipality of one of it's core services.


I agree that we need to do something and that's why I'm torn. I'll probably end up voting for it.

But it's ridiculous to me that we have an "Energy Crisis" and nobody wants to do anything but wait for somebody to invent some way for us to keep living our current lifestyles, driving everywhere we go, but only in electric cars.

This isn't gonna be magically fixed by some invention. We're gonna have to make drastic lifestyle changes. The sooner we accept that the sooner we can start to solve the problem.
Logged

 
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10346


WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 08, 2008, 12:44:59 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

"Novelty Heritage Trolley Systems", at least you added the word "Novelty" appropriately.

In Tulsa, they call 'em "Rubber-Wheeled Trolley's". Have one now, but fleets twice in years' past.

It's almost a racket, we buy them at full value, minimally use them for a year or so, then sell them for $0.10/$1.00 to some amusement park.






Novelty Heritage Trolley systems are generally a small museum operation with operating (real) trolleys. They are not intended for regular daily commuter service.

Colorado Springs, Ft Collins, Ft Smith and Tucson have such operations. I could only find the South Lake Union Streetcar in Seattle which is for regular use, not a museum.

http://www.fstm.org/

http://www.fortnet.org/trolley/

http://www.railwaypreservation.com/vintagetrolley/coloradosprings.htm

http://www.oldpueblotrolley.org/

http://www.seattlestreetcar.org/
Logged

 
jne
Philanthropist
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 934



« Reply #43 on: September 08, 2008, 12:52:25 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Conan71

quote:
Originally posted by TheTed

I'm really torn on this. With any kind of nod to improving transit I would've been on board.

But it's really, really difficult for me to get behind a plan that just assures we'll continue to fall farther behind other cities when it comes to non-car alternatives.



Not a personal attack, I've heard this said several times now.  I do understand your viewpoint and others with similar ones, but that's kind of like saying:

"Drilling for more oil won't solve all our problems...so we shouldn't do any new drilling"

So we do nothing about it at all and fall further behind in every aspect, including further deteriorating asphalt and concrete streets.

This is what I'm hoping for is that the five year plan turns into a phased improvement program.  First five years stabilizes the road problem, next five or seven, takes care of widening and other mass trans improvements.

We have to start somewhere, we can't keep ignoring this problem. Streets are one essential service we expect out of local government.  Doing nothing about the problem is excusing the municipality of one of it's core services.





I agree, the climate could change dramatically in 5 years.  What's gas going to cost in 2013?  Will some transit implemented in smaller cities start to show some success.  Will Tulsa grow its alt energy industry?  Public sentiment may shift in favor of more long term solutions. Doesn't hurt to have a little hope.
Logged

Vote for the two party system!
-one one Friday and one on Saturday.
Red Arrow
T-Town Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10346


WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 08, 2008, 12:56:51 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by OUGrad05

OurTulsa you seem to have not read my post even though you quoted it twice.  Here's what I said...

Can you name another city of tulsa's size and spread that has light rail and other forms of mass transit?

BTW it needs to be in the US, NOT europe.


You posted list with MANY proposed cities and a whole list of cities that include Baltimore and SanFrancisco.  MUCH larger cities and much more dense.  

Only a couple are even remotely comparable like ABQ and even its more dense than Tulsa and still only has things in the proposal stage with absolutely ZERO track record of successful mass transit.  Even large cities tend to spend more on the mass transit then the systems bring in which means it costs the tax payers more to operate mass transit than the value they receive back from the system.  That isn't necessarily a bad thing but considering no one can provide any real examples with a city the size of tulsa and with the city spread of tulsa and effective mass transit is probably indictive of it not being efficient.  Only at 4 dollar gas did we as a nation get serious about mass transit but our cities still aren't designed for it and suburbs aren't going away anytime soon.


edit: and since when did a trolly system become mass transit?



Comments like your edit are why I object calling the rubber tire, diesel powered thing Tulsa is using a trolley.

Albuquerque has not implemented its downtown trolley but has had success with heavier rail running to the north and south.

http://www.nmrailrunner.com/

My sister takes the Rail Runner to work (and home) and says it's well patronized.
Logged

 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
  Hosted by TulsaConnect and Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
 

Mission

 

"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa become the most vibrant, diverse, sustainable and prosperous city of our size. We achieve this by focusing on the development of Tulsa's distinctive identity and economic growth around a dynamic, urban core, complemented by a constellation of livable, thriving communities."
more...

 

Contact

 

2210 S Main St.
Tulsa, OK 74114
(918) 409-2669
info@tulsanow.org