District 4 Dilemma

[TheArtist]

Did I miss something Artist? Don't people who live outside the Cherry Street area...drive their vehicles to get here? If so, they need parking. The current setup, even with the stop gap angled solution, still doesn't provide for any growth. There has to be some structured parking that doesn't come at the expense of the convenience of the pedestrian.

Unless you are saying that folks outside the area would park downtown, Brady, Riverside, etc. and take transit to the area. Our past experience with any of those loop type systems has not been good. Urban Trolley tried it, Bill White tried it and they both found it hard to attract support from the entertainment districts or the passengers. Maybe now is different or maybe there are better combinations of vehicles and funding.

My son just returned from Spain where the pedestrian is king, plaza's rule and mass transit is mostly in the form of trains. The photos were very alluring with all the restaurants and clubs having outside service. I know our winters would seriously dent that concept but still, the concentration of these old areas should follow that formula. Large medians, small lanes, large sidewalk service areas and plazas. And yes, small, distinctive people movers.

I'm afraid that right now, Cherry Street is still viewed by many as the arterial to get to the grocery store, drug store and gas stations. Make it easier to use 13th and 14th to do that while you make the change to structured parking and a pedestrian friendly boulevard.

If we had good transit, then Downtown, Brookside, Cherry Street, Blue Dome, Brady Arts, suddenly become one.  Your mental map and thoughts change.  I can park in one place and easily get to all of them and think of spending the day or the evening going from place to place via transit.  Not as it is now, I park along Cherry Street, see a few things there, then drive to the Deco District, see a few things there, then drive to the Brady District or Blue Dome. In one evening out I can easily,,,Go to one place and find a place to park then do a little shopping, then go back to the car, drive to and park in another place. to go to an event or concert, go back to the car, drive to and park at another place to eat dinner, go back to the car, drive to and park at another place to go to a club.  With good transit, I and my friends, could park where we wanted ONCE.  I could park by the ballpark, do a couple things there perhaps, and then go to a gallery crawl on Brookside or Cherry Street via transit, and so on.  


As for Urban Trolley and Bill White, what were the wait times between rides?  You need to see one of those trolleys or busses go by every 5-10 minutes. If you get over 15 minutes between rides, worthless. People need to see those busses or trolleys every few minutes for reassurance and visibility to have that "hey, lookie there, I have seen this go by lots of times now, lets try it".  It has to be part of a promotional/educational campaign as well.  You have to have routes posted.  I have seen those trolleys on occasion, but when I looked at the stops could never find any info.  Was this just for a special occasion?  Where did the trolley go?  What were the times between stops?  When did the trolley stop running? Does it run every day? Where are the other stops? How much does it cost?  

We may not be completely ready for this right now.  But, I think good transit could actually promote downtown/mid-town growth, But, I also wouldn't want to miss any opportunities to lessen new parking.  But, its kind of a tricky toss up at this juncture, wait and watch as these areas add more parking infrastructure, or go ahead and start building up good transit.  But, perhaps we should go ahead and make the plans and lay the funding groundwork to get some of it started.

[carltonplace]

I was in New Orleans last weekend and I always marvel at their beautiful old homes in mile after mile of neighborhood that has stayed relatively static with all of the activity on the corridor (Like Magazine, or St Charles). Their electric street cars are always overflowing with passengers.

In New Orleans, they appreciate that their housing stock makes them unique, I can't imagine someone tearing down a house in the quarter or in the garden district to replace it with a mcmansion. If a house has to be replaced, its replaced with a similar style but usually the old house is meticulously restored and tear downs (outside of the inundated areas) are rare.

I noticed one 1920's Craftsman bungalow that was in between two victorian shotguns on Esplanade and it stuck out like a sore thumb, just like the snout houses do in Brookside among the bungalows.

There is nothing wrong with Tulsans wanting to preserve the things that make us Tulsa.

[TheTed]

That urban trolley thing that was tried by some private businessman a few years ago was worthless to me. No schedule. No website to tell me what was going on. I'm not planning my night on taking a trolley not knowing when it'd be coming, or whether the owner had decided to go out of town.

And as for pedestrian activity, our winters shouldn't be enough to discourage walking. Other than a few snowy/icy days, winters are fairly pleasant here. When it's 30-40 degrees, put your coat, gloves and hat on and you're fine. People in much colder climates walk much more than we do (Madison, Wisconsin; Minneapolis, etc).

The summers are what make walking unpleasant. Especially across our vast parking lots. I get all sweaty walking across a sea of asphalt even when it's only 80 degrees out. When it's 105 (and when it's 105 in Tulsa, it's 110 or more downtown), that's when you're discouraged from walking. The lack of shade is harsh on pedestrians.

[AquaMan]

Yes, Artist, frequency and visibility are the key to any of these dedicated routes. If I remember correctly the biggest hindrance to increasing those things was vehicle design. It costs a lot of money to hire drivers and pump diesel into 8-12mpg vehicles to make frequent stops 18 hours a day. Seriously, I looked at doing it and was astounded at how fast the expenses mounted up. Insurance is also pretty stout. A municipality can self insure or spread the cost among its routes, but an independent cannot. However, the municipal transit systems, imo, are not flexible and creative enough to fill this niche alone.

And that is the other major obstacle. Tulsa Transit is marginally profitable if at all. They no doubt would want to provide the service, if profitable, but if they can't they wouldn't relish another operation doing so. Especially if it involves decreasing their advertising revenues. And it will.
 
The successful product would be quiet, non polluting, electric drive people movers (not trolleys or buses) that were partially funded with grants and underwritten by PSO and the major players in the area (hospitals, clinics, entertainment associations and schools).  A consortium of operators with experience in, or knowledge of, the consumers for these area could be formed (I bet Blake knows some). We have to look at newer transportation technology to match the demographics of these areas.

I for one, would love to be involved with a project like that.

edit: What if Tulsa University, in association with OSU, TCC and the pre-engineering students at Memorial HS, designed the vehicle used in the loops  that SXSW detailed? I'm betting it could also be manufactured in Tulsa as well. Talk about a project with synergism. A competition for the best design, then its local execution would be great fun and a job creation process.

[DTowner]

I think these ideas are interesting, but all rely on large numbers of people driving somewhere, parking and then using a trolley/transportation system for an evening out.  While some percentage of park and ride participation is inevitable and will always be needed in this part of the country, to really work you need a significant percentage of riders who live along the routes that simply catch a ride to a different part of town.  That requires a density level we are no where close to achieving.

The dreams of trolleys also ignore that for many of us, a night out really only includes dinner and maybe drinks/dessert in one area.  If I go to Cherry St., I'm probably not going to also hit Brookside and Blue Dome that same night.  To drive past Cherry St. to downtown in order to park and ride a trolley back to Cherry St. is simply not going to happen.

I get Artist's point that if we keep making the use of cars convenient we'll never get sufficient mass transit demand and use to support a viable system.  I agree.  However, you simply can't wish away a lifetime of conditioning that creates an expectation of driving to and parking at the front door of our destination.  And you can't expect businesses to locate in an area with inadequate parking to serve its customers. 

I think Blake's point is a good one that recognizes our current reality and nudges us towards something better, even if not the ultimate goal.

[TheTed]

I found this from an article in today's TW interesting. If we had regular service connecting Brookside, Cherry Street and downtown that extended into the evenings, at least on weekends, I'd be more likely to ride.

Changes proposed for implementation within the next five years include creating a pilot program to provide express service to some suburbs, starting a rapid bus service pilot program along Peoria Avenue and development of "super" bus stops at busy locations.

The article also mentions standardizing arrival and departure times systemwide to every 30 or 60 minutes. Obviously these are minor changes, but with the current climate it may be the best we can do. At least you don't have to check the schedule constantly like you do now, with service at strange intervals like every 80 minutes.

[AquaMan]

Dtowner, I suspect its not so much the density of residences throughout the city as it is the density of population at certain time periods in certain areas. For instance, TU, TCC, OSU medical, Shusterman and OSU Tulsa all have high density at particular times. Downtown density swells during the day and then again on evenings and weekends. The hospitals undoubtedly increase the density of the area around 15th & Utica with identifiable shift peaks and seasons. Each of those areas have their own parking too. Actually, the density of the surrounding residential areas shrink daily as the flow of workers and consumers head to these areas.

The density models are also based on the types of routes, the types of high cost vehicles used and the limitations of municipal system operators. IOW, it takes general high density to be successful with their models.

But, I agree that we are behaviorally conditioned to the status quo of cars parked next to destinations. Economically this may be our window to consider another concept in an urban setting. Once the economy rebounds no one thinks it necessary to change. More cars, more parking, more parking lots.

[akupetsky]

OK, I'll vote for Blake this year.  It's only for one year.

If, however, he manages to bring U2 or even Arcade Fire http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qBLnWPKcVIto the BOK Center, I'll be his for the foreseeable future.

[sgrizzle]

I found this from an article in today's TW interesting. If we had regular service connecting Brookside, Cherry Street and downtown that extended into the evenings, at least on weekends, I'd be more likely to ride.

The article also mentions standardizing arrival and departure times systemwide to every 30 or 60 minutes. Obviously these are minor changes, but with the current climate it may be the best we can do. At least you don't have to check the schedule constantly like you do now, with service at strange intervals like every 80 minutes.

I got disenfranchised with bus service years ago. My favorite was when the bus pulled into a Warehouse market parking lot, turned the engine off, and sat there for 15 minutes because "it wasn't time to be at the next stop"

[carltonplace]

I got disenfranchised with bus service years ago. My favorite was when the bus pulled into a Warehouse market parking lot, turned the engine off, and sat there for 15 minutes because "it wasn't time to be at the next stop"

Ha! The bus to the Cherokee Business Park stops before it gets to Whirlpool, Verizon, CapOne, Bama, ONG etc for 15 minute break before it lets off any passengers at their workplace. Shouldn't it stop for break after it gets everyone to work?

[AquaMan]

Their schedules are based on having to stop for rider pickup at designated locations. When there are no riders to pick up it makes the bus early to the next stop where riders have not arrived yet. So, they have to stop infrequently and get back on schedule. The 15th street bus that I used to take would stop at around Boston and wait when he was too early. If it was a lazy driver and he didn't, then I would miss the bus and have to walk. That unreliability meant I seldom took the bus to a job that was only a mile away.

The bureaucratic restraints that municipal systems face are tremendous. I would like to see them cede out smaller niche routes to independents who could better identify and serve routes like the entertainment districts.

[Gaspar]

The bureaucratic restraints that municipal systems face are tremendous. I would like to see them cede out smaller niche routes to independents who could better identify and serve routes like the entertainment districts.

I like your thinking!  They currently operate about 100 vehicles with an expenditure of about $150,000 per vehicle per year ($15 million in yearly expenses).  Each rider costs $22.16 (2009 numbers, higher now).  Each rider reports an average of 30 minutes waiting at or walking to their stop each way.  With transfer and transit times, you can safely estimate that each rider devotes one to two hours a day (round trip) to their commute.

With a round trip expense cost of $44 per rider not calculating cost tied up in loss of productivity you can make some simple generalizations.

Tulsa Transit could pay riders $10,000 every year to take a cab to work, save several million dollars (and stimulate the private transport industry).
They could pay private van services $8 per rider per trip and save $10 Million in operating expenses (and stimulate the private transport industry).
Or Tulsa Transit could purchase each of their riders an $42,000 hybrid automobile every four years! (and GO GREEN).
Or they could establish a combination of these alternatives.

[OwenParkPhil]

I am looking for someone in District 4 to help us with the Owen Park neighborhood.  We need someone to promote this neighborhood.  

I am glad to read Blake Ewing is the kind of preservationist I like to see around these parts.  I don't want an attorney who represents developers.  No more fat cats for me.  I am a Democrat, but I'm willing and eager to vote for Blake if he helps us rejuvenate Owen Park, in a historical way.  My neighbors and I would like to make this neighborhood one that creative, progressive people will live in. It would really be convenient for people that own businesses in downtown or in the Brady District.

I don't see why we can't be another Maple Ridge eventually.  Right now it's inexpensive to buy in Owen Park.  This is the first planned addition to Tulsa, as far as Tulsa history goes (if my sources are correct).

We need new blood over here in Owen Park, but we need people who will realize the historic importance of this neighborhood, since it's on the National Historic Register.  We don't want "tear downs" or people building modern lofts in this neighborhood.  We'd like to see "time period correct" homes in Owen Park.  In the Park, that encompasses many styles of architecture from about 1910 to about 1935.

I am excited to read Blake's post on here, and will vote for him.  I'm afraid Brune is the "same old, same old" type of politician.

[AquaMan]

Gas, I would gladly take that money. Check is fine.

One of their constraints is in the type vehicles they are required to put on the streets. I am told that grant money specifically requires certain configurations and since most muni's are already strapped for money they are forced to field buses that don't necessarily make sense. Perhaps the grants are designed by bus manufacturers and for larger cities? Or perhaps the requirements come from claims sensitive insurance companies.

Anyway, it seems this is an industry that begs privatization. As long as their license requires that some routes be "incentivised" to run through low/no profit areas to facilitate low income transportation. I'm sure lots of cab companies are capable operators.

[Conan71]

Gas, I would gladly take that money. Check is fine.

One of their constraints is in the type vehicles they are required to put on the streets. I am told that grant money specifically requires certain configurations and since most muni's are already strapped for money they are forced to field buses that don't necessarily make sense. Perhaps the grants are designed by bus manufacturers and for larger cities? Or perhaps the requirements come from claims sensitive insurance companies.

Anyway, it seems this is an industry that begs privatization. As long as their license requires that some routes be "incentivised" to run through low/no profit areas to facilitate low income transportation. I'm sure lots of cab companies are capable operators.  their lobbyists push the hardest.