News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

INCOG planning for commuter rail

Started by sportyart, July 17, 2005, 03:09:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

robbyfoxxxx

#46
June 21, 2006, 04:11:14 PM
Rail in Tulsa will not work, half of downtown is a parking lot, etc. etc. everything is opposite of what is desirable for rail. Plus the conservative state wont raise taxes for such public works, thats why we have turnpikes,perhaps. This may change in time. I think commuter buses to the outlying areas like Claremore, Bixby, Sand Springs Buslines to downtown Tulsa would be economical.The thing is not everyone goes to downtown aka.the big parking lot.

PonderInc

#47
June 21, 2006, 04:23:20 PM
45,000 people work in downtown Tulsa.  I say, bring on the commuter rail, and get folks off the expressways!  

Park and ride systems work in lots of cities, and it would work in Tulsa with our "satellite" communities.  Imagine how quickly rail would catch on when people sitting in traffic on the BA or 169 started seeing trains zipping past them. (Full of people relaxing, reading, working on their laptops, chatting...generally taking it easy on the trains.)

Imagine a rail line from downtown to Owasso via the airport.  Tulsans and visitors could finally get to the airport w/o a car, and all the Owasso denizens who work at American Airlines or downtown could leave their Dodge Rams at home.

OKC_Shane

#48
June 21, 2006, 05:14:45 PM
It makes me excited to consider the possibilties for light rail and commuter rail. If we lobby and lobby hard for it- citing other cities like Portland and Dallas who have had enormous boosts from their rail systems- maybe we can get some political attention from the state. And the state can find ways to get federal help on it, but it takes a long time so it would be good to start now.

It would be incredibly easy for our cities to do this themselves, too- Tulsa's next Vision/OKC's next MAPS could be transit oriented- the people would vote, and presumably if it passed the popular vote it would already have community support.

kingpen

#49
June 21, 2006, 05:17:16 PM
Do you really think people will ride a train in Tulsa?  Don't you have to have someplace to ride to?

TheArtist

#50
June 21, 2006, 05:51:21 PM
I dont think we could even afford the "extention" that Dallas is building at over 2 billion dollars. They have a lot more money coming in than Tulsa does plus they have more density.  They are building the dart to and from places that already exist and have had more density than any place in Tulsa. Remember even some of the suburbs of Dallas are close to the size of Tulsa.  Plus they are growing while Tulsa's population is shrinking.  

 I do think we should start planning for a light commuter rail and establishing where the lines may be and buying the right of ways if possible.  But even that may be difficult to do. But here again I think we should spend our money first on making the city attractive enough that its not losing people and starts to grow.  Like for better schools and police, I bet a few billion dollars on that would go a looong way.

I dont think spending money on a commuter line from BA to Downtown is going to make people want to move to Tulsa.  May do just the opposite.  Frankly it should be Broken Arrow that spends the money to do that.

Better schools, higher teacher pay, and crime prevention first I say.
"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 h

Matthew.Dowty

#51
June 21, 2006, 06:11:51 PM
I did not mean by posting the video that modern light rail is the right technology for Tulsa.

Commuter rail, a downtown street car circulator that hits OSU-TULSA and maybe with an extension to TU, and beefed up bus service is probably what the consultants will recommend.  Just as they have for Oklahoma City.

It goes without saying we need better police and schools with a hybrid voucher experiment.

robbyfoxxxx

#52
June 21, 2006, 08:31:04 PM
Has anybody seen Houstons' light rail? It has 30000 passengers a day and they are building a new line from the Galleria to the University of Houston, it is estimated to have more riders than Los Angeles's Rail system. Its' pretty impressive.

http://www.outofbalance.org/days/2004/day040303.html

TheCritic

#53
June 21, 2006, 09:03:37 PM
Let me understand this ... you cannot even find the money to paint the freeway overpasses and you are going to build light rail?

Get real!

AVERAGE JOE

#54
June 21, 2006, 09:10:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by TheCritic

Let me understand this ... you cannot even find the money to paint the freeway overpasses and you are going to build light rail?

Get real!

Your point is taken, but just fyi those are two different funding sources. The state owns and maintains the freeway overpasses. Light rail would be a municipal effort (with a hefty dose of federal transporation funding).

inteller

#55
June 21, 2006, 10:05:17 PM
who do you think dispurses federal transportation funding?  I can guarantee you it doesn't go Feds->City.

Oil Capital

#56
June 21, 2006, 10:35:25 PM
quote:
Originally posted by inteller

who do you think dispurses federal transportation funding?  I can guarantee you it doesn't go Feds->City.


Well, it does seem like mass transit funding generally does go directly from the Feds to the City (or metro transit agency)
 

PonderInc

#57
June 21, 2006, 11:09:49 PM
Here's more than you ever wanted to know about the Federal Transportation Administration's "New Starts" program:http://www.fta.dot.gov/16228_ENG_HTML.htm
and...http://www.fta.dot.gov/16277_ENG_HTML.htm

You'll notice that cities like Portland, Denver, Dallas, SLC, Seattle, Wash DC, and Norfolk VA have gotten into the game.  There's no reason why Tulsa should stand on the sidelines and let them get all the federal funding.

AVERAGE JOE

#58
June 22, 2006, 08:57:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by inteller

who do you think dispurses federal transportation funding?  I can guarantee you it doesn't go Feds->City.

See: two posts above.

If I recall right, CDBG funding goes directly from the feds to municipalities, too.

Oil Capital

#59
June 22, 2006, 05:21:00 PM
quote:
Originally posted by inteller

quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:
Originally posted by inteller

who do you think dispurses federal transportation funding?  I can guarantee you it doesn't go Feds->City.

See: two posts above.

If I recall right, CDBG funding goes directly from the feds to municipalities, too.*


From the grant site:

"FTA typically assigns project management oversight contractors to projects undergoing PE to ensure that the engineering effort progresses in accordance with FTA requirements, and that the project sponsor is adequately preparing for the final design stage of development."

In other words, a government contractor (NOT picked by the municipality) holds the purse strings and decides what does and doesn't happen on the project.  Its akin to letting a fox in the hen house.



and that proves what, exactly, regarding mass transit money going directly to cities or being routed through the states?
 
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions