Our Situation Has Become a National Story

[hoodlum]

so tulsa is 49th out of 19,355 incorporated cities.

hey we are in the top 99.8% of cities that can weather an oil crisis.

not defending our dependance on the automobile but also putting these polls in perspective.

we do have some things to work on in terms of transit, but it isn't the end of the world an we aren't some sort of horrible place because of this poll.

[UrbanPlanner]

We could always have a private company come forward and operate a mass transit system in Tulsa. I just spent a month in Japan (mainly in the city of Kyoto) and all the mass transit systems there are owned by private companies.

Kyoto had rail service lines that went out to the small country towns much like what Bartlesville and Muskogee are to Tulsa, and it also had subway lines that went out from the main rail lines. A subway/rail system could work in Tulsa. Kyoto only has about a million people and was not that much more dense then parts of Tulsa.

Here's a map of what I think could be a good transit system. Blue lines are light rail type and the red lines are subway lines.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116109457081287172010.00044f7f0991271ed885f&ll=36.211039,-95.534363&spn=1.030452,2.384033&z=9

[dsjeffries]

quote:Originally posted by UrbanPlanner

We could always have a private company come forward and operate a mass transit system in Tulsa. I just spent a month in Japan (mainly in the city of Kyoto) and all the mass transit systems there are owned by private companies.

Kyoto had rail service lines that went out to the small country towns much like what Bartlesville and Muskogee are to Tulsa, and it also had subway lines that went out from the main rail lines. A subway/rail system could work in Tulsa. Kyoto only has about a million people and was not that much more dense then parts of Tulsa.

Here's a map of what I think could be a good transit system. Blue lines are light rail type and the red lines are subway lines.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116109457081287172010.00044f7f0991271ed885f&ll=36.211039,-95.534363&spn=1.030452,2.384033&z=9

I like your plan... However, the railroad tracks leading to Skiatook from downtown Tulsa have been turned into a walking/biking trail [B)].

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by UrbanPlanner

We could always have a private company come forward and operate a mass transit system in Tulsa. I just spent a month in Japan (mainly in the city of Kyoto) and all the mass transit systems there are owned by private companies.

Kyoto had rail service lines that went out to the small country towns much like what Bartlesville and Muskogee are to Tulsa, and it also had subway lines that went out from the main rail lines. A subway/rail system could work in Tulsa. Kyoto only has about a million people and was not that much more dense then parts of Tulsa.

Here's a map of what I think could be a good transit system. Blue lines are light rail type and the red lines are subway lines.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116109457081287172010.00044f7f0991271ed885f&ll=36.211039,-95.534363&spn=1.030452,2.384033&z=9

Are all of these existing rail lines?  There are some good routes.  After seeing how much the "Big Dig" set the taxpayers of Mass. back, I don't think subterrainian construction is going to be in high demand- especially for privately-owned/operated.

Not saying the plan you put up isn't a good idea, it's definitely a good basis for further discussion.  Welcome aboard and please don't be a stranger.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by UrbanPlanner


Kyoto had rail service lines that went out to the small country towns much like what Bartlesville and Muskogee are to Tulsa, and it also had subway lines that went out from the main rail lines. A subway/rail system could work in Tulsa. Kyoto only has about a million people and was not that much more dense then parts of Tulsa.

The city of Kyoto has a population of 1.4 million which is nearly four times the size of Tulsa and would place it in the top ten cities in the nation in population. Kyoto's metro area with Osaka has over 18 million people and is just slightly smaller then New York's metro region.

I don't think it's a relevant comparison.

[UrbanPlanner]

Yes, Kyoto has a population of 1.4 million.. but there really is no such thing as a suburb. So Kyoto is still larger then Tulsa, but it's not so much larger that you couldn't compare it to Tulsa.

They do group Osaka and a couple other cities together in a region, but it's still at the least a 30 minute train ride from Kyoto station to the closest major Osaka station. So just because the regional population is 18 million does not mean they are side by side. They draw off of each similar as Tulsa does to OKC and Dallas.

Most of the Rail lines I have on that map are existing lines in Tulsa that would just need to be upgraded. All the subway lines would be new lines that needed to be constructed underneath the city. I honestly have no idea how much that would be to construct, but I think if we could get the rail lines then slow build out subway lines it would increase the desirability of high density development inside Tulsa.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by UrbanPlanner

We could always have a private company come forward and operate a mass transit system in Tulsa. I just spent a month in Japan (mainly in the city of Kyoto) and all the mass transit systems there are owned by private companies.

Kyoto had rail service lines that went out to the small country towns much like what Bartlesville and Muskogee are to Tulsa, and it also had subway lines that went out from the main rail lines. A subway/rail system could work in Tulsa. Kyoto only has about a million people and was not that much more dense then parts of Tulsa.

Here's a map of what I think could be a good transit system. Blue lines are light rail type and the red lines are subway lines.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116109457081287172010.00044f7f0991271ed885f&ll=36.211039,-95.534363&spn=1.030452,2.384033&z=9

What you are ignoring is that the Japanese railway system was built by the government then privatised later. When you say Kyoto is not much more dense I find that very hard to believe Kyoto has a density of 4,608 people per square mile, Tulsa 2,152. Thats more than twice as much.

I think it would be fine if the government got out of the business of providing public transport, but only if it got out of the business of building and maintaining roads. To force public transport to compete in the market when roads don't just seems plain unfair.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by hoodlum

so tulsa is 49th out of 19,355 incorporated cities.

hey we are in the top 99.8% of cities that can weather an oil crisis.

not defending our dependance on the automobile but also putting these polls in perspective.

we do have some things to work on in terms of transit, but it isn't the end of the world an we aren't some sort of horrible place because of this poll.

We are 49 of 50. They didn't rank the other 19,305.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:buckeye said
What's with all the self-flagellation about 60 years worth of car culture? The Inner Puritan coming forth?

Because in hind site, it was a bad decision.  Roads cost tons of money to create and maintain while taking up taxable space.  Tulsa is among the worst in the nation for road miles per capita.  That means each person spends more to maintain roads than nearly anywhere else.

Add to the inherent sprawl element to it and we have to drive further that most people.  Which, of course, means we are paying more for fuel.  

The reliance on cars also means we need to waste more land on parking.  Citizens need to have 2 cars per family.  And on and on... as a whole the entire process is amazingly inefficient mode of transportation in an urban setting.  It costs our citizens MONEY and the in place infrastructure limits our ability to remedy the situation.

Hence the frustration.
- - -

Urban Planner, looking at Kyoto as a analogy is misguided:

Kyoto Japan, 1.4 Million people at 4,608 /sq mi
Tulsa, 382,872 people at 2,152.0/sq mi

So as a stand alone entity we are 25% the size of Kyoto and less than half of the density.  

Tulsa MSA, 905,000 people, IN 850,000 SQUARE MILES!!!  Or 1.06/sq mile.

Given that measure, we are still only 2/3's of Kyoto and spread over an area the size of it's entire Prefecture.

What I'm getting at, is the Kyoto model is simply not applicable to Tulsa.  We are 25% of the people in more than twice the area, by that measure alone it won't work.  NOW, add to the fact that Kyoto is hooked up to a national and regional rail network (Tulsa is not).  That in Tulsa everyone owns a car, highways are plentiful, and parking is always available (Kyoto is not car centric).

There are significant and insurmountable differences.

Here is a list of cities with a subway system in the US:

New York City (18mil urban people, 27K sq/mi)

San Francisco (4mil urban [metro is bigger, but I'm trying to include only areas covered in their mass transit], 16K sq/mi)

Boston (4mil, 12K sq/mi)

D.C. (5mil, 9K sq/mi)

Baltimore (2mil, 8K sq/mi, limited)

Chicago (8mil, 12.5K sq/mi)

Los Angeles (4.8mil, 8,205 sq/mi)

Philadelphia (5mil, 11K sq/mi)

SO... the least dense US city with a subway is LA.  With nearly ten times the people as metro Tulsa (not counting exurbs) and with 8 times the density.  I don't think a subway is feasible.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Tulsa MSA, 905,000 people, IN 850,000 SQUARE MILES!!!  Or 1.06/sq mile.

850,000 sq miles is like 12 Oklahomas.

[SXSW]

The downtown Tulsa (Union Depot) to downtown BA commuter rail would be a good start.  Use the existing rail line along the BA Expy.  Connect suburban BA and east Tulsa to dense neighborhoods in Midtown and to downtown.  Have stops along it at:
- Greenwood-East End/Drillers Ballpark?
- Peoria-Pearl District
- Utica-Kendall-Whittier neighborhood
- 11th St.-Hillcrest/TU
- 15th-Cherry Street
- 21st-Midtown
- Yale
- Memorial
- 71st-Kenosha

Where the train follows the highway the stations could be configured like they are in Denver:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qmb8r267pgks&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=10318596&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

[buckeye]

Hind sight is 20/20 and all that...in other words, useless to retroactively criticize decisions that were well-made in their time.  Sure, we know it's not going to work well anymore, but all the bellyaching here, in the press and peppering the internet at large makes me annoyed.

Far more people use it as an excuse to ***** up a storm than to make sensible suggestions for the future.

That said, there's some good stuff going on in this thread.

[perspicuity85]

quote:Originally posted by buckeye

Hind sight is 20/20 and all that...in other words, useless to retroactively criticize decisions that were well-made in their time.  Sure, we know it's not going to work well anymore, but all the bellyaching here, in the press and peppering the internet at large makes me annoyed.

Far more people use it as an excuse to ***** up a storm than to make sensible suggestions for the future.

That said, there's some good stuff going on in this thread.

Buckeye, you hit the bullseye, for lack of a better expression.  I absolutely agree, complaining only takes time away from planning.  

Without further hesitation: my main idea for improving public transportaion in Tulsa is the implementation of a streetcar system-- this allows the use of existing arterial streets (no eminent domain needed), and differentiates the product of public transportation to something more than just a means of getting from point A to point B.  A blunt example: many people don't ride the Tulsa Transit bus system because of its low-class perception.  Streetcars have a nostalgic and tourist appeal, which can result in a wider ridership market.  Furthermore, the higher the quantity of public transportation seats demanded, the higher the city can charge for ticket prices.  So, more people riding + higher ticket prices = much much more public transportation revenue, and therefore, possible revenue to maintain our ailing street/utility infrastructure.  Not to mention the fact that public transportation supports walkable urban neighborhoods, which help reduce suburban sprawl.  I think streetcars are possibly viable in the following locations:
a) along Riverside Dr., between the park and the street, from 18th St. to the 96th St. Jenks bridge.
b) along Peoria Ave. from 6th St. to I-44.
c) along 6th St. from Peoria Ave. into Downtown.
d) along 21st St. from Peoria Ave. to Yale Ave.
e) along 11th St. from Harvard Ave. into Downtown, and across the 11th St. bridge into the West Side.
f) along 41st St. from Peoria Ave. to Sheridan Rd.
g) Within Downtown: along Cincinnati and Detroit Avenues, from OSU-Tulsa to 11th St.  Along 1st and 2nd Streets, from Denver Ave. to Greenwood Ave.  Along Denver Ave., from 1st St. to 18th St.

I'll try to post a map with my route.

[shadows]

We did win the battle of Japan by bombing their civilian population.  We won the battle of Japan but they have won the war..      They concentrated on becoming the industrial giants of the world while we destroyed our industries in favor of recreation.  In an survey released they showed $8,000 in savings for all their population while we showed nearly the same charged on our credit cards.  

One has only to observe the TV pictures of the sleek snaking light rail transporters of the their people, streaking across the cities.   They have had no trouble financing them as we have paid the bills  before they were turned over to private operators.

Tulsa is a small town that wants to wear a hat two sizes to large that falls over their ears and makes it where it cannot see the progressing world of today.   We call on out-of - towners to promote such things that could be a failure in cities three times our size.

Tulsa is an aging city with retires who have paid for their now considered  substandard homes over the years, living on very limited incomes, who in their retirement years cannot any longer afford these illusions of necessity that take the very essentials to their lives from them in taxes and fee's.

They are faced with the city budget (that includes the process of collecting money) for the next decade to spend it now and we will further raise more taxes when that time arrives.  

The bond issue is not for fixing the streets, (as the money if used properly) the state road tax pays the city one dollar for each person on the last census each month.  

The bond issue also covers buying buses, fire equipment, telecommunications systems, maintaining police, fire, parks, public works, equipment management facilities, Gilcrease, Performing arts and Tulsa convention center.

 We don't even have a plan for a light rail system but we are sure getting a ride through the smoke of one.   The only thing not mentioned is that "its for the children" to pay off in decades to come.  

Then too we will need another 100 desks in the new glass cube for another 100 supervisors to note where the money will be spent.

I need to look up what the word "stupid" means.

[OUGrad05]

quote:Originally posted by jackbristow

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/12/news/economy/cities_oil/index.htm?postversion=2008061207

Well, we knew it was bad, but check this out.  Tulsa is rated as the 2nd worst nation in the city for public transportation infrastructure.  Guess who was the worst - OKC.

This local topic has gone national.  Oklahoma needs to invest in public transportation infrastructure in a dramatic way.  Rail linking our two cities would be a great first step.

I think fixing our existing roads and using our tax dollars as intended would be a great first.  Then a rail system.