Mass-transit in Tulsa-sized cities

[perspicuity85]

Read the articles, they are very interesting.

Albuquerque:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_abq_2006-07a.htm

Little Rock:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_lr-stc-photoessay_2006-02a.htm

Tucson:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_tuc_2006-05b.htm

Nashville:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_nsh_2005-01.htm

[cannon_fodder]

I have to admit up front that I didnt read all the articles all the way, Im guilty of just glancing.

That said, a website advocating for light rail service declares that light rail service kicks donkey in all cities it is implemented in.  Shocking.

I would be much more interesting in hearing the take from a forum like ours were dissenting opinions are presented.  I'm sure that website touts how awesome Houston's rail system is too, which is nothing short of chaos.

[perspicuity85]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I have to admit up front that I didnt read all the articles all the way, Im guilty of just glancing.

That said, a website advocating for light rail service declares that light rail service kicks donkey in all cities it is implemented in.  Shocking.

Well you're right, cannon_fodder.  I anticipated that type of response from forum-posters.  However, the thing that really caught my eye was the cost considerations in the articles.  The Little Rock and Nashville articles specifically address the implementation of light rail on a tight budget.  They did not come up with their own data on the costs, they cited credible sources.  

I just want to stimulate some discussion about the implementation of mass-transit in Tulsa, and take a look at what similar-sized cities have done.

[colemandavid]

i think light rail would be good for a broken arrow to downtown route, or maybe a route from downtown down riverside to jenks.

[Conan71]

We've had convenient mass-transit in Tulsa for years and it's under-utilized.  We started another thread on this, I think on the development forum.  People like the convenience of a car too much to leave it at home.  Aside from that, our idea of congestion is a milk run compared to what drivers face in L.A., NYC, Houston, Dallas, etc.

When I was a "latch-key" kid growing up and living in mid-town, I took the bus about everywhere.  That was before we worried about child predators though.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

I promise to give me take soon.

Ironically all my time is taken up at the moment creating a computer model of a LRT scheme in a small city. Come Friday and the report is in, I'll comment. [8D]

[si_uk_lon_ok]

I was thinking about mass transit systems for Tulsa today and I wanted to ask everyone on Tulsa Now a question. As a transport planner, I normally look for schemes that will reduce congestion, increase journey time reliability and have high net present values, but I'd like to ask people what they want in a mass transit system?

Do you want it to add the development of downtown, improve air quality, reduce congestion, improve social inequality or something else? Do you want a scheme to link downtown with local neighbourhoods, such as Brady Heights or Riverview, something linking the suburbs or something more regional?

I'm asking because in previous posts I was aware I shot down ideas of a train between the airport and downtown. However I did it using my criteria for what a mass transit system should fulfil. So I'd really appreciate your comments.

[Conan71]

Tulsa is so atypical when you compare it to other cities.  Things which work in other cities totally flop here or don't even get to the launch stage.

As much as people in Europe see rail as indiginous to their culture, we don't see it at all.  We really don't have what amounts to congestion by other cities standards.  A distance that takes 1.5 hours to cover in a larger metropolis only takes 20-30 minutes tops here.  

I really don't know that there is enough business travel which comes to downtown to justify an airport to DT link via rail.  

The most logical would be BA to downtown, but there again, that may only amount to a few thousand workers from DT who live in BA, and would ignore those in Owasso, Jenks, or far south BA.

One line which could be cool in the future, once we get our crap together on what to do with the river near downtown might be a monorail out to Jenks' version of river development.

[YoungTulsan]

I don't think a very large amount of Broken Arrow commuters would embrace the idea of riding on a train.  First, theyd still have to commute to the train station, and what kind of parking would be required there if even a small portion of the BA expwy commuters chose to get on a train?

They are commuters by heart and their cars are their "freedom", as I see it in the local culture.

Besides, most people who live in Broken Arrow and work in Tulsa don't work in Downtown.  They work at 61st and Yale, 51st and Lewis, Pine and Harvard, West Tulsa, 101st and Sheridan, 21st and Utica (and so on and so forth)

I do like the ideas of linking the Airport, downtown, Port of Catoosa, etc on a north route using existing railways.  That sounds like an actual workable idea.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

If the consensus is that Tulsa has a good road network, why not build a public transport system that using the existing road network rather than going through the costly route of building a new network to compete with the roads or modifying and using existing rail lines?

I'm sure if you've read my posts before I'm a big advocate for buses and coaches for Tulsa and in general. I think you could have dedicated coach and bus lanes on the freeways and arteries in Tulsa. I think that buses would be coming along so quickly that with dedicated road routes and new styles of buses people may not realize that they are even taking a bus and mistake it for a much more costly light rail scheme. Coaches could on the other hand serve outlying towns, they can be comfortable, direct and even have wifi, again with dedicated routes they should be quicker than the car.


These buses are called ftr


Luxury Coaches.

I do really like rail and I think the city should purchase the future right of ways of some likely routes so when the day comes that they become viable they can be built quickly. However I think at the moment the road network is too quick and reliable and cars and parking too cheap for rail to compete well on a local level.

When I have sometime, I'll do some gravity models to look at the areas that would likely have the strongest demand. I was wondering if the city of Tulsa had some traffic models that they worked off to forecast demand or if the extension of the Gilcrease expressway has some related transport models?

[Johnboy976]

That ftr is retro looking. Tulsa should make theirs look like a patriot missile. You know, all patriotic and what-not.

[perspicuity85]

I would like to see Tulsa implement a streetcar system.  Most people don't know this, but Tulsa actually had streetcars in the early 1900s.  The line went all around downtown and all the way to Sand Springs.  Following WWII, the streetcars were junked just as they were in many other cities.  I agree with some other posters that Tulsa's traffice congestion is nothing compared to many other cities.  There has also been a considerable amount of freeway and turnpike improvements within  Tulsa metro in the past 15 years that makes traffic move much easier.  A light rail may not today be worth the cost of implementation.  Streetcars, however, provide not only transportation, but a leisure opportunity for tourists and citizens.  Streetcars can also hold a prestige status, which gives them equity as a product.  Streetcars are a way of differentiating the product of mass transportation into more than just getting from point A to point B.

[pfox]

quote:Originally posted by perspicuity85

I would like to see Tulsa implement a streetcar system.  Most people don't know this, but Tulsa actually had streetcars in the early 1900s.  The line went all around downtown and all the way to Sand Springs.  Following WWII, the streetcars were junked just as they were in many other cities.  I agree with some other posters that Tulsa's traffice congestion is nothing compared to many other cities.  There has also been a considerable amount of freeway and turnpike improvements within  Tulsa metro in the past 15 years that makes traffic move much easier.  A light rail may not today be worth the cost of implementation.  Streetcars, however, provide not only transportation, but a leisure opportunity for tourists and citizens.  Streetcars can also hold a prestige status, which gives them equity as a product.  Streetcars are a way of differentiating the product of mass transportation into more than just getting from point A to point B.

:clap :clap :clap

[Conan71]

Si- Tulsa has always had a bus system.  Image is the big problem.  They will get spikes in ridership when we have ozone alert days.  I believe they also got a spike right after hurricane Katrina and gas arbitrarilly went to $3.29 a gallon.

I agree that a streetcar line adds a certain "cool" factor, but wouldn't be of much use for practical transportation except within downtown.

I drove to Austin over the weekend and I'm curious if the rails I saw adjacent to Loop 1 that I saw were part of a light rail system.  Anyone know?

[si_uk_lon_ok]

I agree with Conan and Perspicuity in that one of the key factors in mass transit is how people perceive the mode of transport. I understand that streetcars used to be much more prevalent. In fact, there is a great book in the central library called when Oklahoma took the streetcar that shows all the routes it used to take. I think it could be worth introducing them, however I'm not sure what would be the purpose of paying to lay expensive track for them. I think the real danger with new mass transit is that you over spend on the infrastructure and the system can never become profitable.

I think Perspicuity has a good point that with the fast journey times associated with free flowing highway and easy parking mass transit has to differentiate itself to compete effectively. I think you have to challenge peoples perceptions over what a mass transit system can look like, but also how people perceive a transit system can run, for example frequent services and real time waiting information.

I realize that Tulsa has a bus system, I've seen them frequently downtown. Although I do have to wonder about all the bail bond adverts on them, I find that really off putting when you are trying to market a service to indicate that the majority of the customers using your buses might at some point need a bail bond. Perhaps Council Oak cheese and wine could advertise on them?  I'm just saying you can reinvent the bus system at quite low cost compared to other possibilities and have something comparable with light rail. There are schemes in Australia that have amazing rapid buses, where the local areas around the stops have seen property prices on par to those next to new light rail lines.