Recently there has been some discussion regarding the possibility of a BA / Downtown commuter rail line. What about a line from the airport to downtown? A rail line already exists along North 75. This would provide convenient and affordable access to our city for tourists arriving by air. Some stops that come to mind could be TCC – North, the area near the Albertson's on North Peoria, and OSU-Tulsa. I personally love visiting cities such as Chicago, New York, Altanta, and St. Louis, where I can get off my flight and ride the train into the city's core. It's less hassle, and always more affordable.
Tulsa definitely needs to add some mass transit to and from the airport. When I fly into a city, I expect to be able to jump on a bus or a train and get downtown.
I live a couple miles from downtown, and had to take a taxi from the airport once...cost me something like 30 or 40 bucks. There was no bus service. (I think there is a bus that goes to the airport now, but it's not express...I could bike there in less time!)
I think the way to approach this would be to consider rail service from Owasso to downtown Tulsa via the airport. That way, the Owasso folks could get to their jobs downtown and at American Airlines without clogging up 169 and 244...and Tulsans could zip to and from the airport without having to drive.
quote:
Originally posted by DwnTwnTul
What about a line from the airport to downtown?
This would be the ticket for sure in bringing positive growth to downtown. Minneapolis did this and generated far more revenue in their downtown area then they ever expected to.
This would bring most of the travelers downtown and in return would support new hotels and all the venues of entertainment our city would have to offer.
Awesome idea DwnTwnTul, lets just hope the right people see this and look into it.
Here's a link to Minneapolis Light Rail Project:
http://www.mspairport.com/msp/Ground_Transportation/Light_Rail.aspx
That's a good point about American Airline employees. It's probably unlikely there would be a train stop at the front door of the AA facility due to security, but a shuttle could run from the airport train station to AA routinely.
I just don't understand why the city isn't focusing more on this line versus the BA line. BA residents are much less likely to utilize mass transit. That whole concept is beneath them. On the other hand, those of us downtown and North are not afraid of mass transit. In fact, many of us enjoy it. We actually thrive on all things urban. Not only is a rail line more fitting to this area of town, but it would also be a major tourism benefit.
I truly believe that once people actually experience Tulsa, they leave with a completely different perspective. Speaking of AA in Tulsa, perhaps we should consider targeting this demographic. Knowing the smart remarks made so frequently on this forum, let me get ahead of you. I'm NOT suggesting we try to attract a bunch of Anonymous Alcoholics to our city. You KNOW what I mean by "AA". There are thousands of airline employees across America, most offering their employees flight benefits. Recognizing that most people don't want to risk the cost involved with coming to an unknown land, it seems only natural that individuals with flight benefits would be more willing to take this risk. However, for this to be successful we need to make it as convenient and affordable to them as possible. Having to spend an extra $40 on a cab or car once they arrive, will only serve to discourage them. Upon an enjoyable experience, they definitely would return home and inform their friends and families, leading to an improved reputation for Tulsa.
quote:
Originally posted by Porky
Awesome idea DwnTwnTul, lets just hope the right people see this and look into it.
Thanks Porky. Perhaps I'm young and naive, but I still have faith in forums like this one to generate the amount of buzz needed. Unfortunately, suggestions such as this one submitted to our elected "representatives" usually go unnoticed.
I'm for it.
It's an idea that has been kicked around before, but it's well worth revisiting. And kudos to DTT for breaking it out the line on its own, rather than relying on it being a part of a bigger transit system -- that's a new twist. DTT is right, it's a good enough idea to stand on its own.
It would also likely be a cost effective idea, too. The track already exists -- darn near a straight shot from downtown.
Google maps clearly shows the tracks (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=tulsa+ok&layer=&ie=UTF8&z=13&ll=36.1613,-95.919743&spn=0.068742,0.21698&om=1%22). Just follow 2nd Street out of downtown eastbound, skirt Mike Patrick Park at Yale & Dawson Road, and head right for the southern edge of the airport grounds. All they'd have to build is a little spur from those tracks to the terminal -- either cut NE diagonally around 73rd East Ave and head right up Airport Drive or go under Hwy 11 and wrap around the Fine Parking facility at Memorial. Run trains twice an hour from 7am to 9pm.
While we're at it, put FedEx and UPS drop boxes (and maybe service counters) at the transit stop downtown and use the train to haul the packages out to Cargo Road at the airport.
edit: if you want to get REALLY crazy with the idea, those same tracks continue due east to Catoosa, where we could run a spur south down 193rd to the Cherokee Casino. Gets people from the airport to the casino, but ALSO from the casino to downtown Tulsa.
The tracks head east of Catoosa and eventually run parallel to Route 66 all the way to Claremore. Run pretty close to the Port of Catoosa, if that's of benefit to anyone.
I really hope this comes to the forefront of possible public projects. I'm all for the river but I think there is enough private money available for development there. I've always felt that transportation, specifically light rail and pedestrian friendly projects, is exactly what's needed for any other projects in the area to work cohesively.
Great topic, excellent idea!
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
Google maps clearly shows the tracks (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=tulsa+ok&layer=&ie=UTF8&z=13&ll=36.1613,-95.919743&spn=0.068742,0.21698&om=1%22).
That's incredible, this really needs to be looked into.
(http://www.applepics.com/11/blandbridenstine/News/ttownrail.jpg)
While the tracks that run South of the airport would be a much faster route into downtown, I think we should keep an open mind regarding the tracks North of the airport. It's hard to tell in this map, but those tracks actually run along the "Cherokee Expy" into downtown.
Utilizing the North tracks would allow for better access to OSU-Tulsa, the proposed Langston-Tulsa site, new devlopment on North Peoria, Mohawk Park, the Zoo, and Tulsa Air and Space Museum.
I really like Average Joe's idea of also using it for cargo purposes. Perhaps our city leaders could partner with companies such as FedEx, UPS, etc. for sponsorship.
If this rail line was established and I had the money, I would love to build a parking garage near the downtown station on this line. It could be sold as a long-term "park and ride".
quote:
Originally posted by DwnTwnTul
While the tracks that run South of the airport would be a much faster route into downtown, I think we should keep an open mind regarding the tracks North of the airport. It's hard to tell in this map, but those tracks actually run along the "Cherokee Expy" into downtown.
Utilizing the North tracks would allow for better access to OSU-Tulsa, the proposed Langston-Tulsa site, new devlopment on North Peoria, Mohawk Park, the Zoo, and Tulsa Air and Space Museum.
I really like Average Joe's idea of also using it for cargo purposes. Perhaps our city leaders could partner with companies such as FedEx, UPS, etc. for sponsorship.
If this rail line was established and I had the money, I would love to build a parking garage near the downtown station on this line. It could be sold as a long-term "park and ride".
Good ideas, although I'd still favor the more direct "express" route for the airport rail service. A person going to the airport wants the fastest, most direct service possible (ties in with your very good park & ride idea), so making lots of stops throughout north Tulsa is less than ideal. Same would probably hold true for business travelers coming from the airport to meetings downtown. That's my take, anyway. I'd make the airport shuttle a non-stop express - get on downtown, next stop - airport. Depending on the condition of the track and the train used, it could take as little as 8-10 minutes.
But you're right, the tracks to the north that run along Hwy 75 out to Mohawk Park and eventually to Owasso would make an ideal transit line -- Pine and Peoria stop, Mohawk Park stop, Owasso stop.
Thinking about this a little more, I think the 10 minute trip time would be about right. I'm guessing the length of the tracks from downtown to the airport would be around 6-7 miles.
Peoria to Memorial = 5 miles
Admiral to Virgin = 1.5 miles
Add a little for downtown to Peoria and Virgin to the terminal, but subtract some for heading diagonally "as the crow flies".
Just for sake of argument, let's say the track is 6 miles. If the train averages 30mph, that's exactly a 10 minute trip. So not knowing the exact length of the track, I'm still confident that a 10 minute trip is feasible because I think a non-stop train can average more than 30mph.
Ten minutes from downtown is pretty darn convenient, especially being dropped off/picked up right at the terminal.
Makes it very easy to schedule as well. Run trains departing downtown on the hour and half past, run trains departing the airport at quarter after and quarter til, like this:
Depart downtown - 7:00am
Arrive airport - 7:10am
(five minute passegner boarding)
Depart airport - 7:15am
Arrive downtown - 7:25am
(five minute passenger boarding)
Depart downtown - 7:30am
(etc, etc, repeat all day until 9:00pm)
Folks, this would only require one train. Well, maybe two to have a back-up train and to be able to swap them out for maintenance purposes. But that's it -- one train running back and forth all day.
Joe, I drive on 75 from 14th and Denver to 69th St North at 6:AM with no traffic at 70 MPH and it takes 13 minutes. Not to quibble, but with a couple of stops its more likely a 20 to 30 minute train commute at 30 MPH
quote:
Originally posted by carltonplace
Joe, I drive on 75 from 14th and Denver to 69th St North at 6:AM with no traffic at 70 MPH and it takes 13 minutes. Not to quibble, but with a couple of stops its more likely a 20 to 30 minute train commute at 30 MPH
Different route entirely. Look at the map Porky posted above - no twists or turns, just 6-7 miles in an almost perfectly straight line from downtown to the airport. And if you'll reread my posts you'll see that the route I proposed is an express - no stops.
Walk me through the math, Average Joe.
Anyone...please feel free to change the numbers if you have different knowledge.
A six mile route from the airport to the central business district preferredly next to a structured parking area. The train runs every half hour each way. 24 miles of travel every hour. You could probably run it less often during off peak, but for now say you run it from 6am till 10pm. That covers almost all of the flights leaving the airport.
That means 32 trips in and 32 trips out each day. 64 six mile trips equals 384 miles a day. What is the operating cost per mile?
I read that locomotive engines were two million dollars a piece and passenger cabs were 1.5 million dollars a piece. I have no idea if these are good, but I think we would need three engines and say six cab cars. That is $15 million in rolling capital stock plus I am sure another five million dollars in tools and offices and probably another five million dollars in platforms and security stations. What is the funding source for 25 million in initial capital costs?
Where do we put it downtown? Are there any acquisition costs?
I do like the idea, but still reserve the right to oppose if the numbers just don't work. The most important number is probably the number of passengers per day and just don't feel there is going to be enough with the airport terminal as the only destination from downtown. Maybe if there was a way to connect to the jobs at American Airlines.
I would like to see the downtown link be right where the Boulder Bridge is now. Build a large elevated depot that lets out to the north into new structured parking for the Brady theatre and to the south to a ramp to the existing parking garage on Second Street.
I like the route from downtown to the Airport even more than one to BA. It is a proactive planning approach that could ultimately make all of the difference to north Tulsa. A direct line between the airport & downtown, with one or two stops along the way, combined with a transit oriented development node--you would have a great incentive for a high-density, mixed use development in a very underutilized area of town. Also, if you look at the map, the northern train route extends on beyond the airport up to Owasso, Collinsville, and eventually Bartlesville. What a great day trip--Woolaroc, OKMozart, etc.... A great benefit for both Tulsa & Bartlesville.
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
the route I proposed is an express - no stops.
Exactly, it would have to be a non-stop in order for it to work with travelers. Everything has to be catered to the people coming in and leaving at the airports.
Also the Light Rail system would have to be implemented in order for it to be cost effective and fast.
quote:
Originally posted by Porky
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
the route I proposed is an express - no stops.
Exactly, it would have to be a non-stop in order for it to work with travelers. Everything has to be catered to the people coming in and leaving at the airports.
Also the Light Rail system would have to be implemented in order for it to be cost effective and fast.
You could always do a mix, as most other cities do--have an express during some hours, and local at other times. I would think that peak time for commuters (7am to 9am) would not be peak for airport travelers (except for Dallas, planes from east coast will arrive late morning, early afternoon; other planes even later). I wonder whether a train exclusively devoted to airport/downtown connection would have enough riders. Really, under the best scenerio, how many travelers does Tulsa get a day? To work, I think it needs some other stops included, at least during commuter times. Again, pull in Owasso, and eventually Bartesville, and you have a transit that will work for commuters & travelers. And with a couple of stops between downtown & the airport, you won't add more than 10 or 15 minutes. Speaking from experience, an average cab ride from the airport to downtown is around $40. I imagine that, given the cost comparison, most travelers would still take the train even if the travel time is fifteen minutes more.
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
You could always do a mix, as most other cities do--have an express during some hours, and local at other times. I would think that peak time for commuters (7am to 9am) would not be peak for airport travelers (except for Dallas, planes from east coast will arrive late morning, early afternoon; other planes even later). I wonder whether a train exclusively devoted to airport/downtown connection would have enough riders. Really, under the best scenerio, how many travelers does Tulsa get a day? To work, I think it needs some other stops included, at least during commuter times. Again, pull in Owasso, and eventually Bartesville, and you have a transit that will work for commuters & travelers. And with a couple of stops between downtown & the airport, you won't add more than 10 or 15 minutes. Speaking from experience, an average cab ride from the airport to downtown is around $40. I imagine that, given the cost comparison, most travelers would still take the train even if the travel time is fifteen minutes more.
The mix would only work if there were more trains. The airport train needs to be left just for airport travelers.
I'm all for more then one train and I think the B'ville connection would hold some merit, as one from Claremore. But I do know that this system didn't work well with Lawrence, Kansas running a train to Kansas City. I don't know what the reasons were but it would be worth looking into why it failed.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Walk me through the math, Average Joe.
Anyone...please feel free to change the numbers if you have different knowledge.
A six mile route from the airport to the central business district preferredly next to a structured parking area. The train runs every half hour each way. 24 miles of travel every hour. You could probably run it less often during off peak, but for now say you run it from 6am till 10pm. That covers almost all of the flights leaving the airport.
That means 32 trips in and 32 trips out each day. 64 six mile trips equals 384 miles a day. What is the operating cost per mile?
I read that locomotive engines were two million dollars a piece and passenger cabs were 1.5 million dollars a piece. I have no idea if these are good, but I think we would need three engines and say six cab cars. That is $15 million in rolling capital stock plus I am sure another five million dollars in tools and offices and probably another five million dollars in platforms and security stations. What is the funding source for 25 million in initial capital costs?
Where do we put it downtown? Are there any acquisition costs?
I do like the idea, but still reserve the right to oppose if the numbers just don't work. The most important number is probably the number of passengers per day and just don't feel there is going to be enough with the airport terminal as the only destination from downtown. Maybe if there was a way to connect to the jobs at American Airlines.
I would like to see the downtown link be right where the Boulder Bridge is now. Build a large elevated depot that lets out to the north into new structured parking for the Brady theatre and to the south to a ramp to the existing parking garage on Second Street.
RM, I don't have the exact numbers, but from what I recall from the Tulsa-BA Light Rail Study presentation, the costs aren't nearly that high for the trains. The total startup costs for that line would be in the $32 to $38 million range, which included twice the length of track to prep, 4 stations (versus 2 stations for the airport express), and a many more grade crossing improvements. So I'd say $25 million for the airport train startup is high. It could be as little as half that... not that $12 million is chump change.
Speaking of grade crossings, I looked at the route a little more closely. As luck would have it, we wouldn't have to install grade crossing improvements at Peoria, Utica or Lewis because there are already bridges/underpasses at those crossings. Oddly enough, there would need to be grade crossing improvements at Madison (near the IDL) and Trenton, but those are non-arterials (little impact on traffic flow). First arterial crossing would be Harvard, then Pine, Yale and Sheridan.
As for the downtown station, the location the BA commuter rail study mentioned was "around" Cincinnati or Detroit. Too bad the old Union Depot ground floor couldn't be used - talk about coming full circle. Anyway, there's a simple little two story brick warehouse building on the NW corner of 1st & Elgin that backs up to the tracks that would make a fine little transit station. RM, I'm sure you know the one - the vacant one across the street from the Met, painted red (sort of). Work out a deal with whoever owns the dirty ice cube (former Wiltel building) to lease some of the parking in the garage at 1st & Detroit. Or there's that HUGE 2-block long surface lot behind the old Santa Fe Depot that could be used. Oooh, wait... how about running a little spur across 1st and using the old Santa Fe Depot as the transit station? Probably not feasible, but how cool would that be?[:)]
pmcalk, I like the direction you're heading. My opinion would be to run a non-stop train to start, and then entertain ideas of adding a TOD halfway along the route once demand has built up. If you look at the satelite photos on Google Maps, there's a lot of possibilities with industrial sites along the tracks. Somewhere around Harvard or Lewis would be ideal, because there's already density to the surrounding neighborhoods and the TOD would be relatively close to TU or Whittier Square.
I was doing some rough calculations on the potential demand of such a service, if it was just an express.
The airport receives around 3,000,000 travellers a year. I'm assuming this is both inbound and outbound travellers. If we assume that they travel in groups of around 1.5 (which I feel is on the high side) and everyone comes by car at the moment, this would be around 2,000,000 car trips to the airport by travellers. While I realise that people may come to meet people at the airport these are unlikely to originate in downtown, so I've left them off. I'm also assuming that it would be business users who would most likely be using the service as they would be heading to the downtown area more than Tulsan residents. So if 50% of passengers at the airport are business travellers (a fairly high figure) that would be 1,000,000 business related car trips a year heading to the airport. If half of these business travellers were heading downtown this would be 500,000 car trips from the airport to downtown for business travellers. Each day this would be 1,369. We have to then work out how many people would use the train. This would likely only be people in town for a short time and therefore not hiring a car, people with business near to the station and people who don't mind taking the train. A very optimistic modal split for the train would be 15%, especially without an integrated transport system in downtown for those with no cars. This means that we have 205 car trips a day travelling to and from the airport would be diverted onto the rail line or 308 people. If you divide this by the numbers of trains a day, this would come to around 4.8 people a train. I don't think the train frequency should be lowered though as that would reduce the modal share of the train. I really think for the service to work it needs to link up to some park and rail services into downtown and be a piece of an integrated mass transit system.
To put it another way, if you have six cab cars, which is what I have seen suggested. That would have a capacity of 330 people. If the train only ever travelled half full at 165, 50% capacity is usually taken as break even on train services, this can be lowered the higher the capacity due to the low marginal cost of additional carriages compared to extra trains. Travelling 64 times a day this would carry 10,560 and over the course of the year this would be 3,854,400 trips. The airport only currently serves 3,000,000 travellers a year.
Don't stop the music, this keeps sounding better and better.
Since the Jazz hall of fame only uses part of the old depot, why not use it?
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
Since the Jazz hall of fame only uses part of the old depot, why not use it?
Excellent Choice sgrizzle...!
Great idea. Not only would it provide a transit line to the airport, but it would start a mass-transit hub in Tulsa. If the bus lines and the rail line tied together downtown and something happened with the BA line (train, express bus, whatever) then there would be a nice foundation in place.
If nothing else, it would make it very nice for residents to hop a bus to the rail to the airport and avoid leaving our cars somewhere not home.
cost is a point of concern, as is the current use of those tracks. I know both of those lines are currently under use by industry...
Don't forget about the plans to bring Amtrak service to Tulsa, either.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Great idea. Not only would it provide a transit line to the airport, but it would start a mass-transit hub in Tulsa. If the bus lines and the rail line tied together downtown and something happened with the BA line (train, express bus, whatever) then there would be a nice foundation in place.
If nothing else, it would make it very nice for residents to hop a bus to the rail to the airport and avoid leaving our cars somewhere not home.
That's true, I think the viability of any rail line depends on the integration with other public transit routes.
I think it is important that Tulsa has a plan of how it will build up its public transport system in stages that interlock and reinforce each other. I agree that bringing Amtrak to Tulsa would be a great start, maybe followed by a bus rapid transit system, then an integrated rail system linking Broken Arrow, Claremore and Bartlesville with one downtown station.
I think the real danger is that in the wrong order you could build public transport infrastructure that would work under some circumstances, but is not integrated with the rest of the system and has low numbers of users. I think if tax payers are asked to fund a scheme that fails they will be extremely reluctant to fund further schemes.
2 trains would provide service about every 15 minutes. I'm guessing a third would allow for maintenance, etc. With a route that size, hopefully they could utilize the engine/passenger car combo unit popular in other cities instead of buying a separate locomotive engine. The weight wouldn't really justify that.
I would think this line would easily be able to charge $5-$10 one-way as it allows business commuters the ability to travel from work to out-of-state locations without using a car. The cost would need to be slightly under, or close to, cab fair. It would be very popular with out-of-state business travelers. A downtown shuttle bus would have to be combined with this service in case the office or hotel you are seeking isn't within a few blocks of the station.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_Multiple_Unit
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
2 trains would provide service about every 15 minutes. I'm guessing a third would allow for maintenance, etc. With a route that size, hopefully they could utilize the engine/passenger car combo unit popular in other cities instead of buying a separate locomotive engine. The weight wouldn't really justify that.
I would think this line would easily be able to charge $5-$10 one-way as it allows business commuters the ability to travel from work to out-of-state locations without using a car. The cost would need to be slightly under, or close to, cab fair. It would be very popular with out-of-state business travelers. A downtown shuttle bus would have to be combined with this service in case the office or hotel you are seeking isn't within a few blocks of the station.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_Multiple_Unit
Look I really like the idea of a rail link to the airport. I'm really pro public transport. However the airport can't support an exclusive express link. The airport only has 3,000,000 users a year, please correct me if I'm wrong.
If we jump to a service every 15 mins, with one carriage half full that's 27.5 people on each of the 128 rail journeys in a day that would be 3520 a day or 1,284,800 a year. That's nearly half the passengers using the airport. I'm sorry but the idea in its present form is not viable.
quote:
Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
2 trains would provide service about every 15 minutes. I'm guessing a third would allow for maintenance, etc. With a route that size, hopefully they could utilize the engine/passenger car combo unit popular in other cities instead of buying a separate locomotive engine. The weight wouldn't really justify that.
I would think this line would easily be able to charge $5-$10 one-way as it allows business commuters the ability to travel from work to out-of-state locations without using a car. The cost would need to be slightly under, or close to, cab fair. It would be very popular with out-of-state business travelers. A downtown shuttle bus would have to be combined with this service in case the office or hotel you are seeking isn't within a few blocks of the station.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_Multiple_Unit
Look I really like the idea of a rail link to the airport. I'm really pro public transport. However the airport can't support an exclusive express link. The airport only has 3,000,000 users a year, please correct me if I'm wrong.
If we jump to a service every 15 mins, with one carriage half full that's 27.5 people on each of the 128 rail journeys in a day that would be 3520 a day or 1,284,800 a year. That's nearly half the passengers using the airport. I'm sorry but the idea in its present form is not viable.
Being that it would be primarily for business, it would likely not run every 15 minutes for 16 hours. Two trains would allow for 15 minutes but I would assume closer to 30 minutes or not at all during late evening. Train may only run 12 hours and only make around half your number of trips a day. (It it doubtful any airport that has 160 flights has almost the same # of train trips)
That would be about 600,000 passengers per year. About 20%. If they could charge $10/trip, that is $6M a year. Even at $5 a ride this is much better on paper than the BA route.
People need to have a paradigm shift when it comes to the cost of public transportation around here. A train that has a terminal in Owasso, goes by the AA maintenance base, airport, and continues on into downtown dropping passengers off at Williams Companies front door is definitely something worth considering. But this needs to be done before talk of expanding 169 through Owasso; If the highway gets the transportation money before a train, then this will not happen anytime soon.
One reason that BA keeps coming up is that Broken Arrow residents have proven their desire to use mass transit to get downtown via an express bus. I know it was running several years ago and was successful. It may have been interrupted after Tulsa's 2002 downturn, but I think it's back in business now.
re: costs - remember that there's a lot of federal money available for capital transportation costs. (We can always buy new buses and computers...but we struggle to pay for drivers and fuel.) Last time I looked, on average, the feds matched us 2 to 1 on mass transit capital expenditures.
My concern with using existing tracks...we have a LOT of freight trains coming into and out of downtown every day. (Almost every time I walk across the Boulder Bridge, there's a train underneath it.) These trains are not speeding through town. They are creeping. A good passenger train service should be able to whisk people from place to place. It should easily go 60 miles an hour, not 30...with plenty of time for a few stops along the way. Cars that are stuck on the expressway should look up and think: "Wow, if I were on that train, I'd already be home!" I don't know, but I expect that we'd need more and better tracks to pull this off.
MONORAIL!!!
(had to do it)
With a modal split of 20%, 600,000 people would use the rail line. This would be barely profitable, with 50% occupancy on a single carriage train.
I think though that 20% using the service is at the moment completely unachievable. I've looked for data on the modal split of people getting to airports and found two relevant articles, one from the UK and one from the USA.
How do passengers travell to airports? (//%22http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/trends/2001articles/article8howdopassengerstrave5441%22)
The British article requires some flexibility, the modal split won't be that similar to the USA. Car ownership is lower and the propensity to use public transport is higher, so any airport in the USA would struggle to match the modal splits in this report, but lets be optimistic and say they can. If we look at table H1 you can see that the modal split is between 1-22% for rail. Tulsa is however not Gatwick with 22%, Gatwick has extensive rail links with a wide range of destinations which in turn link up to bus, tram and underground services and is located quite far from population centres and isn't that easy to reach by car. Tulsa airport is located nearer to the city centre and has good highway links. Both Heathrow and Birmingham have 7% modal share for rail however both of these have rail lines that are integrated into existing mass transit systems. Now Newcastle has 5%, it is a metropolitan area about the same size as Tulsa, has an airport with 2.9 million passengers per annum and a rail link. Newcastle has a rail line around the city of 77.7km with 59 stations, Newcastle also has low levels of car ownership. Now I know this isn't US, but if we make a stretch and try to apply Newcastle to Tulsa's rail link we are only looking at 5% modal split, or more like 3% which is what my original post considered likely. This rail link really needs to be part of a bigger system to be viable.
MIT Info (//%22http://ardent.mit.edu/airports/ASP_current_lectures/ASP%2004/Airport%20Access04.pdf%22)
This report from MIT shows when rail access is successful. Reasons include; existing metropolitan rail network, low cost of rail extension to airport, highway access difficult or pollution measures. As far as I can tell Tulsa fits none of these reasons why a rail link would be successful.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
One reason that BA keeps coming up is that Broken Arrow residents have proven their desire to use mass transit to get downtown via an express bus. I know it was running several years ago and was successful. It may have been interrupted after Tulsa's 2002 downturn, but I think it's back in business now.
re: costs - remember that there's a lot of federal money available for capital transportation costs. (We can always buy new buses and computers...but we struggle to pay for drivers and fuel.) Last time I looked, on average, the feds matched us 2 to 1 on mass transit capital expenditures.
My concern with using existing tracks...we have a LOT of freight trains coming into and out of downtown every day. (Almost every time I walk across the Boulder Bridge, there's a train underneath it.) These trains are not speeding through town. They are creeping. A good passenger train service should be able to whisk people from place to place. It should easily go 60 miles an hour, not 30...with plenty of time for a few stops along the way. Cars that are stuck on the expressway should look up and think: "Wow, if I were on that train, I'd already be home!" I don't know, but I expect that we'd need more and better tracks to pull this off.
Good thought about the freight trains, but the solution is the same as what they would employ on the Tulsa-BA commuter line -- freight trains run after commuter hours. Even if the airport express train ran from 7:00am to 9:00pm, the freight folks would have at least 8-9 hours to run freight down those lines.
Transit during the day and evening, freight at night.
Seems to me like Sully needs to get busy in D.C. and start earning his keep.
A rail route (whether light rail or commuter) between downtown Tulsa and the airport would rarely get used ..... at least not by the amount of ridership to garner any state or federal funding. Even in larger cities, this type of route sees minimal success, especially when there are no other trip generators along the line.
The key reason the Hiawatha Line in Minneapolis is so successful is because there are plenty of other trip generators along the route, namely the Mall of America.
I've worked in transit for 12 years, and I can say without a doubt that a rail route between downtown Tulsa and TUL will never see the light of day.
The proposed commuter rail beween Broken Arrow and Tulsa holds much more promise.
quote:
Originally posted by NCTulsan
A rail route (whether light rail or commuter) between downtown Tulsa and the airport would rarely get used ..... at least not by the amount of ridership to garner any state or federal funding. Even in larger cities, this type of route sees minimal success, especially when there are no other trip generators along the line.
The key reason the Hiawatha Line in Minneapolis is so successful is because there are plenty of other trip generators along the route, namely the Mall of America.
I've worked in transit for 12 years, and I can say without a doubt that a rail route between downtown Tulsa and TUL will never see the light of day.
The proposed commuter rail beween Broken Arrow and Tulsa holds much more promise.
I've always thought that you could have a commuter train system with sufficient trip generators in Tulsa. With the new development going in at 71st and Turkey Mountain, the casinos, the 71st street shopping corridor, the Arkansas River and downtown revitalization, I'll bet Tulsa can support a two-way 71st/Arkansas River - downtown - Airport/Zoo - BA run. You can lay tracks on the west side of the Arkansas instead of or along with any new north-south road that is built opposite Riverside Drive. I would argue that that is the environmentally correct thing to do anyway. You can have buses and cabs running from stations at 71st/Turkey Mountain, BA and downtown to round out the last mile.
People its going to be hard enough to get the BA to Downtown route going. Lets focus on that first. If that doesnt go through, nothing else will.
As for the river, I would like to see a west river side drive first, from Jenks to Downtown. That needs to be done so that the INCOG 41st area west side developments can happen thus building more density along that side. A realistic plan for a downtown/midtown trolley car service would be nice as well. That could also then extend to the riverside corridor in time which would then connect with the planned Aquarium/Riverwalk/Casino Trolley runs. If that became busy enough a street car system could eventually be installed in the roadway or a monorail with pilings right along the riverbank.
You guys wanna pass me some of what you are smoking [:)][;)]
'ere...*cough* *cough*