The future of mass transit in Tulsa

[Ocklawaha]

quote:Originally posted by Ben Wehr

I just don't see a need for Rail Way mass transit in the Tulsa metro area. If you're traveling to BA, Bixby, jenks, Sand Springs, Owasso it would be a 15 to 20 min drive. Now, what I think would be beneficial is if there were a quick and efficiant way to get people from down town Tulsa to Bartlesville, Olkmulgee, McCalaster, Muskogee, and other areas where the drive is over 30 min. But from BA to Tulsa and other close communities it's just not practical.

Your decisions will depend in part on your vision for the Tulsa you are building for your childrens children.



You can have the image above in Heritage Streetcar or Modern Streetcar or even LRT.

You can have the image below with Bus Rapid Transit.

Which City do you want to be?



As for the difference in Rail and Bus in terms of attraction of riders you can check the numbers for yourself at: http://www.lightrailnow.org/

For the difference in development attraction, "PCT Trolley buses vs REAL STREETCARS" WITH NUMBERS check out: The American Public Transportation Association web pages on "Heritage Trolleys"

http://www.heritagetrolley.com/planBenefits.htm

Long interesting FEATURE STORY on "Bring Back The Streetcars" from the APTA.
http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/weyrich.cfm

You want the TRUTH about streetcars?

You might also want to visit my blog at:

http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/

I also keep an informational web-site on transit at:

http://www.freewebs.com/lightrailjacksonville/

Streetcar and Transit Myths

Myth: You should always select one form of transit in order to maximize the impact.
Fact: In Transit, as in Wal-Mart, Mix and Choice sell.

Myth: BRT is just like rail only cheaper.
Fact: Look up the definition of the word CHEAP.

Myth: Overhead wires will be an eyesore.
Fact: Streetcars use a single overhead wire 1/2 inch in diameter.

Myth: Amtrak has no relation to Commuter Rail.
Fact: By introducing Amtrak services the federal and state governments pay to improve the track and plant, which can then be used by Commuter Rail. In fact Amtrak does operate some Commuter Rail services under contract.

Myth: Bikes and streetcars don't mix.
Fact: Portland and Philadelphia are bicycle-friendly cities; we can learn from them how to integrate streetcars and bikes.

Myth: Streetcars will harm bus service.
Fact: Buses replaced by streetcars can be used to provide new and expanded services. Streetcars can increase overall transit ridership.

Myth: People who don't ride buses won't ride streetcars.
Fact: In San Francisco, 7,000 people/day rode the electric bus; 21,000 people/day rode a streetcar on the same route.

Myth: Streetcars are more expensive to operate than buses.
Fact: There are trade-offs; buses last only 8 years, streetcars last 40 years.

Myth: Streetcars are too slow to attract riders.
Fact: Streetcars are designed to provide convenient, accessible, comfortable transportation. As for speed, streetcar/LRT has the same basic locomotion as the French High Speed Trains, it's all about how you want YOURS.

Myth: Streetcars won't reduce car trips.
Fact: They will reduce short, wasteful car trips within the area they serve by providing a predictable, comfortable alternative.

Myth: Fixed tracks make streetcars less flexible, and therefore a waste of money.
Fact: Building a permanent infrastructure for streetcars encourages retail and residential development. Current return in development dollars is about $1,200 dollars per $1 dollar invested in streetcar.

Myth: We can test or even achieve the streetcar potential with a Faux Trolley bus.
Fact: There is no relationship between the ridership of faux buses and real streetcars. One city experienced a jump from 7,000 passengers per day without rail to 21,000 a day with rail on the same route.

Myth: Rail is inflexible and thus prone to massive investment and loss.
Fact: Rail is perhaps the most flexible of all transit, but once on the ground it is a fixture that attracts TOD. No investor is going to sink a fortune in a new skyscraper because a bus is nearby. Elevated, in street, side of road, median, private railroad track, subway.

This is just the tip of the iceberg y'all and as a professional in this field, I'll be glad to post and fight this battle along side you. As one with ancestral roots in Oklahoma, and a former Cashion, OK. Councilman and student of OSU, I have more then a passing interest.

OCKLAWAHA [}:)]

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by Ocklawaha

This is just the tip of the iceberg y'all and as a professional in this field, I'll be glad to post and fight this battle along side you. As one with ancestral roots in Oklahoma, and a former Cashion, OK. Councilman and student of OSU, I have more then a passing interest.

Glad to have you

[1956packard]

ALOHA AND LAWZEE

I have poor eyesight  and am a sumetime user of mass transit

"WHERE DO FELLOW TULSANS GET  THESE WEIRD OFF THE WALL IDEAS
(I read a lot of them on Tulsa now)?

"MASS TRANSIT IN TULSA SUCKS!"

"TULSA TRANSIT IS A JOKE AND SUCKS!"

"TAXIES IN TULSA SUCK!"

   Mass Transit  is for the handicapped and the poor if you are not handicapped or poor you are a green,psycho-babble yuppi liberal!
the bus system in Tulsa is so wacked it takes some times two to three buses
and one and a half hours to go to one place in Tulsa  I've have used
Tulsa Transit since 1987;  it has gone from functionally bad to totally annoying and almost useless.  use taxies in tulsa they take forever and a day to pick you up  and charge you and a arm and a leg. street cars good grief we can't even fix the socially necessary evil  for the poor and handicapped and you green liberal folk want street cars good grief!
        Okay hypocritical green folk first lets do our moral duty and fix Tulsa transit and Tulsa's taxi services for the handicapped and poor.  Secondly
lets find a affordable and renewable fuel source
        Street cars as a viable solution  for mass transit good grief;
Jesus wept in the garden of  Gethsemane! 

ALOHA AND LAWZEE

[Chicken Little]

1956packard,

There are two types of transit riders:  "captive" riders and "choice" riders.  Tulsa has captive riders, people such as yourself who must have public transit in order to take care of themselves. Our transit system is nearly "useless", you're right.  But fixing it isn't going to happen with just a few mild adjustments.  

As you noted, our transit system does not even begin to serve the captive population adequately.  By the way, it's not just for the "poor and handicapped" as you suggest, there are other hidden groups like seniors and school kids who would enjoy a much better quality of life if they had better mobility.

I think the fallacy, however, is that once you have a transit system that adequately serves the captive population, then your ridership will plateau.  That's not the case.  A good transit system, even in Tulsa, will start to pick up lots of "choice" riders, i.e., those who have a car but choose to take mass transit because it's convenient; easy; good for the environment; don't have to pay for parking; or some other valid reason.  It won't be long before transit becomes a priority investment for lots of Tulsans.  With enough choice riders, Tulsa will have to begin balancing transit investments with traditional big-ticket expenditures like street widening.

Going from awful to excellent, as challenging as it sounds, is probably the only way to "fix" Tulsa Transit.  It requires a big solution and it's necessarily a government solution.  But the existing roadway/private car system we have today is a big government solution, too, and it's leaving a lot of folks like you behind.  

[Red Arrow]

There are two types of transit riders:  "captive" riders and "choice" riders...  

Correct CL,

In order to attract "choice" riders, the system will need to be clean and efficient with frequent service.  As you said, excellent.  "Choice" riders usually prefer rail.    This does not mean that buses do not have a place in good mass transit.  It is just not the only (or preferred) solution.  True BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) on a dedicated Right of Way is usually no less expensive than rail if equipment life and operating costs are considered.  See www.lightrailnow.org for the studies I use for my conclusions.

[OurTulsa]

One of my favorite outcomes of a good mass transit system is the infill development that occurs around stations.  Ultimately, you/me/the City gets far more bang for their/our buck (or return on investment) with a transit system than we/they will ever realize with a new road.

[Composer]

The City of Broken Arrow voted last night to contribute $78,778 toward a Light Rail study. 

Other Contributions:
Tulsa - $285,406
Owasso - $20,328
Sand Springs - $13,950
Jenks - $11,538

[TheArtist]

Where did you see this?..... Any more info, I am curious as to what this study is exactly? We have already paid for and done in depth studies, had public meetings, etc. on rail? Just how many studies do they need to do?

[Renaissance]

I wondered the same thing--I thought we already did a study.  Maybe this is more specific engineering, etc.

[Composer]

You can see the Broken Arrow City Council minutes from this weeks meeting at:
www.brokenarrowok.gov

It seems to be an INCOG thing.

The story was in the Broken Arrow Ledger. 

[TheArtist]

The last study was an INCOG thing as well.