Vision 2025...Part 2?

[TheArtist]

It seems like a decent plan to me, what exactly do you dislike about it? Worlds better than that Vision2 mess Dewey backed.

Most of the package is for roads, over half a billion dollars worth. Scarce few dollars are for transitioning to more transit (including updating our zoning code to allow good transit to be legal). For all intents and purposes, it's us again putting all our eggs in one basket, and not even doing that in the smartest way.  The world is changing, has changed, and we are still doing things the same old way.  We are allocating our bets, our hopes for the future, into an old vision. I just do not think this plan the way it is proportioned is wise at all. We have been over and over the details a dozen times on here so am not going to bother rehashing them once again.  

[swake]

Most of the package is for roads, over half a billion dollars worth. Scarce few dollars are for transitioning to more transit (including updating our zoning code to allow good transit to be legal). For all intents and purposes, it's us again putting all our eggs in one basket, and not even doing that in the smartest way.  The world is changing, has changed, and we are still doing things the same old way.  We are allocating our bets, our hopes for the future, into an old vision. I just do not think this plan the way it is proportioned is wise at all. We have been over and over the details a dozen times on here so am not going to bother rehashing them once again.  

So we should stop paying to maintain roads? I'm all for transit, but America's car culture is going nowhere.

[Townsend]

So we should stop paying to maintain roads? I'm all for transit, but America's car culture is going nowhere.

Funny you should say that.  I've seen reports but no definitive study showing DL acquisition is lowering in importance or want in our younger folks.

The talking heads were saying that is no longer the most important thing to do on your 16th.  I've seen proof of it with some of my friend's kids.

That's an enormous swing from when I was a teen.

Artist - I agree, this is in no way a vision but I didn't want to start a new thread for the county issue.

[TheArtist]

So we should stop paying to maintain roads? I'm all for transit, but America's car culture is going nowhere.

Actually the car culture has been in decline and indeed, as has been mentioned, the younger cohort is more and more less interested in having a car and would rather use transit. They are getting licenses later, cars later, and are more and more moving to areas where they can live car free.  More of them get cars because they "have too", otherwise cars are a waste of money (if you have it) that could be spent elsewhere.   http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=youger%20people%20less%20likely%20to%20drive%20or%20want%20cars&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbusiness.time.com%2F2013%2F08%2F09%2Fthe-great-debate-do-millennials-really-want-cars-or-not%2F&ei=zcsUUtyfDeLsyQGupIDQCw&usg=AFQjCNE4sF2n6vlSE-V73HnBD4KE6zorrA&bvm=bv.50952593,d.cGE

Also, this isn't about just maintaining roads (heck if we hadn't built as many lane miles in the first place we wouldn't "need" so much money to maintain them.  We have more roads per our population than is warranted which means that we haven't been efficient in the past,,, and now we want more?  Also, have seen studies that show that with the type of layout and traffic pattern usage our city has, things like 3 lanes, one going each way and a center turn lane, are actually more efficient and more cost effective way of moving traffic than 4 lanes.  Also, we aren't allocating sufficient funds to begin "bending the curve" towards more transit (transit can actually take trips, wear and tear, off of roads thus lessening maintenance).  Some say our city actually needs to go on a "lane diet", making less lanes, not more.  We spend money on one thing and then complain that there is not enough for another.  Then there is the money for expanding the Gilcrease expressway which would do nothing but encourage more slow growth for the city when the studies the city itself paid for shows that if we do not build it our city will actually grow faster.  Back to car culture,,, we make transit and pedestrian friendly development illegal (what part of that are people not getting?) and are not adequately funding the implementation of the new comprehensive plan (lots for more and wider roads though), and then say it's purely a choice that people here prefer driving cars instead of using transit?  I could go on and on.

[Hoss]

Funny you should say that.  I've seen reports but no definitive study showing DL acquisition is lowering in importance or want in our younger folks.

The talking heads were saying that is no longer the most important thing to do on your 16th.  I've seen proof of it with some of my friend's kids.

That's an enormous swing from when I was a teen.

Artist - I agree, this is in no way a vision but I didn't want to start a new thread for the county issue.

I think much of it has to do with the graduated license that Oklahoma (and much of the nation) has adopted.  When I was 15 1/2, you took your written test and then you could drive with a licensed driver in the passenger seat.  It's not quite as easy these days to get your full license.

Plus, my license back then was 7 dollars.

[AquaMan]

Actually the car culture has been in decline and indeed, as has been mentioned, the younger cohort is more and more less interested in having a car and would rather use transit. They are getting licenses later, cars later, and are more and more moving to areas where they can live car free.  More of them get cars because they "have too", otherwise cars are a waste of money (if you have it) that could be spent elsewhere.   http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=youger%20people%20less%20likely%20to%20drive%20or%20want%20cars&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbusiness.time.com%2F2013%2F08%2F09%2Fthe-great-debate-do-millennials-really-want-cars-or-not%2F&ei=zcsUUtyfDeLsyQGupIDQCw&usg=AFQjCNE4sF2n6vlSE-V73HnBD4KE6zorrA&bvm=bv.50952593,d.cGE

Also, this isn't about just maintaining roads (heck if we hadn't built as many lane miles in the first place we wouldn't "need" so much money to maintain them.  We have more roads per our population than is warranted which means that we haven't been efficient in the past,,, and now we want more?  Also, have seen studies that show that with the type of layout and traffic pattern usage our city has, things like 3 lanes, one going each way and a center turn lane, are actually more efficient and more cost effective way of moving traffic than 4 lanes.  Also, we aren't allocating sufficient funds to begin "bending the curve" towards more transit (transit can actually take trips, wear and tear, off of roads thus lessening maintenance).  Some say our city actually needs to go on a "lane diet", making less lanes, not more.  We spend money on one thing and then complain that there is not enough for another.  Then there is the money for expanding the Gilcrease expressway which would do nothing but encourage more slow growth for the city when the studies the city itself paid for shows that if we do not build it our city will actually grow faster.  Back to car culture,,, we make transit and pedestrian friendly development illegal (what part of that are people not getting?) and are not adequately funding the implementation of the new comprehensive plan (lots for more and wider roads though), and then say it's purely a choice that people here prefer driving cars instead of using transit?  I could go on and on.

You're asking for wine at a beer bar and complaining about the limited selection.

These folks are doing what they've been trained to do (make no changes, exhibit no leadership, don't rock the boat....whatever you want to call it) for generations. We simply are not a progressively led community. That unfortunately goes hand in hand with communities that vote straight party tickets. We tend to ignore talented, well informed politicians if they aren't in our party. Right now, the only thing that a conservative republican can raise taxes for and not be hounded out of office is maintaining infrastructure and enticing employers.

Note for those who actually read my posts. I wrote that to include all parties, philosophies and spiritualities. Anytime a community limits who can play in the game, the game suffers.

[swake]

Actually the car culture has been in decline and indeed, as has been mentioned, the younger cohort is more and more less interested in having a car and would rather use transit. They are getting licenses later, cars later, and are more and more moving to areas where they can live car free.  More of them get cars because they "have too", otherwise cars are a waste of money (if you have it) that could be spent elsewhere.   http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=youger%20people%20less%20likely%20to%20drive%20or%20want%20cars&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbusiness.time.com%2F2013%2F08%2F09%2Fthe-great-debate-do-millennials-really-want-cars-or-not%2F&ei=zcsUUtyfDeLsyQGupIDQCw&usg=AFQjCNE4sF2n6vlSE-V73HnBD4KE6zorrA&bvm=bv.50952593,d.cGE

Also, this isn't about just maintaining roads (heck if we hadn't built as many lane miles in the first place we wouldn't "need" so much money to maintain them.  We have more roads per our population than is warranted which means that we haven't been efficient in the past,,, and now we want more?  Also, have seen studies that show that with the type of layout and traffic pattern usage our city has, things like 3 lanes, one going each way and a center turn lane, are actually more efficient and more cost effective way of moving traffic than 4 lanes.  Also, we aren't allocating sufficient funds to begin "bending the curve" towards more transit (transit can actually take trips, wear and tear, off of roads thus lessening maintenance).  Some say our city actually needs to go on a "lane diet", making less lanes, not more.  We spend money on one thing and then complain that there is not enough for another.  Then there is the money for expanding the Gilcrease expressway which would do nothing but encourage more slow growth for the city when the studies the city itself paid for shows that if we do not build it our city will actually grow faster.  Back to car culture,,, we make transit and pedestrian friendly development illegal (what part of that are people not getting?) and are not adequately funding the implementation of the new comprehensive plan (lots for more and wider roads though), and then say it's purely a choice that people here prefer driving cars instead of using transit?  I could go on and on.

I have a 17 year old, I know lots of new drivers. Yes they are getting them later and it's not as big a deal. But they are getting a license, all of them. And they want to live in dense cities when they are young. But when they get older and have kids the thinking will change. I live in Jenks now, but I lived at 15th and Carson until I got married and had kids.

I want rail transit in Tulsa, yes let's have fewer cars on the road. But rail/transit will only ever be a smaller part of the answer. According to the Census, 86% of Americans drive to work. Only 5% take transit.  Even in New York City there are streets and even in New York City  46% of residents own cars. Only 1/3 of residents in Metro New York take transit to work. And New York is by far the most transit heavy city in America. Only five metros in the whole country have more than 10% of commuters use transit. Road are and always will be the primary mode of transportation and they need to be maintained.

[Weatherdemon]

I have a 17 year old, I know lots of new drivers. Yes they are getting them later and it's not as big a deal. But they are getting a license, all of them. And they want to live in dense cities when they are young. But when they get older and have kids the thinking will change. I live in Jenks now, but I lived at 15th and Carson until I got married and had kids.

I want rail transit in Tulsa, yes let's have fewer cars on the road. But rail/transit will only ever be a smaller part of the answer. According to the Census, 86% of Americans drive to work. Only 5% take transit.  Even in New York City there are streets and even in New York City  46% of residents own cars. Only 1/3 of residents in Metro New York take transit to work. And New York is by far the most transit heavy city in America. Only five metros in the whole country have more than 10% of commuters use transit. Road are and always will be the primary mode of transportation and they need to be maintained.

If we had train service from Owasso to downtown I would take it 90% of the time.

[swake]

If we had train service from Owasso to downtown I would take it 90% of the time.

You say that, but I work with a lot of people at my company in offices in LA, The Bay area and Philadelphia, areas with good mass transit and nearly everyone still drives. And my company PAYS for employee transit passes in big cities to keep people from driving.

We allow telecommuniting too, a lot more people take advantage of that than use the train. I do that sometimes myself. I would do it more if my VPN speeds were better.

[Oil Capital]

If we had train service from Owasso to downtown I would take it 90% of the time.

Don't bet your life savings on that.   It's very easy to say, in the abstract.  But when you live in the reality of mass transit being slower and less convenient than your car. . .  driving your car to a park and ride lot . . .  waiting on hot/cold/wet rail platforms . . . etc., etc. . . .  Well, there's a reason there are so few cities in America where more than 10% of workers take mass transit and even in NYC metro only 1/3 take transit to work (relying on Swake's stats above).

[Weatherdemon]

Don't bet your life savings on that.   It's very easy to say, in the abstract.  But when you live in the reality of mass transit being slower and less convenient than your car. . .  driving your car to a park and ride lot . . .  waiting on hot/cold/wet rail platforms . . . etc., etc. . . .  Well, there's a reason there are so few cities in America where more than 10% of workers take mass transit and even in NYC only 1/3 take transit to work (relying on Swake's stats above).

If they had no shelters at the train depots then that would suck and sway me during bad weather but driving 3 or 4 miles to the train station and being dropped off (at what I hope would be the old depot) downtown would be sweet. I guess the depot point downtown would make a different too. I probably wouldn't walk more than 4 or 5 blocks.

I've walked that far in the wind, rain, cold, and heat over most of the course of my 12 total years downtown as I've only been in a garage for 2-3 years.

Cost would be a factor too as 4 days a week would save me probably $35 a week but if it costs me $40 I'm not sure it would be worth the slight extra inconvenience.

[swake]

If they had no shelters at the train depots then that would suck and sway me during bad weather but driving 3 or 4 miles to the train station and being dropped off (at what I hope would be the old depot) downtown would be sweet. I guess the depot point downtown would make a different too. I probably wouldn't walk more than 4 or 5 blocks.

I've walked that far in the wind, rain, cold, and heat over most of the course of my 12 total years downtown as I've only been in a garage for 2-3 years.

Cost would be a factor too as 4 days a week would save me probably $35 a week but if it costs me $40 I'm not sure it would be worth the slight extra inconvenience.

I'm telling you, my company's offices in LA and Philadelphia are both just a few blocks a train station. The one in San Jose is less than a mile with a bus line in-between. We pay for employees transit passes to keep people from driving so the train is basically FREE. They still almost all drive, some of them drive for an hour.

[TheArtist]

  I think we are associating transit with "commuting to work" only.  That's not what Pedestrian/Transit friendly is totally about.  Today I drove downtown but so far I have also gone to... check on getting my Passport renewed (did not get in my car and drive to do that), went to the printers (did not drive), went to get something for lunch (did not drive), ran an errand to the Tulsa Art Deco Museum (did not drive).  That in just one partial day. The other night I walked to dinner, then drove home and walked to the bookstore and then walked to the movies, then walked back home. Sure I still used my car each of those days to commute, but I was also able to not be on the road a LOT more than I would have been otherwise, because I was in areas where I could walk (or take transit, for transit only truly works in areas where you can walk).  I was able to not be another car on the road going up and down the main arteries, I was not another car sitting in front of you at an intersection, was one less car in the parking lot, etc.... that is one example of how having pedestrian/transit friendly areas helps out in many ways,,, even when your a person who does use their car to commute.  Imagine how many trips, on roads you the driver are using, are likely not taken by someone who does use transit?  The more of that you have going on, the better imho. We have built most of our city, even much of the core to be, car trips only, to do just about anything.  I think we can be wiser with how our money is spent so that we can begin to bend the curve on how many "lane miles" per person we need (and pay for), begin to reduce the "number of trips" on the roads per person, the spaces we need for parking per person, AND also shorten the distance of many of the trips people do take, again reducing wear and tear and expense.  Also, walking on occasion can actually improve over all health lol.    

   

[Weatherdemon]

I'm telling you, my company's offices in LA and Philadelphia are both just a few blocks a train station. The one in San Jose is less than a mile with a bus line in-between. We pay for employees transit passes to keep people from driving so the train is basically FREE. They still almost all drive, some of them drive for an hour.

I'm don't recall saying that 90% of my company would. I said I would 90% of the time.
I've taken the commuter train from NYC to Connecticut and enjoyed it.
I would likely take more trips to OKC if we had train service there.

It seems some of the train routes stop so many times that it takes as long as driving so I wouldn't take it to Dallas or KC and also because I would also have to rent a vehicle when I got there.

[nathanm]

(relying on Swake's stats above).

Swake's stats include Staten Island, which for fairly obvious reasons, relies on cars more than any other borough. It looks/works more like the rest of the country than the other boroughs. Your commute options, should you live there, are a train (which is only recently back in service) to a slow ferry to another train/bus/whatever. The vast majority of the transportation capacity on and off the island is road-based. No shock there that people would choose cars.

Even accepting that we'll never do better than Staten Island, take even 1 in 5 cars off the road and suddenly we need a lot less widening and somewhat less maintenance. We'll never get even that far with inconvenient schedules and an incomplete transit network, though. So we'll keep spending billions on roads and nearly nothing on transit and we'll continue to be the same sort of city we've been for the past decade. Good for us.