Vision 2025...Part 2?

[Conan71]

RA, conservative businessmen were in charge of Tulsa then. Have been for a long time. Whether they called themselves Democrats (up til 1964) or Republicans or Independents, they were and always have been varying degrees of conservative.

When Tulsan's stop knee jerk voting for these guys who don't even bother with putting their party affiliation on their yard signs ( as in, Jones....A True Conservative...), we may actually start to realize that the population will support transit friendly zoning and real trolleys.

Since city races are now non-partisan, why would anyone put party affiliation on their campaign signs?

[TulsaRufnex]

Rather than concentrate on a results-oriented "1 in 5 cars" or transit use of more than 10%, I think Tulsa should have a civic goal of zoning 1 in 5 homes in the city or 10% of the metropolitan area as "transit friendly."

Honestly, I know lots of Tulsans who've lived other places who could be counted on to consider mass transit as a serious option... but... we currently have QT's in this city with umpteen gas pumps which means that even if you're only out of bread or milk, you MUST DRIVE somewhere/anywhere to get anything/anytime.  I mean, there's a "corner store" off Quanah and Archer that's been boarded up for years/decades?  The old Safeway off south Denver is going to be a temporary home for the library rather than a grocery or retail store because we're all used to being FORCED TO DRIVE just about anywhere... our leaders have precious little concept of what a pedestrian friendly development and lifestyle would involve and how much it could potentially benefit Tulsa, even if it's only a small few square miles of the city.

Step One:  A humble commuter train along the Broken Arrow Expressway to downtown Tulsa.  Would it be a rousing success?  Probably not.  But it would at least suggest to Tulsans stuck in rush hour traffic that it doesn't have to be this way...

Step Two:  One real city bus or official looking Tulsa Transit streetcar that runs at least every thirty minutes later in the evenings from the Denver bus terminal/BOk Center through the entertainment areas of Brady/Blue Dome/East Village and goes up and down Peoria to/from 35th or 41st Streets (making a loop south to/from the "Gathering Place" off Riverside Drive).  Keep the #870 South Nightline van but only run it to/from 41st & Peoria for an easy transfer to the main bus/streetcar.

Step Three:  Reasonable bus/streetcar service that runs on Sundays... nothing earthshattering, but would run every thirty to forty-five minutes from at least noon to 7 or 8pm.

There needs to be an area (or areas) in Tulsa (no matter how small) that offer transit not only for the often fickle tastes of younger hipsters, but also to the larger waves of future retirees who'd rather opt to live without a car in a reasonably priced walkable area of urban Tulsa than shuffle off to a retirement village in Florida or Arizona.

[DTowner]

Rather than concentrate on "1 in 5 cars" or transit use of more than 10%, I think Tulsa should concentrate on 1 in 5 homes in the city or 10% of the metropolitan area being zoned as "transit friendly."

Honestly, I know lots of Tulsans who've lived other places who could be counted on to consider mass transit as a serious option... but... we have currently have QT's in this city with umpteen gas pumps which means that even if you're out of bread or milk, you MUST DRIVE somewhere/anywhere to get anything/anytime.  I mean, there's a "corner store" off Quanah and Archer that's been boarded up for years/decades?  The old Safeway off south Denver is going to be a temporary home for the library rather than a grocery or retail store because we're all used to being FORCED TO DRIVE just about anywhere... our leaders have precious little concept of what pedestrian friendly development would involve and how much it would benefit Tulsa, even if it's only a small few square miles of the city.

Step One:  A humble commuter train along the Broken Arrow Expressway to downtown Tulsa.  Would it be a rousing success?  Probably not.  But it would at least suggest to Tulsans stuck in rush hour traffic that it doesn't have to be this way...

Step Two:  One real city bus or official looking Tulsa Transit streetcar that runs at least every thirty minutes later in the evenings from the Denver bus terminal through the entertainment areas of Brady/Blue Dome/East Village and goes up and down Peoria to/from 35th or 41st Streets (making a loop south to/from the "Gathering Place" off Riverside Drive).  Keep the #870 South Nightline van but only run it to/from 41st & Peoria for an easy transfer to the main bus/streetcar.

Step Three:  Reasonable bus/streetcar service that runs on Sundays... nothing earthshattering, but would at least run every thirty to forty-five minutes from at least from noon to 7 or 8pm.

There needs to be an area (or areas) in Tulsa (no matter how small) that offer transit not only for the often fickle tastes of younger hipsters, but also to the larger wave of retirees who'd rather opt to live without a car in a reasonably priced walkable area of urban Tulsa than shuffle off to a retirement village in Florida or Arizona.

Gotta start somewhere.        

Wouldn't starting with a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane on the BA (and 169) make more sense?  It's not as sexy as a train, but it's a lot cheaper/easier and would actually push people into starting to rethink the notion that the ony way to get to work is to drive in a car by him/herself.  It would have the added benefit of squeezing down traffic during rush hour to lengthen the vehicle commute, which could help increase demand for mass transit alternatives.

[TulsaRufnex]

Wouldn't starting with a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane on the BA (and 169) make more sense?  It's not as sexy as a train, but it's a lot cheaper/easier and would actually push people into starting to rethink the notion that the ony way to get to work is to drive in a car by him/herself.  It would have the added benefit of squeezing down traffic during rush hour to lengthen the vehicle commute, which could help increase demand for mass transit alternatives.

Definitely makes sense on 169.
And maybe (IMHO) on the BA from Broken Arrow east to Memorial?
A commuter train stop or two in Broken Arrow and then another stop at the transit hub off 34th and Memorial-- all would be "park & ride" options before a final stop downtown...

I'm just thinking about the existing train tracks in between the BA (reminds me of the "el" tracks from O'hare in the middle of the expressway in northwest Chicago) and the previous plan floated by Mayor Taylor about a small commuter train that runs back and forth...
http://www.newson6.com/story/7659590/tulsa-transit-considering-a-commuter-train

[Red Arrow]

Step Two:  One real city bus or official looking Tulsa Transit streetcar that runs at least every thirty minutes later in the evenings from the Denver bus terminal/BOk Center through the entertainment areas of Brady/Blue Dome/East Village and goes up and down Peoria to/from 35th or 41st Streets (making a loop south to/from the "Gathering Place" off Riverside Drive).  Keep the #870 South Nightline van but only run it to/from 41st & Peoria for an easy transfer to the main bus/streetcar.

Step Three:  Reasonable bus/streetcar service that runs on Sundays... nothing earthshattering, but would at least run every thirty to forty-five minutes from at least noon to 7 or 8pm.

There needs to be an area (or areas) in Tulsa (no matter how small) that offer transit not only for the often fickle tastes of younger hipsters, but also to the larger wave of retirees who'd rather opt to live without a car in a reasonably priced walkable area of urban Tulsa than shuffle off to a retirement village in Florida or Arizona.

I am not so sure 30 minutes will attract riders of choice.  It really should be 15 min max except for really off-hours.

[TulsaRufnex]

I am not so sure 30 minutes will attract riders of choice.  It really should be 15 min max except for really off-hours.

Most of the nightline service that Tulsa currently offers after 7 or 7:30pm (only 4 routes) run an hour to an hour and a half apart.
I agree that every 15 minutes would be ideal but somebody would need to do a little cost/benefit analysis, as no city I've ever lived in has bus services every 15 minutes later in the evenings.

***I like the idea that a very humble (at least at first) BA commuter rail would serve as an advertisement for transit in general... and then there's my urban soccer stadium idea for south of Blue Dome/East Village***  

[nathanm]

Wouldn't starting with a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane on the BA (and 169) make more sense?  It's not as sexy as a train, but it's a lot cheaper/easier and would actually push people into starting to rethink the notion that the ony way to get to work is to drive in a car by him/herself.  It would have the added benefit of squeezing down traffic during rush hour to lengthen the vehicle commute, which could help increase demand for mass transit alternatives.

I'm not a big fan, especially since it's rare we get traffic slow down enough for an HOV lane to be very useful. Don't get me wrong, I think they're just dandy when they're not being used directly as a stick to try to force people out of their cars.

Rufnex, I like the way you're thinking, but I'm of the belief that a downtown circulator trolley is the best first step. It serves a need that people are already clamoring for and gets people from the end of the future commuter or long distance rail to points around downtown. I could be persuaded that commuter rail should come before a bar district trolley, but I still think that would see high enough use to be a good project on its own. Commuter rail seems more like something we'd have to end up paying for so that people in thea suburbs could reap most of the benefit from. Trollies, on the other hand, seem like us doing for ourselves what needs to be done. I think that successfully demonstrating public transit could get the rest of the metro to pitch in on the larger projects like the trolley and OKC rail line.

I also like the framing you used of having a certain number of households well served by transit rather than a traffic reduction goal. It is true that there are a lot of people here wouldn't want to use it if it were practically one seat door to door. And it is more about providing amenities that people will want going forward than getting cars off the road. That will happen organically (at least to some degree) no matter what we do as fuel prices continue to increase.

RA, I think 15 minute headway would make a huge difference in acceptance of transit service here, but given that we currently operate with 45 minute to 1 hour headways during the day, how on earth can we get there? The real problem with long headways like we have is that if your trip requires a transfer, you can be waiting around a very long time. I'm fairly willing to leave a bit earlier or later than I'd prefer, but combining that with an hour's wait at a midpoint and suddenly my trip is taking 2 hours instead of 30 minutes and it's seeming quite unreasonable as a way to get around.

[TulsaRufnex]

I think you'd run head first into a perception problem with just about any "downtown circulator trolley" plan because it would potentially be used primarily by a buncha drunks (or at least be stuck with that perception/reputation).  I'd rather have the private sector do the downtown trolley stuff -- see Scooby...

I figure that in exchange for a modest BA commuter train on existing tracks, we could get real buses with regular nightly routes on what is arguably Tulsa's most busy route, the one going south on Peoria to Brookside.
The worst part of Tulsa Transit is getting stuck at night at the mercy of four passenger vans that go around in circles at night servicing an entire city with a handful of routes that run over an hour apart... this arrangement really, really sucks.

I wish "The Gathering Place" could have been a little less expensive with maybe $10mil - $30mil earmarked for privately funded pedestrian friendly transit between the park and Riverside/Brookside/Downtown.

[nathanm]

I think you'd run head first into a perception problem with just about any "downtown circulator trolley" plan because it would potentially be used primarily by a buncha drunks (or at least be stuck with that perception/reputation).  I'd rather have the private sector do the downtown trolley stuff -- see Scooby...

Who else is out in force at 2 in the morning but drunks? Seriously, though, you don't think it would get heavily used at least during lunch time and events? I'm not really sure why we'd want to keep Tulsa Transit (or whatever other agency we might create to run the trolley system) away from what would probably be the highest profile route in the city. Seems like good advertising to me.

My question regarding commuter rail going first is this: Who will ride it if there aren't convenient connections except people whose destination is within a couple of blocks of the Tulsa station? It's already hard enough to get people to do the park and ride thing. Even rail to OKC first would make more sense. It's at least a trip that's far enough that it doesn't seem completely ridiculous to rent a car or pay for a cab or something if transit isn't a viable option. And let's face it, at present the bus is not a viable option for many-to-most trips. Short trips aren't bad, but for those I'd walk or bike anyway. Longer trips that require one or more transfers take an unreasonably long time.

Problem is that even if we decrease headway it'll take a long while before people who aren't already regular riders will even notice. By then, we will have declared the whole thing a failure and gone back to the way things are now.

[Red Arrow]

Most of the nightline service that Tulsa currently offers after 7 or 7:30pm (only 4 routes) run an hour to an hour and a half apart.
I agree that every 15 minutes would be ideal but somebody would need to do a little cost/benefit analysis, as no city I've ever lived in has bus services every 15 minutes later in the evenings.

***I like the idea that a very humble (at least at first) BA commuter rail would serve as an advertisement for transit in general... and then there's my urban soccer stadium idea for south of Blue Dome/East Village***  

See the schedule for the 101 Trolley Route.  It's the one I lived next to for a lot of years.  I remembered no worse than 20 min except on Sundays.  Looking now, it has some 20 and 30 minute headway depending on how far out from 69th Street you are. (69th Street is where Philly and suburban transit meet.) Really early and late it gets longer.  Weekends look like mostly 30 min.   Look at the rush hours headways.   Most of the people live between 69th Street and Woodland Ave in Springfield.

http://www.septa.org/schedules/trolley/index.html

Edit:  Woodland Ave is in Springfield, not most of the people.  Housing is pretty much non-stop from 69th St out to Woodland Ave.  Past that is some open area until the trolley gets to Media.

[Red Arrow]

RA, I think 15 minute headway would make a huge difference in acceptance of transit service here, but given that we currently operate with 45 minute to 1 hour headways during the day, how on earth can we get there? The real problem with long headways like we have is that if your trip requires a transfer, you can be waiting around a very long time. I'm fairly willing to leave a bit earlier or later than I'd prefer, but combining that with an hour's wait at a midpoint and suddenly my trip is taking 2 hours instead of 30 minutes and it's seeming quite unreasonable as a way to get around.

My favorite trolley line survived the Transit Holocaust in part because while other trolley lines were increasing prices and cutting service, Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Co cut prices and increased service.  This was assisted by new (1932) lightweight/ single operator trolleys.  Ridership started to increase.   WWII helped too as gas rationing etc made the trolley more attractive.  The West Chester and Ardmore (PA) lines lasted until the 50s and 60s respectively.  The Media and Sharon Hill lines survive today. 

Cutting the headway to 15 minutes all day long would not make sense. (See the schedule link in my reply to Ruff.) During non-rush hours, 20 to 30 minutes is probably reasonable. Early (5AM) and late after 10 PM I will have to agree to 45 min to an hour based on the SEPTA 101 schedule.  During normal daytime hours,  an hour is way too long and encourages potential riders to find another way. It basically boils down to a money commitment from the residents of the area to have transit available.  That money will only become available with a clean, easy to use,...... transit system.  Chicken and egg, I realize.  I don't think the money will come for a relatively constant 45 minute headway.  I wouldn't use it.  I don't expect a trolley out here in my lifetime except maybe the planned one going down Delaware/121st to Memorial. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

You are misrepresenting the history.  GM did indeed enter into a joint venture that bought up trolley lines in a number of cities (most of which were failing), but, they did not engage in an effort to kill bus transit.  Quite the opposite.  The mission of the joint venture was to sell buses, which GM at the time manufactured.

Yep.  Got that twisted around....

Trolleys and electric trains....

[TheArtist]

Step 1. Zoning
Step 2. Transit (bus or rail)

    Zone certain downtown streets to have pedestrian/transit friendly only developments,
         Boston Ave from BOK tower to Boston Ave Church.
         The downtown loop from Boulder to Archer, to Elgin, to 6th
         6th Street from Boulder to TU        Plus a couple more sections of street, but certainly get that pedestrian loop around downtown so that you will have a large enough connected core to make downtown a truly attractive, live, work, play, pedestrian/transit friendly place.   

Then begin transit (dedicated bus or rail) to other areas like Brookside and Cherry Street, Whittier Square and TU.  Also do the "starter rail" line from the Fin-Tube site to the West Bank area.  And zone areas around all of those to be pedestrian/transit friendly as well.  By then the time should be ripe to consider rail to and from OKC, perhaps BA, a north Tulsa node (previously zoned to begin the pedestrian/transit friendly "transformation") and on to the Airport, and along the river to Jenks.

Start with the core and zone those areas around it and any other future areas that you will likely want rail to go to in the future.  Then do the transit lines (dedicated rail or bus route).

[AquaMan]

Since city races are now non-partisan, why would anyone put party affiliation on their campaign signs?

If they're running for a non city office. Or they are into reality.

[Red Arrow]

RA, conservative businessmen were in charge of Tulsa then. Have been for a long time. Whether they called themselves Democrats (up til 1964) or Republicans or Independents, they were and always have been varying degrees of conservative.

I expect (but have no actual evidence) there were also some financial benefits for some city leaders by converting to buses.  That can warp a lot of decisions.   A case could be made that fixing the trolleys would have been the conservative (against change?) thing to do rather than try something new like buses.  Regardless, I think it was the wrong decision having 20/20 hindsight.

It's interesting that transit is the very thing that allowed ordinary (not rich) people to move away from where they worked to the suburbs.