Tulsa World: County OKs funds for land for a new juvenile justice center

[rdj]

I'm enjoying the spirited banter, thanks for the input and ideas.

I'm told by some I like to argue, just to argue.  

If the thing gets approved you won't find me chained to the bulldozers or anything.  I've talked to others outside the forum that agree with my points and then others with far more input in the process than me who believe it is a good thing.  At then end of the day I'm going to trust our city planners and continue to work to make Tulsa better.

My question about the Wal*Mart stemmed from design and land use.  I was not an active member here when a Supercenter was proposed for East End.  I know many urban enthusiasts that flipped out.  I haven't had one person ask me about this, in fact many were unaware until I asked them.

Why are we more upset with the idea of the world's largest retailer plopping down in a location many believed could become a Utopian downtown development than a juvenile justice center being constructed on the fringe in a currently undesirable corner of downtown?  If we believe the juvenile justice complex site is the best and highest use for the location than we should apply the same design and construction standards that we would apply to Wal*Mart, Elliot Nelson, Blake Ewing, Tribune Lofts, etc, etc.  I purposefully didn't include newly constructed (or acquired) buildings such as BOK Center, ONEOK Field & City Hall at OTC in that list because I would hope that we would hold our governments to an even higher standards of design and construction than we hold the private entities.  If they are risking our tax dollars, not only those to build this center but the approx $400MM we've invested in the three aforementioned public facilities downtown that could be affected by this center, then we should demand more than "good enough for government work" on this facility.

[Conan71]

I'm told by some I like to argue, just to argue.  

If the thing gets approved you won't find me chained to the bulldozers or anything.  I've talked to others outside the forum that agree with my points and then others with far more input in the process than me who believe it is a good thing.  At then end of the day I'm going to trust our city planners and continue to work to make Tulsa better.

My question about the Wal*Mart stemmed from design and land use.  I was not an active member here when a Supercenter was proposed for East End.  I know many urban enthusiasts that flipped out.  I haven't had one person ask me about this, in fact many were unaware until I asked them.

Why are we more upset with the idea of the world's largest retailer plopping down in a location many believed could become a Utopian downtown development than a juvenile justice center being constructed on the fringe in a currently undesirable corner of downtown?  If we believe the juvenile justice complex site is the best and highest use for the location than we should apply the same design and construction standards that we would apply to Wal*Mart, Elliot Nelson, Blake Ewing, Tribune Lofts, etc, etc.  I purposefully didn't include newly constructed (or acquired) buildings such as BOK Center, ONEOK Field & City Hall at OTC in that list because I would hope that we would hold our governments to an even higher standards of design and construction than we hold the private entities.  If they are risking our tax dollars, not only those to build this center but the approx $400MM we've invested in the three aforementioned public facilities downtown that could be affected by this center, then we should demand more than "good enough for government work" on this facility.

I agree, design is important.  I believe the design of the building rather than what it houses will have far more impact on future development around the area. 

If nothing else, increased law enforcement presence in the area might help mitigate some of the loitering which now makes pedestrians uncomfortable.

You should come to lunch with us next week.  I'm sure Recyclemichael would be happy to oversee your initiation ritual

[dbacks fan]

At some point we could cross the threshold and make light rail feasible.

Plan on having deep pockets for that. When the light rail was constructed here in the Phoenix area the 20 mile route was $1.4billion. We recieved 41%, $541million from the fed and the rest was paid for by Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Glendale, and from Prop 400.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special1/articles/0916Prop400QampA.html

[Red Arrow]

Plan on having deep pockets for that. When the light rail was constructed here in the Phoenix area the 20 mile route was $1.4billion. We recieved 41%, $541million from the fed and the rest was paid for by Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Glendale, and from Prop 400.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special1/articles/0916Prop400QampA.html

High up front costs.  Annualized cost adjusted for lifetimes of the equipment can be less expensive for light rail / trolleys than rubber tires.  It depends on the ridership quantities.  Road maintenance is usually neglected for rubber tired vehicles too but it is part of the real cost to the community.   See www.lightrailnow.org for many articles on the subject.

[AquaMan]

High up front costs.  Annualized cost adjusted for lifetimes of the equipment can be less expensive for light rail / trolleys than rubber tires.  It depends on the ridership quantities.  Road maintenance is usually neglected for rubber tired vehicles too but it is part of the real cost to the community.   See www.lightrailnow.org for many articles on the subject.

One of the few things we agree on...rubber wheel trolleys...

[dbacks fan]

One of the few things we agree on...rubber wheel trolleys...

Please, don't get me wrong, light rail has a place in a lot of cities, but it has to work with a comprehensive transit plan that includes light rail, park and ride sites that include bus, bike, and car to stations that are attached to the light rail, trolley, connections. You also have to make it attractive and affordable to users of mass transit. And the routes need to be to areas that will draw the most riders/passengers to a specifc destination. What works in the eastern cities is the fact that they have had long established lines that feed into a densely business enviroment. Light rail, cable cars, subway, bus, and trolley service works in San Francisco works because it has been an evolution. Chicago, Boston, Philidelphia, DC, and other major cities on the east coast have had these systems in place for the last hundred years.

A rail line from BA to downtown Tulsa should have been thought of 40 years ago. The sad thing here in Phoenix, is there was a proposal in the early 80's to include light and high speed rail that would run throughout the valley along the highways that feed into downtown, it would have been built into the highway system, and provided inbound and outbound service, and it was voted down, and now the metro area is playing catch up.

I know that in some aspects I'm preaching to the chior, but get over the past and make some sort of plan that is user friendly. Mass transit in a city needs to entice people to use it, and be convinient.

If I was to take a trip to San Fransisco, I would stay where I have before in Fremont, at the south end of the BART line, and I would spend about $20.00 for a BART Pass into and back, and then spend $10.00 for an all day pass for cable car, bus, trolley to get around, and gee, walk.

Excuse the rant, I get what all of you want, but it's not that easy to implement.

[rdj]

What if Ray Siegfried had gotten his way and Tulsa had built a giant monorail system?  How cool would that be?

[dbacks fan]

What if Ray Siegfried had gotten his way and Tulsa had built a giant monorail system?  How cool would that be?

Tulsa might have had a transit system that works, and it might be functional, but trying to undo things from th 60's and 70's and even into the late 50's is hard to change.

[TheArtist]

Plan on having deep pockets for that. When the light rail was constructed here in the Phoenix area the 20 mile route was $1.4billion. We recieved 41%, $541million from the fed and the rest was paid for by Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Glendale, and from Prop 400.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/special1/articles/0916Prop400QampA.html

That high cost my friend is the main reason we should start the planning and zoning for it now!  It doesn't have to cost nearly as much as that if you get ahead of the curve.  It think it was estimated that the approx 14 miles from downtown Tulsa to BA would run us about 80 mill.   Thats a bargain compared to what we are spending to widen I44 near my house at 100mill a mile.  Imagine the cost of widening the BA again.

  But you begin figuring out where you want your TOD now, buy lots for park and ride now on the cheap, encourage pedestrian friendly development to begin now in the appropriate areas.... You go a long way to making things workable and affordable 20- 30 -40 years hence. But we are not doing that.

  When they had those meetings discussing light rail possibilities in Tulsa a year or so ago and had guest speakers from other states, one of those guest speakers was from Austin.  The main point they said was....

   "Tulsa is at the perfect stage of its development NOW to begin planning and implementing a light rail plan" (that doesn't mean putting in the rail now, but doing things like I mentioned above) "You can dramatically cut your costs long term, and avoid a lot of the mistakes we made"   

  The same principles work for within and around downtown as, from downtown Tulsa to downtown BA.  Start the process now and it will all work out MUCH better when your ready to actually start laying the tracks.

[Red Arrow]

One of the few things we agree on...rubber wheel trolleys...

I still prefer to call a "rubber wheel trolley" a bus.  

A rubber tire bus powered by an electric motor using electricity from a pair of overhead wires can be called a "trolley bus" since the current collectors on the vehicle are where the term trolley came from.

[Red Arrow]

Chicago, Boston, Philidelphia, DC, and other major cities on the east coast have had these systems in place for the last hundred years.

The trolley line that I grew up near is indeed about 100 yrs old.  When it was put in, there wasn't much between the western edge of Philadelphia (PA) and Media (the county seat of Delaware County).  Over the years it filled in significantly.  That line runs mostly on separate right of way and is still a trolley today.  It acts more like an Interurban than a street car except at both ends of the line. 

[AquaMan]

I'm enjoying the spirited banter, thanks for the input and ideas.

It occurs to me that I am hopelessly idealistic. In my heart, I know that most Tulsan's are afraid. Afraid of their neighbors, their neighbor's kids, and even their own kids. They would rather not have any thing in their neighborhood that taps into that fear. So, yeah, unfortunately given those constraints I can understand why the county has gravitated towards dumping anything with the perception of danger into one melting pot downtown where there is little opposition.

It's not the best option for the city, the surrounding hoods, downtown entertainment district or the JV center itself but, that's life in the city.

Meanwhile it also occurs to me that the biggest player in the Midtown area (other than hospitals) probably has their sights on Wilson Middle school. I suspect TU already knows its strategic value and its market value. Easy way to add more campus.

[patric]

Meanwhile it also occurs to me that the biggest player in the Midtown area (other than hospitals) probably has their sights on Wilson Middle school. I suspect TU already knows its strategic value and its market value. Easy way to add more campus.

Would it be such a shock if it turned out it was already drawn into their next "5-year plan" of land acquisitions?

[LandArchPoke]

Is there a thread on here that has discussion on light rail in Tulsa? I'm sure there would be a lot of great opinions of what Tulsa should do. I will have to draw up some maps to show what I think would be a great start for a system and how to build one.

But back to what the topic is of this thread. Conan I noticed you had said in response to my post and I will agree with you that there is a lot of land to be developed in the IDL (and or around the IDL, north of 244, the pearl, south of the BA) but right now the Brady District has the most development underway and this area would have much higher redevelopment potential in the downtown core than anywhere else once we had the chance to move the County Jail.

rdj you mentioned the connection to Crosby Height which is a good point, but the IDL still acts as a huge barrier and there's not much we can do about that. With streetscape and make the underpasses more pedestrian friendly I think it could be easily solvable because I have been in several major cities that have done a better job at making walking under a highway a lot easier and safer.

It goes back to the DESIGN of everything; if they spend the extra money to get a really nice design for this center it will help the neighborhood.

My question would be what if this was placed somewhere around I-44 and the BA interchange? This is a more centralized location in the county and on the southside it is mostly industrial and some commercial usage. Just a thought.

[Red Arrow]

Is there a thread on here that has discussion on light rail in Tulsa?

There have been several.  Search using trolley, light rail, commuter rail and maybe some more.  I believe there have been some maps of a starter system and one (or a link) of the system Tulsa had before the trolley holocaust.