Transit : Planning and Issues (Streetcar, Light Rail, Bus, Bikes, etc)

[TheArtist]

1.  Implement the new comprehensive plan ASAP.     That will help us begin evolving towards a more pedestrian friendly/transit friendly city and stop the bloodletting non pedestrian friendly and non transit friendly developments from going into areas that we know we want to be pedestrian and transit friendly.

2.  We have a basic idea of where our likely rail lines will end up going so... Coordinate a long range 40-50 years our, rail/transit plan with the suburbs and then...

3.  Continue to work to implement the "starter line" downtown 15-20 year time horizon.

4.  From the starter line downtown extend a small trolley line.  (that may very well get going before the "starter line")

5.  Create more "small area" plans within the comprehensive plan.  I personally would really like to see one done for around where I live near 41st and Yale, as one example.


  A Wish List item that I think would be good for Tulsa and downtown, but unfortunately, right now looks unlikely to happen. 

A downtown plan that looks at our potential transit and pedestrian zones (where we want to invest in rail etc.) and create Street Zoning designating our A. Streets "Pedestrian/transit friendly streets" and B. Streets "car oriented streets".   Don't have to do every street for we don't know what the future holds in some areas yet, but there are some streets where the writing is on the wall or that will have important public investments on them in the future like the rail/trolley line from Brady Heights to just south of Downtown, or that we would really like to see develop in a pedestrian friendly manner in order to connect our pedestrian friendly/transit friendly "districts".

[Red Arrow]

If you can't get bus ridership up and have a decent bus system, don't even think about light rail.

It would seem so but it turns out to not be necessarily true.

Check out the facts and myths.
http://www.lightrailnow.org/

[DTowner]

It would seem so but it turns out to not be necessarily true.

Check out the facts and myths.
http://www.lightrailnow.org/

Might it be possible that a website named "LightRailNow!" is just a wee bit biased towards light rail?

[Red Arrow]

Might it be possible that a website named "LightRailNow!" is just a wee bit biased towards light rail?

It obviously is.  Have you looked at any of it?  I believe they do a reasonable job of presenting opposing views and data. The conclusions will obviously be a bit biased but you are free to draw your own conclusions.  They have several authors that have extensive experience in the public transportation industry and government agencies.  There is a lot of information collected there in one convenient location.  There are some road warrior sites around if you want mega parking spaces and the expressways to have 8 lanes in each direction like the LA area

[DTowner]

It obviously is.  Have you looked at any of it?  I believe they do a reasonable job of presenting opposing views and data. The conclusions will obviously be a bit biased but you are free to draw your own conclusions.  They have several authors that have extensive experience in the public transportation industry and government agencies.  There is a lot of information collected there in one convenient location.  There are some road warrior sites around if you want mega parking spaces and the expressways to have 8 lanes in each direction like the LA area

Briefly.  It looked like it had some interesting information.  Unfortunately, most mass transit usually gets undersold on costs and oversold on ridership projections.   While rail is always more sexy than buses in the minds of planners and the public, it is so much more expensive and less flexible as a people mover.  Attitudes towards mass transit in this area will be difficult to change, especially given current low usage and familiarity.

[Red Arrow]

Briefly.  It looked like it had some interesting information.  Unfortunately, most mass transit usually gets undersold on costs and oversold on ridership projections.   While rail is always more sexy than buses in the minds of planners and the public, it is so much more expensive and less flexible as a people mover.  Attitudes towards mass transit in this area will be difficult to change, especially given current low usage and familiarity.

A little too briefly.  Certainly some have run over but name much of any transportation project that hasn't.  Spend some more time on the site.  The fact that it is less flexible can be an advantage too.  Development around a rail system can be more assured that it will stay there than a bus route which can be changed with a pen stroke.  Attitudes toward riding a bus are not always the same as riding rail, even on the same route as the predecessor to SEPTA (South East Pennsylvania Transit Authority) found when they replaced the Ardmore trolley line with buses running the exact same route.  If I get the chance, I'll dig up a few article titles that aren't just "XXX Light Rail a Big Success".

[custosnox]

That's your opinion. Do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation or just here to criticize?

I just love how when you tell someone that what they present is flawed and back it up, their response is "that's your opinion."  How can you have a constructive conversation when you have a flawed base?  And to criticize is to be constructive, as it finds flaws with an argument.  Beyond that, you gave a city as an example and gave flawed info on it, and that is the limit to anything constructive that you have added to the conversation.  Instead you have spent all of your efforts trying to defend your inaccurate assessment.  You say "Hey, we can do this" but don't even look at how that could even work.  To do that you first have to look how things are different in the situations, but you refuse to do that.  So quit being so damn defensive on the subject, look at it, and respond intelligently, and stop trying to blame your flaws on someone else being critical.

[Red Arrow]

Briefly.  It looked like it had some interesting information.  Unfortunately, most mass transit usually gets undersold on costs and oversold on ridership projections.   While rail is always more sexy than buses in the minds of planners and the public, it is so much more expensive and less flexible as a people mover.  Attitudes towards mass transit in this area will be difficult to change, especially given current low usage and familiarity.

This is interesting.
http://www.heritagetrolley.org/articleTennyson.htm

Yes, another trolley site but read the author's credentials.

[Red Arrow]

This is interesting.
http://www.heritagetrolley.org/articleTennyson.htm

Yes, another trolley site but read the author's credentials.

This was getting burried fast so I replied rather than edit.

I thought I could find a one location resume for Tennyson but I haven't.  He is a transportation engineer.  He is obviously pro-rail, however he appears to back his opinions with data.

Edson L. Tennyson, PE (former Transit Commissioner, City of Philadelphia and former Deputy Transportation Secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania)
He is also listed as a member at large of the Fairfax County (VA) Transportation Advisory Commission.

Philadelphia has a mix of commuter rail, light rail, rapid transit, and.... buses.

[DTowner]

A little too briefly.  Certainly some have run over but name much of any transportation project that hasn't.  Spend some more time on the site.  The fact that it is less flexible can be an advantage too.  Development around a rail system can be more assured that it will stay there than a bus route which can be changed with a pen stroke.  Attitudes toward riding a bus are not always the same as riding rail, even on the same route as the predecessor to SEPTA (South East Pennsylvania Transit Authority) found when they replaced the Ardmore trolley line with buses running the exact same route.  If I get the chance, I'll dig up a few article titles that aren't just "XXX Light Rail a Big Success".

I looked briefly only because I was pressed for time.  I will spend more time looking at the site later.  I'm not anti-rail.  I lived in an east coast city for a number of years and regularly commuted by a combination of subway, bus and foot, and for a stretch of time did not own a car (a hard adjustment for someone who grew up in the mid-west).  It was my most well-read period of my life.

[Townsend]

Route On Time

Potential revamp of Tulsa Transit eyed by city councilors

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A53006

o Bill Cartwright, it's an old question -- one that's been answered for Tulsa's bus system in the past.

With limited resources, do you focus on bus frequency, or instead make sure all parts of the community receive some bus service?

Tulsa's system has a wide reach. But if a would-be passenger just misses a bus at their stop, it takes an average of 55 minutes of waiting for another bus to come by.

Last month, Tulsa city councilors asked Cartwright to study how the system might look if the focus was on frequency instead of reach.

While Councilor G.T. Bynum said he was "not in a position right now to make any sort of proposal," he and other councilors told Cartwright in a Sept. 13 committee meeting they wanted more information about how a system might work if the emphasis was placed on frequency rather than coverage area.

In an interview, Cartwright explained how the bus system arrived at its current state.

"Back in 2002, when the national economy declined dramatically and the city economy and the city budget declined dramatically, we got our budget cut quite a bit," said Cartwright, general manager for the Metropolitan Tulsa Transit Authority.

Cartwright said the idea of cutting bus routes met with strong public opposition.

"When we have a large number of transit dependent people like we do in Tulsa, if you decide you're going to cut out service in this area or that area, they don't have a way to get there," Cartwright said.

But where is there? In the city council meeting, Cartwright told councilors that 54 percent of riders use the bus system to make it to work, while another 11 percent use the system to get to school.


However, at the meeting, Councilor Blake Ewing spoke about other ideas for the bus system, citing as a concern a report of an arduous odyssey for someone trying to get to a grocery store from north Tulsa, which he said has a dearth of grocery stores.

"If it's making it impossible for people to use it for the regular everyday parts of their life, those are the things that I'm interested in addressing. Yes, work and school is important, but I would say purchasing fresh produce and dairy is important, and people aren't able to do that," Ewing said. He also offered a rhetorical question: "Are we ever going to provide a public transportation system in Tulsa that allows people to live without a car?"

Cartwright told UTW he expects to have the information requested by councilors within two to three weeks.

He said Tulsa Transit also works with the Indian Nations Council of Governments, which is considered a planning authority for the region. In October of last year, INCOG adopted a 25-year transportation plan that identified high-traffic corridors that might be appropriate for enhanced public transit.

Tulsa Transit was formed as a public trust in 1968 with $60,000 in city funds to continue service that had been abandoned by a private bus company.

While it relies on the city for funding, Cartwright's position is filled by the Tulsa Transit board -- so he reports to the board, rather than the city councilors or Mayor Dewey Bartlett.

When the city asked citizens to suggest projects that might be funded through the Vision2 proposal to extend a sales tax hike through 2029, roughly 320 submissions came in online during the three weeks immediately after the call for public input. About 10 responses described a desire to use Vision2 funds to improve the bus system.

"We did check on the Vision2 funding, but the message we got back from the city council was that they thought that the city's capital improvement projects, CIP, would be more appropriate for our funding needs," Cartwright said.

At the Sept. 13 meeting, councilors spoke somewhat vaguely about boosting funding for bus service.

Councilor Phil Lakin described how starting the process of studying bus service now could lead to a better-informed solution come June, when it's time to finalize yearly budgets.

"It's better to start now than try to do this ... [in June] to get you the kind of funding that you're requesting," Lakin said.

In an interview, Cartwright mused about funding challenges faced by Tulsa Transit.

"A lot of cities have a special allocation. They'll have a one-cent sales tax or a half-cent sales tax that's dedicated for transit operations. That would be terrific to have something like that, because then you can plan ahead years in advance much better than we can," Cartwright said.

Cartwright said fares have held steady at $1.50 since 2009, which he called a "pretty average fare in the Midwest."

"Tulsa Transit has no plans right now to recommend any fare increase," he said.

As far as the systems philosophy, Cartwright put it this way: "We're here to deliver the best system that we can to serve as many people as possible. And the people that we're serving, the people that are currently using the system, their input means quite a bit to us. We feel like the final say in how the system looks should really be based on the input from the general public that rides the system, because they know what they're needs are better than someone else would."