Downtown Densities (from S&J Discussion)

[LandArchPoke]

 Indeed, but to be a little more clear, what I am talking about isn't light rail at this point, or perhaps even Street Cars.  Also I am talking about routes that are only long enough, starting off, to circulate within downtown itself.  There is a need to get people into areas like the Brady Arts district, but rather than build more parking, have say a small, sharp looking bus or two that goes by each stop every 5-10 minutes in a loop around downtown that passes areas plentiful in parking and goes through the areas where the people want to go. Then in time add perhaps another bus, or perhaps a streetcar line that intersects that route, or two lines, etc.  Start small and build that transit model up.  Free up places where you would otherwise put in more parking garages to have them instead be used for businesses, entertainment and living (not to mention freeing up developers of places like living from having to add as much or even any parking and thus allowing them to make their living more affordable).  Then as the parking spaces get used up and you still need parking... keep inching your transit routes outward.  Make the transit go across the river to the west bank where there is parking there or to the Fin Tube site, use park and ride into the core from other parts of the city and suburbs, etc.   Keep densifying the core and making it super high quality and attractive and as you need "parking" push your transit out to parking, or other "nodes" like Cherry Street, that exist further away. And remember, as you make the lines longer, your not just adding parking at either end, but potentially streetside parking all along the way.  The parking already exists, just need transit of some sort to get people from those spots to where they want to go.      

I see all kinds of empty parking spaces all over downtown while some areas are packed with cars on different occasions.  Boston Ave around 5th is often packed with cars in those spaces, but go two blocks south or east and there is plenty of parking.   Put in transit that goes past those available spaces and while your doing that you allow more density to happen, incentivise development that doesn't feel that it has to have or pay for it's own parking and so forth.  That model grows versus the "parking garage/fake density" model.   You end up with sidewalks that are actually busy and attractive most of the time, which spurs more growth, versus the parking garage/fake density model that has your sidewalks often still empty and transit if you want it, that doesnt work as well because you don't have enough people using it. (aka Uptown Dallas).

Artist, I could not agree with you more about what some of the leadership thinks about the parking situation. The fake urbanity of uptown Dallas just makes me sad every time I'm there. Another example I might add to this fake urbanity would be 16th Street in Denver. It is in a sense a strip mall with parking garages above it. I applaud Blake's forward thinking in retail downtown but a lot of people tend to gravel over him on this board. Not trying to attack him what so ever because he is doing A LOT of great things for this city. The 5th street plan he has in mind just sounds to me like a glorified strip mall. The parking situation downtown is fine and can support plenty of retail growth. There is MORE then 1 large parking structure with in block of 5th Street downtown. If they really want to cater to suburban people to come downtown and shop, add valet parking (cheap valet parking). Bam you've solved the problem of them having to walk. I can bet you people walk more from their parking spot at Woodland Hills and through the mall then they would parking in a garage near 5th and walking around that area to shop at ground floor retail stores. If we keep adding parking garage the need to build a streetcar route or improve our transit situation will never happen. You'll see more traffic problem like you see in Los Angeles (not to the extreme) but they are a very auto dependant city that has grown very urban. The Brady District does not need a parking garage either. Adding more street parking and allowing the William's garage to serve the district on nights and weekends will do just fine. Again if some of the business owners keep the valet system going there everything will be alright.

People seem hell bent on trying to cater to people that are worried about parking, but I can assure you the people bitching about it now are the one's there never patronize these area's and never will because of it. We need to build downtown into a neighborhood while finding a middle ground of keeping it accessible to residents outside the core. I am afraid that some of the leaders in our city are focusing on the wrong issues. We should focus on how to utilize the parking structures we have now and how we can make them service area's like the Brady and Blue Dome as some of the more convenient parking downtown goes away.

[LandArchPoke]

This was my idea for starter routes downtown and to outer core areas.

I would probably start with the connection of OSU Tulsa - TCC - TU, followed by the BOk/ Convention Center - Pearl District - Cherry St - Brookside Route. You could really interchange these and I think both routes would be very successful.

As downtown grows you then add some smaller routes like the circular route around downtown I've shown. Once the core has grown and parking has become more of an issue is when you start thinking about Light Rail/ Commuter Rail options to outlying areas. If we continue this focus on adding more and more parking downtown we will never get away from an auto dependency core.

[Red Arrow]

I can bet you people walk more from their parking spot at Woodland Hills and through the mall than they would parking in a garage near 5th and walking around that area to shop at ground floor retail stores.

That's something a lot of people conveniently forget or ignore.

[Red Arrow]

This was my idea for starter routes downtown and to outer core areas.

I would probably start with the connection of OSU Tulsa - TCC - TU, followed by the BOk/ Convention Center - Pearl District - Cherry St - Brookside Route. You could really interchange these and I think both routes would be very successful.

As downtown grows you then add some smaller routes like the circular route around downtown I've shown. Once the core has grown and parking has become more of an issue is when you start thinking about Light Rail/ Commuter Rail options to outlying areas. If we continue this focus on adding more and more parking downtown we will never get away from an auto dependency core.

I have read (probably on Light Rail Now) that studies on transit show that people are willing to walk about 1/4 mile to get to or from a transit stop.  A downtown circulator is going to be important to break the chicken/egg situation with parking.  We will have to accept that it will be a money loser for a while until the parking lots are turned into something better.  A half way commitment such as buses running on a long headway (time between buses) is bound to fail and prove that Tulsa cannot support transit. If you have to study the system to learn how to use it, forget it.

[LandArchPoke]

For comparison:

Red: 2,982 ft.             Potential full retail area if it went from Denver to Frankfurt
Pink: 1,688 ft.            5th Street's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Light Blue: 1,362 ft.     Main Street's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Green: 201 ft.             Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Yellow: 1,471 ft.         Boston Ave's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Orange: 556 ft.           Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Dark Blue: 417 ft.        Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Purple: 393 ft.            Parking (walking distance to 5th)





Red: 1,045 ft.          Woodland Hills retail core length
Pink: 308 ft.            (Walking distance to core)
Light Blue: 370 ft.      "  "
Green: 484 ft.           "  "
Yellow: 300 ft.          "  "
Orange: 265 ft.         "  "
Dark Blue: 400 ft       "  "

[LandArchPoke]

I have read (probably on Light Rail Now) that studies on transit show that people are willing to walk about 1/4 mile to get to or from a transit stop.  A downtown circulator is going to be important to break the chicken/egg situation with parking.  We will have to accept that it will be a money loser for a while until the parking lots are turned into something better.  A half way commitment such as buses running on a long headway (time between buses) is bound to fail and prove that Tulsa cannot support transit. If you have to study the system to learn how to use it, forget it.

A lot of people cry foul on the fact that any type of mass transit on figures alone tends to be a money loser. In comparison on what we on highway and street construction and the dollar we get back on that mass transit tends to be more effective. Investment follows infrastructure period. Mass transit allows the city that constructs it to get developers to build more mixed use development which in turn provides much greater sales and property tax returns. So while in costs to government operations, mass transit tends to be in the red when look at costs, you have to weigh it with the added population base, tax income, and being able to provide more efficient services to your population. A transit friendly mixed use core will pay for the offset in costs it takes to run the system. People tend to over look that as well.

[AquaMan]

I have read (probably on Light Rail Now) that studies on transit show that people are willing to walk about 1/4 mile to get to or from a transit stop.  A downtown circulator is going to be important to break the chicken/egg situation with parking.  We will have to accept that it will be a money loser for a while until the parking lots are turned into something better.  A half way commitment such as buses running on a long headway (time between buses) is bound to fail and prove that Tulsa cannot support transit. If you have to study the system to learn how to use it, forget it.

What do you consider an acceptable headway. 20minutes?

[Red Arrow]

What do you consider an acceptable headway. 20minutes?

Depends on the time of day.  The (real) trolley that ran close to my house where I grew up ran about 7 minutes during rush hours, 15 minutes most of the day, an a little longer other times.  Check the SEPTA route 101 schedule for current times.

Edit:  Link to SEPTA Route 101 Schedule

http://www.septa.org/schedules/trolley/pdf/101.pdf

[jacobi]

A lot of people cry foul on the fact that any type of mass transit on figures alone tends to be a money loser. In comparison on what we on highway and street construction and the dollar we get back on that mass transit tends to be more effective. Investment follows infrastructure period. Mass transit allows the city that constructs it to get developers to build more mixed use development which in turn provides much greater sales and property tax returns. So while in costs to government operations, mass transit tends to be in the red when look at costs, you have to weigh it with the added population base, tax income, and being able to provide more efficient services to your population. A transit friendly mixed use core will pay for the offset in costs it takes to run the system. People tend to over look that as well.

Bravo!

[Conan71]

A lot of people cry foul on the fact that any type of mass transit on figures alone tends to be a money loser. In comparison on what we on highway and street construction and the dollar we get back on that mass transit tends to be more effective. Investment follows infrastructure period. Mass transit allows the city that constructs it to get developers to build more mixed use development which in turn provides much greater sales and property tax returns. So while in costs to government operations, mass transit tends to be in the red when look at costs, you have to weigh it with the added population base, tax income, and being able to provide more efficient services to your population. A transit friendly mixed use core will pay for the offset in costs it takes to run the system. People tend to over look that as well.

Great post LandArch.  It really is much like an arena or ballpark.  The real value is a "civic" value, which is much greater than a monetary value.

[jacobi]

Great post LandArch.  It really is much like an arena or ballpark.  The real value is a "civic" value, which is much greater than a monetary value.

Well it is more than that.  I think what he meant was that if you look at the financials of mass transit (cost over revenue) it's a lemon.  When you concider the tax base value added by new constructiona of denser properties, it's a winner in the end.

[Conan71]

Well it is more than that.  I think what he meant was that if you look at the financials of mass transit (cost over revenue) it's a lemon.  When you concider the tax base value added by new constructiona of denser properties, it's a winner in the end.

And just like mass transit, arenas and stadiums are financial lemons, but take a look at the private investment they have spurred not only in our downtown but many others around the country.

[Teatownclown]

And just like mass transit, arenas and stadiums are financial lemons, but take a look at the private investment they have spurred not only in our downtown but many others around the country.

Well, you're never too old to learn something stupid.

Let me get this straight. You don't like the budget deficit but you're all for white elephants?

[carltonplace]

For comparison:

Red: 2,982 ft.             Potential full retail area if it went from Denver to Frankfurt
Pink: 1,688 ft.            5th Street's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Light Blue: 1,362 ft.     Main Street's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Green: 201 ft.             Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Yellow: 1,471 ft.         Boston Ave's area of existing buildings with ground floor retail opportunities
Orange: 556 ft.           Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Dark Blue: 417 ft.        Parking (walking distance to 5th)
Purple: 393 ft.            Parking (walking distance to 5th)





Red: 1,045 ft.          Woodland Hills retail core length
Pink: 308 ft.            (Walking distance to core)
Light Blue: 370 ft.      "  "
Green: 484 ft.           "  "
Yellow: 300 ft.          "  "
Orange: 265 ft.         "  "
Dark Blue: 400 ft       "  "

^ This is awesome, I humbly nominate this for post of the month.

[Teatownclown]

Yes, Landy....I got to say keep 'em coming. I like your work.

Be very patient....