Tulsa's exciting rail possibilities

[pfox]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

Does INCOG have any information on its website about this rail plan?  I looked and couldn't find anything.  The Transportation Improvement Plan only mentions "rail" when talking about signage and street crossings, etc.

A recent article mentioned that it would take a billion dollars to fix the thousands of miles of city streets already under Tulsa's control.  And we spend hundreds of millions of dollars widening streets to reach the burbs.  Commuter rail makes much more sense as a long-term investment.  Reducing auto traffic on city streets will reduce maintenance costs and the need to widen streets.  It would encourage more walkable, dense, mixed use development near rail lines.  And it would help Tulsa stay out of ozone trouble.  It would allow the average family to own fewer cars/household.  Just think: owning one fewer car would save thousands of dollars a year (car payments, gas, insurance, tires, maintenance, etc).

Not yet...what is being studied are which of the exsisting rail lines have potential as passenger rail corridors, and which of those merit more in depth analysis, e.g. the Broken Arrow corridor.  Tulsa Transit is pursuing federal funding for what is called Alternatives Analysis, which is a requirement to qualify for federal funding for capital costs of implementing a rail corridor. Outside of the BA line, we are not at this time conducting an Alternatives Analysis on any other line, but there are at least two more that probably merit further study.

I can tell you this, I think there have been some very insightful comments so far in this thread regarding how our long term transportation investments should change.

I anticipate expanding public involvement in this effort sooner rather than later. FYI.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Chris

Our roads are facing large amounts of repair just to get them to average status. Maybe if we invest in light rail some of the wear on the roads will be relieved. We could stop spending all our money on widening and repaving roads and give people a choice! At least let us vote on it!

A great deal of the damage to our roads is done by large trucks, and we have very low diesel taxes. We have tried to encourage trucking in Oklahoma for some unknown reason.

We need to flip that. How about funding rail projects and have the local matching dollars come from diesel fuel taxes. That would discourage trucks without a local destination from entering Oklahoma. Lessen the ongoing damage from large trucks and provide an alternative to car traffic.

Well-intentioned comment and good idea about the fuel taxes.  However, most of the damage from heavy vehicles falls under the jurisdiction of ODOT through the Tulsa area.  Still doesn't address deterioration of arterial streets.

ODOT seems to at least be a little bit ahead of the city on keeping up roads and replacing/upgrading bridges.

ODOT is ahead of the city? No way, the worst roads are all highways, the IDL and I-44 at US75 come to mind.

And, I would assume that ODOT through INCOG would be the local funding mechanism as we are talking about crossing city and county lines on these rail lines. And, in any case, I don't know that cities can levy fuel taxes.

[Conan71]

Looking at recent improvements and maintenance  to I-44 east of the river, I think ODOT has the city beat.

Looking at I-44 at 75 and the B.A. Expressway/IDL, they all suck.  75 south of the river to the Creek is in pretty good shape.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd
Read.  Think.  THEN post.

Requires too much reading and thought.

PI said there was no info on the INCOG site.  Odd, considering they are in the middle of it.  I guess we were supposed to figure out MTTA had it by osmosis.

[Double A]

I think we should bring back car inspection stickers to fund personal/fleet zero emission  vehicle incentives and passenger rail transit in the state. It's a win-win, IMO, because we'll be getting the junkers off the road and it might help to keep Tulsa and OKC off the dirty air list(the rain this year has been a real blessing in this struggle). 25 or 30 bucks a year sounds pretty reasonable to me.

[Chris]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

I think we should bring back car inspection stickers to fund personal/fleet zero emission  vehicle incentives and passenger rail transit in the state. It's a win-win, IMO, because we'll be getting the junkers off the road and it might help to keep Tulsa and OKC off the dirty air list(the rain this year has been a real blessing in this struggle). 25 or 30 bucks a year sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Sounds good to me!

[Rowdy]

I was glad to see us get rid of the inspection stickers.  Then, every Joe out there brought out there smog machines and made me KACK like a cat with a furball. Let's bring the smog inspections back.

[sgrizzle]

Car inspections in OK were a joke before. I could set my car on fire and still get it passed. Plus, the state was only getting about $1 back which was barely keeping the program afloat.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Car inspections in OK were a joke before. I could set my car on fire and still get it passed. Plus, the state was only getting about $1 back which was barely keeping the program afloat.

I agree they were preposterous. Even the inspection sites often refused to do them.

What if inspections were patterned off of what Arizona and Ca. do? A lot of smog pumpers are kept in garages or re-tuned which would affect us collectible car lovers, but there could be exemptions and clarifications. Could it be locally administered with revenue to the metro?

[sgrizzle]

California's standards are way to high. With any standard you set, you will leave some people, generally lower income, without transportation. I would suggest something radically different like replacing license plate decals with "vehicle safety and licensing" checks every year or 6 months. Combine the license plate process with inspection, checking for valid insurance and driver's license. Failure to keep any of it up to date would result in potential seizure of the vehicle. I think it's just silly to have two sets of stickers and two places to keep track of what's up to date.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Car inspections in OK were a joke before. I could set my car on fire and still get it passed. Plus, the state was only getting about $1 back which was barely keeping the program afloat.

I agree they were preposterous. Even the inspection sites often refused to do them.

What if inspections were patterned off of what Arizona and Ca. do? A lot of smog pumpers are kept in garages or re-tuned which would affect us collectible car lovers, but there could be exemptions and clarifications. Could it be locally administered with revenue to the metro?

                                            It is extremely likely that we will know exactly what that is like in the not too distant future if we don't take some serious steps to reverse the damage done by our destructive, lustful, lifestyles of image and denial powered by infernal destruction engines. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO BE ON THE DIRTY AIR LIST. All the regressive "econocomic" development sales taxes, tax increment finance districts and bond indebtedness in the world won't be able to save Tulsa. Ozone Alerts will not(are not) going to cut it. Tulsa needs an intervention.            

[pfox]

Listen to this...Why having a variety of transportation options is good for your city.

Portland, of course.

Portland transit system saves money for Portlanders: The Green Dividend

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Riverparks owns the line from Jenks to Tulsa along the base of Turkey Mtn.

Wrong.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Vision 2025

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Riverparks owns the line from Jenks to Tulsa along the base of Turkey Mtn.

Wrong.

Already been corrected and acknowledged sir. Do try to keep up.

[booWorld]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

PI said there was no info on the INCOG site.  Odd, considering they are in the middle of it.  I guess we were supposed to figure out MTTA had it by osmosis.

Finding information on these types of studies online is very difficult and frustrating for me.  I think INCOG ought to post them on their website or provide clear, direct links to other websites.

I've gone to INCOG in person to pick up actual printed copies of reports and maps, but I'd prefer to have the option of looking at the studies online.

Side note:  Pat Treadway has been pushing hard for the updated Comprehensive Plan to be available electronically.  That would be wonderful for those of us who actually want to be involved in the planning process for Tulsa.