What About Rail?

[tulsasignnazi]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist
You cant do it in a vacuum. We have to have other policies that say...no more widening of roads and commuter highways, and other policies that encourage high density development, less parking, etc.

THAT would NEVER work in a political system known as the Great American Democracy, the institutionalization of collective STUPIDITY.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!
[]

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by tulsasignnazi

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
I think cycling should be part of any mass transit strategy. I'd like to see the minimum number of car parking spaces swapped with a minimum number of cycle racks and the car parking requirement completely scrapped. I think the city should be safe for all cyclists, but remembering that not everyone can or wants to cycle.

Why wouldn't EVERYONE want to cycle?  Works great for Santa.

The City is ALREADY safe for bicycling.  If that were NOT the case, don'tcha think Santa would have been smashed into a two-mile long BLOODY mess on the Broken Arrow Expressway a long time ago?

The problem with Tulsa streets?  Santa gets kinda lonely on the BA.

You know, every time I think about biking and I hear or see you it makes me not want to because then I would be associated with a freak like you. If you really want people to follow the lead, make sure the lead is someone they would want to follow. People want to be associated with something nice, cool, or at least normal,,, not a freakshow.

Why do you say you want to encourage bikeriding, but then go out of your way to discourage it by making it look stupid?

You had started a thread earlier about how to get people to bike, or something like that. I thought it sounded like fun. I posted a comment saying so. Then you couldnt leave well enough alone or go in a positive direction, you stared adding all kinds of freaky crap on there. I had to delet my post so I wouldnt be associated with it. Know your local audience and speak to them, encourage them, dont run them off. You could make a difference, but you get more of a thrill out of getting attention than really doing what it takes to encourage people to bike.

[TulsaFan-inTexas]

People will more likely ride rail than buses. It's happening here in the DFW area with DART lite rail and the T. Rail is an efficient way to get around and it is a PLEASANT experience. Just wait til gas hits 4$ a gallon and see how many people start saying, "why don't we have mass transit?"

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

This event will be an opportunity to address how all the pieces of the of the transit puzzle fit together.  Rail is one component of the discussion, but it doesn't end there.  Consideration for busses, bikes, pedestrians and, yes, even cars, must factor into any real mobility strategy.  

The goal is to create a viable, comprehensive, user-friendly transit system that will benefit Tulsa both economically and environmentally, while increasing quality of life for all Tulsans.  

TulsaNow has talked about sponsoring a forum such as this for several years.  I hope everyone who has ever ridden public transit in other cities and said "Wouldn't it be great if we had this in Tulsa?" will show up and learn more!

[TulsaFan-inTexas]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

You all are talking past each other.  

No one is proposing that Tulsa suddenly become encrusted with light rail lines going up and down each arterial, or that Tulsans are suddenly going to give up their cars.

The suggestion on the table is that Tulsans could benefit from one or two light rail/commuter rail lines.

There should be no questions that Tulsans should ride these lines.  They get ridden--if you think they'll stay empty, you either haven't traveled to Dallas, Houston, Denver or Atlanta, or your are purposefully obscuring facts about "average Tulsans."

The real question is practicality and money.  How feasible are multiple lines?  How expensive would they be?  How long would it take?  Where would the first lines be?  Would they be commuter-based or mostly in-town?  That's what I hope would be addressed at these forums.  

The question is not "to be or not to be," but how.  You people are trying to make this into some sort of ideological question and it's impossible not to get frustrated.

I'm in total agreement with you Floyd.

[tulsasignnazi]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist
You know, every time I think about biking and I hear or see you it makes me not want to because then I would be associated with a freak like you. If you really want people to follow the lead, make sure the lead is someone they would want to follow. People want to be associated with something nice, cool, or at least normal,,, not a freakshow.

Why do you say you want to encourage bikeriding, but then go out of your way to discourage it by making it look stupid?

You had started a thread earlier about how to get people to bike, or something like that. I thought it sounded like fun. I posted a comment saying so. Then you couldnt leave well enough alone or go in a positive direction, you stared adding all kinds of freaky crap on there. I had to delet my post so I wouldnt be associated with it. Know your local audience and speak to them, encourage them, dont run them off. You could make a difference, but you get more of a thrill out of getting attention than really doing what it takes to encourage people to bike.

Actually, in a more global scheme of relevant societal issues, biking is much more than STUPID. Bicyclists.

Help me out with that cliche again.  How does it go?  If ya can't beat 'em, at least FREAK 'em out.  

Perhaps Santa really KNOWS his audience.  It probably DON'T include YOU.  []

If you don't really want to be associated with a freak on a bike like Santa, then keep DRIVING and growing that FAT arse.

With another random thought:  Why would you allow a FREAK to dictate your decision to bike or not?  Shouldn't you bike just because it's FUN?  Naaaaaaah.  Forget it.

In the "normal" mainstream world full of cars, bikes are FREAKY, just as ARTISTS are freaky in the "normal" working world of 9-5'ers.  I bet NO one would want to associate with an ARTIST in the corporate boardroom.  

I am TRULY astounded YOU, of all people, TheARTIST, would consider a truly AMAZING piece of street ART, such as the bicycling Santa, FREAKY.  I think it's ART. []

Italy has Michealangelo and Machiavelli.  Tulsa has SANTA.  Certainly Tulsa could probably do a whole lot worse, like Detroit.  We are TRULY blessed.

LIGHTEN up and enjoy the adrenline, ferchristsakes.
[]

[tulsasignnazi]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas

People will more likely ride rail than buses. It's happening here in the DFW area with DART lite rail and the T.

EXACTLY my point.  In the auto-centric economy, rail cannibalizes bus ridership.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by tulsasignnazi

quote:Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas

People will more likely ride rail than buses. It's happening here in the DFW area with DART lite rail and the T.

EXACTLY my point.  In the auto-centric economy, rail cannibalizes bus ridership.

Rail takes mode share away from cars too. If you change bus routes to feed into rail you can increase bus patronage.

[tulsasignnazi]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

Rail takes mode share away from cars too. If you change bus routes to feed into rail you can increase bus patronage.

Oh, Fo' shure!  We both share a common wet dream.  You believe THAT.  And, I believe SANTA will actually get more people on more bikes.[]

[Renaissance]

This Santa f^cker is annoying as sh!t.  I really can't stand radicals, of any stripe.  They don't want to engage with you, they want to shout at you.

Hey Tay, why don't you buzz the f^ck off?  You keep repeating that rail cannibalizes buses, but a) it's not shown to be true--could cause more demand if folks need transit from nodes as Bates keeps harping on, and b) is it neceessarily a bad thing, Mr. Bike Fanatic?  Also, you people talking about the "fact" that rail doesn't spur development obviously haven't spent a lot of time with real estate private equity types.  I only learned about Transit Oriented Development (TOD) lately, but investors are falling over themselves trying to find new TODs to throw their fund money at.

Tay, you're ruining my normally enjoyable forum reading.  IGNORED.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by tulsasignnazi

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist
You know, every time I think about biking and I hear or see you it makes me not want to because then I would be associated with a freak like you. If you really want people to follow the lead, make sure the lead is someone they would want to follow. People want to be associated with something nice, cool, or at least normal,,, not a freakshow.

Why do you say you want to encourage bikeriding, but then go out of your way to discourage it by making it look stupid?

You had started a thread earlier about how to get people to bike, or something like that. I thought it sounded like fun. I posted a comment saying so. Then you couldnt leave well enough alone or go in a positive direction, you stared adding all kinds of freaky crap on there. I had to delet my post so I wouldnt be associated with it. Know your local audience and speak to them, encourage them, dont run them off. You could make a difference, but you get more of a thrill out of getting attention than really doing what it takes to encourage people to bike.

Actually, in a more global scheme of relevant societal issues, biking is much more than STUPID. Bicyclists:  NGIGERS of the roadway.

Help me out with that cliche again.  How does it go?  If ya can't beat 'em, at least FREAK 'em out.  

Perhaps Santa really KNOWS his audience.  It probably DON'T include YOU.  []

If you don't really want to be associated with a freak on a bike like Santa, then keep DRIVING and growing that FAT arse.

With another random thought:  Why would you allow a FREAK to dictate your decision to bike or not?  Shouldn't you bike just because it's FUN?  Naaaaaaah.  Forget it.

In the "normal" mainstream world full of cars, bikes are FREAKY, just as ARTISTS are freaky in the "normal" working world of 9-5'ers.  I bet NO one would want to associate with an ARTIST in the corporate boardroom.  

I am TRULY astounded YOU, of all people, TheARTIST, would consider a truly AMAZING piece of street ART, such as the bicycling Santa, FREAKY.  I think it's ART. []

Italy has Michealangelo and Machiavelli.  Tulsa has SANTA.  Certainly Tulsa could probably do a whole lot worse, like Detroit.  We are TRULY blessed.

LIGHTEN up and enjoy the adrenline, ferchristsakes.
[]

Apparently your audience doesnt include anyone on this forum, so its odd that you keep coming on here?

You obviously dont know me either. I am probably slimmer than your fat arse.

As for biking, I have wanted to start. I thought with that other thread you were someone else and were going to get people together to do some fun biking stuff. But then the thread got absurd and disghusting and turned me off from wanting to join you. Then as your comments got more and more outrageous I figured out it was you. The point is, you had me, and probably some others then ruined it.  Why dont you do something that really gets people involved? You have so much energy and desire to. Why not do something positive that has real results? Other than pissing people off. Or is that your real agenda? Make up your mind. Is what your doing working?

And I would fit in quite nicely in any boardroom. Those are the kind of people who want me to work for them, who appreciate what I do, they show it because they are willing to spend the big bucks to get it.  I get to see their boardrooms and, speaking of fun, their fancy parties as well... do you?

I know real artists, people of all kinds like hanging around real artists, and your no artist. Please take your meds.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I agree that a trainride would be difficult if I was lugging around young children to a stop each day. But I would ride one to work each day and would love to have a park and ride option for downtown events.

I am a neophyte on this topic and I hope to learn from both perspectives on this thread. I plan to attend the forum on the 24th.

I too worry about spending millions on a rail system that I would probably not use often, but if it spurred quality urban redevelopment, I would support it.

Pretty much where I'm at.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

Chicken Little,

As I've said before, I like using rail. I didn't have a car in college, and I depended on the MBTA's network of streetcars, subways, and buses, our fraternity's informal jitney service between the house and campus two miles away, and my own two feet to get around.

I didn't have a car for the summer I spent in Manila, either. Although they had a single rail line connecting the airport to downtown, it didn't go near the house or the campus. Instead, I depended on a network of privately owned buses and jeepneys to get me around.

Back then, I was navigating the public transport network on my own. I could easily tolerate walking a mile in whatever kind of weather between the subway station or bus stop and where I needed to go. Walking the two or three miles between home and campus or work, at a 4 mph clip, was always an option if I had to wait too long for a streetcar or a bus.

Now, a quarter of a century later as a dad with three kids, I can't hit 4 mph walking speed very often, particularly if I have to lug a 30 lb. two-year-old whose legs are tired. If I were to try to manage getting a family around town without a car, it would be crucial that every place I needed to go were within at most a quarter-mile of public transport.

I don't see the advocates of rail in Tulsa, such as yourself, addressing the practical issues I encountered as a public transport user.

You and others seem to be saying that the presence of commuter rail will eventually result in nodes of high-density, pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented development that will make it possible for people to live most of their lives without a car. In the scenario you seem to propose, everything will be within easy walking distance of the stations, and you won't have to cross massive parking lots on foot to get between the street and the front door of a store.

What I don't hear from you is any attempt to explain how people, particularly families with small children, get from home to work to school to shopping to the doctor's office via public transport between now and when your glorious future is realized.

I want to know how you propose to make it convenient enough for people, particularly families with small children, to use public transport of any form to get where they need to go, convenient enough to forgo using their own cars.

I'd especially like to know, Chicken Little, whether you have any personal experience living without a car for more than a year.

I do not want to see Tulsa spend tens or hundreds of millions on a rail line with three trains a day before we explore more modest and practical ways of providing public transport to far more people.

Via his comments, CL just seems interested in calling you out as a charlatan, rather than engaging in substantive discussion.

[PonderInc]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas

People will more likely ride rail than buses. It's happening here in the DFW area with DART lite rail and the T. Rail is an efficient way to get around and it is a PLEASANT experience. Just wait til gas hits 4$ a gallon and see how many people start saying, "why don't we have mass transit?"

Here in Tulsa, bus ridership jumps up whenever gas rises above $3.10.  I would love to see the statistics for what happens with each dime above that.

[pfox]

Sometimes the answer to the question is the simplest one.

In order for Mr. Bates or Mr. Little to operate in this city without a car.  Well...that is not a likely scenario, is it?

We are not looking at rail to eliminate cars.  We are looking at rail because what is most important in transportation planning is redundancy.

What that means is, good transportation systems work together, overlap, and provide options when one system breaks down.  

Example: Daily peak hour congestion.

Solutions:  Do Nothing, Provide an alternative (mass transit), or improve the existing system (add capacity or systems to reduce congestion*).  

Well, we, being responsible planners have and are looking at all three options.  Clearly, no train operates in a vacuum.  Just like an expressway, in order for it to work, you have to have those other systems in place.  Roadways, bikeways, feeder transit routes, park and ride, kiss and rides, all function together.  

So...where are Tulsa's deficiencies? Most notably, Transit.  What should be the basic services that transit provides? Frequency, convenience, and reliability.  Will it take you where you need to go and get you there when you need to get there?  Do I have to worry about a schedule or does the bus come every 15-20 minutes reliably?  Am I safe?

So, yes, in order for a high capacity train to work, we will have to pony up and pay for better bus service, so that, if you get off at 31st and Yale, you can quickly get on another bus and get to St. Francis Hospital or OU-Tulsa or the Fairgrounds within 5 to 10 minutes.

The densities everyone is worried about should be addressed during the Comp Plan update.  That is why we are coordinating with the City and providing them with every bit of data they need to evaluate our current and future transportation needs, and adjust the land uses appropriately.  Should we have a TOD or MXU category?  If we are going to have a successful transit system, we probably should consider it.

*The great thing about all of this is that even our roadway engineers down the road at ODOT have conceded that we cannot build our way out of this problem. The problem? Ever increasing congestion (and reduced air quality as a by product). Adding capacity only adds more cars.  We can make it better for a while, until that latent traffic catches up, and then you are in the same problem, only with that much more road to maintain.  How do you add capacity on a rail line?  You add another railcar.  You tell me what is more cost efficient.

The Artist is correct.  It was us who cited costs associated with the I-44 project.  350 million for Yale to Riverside.  Over 100 million per mile.  We could, using the existing tracks here in Tulsa, implement darn near 45 miles of passenger rail for that cost.

Think about that.  Currently, just to downtown, not including interim/midpoint destinations, that would serve 7500 commuters from South Tulsa County, Broken Arrow, Owasso, and Sand Springs, who work downtown.  Those are just employment based commuters to downtown.  That figure does not include trips to the Airport, Commuters whos destination is somewhere in-between those places and downtown, excursion trips, tourists, Airport to downtown trips, event based trips. It also does not account for any growth, TOD, et cetera, along the corridor.

My point is...the myopia must stop.  We need to stop thinking about all the reasons why we cannot or are unwilling to change our harmful growth pattern and start believing that we can actually change this place for the better .....and smarter.

I believe that our transportation choices have more ability to shape our city in positive and negative ways (depending on your choice) than any other public investment.  Transit can help us realize our dreams for this city.  A revitalized downtown, quality infill, better & friendlier streets, beautiful neighborhoods, and economic vitality.

[DwnTwnTul]

I remember when Dallas' DART was just a concept.  They planned to have small communities spring up along the rail at various rail stops.  They envisioned residential mixed with office space, restaurants, and entertainment.  This vision indeed came to fruition and has proven quite successful.  

I have always thought the small area of land East of OSU – Tulsa would be prime for this type of development.  This area appears to be filled with abandoned buildings and is bound by 75 and 244 and an existing rail track.  This rail track also appears to be abandoned.  This particular existing line could service the airport, Mohawk Park (the zoo), TCC – NE, Langston – Tulsa, and OSU – Tulsa.  Students and tourists alike would definitely use this as a mode of transportation.  Even more people would, if it eventually branched out South.  

This small area could serve as the city's central hub for a rail project.  I envision a village with several midrise buildings looking over Tulsa's beautiful skyline.  This village would consist of housing, shopping, a movie theatre, etc.  I picture people coming to the village for an afternoon of shopping, eating, and exploring.  Businesses could team up with the Zoo and offer tickets for an afternoon trip out there then back to village for an evening of dinning and nightlife.  

Imagine the impact this would have on visitors arriving via air and this new rail line.  While our airport isn't large, it is one of the cleanest and nicest in the country.  Travelers would land in a clean, non-congested airport; board the train, for a quick, affordable trip into the city.  Arriving in a bustling mixed development would make a great impression on these individuals.  From there they could stay in a hotel located in the village or hop a cab to a downtown destination.