UTW Summer Brewsurbatulsaclassifiedsbutton
  TULSA METRO'S ONLY INDEPENDENT NEWSWEEKLY
UTW Reader Comments  |  Has Something Made You Mad? Tell Us!    
Home » Columns » OpEd
  RSS XML

The Road Ahead

The problem with Tulsa's transportation strategy is that we're not looking around the corner


BY RAY PEARCEY

Agile, imaginative management of the environmental/energy nexus is at the core of a vibrant, fully competitive future for Tulsa.

Crafting a powerful, sustainable transportation strategy is a part of the golden path for Green Country. We need to continue to fix the streets, but doing so is only a piece of the grand challenge confronting the region.

Gas Prices and Tulsa's Future

We may soon, to use a highly topical example, witness a landscape-altering, reset in the price of gasoline in Tulsa and across the country -- not withstanding a temporary drop that may occur this summer.

An epic price jump may come as a consequence of continuing explosive economic growth in Indian and China, the Arab Spring, constraints on domestic gas refining capacity and what my friend Dr. Bruce Langus, a Tulsa geologist/earth science pro and others call the advent of peak oil -- the end of cheap oil.

Tulsa will become, by virtually any reasonable definition, an exceptionally fragile place should these events transpire. Our city is car, SUV and truck-crazy like few other communities, and we have only a rudimentary bus and public transit system.

Not having a stout transit system that is a real light rail system or a fully capable bus system creates a huge problem for the Tulsa metro. INCOG chief Rich Brierre says that Tulsa is on the short list of mid-sized communities that would be in catastrophic shape if oil prices move to a new semi-permanent level.

And there is a lot of literature on what may happen with a sustained gas price spike -- some of it from urban economics, some from city planning, some from environmental engineering and parts from human ecology. Joan Fitzgerald, a professor at Northwestern University, has written a stellar new book on what we might expect.

In "Emerald Cities: Urban Sustainability and Economic Development," Fitzgerald's assessment paints a very stark picture:

"Cities have much to gain by reducing driving. Getting away from cars reduces pollution and has economic development and job potential ... Reducing car use would both increase national energy security by decreasing reliance on foreign oil and put a big dent into the nation's massive contribution to greenhouse gas production. Where cities do have a unique role to play is in reducing vehicle miles traveled by increasing public transportation and other non-automobile options. With only 4.7 percent of US workers commuting by public-private transportation there's a lot of room for improvement."

The Talent Base

I visited this week with the transportation planning crew at INCOG -- Green Country's metropolitan planning organization. There are a host of local planning and transport gurus at the center of what looks to be a really inventive effort to transform bus transport and other elements of locomotion, including INCOG's Viplav Putta, James Wagner, Kasey Frost and an inventive group of consulting pros including Austin pollster Robin Rather and planning pro Patrick Fox Jr.

All are leading a compelling, post-bureaucratic (FASTforward) effort to help us imagine what science writer Steven Johnson calls the "adjacent future".

A critical part of INCOG's mission is to guide the transportation planning efforts of the City of Tulsa and many of the surrounding counties that make up our metropolitan area -- an area of well over 1 million people.

Many Urban Tulsa Weekly readers may believe that public transit/ bus transport is only for people with modest incomes and those who have unreliable access to a car. While there are certainly a group of folks in Tulsa who lead transit-centric lives, the number is small (say under 2 percent), but this is deceptive.

Any of the high density development plans -- any of the consensus choices that came from the PLANiTULSA planning process last year -- would require a big rethink of how we spend transportation dollars and what we have made top priority items. An epic gas price "explosion" would certainly change bus ridership in Green Country -- and we aren't ready.

An Example: Agility and the Bus

Part of our challenge here in Tulsa is to turn a well managed, if anemic bus systems -- something that we already have -- into a spine on which to build something more substantial. INCOG's James Warner and others here in Tulsa talk about "Bus Rapid Transit" -- a sort of bus system on steroids that might attract dramatically higher Tulsa area ridership with outsized impacts on employment, pollution emissions and congestion on a handful of Tulsa street segments.

Jenna Wortham, a tech writer for The New York Times, writing about startup company Uber, highlights a fascinating part of another key piece of the transit future for Tulsa.

"Here is yet another thing you can do with a smartphone: summon a car to pick you up with a tap on the screen. Uber, a start-up based in San Francisco, offers a cellphone application that is aimed at making using a car service quick and painless ... some welcomed it as an antidote to notoriously sluggish public transit and a dearth of cabs. Uber is not a taxi or limousine company. Instead it operates as a dispatch service, working with local owners of licensed private car companies. Uber provides each car with an iPhone and software that manages incoming requests. When an Uber user needs a ride, the dispatcher and the closest car are notified, and the system sends back an estimate of the pick-up time. While they wait, users can monitor the car's location on their phone."

Imagine a re-animated Tulsa area bus system that operates on an "auto-improvised" route system that corresponds to where users are and what they actually need--on a minute-to-minute basis.

This is an example of the kind of the breakout thinking that can keep us rolling -- and maybe help us see around the corner.


Share this article:
 
Google Bookmarks  digg  Del.icio.us  reddit  Yahoo My Web  Newsvine  MySpace 

COMMENTS
3 comments posted for this article
William, tulsa
 5/17/2011 - 8:11pm
   Mass transit isn't just about how you get there, but what the place is like "there". Its about working to create pedestrian friendly nodes. Its about planning for the future and setting a step by step process in place leading you to what you want. Check out what Salt Lake City has done for instance. They are building rail just like we build highways and you see the appropriate, pedestrian friendly business/shopping/living developments popping up all up and down their lines. Their new suburban developments are even becoming more and more rail centric. Then they add bus lines branching out laterally from the rail lines down pedestrian friendly corridors. For a neat thread, check out Skyscraper Page Forums, the Transportation section, then find the Salt Lake City thread. They are a conservative city that has discovered the "smart money" for future development is in rail/mass transit, and the appropriate zoning for that, not just highways and its zoning. Their economy is becoming more efficient, is booming, has low unemployment, and the population is growing rapidly as people discover its convenient, enjoyable way of life. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=150074&page=17
Report this comment
Ray Pearcey
 5/12/2011 - 6:22pm
   Howdy & thx for the comments-- here are my responses:
   
   (1) Planning-- what planning are you talking about?
   Maybe you're thinking about the enormous "anti-planning" round of spending on the interstate highway system during the Eisenhower administration that, together with the then new VA & FHA housing loan programs,  facilitated the  flight to suburbia and the undermining of many US core city economies. While there were garden variety zoning, development management efforts and federally funded  inner city centric "urban renewal" programs also underway during the period you cite, none of these efforts had anywhere near the scale need to counter the overweening, centrifugal push of the federal highway project and postwar housing loan "drivers". Calling any of this these processes "planning"  is bizarre;
   
   (2) I'm afraid you missed the point of a good part of the essay-there are-- I repeat there are-- a host of light transit --and a bevy of advanced bus transit models  (some originating as long ago as the mid '80's via the Urban Institues' "para-transit" experiments) that "work" without the heavy densities demanded by conventional transit. One of these, a relatively new one, is  Bus Rapid Transit (which I mentioned in my article), it uses fast headways, intelligent routing and an ensemble of smaller & big bus fleet (CNG & electric) vehicles to make bus transit more compelling, and vastly more accessible without the huge physical disruptions, decades long land acquisition/construction cycles and astronomical capital costs inherent in contemporary  heavy rail commuter projects;
   
   (3) When regimes like Bus Rapid Transit (in use in several large and mid sized towns) are joined with automated vechicle location software, conventional smart phones and "on call" routing we may find ourselves on the cusp of a transformative unimagined in US transit ridership--and one that is a grand match for places  like Tulsa;
   
   (4) The other point, I suppose I didn't quite convey, is a stark one--- without a agile, fully capable transit option Tulsa is extremely vulnerable to a big "crash" in the wake of an explosive rise in the cost of gas--- the Tulsa World carried an article on this matter today (Thursday , June 11). And we don't have decades to come to grips with this scenario-- interestingly enough, some recent and very savvy Tulsa citizen polling on this matter suggests that our folks are surprisingly amenable to changing Tulsa area transport spending priorities to cope with this potential shock; willingness to support higher taxes to do this  kind of project was much more mixed--although  it too was amazingly positive;
   
   (5) Green Country peeps would be hugely foolish to wait for events-- like the onset of peak oil-- to bring our region to a bonecrushing crisis economically and socially. And this "spot of trouble" will surely whack us big time  if we fail to look right away at a range of surprisingly affordable "third way" transit options that not only break the supposed "iron" link between density and viability but go a long way toward crafting a sustainable, more nimble Metro--- this is what I mean by "seeing around the corner";
   
   (6) Lastly, your conception of the rate of change in our society is out of date-- I would call your attention to science writer Steven Johnson's new book-- he argues, rightly , that we are witness to an astonishing acceleration in technological, social and cultural change-- you only have to think about the difference between the time from conception to wide scale adoption for, say radio (40 years) and smartphones (4 years) to see the evidence. Or we could look at seat belt adoption, interracial marriage rates, PC penetration rates or wide scale acceptance of gay people if you want social phenomena that evidence this speed-up.  
   
   If jobs, families and the fate of thousands of enterprises came down to how fast Tulsan's could adapt to $10- $15 a gallon gas I'd bet my ass you'd see an electrifying and fast re-population of midtown and a sea change in how we use transit, walking and bikes in this Burg!
Report this comment
Kent Morlan
 5/12/2011 - 9:39am
   As a result of 1950s and 1960s city planning, most American city sprawl all over the place. The population density of Tulsa is about 2,200 per square mile. It is not possible to cost effectively provide mass transit to a population that is so spread out.
   
   What will actually probably happen is that as energy costs go up at a rate in excess of real earnings, people will elect to relocate so that they live a lot closer to where they work. It will become too expensive to drive long distances to work.
   
   This will take time. I will not be alive when Tulsa is once again a compact city as it was in the 1930s.
   
   Mass transit? Dream on.
Report this comment

Post a comment




MORE BY RAY PEARCEY
Stopping the Jail Train
Because it won't take us to Safeville [May 22, 2013]
Forgotten Parks
Advanced decay just one of the issues [May 15, 2013]
Technology and Democracy
New ground to plow in the digital age, part 1 [May 8, 2013]
My Profile | My Settings

Subscriptions Available at $124/yr.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing. No refunds are issued. Back issues are available for $10/copy.

We accept Visa, M/C, checks and money orders. Call to charge by phone 918-592-5550. Enter your contact information in the form below and we will contact you.

If ordering by mail, make checks and money orders payable to Urban Tulsa Weekly. Send your payment along with your complete postal delivery address to Urban Tulsa Weekly, Attn: Samantha, PO Box 50499, Tulsa, OK 74150

Name:
Address:
Address2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email:
Phone:
Comments:

 

Urban Tulsa Weekly
1924 E. 6th St.
Tulsa OK 74104
Phone: (918) 592-5550
Fax: (918) 592-5970
e-mail: Subscriptions

Powered by Gyrosite © Copyright 2013, Urban Tulsa Weekly   RSS