all this talk of union station, well I remember the sante fe depot sat empty being vandalized for years and squatted by homeless people.. what if they just yanked the tracks out, Amtrak wouldn't have it open again. While other City's are moving back to light rail, we are moving away from it or not?

Union Station has no bearing on whether we are moving towards or away from light rail.

Read the entire thread.

Union Station has no bearing on whether we are moving towards or away from light rail.

Read the entire thread.

Im reading, the thread is huge :) I think it would be good to use Union Station as part of it. Bricktown was so popular because it was 'old'. And now its help revitalize all of downtown. Not everything should be new. But I will not comment again until I catch up, cheers. :)

I didn't own a car for over 10 years of my adult life. I lived in big cities and rode mass transit every single day. I think that qualifies me to give my opinion about what I think will work and what won't. I may not be an engineer, but I'm something as, if not more important....I'm a customer. Ask the customer what they want, and you're more likely to get them to buy and use your product.

No matter what we say, Tom has no regard for compromise or differing opinions. I was willing to consider the station's use, but Tom isn't willing to consider it's non-use. Their tired arguements are losing steam and we will soon see I-40 roll right over them with little fuss. We can all rest assure that I-40 will be right where it's supposed to be and we will be able to forget any of this tired crap ever happened.

route66girl - Union Station and the 2 active lines behind it are not going away. In fact, I would like to see Union Station as a stop on some kind of rail line. However, that is not what Tom and his group wants. He wants to turn the area around Union Station into the largest intermodal working freight yard in the Southwest complete with gantry cranes, 24/7 semi-trucks, shipping containers, and maintenance equipment. Keep in mind that Tom does not work for a railroad, but he did stay at Holiday Inn Express.

Keep in mind that Tom does not work for a railroad, but he did stay at Holiday Inn Express.


:tiphat:

route66gal,

I want to make union station the 'everything' hub of okc...but, after drawing up my own figures and factoring in how terribly behind Oklahoma is on transit, there is no way in the world union station could handle all of that influx of traffic--on rail alone--not figuring bus parking...automobile drop-off/pickup parking, etc... the plan that I have put together actually uses Union Station as one of many inner-loop substations, which would make good use of the two tracks...who knows, maybe that's what they were thinking with the two tracks as well. If they wanted to make it 100% unusable, wouldn't they take away all the tracks and remove all bridges over that way?


As it sits now, they are not destroying Union Station and in fact, as others have stated, they are leaving a couple of lines there for potential future use.

In the big picture, Oklahoma has kept the issue silent, hoping the growing transit problem would somehow go away if they just kept it off the drawing board. One can't even imagine how quickly the walls of that station would bust at the seams if we had even a halfway decent system. Even if they were to ditch C2S altogether and give the entire area to Union Station, it would have to be expanded and modified as ridership caught on.

It is an awesome facility and way cool looking. The station will be saved in the process and rail....I mean, come on people, rail is replaceable and cheap for the most part...and that rail layout all over downtown is the work of a madman...look at the layout...looks like someone was going to build a death ride for a horror movie!

Dont assume that I'm all for the project though. I'm not onboard with the choice they made on the location of the new I-40, and I question whether they can do C2S in the next 100 years, before it goes out of style! If they would add a few more "S" turns and some more overly-tight on/off-ramps I think it would be right in-line with they typically come up with here.

Okay guys thanks for clearing up your thoughts on it :)

I just love Union Station, I once rented an old house that was said have been the architects personal residence he built while working on it. It was a great house, lost of the same character but scaled down... I dont know if the story of the builder was true but the fireplace and the tile colors are a match, along with the Mission Art Deco Style, light fixtures and such. And part of the old rail ran right by it in its yard..

Yeah, no doubt it's a cool-looking place...I would at least like to see it tied into the transit system.

route66gal,

In the big picture, Oklahoma has kept the issue silent, hoping the growing transit problem would somehow go away if they just kept it off the drawing board. One can't even imagine how quickly the walls of that station would bust at the seams if we had even a halfway decent system. Even if they were to ditch C2S altogether and give the entire area to Union Station, it would have to be expanded and modified as ridership caught on.


Oklahoma doesn't have a growing transit problem

that's exactly the point. our transit system is not growing, union station or no union station.

So, I suppose the widening...and re-widening...and re-re-widening of roads is just for looks, eh?

[QUOTE=sgray;183079]...and that rail layout all over downtown is the work of a madman...look at the layout...looks like someone was going to build a death ride for a horror movie!QUOTE]


That is one of the primary obstacles to quickly implementing any rail transit system in OKC. Even if 'we' were to start "cheap" with conventional rail passenger equipment running on existing track - there is no efficient way to move from North-South to the primary East-West line. I think the most likely (and least expensive) way light rail wil be started is to use existing right of ways that currently have conventional rail laid.

I tried to work with the existing rail right of ways, but that pile of spaghetti is really not what any sane engineer would want to use for an optimized rail transit system. The interchange from N-S to E-W would need to be completely reengineered to meet modern standards for a light rail (DART or MARTA style) transit system.

That is the primary reason why I am convinced Union Station cannot be the hub advocated by Mr Elmore and others. It would be an important interchange point between light rail and modern street car in the system I envision. I still maintain the best place for express freight rail is on the Will Rogers Airport grounds with light rail running from WR Airport to downtown along the current right of way Union Station is on.

CaptDave,

I think that's pretty much the gist of it...even with all of that load of crazy they are implementing down there, the new layout will be something more usable, I think...

I still believe that we are better served by keeping to conventional rail, like MARTA and METRO and others. Not the big ugly real heavy cars, but like the ones marta and metro use. In some areas, we can start right away and add dedicated track an beef up the infrastructure as ridership catches on...and if the line does well, expand it, and if things change or other needs occur in other areas, we can move trains around pretty easily because of the common track style.

I think that for people who live outside of Oklahoma City, we should give an assurance that there will be rail access to their town (if it already exists). In other words, we're not going to tear up rail going from their town to Oklahoma City. If they want actual trains to run on that rail, then the city should be willing to entertain discussions about what portion of the costs should be assumed by Oklahoma City and what portion by the town in question. As far as precisely where within Oklahoma City that rail goes, where a station is located and what kinds of transit options exist, that should be up to the city and citizens of Oklahoma City. As residents of Oklahoma City our quality of life is affected by decisions being made, and so decisions regarding location of rail and stations should be determined by those affected.

Betts, I agree, this is very critical to the entire system working out. It may be a huge benefit to OKC, but it is also critical for the surrounding cities to not only have access for their residents, but to share in the operating cost.

We need to get it right too and get the leaders together before the project is started. I can think of several systems off the top of my head where the plan was to extend into other cities and counties and they were left out of the loop until after the fact and now they won't support it.

America's love affair with the car more of a forced marriage?
11/17/08 TECHNORATI


In a 1922 memo that will live in infamy, GM President Alfred P. Sloan established a unit aimed at dumping electrified mass transit in favor of gas-burning cars, trucks and buses.

Just one American family in 10 then owned an automobile. Instead, we loved our 44,000 miles of passenger rail routes managed by 1,200 companies employing 300,000 Americans who ran 15 billion annual trips generating an income of $1 billion. According to Snell, "virtually every city and town in America of more than 2,500 people had its own electric rail system."

But GM lost $65 million in 1921. So Sloan enlisted Standard Oil (now Exxon), Philips Petroleum, glass and rubber companies and an army of financiers and politicians to kill mass transit.

The campaigns varied, as did the economic and technical health of many of the systems themselves. Some now argue that buses would have transcended many of the rail lines anyway. More likely, they would have hybridized and complemented each other.

But with a varied arsenal of political and financial subterfuges, GM helped gut the core of America's train and trolley systems. It was the murder of our rail systems that made our "love affair" with the car a tragedy of necessity.

In 1949 a complex federal prosecution for related crimes resulted in an anti-trust fine against GM of a whopping $5000. For years thereafter GM continued to bury electric rail systems by "bustituting" gas-fired vehicles.

Then came the interstates. After driving his Allied forces into Berlin on Hitler's Autobahn, Dwight Eisenhower brought home a passion for America's biggest public works project. Some 40,000 miles of vital eco-systems were eventually paved under.

In habitat destruction, oil addiction, global warming, outright traffic deaths (some 40,000/year and more), ancillary ailments and wars for oil, the automobile embodies the worst ecological catastrophe in human history...

...So let's convert the company's infrastructure to churn out trolley cars, monorails, passenger trains, truly green buses.

FDR forced Detroit to manufacture the tanks, planes and guns that won World War 2 (try buying a 1944 Chevrolet!). Now let a reinvented GM make the "weapons" to win the climate war and energy independence.

It demands re-tooling and re-training. But GM's special role in history must now evolve into using its infrastructure to restore the mass transit system---and ecological balance---it has helped destroy.

Meanwhile, The New York Times has a great op-ed by Robert Goodman on how the big three auto companies should become "transportmakers" which make all manner of public transport in exchange for our bailing them out.

What about companies that already make transit systems? Should they be put of business just so the federal government can make GM pay for past crime against humanity? OKC should not look to Europe as a way to build a mass transit system. They should look to Perth, Australia.

Here is a photo of Perths downtown rail station. This is just the passenger loading platforms for 3 of the 4 lines that service the station. Notice how this one little piece dwarfs the entire Union Station site.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1143/1468078972_7f080d50e6.jpg?v=0

And how bout how its COVERED!!! Find me someone that wants to stand on a platform in OKC in the winter with ) degree temps and a 30 mph wind. Not gonna happen. We'll need a real platform like the Perth one or people aren't going to be interested.

I disagree that on the argument that OKC should not look to Europe on how to build mass transit systems. Having said that, I am not suggesting we follow anyone. Europe has a lot of regular speed rail and very high speed rail, like many other eastern countries, so they must have learned some lessons along the way.

Kerry- your pic of the platform in Perth makes a very good point. Look at how much of mass transit here in the U.S. puts people out in the elements. I agree with bomber, we have some of the craziest combinations of weather right here in OK. The days of dumping a bench on the side of the road as your 'new bus stop' or building a mass transit center that has everyone walking right back into the elements makes no sense.

Projects/Programs (http://www.rideuta.com/projects/commuterrail/default.aspx)

I actually think a street grade network of trolleys would be great for OKC. They are quite and since they are just one car they coud go through neighborhoods without making a lot of noise. What would be cool is if they didn't even have traditional stations. Just stand along the street and flag one down (like a taxi). When you want to get off push a button and you get off at the next intersection.

http://www.stb.dot.gov/filings/all.nsf/516f705cf0299f92852575060024b741/cac7cf51d641d7fa852574f9006e5905/$FILE/223917.PDF

Isn't a trolley just a bus with better skin tone and breath? :)

Here is the one big difference between a trolley and a bus - permanence. Once tracks are laid the likelihood that the route would be altered is very small. This gives developers assurances that the system will stay in place. Bus routes change all of the time so they don't generate any development along their route.

Imagine if the area inside of I-240, I-44, and I-35 could be completely navigated without a car.

Posted on Mon, Nov. 17, 2008


Winging It: Amtrak will be key part of Obama's plans
By Tom Belden

Last week's column focused on how policies of the Obama administration are likely to affect airlines and the travel business. I didn't have room to say all I wanted to about what may be the most striking change in store in the transport arena: how Amtrak and other passenger-rail service will be treated by the White House.
Barack Obama's campaign outlined an ambitious effort to support not just the service Amtrak already provides but development of new high-speed intercity rail corridors and public transportation in urban areas.

The president-elect's platform made its case in part by linking those needs to cutting our thirst for expensive fossil fuel, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and spurring the economy by rebuilding the nation's transportation infrastructure, including airports and highways.

If you've ridden an Amtrak train recently, you may know how timely these efforts are. Thanks in part to record gasoline prices and the hassles and cost of air travel, the once-ridiculed, often less-than-perfect railroad is carrying record numbers of customers and collecting more revenue than ever before.

At peak times, it's standing-room only on some trains. Amtrak warned last summer that, at times, it doesn't have enough rail cars in good working order to meet the demand.

In the 2008 fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, Amtrak carried 14 percent more customers and collected 18 percent more revenue than it did the year before. It was the sixth straight year of increases. Some routes saw increases of more than 30 percent and virtually all of its 43 routes nationwide carried at least 6 percent more passengers.

This upward trend was broken in October, when traffic fell on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor, most likely because of lower gas prices and the deteriorating economy reducing business travel.

But Amtrak patronage elsewhere continued to grow last month, as it has been doing for several years. At one time, half of the railroad's riders were on Northeast Corridor trains. Today, it's 38 percent because of the growth on routes in the rest of the country.

Among the reasons for that growth is that numerous states, including Pennsylvania, help support short- and medium-distance Amtrak trains that are just the kinds business and leisure travelers want - especially when gas hits $4 a gallon.

Public transit systems, both those that operate trains and those with buses only, have had an increase in riders this year as well. They carried 5.2 percent more passengers in the second quarter, compared with 2007; those are the latest figures available and represent growth before gas prices surged this summer.

The American Public Transportation Association says 85 percent of the systems, like Amtrak, also lack the capacity they need to meet peak-hour demand.

Fortunately, Congress responded this year to decades of starvation budgets for Amtrak by passing a five-year, $13 billion reauthorization bill that President Bush signed. If Congress appropriates funds as the bill envisions, it should give Amtrak money to begin making up for past shortages, including the lack of equipment to meet peak demand.

Over the last 25-plus years, three Republican presidents and members of Congress, aided by some Democrats, have worked to dismantle Amtrak, contending that it's not used by enough travelers to justify annual operating subsidies of a million dollars or more.

If people in the Northeast or other heavily populated areas want passenger trains, this argument goes, they should form regional compacts and subsidize them themselves. But long-distance trains are a thing of the past and don't deserve taxpayer support, the critics say.

Congress has repeatedly rejected this approach, voting to keep a national passenger system in place, a position that a majority of Americans have said in surveys they agree with.

I have always considered the position of the Amtrak critics specious. Transportation systems have been a government function since the Romans started building roads and can't exist unless all taxpayers - not just those who use them - support them.

Airlines use airports that today are largely self-sufficient, collecting revenue from passengers. But most of them - including Philadelphia International - were built years ago at taxpayer expense. The air-traffic control system is supported both by user fees and all taxpayers. Some of the cost of aviation security also is borne by all of us.

Likewise, highways and city streets aren't built and maintained solely with gasoline tax revenue from motorists. When you back out of your driveway to start an out-of-town trip, you're on a public street that your property and income taxes helped pay for, on your way to an airport your grandparents helped build.

Perhaps we now have an administration in Washington that understands the role that all forms of transportation have in mobility and economic development.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Tom Belden
at 215-854-2454 or tbelden@phillynews.com.

The sooner we can get rid of a nation rail system and spend that money on regional rail systems the better.

If you've ridden an Amtrak train recently, you know how time consuming it is. If cross country and interstate passenger rail is ever going to work in this country, we are going to have to have high speed rail, or we're going to have to go to the European system of giving everyone six weeks vacation in the late summer and fall. You cannot use Amtrak for a typical American vacation, because the transit eats up a significant portion of the vacation time.

Even high speed rail is time consuming. My son takes the Skinkansen from Tokyo to Nagasaki to visit his girlfriend, and it takes 5+ hours to get there. If he flys, it takes less than two hours. The price is not significantly better for the bullet train. Again, practicality has to be a significant part of the discussion when we plan for future transportation in this country.

3 days from OKC to LA...without delays.

Yeah, I agree betts, of all places to not have any high speed pax rail at all. It does take forever as it is now.

BTW- did anybody watch the report on union station on channel 9 this evening (5pm)?

Nope. What did they say?

It was a pretty even report. They talked about the folks that are fighting the i-40 vs union station issue and then they interviewed a guy from ODOT and a guy from OnTrac. It wasn't too in-depth and if I didn't have some knowledge on the subject, I might have been confused after the report.

Betts and all that may not have seen the report, here is the link with video...

News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | Group Wants to Derail Crosstown (http://www.news9.com/Global/story.asp?S=9380766&nav=menu681_2/)

OnTrac is off track in my book. They seriously try to claim that ODOT intentionally didn't maintain I-40 so they could move it south as part of some clandestine operation to destroy the possibility of creating a national rail hub at Union Station. How delusional are these people? What a bunch of crack-pots.

They're coming to take me away,
Haha, they're coming to take me away,
Ho ho, hee hee, ha ha,
To the funny farm
Where Life is Beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those Nice Young Men
In their Clean White Coats
And they're coming to take me AWAY,
HA HAAAAA

Excellent report by Alex Cameron.

Tom Elmore and his mousy friend at OnTrac want to quash any logical discussion of this because they realize that it blows their argument out of the water.

They have no regard for the Latino community center or the Little Flower Church. They have no regard for the people that drive the dangerous crosstown every day. They have no regard for the taxpayers that don't want another 100 million tacked on to the project and years of delay so I-40 can be moved. And they have no willingness whatsoever to discuss a compromise that would have Union Station as a rail station using the two tracks that will remain.

OnTrac is off track in my book. They seriously try to claim that ODOT intentionally didn't maintain I-40 so they could move it south as part of some clandestine operation to destroy the possibility of creating a national rail hub at Union Station. How delusional are these people? What a bunch of crack-pots.


No doubt! I thought to myself there, why would ODOT intentionally endanger the lives of other Oklahomans (probably themselves included) to keep the elevated portion open any longer. That guy that Cameron interviewed wasn't Old Downtown Guy was it? He sure acted like it.

I'm glad News 9 did this story, as well as the Governor issuing a statement saying the matter is a done deal. Now we can let this thread rightfully die.

I for one am glad the governor finally weighed in on this. Once and for all, we know that the rail folks will no longer get in the way of progress for some ridiculously flawed vision of mediocrity.

New conspiracy theory - the Governor is a closet Mormon.

November 20, 2008
AMERICANS SUPPORT NEW TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT
(....but not in Oklahoma....)

Americans overwhelmingly support new transportation investments
The results of November’s Presidential election may have represented a change for our country, but at least one trend at the ballot box remained unchanged from the past few elections: Taxpayers across the country approved a bevy of ballot measures to expand public transportation, commuter rail, bike and pedestrian access, and other innovative transportation projects.

It’s perhaps most telling that even in a time of brutal economic crises and expensive gas, taxpayers voted for 14 initiatives that will raise their taxes. In short, we seem to be collectively tired of business-as-usual — more highways, all the time, resulting in only more congestion, with no coherent vision for world-class transportation in our cities and communities — and we are willing to pay out of our own pockets for solutions that can get us out of traffic and keep us moving. Hit the jump for the details.

At least 23 transportation-related initiatives were approved nationwide, meaning that more than $75 billion will soon be flowing into our transportation networks. There were big victories in California with Measure R in Los Angeles (read our Q&A with the campaign director) and Proposition 1A statewide that will provide the initial financing for a high-speed rail system from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

In 2007, Seattle voters gave a collective “thumbs down” to a transit funding package that would have expanded rail and bus service — but also included funding for roads and highways. This year, Sound Transit brought a new proposal to the ballot box that stripped out the road and highway provisions, but added 34 additional miles of light rail, expanded bus service and a 15 year timeline for construction. This time, Seattle voters approved the $17.8 billion sales tax package 58 to 42 percent.

Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, told the Wall Street Journal that this year was perhaps even more telling than the past few elections with transportation ballot measures:

“Before the election, we wondered what was going to weigh most on voters,” he said. “…the recent memory of $4 per gallon gas or concerns about the economy. It was pretty clear people voted for the future. The page has turned on transportation in America.”

Pretty soon, there will likely be skilled workers from the reeling automotive industry looking for work, where demand is guaranteed to fall well short of their production capacity, bailout or no. Why, what in the world could we build to put a large number of skilled laborers to work?

Siemens, which makes train equipment for both light rail and high-speed rail, plans to bid on many of the recently approved projects, and expects its annual revenue from light-rail projects in the U.S. to grow 50% to $300 million in coming years. It has a three-year backlog for railcar orders and is hiring 200 additional workers in coming months.

“When you go through an election cycle like we just went through, it confirms the strategy we put together,” said Robin Stimson, vice president of business development for Siemens Transportation Systems Inc. “It’s related to the outlook that the rail renaissance will continue to grow.”

Executives at niche locomotive builder Brookville Equipment Corp., say it has expanded employment 25% to 200 workers in the past year, and has added 24,000 square feet to its production facility in Brookville, Pa. The company expects sales to double this year to $50 million and has order backlogs until 2011.

And that’s only with the very modest increases in rail and public transportation investments in this country. Imagine if we really got serious about investing in 21st Century transportation? It’s time to return America to the position of worldwide envy for our transportation system.

Did November 4th’s successful ballot measures get us there? Of course not. But it was a very good start.

Read an exhaustive rundown on transportation ballot measures from the Center for Transportation Excellence. And don’t miss Ryan Avent’s wonderful piece on Grist detailing how investing in transit is a sound economic decision for the future.

November 20, 2008
AMERICANS SUPPORT NEW TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT
(....but not in Oklahoma....)

NO, TOM, YOU ARE WRONG. Mass transit was voted top priority for Maps 3 by the citizens.

Just because we don't share YOUR vision for Union Station does not make us anti-rail or anti-mass trans. Frankly, I'm getting EXTREMELY tired of your single-minded, block-headed opinion.

NO, TOM, YOU ARE WRONG. Mass transit was voted top priority for Maps 3 by the citizens.

Just because we don't share YOUR vision for Union Station does not make us anti-rail or anti-mass trans. Frankly, I'm getting EXTREMELY tired of your single-minded, block-headed opinion.


Me too. Tom hire a PR firm, because you a turning more people off.

Me too. Tom hire a PR firm, because you a turning more people off.

Actually, in a way, Tom did hire a PR firm. He writes the script and Marion does all the talking for OffTrac. Same verse, same as the first...

I thought the new I-40 was an investment in transportation.

Tom Elmore - Yawnnnnnn.

JACKSONVILLE TRANSIT BLOG: FIGHT FOR OKC UNION STATION IS OUR FIGHT, TOO...

JACKSONVILLE TRANSIT: Sep 30, 2008 (http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/2008_09_30_archive.html)

oh dear lord Tom! That article is 5 months old and housed in their archives section. Let it die, please!

Attorney claims ODOT Crosstown request may have cost more time | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/3502/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

Attorney claims ODOT Crosstown request may have cost more time
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
By Ben Fenwick

A letter from the director of the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) to a federal board asking that board to “expeditiously issue” a ruling actually caused the ruling to be delayed further, according to an attorney.

SEVERAL MONTHS
COMMUTER RAIL PATHWAYS

The letter, dated Jan. 30 and sent by ODOT Director Gary Ridley to the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB), states that a pending decision by the board regarding a railway abandonment in the path of the proposed Crosstown Expressway relocation project is holding up construction and indicated $70 million in construction costs is at stake.

“If the department is to complete this vital relocation project in the affected area in a timely fashion, it must have clearance to proceed with the next segment of the project by March 2009,” Ridley wrote. “The contract at issue involves approximately $70 million in construction costs. … We ask now that the board expeditiously issue its decision.”

However, Fritz Kahn, a Washington, D.C., attorney who represents several entities opposed to the Crosstown relocation project, said the letter reopened the case for review as well as for competing filings, almost certainly ensuring a delay.

“That letter that was submitted on behalf of ODOT, though it was intended to urge the agency to render a decision, will have the practical effect of slowing things down,” Kahn said. “They (the STB) will now have to take that letter into consideration. (Opposed groups) responded, I responded … so, all those will need to be dealt with.”


SEVERAL MONTHS

Kahn estimated Ridley’s letter could delay the STB’s ruling by several months.


Ridley denied requests to be interviewed by Oklahoma Gazette.

David Streb, ODOT director of engineering, said Ridley only meant to facilitate a ruling from the STB. He said Ridley and ODOT didn’t intend for the letter to be treated as a filing in the case, although the letter was posted on the federal board’s Web site as a document in the case.

“We had no intention, nor do we feel it was a filing. It was just a reminder letter to illustrate that the STB ruling, the timeliness of it, could have impacts of us moving forward on the Crosstown Expressway,” Streb said. “It was just a reminder of the critical nature of the Crosstown Expressway, the desire to get that open in 2012. … It was just a reminder that we have a large construction project pending, based on the outcome of the ruling. It was just to point that fact out.”

The question before the board concerns a rail line situated in the proposed path of the $600 million Interstate 40 Crosstown relocation project. In June 2008, the STB ruled documents filed by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway claiming the line had not been used for two years — a requirement before a rail line is cut — were false. The board reopened the case and groups opposed to the relocation’s proposed pathway filed numerous disputes to block construction.


COMMUTER RAIL PATHWAYS

Marion Hutchison, communications director for one of those opposition groups, Oklahomans for New Transportation Alternatives Coalition (OnTrac), said ODOT plans to pave over the numerous commuter rail pathways behind the Union Station, thereby making a new commuter rail system in Oklahoma City almost impossible.


“They made assumptions there would be no public abandonment process and they just moved forward. That is not the case,” Hutchison said. “They are desperate and did this without approval, and now they are trying to pull a rabbit out of the hat … Ridley sent this letter saying they were about to lose funds. … I think it shows the concern at ODOT. They are very worried.”

Streb said the $70 million project being held up by the proceedings is the pouring of concrete over the rails behind the station. However, he insisted that the money is not necessarily going to be lost, but that the project will be held up.

“We have a large construction project in progress that will probably be in excess of $70 million dollars. It involves the semi-depressed section in the area behind Union Station,” he said. “We’re getting close to the point that, in order to hold our 2012 opening date, this will have to come to resolve fairly soon or our ability to open the new Crosstown Expressway in 2012 may be compromised … it will build the foundation for the new Crosstown Expressway right behind Union Station.” —Ben Fenwick

Published November 22, 2008 01:14 am - Editor, The Transcript:
An open letter to Gov. Brad Henry:
The League of Women Voters of Norman sincerely urges you to take the initiative as Governor to issue a moratorium on relocation of the Interstate 40 Crosstown Expressway through the state-owned Oklahoma City Union Station rail yard.

IT'S NOT A CHOICE

Editor, The Transcript:

An open letter to Gov. Brad Henry:

The League of Women Voters of Norman sincerely urges you to take the initiative as Governor to issue a moratorium on relocation of the Interstate 40 Crosstown Expressway through the state-owned Oklahoma City Union Station rail yard. We further believe that the Santa Fe Station, whose terminal building is privately owned and whose narrow, elevated yard already handles in excess of 40 fast freight trains each day, is clearly not a candidate to become our regional transit hub.

This issue affects every community in Oklahoma that has rail service to and thorough Oklahoma City, and it is pivotal to the future of passenger and freight transportation statewide. The development of modern multi-modal transportation systems is central in the effort to reduce the harmful emissions of fossil fuels and to increase economic opportunities.

Oklahomans for New Transportation Alternatives Coalition (OnTrac) has consulted transportation experts and engineers about the possibility of realigning a segment of the Crosstown Expressway so that it would fall 200-300 feet south of the Union Station rail yard on right-of-way owned by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT). It appears that realignment is definitely feasible. To date five communities - Norman, Chickasha, El Reno, Shawnee, and Lawton -- have passed resolutions petitioning you to convene a special commission to consider realignment proposals. ODOT is vigorously opposing any effort to consider an alternative plan which would save the Oklahoma City rail yard.

This is not a choice between the Crosstown or Union Station rail yard. The Crosstown can be relocated, but once the rail yard is destroyed, the cost of acquiring land and rebuilding a station with space for multiple rail lines would be astronomical. We believe that this lost opportunity would adversely affect the future of Oklahoma indefinitely.

BARBARA ROBINSON

President, League of Women Voters, Norman

Are we seriously still talking about this crap? The same old tired and pointless (and irrelevant) arguements come from the rail folks and again, WE'RE PAST THIS SO LET IT DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And if you cause a delay in the cross town folks, I gurantee you will be one of the most hated groups of people in OKC and will have thousands of people wanting to punch your face in.

How much money have Norman, Lawton, Chickasha, El Reno and Shawnee offered to support these rail lines they think they need so badly? Have they done the studies showing how many passengers they'll have traveling to OKC daily? And, since there's no freight there now, how is it going to affect to movement of freight between their cities and OKC differently?

10.7 Billion Trips Taken On U.S. Public Transportation In 2008 -- Highest Level in 52 Years; Ridership Increased as Gas Prices Declined and Jobs Were Lost Transit News March 9, 2009

APTA: 10.7 Billion Trips Taken On U.S. Public Transportation In 2008 -- Highest Level in 52 Years; Ridership Increased as Gas Prices Decline and Jobs Were Lost (http://www.apta.com/media/releases/090309_ridership.cfm)

contacts:

Virginia Miller
(202) 496-4816
vmiller@apta.com

Despite falling gas prices and an economic recession, increasing numbers of Americans took 10.7 billion trips on public transportation in 2008, the highest level of ridership in 52 years and a modern ridership record, according to a report released today by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). This represents a 4.0 percent increase over the number of trips taken in 2007 on public transportation, while at the same time, vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) on our nation’s roads declined by 3.6 percent in 2008, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

“Even as gas prices fell for the second half of the year and hundreds of thousands of people lost jobs, more and more people chose to ride public transportation throughout the country,” said APTA president William W. Millar. “Given our current economic condition, people are looking for ways to save money and taking public transportation offers a substantial savings of more than $8,000 a year. That’s quite a savings.”

This ridership record continues a long term trend of ridership growth. Public transportation use is up 38% percent since 1995, a figure that is almost triple the growth rate of the population (14 percent) and up substantially over the growth rate for the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on our nation’s highways (21%) for that same period.

Millar announced the ridership increase before more than 600 public transit leaders at an APTA conference in Washington, D.C. He noted that the record ridership shows the clear demand for public transit and compelling need for increased investment at the federal, state, and local levels.

Millar also announced the launch of a new advocacy campaign, Public Transportation Takes Us There, which is aimed at building congressional support for the authorization of the federal surface transportation legislation, which expires Sept. 30, 2009.

“Now, more than ever, the value of public transportation is evident and the public has clearly demonstrated that they want and need more public transit services,” said Millar. “Public transportation is good for the economy, good for the environment and good for energy independence and now is the time for the federal government to increase its investment in public transportation.”

Beyond the need for greater public transit investment in a new federal surface transportation bill (the current one legislation expires September 30, 2009), and the 2010 appropriations bill, APTA is advocating for the inclusion of public transportation investment in any energy or climate change bill.

“Every year, public transportation saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline and reduces our nation’s carbon emissions by 37 million metric tons,” said Millar. “Clearly, public transportation is part of the solution for our country’s national goals of energy independence and carbon emissions reduction.

Millar also called on local and state governments to increase their investment in public transportation. Currently, transit systems are facing fare increases, service reductions, and layoffs – at a time of record ridership – because of declining state and local revenues.

2008 Ridership Breakdown
For the second year in a row, ridership on all modes of public transportation increased in every quarter. Light rail (modern streetcars, trolleys, and heritage trolleys) had the highest percentage of annual ridership increase among all modes, with an 8.3 percent increase in 2008. The light rail system that started in November 2007 in Charlotte, NC showed the highest percentage of increase with an annual 862 percent increase. The New Orleans, LA light rail system, which is still recovering from Hurricane Katrina, had an annual increase of 218 percent. Light rail systems with double digit ridership in 2008 were located in the following areas: Buffalo (23.9%); Philadelphia (23.3 %); Sacramento (14.4%); Baltimore (13.7%); Minneapolis (12.3%); Salt Lake City (12.3%); the state of New Jersey (10.9%); Denver (10.5%); and Dallas (10.2%).

Commuter rail increased in 2008 by 4.7 percent. The commuter rail systems with the double digit ridership growth rate in 2008 were located in the following areas: Albuquerque (35.1%); Portland, ME (26.5%); Seattle (23.8%); Pompano Beach, FL (22.9%); Harrisburg-Philadelphia (17.7%); New Haven (17.5%); Oakland (16.1%); Stockton, CA (14.7%); Dallas-Fort Worth (14.1%); San Carlos, CA (12.5%).

Heavy rail (subways) ridership increased by 3.5% in 2008. The heavy rail systems with the highest increases in ridership for 2008 were in the following cities: San Juan (13.3%); Lindenwold, NJ (9.9%); Atlanta (8.6%); Miami (8.2%), Boston (7.9%), and Los Angeles (7.7%).

Bus service saw an increase of 3.9 percent, but in communities with a population of less than 100,000, bus services saw an increase of 9.3 percent in 2008. Major increases by large bus agencies occurred in the following cities: Phoenix (11.5%); San Antonio (10.2%); San Diego (10.0%); St. Louis (8.9%); Baltimore (8.7%); and Denver (8.6%).

Demand response (paratransit) increased in 2008 by 5.9 percent.

To see the complete APTA ridership report go to APTA: Public Transportation Ridership Statistics (http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership)

For more information on public transportation’s role in climate change and energy independence, go to Public Transportation TAKES US THERE (http://publictransportation.org/takesusthere/)

***

APTA is a nonprofit international association of more than 1,500 member organizations including public transportation systems; planning, design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; and state associations and departments of transportation. APTA members serve the public interest by providing safe, efficient and economical public transportation services and products. APTA members serve more than 90 percent of persons using public transportation in the United States and Canada.

Tom, Union Station is not to be torn down by this project. ODOT engineers have provided plans showing there will be room for rail lines if this ever becomes an intermodal station. City leaders, meanwhile, say this station is not the best location for an intermodal station. I first covered your objections at least seven years ago.
The opposition cited seems to keep coming from Norman. What do you say to people who claim you are beating a very dead horse?

I'm also curious as to you answer to the questions by Betts. I'll reprint them again:
"How much money have Norman, Lawton, Chickasha, El Reno and Shawnee offered to support these rail lines they think they need so badly? Have they done the studies showing how many passengers they'll have traveling to OKC daily? And, since there's no freight there now, how is it going to affect to movement of freight between their cities and OKC differently?"

I'm not taking sides here. But I am trying to force you to address some new questions instead of repeating the same talking points given the past decade.
-Steve

While valid points, I don't know if I'd trust "city leaders" when it comes to knowing much on the topic of mass transit.

Well and since when have Tom or his groupies been concerned with relevant facts? He'll find you all sorts of articles that have absolutely nothing to do with anything, but that's as far as he can go.

Music City Star - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_City_Star)

That building really is cool. I have occassion to go there often as we do work for COTPA. Amazing building.

Well and since when have Tom or his groupies been concerned with relevant facts? He'll find you all sorts of articles that have absolutely nothing to do with anything, but that's as far as he can go.

What I like is that six minutes after you posted this, it happened.

Let's see now. ODOT's worried because it was proven BNSF falsified evidence so that it got thrown out. Attorney claims ODOT Crosstown request may have cost more time | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/3502/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

And Tom Elmore is never right but is winning legal battles.

Things that make you go hmmm....