DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS PRESENT MASS TRANSIT PROPOSAL TO CITY COUNCIL

Oklahoma City, OK – Urban Neighbors (U.N.), downtown’s residents association, presented a comprehensive 3-page report to the OKC City Council this morning requesting that the underutilized downtown trolley system (A MAPS I project) be reviewed and updated to meet modern demands. Presenting copies of the 3-page report to City Council were U.N. Board Members Mark Gibbs and Brian Hammond.

“We are very optimistic that Mayor Cornett and the City Council will recognize the need for a massive revamp of our mass transit system in this city, and be receptive to overhauling the system so that it might meet the needs of downtown residents, workers and visitors. We anticipate Mayor Cornett and the City Council will come up with a comprehensive plan and solution over the next few months and create a line in next year’s operating budget for a more functional trolley system. The downtown transit system must also make sense for the future as well by being environmentally friendly,” said Urban Neighbors Board Member Jeff Bezdek. The most challenging aspect of the current system is that it does not efficiently serve the needs of the growing and diversified downtown community. “As an organization we are dedicated to bringing vital issues concerning downtown to the city. Urban Neighbors is proud to be a vital link between the City of OKC and downtown residents” Bezdek further commented.

“Our hope is that this will be an important first step with the city in creating a modern mass transit system to meet downtown needs” Bezdek added. On August 19th, Mayor Cornett and City Council is expected to attend a workshop with Metro Transit at the OKC Zoo’s conference facilities. At the downtown transit workshop the city leaders are expected to learn about the current downtown trolley system, how it operates, its’ problems as well as come to their own conclusions on how they might be able to tackle the issues. The workshop will be open to the public; however citizens will not be allowed to comment at the workshop. The public is encouraged to attend and show their support for a modern mass transit system for Oklahoma City.

On a related note, just before the U.N. Transportation Subcommittee presented the comprehensive downtown transit report to the Mayor and City Council, a Citizen Survey Report was submitted to the City Council. The Citizen Survey Report addresses issues such as perception of the city, quality of life, traffic, code enforcement and other issues. Interestingly enough, once again mass transportation was a high priority from citizens.

“The time is now for our great city to truly take a transformation in becoming a Big League City. The next logical step as a city is an efficient mass-transit system. Research over the last several years shows several health benefits in relation to mass transit systems. People have a tendency to walk more if they have access to an efficient mass transit system” said U.N. Board Member Steven Newlon.

People also have a propensity to visit local attractions more by foot and to bike to transit centers as well. This is perfect time to encourage the fitness benefits to mass transit while Mayor Cornett and the City are promoting the “This City is Going on a Diet” campaign, Newlon added.

Some of the highlights of the U.N.’s official report to the City of OKC include the following:

• Downtown’s area and use has changed dramatically over last decade
• The existing trolley system is poorly understood by public
• Low ridership on key routes
• Timings and actual arrivals at trolley stops are inconsistent
• Stops are poorly identified
• Stops feature limited information (route maps, schedule times, and actual arrivals)
• Hours of service are limited and poorly advertised
• Onboard stop information is inconsistent or not available
• Existing system is not configured for 2008 or future ridership demographics.


The U.N. Transportation Subcommittee recommends that a detailed analysis be conducted of potential new routes. Public and private input must be solicited from business, residential, development, entertainment, and tourism stakeholders. The input gathered should identify routes that service these various demographics, in order to maintain good ridership levels during all operational hours. Certain specific demographics may entice more direct routes, but stability and consistent ridership will help maintain the health of the system. Also, a diverse and eclectic ridership would justify a broadened daily operational period.

A comprehensive public information and marketing campaign must be implemented to increase awareness and ridership of the reprogrammed system. Such marketing will reinforce the accessibility and utility of the system to all potential user demographics. In addition, the ridership experience will be improved with vehicle operators that are trained in enhanced customer service. The personal interface between "trolley" operators and riders should follow the "Downtown Ambassador" model. Vehicle operators must be helpful in assisting customers with diverse knowledge of downtown, vehicle stops, points of interest and available amenities. They should also assist residents who have special needs including the proper stowage of physical items.

Data was collected by Urban Neighbors from downtown residents, workers and visitors over the course of several months. The Urban Neighbors Transportation Subcommittee noted in its initial surveys and interaction with potential users that increased fares to cover enhanced services would be acceptable. The subcommittee emphasizes that the existing "trolley like" bus vehicles have a limited life expectancy and encourages the benefits and experience of a reprogrammed system to be migrated over to permanent future solutions. There is a great desire for a modern transportation solution that can permanently service the downtown and central city where density levels are increasing significantly. The success of improvements to the existing system will assist in the future development of transportation in all areas of the Oklahoma City Metroplex.


Website: Home | Urban Neighbors (http://www.urbanneighbors.org)

----------------------------------------------------------

There has been strong public interest throughout OKC recently about the City's public transportation system. Metro Transit is organizing an informational workshop for the City Council starting at 8:30 am at the OKC Zoo Educational Center on Tuesday, August 19. The public will not be allowed to speak but a strong showing by the public will show our support for improving the Downtown trolley system.

What? Still no proposals to serve the rest of the city? What a joke! Lawton has better bus coverage than OKC does. I would venture to say that Oklahoma City has the worst bus system of any medium to large city in the United States. You cannot even ride the bus to Tinker, where more than 20,000 people are employed.

You can call it Metro Transit, Mass Trans, or what ever they use to be called and they have never been worth riding. They deliberately put together half hearted routes that are not dependable so no one will ride them and then use the low ridership as an excuse not to invest in a real bus system. What good is the trolley downtown if you cannot go anywhere on them?

Every major artery in the metro should have regular bus routes that require no longer than one hour wait up until at least 10:00 PM. If they were to seriously do this consistently, I guarantee you there would be lots of people riding the bus. Not just poor people. I have lived in several cities that all income levels rode the bus but then again they had a real bus system that could be depended upon. Looks like we have the same old non committal half baked bus system plans for the future.

This looks great! As a publishing type, however, I can see a few edits. Still, this is an impressive report.

They deliberately put together half hearted routes that are not dependable so no one will ride them and then use the low ridership as an excuse not to invest in a real bus system.

Spot on. The leadership of this city for the last 40 years has been hostile to transit. For some reason, the concept of it is threatening to them and other Oklahomans. Maybe it's just a little too urban.

WE have a window NOW to do something about mass transit in OKC. If we don't do it now, it will never happen.

plmcord, keep in mind this is a statement coming from DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION. You make true statements about the whole city needing coverage, but this a association representing needs of people who live downtown. I encourage you to organize something on a much larger scale that encompasses the entire city as well as to attend the city council's transit workshop at the zoo on Aug. 19th. Not to mention as soonerguru pointed out, we have a window now to do something. The city isn't going to build a multi-billion dollar system from scratch. To get it to work in this city, it will have to be a downtown circular that will easily get supported, and then build it out from there. Given how our city has operated for decades, this is probably the only realistic way to get a modern system in place.

metro,

That's a great point, but the city may be overlooking how interested in transit the citizens are. If the city leaders put it in MAPS III, we will get it. The citizens will vote for MAPS III.

Also, people may be more inclined to support it if they felt it was somewhat substantive. A circular route downtown may appear limited to tourist uses, which may or may not address citizen needs / desires. Were that the case, some people may vote against it.

Hopefully, OKC won't be too timid about going after the transit solutions. The more encompassing it is, the better the city will be in the long run, both in having quality transportation, but also in greater density and a stimulus for greater urban development. This will also lead to more federal investment for the city over time.

Transit is about the most intelligent investment the city could possibly make.

I completely understand that. I'm one of the ones working behind the scenes on this effort. It'd be nice to have more citizens put their money where their mouth is. Show up at COPTA meetings, City Council meetings, etc. Sadly, it's been almost all talk by citizens. PLEASEEEEEEEEEE attend the City Council's transit workshop on the 19th if any of you can. Again, citizens won't get to talk, but our presence will speak volumes to the City Council that the public does care about mass transit and to getting them to put a line item in next years budget for mass transit. It is a very real possibility. This first phase wouldn't require a public vote, the city is already realizing their is a problem for tourists/downtown residents/workers. That's over 60,000 people alone. This would definitely be successful if implemented properly, THEN the public and city would see how successful a modern system could be and then a broader system can go to a public vote for MAPS 3.

Just so I understand, the line item is to improve the embarrassing trolley system, right?

Hopefully. Make it more reliable and user friendly basically. They threw $500,000 of city money for the river boats to nowhere, think of what that or more could do for the trolleys. Possibly adjust the routes, add more trolleys, make them more reliable, advertise them, etc. If the city could throw $2 million at their budget next year, that'd do wonders if executed properly. That's part of the reason the city council is having a workshop with COPTA, to find out what is broken with the system and come up with a realistic way of fixing it. MAPS 3 will come in time, but mass transit is a chicken and egg dilemma with this city. Got to have something in place that works before we'll get a full blown system.

I can't believe they funded a penny of the river boat. What a joke.

Good work on this metro and company. I look forward to seeing the city council act on this. They would be incredibly foolish not to.

Bravo! However, I agree with the rest of the city idea as well. Today, I drove down Western and was appalled at the bus stop situation that exists for riders. I'm going to be out of town on the 19th, unfortunately,as I'd love to attend that meeting.

Do you have an address for that meeting?

It's at the Zoo.

Do you have an address for that meeting?

8:30 am at the OKC Zoo Educational Center on Tuesday, August 19. I imagine you could Google the OKC Zoo's address.

Zoo location:
Directions - Oklahoma City Zoo (http://www.okczoo.com/plan-your-visit/directions/)

Making the downtown trolley better is a good short-term solution and will be useful for residents and visitors alike. We need to be discussing long-term mass-transit solutions at the same time so we can start the planning (not studies but actual planning such as costs, a time schedule, stop locations, etc.). I still think connecting the OUHSC to downtown and the blvd. via Auto Alley is the best way to begin when it comes to fixed rail in the central city. However commuter rail to Norman/Edmond should be the first rail endeavor IMO.

Residents association blasts downtown transit

Urban Neighbors, downtown Oklahoma City's residents association, presented a three-page report to the Oklahoma City Council on Tuesday requesting changes to the Oklahoma Spirit trolley system to meet "modern demands.”
The report by Urban Neighbors board members Mark Gibbs and Brian Hammond called the system inadequate and in need of overhaul.

Some of the highlights of the group's official report to the city:

•Downtown's use has changed dramatically over past decade.

•The existing trolley system is poorly understood by public.

•Low ridership on key routes.

•Timings and actual arrivals at trolley stops are inconsistent.

•Stops are poorly identified.

•Hours of service are limited and poorly advertised.

•Existing system is not configured for future ridership demographics.


City Council appoints Bricktown consultant
The Oklahoma City Council on Tuesday unanimously approved spending up to $75,000 to hire consultant Robert Charles Lester & Co. to draw up a master development plan for Bricktown.
The contract calls for the firm to come up with suggested land uses, leasing and marketing strategies, and to identify obstacles to development.

On the town: Wednesday August 13, 2008 | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/on-the-town-wednesday-august-13-2008/article/3282687/?tm=1218591534)

San Francisco trolley cars are thought of as tourist-only transports. But the straphangers < 9:00 a.m. and > 4:00 p.m. are a lot of locals commuting to/from work. As it would be here for the U.N. gang.

If anyone is interested KSBI 52 will be having a segment on their 5:30pm and 6:30pm news as will OETA 13 have a nice piece on this at 6:30pm. Let's keep the dialogue in front of the city on mass transit. The more dialogue, the more chance for a real change for mass transit in this city.

I like the Bricktown master plan idea. Maybe we can start getting rid of the surface parking.

Now You've Done It... You Just Had to Egg Me On (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2008/08/13/um-yeah/)

Now You’ve Done It… You Just Had to Egg Me On

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/files/2008/08/trolley.jpg

Former MetroTransit director Randy Hume, back when trolleys were shinny and new, and could be counted on to hit pretty much every corner of downtown every 10 minutes (and five minutes during the lunch hour). Sure, the map wasn’t easy to follow, but compare it to what’s out there today (if you can find it on COTPA’s web site).

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/files/2008/08/transitmap.jpg

Steve Newlon, a board member with Urban Neighbors, suggested we go a bit more in-depth on the blog with the group’s report on public transit. I couldn’t agree more. So let’s take a look at their actual report:


TASK- The UN Transportation Subcommittee has reviewed the Public Transportation options in the Downtown area. This review of current transportation ability was stimulated by concerns regarding the success and programming of the existing system.

ASSESMENT- Urban Neighbors has solicited input from its membership of downtown residents and workers as well as tourists and the general public. We have engaged in a fruitful dialogue with Metro Transit and we have reviewed available information and opinions to analyze the current situation.

FINDINGS- The subcommittee realizes that the current available transit service is faced with many challenges. The downtown areas use has changed dramatically over the past decade with new potential transit users and trip needs. The existing transit system is-

1. Poorly understood by the General Public (my comment: Urban Neighbors is being kind. How much time and money has been invested into educating the public about the Oklahoma Spirit trolleys compared to what has been spent on the new river cruisers?)

2. Faces low ridership on key routes (ah, but why? When the trolleys started, they had much better ridership. Numbers dropped as MetroTransit lengthened wait times, trimmed service and lengthened routes? Coincidence?)

3. Timings and actual arrivals at stops are inconsistent (Um, yeah)

4. Stops are poorly identified (Um, yeah)

5. Stops feature limited information (Route maps, schedule times and

actual arrivals) (Um, yeah)


6. Hours of service are limited and poorly advertised (um, yeah)

7. Onboard stop information is inconsistent or not available (um, yeah)

8. Existing system is not configured for 2008 and future ridership demographics in 2008 and the future (um, yeah)

(Come on folks, is all you’ve got? Other complaints I’ve heard include the “friendliness” of the drivers and the upkeep of the trolleys).

The primary existing downtown service is provided by the “trolley-like” bus vehicles funded through the MAPS I initiative. Some parts of this service have been discontinued due to low ridership or funding pressures since its inception. Some operational funding has been redirected from downtown to other areas at various times over the 10 years of operation. The existing system is poorly understood by the general public.

This confusion has caused poor ridership on routes that should exhibit higher ridership. Existing and new riders are often challenged by the inconsistent service delivery. In our assessment period, we received many complaints regarding late or no arrivals. While several stops are clearly identified at the Ford

Center, OKC National Memorial, and Bricktown, most stops are not clearly obvious.

Many stops appear undistinguishable from standard bus stops unless directly read by pedestrian traffic. These “regular” stops feature only limited signage and do not display running time, actual arrival time, and projected arrival time. Actual riders of the system have responded that the information regarding upcoming stops and or points of interest are not consistently conveyed by onboard signage or audible announcement.

(Interesting note here: way, way back when, back when the trolleys were launched a decade ago, I asked then MetroTransit director Randy Hume if they had thought about using exterior trolley signs like those used by similar shuttles in San Antonio that clearly identified major attractions along the route. Randy told me then they’d “think about it.” Here’s another question: how much would a half dozen or so signs cost compared to what’s being spent on advertising for the river cruisers? Yes, I’ll keep bringing up this comparison because the river cruisers were launched as a form of public transit. Should a city be ensuring existing transit is being well run and funded before launching into an entirely new and untested form of public transit?)

The most challenging aspect of the current system is that it does not efficiently serve the needs of the growing and diversified downtown community. Existing routes and stops are primarily configured for tourism. (Here’s another question: was the west route, the Orange route, based on need or political interests? Before the River Cruisers started up, the Orange Route was averaging 11 passengers a day).

New citizen demographics and needs have evolved with new residential, office, health care and medical research development. Diversified business growth, new neighborhood corridors, and continued entertainment development lead to increased demand for Public Transportation, especially as fuel costs rise.

SOLUTIONS

1. Conduct detailed analysis to establish new routes

2. Determine reprogramming operational costs

3. Reprogram system routes

4. Rehabilitate existing vehicles

5. Design and install distinctive stop locations

6. Improve and expand hours of service

7. Use current technology to improve user information of scheduled and actual arrivals

8. Embark on comprehensive marketing and information campaign

9. Improve onboard experience with automated and consistent stop announcements

10. New infrastructure should be designed for easy migration to a modern, ecological, customer friendly transit system The Transportation Subcommittee recommends that a detailed analysis should be conducted of potential new routes.

Public and private input must be solicited from business, residential, development, entertainment, and tourism stakeholders. The input gathered should identify routes that service these various demographics, in order to maintain good ridership levels during all operational hours.

Certain specific demographics may entice more direct routes, but stability and consistent ridership will help maintain the health of the system. Also, a diverse and eclectic ridership would justify a broadened daily operational period. Upon considering the data collected from stakeholders and available statistics, an optimal transit routing solution must be priced out. The system should be reprogrammed to the level of funds available and desired for further economic development.

The existing operational “trolley-like” vehicles should be rehabilitated cosmetically and functionally for their remaining three years before they are life-expired. They should be reprogrammed with new onboard features for their prospective new uses. Bins, shelving, cargo nets, and other storage amenities should be incorporated to assist with groceries and other physical goods.

Current technology should be incorporated for automated GPS activated audible and visual indicators regarding upcoming stops and tourist interest. The vehicle routes should be more clearly identified via vehicle colors or the reinstatement of the colored flag bumper indicators. Such enhancements will distinguish vehicles for pedestrian interaction. Distinctive, downtown-specific stop designators should be designed to incorporate operational information.

These designators should also include current technology with GPS displays or audible signal to indicate the actual arrival time of a vehicle. Such designators could also incorporate kiosk features with additional relevant information. They should also be designed for authorized removal and transfer to new locations for future system upgrades or re-alignment. A comprehensive public information and marketing campaign must be implemented to increase awareness and ridership of the reprogrammed system. Such marketing will reinforce the accessibility and utility of the system to all potential user demographics. In addition, the ridership experience should be improved with vehicle operators that are trained in enhanced customer service.

The personal interface between “trolley” operators and riders should follow the “Downtown Ambassador” model. Vehicle operators should be helpful in assisting customers with diverse knowledge of downtown, vehicle stops, points of interest, and available amenities. They should also assist downtown residents who have special needs including the proper stowage of physical items.

OTHER FINDINGS- The Urban Neighbors Transportation Subcommittee noted in its initial surveys and interaction with potential users that increased fares to cover enhanced services would be acceptable. The subcommittee emphasizes that the existing “trolley-like” bus vehicles have a limited life expectancy and encourages the benefits and experience of a re-programmed system to be migrated over to permanent future solutions. There is great desire for a modern transportation solution that can permanently service the downtown and central city where density levels increasingly significantly.


The success of improvements to the existing system should assist in the future development of transportation in all areas of the Oklahoma City metroplex.




(Final note: Don’t expect Urban Neighbors to be the only group to weigh in on the trolleys. Bricktown is next).

Would it be possible to make the trolleys free? If not, simply shortening the wait time and reliability would be extremely helpful. I think waiting time is the single biggest impediment to use, or, at least it is for me. If it's more than a ten to 15 minute wait, I'm going to walk. I don't mind walking, but others do.

It seems to me that if you make something free people will put up with a lot of inconveniences - even it just saves them 50 cents. Once you start charging to ride, people perception of what to expect changes.

Hey everyone,

I thought this article in today's NYT about an upcoming initiative in Cincinnati to add streetcars and light rail was applicable to this discussion:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/us/14streetcar.html

I live in Norman, but drive everyday to Oklahoma City - and have GREAT interest in any mass transit initiative. I agree that downtown OKC is the place to start, and I bet it would take off quickly if designed well. Ultimately, anything forward looking should include the metro as a whole - as a Norman resident, I totally vote yes on any regional initiative that would tie us into Oklahoma City with a more robust mass transit system.



www.unitedstatesofmichael.com

Good article michael, I'll see if I can get that into city council hands to see that we MUST do something about mass transit to stay competitive, or heck even just catch up.

All who are interested in attending the city council/Metro Transit workshop on the 19th, it got postponed until Sept. 30th due to Clara Luper Day being the 19th. Location is expected to remain the same. I will post more info as I receive it. We really need a good public turnout on Sept. 30th, to show there is a public demand for public transit. It won't be a workshop just for downtown needs, but for citywide transit needs.

Hey metro, I hope they do read it and that there are enough of us who show support at the grass roots level. Thanks for the heads up about the date change, I'll see if I can make it on the 30th...




www.unitedstatesofmichael.com

Hey everyone,

I thought this article in today's NYT about an upcoming initiative in Cincinnati to add streetcars and light rail was applicable to this discussion:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/us/14streetcar.html

I live in Norman, but drive everyday to Oklahoma City - and have GREAT interest in any mass transit initiative. I agree that downtown OKC is the place to start, and I bet it would take off quickly if designed well. Ultimately, anything forward looking should include the metro as a whole - as a Norman resident, I totally vote yes on any regional initiative that would tie us into Oklahoma City with a more robust mass transit system.



www.unitedstatesofmichael.com

There are many more just like you who commute to OKC from Norman, myself included. Tying Norman to OKC (along with Moore and Edmond) is good for the whole Metro. Not only does it offer an alternative to congested I-35 it helps our air quality and creates denser development and TOD's around stations.

Not trying to be inflamatory, but...
Why should OKC government effort and tax dollars go to establish mass transit/rail routes from Edmond/Guthrie and Moore/Norman, thereby encouraging urban sprawl and having a negative impact on the tax base in the city center? Do you see my point?

It won't happen unless Edmond, Guthrie, Moore, Norman and other outlying cities are willing to share the cost. And OKC leaders may appear to be against it because the negative impacts on urban renewal outweigh the positive impacts. Just my thoughts...

Not trying to be inflamatory, but...
Why should OKC government effort and tax dollars go to establish mass transit/rail routes from Edmond/Guthrie and Moore/Norman, thereby encouraging urban sprawl and having a negative impact on the tax base in the city center? Do you see my point?

It won't happen unless Edmond, Guthrie, Moore, Norman and other outlying cities are willing to share the cost. And OKC leaders may appear to be against it because the negative impacts on urban renewal outweigh the positive impacts. Just my thoughts...

That's exactly what I stated in another topic on this board. The connecting cities need to pay 30%-50% of the cost for installation & their stations. Look at DART in Dallas. Cities like Frisco have to front their part of the bill if they want the service!

Not trying to be inflamatory, but...
Why should OKC government effort and tax dollars go to establish mass transit/rail routes from Edmond/Guthrie and Moore/Norman, thereby encouraging urban sprawl and having a negative impact on the tax base in the city center? Do you see my point?

It won't happen unless Edmond, Guthrie, Moore, Norman and other outlying cities are willing to share the cost. And OKC leaders may appear to be against it because the negative impacts on urban renewal outweigh the positive impacts. Just my thoughts...

I'm fairly sure that's how it works in most every light-rail systems. The outlying communities have to agree to be included and then fund their portion of the system. No city is ever going to pay to service other communities (unless it's retail base really wants it to, but I don't see that happening ).

Of course Norman, Edmond, and Moore would have to "pay to play" so to speak. Every other commuter/light rail line that I know of works that way where the city and suburbs share the cost of connecting each other with the state and/or federal govt. helping pay the rest.

Salt Lake City is a good city to look at because it is very similar to OKC in terms of size and density. It also has a distinct north-south growth pattern similar to OKC that is now connected by commuter rail with 15 min. frequencies in stops during rush hour and 30 min. at other times from 5 am to midnight all week. I would hope our system would run until 2 or 3 am on weekends though.

A map of their system
http://www.rideuta.com/images/08NEWRailCarMap.jpg

The commuter rail cars (would be similar to what we would use on a Norman-Edmond line)
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2264/dsc00164da4.jpg

The light rail cars (similar to what we would use on a street-based line in downtown)
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/3828/dsc00179iq8.jpg

Map of what our system could be someday with commuter rail and light rail converging in downtown
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/okclightrail4.jpg

And just Metro commuter rail/Adventure District tourist train
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/OKCTRANSITcopy.jpg

Good post BG918. For those interested, FOX 25 Morning News interviewed me today on this same topic. It should air in their morning news tomorrow. I believe at the 6:30, 7:00 and 7:30am segments. Anyhow much more importantly, keep the dialogue going on mass transit, write your city councilperson and tell them how you feel. The City Council has moved their workshop to Sept. 30th, location is expected to be the same and time is TBD.

Here is a map of Houston's "starter line" which has been successful in linking the huge Texas Med. Center to downtown. It is also the basis for a much larger network.
http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/houston/images/img11.gif

Here is what OKC's starter line could look like, connecting the two main areas of employment in central OKC: OUHSC and downtown while also hitting the north end of the rapidly developing residential Triangle district, right through emerging retail corridor Auto Alley, right by Deep Deuce and Bricktown on E.K. Gaylord, and then down our new grand blvd. next to the Ford Center, future convention center, and park.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/okclightrail.jpg

Once the new convention center is built and the Cox is torn down and redeveloped it will be a great catalyst for high density growth on that site with light rail running next to it. If we can get some kind of streetcar along Sheridan (the "green line" mentioned here before) connecting the Arts District, Devon Tower, and Bricktown that would connect with this line at E.K. Gaylord that would really be good for connecting people in downtown. Add commuter rail from Edmond and Moore/Norman connecting at Santa Fe Depot (E.K Gaylord & Sheridan/Reno) and you suddenly have a viable transit system that could be used by thousands of people daily.

Wow. Can you imagine us having such a system! What a structure. Then no matter what happened with fuel pricing we could be set. In looking at this, and how important a feature that would be to our metro, it would be worth it to redesign our beautiful C2S around this idea. And to move I40 in accordance. It would give us the bones to support wonderful and sensible growth. It would benefit all socioeconomic classes. If it were possible.

The City has moved the Transportation workshop to Tuesday, September 16 from 8:30 - 11:30 am at the OKC ZOO, Educational Building. The public is strongly encouraged to attend. The workshop will be for mass transit issues for the city as a whole and not just the Downtown Trolley's. The more people that show, the better chance we have to continue to put pressure on the city to do something about implementing a functional mass transit system for this great city!

Downtown neighborhood association submits trolley route change request
Wednesday, 20 August 2008


http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll226/Tendollarrod/Trolley.jpg

The Oklahoma Spirit Trolley serves as a means of public transportation in Bricktown, downtown and on the near south side of Oklahoma City. Plans are being considered to improve trolley services in the city. Here, one of the wheeled trolleys waits at the corner of N. May Avenue and Interstate 40.

Notes from the Aug. 12 City Council meeting
From Sentinel staff reports

Urban Neighbors (U.N.), downtown’s residents association, presented a comprehensive three-page report to the Oklahoma City Council last week requesting that the downtown trolley system be reviewed and updated to meet modern demands.


“We are very optimistic that Mayor Cornett and the City Council will recognize the need for a massive revamp of our mass transit system in this city, and be receptive to overhauling the system so that it might meet the needs of downtown residents, workers and visitors,” said Urban Neighbors Board Member Jeff Bezdek. “We anticipate Mayor Cornett and the City Council will come up with a comprehensive plan and solution over the next few months and create a line in next year’s operating budget for a more functional trolley system. The downtown transit system must also make sense for the future as well by being environmentally friendly.”
The Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys currently operate similar to city busses, with routes throughout the downtown area and the I-40/Meridian corridor. Some residents and tourists have complained that the trolley system is difficult to figure out and doesn’t always run according to its posted schedule.
As if the U.N. had a crystal ball, just before the trolley presentation the City Council heard the results of a recent citizen’s survey that shows public transit is once again ranked as a high concern of city residents. In fact, the issue ranked as the second highest priority, behind only maintenance of public streets. Public transit was a strong concern from last year’s survey also, and this year it was 10 percent higher with 38 percent of residents ranking it as the top priority.
The most challenging aspect of the current trolley system, according to the neighborhood association’s report, is that it does not efficiently serve the needs of the growing and diversified downtown community.
“As an organization we are dedicated to bringing vital issues concerning downtown to the city. Urban Neighbors is proud to be a vital link between the City of OKC and downtown residents” Bezdek further commented. “Our hope is that this will be an important first step with the city in creating a modern mass transit system to meet downtown needs.”
Michael Scroggins, spokesman for Metro Transit, said his department agrees with much of what the U.N. has to say.
“We know we have some issues we need to work on,” Scroggins said. “There’s more tourism now and downtown is a busier place. The whole environment has changed down here.”

Read the rest of this story in the August 20 issue of The City Sentinel

Bus systems lure riders with plush seats and Wi-Fi
Journal Record

August 22, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) – Think of the typical city bus, and you’re likely to picture old vehicles with hard seats and noisy brakes that belch diesel fumes as they jerk from stop to stop. Transit agencies want you to take another look. They’re rolling out more attractive and comfortable buses, convenient express routes and even on-board Wi-Fi.

High gas prices and a tight economy have made all kinds of transit, including buses, more popular. In the first three months of 2008, 2.6 billion trips were taken on public transportation in the U.S., a 3 percent increase over the first quarter of 2007, according to the American Public Transportation Association. Bus ridership increased 2 percent to nearly 1.5 billion trips. Buses may lack the hipness of subways or light rail, but they are the best hope for accommodating large numbers of new riders quickly and affordably.

To harness the increased demand for mass transit, officials are turning to new ways of delivering and marketing their bus service. Ted Mann, an Arlington, Va., resident, has been a regular bus rider since totaling his car a year ago and has noticed the improvements. Mann, 66, said the Washington area’s extensive transit service has meant he hasn’t felt compelled to buy a new car. Still, he can testify to the image problem that buses face.“The other night I was with a group of people, and the fastest thing to do was to get on the bus. Some of these people had never been on a bus – as if this was some awful low-class way,” he said.

Nationally, bus riders tend to be poorer than rail passengers. According to a 2007 national study by public transportation association, 21 percent of trips by rail are made by people with household incomes less than $25,000, compared with 43 percent of bus trips.

On the other side of the spectrum, 30 percent of rail trips are made by people with incomes of $75,000 or higher, while only 12 percent of bus trips are. Metro, the Washington region’s transit agency, hopes a makeover will help buses’ public relations problem. This month the agency is introducing new buses with a modern red and silver color scheme, cushioned seats and sound-deadening floors for a quieter ride.“People who wouldn’t normally take the bus – they can see this beautiful piece of art here and want to take public transportation,” said Milo Victoria, Metro’s assistant general manager for bus operations.

Elsewhere, transit agencies from Chattanooga, Tenn., to Cincinnati to Oakland, Calif., have introduced Wi-Fi on buses, particularly those on longer commuter routes. Metro plans to make Wi-Fi available at elaborate new bus shelters in Arlington, which will also feature heated seats and electronic signs with bus arrival and departure information.

And transit systems are looking for inexpensive ways to make bus trips faster. Cincinnati’s Metro received permission this month to make permanent an arrangement that allows buses to travel in the left shoulder of Interstate 71 when traffic is heavy. Other systems use technology that keeps traffic lights green when a bus approaches. Transit systems are also adopting more fuel-efficient alternatives to regular diesel buses, helping insulate them from rising fuel costs while also providing another selling point for potential passengers who care about the environment. In Philadelphia, for example, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority has ordered 400 new diesel-electric hybrids, with the first 100 to be introduced by the end of the year.

In the Washington region, the emphasis on improving bus service marks a shift. Metro’s rail system, a federal project of the 1960s and 1970s, has long been the local favorite. Home buyers often pay a premium for proximity to a Metro station while bus routes don’t have the same cachet.

Metro General Manager John Catoe, who arrived at the agency last year with a mandate to improve bus service, said nicer vehicles and more convenient service will go a long way to changing the mode’s image.“We painted the picture of the bus,” he said. “We as an industry need to repaint the picture and make it attractive.”Expanding and improving Washington’s bus service is critical to shift some of the pressure off the rail system, which is packed during rush hour and has little room to add longer or more frequent trains.

Catoe has proposed an extensive network of express buses that would use shoulders or bus-only lanes to help meet the region’s immediate transportation needs.Such an initiative would require millions of dollars in new equipment. Washington’s new 60-foot articulated buses cost nearly $800,000 apiece – a total of $17.4 million for 22 buses.But that’s nothing close to the cost of expanding the rail network. For example, a project to extend Metrorail 11.6 miles in northern Virginia carries a $2.6 billion price tag, and it won’t be done until 2013 at the earliest.“Right now we have the issues,” Catoe said, “and we don’t have a lot of time to be building things.”


http://www.journalrecord.com/_images/articles/t_labsReinventing%20the%20Bus_Swan.JPG
Alexander Best uses his laptop with a Wi-Fi connection on board AC Transit’s Transbay Express bus at a bus depot in San Francisco on Wednesday. Transit agencies want you to take another look at buses. They’re rolling out more attractive and comfortable buses, convenient express routes and even on-board Wi-Fi. AP PHOTO

The Journal Record - Article (http://www.journalrecord.com/article.cfm?recid=91552)

BG - your Eastern side won't do though. You have to connect out to Tinker...or maybe even Shawnee. Just in the Mid-Del area, you have well over 100K people in and out every day, not to mention the Tinker employees. Plus there's a rail line already going through the middle of town.

BG - your Eastern side won't do though. You have to connect out to Tinker...or maybe even Shawnee. Just in the Mid-Del area, you have well over 100K people in and out every day, not to mention the Tinker employees. Plus there's a rail line already going through the middle of town.

That could be the next phase after the Edmond-Norman and Downtown-Airport commuter lines are finished. With the way the city works though we should be dancing in the streets once the first train pulls out of the station. :)

I think the possibility of connecting our densest inner city neighborhoods and employment centers with light rail/streetcar is really exciting. Building up the densities in these parts of town should be a high priority and the LRT helps reinforce that. Remember Classen once had trolleys, we are simply reinstating that service 60 years later...

I think those are great, but we would have to have a light rail line going down Reno connecting Yukon/Mustang area to downtown and then on to the Midwest City/Del City area.

they should build a line that is from downtown to the capitol, so that people see it can succeed.

we need a starter line, to get it rollin'

Sad to say but OKC's mass transit is lacking. I have been overseas several times and rode the public transportation. It's easy to understand, takes you where you want to do and inexpensive. I live on route 8 and it has to be one of the worst thought out routes. I attempted to ride it as a learning experience but, the darned bus did not show up on time so I walked back home. :dontgetit

Tomorrow is the city council's mass transit workshop at the Zoo conference center. Again, it's open to the public, but public comment won't be accepted. If you can make it, just showing up will help show your support for a modern usable mass transit system in our great city!

I have spoken on the issue of the poor bus service in the Oklahoma City metro area many times. It is shameful that our city refused to make a viable bus system that covers all major arteries with regular service. With gas prices approaching $4.00 a gallon, it is tough for many people to afford to drive. This has been a topic of discussion for years that our city has the worst bus system than any city of comarable size in the United States. There are entire sections of the city that get no service at all and those that do, are sporadic at best. On a good day you will wait no less than one hour at any bus stop in the metro area. I live four miles from downtown Oklahoma City and I would have to walk two and a half miles to find the nearest bus that runs four times a day.

I have been very proud of our city in many respects but am ashamed at their lack of leadership in this area. The reason that I decided to post this message was that I just heard a story on KFOR channel 4 about a meeting to discuss the bus system. They cut to a city council member that suggested cutting all services except downtown. This means the areas with virtually no service would actually get no service at all. I work at Tinker AFB, the largest single site employer in the state with more that 20,000 full time employees. Our city does not have any bus service to Tinker at all. This lack of leadership that I referred to is made evident in the words of this councilman when he said it would be irresponsible to pay $54 million a year to expand the bus system with no gaurantees that ridership will increase. This coming from a guy who voted to give $17 million to Bass Pro Shops to rent a store downtown. I was not completely opposed to this because I knew there would be a return on the investment.

He is trying to make this same claim about the bus system. The problem with that is that our city leaders have deliberately made our bus system meet minimum governmental requirements knowing that it would fail to attract riders so they can claim that no one will ride the bus. I have lived in the Oklahoma City area for 32 years and this city has never had an acceptable bus system even one day. They do not cover the city with acceptable service and no one wants to ride the bus. The very few bus stops that are in the city do not have any cover whatsoever. You are lucky to have a bench in the hot sun or snow. When a person has to sit out in the weather for more than an hour at best, you are never going to get a serious ridership. The city leaders use this history of poor ridership as an excuse to say the bus system will not get a return on its investment. These decisions are calculated and deliberate. Our city leaders do not want to spend money on a bus system so they create an environment that results in a self fulfilling prophecy of no riders.

I think this tactic is shameful and needs to have a light shined upon it. I have lived in many other cities that have much better bus systems than ours and a couple were actually smaller cities. I think that our leaders need to be thinking about the citizens that are struggling to pay for gas. There should be regular bus system, meaning at least ever 30 minutes, to every major artery in the metro. This service should continue no earlier than 10:00 PM daily. Yes it would be expensive at first but in the long term it would pay for itself. This notion that no one would ride the bus is ridiculous. They have zero evidence to prove that because Oklahoma City has NEVER had full time bus service throughout the metro area. I have never seen a city that had regular service that did not have heavy usage. In Phoenix, Tucson, and Denver they were heavily used by people of all socioeconomic backgrounds.

A real leader would step up and take responsibility and do the right thing. If we can afford to spend $54 million to buy the old General Motors plant, and $121 million to upgrade the Ford Center, I really believe we can do this. For the record I did not oppose those other initiatives again because I know they will bring a return on the investment. The bus system will bring a return on the investment as well. The assumption that a bus system will cost $54 million to improve the bus system makes the assumption that people will be riding for free and no fees will be collected. It neglects the idea that less cars would be on the road. We need to take a stand and tell our “acting” leaders to step up and actually be one. Let’s get a bus system that can be depended upon to get our citizens around.

I have spoken on the issue of the poor bus service in the Oklahoma City metro area many times. It is shameful that our city refused to make a viable bus system that covers all major arteries with regular service. With gas prices approaching $4.00 a gallon, it is tough for many people to afford to drive. This has been a topic of discussion for years that our city has the worst bus system than any city of comarable size in the United States. There are entire sections of the city that get no service at all and those that do, are sporadic at best. On a good day you will wait no less than one hour at any bus stop in the metro area. I live four miles from downtown Oklahoma City and I would have to walk two and a half miles to find the nearest bus that runs four times a day.

I have been very proud of our city in many respects but am ashamed at their lack of leadership in this area. The reason that I decided to post this message was that I just heard a story on KFOR channel 4 about a meeting to discuss the bus system. They cut to a city council member that suggested cutting all services except downtown. This means the areas with virtually no service would actually get no service at all. I work at Tinker AFB, the largest single site employer in the state with more that 20,000 full time employees. Our city does not have any bus service to Tinker at all. This lack of leadership that I referred to is made evident in the words of this councilman when he said it would be irresponsible to pay $54 million a year to expand the bus system with no gaurantees that ridership will increase. This coming from a guy who voted to give $17 million to Bass Pro Shops to rent a store downtown. I was not completely opposed to this because I knew there would be a return on the investment.

He is trying to make this same claim about the bus system. The problem with that is that our city leaders have deliberately made our bus system meet minimum governmental requirements knowing that it would fail to attract riders so they can claim that no one will ride the bus. I have lived in the Oklahoma City area for 32 years and this city has never had an acceptable bus system even one day. They do not cover the city with acceptable service and no one wants to ride the bus. The very few bus stops that are in the city do not have any cover whatsoever. You are lucky to have a bench in the hot sun or snow. When a person has to sit out in the weather for more than an hour at best, you are never going to get a serious ridership. The city leaders use this history of poor ridership as an excuse to say the bus system will not get a return on its investment. These decisions are calculated and deliberate. Our city leaders do not want to spend money on a bus system so they create an environment that results in a self fulfilling prophecy of no riders.

I think this tactic is shameful and needs to have a light shined upon it. I have lived in many other cities that have much better bus systems than ours and a couple were actually smaller cities. I think that our leaders need to be thinking about the citizens that are struggling to pay for gas. There should be regular bus system, meaning at least ever 30 minutes, to every major artery in the metro. This service should continue no earlier than 10:00 PM daily. Yes it would be expensive at first but in the long term it would pay for itself. This notion that no one would ride the bus is ridiculous. They have zero evidence to prove that because Oklahoma City has NEVER had full time bus service throughout the metro area. I have never seen a city that had regular service that did not have heavy usage. In Phoenix, Tucson, and Denver they were heavily used by people of all socioeconomic backgrounds.

A real leader would step up and take responsibility and do the right thing. If we can afford to spend $54 million to buy the old General Motors plant, and $121 million to upgrade the Ford Center, I really believe we can do this. For the record I did not oppose those other initiatives again because I know they will bring a return on the investment. The bus system will bring a return on the investment as well. The assumption that a bus system will cost $54 million to improve the bus system makes the assumption that people will be riding for free and no fees will be collected. It neglects the idea that less cars would be on the road. We need to take a stand and tell our “acting” leaders to step up and actually be one. Let’s get a bus system that can be depended upon to get our citizens around.

Well said, Mayor Cornett are you listening?? I will say Norman has pretty good service with CART.

Well said, Mayor Cornett are you listening?? I will say Norman has pretty good service with CART.

Norman is a bit smaller in size than Oklahoma City. Plus, it has a dedicated funding source due to student fees at OU. You can't compare the two.

Norman is a bit smaller in size than Oklahoma City. Plus, it has a dedicated funding source due to student fees at OU. You can't compare the two.

Then the bus system should have dedicated funding that isn't at the whim of the city council which is so not dedicated in doing whats really needed.
Such as .25 sales tax. and really update the bus fleet.
Many don't know that the mechanics @ the bus system is frustrated for the lack of spare parts.
Recently McClendon made a few commericals "saying his good friend Pickens" is into the CNG option.
I would like to see if as did Pickens did{ie Pickens ordered from GE 2$ bln worth of turbines}, if AM would be as kind as to furnished as a gift to our "big league City's mass transit" showing as his dedication to CNG, as his good friend.

Then the bus system should have dedicated funding that isn't at the whim of the city council which is so not dedicated in doing whats really needed.
Such as .25 sales tax. and really update the bus fleet.
Many don't know that the mechanics @ the bus system is frustrated for the lack of spare parts.
Recently McClendon made a few commericals "saying his good friend Pickens" is into the CNG option.
I would like to see if as did Pickens did{ie Pickens ordered from GE 2$ bln worth of turbines}, if AM would be as kind as to furnished as a gift to our "big league City's mass transit" showing as his dedication to CNG, as his good friend.

A dedicated funding source is needed, but it would require a vote of the people. As such, it needs to be done on a regional basis, likely county by county, say every county in our MSA or our transportation study area. Then, the funding should go to a separate regional transit authority (RTA) that it not a trust of the city. Operating costs would still need supplemental assistance from the state and feds.

An RTA would be able to help develop public/private partnerships that would encourage corporate support from potential players like Chesapeake.

Basically, the system needs a complete makeover. COTPA should be dismantled and built from the ground up.

cotpa is more concerned with parking garages and silly boat routes than bus transit.

So what was the outcome of the meeting on Tuesday?

That's what I keep wondering.. wanted to go but had a conflict. Lot of people show? Someone let us know.

but boats are way cool, btw.

I didn't make it but some colleagues did, I will check with them. I believe another formal meeting (not sure if public) is taking place next week.

This is the short version from the online City Sentinel. There is more info and comments in the printed version.


City Sentinel Online | OKC Downtown & Bricktown's Favorite Weekly Newspaper - City leaders discuss future of public transportation (http://city-sentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1043&Itemid=26)

City leaders discuss future of public transportation
Wednesday, 24 September 2008


The Downtown Metro Transit Center at Northwest Fifth Street and Harvey Avenue is the main focal point for the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority (COTPA). City leaders and the COTPA public trust are looking at ways to improve the public transportation including the possibility of adding streetcars, commuter trains and enhanced buses to its fleet.
By Rod Jones

As if city leaders needed another indication that public transportation is a popular issue amongst residents, the turnout for a special workshop at the Oklahoma City Zoo and Botanical Gardens brought yet another sign.


The packed meeting room last Tuesday morning served to confirm what the two most recent annual citizen surveys previously stated — residents want a better public transit system more than almost every other topic in the survey.
The Oklahoma City Council and the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority (COTPA) held the joint workshop to discuss new ideas on how the city could help move people around its expansive area.
While a successful public transportation system might be considered expensive, especially considering the higher cost of fuel than recent years and the city’s physical size, COPTA officials pointed out that the money invested could bring back several times that amount in economic benefits.
“Every dollar invested in public transportation projects generates approximately $6 in local economic activity,” pointed out one transportation board trustee.
COTPA’s “fact book” handed out to council members gives several other financial benefits to transportation investments:
• Every $10 million in capital investment in public transportation yields $30 million in increased business sales
• Every $10 million in operating investment in public transportation yields $32 million in increased business sales
• Real estate — residential, commercial or business that is served by public transportation is valued more highly by the public than similar properties not as well served by transit
• Public transportation enhances local and state economic growth in many ways, increasing the local customer base for a range of services.
Even in light of those figures, the overlying issue expressed by council members was apparent — how to pay for the nearly $400 million price tag to install, plus the annual $50 million operational expenses, to get what the agency considers the optimum transportation system as indicated in its fixed guideway study.
“The key issue is still ‘how are we going to fund it?’” said Mayor Mick Cornett. “And which cities are on board to help?”
Some council members suggested starting by expanding a few services initially, then studying how they succeeded before jumping into the rest of the plan.
“There’s got to be a way to test it before we spend the money,” said Councilman Pat Ryan.
Rick Cain, COTPA director, said the agency has already seen results when expanding service on certain routes, particularly a line up and down 23rd Street between the Capitol building and McArthur Boulevard and a route around the Quail Springs Mall area. He also said the city’s recent decision to put bicycle racks on some buses has yielded surprising results with more than 110 cyclists using them.

Read the rest of this story in the September 24 issue of The City Sentinel


Rail for the long haul


On a related topic, John Dougherty of the Oklahoma Department of Transportation announced that the State of Kansas his turned in a report to Amtrak regarding extending its rail service south through Oklahoma into Texas.
The joint feasibility study will study how to get passenger rail service added from Kansas to Texas via Oklahoma, with a strong likelihood that Oklahoma City and others would be included in the list of stops.
Such a service would essentially complete a loop for the Heartland Flyer, which currently dead ends in Oklahoma City in its service to and from Ft. Worth, Texas. If plans continue on repairing and adding a rail line toward the north, Amtrak service could get local residents into Newton, Kan., a major railroad crossroads going east and west.
The study will look at where rail needs to be added, where it needs to be repaired and how much the service would cost to operate and get into service. If everything stays on track, so to speak, from that point Dougherty said the new line could begin operating as early as 2010.
Dougherty said the popularity of the Heartland Flyer has made Amtrak consider adding a second daily trip, which would probably mirror the departure time of the original but from the opposite end of the route. He said such frequent use is evidence that a continuous route — all the way through from Kansas to Texas — might have a pretty good chance of success, especially when considering the current costs of driving.
He advised the city to “step forward” with other cities that would benefit from the expanded service and encourage their state and federal government representatives to support the effort.
“There’s not a lot of support in Congress right now for Amtrak, but I think that has to change,” he said.

From Steve's blog:

The Central Transportation and Parking Authority (MetroTransit) has been hit with a wave of complaints regarding its downtown trolley service - one of the nine original Metropolitan Area Projects.

Tourists say the service is unreliable. Downtown residents say the routes are designed to discourage their use by locals. Office workers say the rides are too far apart to be used at lunch time.

So you’d think COTPA would be trying to upgrade its performance, right?

So, here’s their latest accomplishment: they covered up their route maps in Bricktown with a decal encouraging folks to call 235-ride for information about the orange line - a route designed to serve not downtown or Bricktown, but rather the I-40/Meridian hotel corridor.

This notice also assumes every visitor has a cell phone handy or knows where to find a pay phone.


http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/files/2008/10/trolley.jpg

Take a look at OnTrac (http://www.ontracok.org)

2.86 cents of the federal fuel tax paid on every gallon of motor fuel used on public roads in the nation goes to the Federal Transit Trust Fund.

Oklahomans, thus, are said to pay 70+ million into the fund yearly.

What happens to that money?

The first phase of DART Rail -- 23.5 miles of light rail and commuter rail -- was created using a captured, local penny sales tax. The "price of admission" for suburbs wishing to participate was an equal contribution.

We have the money. We have the assets. What we -- so far -- don't have is the leadership.

The people need to insist.

...and I'd suggest a new public entity, a truly regional, multimodal transit authority, "COMET" -- Central Oklahoma Metropolitan Transit.

TOM ELMORE
NATI - Solutions to the Nation's Transportation Problems (http://www.advancedtransport.org)

From Steve's blog:

The Central Transportation and Parking Authority (MetroTransit) has been hit with a wave of complaints regarding its downtown trolley service - one of the nine original Metropolitan Area Projects.

Tourists say the service is unreliable. Downtown residents say the routes are designed to discourage their use by locals. Office workers say the rides are too far apart to be used at lunch time.

So you’d think COTPA would be trying to upgrade its performance, right?

So, here’s their latest accomplishment: they covered up their route maps in Bricktown with a decal encouraging folks to call 235-ride for information about the orange line - a route designed to serve not downtown or Bricktown, but rather the I-40/Meridian hotel corridor.

This notice also assumes every visitor has a cell phone handy or knows where to find a pay phone.


http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/files/2008/10/trolley.jpg

How difficult would it be to come up with a decent trolley/bus system? There are plenty of cities to study to determine how to increase ease of use, which would also dramatically increase ridership. We are in the dark ages on this topic, and I don't know what can be done to beat the importance of this into the heads of our local leadership. Light rail is a nice idea, but what we really need is ease of movement in the CBD, close in neighborhoods, the Health Sciences Center area, etc and buses and trollies can do this quickly and efficiently. I'm thrilled we're going to have an NBA team. It truly is one step towards becoming a "major league city", but sensible, reliable, easy to use transportation is just as important.

On top of all their rail and bus service, Austin has trolleys like ours that are FREE and make a simple loop around the tourist friendly downtown areas.

We need to completely revamp this as well as begin to look at the next step for mass transit.

...and I'd suggest a new public entity, a truly regional, multimodal transit authority, "COMET" -- Central Oklahoma Metropolitan Transit.

TOM ELMORE
NATI - Solutions to the Nation's Transportation Problems (http://www.advancedtransport.org)

Love the name Tom . . . how can we get that nailed down for future use?