I wouldn't mind one of these. However, it should go further west, east, south, and north, instead of just around the city.

I always got the impression that's what these things were for. Getting anyone living in OKC, around.

I think the idea as I've heard it is to build something that can be expanded upon. Therefore, you start out in the central city and expand accordingly over time.

I think the idea as I've heard it is to build something that can be expanded upon. Therefore, you start out in the central city and expand accordingly over time.

Would only those in the central city be taxed for it? Kinda like a TIF district?

It's my understanding that the project would involve improved CNG-powered buses to the whole city. The street car element would begin in the central corridor.

[QUOTE=Steve;225318] Bezdek is an architect and downtown resident and advocate.

FYI, Jeff Bezdek is not an architect and should not be referred to as such. However, he is a downtown resident and advocate and puts a seemingly tireless effort into what he promotes.

I wouldn't mind one of these. However, it should go further west, east, south, and north, instead of just around the city.

I always got the impression that's what these things were for. Getting anyone living in OKC, around.


That's a whole different system, one that's being examined by the Regional Transit Dialogue and would most likely be funded by a region-wide transit district.



I think the idea as I've heard it is to build something that can be expanded upon. Therefore, you start out in the central city and expand accordingly over time.

Streetcar systems are inherently local to a region's CBD/Core neighborhoods and do not expand much further than such. Mode of choice for longer distances is LRT or Commuter Rail; both of which were recommended by the Fixed Guideway Study and are currently being examined. The idea being that all modes (bus, Modern Streetcar, LRT/CRT) are connected through a single transit hub (i.e. Union Station or a newly constructed one near the CBD).


Would only those in the central city be taxed for it? Kinda like a TIF district?

For the Streetcar, Yes. It's been historically difficult for central cities to get suburbs to pay for an exclusive system. However, when discussing a regional system (Bus and LRT/CRT) a tax district including multiple municipalities is optimal. See RTD (http://www.rtd-denver.com/factsAndFigures.shtml)

Love the idea but would like to see it be a looped system rather than an out-and-back.

Sounds great! It's weird, but every time a proposal like this comes up I feel like it may not pass. Given our recent history I don't really have any reason to feel this way, but I do. I'm with Cuat on this one. I'll be REALLY disappointed if mass transit is booted off MAPS 3. Especially if it were booted in an effort to repay Clay for the Thunder. Don't think the unfortunate scenario will happen, but it could. If the chamber backed off they did it for a reason. Who knows?

Oh yeah, the skyline shot on the Modern Transit Project page is freakin' awesome.

ok, I'm sorry, but I looked at the map for this, and the read all the supposedly informed comments and I just don't see how this will help in any way whatsoever.

It doesn't help traffic congestion.

It doesn't help commuters.

It doesn't look like this does anything more than what could be accomplished by adding an extra bus or 3 to the downtown area.

Sure, it means that in ten years(LOL!) we can say we have "mass transit" in OKC, but I can't see that as a reason to justify the cost.

IMHO, "Mass Transit" for OKC means a line system to connect Edmond, Moore, Mustang, The Village, etc... with the downtown area as a hub. That would alleviate congestion and cut down pollution.

fuzzytoad, most cities have a combination of light rail / streetcar / subway and commuter rail.

The plan would be to create commuter rail lines to the places you mentioned and connect it to the streetcar / light rail system.

ok, I'm sorry, but I looked at the map for this, and the read all the supposedly informed comments and I just don't see how this will help in any way whatsoever.

It doesn't help traffic congestion.

It doesn't help commuters.

It doesn't look like this does anything more than what could be accomplished by adding an extra bus or 3 to the downtown area.

Sure, it means that in ten years(LOL!) we can say we have "mass transit" in OKC, but I can't see that as a reason to justify the cost.

IMHO, "Mass Transit" for OKC means a line system to connect Edmond, Moore, Mustang, The Village, etc... with the downtown area as a hub. That would alleviate congestion and cut down pollution.

If you truly read all the "supposedly informed comments" you would have concluded that this proposal is just a single part of an overall system, one that could potentially impact the entire region. Again, this would serve as the dispersion system for regional commuters arriving at a central station.

For example, an Edmondite would drive to a LRT/CRT park-n-ride station somewhere in Edmond, hop on the train, arrive at a central hub (Union Station, Santa Fe) and transfer to the Modern Streetcar to get to their job at the OUHSC or wherever. This proposal is for the Modern Streetcar component.

that map posted is an example and not necessarily the EXACT route that will take place. It's merely an idea of what areas need to be hit up. Don't focus so much on the exact route and funding mechanisms right now as much as promoting the heck out of this and getting viral, and being vocal to city leaders to run with transit. Most cities don't have the exact final details until after funding is improved and consultants are hired, etc. Many of you seem to be getting too critical but are supporters of mass transit, we MUST create the dialogue with the city, or I'm afraid this will not happen. We can finalize details after the city is on board.

If you truly read all the "supposedly informed comments" you would have concluded that this proposal is just a single part of an overall system, one that could potentially impact the entire region. Again, this would serve as the dispersion system for regional commuters arriving at a central station.

For example, an Edmondite would drive to a LRT/CRT park-n-ride station somewhere in Edmond, hop on the train, arrive at a central hub (Union Station, Santa Fe) and transfer to the Modern Streetcar to get to their job at the OUHSC or wherever. This proposal is for the Modern Streetcar component.

I did read all the "informed" comments, and I read the info posted at Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/)

nowhere does it mention anything about connection to suburb areas of OKC.

The only mention of Light Rail connections was the Tulsa - Texas federally funded project.

Everywhere else is about this "Streetcar" revival which sounds more like an art project than an actual transportation project.

that map posted is not legit

Then someone needs to let the maintainer of About | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/about.html) know that.

fuzzytoad, most cities have a combination of light rail / streetcar / subway and commuter rail.

yes, I'm aware of that.




The plan would be to create commuter rail lines to the places you mentioned and connect it to the streetcar / light rail system.

Where does it detail this information on the Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/) website?

I'll admit that I may have missed it when visiting the site, but the only place I've seen any details of connecting any real commuter areas to this "Streetcar" system are wishes and hopes from posters to this thread.

fuzzytoad... are you even aware of/ have read the Fixed Guideway Study?

IMHO, "Mass Transit" for OKC means a line system to connect Edmond, Moore, Mustang, The Village, etc... with the downtown area as a hub. That would alleviate congestion and cut down pollution.


The suburbs are not part of current planning because the city doesn't want to invest money to encourage people to leave the city! However, a commuter system could be created over time with the suburbs' support, like DART has done in Dallas.

Regarding congestion, the plan involves very nice buses and improved coverage overall, so, yes, congestion would be reduced.

Remember, it's not just the street car (that just provides a little sex appeal).

fuzzytoad... are you even aware of/ have read the Fixed Guideway Study?

No sir, I am not and have not.

got a link? :)

that map posted is not legit

you posted the link to the site that hosts it... did you post a link to a site that isn't legit?

-M

Programs and Services > Transportation and Data Services > Fixed Guideway Systems (http://www.acogok.org/programs_and_services/transportation_and_data_services/fixedguideway.asp)

yes, I'm aware of that.




Where does it detail this information on the Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/) website?

I'll admit that I may have missed it when visiting the site, but the only place I've seen any details of connecting any real commuter areas to this "Streetcar" system are wishes and hopes from posters to this thread.

It doesn't, two separate but complementary systems. Again, this is for the Streetcar component. The other components are also in the planning stages, but are much more complex with regards to funding, governance, and prioritization.


No sir, I am not and have not.

got a link? :)

Fixed Guideway Study (http://acogok.org/Programs_and_Services/Transportation_and_Data_Services/fixedguideway.asp)

Where does it detail this information on the Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/) website?

I'll admit that I may have missed it when visiting the site, but the only place I've seen any details of connecting any real commuter areas to this "Streetcar" system are wishes and hopes from posters to this thread.

Here is the quote:

"The Association of Central Oklahoma Goverments (ACOG) has recently developed a regional committee to partner with the City of Oklahoma City and other metro cities to utilize the Fixed Guideway Study as a springboard for coordinated transit improvements. This will lead to joint planning and system integration with our neighboring communities of Edmond, Moore, Norman, Del City, Midwest City."

If you look under the area called "Following Steps" you will find what follows this. It doesn't detail anything, just talks about doing it in the future. I think they want to make sure something like this is usefull and succeeds before they sink billions into expanding it.

misread, delete this post please :)

Programs and Services > Transportation and Data Services > Fixed Guideway Systems (http://www.acogok.org/programs_and_services/transportation_and_data_services/fixedguideway.asp)

thanks! I'll read it!

Here is the quote:

"The Association of Central Oklahoma Goverments (ACOG) has recently developed a regional committee to partner with the City of Oklahoma City and other metro cities to utilize the Fixed Guideway Study as a springboard for coordinated transit improvements. This will lead to joint planning and system integration with our neighboring communities of Edmond, Moore, Norman, Del City, Midwest City."

If you look under the area called "Following Steps" you will find what follows this. It doesn't detail anything, just talks about doing it in the future. I think they want to make sure something like this is usefull and succeeds before they sink billions into expanding it.

I did indeed miss that part.. thanks!

yes, I'm aware of that.




Where does it detail this information on the Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/) website?

I'll admit that I may have missed it when visiting the site, but the only place I've seen any details of connecting any real commuter areas to this "Streetcar" system are wishes and hopes from posters to this thread.

Where were all of the maps on our current modern developments when they first planned the city street grid system??? These are all individual projects and will grow off of eachother as they are implemented.

I'm excited! But lord knows Tom Elmore is going to giddy over this.

Where were all of the maps on our current modern developments when they first planned the city street grid system??? These are all individual projects and will grow off of eachother as they are implemented.

Valid point, but I still stand by my original decision on this whole thing.

Creating a viable mass transit system in a city has *never* worked when centralizing the transit system to the least commonly used/needed area.

If a transit system is going to relieve congestion, it has to do so at the areas of congestion, in other words, the places where people have to drive to and from work. Not everyone lives *and* works in downtown okc. Most downtown works live outside the downtown area and this streetcar system isn't going to do them any good.

What will happen is the same thing that happened in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis. A centralized Downtown-only transit system got less than 1% usage from people who drove their own vehicles(and caused an increase in congestion around the transit-enabled area), the plan was called a failure and all future connection projects to suburbs and commuters were cancelled.

Valid point, but I still stand by my original decision on this whole thing.

Creating a viable mass transit system in a city has *never* worked when centralizing the transit system to the least commonly used/needed area.

If a transit system is going to relieve congestion, it has to do so at the areas of congestion, in other words, the places where people have to drive to and from work. Not everyone lives *and* works in downtown okc. Most downtown works live outside the downtown area and this streetcar system isn't going to do them any good.

What will happen is the same thing that happened in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis. A centralized Downtown-only transit system got less than 1% usage from people who drove their own vehicles(and caused an increase in congestion around the transit-enabled area), the plan was called a failure and all future connection projects to suburbs and commuters were cancelled.

:facepalm:

What are you talking about?

Portland recently opened another expansion, Seattle just approved $17 billion for LRT, and Minneapolis is currently in the preliminary stages of a planned complete system. Am I missing something here?

Again, because you don't seem to listen, this is ONE component of a planned system which includes the suburbs.

What will happen is the same thing that happened in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis. A centralized Downtown-only transit system got less than 1% usage from people who drove their own vehicles(and caused an increase in congestion around the transit-enabled area), the plan was called a failure and all future connection projects to suburbs and commuters were cancelled.

This is absolutely not true. Also, remember the plan is not just the street car. It involves significant improvement in the new buses and routes.

And lets not kid ourselves, if we try to sell this as a relief of congestion, we are going fail. OKC does not have congestion. Here (http://www.reason.org/news/show/126809.html) and Here (http://scorecard.inrix.com/scorecard/Top100Metros.asp).

you posted the link to the site that hosts it... did you post a link to a site that isn't legit?

-M

Edited my original post, I was posting from Iphone at Mayors Conference and couldn't express my complete thought. It's merely a "guideline" not a final map.

:facepalm:

What are you talking about?

Portland recently opened another expansion, Seattle just approved $17 billion for LRT, and Minneapolis is currently in the preliminary stages of a planned complete system. Am I missing something here?

Again, because you don't seem to listen, this is ONE component of a planned system which includes the suburbs.


What you're conviently failing to acknowledge is that the $18b seattle is getting and the monetary incentive minneapolis is using are part of the 23 transit incentives given to states as part of the bailout. Money being used in Seattle and Minneapolis to *finish* or fix what has already failed after already having billions spent on them over the last 12-15 years.

We're starting from scratch, and starting in the *exact* same way that has failed in every other city it was started in..

Are you saying we should just go ahead and "hope" for another bailout program in 15 years to fix our transit system that nobody uses?

and yes, I did listen.. which is why I mentioned the fact that a centralized plan has always failed and caused the suburb plans to be cancelled..

And lets not kid ourselves, if we try to sell this as a relief of congestion, we are going fail. OKC does not have congestion. Here (http://www.reason.org/news/show/126809.html) and Here (http://scorecard.inrix.com/scorecard/Top100Metros.asp).

yeah, those are pretty graphs and all.. They don't explain why it takes an hour to 2 hours to drive 14 miles on I-235 every weekday.

I realize that people like to throw out graphs that explain why real-world experiences aren't really real, but I'm confident that the voters in Oklahoma will see this for what it really is..

yeah, those are pretty graphs and all.. They don't explain why it takes an hour to 2 hours to drive 14 miles on I-235 every weekday.

Seriously? Methinks this is a WEEEE bit of an exaggeration. I drive I-235 from Edmond to downtown daily, and it generally only takes me 30-35 minutes from Memorial Road to my parking garage downtown, save for days like to day when there are accidents, and it tacked on about 10-15 more minutes.

What will happen is the same thing that happened in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis. A centralized Downtown-only transit system got less than 1% usage from people who drove their own vehicles(and caused an increase in congestion around the transit-enabled area), the plan was called a failure and all future connection projects to suburbs and commuters were cancelled.

Um, Seattle(Sound transit) light rail is continuing to expand into the suburbs with Bellevue next on the list. Seeing as it hasn't been called a failure, nor have future connection projects to the suburbs been cancelled, I guess you don't really know what you're talking about.

Also, Portland's streetcar system, from what I understand, has been a big success. They are also expanding streetcar and light rail.

FAIL.

And lets not kid ourselves, if we try to sell this as a relief of congestion, we are going fail. OKC does not have congestion. Here (http://www.reason.org/news/show/126809.html) and Here (http://scorecard.inrix.com/scorecard/Top100Metros.asp).

I never appreciated how easy it was to get around in OKC until I moved to Austin--talk about going from one end of the spectrum to the other in terms of traffic. (I took note of the second link's ranking for Austin having the worst congestion of all metropolitan areas during rush hour.)

I really don't see the utility in a system like this for OKC. Traffic is light, the street grid is easy to navigate, and parking is cheap and relatively plentiful (I recognize the parking complaints, but again, it's relative--OKC fares much better than others). OKC was built to accommodate the automobile, and I don't think there's a bit of shame in embracing that. To be honest, I'm much more excited about the new crosstown than this project because I question the long-term viability of a rail system in OKC. The people may have "voted" for rail, but what will ridership be like when the novelty wears off? Maybe we should take another look at rail in the future if the Core to Shore plan comes to fruition and there's a substantial increase in downtown/midtown population (and population density) over the next decade. For now, I would rather see this time and money diverted toward overhauling the bus system.

Seriously? Methinks this is a WEEEE bit of an exaggeration. I drive I-235 from Edmond to downtown daily, and it generally only takes me 30-35 minutes from Memorial Road to my parking garage downtown, save for days like to day when there are accidents, and it tacked on about 10-15 more minutes.

seriously..

I leave from roughly danforth and broadway every morning at 7:45-8 and get to the federal building between 9 and 9:45.

it's usually after 2-3 am when I leave to go back home and that takes about 15-20 minutes, but the times I've had to leave at 5pm I've rarely ever gotten home before 6:30.

Um, Seattle(Sound transit) light rail is continuing to expand into the suburbs with Bellevue next on the list. Seeing as it hasn't been called a failure, nor have future connection projects to the suburbs been cancelled, I guess you don't really know what you're talking about.

"The Economist magazine recently said Seattle has the "worst transportation planning in North America". In addition, 420,000 signatures on an initiative (I-912) to repeal the new State gas tax were gathered in just 32 days. These should be wakeup calls for this region to fix fundamental problems in how we go about transportation planning.

Many who signed I-912 said they didn’t trust government to spend their tax dollars wisely and that there was a lack of accountability. Unfortunately, their concerns are well founded, and unless something is done angry citizens threaten not only the gas tax but also the RTID package of local tax increases needed to finish paying for the viaduct, 520 bridge and other critical projects. Remember a similar package (Referendum 51) was defeated in 2002 largely on the lack-of-trust issue. (a) Initiatives are crude remedies and do collateral damage, but a "starve the beast" approach is about the only way ordinary voters can hope to change things.

(a) Seattle Times, Jan 12, 2003. see How ST Abused….p.108 for the quote

It’s far, far better to address the causes of voter disillusionment before these issues come to vote. Lets take steps to ensure our tax dollars will be spent wisely, and spent achieving what people care about most; namely faster trips for auto and transit users alike. Lets also install accountability and rebuild trust.

There are two high priority targets for reform here at the regional level: Sound Transit (ST) and our official regional transportation-planning agency, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). ST’s a poster child for why people don’t trust government to spend tax dollars wisely, and PSRC’s asleep on the job.

Sound Transit is doing four major things wrong. First it has built a hugely wasteful commuter rail line called Sounder where every ride requires over $100 in taxpayer subsidies. (b) Second, it’s building a light rail system that will cost billions more than an equally effective bus rapid transit system. (c) Third it’s destroying trust by disseminating misleading information. (d) Forth, its management is –for all practical purposes --not accountable for results. Highlights follow but see Puget Sound Public Interest Transportation Forum: Seattle RTA Sound Transit light rail commuter rail bus monorail transit plan (http://www.bettertransport.info/pitf/) and CETA - Coalition for Effective Transportation Alternatives (http://effectivetransportation.org) for details."



Also, Portland's streetcar system, from what I understand, has been a big success. They are also expanding streetcar and light rail.

FAIL.

"Unless they had gone out of their way on their junket, the visiting dignitaries were unlikely to hear the other side of the story: Portland's public transit has done nothing to relieve the region's growing congestion; its high cost has sparked a taxpayer revolt; the developments along the rail lines were themselves heavily subsidized; and those subsidies led a crafty cabal of ex-politicians and developers to milk the system for their own gain.

How do Portland-area residents feel about local light-rail projects? They voted against raising taxes to build more light-rail in 1998. In 2002, they voted against a ballot measure increasing neighborhood densities — as transit-oriented developments do. In 2004, they supported a property-rights measure that challenged the very foundations of Oregon's land-use planning system. Planners have ignored all these votes and are building light rail with tax-increment financing and other hidden tax increases."


yeah, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

yeah, those are pretty graphs and all.. They don't explain why it takes an hour to 2 hours to drive 14 miles on I-235 every weekday.

I realize that people like to throw out graphs that explain why real-world experiences aren't really real, but I'm confident that the voters in Oklahoma will see this for what it really is..

What a ridiculous exaggeration. I've made that drive hundreds of times and never experienced anywhere close to that bad of traffic in OKC, even during that painful widening project north of 63rd. It doesn't even take that long to go 14 miles on I-35 in Austin. Given the relative simplicity of acquiring data on traffic counts, flow, etc., I think the "pretty graphs" speak much more loudly than any "real-world experience."

Yeah, I go to the Seattle Times for all my "transportation analysis." Or to the highly respected -- by highway lobby people -- OKC "Fixed Guideway Study."

Fixed?

Yep. It was fixed, alright -- from the very beginning. I told them at their first "public meeting," on a Presidents Day holiday at the Norick Library with more bureaucrats and presenters present than public, what their "study" would find. We don't need rail of any kind for a long, long time.

It was quite reminiscent of all that "elaborate consensus building" ODOT did in its "public input process" for the plan to destroy the Union Station rail yard with an unnecessary highway. Only I can't find anybody who actually wanted ODOT's "solution."

Who was, at least ostensibly, behind the "Fixed Guideway Study?" COTPA, Carter Burgess Engineers and Saxum Communications.

The senior-most individual of long standing at COTPA by then was their Oklahoma Transit Association XD and chief lobbyist who also serves as XD for Oklahoma Good Roads and Streets. Who are they? Neal McCaleb and associates.

The world website of Carter Burgess extensively lauded Dallas, Denver and Washington, DC for intelligent preservation and reuse of their historic Union Stations as modern transit hubs. But in OKC, home of the West's last unused Union Station boasting all original yard space, of which envy has been expressed by transit leaders in Dallas and Denver, Carter Burgess said "saving this Union Station is not in our mandate." Where does Carter Burgess get most of its business in Oklahoma? Likely, ODOT. Who runs ODOT? Ostensibly, Gary Ridley, hand picked replacement of -- Neal McCaleb.

And Saxum Communications? Just happened, at the time it was scattering "public input meetings" out into small venues at odd times all over the metro, to be running the State Question 723 campaign for "Oklahomans for Safe Bridges and Roads." Who are they? Neal McCaleb and associates.

Is the Fixed Guideway Study worth the paper it's written on?

Actually, it cost the taxpayers about $800,000.

I leave from roughly danforth and broadway every morning at 7:45-8 and get to the federal building between 9 and 9:45.

Are you getting held up in Edmond? If the freeways are clear, it shouldn't take you that long. Especially after the hundreds of millions of dollars we have spent on that freeway corridor recently. It has been my experience though that Edmond is actually very congested for its size. It's kind of designed that way. I am sure if you drove down broadway, that would take awhile. So, you probably go out to I-35 and get held up at the I-35 / I-235 exchange.

I am curious though, how long do you think it should take? That is quite a distance, actually, that includes either driving through a city that was designed to put all of its north/south traffic essentially on one or two roads roads and/or navigating a major freeway interchange at commute times. I used to commute about half that distance in LA and it would take 1-2 hours during the commute. It would take about 20 minutes outside of commute times. Then again, it probably takes 20 minutes just to drive from Danforth to Memorial on Broadway.

I see what you are saying that the Edmond commute, especially the North Edmond commute, takes a while from an Oklahoma City perspective. But we have spent TONS of money to facilitate that route already. Personally, I'd rather see the city begin to spend some money on ways to move people within the city instead of in and out of the city. I think doing so is important for the city proper to remain a viable and attractive alternative to living beyond the city's bounds. Both are needed, but no one can honestly say that the suburbs have been neglected by the money spent on Oklahoma City city roads. Well over a billion dollars has been spent on freeways in the last decade or so in the Oklahoma City area in large part to accommodate suburban commuters.

seriously..

I leave from roughly danforth and broadway every morning at 7:45-8 and get to the federal building between 9 and 9:45.

it's usually after 2-3 am when I leave to go back home and that takes about 15-20 minutes, but the times I've had to leave at 5pm I've rarely ever gotten home before 6:30.

Go a different route. We have this beautiful grid, put it to use.

"The Economist magazine recently said Seattle has the "worst transportation planning in North America". In addition, 420,000 signatures on an initiative (I-912) to repeal the new State gas tax were gathered in just 32 days. These should be wakeup calls for this region to fix fundamental problems in how we go about transportation planning.

Many who signed I-912 said they didn’t trust government to spend their tax dollars wisely and that there was a lack of accountability. Unfortunately, their concerns are well founded, and unless something is done angry citizens threaten not only the gas tax but also the RTID package of local tax increases needed to finish paying for the viaduct, 520 bridge and other critical projects. Remember a similar package (Referendum 51) was defeated in 2002 largely on the lack-of-trust issue. (a) Initiatives are crude remedies and do collateral damage, but a "starve the beast" approach is about the only way ordinary voters can hope to change things.

(a) Seattle Times, Jan 12, 2003. see How ST Abused….p.108 for the quote

It’s far, far better to address the causes of voter disillusionment before these issues come to vote. Lets take steps to ensure our tax dollars will be spent wisely, and spent achieving what people care about most; namely faster trips for auto and transit users alike. Lets also install accountability and rebuild trust.

There are two high priority targets for reform here at the regional level: Sound Transit (ST) and our official regional transportation-planning agency, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). ST’s a poster child for why people don’t trust government to spend tax dollars wisely, and PSRC’s asleep on the job.

Sound Transit is doing four major things wrong. First it has built a hugely wasteful commuter rail line called Sounder where every ride requires over $100 in taxpayer subsidies. (b) Second, it’s building a light rail system that will cost billions more than an equally effective bus rapid transit system. (c) Third it’s destroying trust by disseminating misleading information. (d) Forth, its management is –for all practical purposes --not accountable for results. Highlights follow but see Puget Sound Public Interest Transportation Forum: Seattle RTA Sound Transit light rail commuter rail bus monorail transit plan (http://www.bettertransport.info/pitf/) and CETA - Coalition for Effective Transportation Alternatives (http://effectivetransportation.org) for details."




"Unless they had gone out of their way on their junket, the visiting dignitaries were unlikely to hear the other side of the story: Portland's public transit has done nothing to relieve the region's growing congestion; its high cost has sparked a taxpayer revolt; the developments along the rail lines were themselves heavily subsidized; and those subsidies led a crafty cabal of ex-politicians and developers to milk the system for their own gain.

How do Portland-area residents feel about local light-rail projects? They voted against raising taxes to build more light-rail in 1998. In 2002, they voted against a ballot measure increasing neighborhood densities — as transit-oriented developments do. In 2004, they supported a property-rights measure that challenged the very foundations of Oregon's land-use planning system. Planners have ignored all these votes and are building light rail with tax-increment financing and other hidden tax increases."


yeah, I have no idea what I'm talking about.


OK, so you cited a bunch of opinion pieces, one from 2003 proclaiming Sound Transit's failures. It doesn't explain, then, why 59 percent of voters recently approved a $22.8 billion ballot measure designed to extend light rail to where? You guessed it, the suburbs.

I don't know about Portland, but at some point(since 1998 and 2002) they must have voted in favor of rail measures.

I stand by my claims.

Pardon me if this has already been posted -- very long threads like this one mitigate against me reading the whole thing to find out -- but here is a new website which relates to this topic, the Modern Transit Project: Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City (http://www.mtpokc.com/)

And lets not kid ourselves, if we try to sell this as a relief of congestion, we are going fail. OKC does not have congestion. Here (http://www.reason.org/news/show/126809.html) and Here (http://scorecard.inrix.com/scorecard/Top100Metros.asp).

this

yeah, those are pretty graphs and all.. They don't explain why it takes an hour to 2 hours to drive 14 miles on I-235 every weekday.

I realize that people like to throw out graphs that explain why real-world experiences aren't really real, but I'm confident that the voters in Oklahoma will see this for what it really is..

I can get you plenty more that suggest the same thing. A lot of these "pretty graphs" are based on sound trip data provided and summarized in the this region's 2030 Long Range Plan. Data that is meticulously gathered using GPS and surveys, provided by people just like you. Anecdotal exaggerations or not, one congested section (for that matter, many sections) of a massive system does not deduce the graphs provided to be false. It merely indicates most cities have it far worse. Now, if citizens of Central Oklahoma believe it to be congested than great, less work for the public outreach folks. It's an easier sell.

Most transit advocates sell systems as alternatives for commuters, not the end all solution to every transportation problem.

We have this beautiful grid, put it to use.

To be fair, Edmond doesn't.

I have pretty much come to the conclusion that everyone who complains about traffic in Oklahoma City lives in Edmond. ; )

Yeah, I go to the Seattle Times for all my "transportation analysis." Or to the highly respected -- by highway lobby people -- OKC "Fixed Guideway Study."

Fixed?

Yep. It was fixed, alright -- from the very beginning. I told them at their first "public meeting," on a Presidents Day holiday at the Norick Library with more bureaucrats and presenters present than public, what their "study" would find. We don't need rail of any kind for a long, long time.

It was quite reminiscent of all that "elaborate consensus building" ODOT did in its "public input process" for the plan to destroy the Union Station rail yard with an unnecessary highway. Only I can't find anybody who actually wanted ODOT's "solution."

Who was, at least ostensibly, behind the "Fixed Guideway Study?" COTPA, Carter Burgess Engineers and Saxum Communications.

The senior-most individual of long standing at COTPA by then was their Oklahoma Transit Association XD and chief lobbyist who also serves as XD for Oklahoma Good Roads and Streets. Who are they? Neal McCaleb and associates.

The world website of Carter Burgess extensively lauded Dallas, Denver and Washington, DC for intelligent preservation and reuse of their historic Union Stations as modern transit hubs. But in OKC, home of the West's last unused Union Station boasting all original yard space, of which envy has been expressed by transit leaders in Dallas and Denver, Carter Burgess said "saving this Union Station is not in our mandate." Where does Carter Burgess get most of its business in Oklahoma? Likely, ODOT. Who runs ODOT? Ostensibly, Gary Ridley, hand picked replacement of -- Neal McCaleb.

And Saxum Communications? Just happened, at the time it was scattering "public input meetings" out into small venues at odd times all over the metro, to be running the State Question 723 campaign for "Oklahomans for Safe Bridges and Roads." Who are they? Neal McCaleb and associates.

Is the Fixed Guideway Study worth the paper it's written on?

Actually, it cost the taxpayers about $800,000.

First off Tom, great point in the bold above! That basically kills your whole argument.

Second, can we pleaaaaaaase keep the Union Station chit chat in the thread designated for it?

Since you took your turn, I'm going to take mine. I know the visual map provided is not on speck, but don't you like on it, Tom, how they have Union Station SSE of the Ford Center but it is currently SSW?! AWESOME. I think the city may have plans to build an actual commuter facility that will be large enough to one day accommodate all forms of transportation. What a bummer...

Now, back on topic. I don't understand how people can say this won't work for us when looking at other cities of similar or smaller size such as Austin, TX (more commuter than lightrail/streetcar) and Little Rock, AR (which I believe has a circular too). I also believe that this is a fantastic way to get more people to move downtown. And when gas prices do go up, this may be the case where (and I know this is just pure speculation) somebody might just say "screw owning a car and paying for tags/insurance, not to mention $10/gallon gas. It would be a lot less costly if I were to move downtown". The most interesting question is...does OKC have enough "I's" as opposed to "we's"? Because I don't see a lot of families moving out of the suburbs to save money.

If enough people live downtown, then this could definitely be a great answer. I do like how they are tying in the CNG buses. That could definitely help.

For all the naysayers--at least there IS a page dedicated to a plan and not just a thought in the back of one's head.

To be fair, Edmond doesn't.

I have pretty much come to the conclusion that everyone who complains about traffic in Oklahoma City lives in Edmond. ; )

Edmond is one of the worst designed suburbs I've ever been to. Everything there seems to be about maximizing the development potential of the land at the cost of the city's long-term viability. Building arterial roads only on section lines was such a terrible idea.

And some sort of Manifest Destiny for the Installation of Stoplights.

Jeff Bezdek here. Thank you for many of your kind comments regarding this project and some about me. And quite frankly, I am not opposed to criticism as long as it is factual and responses are weighed in a fair manner.

I have not been on the blog for several years and have resisted disrupting the honest dialogue which OKC talk presents with the launch of this project.

I do want to clear up a few things.

This transit plan is the first coherent start to rectifying 40-50 years of system rot.

It is based on the Fixed Guideway Study which is sanctioned by the mayor. We have had regular and communicative contact.

Public Transit is a highly subsidized device that at one time was a private enterprise. That changed when the automobile became subsidized and road building became a hidden expenditure. PS- "I love my car"

Our city is so spread out that most forms of transit will not work efficiently. Plus, we have a local society that is culturally disconnected from its use.

So..... Changing things is not an easy task. It is not something that should be put in everywhere.

But, all roads lead to downtown. It is the core of the apple. The streetcar proposed has been identified in the FGS (and has been decided) as an optimal solution for downtown. The rubber tired bus trolleys do not work. They are inefficient, confusing, and irregular. I have lived downtown for 8 years (when it wasn't fashionable) and I still don't know when and where they go and I am a transit supporter!

Embedded rails in the ground offer comfort in solace in knowing that yes indeed, this is where the tram is going to come by.

The streetcar would be the first real opportunity to re-expose our citizens to REAL service without gambling on a Metro-wide solution overnight.

Also... Almost everybody I have talked to is either in the camp they don't believe it will work or they want it everywhere "especially to their front door". There is a plan. It is a ten year plan.

$140 million is a down-payment on federal matching funds. That should give us matching power of at least $420 million without the need for politicians. That gives you lots of money to work on those commuter routes (Bus, Bus Rapid Transit, or Light-Rail- refer to the study).


The situation is that it is a very complex issue that took 50 years to create and it will take at least 15 years to dramatically improve. I've been working on it behind the scene for 7 years.

We can wallow in our own situation (especially when gas goes back up to $4.50 or more)- or do something about it.

The streetcar is a start. It is the main connector. It will prove success without dumping all our eggs in a metro-wide light rail basket.

Finally, I find it really fun that everybody is obsessed with the streetcar. The MTP plan calls for innovative use of windmills and a complete replacement of our bus fleet with Oklahoma's own natural gas (commuter buses to be added also).

I find it hilarious that, that part of the proposal has been barely debated/discussed.. Do you guys realize that if this plan were implemented how green it would be. I mean geez- were supposed to be the oil barons of the south and we could have a highly sustainable transit system overnight if we passed this plan. World Class is what were going for. Isn't that enough?- lol Jeff

I do want to put out there that we will be adding LOTS more to the MTP website in terms of emerging content. I think that the next constructive steps are to explain the steps in the plan (FGS) in a understandable form. There seems to be confusion as to whether there is a plan and what that big plan is.

Also, I have been encouraged to empasize that reasonable commuter solutions are in this plan. Commuter express bus BRT, light rail in some areas, ect- long term pic.

Love the idea of natural gas buses, and a streetcar sounds great. Personally, I'm hoping to be doing lots of walking downtown, but it would be nice to know that in inclement weather or if I'm tired, hopping on a streetcar would be an option.

Jeff Bezdek here. Thank you for many of your kind comments regarding this project and some about me. And quite frankly, I am not opposed to criticism as long as it is factual and responses are weighed in a fair manner.

I have not been on the blog for several years and have resisted disrupting the honest dialogue which OKC talk presents with the launch of this project.

I do want to clear up a few things.

This transit plan is the first coherent start to rectifying 40-50 years of system rot.

It is based on the Fixed Guideway Study which is sanctioned by the mayor. We have had regular and communicative contact.

Public Transit is a highly subsidized device that at one time was a private enterprise. That changed when the automobile became subsidized and road building became a hidden expenditure. PS- "I love my car"

Our city is so spread out that most forms of transit will not work efficiently. Plus, we have a local society that is culturally disconnected from its use.

So..... Changing things is not an easy task. It is not something that should be put in everywhere.

But, all roads lead to downtown. It is the core of the apple. The streetcar proposed has been identified in the FGS (and has been decided) as an optimal solution for downtown. The rubber tired bus trolleys do not work. They are inefficient, confusing, and irregular. I have lived downtown for 8 years (when it wasn't fashionable) and I still don't know when and where they go and I am a transit supporter!

Embedded rails in the ground offer comfort in solace in knowing that yes indeed, this is where the tram is going to come by.

The streetcar would be the first real opportunity to re-expose our citizens to REAL service without gambling on a Metro-wide solution overnight.

Also... Almost everybody I have talked to is either in the camp they don't believe it will work or they want it everywhere "especially to their front door". There is a plan. It is a ten year plan.

$140 million is a down-payment on federal matching funds. That should give us matching power of at least $420 million without the need for politicians. That gives you lots of money to work on those commuter routes (Bus, Bus Rapid Transit, or Light-Rail- refer to the study).


The situation is that it is a very complex issue that took 50 years to create and it will take at least 15 years to dramatically improve. I've been working on it behind the scene for 7 years.

We can wallow in our own situation (especially when gas goes back up to $4.50 or more)- or do something about it.

The streetcar is a start. It is the main connector. It will prove success without dumping all our eggs in a metro-wide light rail basket.

Finally, I find it really fun that everybody is obsessed with the streetcar. The MTP plan calls for innovative use of windmills and a complete replacement of our bus fleet with Oklahoma's own natural gas (commuter buses to be added also).

I find it hilarious that, that part of the proposal has been barely debated/discussed.. Do you guys realize that if this plan were implemented how green it would be. I mean geez- were supposed to be the oil barons of the south and we could have a highly sustainable transit system overnight if we passed this plan. World Class is what were going for. Isn't that enough?- lol Jeff

Jeff, what is the estimate of cost for just the first leg of the streetcar, do you know?

Basically a safe number is 28 mil a mile. That factors in the maintenance facility. To get from Deep Deuce to Sky Dance Bridge up to St. Anthony's is about 3.4 miles- about 100 mil. We propose that the State chip in their connection and private development financing could make up about 2 mil if TOD's are incorporated.

Forgive me for not reading the entire thread up to this point, but the fact of the matter is this is where it must start. Sure, a small percentage of OKC residents would end up using it, but I have a feeling that those who do use it, whether DT dwellers or the suburbanite going to an event, would really enjoy using it. If this passes, this will hands down be the biggest thing to keep the momentum going for the downtown area and hopefully propel it even further. And whats good for downtown is also good for the whole city.

And on another note, this will do wonders for attracting new downtown residents, which only creates a better downtown, which creates a better city, which creates...you get the picture.

There is a major framing error that is going on in the minds of many posters here. From my perspective, reasons for installing such a streetcar system may include traffic, high population density, and other things that OKC doesn't have much of- reasons that dissenters are using to show that we don't need streetcar.

However, there is also the fact that the act of building the streetcar is an economic incentive for future development. We can use the streetcar to stimulate the types of urban development that require streetcars - dense, walkable development that would be congested without public transit.

It is an economic strategy to have this form of transit- not merely a way to relieve traffic. It doesn't matter what percentage of residents will use it. The fact is, future success and growth will require it. I really want to live in this city when I graduate from college, but I really want to live in a city where I can have streetcars and light rail systems and a walkable neighborhood, and I represent many people in my generation. It's important in many ways other than moving people around.

Great post, Shane. I agree completely.

We've discussed this here dozens of times. The transit drives development. It has happened everywhere.

Jeff, what is the estimate of cost for just the first leg of the streetcar, do you know?

Basically a safe round number is 28 mil per mile (cost of maintenance facility included). Our system is about 3.4 excluding the Capitol extension.