However, in most cases, privatization often ends up costing the taxpayers even more than the same service formerly provided by government.

Source?

Hey Pete. Is there a way to move over the last two pages of this thread to Mass Transit Announcement? lol The canal hasn't been mentioned again and we need this kind of debate/dialogue on MTA. lol

I just met with the powers to be and we are only really looking at 3 mill a year out of a 30 mil annual budget. Not much all considered.

metro.

Where did I specifically state that?

Where did I specifically state that?

Here...

http://www.okctalk.com/okc-metro-area-talk/18537-maps-3-proposal-if-youre-listening-mayor-coucil.html


Okay, so with all the recent debate, thinking and re-thinking about Core-To-Shore, it seems the majority is not in favor of C2S as proposed. The majority of OKC citizens DO seem to be in favor of a mass transit system. My good friend Jeff Bezdek says we need at least $100 million to run an effective streetcar system.

Here...

http://www.okctalk.com/okc-metro-area-talk/18537-maps-3-proposal-if-youre-listening-mayor-coucil.html

"Hundreds" =/= "at least $100 million"

Once you cross $100 million, I don't think it is incorrect grammar to say the project is in the hundreds of millions as an estimate of cost.

Whatever it takes for OKC to be looked at other than a bible thumping city/state where everything closes down early, is worth it to me.

Numerous friends of mine express how they hate this city. Everything closes early and work's on patterns. He does have a point.

There was a time when buses would stop running at 7 pm, they probably still do.

Stores close earlier than some of the bigger cities, and my friends state there's nothing to do around here but run over trashcans with cars.

I am for an extension of the canal because we need to grow. I am for C2S, because we need to grow. If this city is afraid to spend and take risks, we will never be taken seriously.

I am a screenwriter, but having only just gotten into the business, I was never afraid to take my hard earned money, and vote yes on whatever tax hikes it took to make this city grow. This is someone who was at a time, only making 640 a month, raising 3 kids, and a fiancee (fiancee makes more,) while paying bills. ALL ABOUT RISKS, while being passionate about the city you want to live and die in. I want this city to be known as a city that never sleeps, always has something to do, and isn't afraid to take risks, and get away from what my friends call a bible thumping redneck craphole (they used a different word.)

I make way more money now, but even if I didn't, I would still fork over anything I can to help this city, and make sure it flourish's that way my kids, and my kid's kids, don't get bored out of their minds seeing the same old crap, just a different day.

Once you cross $100 million, I don't think it is incorrect grammar to say the project is in the hundreds of millions as an estimate of cost.

But what your implying does matter. Why not just say "roughly a hundred million"? That's like saying, "I bought a car! It was tens of thousands of dollars!", when in actuality it was $10,450. You were merely sensationalizing the true number to fit your agenda.

And you still haven't told us how to deal with none-choice riders in cities where full privatization of transit is economically impossible.

And you still haven't told us how to deal with none-choice riders in cities where full privatization of transit is economically impossible.

When the government relinquishes its monopoly, more options and more solutions will be had by all segments of society including the disabled, handicapped and low income.

Just as private schools offer special ed learning, and McDonalds hires handicapped, and hospitals pay for sign language interpreters... the private sector always works it out.

As it is, the government provides mass transit while running a deficit and never turning a profit. As long as that business model is in place, no private transit company can compete with a company allowed to continue all the while losing money (saddling the taxpayer with the burden year after year).

The website has been updated and is much more 'glossy.'

It claims that an extension that runs directly to the proposed convention center sites could be funded by MAPS 3 for an estimated $25 Million.

Interesting... on the 'Supporter' page at canalconnection.com there are a number of qutes noteing 'notable individual support.'

The quote for Jeff speck is:
“...the connections to and from Bricktown demand special attention, so that its energy can germinate into the rest of the downtown.” - Oklahoma City Downtown Walkability Analysis and Recommendations - Speck and Associates, LLC

But if you read the Downtown Walkability study the quote is this:

"As discussed, there is a great demand for housing in Bricktown, and this neighborhood
truly represents the best hope for a downtown Oklahoma City renaissance. Not only does
it deserve additional public funding – contingent on strong public planning controls – but
the connections to and from Bricktown demand special attention, so that its energy can
germinate into the rest of the downtown."

Is it me or is he speaking about infill housing and streescapes... not a canal connection.

The additional quotes are ALL form the same July 2 Oklahoman article.

Hmmmm....

Whatever it takes for OKC to be looked at other than a bible thumping city/state where everything closes down early, is worth it to me.

Numerous friends of mine express how they hate this city. Everything closes early and work's on patterns. He does have a point.

There was a time when buses would stop running at 7 pm, they probably still do.

Stores close earlier than some of the bigger cities, and my friends state there's nothing to do around here but run over trashcans with cars.

I am for an extension of the canal because we need to grow. I am for C2S, because we need to grow. If this city is afraid to spend and take risks, we will never be taken seriously.

I am a screenwriter, but having only just gotten into the business, I was never afraid to take my hard earned money, and vote yes on whatever tax hikes it took to make this city grow. This is someone who was at a time, only making 640 a month, raising 3 kids, and a fiancee (fiancee makes more,) while paying bills. ALL ABOUT RISKS, while being passionate about the city you want to live and die in. I want this city to be known as a city that never sleeps, always has something to do, and isn't afraid to take risks, and get away from what my friends call a bible thumping redneck craphole (they used a different word.)

I make way more money now, but even if I didn't, I would still fork over anything I can to help this city, and make sure it flourish's that way my kids, and my kid's kids, don't get bored out of their minds seeing the same old crap, just a different day.

You need to get out more. For passive entertainment, there's a TON to do in central Oklahoma, and for all age groups. For active entertainment, that depends on what you and your friends want to do, or are willing to do. As for stores closing earlier than you would like, they would stay open later if customers demanded it, which clearly they don't. If you want to live in a city that never sleeps, there's only one that I know of, and Governor Patterson & Mayor Bloomberg are raising taxes so high (which you equate to "taking risks") that citizens and employers are moving out in droves.

I know of no-one who sounds unhappier about being in OKC than you and your friends. If that's our fault, you'll clearly be happier elsewhere and should move; if that's your fault, you'll always be unhappy no matter where you are.

You're effectively defending a business venture that will guarantee to burden the investors (taxpayers) a net loss year after year after year?

Source?

The same exact thing could be said about the ACTUAL hundreds of millions of dollars (close to a billion actually) already spent over the last decade on I-235 / HWY 77 and I-35 in the south part of the city for about 20 miles or so just to widen those sections of the road. And this was simply to widen these roads, not build them, which also creates more road to maintain. These projects will not EVER generate one single dollar in direct revenue. So, by the same measure, widening the freeways was a "business venture that will guarantee... the investors a net loss year after year after year". In addition, these same investors have to invest tens of thousands of their own money in the purchase and maintenance of a car to use these roads, as well as pay for the gas that makes these cars go and possibly the expense of cleaning up or offsetting the pollution these cars create. So, if you are trying to discredit mass transit from a direct profit standpoint, then you really have essentially discredited all public transportation projects down to the building of the road that connects to your driveway. Of course, no sane person would evaluate such projects solely from a direct revenue standpoint, because there is obviously an immense economic benefit (necessity, really) to people and goods being able to move easily to, from, and within your market.

Anyway, I personally do NOT think that MAPS 3 should have a comprehensive metro wide mass transit component. I think the billion dollars we just spent on 20 miles of I-235 and I-35 should have been used for that, but mass transit rail money is always harder to get than highway money in this country. Maybe next time we'll spend that highway money on a more efficient and (potentially) cleaner mode of transportation like trains. I doubt it, but at least when we talk about the ROI of mass transit, we really need to compare it to the ROI of other transportation projects like roads and not twist the argument to make mass transit a spoil, while more highway lanes are necessity, when the opposite is more often true.

Since it is a foregone conclusion that a new convention center will be built, what happes to the Cox center? At that point it's primary benefit would be a 2nd downtown arena being only 50-some-odd steps from the 1st. An argument could be made for whether-or-not a 2nd arena is enough reason to keep the building, but it is my opinion that it is not the highest and best use (besides, its nearing the end of it's design life).

Currenly, the main barrier between Bricktown is not the railroad tracks but the bleak row of buildings along the west side of EK Gaylord. The Cox is one of those buildings. The Cox is also guilty of the same crime on the east side of the Myriad Gardens. The removal of the Cox center would be an opportunity to connect the more walkable parts of the CBD and the under-utilzed Gardens with Bricktown. This site would also be the ideal location for the canal extension that has been discussed ad naseum. Something like this:

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/concept1.jpg

During the Core-to-Shore discussions a commercial/retail development was always located the the south of the Gardens. This development could be moved to the Cox site would open up the car-lots for parkland connecting the Gardens with the new Central Park. The former Cox site then would serve as a pedestrian enhancement rather than detriment as it is now.


I really like your thinking here. The only thing I would change is to just get rid of Reno between Oklahoma and Hudson. I don't like the idea of the canal just paralleling the road, and with the new Boulevard just a block south, Reno isn't needed as a major through-route. Then the canal could go in the place of Reno for that segment. This would also eliminate a need for a new tunnell under the railroad overpass and would allow the Myriad Gardens to expand uninterrupted south to the Boulevard. Also, one of the four sections of that former superblock could house a new secondary arena to replace the Myriad.

Basically I would only be in favor of a small extension on this scale anytime in the near future. We just don't need the canal meandering all through downtown and especially into undeveloped areas south of the current I-40. The plan being promoted by the Bricktown Association shows the canal curving around randomly all over the place, paralleling roads and other big flat walls like the side of the convention center and the railroad overpass.

Think how long it took to (sort of) fill in Lower Bricktown. And then think how AWFUL it turned out. Do we need that again x5???

The canal doesn't connect the convention center to Bricktown now, so why is the Association concerned that Bricktown will be forgotten without a canal connection to the new convention center? Makes no sense.

Source?

Hey, if you can find a government run mass public transit system let me know.


The same exact thing could be said about the ACTUAL hundreds of millions of dollars (close to a billion actually) already spent over the last decade on I-235 / HWY 77 and I-35 in the south part of the city for about 20 miles or so just to widen those sections of the road. And this was simply to widen these roads, not build them, which also creates more road to maintain. These projects will not EVER generate one single dollar in direct revenue. So, by the same measure, widening the freeways was a "business venture that will guarantee... the investors a net loss year after year after year". In addition, these same investors have to invest tens of thousands of their own money in the purchase and maintenance of a car to use these roads, as well as pay for the gas that makes these cars go and possibly the expense of cleaning up or offsetting the pollution these cars create. So, if you are trying to discredit mass transit from a direct profit standpoint, then you really have essentially discredited all public transportation projects down to the building of the road that connects to your driveway. Of course, no sane person would evaluate such projects solely from a direct revenue standpoint, because there is obviously an immense economic benefit (necessity, really) to people and goods being able to move easily to, from, and within your market.

This is where I think privatization of roads would be a better alternative. Unlike every privatized entity from book stores to walmart to haliburton, Government agencies don't have to make a profit. So, a private toll road would make money for the owners of that road. As it is, the government will be charged us 50 cents a gallon (among other taxes, I'm sure) to fund the highway system.

Running the canal to that part of the gardens could make for a really nice waterfall feature.

Running the canal to that part of the gardens could make for a really nice waterfall feature.

lol

"The water taxi's final stop today, folks, is the Myriad Garden Pond. Featuring two foot long koiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHHHH!!!"

http://z.about.com/d/travelwithkids/1/5/Q/7/jurassic3USH.JPG

lol

"The water taxi's final stop today, folks, is the Myriad Garden Pond. Featuring two foot long koiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHHHH!!!"

http://z.about.com/d/travelwithkids/1/5/Q/7/jurassic3USH.JPG

Luke, that is a fantastic idea!!! :yourock:

I disagree! :wink:

Seriously though, I encouraged Jim with the Bricktown Association to register and post, and he has now done so, but I think he's caught in the moderation queue. He posted yesterday afternoon, and it hasn't appeared. Would someone mind looking into that?

seriously though, i encouraged jim with the bricktown association to register and post, and he has now done so, but I think he's caught in the moderation queue. he posted yesterday afternoon, and it hasn't appeared. would someone mind looking into that?

as of right now everything in the queue has been approved... -M

Bricktown currently is easily connected to the Cox Center, by either Reno or Sheridan. When you exit the Cox Center, it's easy to see Bricktown. "IF" the Convention Center is builit South of the Ford Center, all of that changes. The walk is almost 3 times further and it's much harder to make a visible connection. Try it! Get in your car, drive to the area of where the convention center is being proposed and look. I did and was very concerned.
Simple Connectivity, that's all we have stressed. Bricktown opposes NOTHING, instead we support all of the efforts of MAPS 3. We are connected now and want to stay that way in the future. If we don't bring this topic to the discussion of our downtown's future who does?
Our message is simple, we are excited about the future and we want to make changes to make things better today and for the future!

and my friends state there's nothing to do around here but run over trashcans with cars.

What would your friends do if they lived in Dallas? I bet they would run over trash cans with cars.

lol

"The water taxi's final stop today, folks, is the Myriad Garden Pond. Featuring two foot long koiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHHHH!!!"

http://z.about.com/d/travelwithkids/1/5/Q/7/jurassic3USH.JPG

LOL Hilarious!

Its so refreshing to read comments and see ideas from sane people about C2S and the canals rather than the mindless goofs who comment on the DOK site. I may have missed it but I am gathering from the posts above that the Myriad Gardens lake is a couple of feet lower than the canals would be? It would take new construction of some of thing things around the lake but couldn't the canal level be raised? Or, we could just leave the old structures around the MG lake, raise the lake level and let it be a forewarning of what global warming would do to NYC? :)

Its so refreshing to read comments and see ideas from sane people about C2S and the canals rather than the mindless goofs who comment on the DOK site. I may have missed it but I am gathering from the posts above that the Myriad Gardens lake is a couple of feet lower than the canals would be? It would take new construction of some of thing things around the lake but couldn't the canal level be raised? Or, we could just leave the old structures around the MG lake, raise the lake level and let it be a forewarning of what global warming would do to NYC? :)Maybe I'm missing something here. Why would you want to raise the canal level?

I hope everything passes when it comes to the canal extension and C2S. I'm ready to see OKC grow bigtime.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but a canal extension isn't going to cause OKC to grow bigtime. C2S although exciting, can possibly cause momentum to slow down. Mass transit is the #1 component to a successful, thriving, dense downtown and mixed-use development. It is time tested and proven in many markets.

Our canal sucks compared to the one in San Antonio. The area around the canal has lots of very nice looking restaurants, and the scenery and the greenery is pleasing.

All we have is a short one way canal. It sorely needs to go in more than one direction. It lacks depth.

mega, San Antonio's Riverwalk has 60 YEARS on our canal. You can't possibly expect it to be as developed or the landscaping as mature as in San Antonio. I don't see how you think a longer undeveloped canal will suddenly make it better or even equal to the Riverwalk.



I may have missed it but I am gathering from the posts above that the Myriad Gardens lake is a couple of feet lower than the canals would be? It would take new construction of some of thing things around the lake but couldn't the canal level be raised?

I haven't seen any definitive answer on this, however the chance that the Myriad Gardens sunken lake is at the same level as the canal or even within a few inches is very, very slim. There are ways around it, such as the canal spilling over a waterfall into the lake, but again, I don't think a canal extension is the answer.