Interesting.

They presented 3 options, none of which were that great. Letstalktransit.com should have the meeting information up soon.

Searching for direction - MAPS 3 streetcar
Officials ponder details of MAPS 3 streetcar system
By Brian Brus
The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY – Supporters of a streetcar system and city planners originally imagined certain destinations would likely be chosen as anchors in a downtown Oklahoma City fixed-rail transit route.

“We had no preconceived ideas about where it should go, although we had guessed what people would want,” said Rick Cain, director of public transportation and parking for the Oklahoma City municipal government.

“But as we’ve moved on, their ideas have shaped several main route options that we’re looking more closely at. Sometimes it’s a little surprising to see the process in action.”

And as Keith Jones told several hundred attendees at the annual Mayor’s Development Roundtable on Wednesday, “That track is pretty permanent, so you want to be very smart about where you put that track down the first time. … What I try to tell folks is that it’s more art than science.”

Jones, vice president and regional transit manager of URS Corp., was a keynote speaker at Mayor Mick Cornett’s event this year, addressing the challenges of establishing a streetcar system – maintaining funding, future expansion potential and routing decisions. Jones was joined in the discussion by Cain; James Ellison, marketing and development specialist for Othello Partners Inc. and vice chairman of the local Modern Transit Project; and Tom McDaniel, Oklahoma City University president and chairman of the MAPS 3 citizen’s advisory committee.

In December, Oklahoma City voters approved the MAPS 3 sales tax, which will be collected for almost eight years before expiring. The initiative will raise about $777 million to fund eight projects, including $130 million for a transit package of five to six miles of a downtown streetcar.

The streetcar will be on rails in city streets and link major employers, businesses, attractions and residential communities in the downtown area. The MAPS 3 ballot text did not provide specific details about the project, leaving it open for public input. To that end, the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority offered an online survey and held public meetings at City Hall.

Cornett said Wednesday the scheduling of MAPS 3 projects hasn’t been set yet, which adds another glitch in determining the final route.

As Cain put it, “If we were to build it tomorrow, you might see one route.

But if the streetcar doesn’t come out for five or seven years, who knows what’s going to evolve over that period?”

But he said the city is trying to determine streetcar routes as quickly as possible so that work will coincide with another massive, unrelated project: Project 180, a streetscaping project that will extensively change 180 acres of streets, sidewalks, lamps, benches and signage throughout downtown for the next three years. If money can be saved because of overlapping efforts, it would provide streetcar planners more options, he said.

Cain said people don’t want to walk more than a block in order to reach a streetcar.

“We know we don’t have enough money right now to reach every point people would like to go to. So the question becomes how do we position ourselves so that when we do get some additional funding in the future, it’s an easy connection to grow into,” he said.

Feedback so far has resolved into three primary options. In two of the route plans (Option 2 and Option 3), St. Anthony Hospital is an anchor with streetcar rails south to Sheridan and Reno, then east to Stiles and north to the edge of the Oklahoma Health Center campus at Centennial Expressway. Those routes pass the Ford Center, Bricktown Ballpark and the Myriad Botanical Gardens.

A third option (Option 1) also passes those landmarks, but incorporates a second loop that passes east of the Centennial Expressway and around the health center campus. Cain stressed the options are still works in progress and not conclusive.

Jones said city leaders must weigh several considerations in determining where the streetcar will pass and make stops, including: what the resident public wants now for their immediate daily use, what visitors will need for special event destinations, sites that are planned for future development, and existing areas that need a traffic boost.

“Getting that balance of serving existing (passenger) generators, but also serving those places where you want to focus on new development and redevelopment is going to be a real challenge,” Jones said.

The OCU law school could end up being one of those generators someday soon. McDaniel said the university wants to move the school downtown to take advantage of related legal resources in the area. In response to Cornett’s question about the school’s needs, McDaniel said mass transit would help solve parking problems.

“The trick is having parking places when we need them,” McDaniel said. “We need a lot of parking places for a very short period of time. So being downtown, we can get our students internships, get them to lawyers’ offices, get them to courthouses, places where they’ll be able to work while they’re students.”

Cain said the streetcar’s interaction with the city’s bus system will be a vital component to the health and growth of both components, but it will take time to fully develop that synergy and, ultimately, an intermodal transit hub somewhere in the heart of the city.

Jones said the streetcar will be “a game changer” because it also will allow greater mobility for Amtrak train travelers.

Searching for direction - MAPS 3 streetcar (http://journalrecord.com/2010/05/12/searching-for-direction-general-news/)

None of the 3 options presented addressed the OCU law school.

I just received this release in my email:

Alternatives Analysis Study Begins
COTPA Studies the Future of Transit in Greater Downtown Area

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority (COTPA) is conducting an Alternatives Analysis (AA) study to help guide the long-term development and expansion of transit in the greater downtown area. The study builds upon recent planning for the streetcar project that is part of MAPS 3 passed by Oklahoma City voters in December 2009. The study will take about a year to complete.

The AA is designed to explore additional transit options and determine one that best meets the future needs of the downtown community. This is one of several steps that must be completed in order for the City to be eligible for future federal funding, according to Rick Cain, administrator of COTPA.

“The MAPS 3 modern streetcar will provide improved mobility and support economic development in the downtown area and provide the foundation for future growth. The AA is broad in scope and will assess other options that could further enhance public transportation in downtown,” explains Cain. “If we hope to receive federal funding to grow our transit system, it’s critical that we have a plan beyond the initial 5 track miles of downtown streetcar and a multimodal transit hub.”

A steering committee made up of citizens has been formed to guide the process and to represent the diverse interests of the downtown community. Before making a recommendation to the COTPA Board of Trustees or the City Council, the committee is tasked with appraising the study’s findings while considering the input received through this spring’s Let’s Talk Transit public meetings.

An orientation meeting for the AA Steering Committee will occur Wednesday, May 19 from 3 to 5 p.m. at the Civic Center Hall of Mirrors.

The AA Steering Committee includes:
- Jeff M. Bezdek, Modern Transit Project
- Kay Bickham, COTPA Trustee
- JoeVan Bullard, Executive Director, Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority
- Mike Carrier, President, OKC Conventions and Visitors Bureau
- Russell Claus, Director, City of Oklahoma City Planning Department
- Mayor Mick Cornett, City of Oklahoma City
- Joseph J. Ferretti, Ph.D., Senior Vice President and Provost University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
- Joe Hodges, President, St. Anthony Hospital
- Jane Jenkins, President and CEO, Downtown Oklahoma City Inc.
- Don Karchmer, Bricktown Parking Investors
- Klaholt Kimker, Vice President Administration, Devon Energy
- Steve Mason, President, Cardinal Engineering
- Michael Ogan, Business Development Director, Greater Oklahoma City Chamber
- David Remy, Urban Neighbors Board
- Nancy Love Robertson, Sr. Vice President – Communications, Sonic Corporate Headquarters
- Jim Roth, Phillips Murrah P.C.
- Councilwoman Meg Salyer, City of Oklahoma City
- Barney Semtner, COTPA Trustee
- Terry Taylor, Planning and Operations Director, Oklahoma Health Center Foundation
- Jim Thompson, Assistant City Manager, City of Oklahoma City
- Lauren White, President/CEO, NewView Oklahoma
- John D. Williams, General Manager, Skirvin Hilton
- Marsha N. Wooden, Vice President of Administration, SandRidge Energy

In Portland, the streetcar 'loop' makes sense. The streetcar goes one way on a one-way street.

Project 180 converts all of our one-ways back to two-way streets. Wouldn't it be odd to have our streetcars go only one way on two-way streets like the 3 options rececently presented propose?

In this example, the blue line is exactly 2.5 miles (or 5 miles of track). It's super simple and goes through all the downtown districts. PLUS... is easy to expand on and create 'spokes' on a wheel. The three options we've seen seem to jog way too much and would be awkward to expand upon.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/streetcar.jpg

In Portland, the streetcar 'loop' makes sense. The streetcar goes one way on a one-way street.

Project 180 converts all of our one-ways back to two-way streets. Wouldn't it be odd to have our streetcars go only one way on two-way streets like the 3 options rececently presented propose?

I'm not really sure I understand this. If we have a loop, then if the streetcar isn't going the direction you want to go, you either ride the loop until you get where you want to go, or you walk. To have streetcars going two directions would either take two tracks, which is twice as expensive, or you'd have to have a spoke and hub system. Using a spoke and hub system, at any given time the streetcar would be going in the wrong direction for half the people, and they'd have to get on, ride to the end and then ride back the other direction.

I'm not really sure I understand this. If we have a loop, then if the streetcar isn't going the direction you want to go, you either ride the loop until you get where you want to go, or you walk. To have streetcars going two directions would either take two tracks, which is twice as expensive, or you'd have to have a spoke and hub system. Using a spoke and hub system, at any given time the streetcar would be going in the wrong direction for half the people, and they'd have to get on, ride to the end and then ride back the other direction.

I don't know what streetcar system you've been on the requires riding to the end of the line before heading the other direction. You just catch the streetcar on the other side of the street.

I thought we're talking about a single track system. Double track costs a lot more money and takes up a lot more space. Perhaps I am in error.

I didn't think it mattered.... a long skinny 5-6 mile loop... or 2.5-3 mile loop with tracks in both directions.

Depends on how much area they want to cover. A single-track loop is definitely less user friendly, but you can cover more ground for the price.

Depends on how much area they want to cover. A single-track loop is definitely less user friendly, but you can cover more ground for the price.

I think you're really covering basically the same amount of ground... putting the track going the other way a block or two away (which could actually add to your walk depending upon which driection you're taveling)

But, if it were a block or two away, you'd still have a line only going one way on a two-way street. Which gets us back to the original statement. It doesn't bother me at all to have a streetcar going one way on a two way street. The benefit of a loop is that you don't have to think or remember which street the line going the other direction is on. To get to where you want to go, you just get on the streetcar. If it's going the wrong direction, you decide whether it's worth it to walk versus how long it will take you to get there if you have to go around the loop.

In the best of all possible worlds, you have a two track system on the same street, so you don't have to think about anything except which direction you want to go. I'm just not sure what kind of money we have for this system. And, for a starter system, I almost think it's better to cover more ground than to pay for two tracks. I'm just throwing ideas out there, however. I'm sure I'll ride it regardless of how its designed.

How is this....
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/trolleystoday/2010_05_11_ns_ew_option3.jpg
....covering more ground (really)

than this....
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/streetcar.jpg

Can we leave out Union Station? I'll be interested to see the ultimate route, but I think you've almost got to run the line there, or you've left Core to Shore completely without access.

...In this example, the blue line is exactly 2.5 miles (or 5 miles of track). It's super simple and goes through all the downtown districts. PLUS... is easy to expand on and create 'spokes' on a wheel. The three options we've seen seem to jog way too much and would be awkward to expand upon.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/streetcar.jpg

I can appreciate the simple approach (sometimes the simplest way is the best way) but it approaches the Loop system that the Mayor was trying to avoid. Unless this loop is the hub of the spoke and hub, but then again, the spokes would be coming much later.

Not familiar with all of downtown but saw a couple of glaring omissions from the blue route (connecting with)...

1) The Ford
2) The City's preferred location of the new Convention Center
3) The MAPS 3 Park

Need to extend it down to the Union Station around the Park/Convention Center. But then how much does that go beyond the 5 to 6 miles?

While they want it to serve a good mix of everyone (downtown businesses, residents & tourists), doesn't seem like a good idea to exclude the tourists either. The main goal of the Streetcars is to serve as a starter for a much larger plan, to get people used to the idea of using mass trans. The harder you make it for some one to use it (number of blocks they are willing to walk to a pickup point), the less likely they are to utilize it and that goes against the stated goal.

This all gets rather complicated and really would have been helpful if routes etc had been determined BEFORE it was decided to include it in MAPS 3 and the info to make an informed decision was put in front of the public BEFORE the vote. IMO

We don't need to go to Union Station -- yet. Remember, this will be a phased system. We need to accomplish the most possible with the initial installation. It doesn't make sense to forego denser, more populated districts for the "hope" that the Union Station area will eventually fill in.

We don't need to go to Union Station -- yet. Remember, this will be a phased system. We need to accomplish the most possible with the initial installation. It doesn't make sense to forego denser, more populated districts for the "hope" that the Union Station area will eventually fill in.

I disagree. Expanding this line will be a slow process. Union Station will be an integral part of Core to Shore, and the park is part of the first phase of Core to Shore. We've already learned that development follows street car lines. One of the best ways to stimulate development in that area is with the street car line. One of the best ways to ensure that our Central Park doesn't become a Will Rogers Park.....out of the way, difficult to access and thus underutilized....is to make it easily accessible immediately. None of the area the line will serve really qualifies as significantly "denser" or "more populated" right now anyway.

I disagree. Expanding this line will be a slow process. Union Station will be an integral part of Core to Shore, and the park is part of the first phase of Core to Shore. We've already learned that development follows street car lines. One of the best ways to stimulate development in that area is with the street car line. One of the best ways to ensure that our Central Park doesn't become a Will Rogers Park.....out of the way, difficult to access and thus underutilized....is to make it easily accessible immediately. None of the area the line will serve really qualifies as significantly "denser" or "more populated" right now anyway.

Sorry. Given the choice of having a functional, successful transit system, and propping up an underutilized area, I will err on the side of ensuring the street car is a success. Bad route design will doom the streetcar to failure, not a risk worth taking.

If it's just one stop of many, it won't matter. If we were talking about the entire route, I might agree with you. But, a stop at Union Station would undoubtedly be preceded by a stop at Midtown or the CBD and followed, perhaps, by a stop at the Ford Center. If the stops preceding and following it are already highly utilized, it will support the new Core to Shore area without having a negative effect. We'll have to agree to disagree.....not that our opinions carry weight regardless.

The route needs to connect the area's biggest employers to the current and existing living and entertainment areas (St. Anthony's, OU Health Sciences Center, Devon, Bricktown) and worry about the convention center and C2S Park later.

I agree with betts, you HAVE to include the Convention Center and MAPS 3 Park (the park is supposedly one of the first projects to be completed and will include the Convention Center if it goes where they City is wanting it too later on). Union Station is a natural connection and hopefully can be tied into the Streetcars. They are trying to strike a balance with current residents/businesses AND development factors. You can not exclude the development factors and the tourist element. One of the biggest mistakes that you can make is to somehow exclude the tourism $$$, that is primarily NEW money coming into the economy. That can only ultimately increase tax revenues. Isn't this the "rising tide lefts all boats"? This is an absolute MUST.

I know funds are limited and that they are wanting a starter system (thats why I was really surprised/disappointed when MAPS 3 was announced that it only included the Downtown Streetcar element). I fully expected MAPS 3 to be the Big 3 elements the Mayor spoke of nearly every time. Roughly a 10 year penny sales tax for the following:

1) $394M for the all-inclusive Mass Transit plan: "Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.)" "The resulting plan included better bus service, commuter rail, a modern streetcar for the downtown area and bus rapid transit, which is a hybrid between bus and rail."

2) $400M for the COMPLETE Convention Center (NOT the $280M "Phase 1" in MAPS 3)

3) $130M for the 70 acre Park. (probably would have been double the amount but several recommended elements in the Core to Shore report where left out)

I agree with betts, you HAVE to include the Convention Center and MAPS 3 Park (the park is supposedly one of the first projects to be completed and will include the Convention Center if it goes where they City is wanting it too later on). Union Station is a natural connection and hopefully can be tied into the Streetcars. They are trying to strike a balance with current residents/businesses AND development factors. You can not exclude the development factors and the tourist element. One of the biggest mistakes that you can make is to somehow exclude the tourism $$$, that is primarily NEW money coming into the economy. That can only ultimately increase tax revenues. Isn't this the "rising tide lefts all boats"? This is an absolute MUST.

I know funds are limited and that they are wanting a starter system (thats why I was really surprised/disappointed when MAPS 3 was announced that it only included the Downtown Streetcar element). I fully expected MAPS 3 to be the Big 3 elements the Mayor spoke of nearly every time. Roughly a 10 year penny sales tax for the following:

1) $394M for the all-inclusive Mass Transit plan: "Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.)" "The resulting plan included better bus service, commuter rail, a modern streetcar for the downtown area and bus rapid transit, which is a hybrid between bus and rail."

I agree. I would have liked a more comprehensive plan. But I believe Urban Pioneer has said that having a streetcar either planned or in place may help us get federal dollars, and, since the federal government is collecting our money whether it's used here or in Utah, I don't mind getting them to help out a bit. Hopefully we can use this as a springboard for a better mass transit system throughout the city. I also hope having a streetcar changes attitudes towards mass transit in general.

betts, I agree (if it is utilized) but we shouldn't bet on federal funds (and to the City's credit, they aren't depending on them for the MAPS 3 streetcar). We made that mistake with the original MAPS and the Feds and more importantly our own representative didn't come though. We ended up with the rubber tired trolleys instead. We can hope, but at this point isn't that just speculation?

It would have been great for the writers of the several preceding comments to have participated in the LetsTalkTransit meetings, with a final meeting (twice on the same day) yet to occur. Lots of good thoughtful comments and observations. OkcTalk might be "a" place to comment, but it is perhaps not the most, but might be the least, meaningful.

That said, I still have questions, perhaps doubts, that the LetsTalkTransit products are something much more than a very interesting parlor game. Not saying that's what it is, but I'm saying that the value of these meetings, and how they might shape the end result, has never been seriously described. Keep in mind that these proceedings are well below the Maps Oversight Board in the overall pecking order.

My work schedule has so far prevented me from attending any of the live events. My involvement is limited to taking the online surveys and writing City Hall. I would encourage all those that can attend the "live" meetings to do so and maybe they can pass along some of the concerns expressed here.

My work schedule has so far prevented me from attending any of the live events. My involvement is limited to taking the online surveys and writing City Hall. I would encourage all those that can attend the "live" meetings to do so and maybe they can pass along some of the concerns expressed here.
Larry, Larry, Larry ... each of the meetings have had sessions beginning at 6 pm (1st had a pair, one midday, other at 6 pm which is the case with the upcoming final meeting, as well). Do you work nights?

If not, you might be able to make the last, on May 27. If you can, I look forward to meeting you.

It would have been great for the writers of the several preceding comments to have participated in the LetsTalkTransit meetings, with a final meeting (twice on the same day) yet to occur.

ME TOO!!! But what's a service industry guy to do?!?!?

Platemaker, did 6 - 7:30 p.m. not work for you?

If I'm being honest... a weekday between 11am and 8pm is pretty much out of the question for me! LOL

My excuse aside ;) I DO think more people could have shown interest by being present.

I would have been there had I could. Too many pressing family concerns made it impossible for me. I'm going to try to make the May 27th one, but might end up having to miss it for the same reason I missed the others.

Just a couple of reminders, the next public meetings are a week from today (next Thursday May 27th) in City Council Chambers. One is at 11:30 AM and one at 6:00 PM.

If I had an opinion about what is the most important undecided question pressing the project right now, I would say it is whether we should double track a key northbound street or spread a northbound alignment over several streets. One street is north, one street is south (a compressed loop). And that fundamental question depends a great deal on your personal belief as to how much density a streetcar line can generate.

The ULI folks think that in a city such as ours, you should only pick a few areas as TOD's (Transit Oriented Developments) and gravitate towards developable "fabric", not empty lots. So, Midtown is a tough call if you believe that as well.

The streets that are of issue are Walker, Hudson, Robinson, and Broadway.

Harvey is intrinsically questionable because it runs into Devon's superblock.

Rick Dowell opposes overhead wires on Walker and is going to fight it every step of the way, although he is fine with it on Hudson.

The 2007 bond issue provides for traffic circles on 9th/Hudson and 8th/Harvey. They are not insurmountable but may require larger circles than the existing one at 10th to deal with the turning radius.

Robinson is a quiet street through Midtown and narrower.

Finally, I have been involved in this a while. I want this thing to work "out of the box."

I believe that the streetcar will be a fundamental catalyst for density. However, if the people who own the vast swaths of vacant land in Midtown "don't get it", will people who do buy them out and build the kind of activity to support a streetcar?

So with all of this said, what do you think?

I would encourage you to post on here and also copy paste your comments also on the Let's Talk Transit website Dean Schirf blog as well if you want to have information directly collated and included in the input process.

Open Mic Night - Option 1, 2 or 3? | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com/schirfblog1)

I don't understand the opposition to overhead wires on a commercial street, personally. It just adds to the urban appeal. And to me, Walker is a more logical street for the streetcar, especially given how it will ultimately connect with Core to Shore. But I think Harvey would work, although not as well. I agree that the streetcar will be a tremendous catalyst for density, and that's one of the reasons why I like Walker. I think that street will pop with development, given all that open land. Maybe it will take a new generation of owners, but I feel pretty confident it will happen.

I can see the benefit of using Robinson north and Harvey south (as outlined in plan number one in Doug's photobucket), as that eliminates the necessity of riding the loop to go both directions for part of the line. In essence the 8th and 4th street loop does the same thing, and I can definitely see the benefit of that. I like the idea of using two different streets more than a doubletrack on a single street because it makes the line very close, no matter where you are downtown, and I think that would increase people's likelihood of riding. It just feels more accessible.

It's hard for me to think of the street car not going down Broadway, however. That would take some getting used to, as I always thought of it as one of the primary streets for the line.

NO traffic circles!

NO traffic circles!

Traffic circles work great and can actually improve the flow of traffic---if you know how to drive.

LOL...That is the key, remember where we live.

IMO, as a result they are dangerous, take up more land etc. Have not personally witnessed them being anything but an accident waiting to happen and have seen them snarl traffic more than they help.

When they decided to put the traffic circle back in the St. Anthony area, there was a quote to the effect "Due to advancements in technology, they are much safer"

What technology?

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

Traffic circles are used very successfully all over the world and don't necessarily create accidents. It avoids stopping every few blocks at a stop where people still ignore the traffic laws (roll through stop, don't go in the proper sequence, etc.) If you are an aware and courteous driver then traffic circles are great. If you are a jerk or ignorant of right of ways then you will have trouble in any intersection.

LOL...That is the key, remember where we live.

IMO, as a result they are dangerous, take up more land etc. Have not personally witnessed them being anything but an accident waiting to happen and have seen them snarl traffic more than they help.


I have worked right on the circle @ 10th & Walker for 2 years and have never witnessed an accident. Nor had I witnessed traffic backing up. But I have heard an occasional honk for ignorant drivers. =)

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

Keep in mind the bus terminal is on Hudson. If there is anything a modern transit system needs, it's connectivity.

Also, what happens when the streetcar gets to the circle in Midtown?

I would propose a route that travels north on Broadway, west on 10th, then south on Hudson.

I hadn't thought about the bus station. You are right, the streetcar really should connect with the bus station, if the bus station is going to stay there for the long term. If it's planned to disappear when we create a transit hub elsewhere, then I would worry about the long term and not the short term, especially since the line would only be a block away anyway were it to run down Walker.

I'd really love to keep a line on 4th street, but that's probably because I live on 3rd. It's easy to be enthusiasti about 4th Street and Broadway because it would benefit me. I probably need to defer to those who have a less vested interest.

[B]The 2007 bond issue provides for traffic circles on 9th/Hudson and 8th/Harvey. They are not insurmountable but may require larger circles than the existing one at 10th to deal with the turning radius.

I totally forgot about this. Hopefully this plan moves forward. If so we may have better options for the streetcar route.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/midtown.jpg

Check this out... potential spokes! Looks like a real transit map to me!

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/streetcar-1.jpg

How many miles of track does that plan total?

I hadn't thought about the bus station. You are right, the streetcar really should connect with the bus station, if the bus station is going to stay there for the long term. If it's planned to disappear when we create a transit hub elsewhere, then I would worry about the long term and not the short term, especially since the line would only be a block away anyway were it to run down Walker.

I have been generally been told that the bus station is not going anywhere as it is such new infrastructure. The new hub that is being studied is indeed a multi-modal hub. One of the challenges of compressing local bus service into a new facility is the extreme surface parking area that would be necessary to handle both local city buses and Bus Rapid Transit or commuter buses.

And if Santa Fe is destined to potentially be that location, the surface area for bus service is questionable.

In anything that we do, it is important that those linkages exist between our bus system and commuter hub if we are to "grow transit ridership" and service those who use it more effectively.

One other thing that often gets overlooked in the broad discussion is that our existing city buses make additional stops on their way into downtown to service downtown. According to Rick Cain, those additional stops will not be necessary as the streetcar will take on this new roll. So service will slightly improve on those routes just by the nature of this new system.

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

Part of it is aesthetic. According to him though, the bigger part of it is he doesn't want himself or his tenants to deal with Walker dug up again. They recently renovated that street. He is fighting 180 as well. The way he sees it, they just went through it.

How many miles of track does that plan total?

That's more than 6.... but it could start like this (less than six miles of double track)

I think it's more important to plan for expansion than tho take our 5-6 miles and simply to to spread it out in a random fashion.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll14/Platemaker_photos/6mile.jpg

First off, they are proposing roundabouts, which are typically smaller than traffic circles and entering traffic must yield to traffic already in the circle. Traffic circles are usually larger and traffic in the circle most often must yield to cars entering the circle.

Secondly, roundabouts/traffic circles are great for cars. They reduce the number of conflict points, significantly decreasing accidents.


But, what about pedestrians? No dedicated signal, no requirement to stop. If they get busy enough it's like running a gauntlet. Something to keep in mind when we design true pedestrian oriented places. I've seen hybrid signaled/roundabouts intersections and am curious to see if they help solve that potential problem.

But, what about pedestrians? No dedicated signal, no requirement to stop. If they get busy enough it's like running a gauntlet. Something to keep in mind when we design true pedestrian oriented places. I've seen hybrid signaled/roundabouts intersections and am curious to see if they help solve that potential problem.


I've never had a problem navigating across the currnt traffic circle on foot. They way the street connect will the circle means you never have to cross more than one lane of traffic at a time. Also, the vast majority of vehicles slow to nearly a stop at they approach the circle, making it easier to yield to pedestrians.

Strangely enough, the fact that people here are unfamiliar with and afraid of traffic circles works on the side of safety. As motorist approach the circle, they tend to be much more cautious and aware of what's going on due to the perceived threat of collision.

Well, from what I have observed living over here, the traffic circle at 10th is much better solution from the 5 street intersection. I remember literally fearing for my life one time at the old intersection.

Regarding streetcar though, having it go around a circle probably is a bit more than a small one can handle.

I have worked right on the circle @ 10th & Walker for 2 years and have never witnessed an accident. Nor had I witnessed traffic backing up. But I have heard an occasional honk for ignorant drivers. =)

The City even said when the removed them that they were dangerous (thus the odd statement when they decided to put some back in: "due to technology, they are much safer now".

If they were dangerous before, what technology changed that? Its a traffic circle...

Well, from what I have observed living over here, the traffic circle at 10th is much better solution from the 5 street intersection. I remember literally fearing for my life one time at the old intersection.

Regarding streetcar though, having it go around a circle probably is a bit more than a small one can handle.

There is definitely a problem when you come to those multi street intersections (sometimes hard to tell which set of lights is yours). Maybe eliminate the 5th street? Diverting it into one of the other 4 before it gets there?

On the Bus Station subject, are we talking about the Greyhound Bus Station, the relatively new City Bus Station or both (when it comes to Streetcars and the Transit Hub)?

I am talking about the newer local bus (Metro Transit) terminal at Hudson/4th connecting with a future commuter rail/inter-modal hub. The location of such a hub is about to get underway and we should have the results early next year. Santa Fe Station will probably rank high on the list, but there is the possibility that a new facility may be proposed somewhere else. Presumably engineers will stick to the North/South corridor of the BNSF freight tracks.

As for Greyhound, I have no real information on it other than COTPA has spoken about it possibly being incorporated into the new intermodal hub.

Some cities incorporate such other transit companies into their hubs as paying tenants. The transit system my father worked for did such with their new hub during his tenure there.

Quite frankly, I do not know what the data is on whether many of the people arriving on Greyhound rely on local transit to get them to a second destination or if most people are dropped off and picked up by friends, family, or cabs.

I would say however that just like local bus service, Greyhound has become "stigmatized" over the years. It is possible that I isolating the commuter rail/bus system and connecting all of these things together via an attractive, modern, efficient streetcar will service better as a re-introduction of transit to the broader Oklahomacitian.

It is easy to say that COTPA is not immediately up for disbanding the use of the somewhat new local multi-million dollar bus station, many people comment on what they see as a beautiful Art Deco bus station that Greyhound employs, and quite frankly, we may have a space issue at the new commuter hub and combining absolutely every single form of transit at one point may not make sense.

Presumably engineers will stick to the North/South corridor of the BNSF freight tracks.

One would hope.

I have ridden a Greyhound bus twice in my life, while I was in college, and in both instances, it was a dismal experience. I'm not really sure what can be done to improve that, unless they were to institute express routes such as Oklahoma City-Dallas wtihout any stops in between. Maybe they already have something like that. I'm not sure Grand Central station as the hub would make it any more attractive to people. However, I do see linking city bus routes to the Greyhound station a good idea, as I suspect they would be utilized by people who ride the long-distance bus upon arrival. I would think, if space is a consideration for our new hub, that perhaps putting the Greyhound station adjacent to the city bus station might be a reasonable plan, and then linking those to the other hub via streetcar.

I don't think that there is any room next to the local bus station for Greyhound. The absence of their use of the facility on Walker/Sheridan might make it quite a target for redevelopment. I would suspect that a few people on this forum might have a problem with that. lol

Just a reminder of the final two "Lets Talk Transit" meetings tomorrow at City Hall Chambers. 11:30 AM and 6 PM. The email that I just received states that the meeting will include a presentation of three representational streetcar route concepts.

This was just posted on the "Lets Talk Transit Website."

Final Streetcar Meeting to Recap Citizen Input Citizen-Based Route Options Will Be Displayed

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 26, 2010



OKLAHOMA CITY – The final meeting in a public input process to determine where the modern streetcar might go in downtown Oklahoma City will take place Thursday, May 27 at City Hall. The community will have the option to attend an 11:30 a.m. or a 6 p.m. meeting with the same agenda.

Throughout the past two months, the Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority has sought citizen input through a series of public meetings and online forums to begin planning for the new public transit component in downtown Oklahoma City.

The final meeting will review public input from previous meetings and several route options will be presented that were developed by meeting attendees throughout the process.

Two online surveys were completed during the process and will also be discussed.

• Citizens were asked to identify their top five route destinations and two suggested anchor points. A variety of responses were given, but when grouped into categories, the top destinations included: Bricktown, the Arts District, Ford Center, Convention Center, OKC Memorial, Midtown and the Oklahoma Health Center.

• Citizens were asked the maximum distance they would walk to access the modern streetcar, 57% said 2-3 blocks, 36% said 4 or more blocks and 7% said 1 block.

• Citizens also prioritized the principals most important to them when planning a route. The top two priorities were: Proximity to major employment sites/housing development/parking garages and community/ cultural facilities; and connections with current and future METRO Transit bus service and transit centers.

The full results of the surveys can be seen online at Home | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.LetsTalkTransit.com).

An Alternatives Analysis Steering Committee made up of citizens is currently reviewing input from transit consultants, city planners and engineers about capital, operating costs and other infrastructure that must be considered, as well as to listening to input from the public about where they want to go. The input from the Let’s Talk Transit public discussion will be reviewed and considered by the Alternatives Analysis Steering Committee and the MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board for their recommendation to the City Council.

Background

Included in MAPS 3, passed by Oklahoma City voters in December 2009, is approximately $130 million in funding for public transportation. The transit package includes approximately five track miles of downtown streetcar and a multimodal transit hub in downtown.

This accelerated process is necessary to identify what streets the streetcar may travel and to coordinate the plan with Project 180, Oklahoma City’s downtown streetscape plan starting in May 2010. Through cooperative planning, the projects will minimize disruption due to construction and maximize cost savings.

For more information or to provide input, visit Home | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.LetsTalkTransit.com).

I'm hearing some chatter about a lot of our concerns going unnoticed from the public forums..

That has been suggested on Steve's blog. It is my guess that Doug is going to vent his suspicions about the process. He has been a vocal questioner of the process. What is funny, is that many of his concerns he has outlined in blog posts on the "Lets talk transit site."

I have not seen these three designs that are being unveiled tomorrow. If he is the blogger, maybe he has.

I wouldn't imagine that--I've never been shown anything in advance, although I am sure that you could email Mike and get any designs or routes that may be in the works. He's pretty willing to share anything he's got, it seems.