If it could be on a Sunday, that would be perfect!

Interesting 2008 article that Marion Hutchison dug up from the Gazette archives...

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-2784-oklahoma-city-wasnt-always-married-to-the-car.html

Oklahoma City wasn't always married to the car

November 13th, 2008
Mike Coppock (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/by-author-35-1.html)

Dr. George Cross, president of the University of Oklahoma, began writing a heartfelt letter to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission at his desk. It was the summer of 1946 and the new owners of the Oklahoma Railway Company had just petitioned the commission seeking to discontinue commuter rail service from Oklahoma City to Norman.

Dr. Cross' concern, as well as that of the Norman Chamber of Commerce, was that ending commuter rail service would greatly affect people needing to get to Norman. Many have forgotten that Oklahoma City had a commuter rail service from 1903 to 1946. At its height, Oklahoma City passengers could ride the electric rails from downtown OKC to Guthrie, El Reno or Norman for a fare ranging anywhere from a nickel to a quarter. Oklahoma City's Belle Isle Power Plant, owned by the Oklahoma Railway Company until 1928, was not constructed to provide electricity to the city, but in order to power the "interurbans," as electric trains were called.

Oklahoma City was not alone in the state with interurban rail service.
McAlester started up a service the same year Oklahoma City did while Guthrie and Muskogee followed up with theirs the following year. A total of 17 electric interurbans eventually operated in the state by 1915, including such seemingly rural settings as Nowata, Clinton, Ardmore, Bartlesville and Miami, and continued to operate until the end of World War II.

"Originally, they were used by workers getting from point A to point B," said Michael Dean, public relations director with the Oklahoma Historical Society. "If you were incredibly rich, you had a carriage and a driver to get you to work. For Oklahoma City, the interurbans were used to get people from their homes to downtown or to the meat packing plants by the stockyards."


EXPANDING THE LINE

Before statehood, and even before Oklahoma City became the capital of Oklahoma, WW Storm began the Metropolitan Railway Company in 1902. It was a very modest affair, consisting of four miles of track centered in downtown Oklahoma City. In January 1904, Anton Classen and John Shartel took over the interurban, renaming it the Oklahoma Railway Company. The two were very ambitious, running track up what would become Classen Boulevard from downtown.

In 1908, they finished construction of the Belle Isle Power Plant to provide electricity for their trains. They also developed Belle Isle Park as a destination " conveniently at the end of one of their interurban lines " for Oklahoma City residents to escape the city. By the next year, they had bought 29 new trains, built two on their own and had laid 32 miles of track.

"It was a marketing tool to sell houses," Dean said. "They were building housing additions and were laying rail from them to where people worked."
In 1910, they took over another Oklahoma City interurban company. By now, Classen and Shartel had 46 passenger cars, had connected Britton with Oklahoma City and were beginning to lay track to Guthrie.

In 1911, they absorbed a similar El Reno firm and linked up with Norman to the south and Edmond to the north. The Guthrie connection was completed in 1916.
With a passenger and freight terminal at Grand Avenue and Hudson, the interurban line was now taking people not only to work, but the state fairgrounds, the University of Oklahoma, the teachers' college in Edmond (now the University of Central Oklahoma), and to amusement parks at Belle Isle and Wheeler Park.

"There was enormous pressure on them from the city and officials to expand their line," said Dean, noting the Oklahoma Railway had gone far beyond the housing districts Classen and Shartel had built. A workers strike in 1911 demonstrated how important the interurbans had become to a city of 65,000.

By the early 1920s, both Classen and Shartel were out of the interurban rail business.
"In the 1920s, they were in constant receivership," Dean pointed out. "The interurbans never paid a dividend to their investors." A large part of the reason for this was due to continually expanding the system.


BORROWING TO PAY

To do so, the Oklahoma Railway was constantly borrowing to pay for the expansion. The firm found itself it a catch-22 situation. The public and local government demanded their expansion and in so doing the lines' profits were eaten away from paying off loans.
This was demonstrated after Hubert Hudson took over the company in 1927, spending more than $2 million for expansion. To offset costs, Hudson sold Belle Isle to Oklahoma City.

Then Oklahoma City saw its interurban commuter train system hit by both the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. Revenues plunged and the company was handed over to the federal government to be administered from 1939 to 1945.

"During the '30s, you can see they were doing everything they could to keep going," said Dean. "They were adjusting rates and they were adjusting routes."
By the time the U.S. entered World War II, the green and cream electric trolleys were running just five routes: along Classen, Belle Isle to the state Capitol, to the fairgrounds, to the stockyards, and a loop around downtown.

World War II, however, created a boom in interurban usage. In 1941, prior to Pearl Harbor, 39 train runs were conducted daily; by 1944, that number was up to 192.
All that traffic was overwhelming the 11 interurbans and 40 streetcars the firm operated. The U.S. Navy helped some: Since the line served the two naval bases on Norman's north side, the Navy bought 10 and converted two that were being used as roadside diners.
By 1944, there had been over two million commuter rides on the interurban trains and 52 million on the streetcars.


END OF THE LINE

But the end of the war brought an end to the boom in business. The two naval bases were closed. Revenue plummeted. Postwar prosperity, with its cheap fuel and emphasis on cars, was ending the need for the interurbans. "Oklahoma City was already starting to spread out by then," Dean said. "The first shopping center had already gone up."
But, Eugene Jordan of Jordan Petroleum and his partner Robert Bowers still saw the interurbans as a threat. They had earlier bought the Oklahoma Transportation Corporation, an instate version of Greyhound, for $1.6 million. Now they petitioned the court to buy the Oklahoma Railway Company with its interurbans and city buses for $2.5 million. The court agreed, transferring ownership to the Oklahoma Transportation Corporation in the fall of 1945.

Jordan and Bowers quickly sold off the firm's assets. The trains were sold to a firm in Mexico City.

By 1947, only old rail tracks embedded into city streets were left of commuter rail in Oklahoma City.

The next year, in 1948, the last of the commuter rails, the Nowata-Union Electric Railway shut down, ending commuter rail within the state. "Mike Coppock

This article is why I laugh at people who say it can't be done today. With a population of just 65,000 there had been 54,000,000 trips and a peak of 192 trains a day.

This article is why I laugh at people who say it can't be done today. With a population of just 65,000 there had been 54,000,000 trips and a peak of 192 trains a day.

As you always say, being "urban" has nothing to do with the amount of people, rather how infrastructure and buildings are oriented.

This article is why I laugh at people who say it can't be done today. With a population of just 65,000 there had been 54,000,000 trips and a peak of 192 trains a day.

Yes, but that was also the days before downtown convention centers and cash producing parking lots.

This article is why I laugh at people who say it can't be done today. With a population of just 65,000 there had been 54,000,000 trips and a peak of 192 trains a day.

You're exaggerating a bit. The 54,000,000 trips was for both the interurban and the street cars and covered a period of 42 years. The 65,000 population you quote was for just Oklahoma City in 1911. The interurban system served more than just Oklahoma City, including Guthrie, El Reno and Norman. Further, by 1944, the end of the period during which the 54,000,000 commutes had been accumulated, OKC's population was over 200,000.

Further, we need to add a bit of perspective to the 54,000,000 commutes. The quoted number of trips sounds huge, of course, but it covers 42 years. So it averages just 1.29 million trips per year -- 24,725 trips per week. Fewer than 5,000 trips per work day. That means fewer than 2,500 people using the system per average work day (allowing for zero usage on non-work days).

The "success" of street cars and interurbans in those years (and it did eventually fail, after all) by no means proves that a rail system would be succcessful in 21st century OKC.

The next MAPS 3 Streetcar/Transit Subcommittee meeting is:

January 25th, Wednesday
3:30 PM
420 Main (10th Floor Conference Room)
Jeff, as of now, when is the earliest we will see the first tracks laid?

Jeff, as of now, when is the earliest we will see the first tracks laid?

late 2014 early 2015

You're exaggerating a bit. The 54,000,000 trips was for both the interurban and the street cars and covered a period of 42 years. The 65,000 population you quote was for just Oklahoma City in 1911. The interurban system served more than just Oklahoma City, including Guthrie, El Reno and Norman. Further, by 1944, the end of the period during which the 54,000,000 commutes had been accumulated, OKC's population was over 200,000.

Further, we need to add a bit of perspective to the 54,000,000 commutes. The quoted number of trips sounds huge, of course, but it covers 42 years. So it averages just 1.29 million trips per year -- 24,725 trips per week. Fewer than 5,000 trips per work day. That means fewer than 2,500 people using the system per average work day (allowing for zero usage on non-work days).

The "success" of street cars and interurbans in those years (and it did eventually fail, after all) by no means proves that a rail system would be succcessful in 21st century OKC.


The story wasn't written clearly but I think it is 54,000,000 trips per year at peak - not cumulative. I base this on other stories of similar sized cities that did make it clear the 50 million range was annual peak.

For example, despite having a much smaller population and a less robust system, Tampa peaked at 24 million riders per year.


Tampa's first electric streetcars were introduced in 1892. The streetcar reached its peak of popularity in the 1920s. In 1926, almost 24 million passengers were carried.

Even Jacksonville which was barely populated in 1930 and much more concentrated peaked at 5.2 million riders per year.



At its peak in 1930, over 100,000 residents rode the 65 miles of streetcar track weekly. Remnants can be found near downtown and in Avondale.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2011-08-29/story/letters-readers-casino-jacksonville-landing#ixzz1jujqVUIX

late 2014 early 2015

But there's probably another year after that until procurement of the cars and the system becomes operational I believe.

The story wasn't written clearly but I think it is 54,000,000 trips per year at peak - not cumulative. I base this on other stories of similar sized cities that did make it clear the 50 million range was annual peak.

For example, despite having a much smaller population and a less robust system, Tampa peaked at 24 million riders per year.



Even Jacksonville which was barely populated in 1930 and much more concentrated peaked at 5.2 million riders per year.

Barely populated? Jax had 130,000 people in 1930. Interesting data. Here is another link with different data for OKC.
http://www.retrometrookc.org/the-george-winn-collection

I still contend these numbers have little meaning for us in the 21st century.

I stand corrected - still not bad numbers though.

http://www.retrometrookc.org/the-george-winn-collection


The system continued to growth through the early 1920s, with ridership peaking at 25.5 million in 1920. The city’s population that year totaled 91,000, which, if broken down by just locals, averages out to 280 rides for every man, woman and child.

Agenda and packet for this Wednesday afternoon's transit subcommittee meeting have just been published at http://okc.gov/AgendaPub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1832&doctype=AGENDA.

Looks like a lot to digest in the presentation on ADG's review of Core to Shore.

This concerns me. From the report:

Modern Streetcar

Findings:
• There was general concern among stakeholders interviewed that the
transit component of the MAPS 3 program needs additional study and
planning. Questions that were raised include:
- What is the market for transit?
- What is the demand?
- How will it connect employment centers and housing?
- What is the rider profile? Who is this transit serving?
- How can transit in Oklahoma City be leveraged to spur high
quality development?
• There was concern among interviewed stakeholders about possible
streetscape clutter created by an overhead wire system.

Have these issues not already been addressed/studies? Why are they coming up in this report, in this context, if they have? It concerns me that someone is attempting to set the stage for a scaling down of the streetcar.

OMG!!! Its the attack of the wires! Geez... who brought up these crap questions??

OMG!!! Its the attack of the wires! Geez... who brought up these crap questions??

Devon.

It is pretty clear we have two streetcar committees. One is called Streetcar Committee and one is called Convention Center Committee. I'll let you guess which of these two came up with these nuggets.


A consultant should be hired to study and verify the most viable route based on all relevant factors including potential economic development impact

Options for powering the streetcar without wires should also be investigated.

This is no surprise but brings it closer to reality. It sounds like it may be a fairly painless process between agreeable parties.

http://newsok.com/board-says-oklahoma-city-should-buy-santa-fe-train-depot-for-transit-hub/article/3643914

Great article! I will be posting an audio recording of the MAPS 3 Transit Subcommittee meeting once the levels are mastered.

http://soundcloud.com/moderntransitproject-okc/01-jan-25-2012-maps-3-transit

xxx

Can't thank you enough Jeff for taking the time to record and post this. Really appreciate it!

There is a TON of relevant information about what the planners and "stakeholders" think about C2S, the Convention Center, the Boulevard, and the Central Park that happened at this meeting.

It was a great meeting to record I intend to try to do it for all of our meetings.

Wow...where to start.

I attended the MAPS 3 Transit Subcommittee meeting on Wednesday mainly to be there when they voted to recommend the acquisition of Santa Fe for the new hub, which took place near the end of the meeting. I had no idea that the controversy over a so-called MAPS 3 Limited Core-to-Shore "Study" would completely dominant the meeting and overshadow that vote. Everyone interested in transit and the Modern Streetcar project should listen to the audio recording of the meeting while looking at the ADG slide presentation on the "study" that is available for download on the City website...I think someone placed a link to the document earlier.

A few observations and questions on my part:

1) Mike Mize of ADG admitted when questioned by the committee that the "study" was actually just one-on-one interviews with a select few "stakeholders" in Core-to-Shore and MAPS 3 conducted and completed in just 36 hours.

2) After questioning by the committee as to who these "stakeholders" were, Mr. Mize read the names of those involved. You can listen for yourself as to who those were.

3) Mr. Mize stated the purpose of the "study" was to assess the impact of MAPS 3 projects on the Core-to-Shore Plan to determine if it remained viable. The "study" looked at the Park, Boulevard, Convention Center and Modern Streetcar components of MAPS 3.

4) The summary slides for the Park, Boulevard and Convention Center provide mostly supportive comments from the "stakeholders" about how the projects will benefit Core-to-Shore, with a few relevant concerns also expressed. Those summaries contained no overreaching questions as to the overall validity of the MAPS 3 projects themselves.

5) The summary slide for the Modern Streetcar containes no supportive comments whatsoever as to how the streetcar could benefit Core-to-Shore. Instead, as previously pointed out, a number of general questions were posed that appear to question the validity of transit in general and which had nothing to do with Core-to-Shore or the so-called purpose of the "study".

6) The recommendations for the Modern Streetcar call for hiring a consutlant to undertake additional studies to answer questions that have for the most part already been thoroughly answered through an extensive 2-year Alternatives Analysis process involving a detailed technical review by Jacobs Engineering, extensive public and stakeholder input into that process, and simultaneous coordinated efforts with the Transit Subcommittee.

7) An additional comments slide near the end of the presentation specifically mentions that the "stakeholders" noted that the Core-to-Shore Plan needed additional focus on the linkage between Midtown, Downtown, Bricktown and the various MAPS 3 components. However, nowhere in the Modern Streetcar summary or elsewhere in the study is there any comment or acknowlegement that one of the primary goals, purposes and values of the Modern Streetcar is to do just that

8) At least one committee member from Park and Convention Center were mentioned as "stakeholders" who were interviewed. However, Mr. Mize told the committee that they were unable to make their schedule for the "study" work to allow Transit Committee Chair Nathaniel Harding provide comments for the "study". When asked by the committee why ADG did not then try to interview Vice-Chair Zane Boatright or another committe member, Mr. Mize provided no good reason.

9) There were a couple of individuals mentioned on the "stakeholder" list that I am personally familiar with and who I know are well acquainted with and support the Modern Streetcar project and transit on the whole. It was hard for me to believe that if the "study" was legitimate how those persons could not have provided very positive and supportive comments about the Modern Streetcar. So I called them yesterday and asked about their interviews. They had no recollection of being asked about their thoughts on the Modern Streetcar or transit, or of providing comments on the project, let alone raising the kind of questions that ended up in the summary for the Modern Streetcar.

As far as the Modern Streetcar, this was clearly not a "study" at all, but a hastily prepared, purposefully limited, biased summary of the personal opinions of a select few individuals with little or no knowledge of the Modern Streetcar project or transit in general.

So, just who was it that raised those questions about the Modern Streetcar and transit?

And who was it that made the decision to include nothing more than those questions and other negative "stakeholder" conerns in the Modern Streetar portion of the "study"?

And for what purpose?

Disturbing to say the least.

This whole survey/study thing is very bizarre.

Who commissioned it in the first place? It's exact purpose was not clear and the execution was extremely poor.

To ask a bunch of questions about the streetcar -- or any part of MAPS3 -- at this juncture is utterly silly as everything has already been approved and is years down the road. I don't blame the subcommittee members for not wanting it circulated because the whole thing is negative and counter-productive.

I just finished listening to the recording. First Thanks Urban so much for posting it. I am amazed at the lack of consideration from the "stakeholder" for the sub-committees recommendations. From listening you can tell the committee is VERY knowledgeable about the subject and have indeed spent years researching and forming their recommendations.
I do hope they pursue the "3D rendering" of the route to help less knowledgeable individuals like myself visualize and get more involved with the project.

Is this the proposed route the committee spoke of?
http://www.mtpokc.com/img/about/connections.jpg

... It's exact purpose was not clear and the execution was extremely poor. ...

It's fairly clear.
Some folk do not support the streetcar, and they are not without substantial influence. You don't get your own 'survey' acting like the project is a square one open question otherwise.

Stuff like this is why those who were dead set opposed to a blank check ballot with some pretty off-ballot ideas were majorly skeptical back around election time. It's also why some folk held their noses and hoped for the best. Hope isn't lost, but from a country boy perspective, there do seem to be some foxes standing sentry duty over by the hen house.

Is this the proposed route the committee spoke of?
http://www.mtpokc.com/img/about/connections.jpg

no

the route is described in this post http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=20121&p=419121#post419121

only the central and north half have been "decided" (pending engineering)

north up robinson (from reno) west on 11th to dewey North on dewey to 13th east on 13th to broadway south on broadway to sheridan west on sheridan to EKG

the southern and eastern part of the route will be decided at upcomming transit meetings .. (into bricktown)

Is this the proposed route the committee spoke of?
http://www.mtpokc.com/img/about/connections.jpg

Getting all the way to the OU Medical Center or State Capital would require Federal funding to supplement our own at this time, we did not get the TIGER grant which might have made that possible. I believe the other one they applied for is to help pay for modifications to EK Gaylord, it has not been decided on yet, but they heard feedback that they needed to make some modifications to it because as the application currently is they would not get it either.

Getting all the way to the OU Medical Center or State Capital would require Federal funding to supplement our own at this time, we did not get the TIGER grant which might have made that possible. I believe the other one they applied for is to help pay for modifications to EK Gaylord, it has not been decided on yet, but they heard feedback that they needed to make some modifications to it because as the application currently is they would not get it either.

I thought the denied TIGER grant was to do work on the hub, and that an application for federal funds for additional rail would not be applied for until the first phase opened up?

I thought the denied TIGER grant was to do work on the hub, and that an application for federal funds for additional rail would not be applied for until the first phase opened up?

you are correct and the federal "process" is ongoing .. currently with the NEPA study for which we got a federal grant

Alternate route

After a recent denial for a federal grant, officials look to other subsidies for the city’s intermodal transit hub.

Clifton Adcock (http://okgazette.com/oklahoma/by-author-439-1.html)
January 31st, 2012

Oklahoma City officials are looking for other ways to fund improvements to the city’s planned intermodal transit hub after failing to win a federal grant.
The MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board voted Jan. 26 to recommend the City Council approve purchase of the Santa Fe Train Depot to serve as a convergence for several modes of transportation in the city, including car, rail, bicycle and possibly bus. The city already set aside $10 million of the $127 million in MAPS 3 streetcar funding to pay for the acquisition and streetcar-related improvements to the station.

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/imgs/media.images/13109/hubreport_10-58x5-64cm.jpg

But a setback came in late December, when the city learned its application was denied for $17 million from a federal Transportation


Read more... http://okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-14268-alternate-route.html

nm

What's the latest on commuter rail in the metro and Amtrak expansion to Kansas?

What's the latest on commuter rail in the metro and Amtrak expansion to Kansas?

A very long and tedious process. Probably still looking at 10+ years out. Right now it's Streetcar service and that's still 5+ years out from being fully completed.

ACOG (asso of central okla governments) is just starting the regional transit AA ... with 7 cities paying for their local match funding ... OKC moore Norman MWC Edmond Yukon and ??? del city i think ...

this will be at least a year long + process .. that will move us a step closer to a regional system

Here is the RFP:

http://www.acogok.org/Newsroom/Downloads12/ccaarfp.pdf

Core issues

Comments in a Core to Shore study rankle some on the MAPS 3 streetcar panel.

Clifton Adcock (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/by-author-439-1.html) February 8th, 2012

Oklahoma City’s 6-year-old plan to develop land between downtown and the Oklahoma River, the Core to Shore plan, is still relevant — it just needs a little tweaking, according to a recent review of it.

ADG, the lead consulting firm hired by the city for MAPS 3, joined with Hargreaves Associates and Jonathan Rose Companies for the limited study after some city officials questioned whether Core to Shore was still valid amid the changes that have taken place in the city and with the MAPS 3 program.

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-14351-core-issues.html

"Other changes since the Core to Shore plan include Project 180, the Interstate 40 relocation and SkyDance pedestrian bridge."

Core to Shore came about as a direct "answer" to the relocating I-40 and while the Skydance Bridge was not developed yet there was always a pedestrian bridge along the Harvey Spine as part of the Core to Shore plans. It is clearly identified in the renderings of the Core to Shore report.

Core to Shore came about as a direct "answer" to the relocating I-40 and while the Skydance Bridge was not developed yet there was always a pedestrian bridge along the Harvey Spine as part of the Core to Shore plans. It is clearly identified in the renderings of the Core to Shore report.

It seems clear that some people of power don't want C2S.

As I have said many times - just wait until streetcar tracks start get put down.

With due respect to those who have put in untold hours toward the return of streetcars to OKC, I'm not completely convinced even a mile of track will get laid.
It ought to be downright silly to feel that way this far down the trail, but I can't quite shake the feeling that much like Project 180 became Project OK, maybe half that ..maybe, the streetcar project is itself back at a maybe stage and a long way from laying down any rails.

With due respect to those who have put in untold hours toward the return of streetcars to OKC, I'm not completely convinced even a mile of track will get laid.
It ought to be downright silly to feel that way this far down the trail, but I can't quite shake the feeling that much like Project 180 became Project OK, maybe half that ..maybe, the streetcar project is itself back at a maybe stage and a long way from laying down any rails.

I'm really concerned your right, and ironically the streetcar is the only project that has an independently organized group that was pushing for it before and after the vote.

I'm really concerned your right, and ironically the streetcar is the only project that has an independently organized group that was pushing for it before and after the vote.

The independently organized group pushing for it was probably the only reason it was included.

And the only reason MAPS3 passed...

So should I be legitimately concerned that the streetcar won't happen or am I just becoming concerned because I'm gullible?

I don't think there's real reason to be concerned. Has a single MAPs project ever just been completely discarded? If that happened there would be no MAPs 4. I think everyone understands that...

And the only reason MAPS3 passed...

I totally disagree, but at the same time admit the streetcar group put a lot of work into passage. I think it would still have passed due to the results of the previous MAPS success. I also believe the streetcar group would have supported maps 3, as they are the type that are for the city moving forward even if the streetcars did not make the cut in this round of maps.

I don't think there's real reason to be concerned. Has a single MAPs project ever just been completely discarded? If that happened there would be no MAPs 4. I think everyone understands that...

Yes, the streetcar got scrapped in MAPS 1. Go back and read it, we discuss it frequently and someone brought it up again like 2 days ago.


I totally disagree, but at the same time admit the streetcar group put a lot of work into passage. I think it would still have passed due to the results of the previous MAPS success. I also believe the streetcar group would have supported maps 3, as they are the type that are for the city moving forward even if the streetcars did not make the cut in this round of maps.

I disagree, and if you look at the polling, the streetcar was the most popular Project by far! Nix it and it will piss a lot of people off.

I've always thought two new highrises would be Mystery Tower X (International Company) and a two tenant tower (American Fidelity/Midfirst Bank type). Also, if Streetcar goes by the wayside (being that I was too young to make my vote count for MAPS and I didn't live in OKC then), I will NOT vote Yes for another MAPS initiative ever again.

Also, if Streetcar goes by the wayside (being that I was too young to make my vote count for MAPS and I didn't live in OKC then), I will NOT vote Yes for another MAPS initiative ever again.

Well, since MAPs have been so beneficial to the City I would not go that far... but I would want the projects voted for on an individual basis if the City shows that they can't be trusted to complete them all (especially, in this case, one of the most popular projects).

I agree with that thought Kilgore. I don't see OKC rescinding investment in the city - even if the city renigs on the streetcar; which I pray does NOT happen since I like the MAPS concept.

But if this does indeed occur, you will see the end of MAPS as we know it but likely NOT the end of civic investment. Projects themselves would just go up and the public would vote for them individually and likely would require much more oversight from those outside of the business/political community (since they WILL be blamed if the streetcar gets nixed/or shortened). In a way, I like having individual projects, since we could be CERTAIN that public projects with 70+% approval (like streetcar) will get built and projects with <30% approval (like the convention center) would not creep in and suck the life out of the less expensive but more popular projects. BUT, MAPS as a brand has been successful and even though I am so sick of the Fairgrounds also sucking from the teet of MAPS, the brand as a whole has been a success largely due to the diversity of projects. Instead of JUST focusing on downtown, MOST of the focus is downtown but all parts of the city have seen 'something'.

That to me, will be the HUGE loss if MAPS as we know it changes from comprehensive to singular project initiatives. But I think OKC residents have seen the results of public investment and will not detract from that or their city. One thing I would like to see if MAPS continues in its current form, is for MAPS to finally become metropolitan. I think we probably need one more 'city' MAPS but MAPS V should be the first truly metropolitan one; and perhaps have Commuter Rail and maybe city halls/libraries/community focus centers for the suburbs. They could probably do that on their own, but it would be nice to have MAPS as the vehicle to quickly improve all/most cities in the metro - not to mention the connectivity to downtown OKC with CR.

Maybe MAPS IV would be a smaller, city focused one (city community centers/libraries, neighbourhood beautification, one or two big downtown additions (football/soccer stadium?, cc hotel(s)/retail complex(es)). Then MAPS V would be metropolitan, and maybe we could finance the CR so that it gets implemented quickly. ...?

just thoughts, and I hope multiple skyscraper announcements happen (2+ Class A leasable towers, 2+ owner-occupied office towers, X residential towers, Y hotel and hotel/condo towers) and that they are all big and glass/modern. We can hope for smaller infill projects to be other architectural schools (Art Deco, Art Moderne, .....) but we need our tallest and biggest to be modern/post modern/futuristic IMO.

I would be fine with an entire MAPs dedicated just to streetcar. Think how that could revolutionize the city...

I'm honestly afraid we're nearing the end of MAPS programs in their current form. MAPS 3 won by a smaller margin and there was controversy with the firefighters/police (I don't remember the details and we don't need to rehash them) and I also think that after these Core to Shore, Convention center and streetcar elements the public will begin to tire on grand downtown civic projects that are publicly funded. With private development really taking off, the city should seriously think about the future MAPS 4 in a slightly different way. I'd like to see focus on other parts of the city/metro area that are looking ailing, maybe massive beautification along the section-line roads, some kind of business-incentive fund to clean up the more desperate pockets and attract corporations that would be new to OKC. I'm not sure how all of this would look.

Agreed. The focus on downtown now needs to move outward. Folks outside of downtown are due their turn now on some projects. They aren't sexy, but infrastructure projects could sure do a lot for us. Repave some of the crappy roads out there. Get utilities burried where they currently aren't. <-wishful thinking, but it could help in ice storms. Convert the street lights to LED and save the city a sh*t ton in utility costs. Build some community centers around town. Maybe work on some sort of kid-friendly spaces along side the community centers? We have our parks, but most don't have much in the way of playground equipment, and then sit dormant during cold weather. Why not have some indoor playgrounds? I'm just tossing some crap out there.

With due respect to those who have put in untold hours toward the return of streetcars to OKC, I'm not completely convinced even a mile of track will get laid.
It ought to be downright silly to feel that way this far down the trail, but I can't quite shake the feeling that much like Project 180 became Project OK, maybe half that ..maybe, the streetcar project is itself back at a maybe stage and a long way from laying down any rails.

Feel free to come to one of our MTP meetings and check our pulse. We're not worried about it not happening. What we are concerned about is that some "key" people may not understand the route and the balance between economic development and immediate ridership numbers. As evidenced in some of the audio recordings, there is some "pettiness" with some people that has to be expunged or resolved.

Also, to use Steve's quote about City Staff on OKC Central, we are concerned with "Daze and Confuse" strategies by some City Staff and consultants. The streetcar is a "strange animal" to them and potentially a "safe" strategy for some is to stall and buy time. Be wary of calls for more route/economic development studies.

There is indeed a time clock in which there may be a moment where we could be vulnerable as a whole. We are not there yet. We will let the public know if time starts running out.

With the acqusition of Santa-Fe on course and discussions regarding proceeding with the 3rd party transit consultant RFP, we are so far on schedule.

Also regarding what "towed" MAPS- it was scientifically verified that the streetcar helped "tip" the scales along with sidewalks, trails, and wellness centers. Undoubtedly, probably without the streetcar/transit, MAPS would have been a much tighter race. And no, while we are progressive, the supporters very well may have campaigned against it otherwise. I can vouch for several key people involved in the campaign.

The streetcar project may not be fully understood by everyone, but it's value to MAPS cannot be underestimated.

we passed 700 mil in street projects in 2007 most of those are just now getting started ..

Feel free to come to one of our MTP meetings and check our pulse. We're not worried about it not happening. What we are concerned about is that some "key" people may not understand the route and the balance between economic development and immediate ridership numbers. As evidenced in some of the audio recordings, there is some "pettiness" with some people that has to be expunged or resolved.

Also, to use Steve's quote about City Staff on OKC Central, we are concerned with "Daze and Confuse" strategies by some City Staff and consultants. The streetcar is a "strange animal" to them and potentially a "safe" strategy for some is to stall and buy time. Be wary of calls for more route/economic development studies.

There is indeed a time clock in which there may be a moment where we could be vulnerable as a whole. We are not there yet. We will let the public know if time starts running out.

With the acqusition of Santa-Fe on course and discussions regarding proceeding with the 3rd party transit consultant RFP, we are so far on schedule.

Also regarding what "towed" MAPS- it was scientifically verified that the streetcar helped "tip" the scales along with sidewalks, trails, and wellness centers. Undoubtedly, probably without the streetcar/transit, MAPS would have been a much tighter race. And no, while we are progressive, the supporters very well may have campaigned against it otherwise. I can vouch for several key people involved in the campaign.

The streetcar project may not be fully understood by everyone, but it's value to MAPS cannot be underestimated.

Thanks for presenting the real story, Urban Pioneer.

My knowledge on this is pretty limited. But it seems there is a lot of paranoia about this not even getting built, and I'm afraid that these fears, some legit but others unfounded, will cause people to accept something far inferior just "to get it done." Bravo to you and others who are making sure everything is followed through as promised.

...
The streetcar project may not be fully understood by everyone, but it's value to MAPS cannot be underestimated.

I don't disagree, but it also seems to be obvious some influential people do disagree. I can't really reconcile a presentation of viability/value type concerns by stakeholders and the interviewees not including anyone from your group while folks from the park and cc groups were included.

I hope you are 100% correct there is no reason to worry and I am merely a bit of a nervous nelly. It doesn't feel that way watching from the bleachers though. But I'll gladly wear a Nervous Elly 2012 Tour shirt if that turns out to be warranted.

Here is a newsok quote from Mr. Mark Beffort.


“It's our time,” he said, but city and business leaders should be looking not just at the next 15 years but the 15 years beyond that.

He compared Oklahoma City to Austin, Texas, and Charlotte, N.C., which 30 years ago took steps Oklahoma City is only starting.

They nursed local business. Oklahoma City has two Fortune 500 companies in Devon Energy and Chesapeake Energy, he said; Austin has two in Dell Computer and Whole Foods, and Charlotte has seven, anchored by Bank of America — and all are homegrown and committed to each city.

They nursed entertainment. Beffort put Bricktown, the Oklahoma City Thunder and the Arts Festival up against Austin's South by Southwest music festival and Charlotte's arts and NASCAR.

They enhanced public transportation with light rail systems. In Oklahoma City, he said, “We should do it, and we should do more than we're thinking about doing.”

They encouraged downtown housing. Oklahoma City's downtown population of about 5,900 pales in comparison to Austin's and Charlotte's, but living downtown is a relatively renewed concept here, he said.

Read more: http://newsok.com/downtown-oklahoma-city-office-market-shines-compared-to-u.s./article/3647036#ixzz1mHUpzvHx


I found this very encouraging as I think he would pass as an influential person and he is saying we should do more.

One of the problems in OKC is that our local business community is dominated by an industry that sees mass transit as a threat to their very existance.

One of the problems in OKC is that our local business community is dominated by an industry that sees mass transit as a threat to their very existance.

I have been thinking this is the obvious answer for quite a while now. For that reason I threw out the idea of having natural gas powered turbines generate the power for the streetcar and future light rail. etc. Excess power could be sold back to the grid. That is as close as I can get to not "offending" our otherwise very supportive energy companies AND getting the rail based transit I think OKC needs.