I definitely suggested the health sciences center as one of the anchors on the survey. There are a lot of people on campus there, and there are also people who families who are hospitalized staying in the area who could take advantage of the line. I realize we will be limited on length of the system, but that and the capital are certainly very important areas that need to be considered for first expansion if they cannot be included in the initial routes.

I think we might be surprised at the ridership we get on the streetcar as our convention center is completed and people learn the routes and system. There are a lot of people downtown at any given time, and that's only going to increase.

I think we might be surprised at the ridership we get on the streetcar as our convention center is completed and people learn the routes and system. There are a lot of people downtown at any given time, and that's only going to increase.

And we would have even more local citizenry downtown if we had wider Bus services. IMHO.

I actually think that locally the attitude towards the bus system is so negative, if people think of it at all, that we need to work backwards. We need to get people riding things like the streetcar, which has a more urban and "cool" feel, and from that get them to be more accepting of bus service. I think you could put an amazing grid of buses in this city and would not see ridership increase significantly, because people don't see themselves riding a bus and have no interest in riding a bus. The only way that would change would be if we had significantly higher gas prices and people simply couldn't afford or didn't want to spend the money to drive AND we had an increased number of buses and routes.

betts,

I think you might just be right...it's "cool." I grew up riding buses in San Francisco and San Diego back in the 1950s and 1960's. I used to take Greyhound all the time until I took a trip out of the OKC terminal. I fly now.

I swear though, I am gonna keep on trying to get someone in the city to alter "Rt 8" a bit so I can get downtown more often.

Councilman Patrick Ryan...are ya hearing me yet?

I'm a big bus rider myself, from my days of living in Denver before they had any other form of transportation. My daughters rarely drive their cars in Chicago and almost always take the bus, which we also do when I'm visiting. It's not that I don't think expanded bus service is a good thing, but rather that the attitude here is such that we're going to have to change it before we'll get signficant ridership from people who own cars. And I think other forms of transit like streetcars and light rail will help change that attitude, which is why I have no problem with the streetcar coming before bus route expansion.

Well, I do love the old streetcars (San Francisco) and I think the light rail is a good idea (San Diego), but I think I am going to show up at the afternoon Public Input Meetings with my sign..."Need Mo Buses." And with that...

It's less about more buses than it is about have buses run later in the evening.

Home | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com/)

It's less about more buses than it is about have buses run later in the evening.

It would be nice if buses could run all night, 24-7. But with the crime being what it is, plus, as it has been pointed out earlier...if folks aren't gonna support it. Maybe if we had about 3,000,000 folks living here.

From my favorite blog:

Oklahoma City Readies Modern Streetcar as Centerpiece of Major Redevelopment Plan The Transport Politic (http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/03/24/oklahoma-city-readies-modern-streetcar-as-centerpiece-of-major-redevelopment-plan/)

Betts and Possumfritter I agree with both of you. We do need a better bus system, but we need to find a way to cool down the love affair we have with the automobile. Way back in the day there was the Interurban. It went from Norman to Guthrie as far west El Reno, and I don't know how far east... way before my time don't you know. In my time here, there hasn't been any bus service near what there has been in Denver or Chicago or San Diego for that matter when I was stationed there in the late 60"s but one could navigate reasonably well by bus here. But urban renewal took retailing out of down town and gasoline was cheap. There was no incentive to go downtown except to work. Gasoline still is cheap when compared to most of the rest of the world. I was on a U.S. Navy float trip in the Mediterranean in 1971 and gasoline in Greece and Italy was purchased by the liter. The price was the equivalent of $1.00 per liter! A person could go from Piraeus, the Athens port to within walking distance of the Acropolis for about a dime riding the bus. I came back to the States and gasoline was 25-35 cents a gallon. Oklahoma City reminds me a lot of Los Angeles in how it is so spread out and there is no good way to get from here to there in OKC without a car. Now we are talking about a light rail system and street cars and a better bus system. Have we come full circle?

Well, if the City will run the Streetcar out here to NW122nd and Council, then we won't need more buses. But, in the meantime I am going to press for a few more buses or modifications of some of the routes.

No offense, but if you want to use public transportation, you might thinking about moving in closer. That's almost a different county.


I actually think that locally the attitude towards the bus system is so negative, if people think of it at all, that we need to work backwards. We need to get people riding things like the streetcar, which has a more urban and "cool" feel, and from that get them to be more accepting of bus service. I think you could put an amazing grid of buses in this city and would not see ridership increase significantly, because people don't see themselves riding a bus and have no interest in riding a bus. The only way that would change would be if we had significantly higher gas prices and people simply couldn't afford or didn't want to spend the money to drive AND we had an increased number of buses and routes.

Even if I go to a place like Chicago, I see the buses as a backup for when the EL or Subway can't get me where I'm going, so I think as people warm to public trans on the streetcar, they would start using the bus to make connections.

And we would have even more local citizenry downtown if we had wider Bus services. IMHO.

The only areas not served by COTPA / buses is the rural areas of OKC which is not financially feasible and will never happen, all other areas have access to bus service with easy access to downtown. (available but not used)

It's less about more buses than it is about have buses run later in the evening.

It's about having the citizens use the adequate number of buses the City already has.

Nope... you don't even have the option of working 8-5 and then going to the grocery store.

It's about having the citizens use the adequate number of buses the City already has.

Lemme guess? You're a retired city employee?

This is precisely what's wrong with the "bus system" in Oklahoma City.

Design a system to fail, with schedules that don't work for people, with routes that are inadequate, and then sneer that not enough people ride them. Brilliant strategy.

The problem is OKC is too spread out and not dense enough. If it was me all bus service would be concentrated in an area within a few miles of downtown. If you want to live out on NW Expressway - great, but you are going to need a car. If you want to have access to mass transit you have to live with 5 miles of downtown. OKC needs to create a pedestrian city within an automobile city. There just isn't enough money or users to spread resources thinly all across the city. We should provide really good service in a select area and limited service elsewhere. If people want it, they need to move to where it is available.

The only areas not served by COTPA / buses is the rural areas of OKC

I don't know when the COTPA was last updated, but has anyone taken into consideration that some of the "rural areas" have become metropolized. There has been alot of development in the past decade just in northwest NWOKC.

And soonerguru hit a homerun with, "...with schedules that don't work for people, with routes that are inadequate..."

I am pretty sure that tweaking Rt. 8 would result in increased "ridership." But, we won't know that unless Metro Transit modifies the current route. And I know that they do this because Rt 8, at one time, ended at the Rockwell Plaza Shopping Center before they elimnated that stop. So, the routes can be modified.

From my favorite blog:

Oklahoma City Readies Modern Streetcar as Centerpiece of Major Redevelopment Plan The Transport Politic (http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/03/24/oklahoma-city-readies-modern-streetcar-as-centerpiece-of-major-redevelopment-plan/)

This blog post is written in a very engaging tone, and I hope it will help to get more people excited about the streetcar, as well as transit in general. However, there are several inaccuracies that I immediately noticed, and perhaps more that I'm not seeing.

*The Association of Central Oklahoma Governments is conducting an Intermodal Hub Study, to determine location/layout of an intermodal hub. The determination of the streetcar route will not be part of this study.

*This Hub study will not be "the first serious plan for transit improvements in this city in forty years." We've got the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study (of which the downtown streetcar is but one element), and additionally, COTPA has a long range plan for expanding bus service. It all boils down to getting the money to fund planned improvements. The MAPS money for the downtown streetcar is finally letting us start implementing planned projects.

*The Modern Transit Project hasn't been around for several years. (Though I do applaud Jeff and the other members for their hard work and continued support of the streetcar!)

*MAPS3 is not truly a regional sales tax. It is in Oklahoma City only.

*Of the $130 million dedicated to transit in MAPS3, $120 million will go toward the streetcar, not $100 million as the post states.

*The new I-40 alignment does not remove rail line capacity, only rail yard space.

*The Association of Central Oklahoma Governments is not at work on a light rail plan. Through the Regional Transit Dialogue, they are looking at the next steps for implementing the Fixed Guideway Study, which includes proposed commuter rail and bus rapid transit elements. While light rail could certainly be a part of our city's public transportation in the future, it is not part of any current or developing plans. (I believe the OP of the blog post got this misinformation from a recent NewsOK article.)

Lemme guess? You're a retired city employee?

This is precisely what's wrong with the "bus system" in Oklahoma City.

Design a system to fail, with schedules that don't work for people, with routes that are inadequate, and then sneer that not enough people ride them. Brilliant strategy.

Answer to question #1: Retired from OKC Parks Department in 2006. (may I ask how this affects/shapes my opinion)

Answer to question #2: Take a neighborhood in the far NW corner of the City, say theres 1500 working adults, probably 75--80% work in different areas of the City, would be impossible to provide bus service to fit everyones work schedules/needs.

[FONT="Arial"]PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS TO COMMENCE REGARDING DOWNTOWN STREETCAR ROUTES

The Modern Transit Project is pleased to announce that official meetings are planned to gather public input to determine streetcar alignments in the downtown area.

March 29th (Monday) (City Hall) 12 PM
March 29th (Monday) (City Hall) 6 - 8 PM

April 13th (Tuesday) (Civic Center) 6 - 8 PM

April 29th (Thursday) (Civic Center) 6 - 8 PM

May 11th (Tuesday) (Civic Center) 6 - 8 PM

May 27th (Thursday) (City Hall) 12 PM
May 27th (Thursday) (City Hall) 6 - 8 PM


Metro Transit and the City of Oklahoma City have also put together an excellent website entitled "lets talk transit" Home | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com)

I visited the website that you provide above several times and now I have two questions.

1) Is MTP running the public meetings as you imply?

2) Does MTP have an official partnership with the Oklahoma City Government
and/or COTPA?

It still amazes me, even after everything is said and done, and I know it's water under the bridge...less than 17% of the voting public was able to get MAPS 3 passed. Less than 17 people out 100. Just friggin amazing!

I visited the website that you provide above several times and now I have two questions.

1) Is MTP running the public meetings as you imply?

2) Does MTP have an official partnership with the Oklahoma City Government
and/or COTPA?

No and No. Not trying to imply anything, simply that we are pleased that this is happening so quickly and subsequently we are trying to get the word out.

The official governmental input process through these meetings and "Let's Talk Transit" website will now take the lead in hosting streetcar meetings and official information gathering.

However, I do know that a good slate of our Committee, Board of Advisers, and Volunteers will be directly involved in helping the process move along.

Rick Cain and Michael Scroggins of COTPA just attended our last Committee/Board meeting and there is sufficient direct involvement and communication. We have all official communications such as e-mails proofed by COTPA for accuracy before they go out regarding the streetcar.

There will be an interesting expansion of MTP's goal's and mission in the near future as the success of the streetcar campaign is handed off to the official governmental input process to plan and design the system.

It still amazes me, even after everything is said and done, and I know it's water under the bridge...less than 17% of the voting public was able to get MAPS 3 passed. Less than 17 people out 100. Just friggin amazing!

By the same measure, only about 14 out of 100 actually opposed it.

The people who bother to vote make decisions for those who don't. By deciding not to vote you essentially give the voters all the power to determine what will happen. To me, that is a decision too and one must live with the consequences of one's decisions.

Answer to question #2: Take a neighborhood in the far NW corner of the City, say theres 1500 working adults, probably 75--80% work in different areas of the City, would be impossible to provide bus service to fit everyones work schedules/needs.

I don't think anyone is promoting the impossible, but if the current bus routes can't even transport 20 of them adequately then something is apparently wrong! You cannot justify the current bus system at all.

By the same measure, only about 14 out of 100 actually opposed it.

I shore can't argue that. Touche!

I will see if the bus analyst for MTP, Walter Jacques, will comment here. He plugged all the bus routes into an expanded grid system that was quite impressive. If you look at the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study it calls for a greatly expanded bus system.

Also, there is a council workshop focusing more on buses coming up.

You cannot justify the current bus system at all.

I'd like to know how many riders are taking the "Sooner Express" back and forth to Norman, or how many are riding on the Edmond Express, and how many good folks are riding the MT out to Midwest City and back.

Reports & Studies | METRO Transit Providing Central Oklahoma Transportation & Bus Service Options (http://www.gometro.org/reports-studies)

I don't think anyone is promoting the impossible, but if the current bus routes can't even transport 20 of them adequately then something is apparently wrong! You cannot justify the current bus system at all.

It's not the buses or the scheduled routes, it's a lack of ridership. I guess they could get all drivers Cleet Certified, outfit them with 9 mm handguns and force people to ride.

RC are you suggesting that public transportation is not needed in OKC?

I don't think anyone is promoting the impossible, but if the current bus routes can't even transport 20 of them adequately then something is apparently wrong! You cannot justify the current bus system at all.

I rode the #38, from 10th and Meridian, east down 10th to downtown last year and it was standing room only. Working people going to work, at about 7:45 a.m.. I counted 28 people on the bus.

Drive by 23rd and Classen and look at the people standing in front of Walgreens waiting for a bus. Always a dozen or more. The non-choice users of transit are out there and they ride/need the bus daily.

The problem is OKC is too spread out and not dense enough. If it was me all bus service would be concentrated in an area within a few miles of downtown. If you want to live out on NW Expressway - great, but you are going to need a car. If you want to have access to mass transit you have to live with 5 miles of downtown. OKC needs to create a pedestrian city within an automobile city. There just isn't enough money or users to spread resources thinly all across the city. We should provide really good service in a select area and limited service elsewhere. If people want it, they need to move to where it is available.

Kerry, that sounds good in theory but you know it would never work. You're suggesting that everyone in OKC that lives more than 5 miles from downtown should just move if they can't drive where they need to go. That would cause major economic hardships on a large part of our population to just benefit a few if transit was limited to a few miles of downtown. You seem to keep thinking that we're going to be like New York or Chicago and that will never happen.

The problem is OKC is too spread out and not dense enough. If it was me all bus service would be concentrated in an area within a few miles of downtown. If you want to live out on NW Expressway - great, but you are going to need a car. If you want to have access to mass transit you have to live with 5 miles of downtown. OKC needs to create a pedestrian city within an automobile city. There just isn't enough money or users to spread resources thinly all across the city. We should provide really good service in a select area and limited service elsewhere. If people want it, they need to move to where it is available.

I agree to an extent and if I am mis-reading this, please correct. But it seems to me that if someone is paying the same taxes (if on the fringe or at dead center) they should expect the same level of City services. If the City doesn't want to/doesn't have the resources needed to supply that, they need to stop accepting the tax $$$ too (guess that means de-annexing as some others have suggested). Don't mis-read this to mean that a less densely populated area should expect the same number of bus pick ups in a day (instead of 20 pickups, there may just be 2). But the point is, that the service option is still there (and the bolded part of your post seems to be in agreement).

And have often wondered the same thing that you mentioned in the last line. If something is that important to you (mountains, oceans, urban canyons, particular retail etc etc etc, then by all means, move someplace that has whatever you are needing/wanting).

And have often wondered the same thing that you mentioned in the last line. If something is that important to you (mountains, oceans, urban canyons, particular retail etc etc etc, then by all means, move someplace that has whatever you are needing/wanting).

Larry, as I said to Kerry in response to him, economic realities don't always allow everyone that option. Most people can't just afford to move to get what they need or desire.

Larry, to someone living in the fringe of the city - water/sewer, electricity/utilities, and police/fire are MUCH more important to them than transit.

to someone living in the inner city, transit is most important to them.

Why?

it's very simple. people who live and work in the fringe of a city are few and far between (less, if any density). So, they care most about utilities to make their area urbanized and accessible. You who live in the fringe pay your taxes for this.

people who live in the inner city are more concentrated and utilities have been there forever and police/fire is well established and quite reliable. And since the inner city is more dense, not the same amount of money would need to be spent on those services. However, there is money left over - and as such, should go to the needs of inner city people, who would most likely use transit.

Now, dont get me wrong, Im not saying that OKC shouldn't implement bus service to denser fringe areas but I think it is short sighted to sit in the fringe and complain about 'paying for inner city services' when far more people who live in the inner city have paid for fringe utilities and 'urbanized' amenities.

In other words, everybody needs to pay something - it's just people's needs differ the closer you live to your neighbours, shoppes, jobs.

I hope this little argument can forever put to rest the suburbanite theory of 'why do I have to pay for services I will never use....' You pay, because you need to pay for what you do use. In fact, suburbanites and fringe should pay more, but they dont because the inner city steps in and OKC's inner city has stepped in too long without seeing benefits of what they need (such as later/expanded bus routes and other forms of transit).

On the same note, I would love to see OKC implement commuter bus routes with park n rides in the fringe. The bus routes would run primarily to downtown, but there should also be connector routes that go from park n ride to park n ride/suburb transit center.

1) The park n rides should be in rural/suburban areas where 'local' people could drive to or where there are a collection of industries. Key suburban/rural park n rides IMO should be at NW EX and just past County Line, Quail Springs somewhere, S. Edmond and Broadway, I-35 and Memorial area, NE 23rd in the Choctaw area, TAFB, North Norman, SW of WRWA/towards Chickasaw, I-40/Morgan Road area, OU/Purcell area.

Notice that all of these areas are more or less rural and would be 'hubs' that rural and suburban people could drive to, park their cars, and hop on an express commuter bus. Some of the locations are also in the midst of industrial and office parks where 'local' shuttle busses could route workers to them to those places. Again, the park n ride Commuter Routes would be point to point (to downtown and to other park n rides and transit centers). There would be NO STOPS inbetween anchors.

2) Transit centers could be located at most major suburb downtowns and smaller ones could be located at key central city destinations (malls, key employment centres, tourist destinations). These should be located at libraries/city halls/community centers in El Reno, Yukon, Piedmont, Edmond downtown, Guthrie downtown, Penn Square, Baptist Hospital/NW Espressway, MWC Center, Crossroads Mall, Moore downtown, Norman downtown, WRWA, OU campus, Shawnee downtown, Chickasaw downtown. These routes would be Express but would have more stops near their terminus than the park n ride commuter routes. These routes would be express to downtown but would also stop at 'local' commuter park n rides.

Also notice that these Transit Centers are more urbanized than the park n ride commuter routes, even though some are located outside of the park n rides. These routes would be Express in the boundary between their location and central OKC, but would have stops near their terminal transit center, any park n ride nearby, and once you get into the inner city/downtown area.

3) The inner city would more or less continue the current routing with modifications that better fit inner city needs and destinations. This would be run just like other major cities (ie, until at least 10pm on every route), and would have night owl service for key routes where the demand is warranted.

If OKC's bus system was this hybrid (downtown hub + commuter point-to-point), I believe it could not only attract new ridership but would also better serve the entire community with limited resources. You would have a 3 tier'd system that would funnel passengers efficiently where they need to go. Rural users would pay a penalty for their lack of density (by having to drive to their nearest park n ride) but would still be offered excellent service options. Suburban and inner suburban areas would be rewarded and densified by getting 'transit center' status and their own 'local' bus routes as feeders. And downtown would be the main hub of it all, with the inner city retaining and building even better access that they desparately need.

Once funds are available and/or transit usage demonstrated demand, commuter rail would be established in the corridors we all know (Purcell/Norman to downtown to Guthrie, TAFB to downtown to El Reno). Once the inner suburban area really densifies, light rail could be built connecting those areas to downtown. But the busses would PROVE this all would work and get OKC on board with using transit regardless of where they live.

Anybody think this plan could work in OKC?

I











































































































































































i

Larry, as I said to Kerry in response to him, economic realities don't always allow everyone that option. Most people can't just afford to move to get what they need or desire.

Please don't misunderstand, if a person's situation has changed and they are suddenly in need of services that they weren't before, that is an entirely different thing. What I am talking about, is finding out what you want/need BEFORE moving anywhere. If you need bus service, find a place to live that is on the route and has times that fit into your schedule. Don't just presume that because it is an apartment complex that a bus stop is nearby. Ask. Find out where the nearest bus stop is. Or even better find out what the bus routes are and then pick out possible options from the route. Someone said that the nearest bus stop is 8 miles from their complex!

I did exactly this when my former employer relocated to Houston and they wanted me to go with them. They just wanted me to go out in a weekend and sign a lease someplace. But due to my work schedule (and Houston's horrific traffic etc) I needed a place that was within a 10 minute commute from the office. In order to find a place within my commute time and a comparable apartment to where I lived, it was going to cost me double in rent alone.

On the same note, I would love to see OKC implement commuter bus routes with park n rides in the fringe. The bus routes would run primarily to downtown, but there should also be connector routes that go from park n ride to park n ride/suburb transit center. ...Anybody think this plan could work in OKC?

What you described sounds a lot like what the Mayor often mentioned leading up to the MAPS 3 announcement (a comprehensive Mass Transit plan). Even the City’s MAPS 3 Survey, Mass Transit COMBINED got the highest number of suggestions by something like an 8 to 1 margin. We even had a cost for the comprehensive plan and while it was high, it was doable under a MAPS type sales tax. Then, MAPS 3 is announced and we only get the Downtown streetcars as a starting point. The Mayor often pointed to that MAPS 3 Survey for justification for the projects picked, yet we don’t know how many people wanted Streetcars. It may have been the highest but it may have been the lowest. We just don’t know since the City lumped it all together.

The costs to do it all now will be much cheaper than later. Take the streetcars as an example. The ones under MAPS 3 are costing 8 times more than what was originally proposed with MAPS (and don’t even go out to the Fairgrounds or the Meridian hotel corridor). The comprehensive plan was going to cost $394M. What will the cost be under this phased in approach? Granted, the City hopes to have federal monies but they hoped that would be the case with MAPS and when federal funding didn't come through, we ended up with the rubber tired trolleys.

Oklahoma City’s mass transit overhaul comes with a big price (Oklahoman, 11/5/08)

Metro Transit spent 18 months studying public transportation options, which included public forums.

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.

Total price tag: $394 million to build...

I guess I'm just SOL? I live 16.51 miles from the Transit Center. I occupy an apartment well within the city limits, but I can't get a bus, unless I want to walk about 4 miles to a crime infested area (Lyrewood).

But hey, I can move north to Edmond or south down to MidWest City or even Norman because then I could catch an OKC Metro Bus.

From The Declaration of Independence

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security

Right on Kerry! So, I say...Give me buses or give me death!

I think when you live in a city, if you are making housing choices, you should make them based on what kind of transit you need. If you really need bus transit, you pick a place to live based on existing transit options. It doesn't mean you can't work to improve those options, however. But I think one should never assume mass transit will come just because one wants it to.

When my daughters moved to Chicago every apartment was evaluated carefully based on access to mass transit. I always did the same when I lived in Denver.

Denver had excellent bus services. I was out by the old Lowry AFB and could get downtown anytime. Not sure what it's like now, or if they have streetcars. But then again, Denver is a whole different class of city.

I will see if the bus analyst for MTP, Walter Jacques, will comment here. He plugged all the bus routes into an expanded grid system that was quite impressive. If you look at the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study it calls for a greatly expanded bus system.

Also, there is a council workshop focusing more on buses coming up.

See, Jeff. It's these type of statements that lend little credibility to your organization. Walter Jacques isn't a "bus analyst". You know what he does for a living. Just because you gave this title to him as part of the MTP boys club and he draws a few routes on a map, doesn't mean he is an analyst for anyone.

The people who bother to vote make decisions for those who don't. By deciding not to vote you essentially give the voters all the power to determine what will happen. To me, that is a decision too and one must live with the consequences of one's decisions.

That's exactly correct and that's why I'm there to vote every time. If I hear you griping about it, I have one question, did you vote? If not, then I don't want to hear it.

Denver had excellent bus services. I was out by the old Lowry AFB and could get downtown anytime. Not sure what it's like now, or if they have streetcars. But then again, Denver is a whole different class of city.

For reference:

Denver (all types)
Ridership: 99 million
Operational Budget:$400 million
Funding /capita:~ $142.86
Funding/trip: $4.04

OKC (all types)
Ridership: 2.7 million
Operational Budget:$21.7 million
Funding /capita: $26.64
Funding/ trip: $8.20

Source (http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2009_q4_ridership_APTA.pdf)

For reference:

Denver (all types)
Ridership: 99 million
Operational Budget:$400 million
Funding /capita:~ $142.86
Funding/trip: $4.04

OKC (all types)
Ridership: 2.7 million
Operational Budget:$21.7 million
Funding /capita: $26.64
Funding/ trip: $8.20

Source (http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2009_q4_ridership_APTA.pdf)

PLANSIT...if you have the time, could you possibly show some "similarly sized" cities to OKC?

Thanks

RC are you suggesting that public transportation is not needed in OKC?

Not at all, I'm just stating the with the size (land wise) OKC will never be able to offer mass transit that's readily available to everyone.

Dallas Texas has an excellant bus service (DART) but with their their size and population, it's much easier to accomplish.

OKC 600,000 people 621 square miles
Dallas 1,200,000 peole 385 square miles

OKC 600,000 people 621 square miles


Ooh ooh ooh - OKC has 300 sq mi of rural land.

But we are still responsible for providing public transit to them.

PLANSIT...if you have the time, could you possibly show some "similarly sized" cities to OKC?

PLANSIT...nevermind, I JUST SAW your link (Source). Sorry!

See, Jeff. It's these type of statements that lend little credibility to your organization. Walter Jacques isn't a "bus analyst". You know what he does for a living. Just because you gave this title to him as part of the MTP boys club and he draws a few routes on a map, doesn't mean he is an analyst for anyone.

Plansit, these comments are irritating. MTP is an organization intentionally made up of volunteers with very specific expertise to critique wonks like you and prod them into actually doing something.

And I think that we have been very successful in doing so.

Walter Jacques is a amazing mathematician who spent at least 100 hours plugging every single bus line, stop, and riding all the routes himself into a sophisticated mathematical model. He is a former logistics Major in the Air Force and now runs complex custom computer models for the Health Department finding millions of dollars of fraud and waste.

I can't imagine a better volunteer to analyze and advise on bus system improvements. He's the kind of citizen I am proud to have involved in our group.

If you want to call MTP "a boys club", then feel free to come to a Committee/Adviser meeting and see who and how many show up. Every single one of our people volunteers significant hours a month and has profound expertise in very specific areas that help move the transit discussion into reality.

If planners like you simply want to plan and plan to plan some more, get some binders ready because I have a shelf in the dusty back of a closet waiting.

The streetcar and hub analysis is moving ahead and behind it you will find stalwart group of motivated diverse people completely disconnected from the planning and leadership bureaucracy that has kept real transit progress from happening for 30 years.

It's not very often I vent, but there is no room for such a comment. I am tired of delusional people.

Let it be known that there would be no streetcar with without MTP and no MAPS 3 without the streetcar. I think that should be credibility enough.

And soonerguru hit a homerun with, "...with schedules that don't work for people, with routes that are inadequate..."



I'm interested in hearing more about this comment. Could you be more specific about the problem you're having with routes and schedules? I've been looking into this same topic and have several ideas but also would like to hear the thoughts of others.

Essentially, I would make the routes mostly follow mile sections either east/west or north/south to take advantage of the layout of the city. Routes would then be more predictable, easy to remember and more efficient in several ways. By walking a few more blocks to a bus instead of catching it at your front door, you save a lot of time.

Thoughts?

I think when you live in a city, if you are making housing choices, you should make them based on what kind of transit you need. If you really need bus transit, you pick a place to live based on existing transit options. It doesn't mean you can't work to improve those options, however. ...

I agree and that is what I was trying to say...LOL

I guess I'm just SOL? I live 16.51 miles from the Transit Center. I occupy an apartment well within the city limits, but I can't get a bus, unless I want to walk about 4 miles to a crime infested area (Lyrewood).

But hey, I can move north to Edmond or south down to MidWest City or even Norman because then I could catch an OKC Metro Bus.

Oh Possom, you're inside the urban area of OKC (even at Rockwell and 122nd), so relax. All you and others need to do is contact Metro in enough numbers and get them to add or change one the their routes. I used to live in your same area back in the late 1980's early 1990's and then the area was booming and new, but fast became part of OKC's urbanized area.

We didn't have bus back then, and Im sure it is more dense there than it was 20 years ago - so I'd think you could easily get them to add bus. The question is - bus to where? downtown?

Oh Possom, you're inside the urban area of OKC (even at Rockwell and 122nd), so relax. All you and others need to do is contact Metro in enough numbers and get them to add or change one the their routes. I used to live in your same area back in the late 1980's early 1990's and then the area was booming and new, but fast became part of OKC's urbanized area.

We didn't have bus back then, and Im sure it is more dense there than it was 20 years ago - so I'd think you could easily get them to add bus. The question is - bus to where? downtown?

From: Simpson, Wayne P <wayne.simpson@okc.gov>
Subject: Re: Metro Transit (Route 8) and NW OKC
To: @yahoo.com>
Cc: "Mayor Mick Cornett" <mayor@okc.gov>, "Councilman Ryan" <ward8@okc.gov>
Date: Wednesday, March 17, 2010, 8:06 AM

"Thanks for your email concerning the need for transit in your area. We at Metro Transit are aware of the need for extended service to not only the northwest area but other areas in Oklahoma City.

However at the present time we do not have the resources to expand service. As resources become available we certainly will consider the northwest area for expansion.

Again thank you for your email and feel free to contacted at anytime.
Sent from my iPhone"

Please don't misunderstand, if a person's situation has changed and they are suddenly in need of services that they weren't before, that is an entirely different thing. What I am talking about, is finding out what you want/need BEFORE moving anywhere. If you need bus service, find a place to live that is on the route and has times that fit into your schedule. Don't just presume that because it is an apartment complex that a bus stop is nearby. Ask. Find out where the nearest bus stop is. Or even better find out what the bus routes are and then pick out possible options from the route. Someone said that the nearest bus stop is 8 miles from their complex!

I did exactly this when my former employer relocated to Houston and they wanted me to go with them. They just wanted me to go out in a weekend and sign a lease someplace. But due to my work schedule (and Houston's horrific traffic etc) I needed a place that was within a 10 minute commute from the office. In order to find a place within my commute time and a comparable apartment to where I lived, it was going to cost me double in rent alone.

Larry, we are in agreement about that. People should take their needs into consideration before renting or buying housing. That wasn't what you said in your previous post, however. You said they should move to be near what they needed or wanted. For those who rent it is much easier to do that but for home owners not so much.

Not at all, I'm just stating the with the size (land wise) OKC will never be able to offer mass transit that's readily available to everyone.

Dallas Texas has an excellant bus service (DART) but with their their size and population, it's much easier to accomplish.

OKC 600,000 people 621 square miles
Dallas 1,200,000 peole 385 square miles

RC, I know you realize that the number of square miles and the population in the two cities don't have much relationship to comparing mass transit. Much of the area of OKC is rural with no housing and little of the area of Dallas is like that. There isn't that much difference in the housing density of Dallas as compared to OKC. Dallas is just much more populated with much larger suburbs that are included in the mass transit. The developed area of the Dallas metro area is considerably larger than OKC>

Ooh ooh ooh - OKC has 300 sq mi of rural land.

But we are still responsible for providing public transit to them.

Kerry, I think you're looking for an argument that no one is really trying to make.

Possom, good work. I wish I lived in the NW still, I'd send an email with you. I have actually sent emails and suggestions to the council and city leadership about systemwide improvements in the past - haha, maybe that's why Larry sees some similarity in what the Mayor of OKC said about oKC's transit future and what I have been writing, lol. :)

But like METRO said - they need to concentrate their service to the more dense areas mainly because they have a lack of busses. I wish they could at least start some trial commuter and/or express routes in the near term and market/promote them, though ... ...

Should the city/metro/ACOG impose a special transit assessment or tax so the city can really get on with expanding the bus routes?

I think that might be the real question.