Listening to this podcast, the whole idea of the survey presented in the meeting seems misguided.

Basically, they went to a bunch of downtown power players and asked for opinions of the streetcar (among other things) and you can tell that many of them are either completely uninformed or out-right against the system. They came back with comments "What is the need for this system? What is the projected ridership? What is the profile of the riders? What is the economic impact?"

I bet you those kinds of questions wouldn't be asked about the convention center...

The survey actually solicited input on the CC, Central Park and the streetcar -- all under the umbrella of Core to Shore but broken out separately.

The comments about the streetcar were almost all negative and/or in the vein of "why are we doing this?". For the other two they were mainly positive with some small suggestions.


I'll link the findings later, as the city site seems to be on the fritz right now.

I bet you those kinds of questions wouldn't be asked about the convention center...


Nah, they asked the same questions, but each had the same answer as well: "who cares. We want one and we're gonna get one."

Listening to the presentation by Rick Cain of COPTA he did say they had $45 million in debt before selling the City Center garages and now Broadway-Kerr.

Now they have no debt they are finalizing a study that seems to indicate there will be the need for two CBD garages just for downtown workers and probably a couple of more (Bricktown and AA) to support economic development in those areas.

Mentioned Robinson between 5th & 6th as a possible location but nothing has been finalized as of yet.

Basically, they went to a bunch of downtown power players and asked for opinions of the streetcar (among other things) and you can tell that many of them are either completely uninformed or out-right against the system. They came back with comments "What is the need for this system? What is the projected ridership? What is the profile of the riders? What is the economic impact?"

All these questions are completely silly at this point. MAPS 3 has long been approved and the streetcar was the most popular part of it. Why even go out and solicit such questions at this point? It just puts negative rhetoric out to the public which in turn causes more negativity.

If I was trying to build a convention center that is going to cost 2 or 3 time as much as I have available I would be trying to cast as much doubt on other projects as I could.

Nah, they asked the same questions, but each had the same answer as well: "who cares. We want one and we're gonna get one."

Yeah, either that or the evil laugh..

7edeOEuXdMU

It's interesting how these processes get shaped as they go along...

Original Core to Shore assumptions face scrutiny in new report
Consultants overseeing master planning for MAPS 3 have completed a report that calls into question several aspects of the Core to Shore plan, including original suggestions that the area will attract retail and residential development.


Read more: http://newsok.com/original-core-to-shore-assumptions-face-scrutiny-in-new-report/article/3659676#ixzz1pqTlA53K

http://newsok.com/original-core-to-shore-assumptions-face-scrutiny-in-new-report/article/3659676

Original Core to Shore assumptions face scrutiny in new report
Consultants overseeing master planning for MAPS 3 have completed a report that calls into question several aspects of the Core to Shore plan, including original suggestions that the area will attract retail and residential development.


Read more: http://newsok.com/original-core-to-shore-assumptions-face-scrutiny-in-new-report/article/3659676#ixzz1pqTlA53K

http://newsok.com/original-core-to-shore-assumptions-face-scrutiny-in-new-report/article/3659676

I never saw the areas adjacent to the park as extremely appealing for retail, but anyone who thinks that property adjacent to the park won't be appealing for residential hasn't thought this through and likely lives in the suburbs. Town homes adjacent to the park would be enough for me to consider moving, and would likely appeal to families more than current downtown housing. The new school will add to interest in living downtown for families and land adjacent to the park is close. We have yet to see what the appeal of an upscale tower downtown would be, but the security of a tower with doorman could well also appeal to people who've not yet seen downtown housing that they like. We're not necessarily talking next year. The Core to Shore plan was always a long term one. But I would move there next year, as a little blight adjacent doesn't scare me.

What I think is a mistake is spending any money to wrap the substation. I would wait to see what the convention center land sells for. If the price is close to that figure, I'd start thinking about marketing that land to a developer. That piece of property is too valuable to waste $10 million on a disguise. Of course, I would put the convention center there, so what do I know?

Somewhat amazing to me that Steve's article left out the part about numerous stakeholders questioning the validity of the streetcar. After listening to city staff and and consulting firms bring the streetcar committee up to date and the committee members reaction to the update one would think that would be part of the article or a seperate article in itself. In my view the concerns over development in the core to shore are easily remedied. Just run the streetcar line down Robinson, behind Union Station, then back north on Walker, encircling the park and development will be generated at a frantic pace. At least I have been led to believe that would be the case if the streetcar enthusiats are to be believed and I have no reason not to believe them. Midtown development will grow on it's own as it has already started. Will the steetcar committee suggest this to win over those doubting stakeholders or are they fearful their claims of development following the tracks could very well be a ruse? Please tell us what you think JTF.

Success of the streetcar around the Concention Center will depend on if the CC can deliver the promised 900% increase in out of state attendance. Or was that a ruse to win over stakeholders to support adding the CC to MAPS III. Personally, I think the streetcar can come closer to spuring development along the park than the CC can come to seeing a 900% increase in out-of-state attendance.

However, I would love to see Core to Shore developed as a high density pedestrian/mass transit area. I say the city should allocate extra funds to extend the streetcar to this area as part of phase 1.

Why, JTF, should extra funds be extended when the Midtown route can be dropped and the money from that be used in core to shore. After all, Midtown was never mentioned on the ballot (it was to be a downtown issue) or in the fixed guideway study as only downtown was mentioned. Also, what caused you to throw in thoughts about the CC as my question to you never mentioned the CC. I just wanted to know your or any others opinions about the core to shore area be subject to development following the rails. Could you direct your thoughts to whether or not develpment would follow the rail in the core to shore area?

Lets not get into what was and wasn't on the ballot (since nothing specific was on the ballot)...and they were already getting panned that MAPS 3 was DT centric again (it was more of a hybrid of MAPS & MAPS 4 Kids). But IIRC, it was UrbanPioneer that mentioned the Midtown spur was a direct result of the Council wanting to get more mileage as it were out of the Streetcar and not just a DT circulator. However, I agree it was a given that there would be a tie-in with the Streetcars and as many of the other MAPS & MAPS 3 projects as possible. Running the length and/or looping around the Park & the Union Station a logical Streetcar stop

Larry, I think I might disagree with you here as a vague memory of the ballot referenced the projects being touted, which included a downtown streetcar system. Perhaps you know of a website that has a copy of the ballot.. My point here is that provided development follows the rail as streetcar activists insist it does, would placement of rail in that area better serve the city by enhancing and speeding up development in core to shore and would that not be better for the city than a jaunt up to 13th street in midtown? I would also be interested in knowing if any of the streetcar committee members live near the proposed midtown route.

Popsy: You may be thinking of the original MAPS ballot which did list the projects (with a surprising amount of detail), MAPS 3 did not list ANY of the projects, basically defined the beginning/ending dates of the tax, the amount of the tax and the stipulation that the money be spent of the vague term "capital improvements". The actual Ordinance went into great verbiage defining it but was so inclusive that it could honestly be spent on just about whatever the Council decides at the time. The Ordinance didn't list the projects either. There was the infamous "Letter of Intent" that did list the projects, but that "Intent" wasn't even mentioned or referenced on the Ballot/Ordinance. It is legally non-binding and as we found out with the courts decision with Bass Pro, the Council can legally change their intent at any time.

I don't disagree with the point of your post...continue...

Lets just say that you will then both be pleased with the new route about to be released from our committee for approval. C2S and Deep Deuce are now proposed to be serviced and there is no proposal for two separate stages. More to come shortly.

Larry, I wasn't confusing it with the original Maps, but could easily have confused it with the letter of intent being a part of the ballot. I think I can safely say that the letter of intent referenced it being a downtown streetcar and core to shore will be a part of downtown as will bricktown.

If one of those is me, that is way kewl....:irule:

I say the city should allocate extra funds to extend the streetcar to this area as part of phase 1.

You mean potential federal funds, correct?

The exact text of the letter of intent (don't laugh, Larry) reads:

2. A new rail-based streetcar system to service the inner city and/or to service other areas within The City of Oklahoma City, plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, such as connections to other rail-based systems and/or a transit hub.

Midtown development will grow on it's own as it has already started.

The streetcar will just make Midtown that much more viable for downtown living and more dense. There is nothing to leverage right now with Core to Shore in regards to the streetcar, other than the park.

I think even if the streetcar concentrated on CTS, it would take it 20 years to just become what Midtown is now. Whereas, if the streetcar services Midtown, it and Deep Deuce could be in 20 years where CTS is going to be in 50+ years (if that makes sense).

The Wednesday MAPS 3 Transit Subcommittee Meeting... Strong discussion and a formal response to the Core to Shore Study.

http://soundcloud.com/moderntransitproject-okc/march-21-2012-maps-3-transit

We were forced to discuss this again at length.

http://soundcloud.com/moderntransitproject-okc/

What was the outcome of the last formal response?

What was the outcome of the last formal response?

received by the maps 3 board .. goes with core to shore study to the council meeting today

Hmm..I may head down there to see what happens at council..thanks.

I watched it this morning.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ7CNchXZ1

IMO, MidTown is the key to the streetcar's success. There is sooooo much more that could be done with that district. If they try and do anything other than CBD > Deep Deuce > MidTown, then it will be way less successful than it could. Initially serving C2S would probably ensure that this project will be the end of rail in Oklahoma City. Some seem worried that it won't be used and if they run it to a district that is generations away from being viable as opposed to serving the ones that are already emerging, then it's guaranteed to fail, meanwhile killing any hope that it will be expanded in the future and maybe killing a lot of trust in the voters to ever do another MAPS type initiative. I'm sure some secretly hope that is the case.

nm

When does the core to shore developments actually start? Do residents have to vote to approve it before they get started?

When does the core to shore developments actually start? Do residents have to vote to approve it before they get started?

MAPS3 via the Central Park will jump start Core to Shore.

Doubtful. C2S is doomed.

Doubtful. C2S is doomed.

Seriously??? You've got that much developable land adjacent to the CBD, close to Bricktown, touched by the Peake, served by the streetcar, close to the river and you think it's doomed? I think it is drought with possibility. I know eople who are renting while waiting for the first housing options to be developed. I would live there myself, should the opportunity arise.

When does the core to shore developments actually start? Do residents have to vote to approve it before they get started?


God I hope not. I think the intention was private developments.

Seriously??? You've got that much developable land adjacent to the CBD, close to Bricktown, touched by the Peake, served by the streetcar, close to the river and you think it's doomed? I think it is drought with possibility. I know eople who are renting while waiting for the first housing options to be developed. I would live there myself, should the opportunity arise.

Yes, seriously. Why hasn't it developed over the last hundred years? Answer - the exact same factors that we have recreated in a frenzy of bad planning. There was a highway in the way, now there will be two, far more intrusive than the Crosstown viaduct ever was. There was a convention center in the way, now there will be an even larger one.

I don't know what OKC leaders are smoking right now honestly. Bath salts? Does bath salts make someone want to commit a C2S?? :Smiley036

Life will be easier when the people who care so much just give up. The worthless triumvirate of Cornett, Couch, and Wenger will succeed in running OKC into the ground. It's not a question of if, but rather when. At least back when the junta was the most insidious factor in city politics, most all could still agree they were competent. OKC will start making good decisions again when it reaches rock bottom, just like in the 90s.

Sometimes I think there may not be a more hopeless city out there, but then I'm always reminded that Dallas, the city we aspire to recreate, is pretty hopeless as well. They're just 6 times larger and growing 3 times as fast as us.

Why hasn't it developed over the last hundred years?

It did, your forgetting our original urban renewal plan of bulldoze and hope for development.

http://www.imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/1915_okc_birdseye.jpg

Which by the way, let's talk about all the structures in C2S that are going to be bulldozed. Probably the Salvation Army, old Film Exchange, other buildings lining S. Broadway and S. Robinson, and probably all of SW 3rd which should be a historic district in its own right.

Shockingly enough, there is still even more de-urbanization that can occur here. We have a new rock bottom to set as our goal with wholesale 70s-style urban renewal orchestrated by people who refuse to learn from history, let alone read about it.

Spartan, unless I've missed something, the parks subcommittee is looking at saving some of those buildings. As far as saying OKC is the most hopeless city out there, it's when people think that that we might as well give up hope. You're too young to remember Oklahoma City 30 years ago. I thought OKC was hopeless then, and am pretty astounded at what has happened since. I've had two people here in Chicago tell me they visited Oklahoma City recently and both of them commented on how "pretty" our downtown is. Now, urban and gritty might be our goal, but pretty is quite an improvement from desolate wasteland, which was my description of downtown when I moved here.

betts, Spartan is obviously just in one of his moods today. He'll get over it.

betts, Spartan is obviously just in one of his moods today. He'll get over it.

Is your tongue still in your cheek ?

http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=5646

Sounds familiar....

Unless Cincinnati is going to get rid of that 318' of road space between downtown and the river it isn't going to work there either. It is sad to think that all 318' feet of road capacity could be replaced by one single lane of track 4' 8.5" wide, but they chose the 18 lanes of road instead. I had a high hopes for C2S but with the extreme width of the new I-40 I just don't see how it is going to happen.

those developments will be very very successful ... living between the 2 pro stadiums right next to the CBD and also next to the street car line ... it will be a home run

those developments will be very very successful ... living between the 2 pro stadiums right next to the CBD and also next to the street car line ... it will be a home run

We'll see. Philadelphia has a very similar situation - super high density development in South Philly, I-76, and then three sports stadiums. For some reason the high density doesn't cross the freeway. They also have the same thing along I-95 (high density on one side - low density on the other).

We'll see. Philadelphia has a very similar situation - super high density development in South Philly, I-76, and then three sports stadiums. For some reason the high density doesn't cross the freeway. They also have the same thing along I-95 (high density on one side - low density on the other).

i will also say that the bridge crossings are also pretty pedestrian friendly .... during OU/cinn we (and lots of others) walked all over the CBD and then back to the football stadium

i will also say that the bridge crossings are also pretty pedestrian friendly .... during OU/cinn we (and lots of others) walked all over the CBD and then back to the football stadium

The key to walking is having a destination to go to. If you were in downtown Cincy and there was not a game would you walk over to the stadium?

The key to walking is having a destination to go to. If you were in downtown Cincy and there was not a game would you walk over to the stadium?

of course not ... but if i lived next to the stadium .. and i wanted to go to a bar or grab a bite to eat i would go into down town .. or jump on the street car and go to uptown (not sure what they call it)

The presence of a streetcar does make a difference.

<sigh> This is what I was talking about having the Streetcar going to Union Station...the fact that it went there would help make it a destination, instead of an interesting focal backdrop

MAPS IV Larry! I should insert an evil grin smiley here, I suppose. There's only so much money, and the streetcar will stop across from the park. The park itself will be a destination, and if there's something interesting in Union Station such as a restaurant, a museum, some shopping, people will walk there during their stroll through the park. I'd like to see it used as an event center as well, as people will want to get married in the park, and it would be nice to have an adjacent reception option.

Must we remind Larry that Union Station has been rendered useless when it comes to being redeemed as an actual station. Yes, if we get East/West commuter rail service on that line--one day--it might make for a nice lil stop but it's just too far away from downtown to be a pedestrian friendly stop. The Santa Fe station is THE STATION that is in the works.

The reason Union Station was rendered useless is because the rail yard was removed by ODOT, I hear they built a highway up against it, so as to make sure there is never room again to make Union Station viable as a hub for rail.

The reason Union Station was rendered useless is because the rail yard was removed by ODOT, I hear they built a highway up against it, so as to make sure there is never room again to make Union Station viable as a hub for rail.

(Sarcasm inferred, I believe, but) Please forgive my naivete: Is ODOT against non-automobile transportation? What the heck does ODOT stand for? and should it be ODOA?

Well, I have never accused ODOT of much simply because I don't know a lot about them, but I do think the Crosstown project was a Big Dig (any project that triples in cost over its lifetime strikes me as pretty corrupt), many transit experts have accused ODOT of having a vendetta against trains, and the moderate transit experts who can't afford to burn bridges have even said that the rail office at ODOT is a corner of a basement. So you can draw your own conclusions...

So at best they just don't understand rail and won't give it a chance, at worst...(I think these things fall in the middle usually)

Well, I have never accused ODOT of much simply because I don't know a lot about them

"Don't know a lot about them".....but then you go on to throw a bunch of speculation about them out there. Wow.

"Don't know a lot about them".....but then you go on to throw a bunch of speculation about them out there.

A bunch of speculation? Wow. I could say a lot worse things about ODOT, I thought the poster would appreciate a more conservative answer that allowed him to draw his own conclusions. Here's a whole post I did a while ago on ODOT's legacy in downtown OKC. For those of you who don't know, it was ODOT that completely leveled almost all of Deep Deuce.
http://downtownontherange.blogspot.com/2012/06/odots-legacy-in-dt-okc.html

And let me get this straight. You're personally attacking me for pausing and avoiding a blanket statement, deferring to comments from people who would know a lot more on the situation than me, and then keeping the scope of my comments to what I do know.

But yes, I apologize for keeping my more indicting comments to the entities that I do know the ins and outs of. Let us know if you care to defend ODOT against any of the facts anyone else has stated. I'll also mention that I know last time was the first time ODOT has ever submitted a "real" RFP to FTA for meaningful rail transit funds, meaning that they actively decided against for all prior appropriation rounds.

I also know that FTA decided against giving OKC a grant to extend our streetcar coverage because they noted a significant lack of political will, I would conservatively guess that ODOT had a lot to do with that. I guess I forgot to mention that.

19 vs 7291...whoops!

Must we remind Larry that Union Station has been rendered useless when it comes to being redeemed as an actual station. Yes, if we get East/West commuter rail service on that line--one day--it might make for a nice lil stop but it's just too far away from downtown to be a pedestrian friendly stop. The Santa Fe station is THE STATION that is in the works.

even an east west line would not go by union station it would go from MWC to Sante Fe to the airport to ??

19 vs 7291...whoops!

And how many of those 7291 have been negative. I may not have been around very long, but it doesn't take long to get tired of Spartan's constant negativity. I've gotten the impression that I'm not the only one.


And let me get this straight. You're personally attacking me for pausing and avoiding a blanket statement, deferring to comments from people who would know a lot more on the situation than me, and then keeping the scope of my comments to what I do know.

You call that a personal attack? I just thought it was ironic that you stated that you didn't know much about ODOT then threw out accusations about them while attributing them to uncited "transit experts".

http://downtownontherange.blogspot.c...in-dt-okc.html

Finally a citation.......oh wait, you're citing yourself.:headscrat