I thought maybe it would be nice to keep this separate from the main streetcar thread. There is a LOT of streetcar planning going on in other cities across the country, so as news becomes available we can post information on them here. It's neat looking at other proposed routes.

Cincinnati's route is available today. It's a 5-mile line for $130 million, and it seems to be fully funded from a patchwork of local, state, and federal funding. They have used 21 stops and connect downtown CBD/cultural areas with the University of Cincinnati which has 40,000 students. The couplet strategy is notable.

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1690/110221streetcar01.jpg

The couplet strategy is notable.

Like Portland, the couplet is only used because of the one way streets. Where the streets aren't one way they don't use couplets. The area along Vine between downtown and the university is going to be really cool. It does run through some pretty rough areas though, especially the north part of the urban core.

Here is a link to the Cincinnati Street Car website. Not sure if it is the official site but it has a lot interesting info - including their long-term plans.

http://www.cincystreetcar.com/index.html

Thanks for that link. Denver seems to be the most prolific and serious about LRT, with all of their projects partially or fully funded and ready to start this year or next with more than 80 miles of light rail. Very impressive


* I-225 Corridor LRT – 2015 – FUNDED
o 10.5-mile new line connecting Southeast and East Lines
o Construction set to begin in 2011
o Relevant articles on the Transport Politic: Denver Sales Tax Increase?, 13 March 2009; Denver Region Comes Closer to Endorsing Sales Tax Increase for Transit, 13 March 2009; Denver FasTracks Problems Expose Complexities of Building Transit at the Regional Scale, 7 December 2009.
* Gold Line LRT – 2016 – Partially Funded
o 11-mile new line from Union Station to the west
o Construction set to begin in 2012
* North Metro Corridor DMU – 2015 – FUNDED
o 18-mile new line from Union Station to the north
o Construction set to begin in 2012
* Northwest Corridor DMU – 2014 – FUNDED
o 41-mile new line from Union Station to the north
o Construction set to begin in 2012
* Southeast Corridor LRT – 2016 - Partially Funded
o 2-mile extension of existing line south
o Construction set to begin in 2011
* Southwest Corridor LRT – 2016 – Partially Funded
o 2.5-mile extension of existing line south
o Construction set to begin in 2011

Interestingly, Tulsa is also stepping up to the plate trying to pull streetcar off. Although I doubt they'll get anywhere soon...their plan probably just involves asking for federal funds. Knowing that city, I doubt that they are prepared to fund anything on their own.

The problem with OKC is that we don't have a university located in a straight line 3-4 miles from downtown that has 40,000 students at it. Or else that would be the obvious line we need. That strategy should be clear for cities like Austin, Madison, Berkeley-Oakland, Seattle, etc. The problem in OKC is that we have to invent destinations for streetcar to go to, and it can't be downtown-to-campus. OCU has what, 4,000 students? That doesn't make it worthwhile.

True, the Mayor stated recently: "Our university system, which in Central Oklahoma includes 120,000 college students", problem is they are spread out all over the Metro area. Now if OU was a little closer by...

Here's the initial streetcar system planned for Milwaukee...

http://dailyreporter.com/files/2010/05/street-car-large.gif

Here's Portland's existing and planned streetcar system...

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/picture-5.png

Here is some info on an issue we are having here in Jax with our Skyway system.




Jacksonville mayoral candidates call for closing Skyway, but lack power to do it



City Hall doesn't have the authority to close it; and feds would want $90 million back.




http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/story_slideshow_thumb/editorial/images/images/mdControlled/cms/2011/03/08/796086547.jpg (http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/editorial/images/images/mdControlled/cms/2011/03/08/796086547.jpg) BRUCE LIPSKY/The Times-Union
The JTA's Skyway moves above Hogan Street passing City Hall going to the Hemming Plaza Station on Friday.

http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/story_slideshow_thumb/editorial/images/images/mdControlled/cms/2011/03/08/796086832.jpg (http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/editorial/images/images/mdControlled/cms/2011/03/08/796086832.jpg) BRUCE LIPSKY/The Times-Union
The JTA's Skyway stops at the Hemming Plaza Station on Friday. The money-losing operation has been derided for years.


http://jacksonville.com/sites/all/themes/jacksonville/images/blank.gifInfographic


http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/story_slideshow_thumb/SkywayMoney030811.jpg (http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/SkywayMoney030811.jpg)


http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=cb95e15e-4997-11e0-b396-a7f73614823a&T=19cim1oaq%2fX%3d1299597712%2fE%3d2022775853%2fR% 3dncnwsloc%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d8.1%2fW%3d0%2fY%3dPARTNER _US%2fF%3d3605190748%2fH%3dYWx0c3BpZD0iOTY3MjgzMTU 0IiBzZXJ2ZUlkPSJjYjk1ZTE1ZS00OTk3LTExZTAtYjM5Ni1hN 2Y3MzYxNDgyM2EiIHNpdGVJZD0iMTA2NjU1MSIgdFN0bXA9IjE yOTk1OTc3MTI1NTkyODQiIHRhcmdldD0iX3RvcCIg%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3dD9890D4C&U=128ui53v4%2fN%3daXM_CtFJpBw-%2fC%3d-1%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d-1%2fV%3d5


By Larry Hannan (http://jacksonville.com/authors/larry-hannan-0)
Two candidates for Jacksonville mayor have indicated they'll look into shutting down the Skyway if elected.

There's one problem: The mayor doesn't have the authority to do it.
Mike Hogan (http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/mayorsrace/hoganprofile.php) and Rick Mullaney (http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/mayorsrace/mullaneyprofile.php) have advocated getting rid of the Skyway, or at least shutting it down, in recent campaign appearances. But the 2.5-mile downtown people-mover, long derided for not going anywhere, is controlled by the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, not by City Hall.

Despite its name, JTA is a state agency that doesn't have to do what the city says. Money to operate the Skyway comes primarily from sales and gas tax revenue, federal funding and a small amount of fare money.

"It is true," said JTA Executive Director Michael Blaylock, "that the city has nothing to do with the Skyway."

By almost any measure, the Skyway has been a disaster. When it was built 20 years ago, JTA promised 100,000 riders per month but, in 2010, ridership was a third of that.
The system is also a huge money-loser. In 2010, it cost $5 million to operate it, but fares and parking revenue generated only $500,000.

Shutting down the Skyway could also have other financial implications. JTA said it would have to reimburse the federal government around $90 million if the Skyway is torn down because it paid the majority of costs to build it.

Officials with the U.S. Department of Transportation confirmed that the federal government would seek reimbursement if the system was shut down before meeting the end of its "useful life."

U.S. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said Jacksonville would struggle to get money for future public transit projects if it threw away the Skyway.

But that hasn't stopped Mullaney and Hogan from saying they want to get rid of it.
The Skyway is item No. 28 on Mullaney's 34-point plan. The plan says the Skyway is not working and costs millions of dollars each year.

Mullaney acknowledged that as mayor he would lack the authority to shut the Skyway down.

"But I don't really think that matters," Mullaney said. "The money JTA spends to operate the Skyway could be transferred to other areas of mass transit that people actually use."

If elected, Mullaney plans to meet with JTA officials and press for a moratorium, with the Skyway ceasing to operate for an undetermined amount of time.

"I want to take a step back and look at whether this will actually be useful," Mullaney said. "I think we can all agree that the way it is now doesn't work."

He doesn't want to tear the Skyway down and is open to it resuming operations sometime in the future when it is a better fit for the community.

The issue of having to pay back the government also needs to be addressed, but Mullaney doesn't believe the federal government would ask for the money back unless the tracks were actually torn down.

Hogan has said several times that he wants to get rid of the Skyway.

His staff e-mailed the Times-Union a three-sentence statement that said he's always been against the Skyway and believes the money spent funding it could be better used elsewhere.

Hogan did not respond to calls and e-mails asking how he'd shut it down, and whether he'd do it even if the federal government demanded reimbursement.

The other mayoral candidates aren't as determined to shut the Skyway down.
In fact, Audrey Moran (http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/mayorsrace/audreyprofile.php) wants to keep it open.

"I don't think it makes any sense to shut it down when you consider that we might have to pay $90 million to do it," Moran said. "We need to figure out a way to make it work."
The key is to redevelop downtown in a way that makes people want to come and ride the Skyway, she said.

Alvin Brown (http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/mayorsrace/alvinprofile.php) said he's neutral on it.

"Since the mayor doesn't control the Skyway," Brown said, "it makes more sense to push a combined vision."

As mayor, Brown would get together with JTA, downtown redevelopment groups, public officials like Mica and U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., and private companies like CSX and ask what could be done to improve the Skyway.

Warren Lee (http://news.jacksonville.com/specials/mayorsrace/warrenprofile.php) said he'd look at ways to make the Skyway more viable.
"If there's no way to make it better, then we should shut it down," Lee said. "But that should only happen after we've looked at all the possibilities."

Lee said Mullaney and Hogan were irresponsible in calling for the shutdown of the Skyway when they lacked the ability to do it.

Moran agreed. "But to be fair," Moran said, "Skyway bashing has been a Jacksonville tradition for a long time."

The Skyway was built in the late 1980s for $185.7 million, with the federal government paying 57 percent of the cost, the state paying 20 percent, JTA paying 13 percent and the city paying 10 percent.

"We are prepared to work with the new mayor and will demonstrate how important the Skyway is," Blaylock said.

It's also not in JTA's interest to antagonize City Hall.

While the Skyway isn't funded by the city, JTA will soon be asking the mayor and City Council to extend the local 6-cent gas tax, which is scheduled to expire in 2016. The tax generates $30 million a year for JTA.

Blaylock said he is confident the next mayor will come to understand its importance.
JTA has plans to install bus-only lanes, is also looking at constructing a light rail, or trolley system, as well as building a commuter rail line from downtown Jacksonville to the suburbs. That system of transportation will feed into the Skyway, Blaylock said, increasing ridership and making the people-mover an essential part of the downtown renaissance.


Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-03-08/story/jacksonville-mayoral-candidates-call-closing-skyway-lack-power-do-it#ixzz1G1Q337Yk

Interestingly, Tulsa is also stepping up to the plate trying to pull streetcar off. Although I doubt they'll get anywhere soon...their plan probably just involves asking for federal funds. Knowing that city, I doubt that they are prepared to fund anything on their own.

The problem with OKC is that we don't have a university located in a straight line 3-4 miles from downtown that has 40,000 students at it. Or else that would be the obvious line we need. That strategy should be clear for cities like Austin, Madison, Berkeley-Oakland, Seattle, etc. The problem in OKC is that we have to invent destinations for streetcar to go to, and it can't be downtown-to-campus. OCU has what, 4,000 students? That doesn't make it worthwhile.

OCU? I know it has only a few thousand students but still a destination. Also OUHSC with 3,500 students.

Commuter rail to Norman makes the most sense for connecting OKC to OU and its 26,000 students.

Tulsa would love to connect TU with downtown as a way to revitalize 11th St/Route 66. That is what that corridor needs to really see any major investment. Another line to Uptown south of downtown (which would provide a connection to the riverfront) that loops to Cherry Street has also been discussed but no real planning has been done yet. I think Tulsa is waiting to see what OKC does.

With all of these other cities adding or expanding streetcar / light rail.

What does this do to Okc?

I was hoping our streetcar would help Okc move up a notch or two into a higher "Tier 2" type of city. But with so many other cities currently with streetcar or future streetcar, it seems all Okc will do is try to keep pace and not really move upward.

Remind me again, where the Okc streetcar will place in comparison to other cities with streetcar. Will the Okc streetcar system be over and above others or does Okc fall somewhere in the middle?

With all of these other cities adding or expanding streetcar / light rail.

What does this do to Okc?

I was hoping our streetcar would help Okc move up a notch or two into a higher "Tier 2" type of city. But with so many other cities currently with streetcar or future streetcar, it seems all Okc will do is try to keep pace and not really move upward.

Remind me again, where the Okc streetcar will place in comparison to other cities with streetcar. Will the Okc streetcar system be over and above others or does Okc fall somewhere in the middle?

Because of MAPS, we seem to be ahead of other cities. We are self-funded while other cities are trying to scrape things together. Our starter system is definitely very ambitious too, a lot of cities are doing routes of 1-4 miles and we are shooting for 5-7. We are definitely ahead of the general curve, except compared to Portland and DC. Even if we were just keeping pace, a streetcar doesn't only serve as a competitive advantage, it mainly provides internal benefits to our city no matter what the conditions in other cities are.

Good point on being self-funded and the internal benefits for our city no matter other cities.

I took this same question over to the "Modern Streetcar Transit Maps3" discussion thread too.

Because of MAPS, we seem to be ahead of other cities. We are self-funded while other cities are trying to scrape things together. Our starter system is definitely very ambitious too, a lot of cities are doing routes of 1-4 miles and we are shooting for 5-7. We are definitely ahead of the general curve, except compared to Portland and DC. Even if we were just keeping pace, a streetcar doesn't only serve as a competitive advantage, it mainly provides internal benefits to our city no matter what the conditions in other cities are.

remember we are very likely to get a 75 mil start grant from the FTA and that will push us to 8-10 miles or more

Read the story I posted above about Jacksonville. If we close down the Skyway which is huge money loser we have to pay back the $90 million the feds kicked in. This is why Rick Scott turned downt the HSR money. If it doesn't work the feds will want their money back.

Read the story I posted above about Jacksonville. If we close down the Skyway which is huge money loser we have to pay back the $90 million the feds kicked in. This is why Rick Scott turned downt the HSR money. If it doesn't work the feds will want their money back.

neither of those directly related to modern street car

I think he is implying if we take federal funds and the streetcar doesn't work for us (the federally funded portion) they may want to get their money back, or at least some of it. It would be worth finding out for sure before we agree to take it.

I think he is implying if we take federal funds and the streetcar doesn't work for us (the federally funded portion) they may want to get their money back, or at least some of it. It would be worth finding out for sure before we agree to take it.

Thank you SkyWestOKC, that is what I meant. It is the reason our governor didn;t take the HSR money for the Tampa-Orlando train. If it doesn't work out we would have been on the hook for several billion dollars. Although, the Skyway system here in Jax might not be the best example. It was a poorly conceived plan from the beginning.

There might be another $25 million grant returned to the Feds now. Looks like the Cincinnati streetcar in the first post here is now in danger of being canceled. http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/03/22/losing-state-support-cincinnatis-streetcar-project-in-peril/

As long as our state leadership stays against the national trend of Republicans going against rail just because it apparently is a current Republican thing to do, we are in a very good position. And our local leadership, conservative or not, remains pretty firmly in favor of rail investment.

There might be another $25 million grant returned to the Feds now. Looks like the Cincinnati streetcar in the first post here is now in danger of being canceled. http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/03/22/losing-state-support-cincinnatis-streetcar-project-in-peril/

As long as our state leadership stays against the national trend of Republicans going against rail just because it apparently is a current Republican thing to do, we are in a very good position. And our local leadership, conservative or not, remains pretty firmly in favor of rail investment.

that is the great thing about our program .. it does have anything to do with the state

that is the great thing about our program .. it does have anything to do with the state

Exactly. Can you imagine where our plans would stand if we had any reliance at all on state funding?

Exactly. Can you imagine where our plans would stand if we had any reliance at all on state funding?

???

While it is true that the startup MAPS 3 Streetcars are not dependent on any outside funding (unlike the Streetcars in the original MAPS), any expansion etc seems fairly depended on outside funding. Regional co-operation and Federal funds. It has been mentioned by the Mayor that the State needs to be involved too (specifically re: a line to the Capital). Am I incorrect on this?

OCU? I know it has only a few thousand students but still a destination. Also OUHSC with 3,500 students.

Commuter rail to Norman makes the most sense for connecting OKC to OU and its 26,000 students.

That makes it a worthy stop on a line, not somewhere that I legitimately think can anchor the end opposite downtown.

Commuter rail isn't part of the equation right now, but I am sure it is the eventual goal of where this is headed. As far as I know, the planning underway is only referencing the commuter to make sure that current plans accommodate future needs, which would be commuter rail from Edmond to Norman. We'll need to figure out a different funding solution for that one..

???

While it is true that the startup MAPS 3 Streetcars are not dependent on any outside funding (unlike the Streetcars in the original MAPS), any expansion etc seems fairly depended on outside funding. Regional co-operation and Federal funds. It has been mentioned by the Mayor that the State needs to be involved too (specifically re: a line to the Capital). Am I incorrect on this?

expansion of the street car won't have/need any regional co-operation or funding .. we will/should get some federal funding for extra miles at the start ...

as far as the state/capital .. it will be for them to decide if they want to play ... the line to the HSC will be able to extend to the capital.

as for the future light rail .. that will take at the very least take lots of regional co-op and maybe some state funding

Larry - once the streetcar is built people will be begging for it to come to their neighborhood. Expanding streetcar/light-rail lines is never a problem. Cities can't build the extensions fast enough. The hard part is getting started.

Light rail produces a burst of development, but not everywhere
http://newurbannetwork.com/article/light-rail-produces-burst-development-not-everywhere-14344


Author:
Philip Langdon
New Urban Network

The Denver, Charlotte, and Minneapolis-St. Paul regions all opened new light-rail lines between 2004 and 2007, aiming to enhance their transportation systems and at the same time encourage efficiently-placed real estate development.

They got much of what they were looking for. “All three transit lines experienced a tremendous amount of new development” — 6.7 million square feet along the Twin Cities’ Hiawatha Line, 7.8 million square feet along Denver’s Southeast Corridor, and 9.8 million square feet served by Charlotte’s Blue Line, says a new report from the Center for Transit-Oriented Development.

The 80-page analysis, Rails to Real Estate: Development Patterns Along Three New Transit Lines, says residential construction came on particularly strong. In the Twin Cities, 86 percent of the development near the 12-mile Hiawatha Line was housing. In Denver, 68 percent was housing, and in Charlotte, 54 percent.

But if anyone expected development to crop up at every station, there was cause for disappointment. Transit-oriented development (TOD) concentrated primarily in areas that already had plenty of jobs or amenities to offer..................read more........http://newurbannetwork.com/article/light-rail-produces-burst-development-not-everywhere-14344

http://newurbannetwork.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-content-width/CTODnew-development.jpg

One of the reasons TOD doesn't develop at every station is because once you get out on the fringes those stations are setup for 'park and ride' which only encourages more sprawl. I am not a fan of the park and ride concept. I prefer a focused mass transit region or connecting urban centers (like downtown Norman and downtown Edmond) with each other. I want people to live closer to train stations, not make it easier for them to sprawl out even more.

Those numbers are really amazing with SF of new development. Nearly 10 Million in Charlotte. Those advocating for the convention center need to read this report.

Light rail produces a burst of development, but not everywhere
http://newurbannetwork.com/article/light-rail-produces-burst-development-not-everywhere-14344



http://newurbannetwork.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-content-width/CTODnew-development.jpg

This should be tagged with "OKC: NB!"

I hope Jeff and the rest of the streetcar read this. No sense at all in focusing all of the efforts on attracting TOD. Development potential can NOT outweigh existing functionality. You have to put some focus on the areas that are currently hot for development, because it won't create new development areas--it will however add tremendously to areas with existing development. That is the way to best maximize TOD potential, by far.

I could not agree more Spartan. Also, the nice (regretably) thing about OKC is that there is so much open land downtown that you don't really have to think about TOD very much when considering street car routes. There is TOD potential everywhere. The first goal, to me, of a streetcar line is to move people places they want to go at distances they are not willing to walk. The second goal is to make the line simple enough that people can understand it and can easily figure out how to get on the streetcar, where to get off and where to catch it again. The third goal is to get people who ordinarily wouldn't consider riding a bus to try the streetcar and learn that mass transit is easy and relaxing....to help change the attitudes of people here regarding mass transit. There are a lot of other goals which we have already discussed, but those are the key ones to me.

Streetcar First!

I don't know the Okc convention center financial numbers to compare but they would need to be staggering in order to go up against the type of new development seen in these 3 cities.

Charlotte nearly 10 million square feet of new development in only 4 years! The low end is Minneapolis with nearly 7 million square feet of new development in a 6 year span!

Let's get Streetcar first!

Four years after that streetcar, the convention center would open to a completely transformed downtown Okc with millions of new sq ft. This would be all new private downtown developments, commercial and residential. Amazing!

To put some of these numbers in perspective;
Block 42 = 103,000 sf
Maywood Lofts = 140,000 sf
Centennial Canal = 107,000 sf

All of Bricktown and Lower Bricktown Retail combined not including Hotels = 553,000 sf!!

This all totals less than 1 million square feet.

Now let those numbers sink in and think about Charlotte at 10 Million Square Feet of New Commercial and Residential Development in only 4 years time.

Now let those numbers sink in and think about Charlotte at 10 Million Square Feet of New Commercial and Residential Development in only 4 years time.

And that was on only one of their lines. We were in Memphis about a year and half ago and the amount of new construction along their streetcar was mind-blowing. New condos, apartments, and hotels everywhere along the line. Also, go check out King Street in San Francisco. Before Muni was put it that area was the worst San Fran had to offer.

Streetcar First!

I don't know the Okc convention center financial numbers to compare but they would need to be staggering in order to go up against the type of new development seen in these 3 cities.

Charlotte nearly 10 million square feet of new development in only 4 years! The low end is Minneapolis with nearly 7 million square feet of new development in a 6 year span!

Let's get Streetcar first!

Four years after that streetcar, the convention center would open to a completely transformed downtown Okc with millions of new sq ft. This would be all new private downtown developments, commercial and residential. Amazing!

To put some of these numbers in perspective;
Block 42 = 103,000 sf
Maywood Lofts = 140,000 sf
Centennial Canal = 107,000 sf

All of Bricktown and Lower Bricktown Retail combined not including Hotels = 553,000 sf!!

This all totals less than 1 million square feet.

Now let those numbers sink in and think about Charlotte at 10 Million Square Feet of New Commercial and Residential Development in only 4 years time.

I prefer to think of it in Portland terms, for every $1 spent on streetcar, $18 in private development. I normally think it's insane to talk about things paying for themselves. But in Portland that's actually worked, of course, they've built their city entirely around streetcar. Expansions are often funded through ad valorem taxing districts, like a BID. 1-18 is not an unreasonable ratio to recoup your investment with property taxes...

Take into account in Spartan's $18 to $1, how much of that goes directly back to the City or does it go to the County or State? Reportedly the $350M that was spent on MAPS lead to $1 to $5 Billion in investment (depends on which set of numbers you believe). If all of that money was coming back to the City (as in the 18 to 1 comparison), MAPS should have not only paid for itself, but there shouldn't have been any need for additional taxes to fund MAPS 2 or MAPS 3. Or at the least at a substantially reduced rate or length. Right?

Take into account is the development going to happen anyway, just maybe not in that location (say on Memorial, Meridian or even the relocated I-40)?

One thing to consider about the C.C., is while it probably doesn't lead that much to private development (other than some retail/bars/clubs etc), it is nearly all NEW money coming into the economy and not just shifting of money from one area of the City to another. Granted, you might be shifting some money from surrounding cities.

Looking at the Cox Calendar about 90-95% of the events at Cox are attended by locals - high school graduations, Sesame Street Live, home and garden show, Barons games, etc. There are very few conventions where most of the delegates come from out of state. I understand that is why we need a new convention center but a new CC pails in comparison to the amount of local revenue generated with TOD, which is brand new money, not just moving money around.

When someone takes out a $5 million construction loan that is brand new money to the economy - it did not exist at all before. Money from a loan is created out of thin air and then spent in the real world of good and services.

Take into account is the development going to happen anyway, just maybe not in that location (say on Memorial, Meridian or even the relocated I-40)?


I can not take that into account, because I disagree that new development is just changing from one spot in Okc to another. Development around the streetcar would not happen without the streetcar.

Memorial, Meridian, will continue their course with or without streetcar. A streetcar has the ability to change Okc into a magnet type of city, such as Charlotte and Portland. New people = New Money.

It's not like we are having to choose one or the other (streetcar or convention center), we get Both, Yea!

It is which comes first, and that makes this a great discussion, Life in Okc is amazing right now. We can disagree on parks, streetcar, convention center, river improvements, but very few Cities are adding all of these improvements.

For those interested in the demise of the Cincinnati Streetcar, here is a good story on it.

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/03/22/losing-state-support-cincinnatis-streetcar-project-in-peril/

Ohio has a budget deficit of nearly $10 billion - they simply don't have the money to pay for construction or operation, even with the Federal government covering half the cost. Of course the federal government is also running a deficit and can't afford it either. It is real crappy that it has to come to point where the multiple levels of government have wasted so much money that they now can't afford to do what they should have been doing in the first place.

I found it interesting as well that Ohio was planning to build a rail system between Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati and that was scrapped as well.

The only way Cincinnati is going to get a street car is if they pay for it themselves (ala a MAPS style tax).

...When someone takes out a $5 million construction loan that is brand new money to the economy - it did not exist at all before. Money from a loan is created out of thin air and then spent in the real world of good and services.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, what I was saying is how much of the TOD is actually new money and not money from a project that would be built somewhere else in the City instead of along the Streetcar route? Also, I am not saying that Streetcars don't lead to development (even though there was a statement to that effect during the ULI presentation). I am just asking what percentage can be directly attributed to the route? In other words, if there was no streetcar, would these developments not get built at all?

Same question I asked about MAPS in general. It has been stated that it lead to at least $1B in private investment. That sales tax rates have increased. But it goes back to the question, what were sales tax rates in the 10 years before MAPS? What was the average yearly growth? How much can be directly attributed to MAPS?

I am for the Streetcars and wish we were getting what was talked about instead of this "starter set". Wish we hadn't ripped out the 180 miles we once had. But we did. To turn it around, did development stop when we ripped out streetcars? When the last streetcar dropped off its final passenger, did OKC come to a screeching halt or did it continue to grow?

...It is which comes first, and that makes this a great discussion, Life in Okc is amazing right now. We can disagree on parks, streetcar, convention center, river improvements, but very few Cities are adding all of these improvements.

Others have posted previously, it is because other cities already have these things. that OKC is playing "catch up".

here's the Phoenix area rail corridor:

http://www.valleymetro.org/images/uploads/lightrail_future_ext_uploads/Corridor-Extentions-High-Capacity-Transit-12-10.jpg

Tempe finally approved the route of its 2.6 mile street car system:

http://www.valleymetro.org/images/uploads/lightrail_future_ext_uploads/tempe-streetcar-route-map.jpg

and the 20 mile Light Rail starter line (opened in Dec 2008) will be extended 3.1 miles through Downtown Mesa to link it with Downtown Tempe and Downtown Phoenix

While in Phoenix last summer for a conference, I rode the light rail line and was fascinated at how efficient it was. While the mileage is definitely more than we are starting with, they have been able to cover a significant amount of ground.

They started making it in an "L shape", connecting the Central Ave. business corridor north of downtown, downtown and the convention/arena area, the airport, and ASU in Tempe.

I really wish we could focus on maximizing the mileage and reach of the initial line past the downtown/midtown areas.

In the current intent, we have around 1.5 to 2 miles in reserve that would get us to 23rd/Classen, Plaza, Paseo, or the Capitol easily.

Right now 'the center of gravity' for many of us seems to be orienting streetcar towards OCU in a 1C or 2A phasing if I can speak liberally.

A great deal of this has to do with numbers of people without cars and likely ridership density.

Of course, a great deal of this has to do with City Council.

Their first critical decision is approval of receiving the 1 A recommendations. This will occur this Tuesday morning. It is probably the most important City Council meeting for the streetcar project since it was approved on the 'resolution of intent.'

The City Cox channel has been running a short "Mayor's magazine" type segment (same set) with Councilmen White and Bowman. Bowman mentions towards the end of it that one of his regrets is not leading the cause to get a permanent OKC, 1 or 2 cent tax on GASOLINE to pay for mass transit needs (buses, "trolleys" etc). Thoughts?

While in Phoenix last summer for a conference, I rode the light rail line and was fascinated at how efficient it was. While the mileage is definitely more than we are starting with, they have been able to cover a significant amount of ground.

They started making it in an "L shape", connecting the Central Ave. business corridor north of downtown, downtown and the convention/arena area, the airport, and ASU in Tempe.

I really wish we could focus on maximizing the mileage and reach of the initial line past the downtown/midtown areas.

You're comparing a light rail system to our street car system. Light rail is not in our current plans even if it's hoped for in the future.

Take into account in Spartan's $18 to $1, how much of that goes directly back to the City or does it go to the County or State? Reportedly the $350M that was spent on MAPS lead to $1 to $5 Billion in investment (depends on which set of numbers you believe). If all of that money was coming back to the City (as in the 18 to 1 comparison), MAPS should have not only paid for itself, but there shouldn't have been any need for additional taxes to fund MAPS 2 or MAPS 3. Or at the least at a substantially reduced rate or length. Right?

Take into account is the development going to happen anyway, just maybe not in that location (say on Memorial, Meridian or even the relocated I-40)?

One thing to consider about the C.C., is while it probably doesn't lead that much to private development (other than some retail/bars/clubs etc), it is nearly all NEW money coming into the economy and not just shifting of money from one area of the City to another. Granted, you might be shifting some money from surrounding cities.

This is a somewhat reasonable argument, but you seem to miss the point about transit-oriented development. Private residential, commercial and retail development in the urban core is essential for this city to grow. The streetcar, facilitating transit-oriented development, will be the stimulus to make this happen.

Your argument regarding the economics of the CC vs the streetcar is flawed. We're not talking about a zero-sum game with transit-oriented development, such as when one business cannibalizes another. It's a multiplier effect. We would actually be facilitating new residents and businesses to locate in a dense, more economically viable environment -- one we currently cannot offer. This is a new paradigm.

Obviously, we need better convention facilities, and having them will lead to more hotel/motel taxes and patronage of our downtown entertainment districts, and that's great. But it doesn't fundamentally change the quality of life of our city, or make it a more appealing place to relocate to, as the streetcar with expected TOD would. It's not even on the same plane as far as economic development activity.

Creating a vibrant, modern city with an active pedestrian core with transit is going to transform this city, its image, and make it an international player. A really nice convention center will not do that.

The City Cox channel has been running a short "Mayor's magazine" type segment (same set) with Councilmen White and Bowman. Bowman mentions towards the end of it that one of his regrets is not leading the cause to get a permanent OKC, 1 or 2 cent tax on GASOLINE to pay for mass transit needs (buses, "trolleys" etc). Thoughts?

That's a brilliant, progressive idea, such that you'd expect from Bowman, and such that you'd expect to be dead on arrival in OKC. Not much more to say as far as I'm aware..

Larry, two points about 18-1: You're right, I'm not sure it brings NEW GROWTH to OKC. You're going to have a $18 of development anyway, why not take that $18 away from the suburbs and add it to downtown in terms of development? We know that streetcar DOES cause areas to be built up that wouldn't otherwise be built up. And as for paying for itself, of course that gets split up many different ways. Some of it goes to fund severely underfunded schools. Some of it goes to fund the bloated police structure. Some of it goes to pave roads. Some of it lines the pockets of cronies. But all of that money would have to be located somewhere else if it wasn't coming in terms of property taxes in the downtown area. And actually, this could dramatically improve inner city schools...ad valorem taxes tend to stay in the school district they were generated in, for mysterious reasons.

One additional point, Seattle has funded a lot of streetcar extensions through BID districts, which leverage the future land values caused by streetcar to pay for streetcar today. It's a great solution, although the only negative side affect is that it exacerbates the upheaval in tenants and gentrification process, but that can be looked at as good also. So if you do decide that you want it to pay for yourself, you can structure a taxing mechanism that is best designed to do that. It is possible in Oklahoma, case in point: how Tulsa has funded its new downtown ballpark. It can be controversial, but it gets the job done.

If nothing else it concentrates growth which is the best kind of growth

Soonerguru:

Don't get me wrong, even though they are incredibly expensive, I am not against the Streetcars. I'm not saying that there isn't any development with Streetcars or not even substantial development because of it (that wouldn't exist elsewhere). Development will certainly occur on it (just like it does when you build major streets, highways etc). It does allow another spot for concentration. No doubt.

The only thing I would take slight issue with is "Private residential, commercial and retail development in the urban core is essential for this city to grow." The City has grown without that for quite a while now without it being concentrated in the urban core, why do we suddenly need it there now? If you want the urban core to grow, that makes since, but then again, it seems like we are back to "cannibalizing" to a certain extent again. Some retail stores give great thought to how closely they put a new location to an existing one because they know a certain percentage will shift (now you have to pay for 2 buildings, 2 sets of management, staff, utilities etc, but do the number of new customers justify it?) Now apparently this doesn't bother McDonald's in the least because they have keep opening them up (seems like there is at least one and sometimes 2 of them at the same exit. Seemingly along every exit there on I-40 west of the I-244/44). LOL.

The only thing I would take slight issue with is "Private residential, commercial and retail development in the urban core is essential for this city to grow." The City has grown without that for quite a while now without it being concentrated in the urban core, why do we suddenly need it there now?

Larry I know you have read this a million times on this forum so I'm not sure why you're asking, but growth will not be healthy and our city will not be attractive to the incoming generation if we do not have urban core growth. We need it there now because it is in high-demand nationally among college graduates and empty nesters, both important demographics. This doesn't require a stop to fringe growth- we can continue trying to live in a faux-pastoral fantasy land while destroying actual countryside. But if we want to attract new people and businesses we will need a more developed core. There is a reason why there are so many cities trying to pursue streetcars, light rail, and other kickstarters for urban development.

Shane, I still am not understanding why the sudden change with the "incoming generation"? By the time this gets built (am speaking more generally of the whole Core to Shore, which is a 30 to 50 year plan), who's to say the pendulum won't have swung back the other way (perhaps multiple times)? Even when talking about mass transit, it has a similar time line as Core to Shore. Seems like we are doing this because it is the "in" thing to do right now?

Well Larry, the point is that when OKC has been sprawling, the older sprawl and inner city has been ghetto as hell. Now that OKC is concentrating more on the inner city, it's only a little bit ghetto with some nice areas in between. A huge improvement over ghetto as hell.

So to break it down into the most basic terms, it's about neighborhood improvement. That's what this is all about. Having livable, nice neighborhoods.

I read an article a couple of days ago (I will try and find it later today).

It was stating that the U.S. needs the upcoming generational shift in order to fix suburban sprawl. It was stating how the Boomer generation loves the suburbs and Gen X and Y are only now starting to move back to urban. Obviously not everywhere or everyone fits into this article but, it had some good points.

okclee - it is an efficiency issue for me. The higher the density the more efficient cities can be run, and not from a central planning point of view, but from an individual point of view. When I look at my personal life and where expenses can be cut and time saved, it is almost all in yard maintenance, automobile ownership, and getting from point A to point B.

Kerry, no doubt...just ask Betts, think she said she is saving an amazing amount/year by living downtown (seems like it was in excess of $10K/year)

Kerry, no doubt...just ask Betts, think she said she is saving an amazing amount/year by living downtown (seems like it was in excess of $10K/year)

I would move to downtown OKC in a heartbeat with kids and all - but we have a darn house in Florida that we can't sell. Every time I drive somewhere I get ticked off that I can't walk there. As I said before, we have an awesome Chinese takeout place that I can see from my bedroom window. It is maybe 1000 feet away but I have to drive 2.5 miles round trip to get to it.

Not necessarily all streetcar but here is a list ......
"The 13 Best U.S. Cities for Public Transit"

1.) Portland, Oregon. (No surprise here. Portland’s expanding light rail and streetcar lines make it the poster child for livable cities.)

2.) Salt Lake City (A surprise, but this underrated city has aggressively built light rail lines.)

3.) New York (Life here would unimaginable without transit. It’s the only major U.S. city where more than half of all households don’t even own a car.)

4.) Boston (The birthplace of subways in America, Boston’s compact settlement makes trains and buses a way of life.)

5.) Minneapolis-St. Paul (A shocker to me, and I live here. A good bus system now augmented with light rail. U.S. News awards it extra points for a stellar safety record.)

6.) San Francisco (Charming cable cars, but also the BART subway, an extensive network of light rail, commuter rail and buses.)

7.) Los Angeles (Even more of a shocker than Minneapolis, but Angelenos have been quietly assembling a respectable network of rapid transit alongside one of the world’s most extensive bus systems.)

8.) Honolulu (A 20-mile elevated rail system is in the works.)

9.) Denver (A little-low on the list, I argue, for a city where voters have said “yes”to an impressive network of light rail lines.)

10.) Austin (I’m skeptical, but must admit it’s been seven or eight years since I last visited.

11.) Washington (Way low for a city with some of the most walkable suburbs in America thanks to its wide-ranging Metro system.)

12.) Seattle (For a city that built a demonstration monorail in 1962, Seattle was late in the game in expanding transit beyond buses.)

13.) Chicago (The Windy City should demand a recount. The el trains and buses go everywhere you need to go.)

.................read more..........................
http://www.shareable.net/blog/the-13-best-us-cities-for-public-transit

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/02/08/10-best-cities-for-public-transportation.

There must be a typo - San Jose was not on the list despite VTA, CalTrain, and ACE (and those are just the rail systems). Not sure how Honolulu makes the list with a 'coming soon' system.

Kerry, this is the thread for your screenshots of Bordeaux, please.

Thought I would pass this article along. Jacksonville is looking to create a transit hub at our convention center. It will serve as a hub for Amtrak and Greyhound. The Skyway also serves the convention center. Keep in mind that the Jackonville Convention Center is a former railroad station.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-05-16/story/jta-making-progress-new-regional-transit-hub-prime-osborn-center

http://www.homewoodsuitesjacksonville.com/images/apg_1146842317.jpg

One of the reasons TOD doesn't develop at every station is because once you get out on the fringes those stations are setup for 'park and ride' which only encourages more sprawl. I am not a fan of the park and ride concept. I prefer a focused mass transit region or connecting urban centers (like downtown Norman and downtown Edmond) with each other. I want people to live closer to train stations, not make it easier for them to sprawl out even more.

Kerry,

I'm a big fan of rail transit, TOD, and putting the brakes on sprawl. However, I want to do this by allocating costs accurately, not by forcing people to live in only one type of land use. If the costs of sprawl are built into the cost of houses in sprawled areas, many more people will choose to live in more compact, TOD-type housing.

On the other hand, pushing everybody into TOD means that we will have to either abandon or tear down millions of houses that are already built in suburbs. This is more wasteful than letting people who so choose live in those houses.

First, I don't want to tell people how to live.
Second, presuming to tell people how to live will only give ammunition to those who are against providing options, such as urban living.

So, I have no problem with an occasional park-and-ride, as long as space for TOD is included.

Sort of off-topic, but illustrative:
Another way of encouraging urban living is to build up our urban schools, so people don't feel they have to "escape" them.

And, another example of proper cost allocation is charging trucks based on the damage they do to highways. As it is, they pay only by the gallon (and a lower rate per gallon at that), whereas they do many times the damage to highways that cars do. That means that car drivers are subsidizing the trucking industry. If that subsidy stopped, truck rates would go up, rail would be more competitive, and more freight would be transported by rail. This would reduce fuel use, improve highway safety, and make our overall economy more competitive.