Surprised there is not a thread on this. I looked over the 7 pages and couldn't find a thread dedicated to a light rail for the greater OKC area. Anyways I came across this article from The Edmond Sun(of all places :p ) and thought I'd pass it along.

Group looks at light rail for metro » Local News » The Edmond Sun (http://www.edmondsun.com/local/x964884617/Group-looks-at-light-rail-for-metro)

PluPan, light rail has been discussed hear often but there has never been a thread devoted to just light rail.

PluPan, light rail has been discussed hear often but there has never been a thread devoted to just light rail.

PluPan..hmm... It works. You just got your first nickname, Plutonic Panda.

From ACOGs prior studies commuter rail seems more likely than light rail

From ACOGs prior studies commuter rail seems more likely than light rail

almost no chance for light rail to any of the 3 cities ... as you said they would almost for sure be Commuter rail ..

There still seems to be a lot of confussion between all the different types of rails systems so when I hear people say light rail, commuter rail, etc... I just translate it into 'rail based transit'. Heck, most people think Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is just a regular non-stop bus with the ability to change the traffic lights.

For example - from the article:


Salt Lake City’s Front Runner light rail system

but from the Frontrunner website


In April 2008, UTA introduced the state’s first commuter rail line, FrontRunner

Not a big deal, I'm just saying. Anyhow, it is great that this effort is being published in the suburbs. I predict it is only a matter of time before Yukon asks why they are being left out. They probably feel like second class citizens because they have to keep driving cars.

BTW - anyone notice how far behind OKC is in getting commuter rail. It is popping up in multiple cities.

Beside the well know large cities Austin, Nashville, Salt Lakes City, and Albuquerque have commuter rail in operation now.

BTW - anyone notice how far behind OKC is in getting commuter rail. It is popping up in multiple cities.

Beside the well know large cities Austin, Nashville, Salt Lakes City, and Albuquerque have commuter rail in operation now.

ACOG and its consultant are gearing up and working on their commuter corridor analysis right now. It's moving, just quieter because it's ACOG.

On New Mexico's Rail Runner you can go round trip from downtown Albuquerque to Santa Fe for $10. The trip is 94 miles.

Please allow me to explain where this article originated and clear up some of the confusion created by it.

Back in 2009, ACOG hosted the Regional Transit Dialogue, which was a year and a half long series of meetings meant to begin a discussion between the various metro area cities and other stakeholders about the idea of developing a regional transit system. The first RTD was very successful and produced some good preliminary recommendations on land use planning, governance, finance and other issues related to developing a regional transit system. When that series of meeting ended, it was anticipated that there would be a follow-up series at some point in the future to further refine those ideas and begin to take a serious look at actually implementing development of a system.

Fast forward to October 31st, 2012, the beginning of the Regional Transit Dialogue II series. On that date, the RTD II Steering Committee met at ACOG to kick-off what will be another year and a half long series of meetings aimed at developing serious recommendations for implementing a regional transit system. In addition to that task, the Steering Committee is also serving as an Oversight Committee for AGOG's new $1.25 million "Commuter Rail Corridor Analysis" being conducted by URS Corporation, an internationally recongized rail transit consulting firm. The approximate 30-member Steering Committee is made up of City officials from OKC, Edmond, Norman and Midwest City, Chamber of Commerce representatives, business leaders, County officials, and other stakeholders.

This past Wednesday, January 23rd, the second meeting of the Steering Committe took place. I serve on the Steering Committee as a representative for OnTrac, and one item on the agenda was a presentation that I gave providing an overview on rail transit systems, including economic development, fiscal impacts, intermodal systems, light rail, commuter rail, intermodal hubs and a look at Oklahoma City's efforts to move toward developing rail transit.

When those in the room introduced themselves, one of the guests identifiied himself as a reporter with the Edmond Sun. So the story that appeared this morning is a result of his attendance of Wednesday's meeting.

While overall the article gets quite a bit right, it also gets a number things wrong, beginning unfortunately with the headline. Here's a list of the major errors:

1) The headline of the article says “Group looks at light rail for metro”, which is NOT correct. My presentation specifically addressed the fact that we are looking at Commuter Rail as the most likely option for the metro and not Light Rail. Commuter Rail was identified in the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study as the best rail mode for Oklahoma City. The new Commuter Rail Corridor Analysis by URS will advance us further with recommendations on station locations, trackage improvements, cost analysis and other important considerations. Due to the extreme cost differences between developing Light Rail versus Commuter Rail, it’s very important that the public not be confused on the matter. To build a Light Rail system between Edmond, Oklahoma City and Norman would cost $2-3 billion dollars, whereas a Commuter Rail system would cost only $200-300 million. What is really frustrating is that during my presentation I actually discussed how many people don't understand the difference between Light Rail and Commuter Rail and went through several slides explaining the difference, as well as clearly spelling out that what we are considering for the OKC metro is Commuter Rail.

2) The article correctly states that the DART system is estimated to generate $128 million in additional annual state and local tax revenues. However, the reported $4.5 million in property values increases is completely in error. The number is acutally $4.5 BILLION.

3) The article incorrectly states that the Salt Lake City Frontrunner is Light Rail, when in fact it is actually Commuter Rail. There were several slides in the presentation illustrating Salt Lake City's rail transit system, and the Frontrunner was specifically shown and discussed as an example of successful Commuter Rail service.

4) Finally, I do not work for ACOG and am not a representative of ACOG. I am an appointed citizen member of the RTD II Steering Committee.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

I assume the rail transit presentation that I gave will be available for viewing at some point on ACOG's website. Until then, I will try to load it to a cloud and provide a link for those who would like to review the information.

Thanks Hutch. I know this is an 'unknow' at this time, but when do you think the first train might leave the station. The only reason I ask is that OKC has already fallen behind peer cities in the implementation of regional rail. Their systems are up and running and we are still talking about it.

Fast forward to October 31st, 2012, the beginning of the Regional Transit Dialogue II series. On that date, the RTD II Steering Committee met at ACOG to kick-off what will be another year and a half long series of meetings aimed at developing serious recommendations for implementing a regional transit system. In addition to that task, the Steering Committee is also serving as an Oversight Committee for AGOG's new $1.25 million "Commuter Rail Corridor Analysis" being conducted by URS Corporation, an internationally recognized rail transit consulting firm. The approximate 30-member Steering Committee is made up of City officials from OKC, Edmond, Norman and Midwest City, Chamber of Commerce representatives, business leaders, County officials, and other stakeholders.


I'll add that EPS (Economic & Planning Systems), a planning firm, is on the consultant team as well, and are very well respected. Additionally, Guernsey is the local support for URS and will do much of the heavy lifting locally, which should add a good element to the overall consulting team.

For those who are interested, ACOG is videoing the RTD II meetings and those are being posted to ACOG's YouTube sight. You can view the first two meetings in their entirety, including the OnTrac rail transit presentation from Wednesday, at:

ACOG RTD II Meeting Videos (http://www.youtube.com/user/acogok)

There are several video segments that cover the full meeting.

Thanks Hutch. I know this is an 'unknow' at this time, but when do you think the first train might leave the station. The only reason I ask is that OKC has already fallen behind peer cities in the implementation of regional rail. Their systems are up and running and we are still talking about it.

If you watch the presentation and following discussion from the Wednesday meeting, you'll get a good idea of the timeframes involved in getting a system in operation. You'll also see some good information addressing your peer city comment.

If they want to attract the average commuter who has a good job and who is very busy speed of service will be most critical…. !
After that its frequency, capacity, locations of stations and buses to meet nearly every train.

COMET isn't bad but I still prefer GOCART (Greater Oklahoma City Area Rail Transit).

You know, it gets a little frustrating to watch videos like that and hear local elected leadership acknowledge how adding lanes of high speed traffic only makes traffic worse, and then they still support things like Oklahoma City Boulevard. The disconnect leaves me shaking my head.

i always liked MORT... Metro of Oklahoma Rail Transit. I would totally wear a t-shirt supporting the MORT

Thanks Hutch. I know this is an 'unknow' at this time, but when do you think the first train might leave the station. The only reason I ask is that OKC has already fallen behind peer cities in the implementation of regional rail. Their systems are up and running and we are still talking about it.

I know I'm not Hutch, but I believe the Sacramento Kings will be sitting pretty in Seattle for 5+ years before our first commuter train leaves.

You know, it gets a little frustrating to watch videos like that and hear local elected leadership acknowledge how adding lanes of high speed traffic only makes traffic worse, and then they still support things like Oklahoma City Boulevard. The disconnect leaves me shaking my head.

okc BLVD will not be high speed

COMET isn't bad but I still prefer GOCART (Greater Oklahoma City Area Rail Transit).

hopefully COMET will include more than just rail

hopefully COMET will include more than just rail

That is easy to fix. GOCART - Greater Oklahoma City Area Rapid Transit. Or we can leave mode and speed out of it all together and have Greater Oklahoma City Area Regional Transit. But like I said, COMET is good also.

okc BLVD will not be high speed

It will be faster and wider than any street around it.

Watched all of the videos, thank you for posting the link to them.

In the future, is it possible the commuter rail lines would be converted to light rail. I think I understand the differences, but am unsure of the type of headways we'd see with commuter rail. Are they similar performance wise to light rail?

SEPTA has heavy rail that functions as commuter serivce but runs off an overhead electrical line. Freight trains use the exact same tracks.

Always good to have this no matter what rail thread we're in:

Light rail - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail_system)

At the bottom of the link page are different modes of rail transportation for you to delve into. Enjoy!

Also got to thinking about the argument of light rail vs. commuter rail. Obviously, cost wise, it would be more cost effective to go with commuter rail since it is 10 times cheaper per mile to construct. But either way, building in the right-of-way of BNSF's mainline and viewing that mainline on Google Maps, you see why it costs $6-8 million per mile. There's hardly any right-of-way left and you'd have to acquire some of that space back to make it happen.

Looking up the mainline (towards Edmond), I could see commuter rail existing on the east side of the ROW where there are already overpasses in place over 4th, 5th, and 6th Streets. Come 14th Street though and you run out of room on the east fringe. What happens there? Acquire that portion of the property from the owner and shave it off?

The railyard and industrial properties between 23rd & 36th could be turned into a storage and maintenance facility for commuter cars and engines. Beyond the yard, there's plenty of ROW for additional commuter track and then around the 50th Street area you run into the quagmire of a new 2 rail line bridge over 235, a level ROW wide enough between 235 and 44 to accommodate 2 lines (which isn't feasible now) and again, a two lane bridge over 44.

North of here, there's more, gotta rebuild a new 63rd Street bridge over the ROW to accommodate future growth in the ROW and that bridge is crumbling and bumpy anyway.

I could go on and on but you can look at Google Maps just to verify it, lol. As troublesome as this seems, tell me how and why you (general audience) think that light rail is so much better than commuter. I think the writer of the Edmond Sun article didn't do as much research as intended on the subject and got confused between the two modes of transportation.

Also got to thinking about the argument of light rail vs. commuter rail. Obviously, cost wise, it would be more cost effective to go with commuter rail since it is 10 times cheaper per mile to construct. But either way, building in the right-of-way of BNSF's mainline and viewing that mainline on Google Maps, you see why it costs $6-8 million per mile. There's hardly any right-of-way left and you'd have to acquire some of that space back to make it happen.

Looking up the mainline (towards Edmond), I could see commuter rail existing on the east side of the ROW where there are already overpasses in place over 4th, 5th, and 6th Streets. Come 14th Street though and you run out of room on the east fringe. What happens there? Acquire that portion of the property from the owner and shave it off?

The railyard and industrial properties between 23rd & 36th could be turned into a storage and maintenance facility for commuter cars and engines. Beyond the yard, there's plenty of ROW for additional commuter track and then around the 50th Street area you run into the quagmire of a new 2 rail line bridge over 235, a level ROW wide enough between 235 and 44 to accommodate 2 lines (which isn't feasible now) and again, a two lane bridge over 44.

North of here, there's more, gotta rebuild a new 63rd Street bridge over the ROW to accommodate future growth in the ROW and that bridge is crumbling and bumpy anyway.

I could go on and on but you can look at Google Maps just to verify it, lol. As troublesome as this seems, tell me how and why you (general audience) think that light rail is so much better than commuter. I think the writer of the Edmond Sun article didn't do as much research as intended on the subject and got confused between the two modes of transportation.

I am guessing this was directed towards me. I do not think light rail is better. I am asking what the difference in terms of frequency, headways, and speed is. Is commuter rail limited in the number of stops it can make because of acceleration and deceleration times, or are they comparable to each other and the difference is moot. I understand the difference between the two modes, but am curious as to how much one is better than the other?

Genuine question, not being rude. I have only used light rail and never have used commuter rail, so I am genuinely unfamiliar with the operations of commuter rail (but I do understand the physical differences of the two)

It will be faster and wider than any street around it.

25 mph in the middle

I think you manage the headways by using modern Rail Diesel Cars such as the Stadler units Denton uses on their 'A-Train' for most service. They are smaller and lighter than conventional locomotives and commuter cars. If extra capacity is needed, two can be coupled together. I think 10 - 15 minute headways would be easily achievable. For peak service and hourly runs each direction, run 2 or 3 conventional trainsets such as those used by Metra, TRE, or other commuter systems.

The right of way issues mentioned by OKC will need to be resolved, but it will be a much lower cost than light rail by a wide margin.

I am guessing this was directed towards me. I do not think light rail is better. I am asking what the difference in terms of frequency, headways, and speed is. Is commuter rail limited in the number of stops it can make because of acceleration and deceleration times, or are they comparable to each other and the difference is moot. I understand the difference between the two modes, but am curious as to how much one is better than the other?

Genuine question, not being rude. I have only used light rail and never have used commuter rail, so I am genuinely unfamiliar with the operations of commuter rail (but I do understand the physical differences of the two)

No, lol, that's why I put General Audience in the post :)

When I think of commuter rail, I think of Chicago. When I think of light rail, I think of Dallas. Dallas has the population to offset the costs of light rail. OKC metro does not. The ROW is here now for us with BNSF. If we can get their thumbs up, which has been given on several occasions in other major cities, then I think commuter is the best route to go.

I have never ridden either :eek:

The right of way issues mentioned by OKC will need to be resolved, but it will be a much lower cost than light rail by a wide margin.

Why there's no "like" option in this new thread I have no clue but +1

No, lol, that's why I put General Audience in the post :)

When I think of commuter rail, I think of Chicago. When I think of light rail, I think of Dallas. Dallas has the population to offset the costs of light rail. OKC metro does not. The ROW is here now for us with BNSF. If we can get their thumbs up, which has been given on several occasions in other major cities, then I think commuter is the best route to go.

I have never ridden either :eek:

Chicago's L system is light rail. They do have commuter rail that runs parallel to certain segments. I believe the commuter rail is called METRA and it is a completely different system and offers no connectivity to the Chicago CTA or the L. All METRA fares are only good on Metra and cannot be used on the L or CTA buses.

The next generation diesel-electric locomotive of choice is the MPXpress made by the Idaho-based company MotivePower:

MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php)

These engines generate higher torque and acceleration and meet EPA Tier 2 emissions standards. They are powerful and quiet, with a whining hum on accerlation that sounds like an Indy race car or a small jet engine. Their increased power and acceleration allows for station spacings similar to light rail systems. They are being used by Metrolink, Caltrain, Frontrunner, Rail Runner, NorthStar, Metra, MARC, MBTA and others. Most pull Bombardier Bi-Level American coaches, which have comfortable seating, restrooms and work tables.

Here's a video of a Caltrain "Baby Bullet" MPxpress accelerating away from a station:

Caltrain Accelerating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LLYCHKMyNY)

Here's a video of a NorthStar MPxpress zooming by on a test run:

NorthStar Zooming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KocAzzn2rOA)

This isn't your parents locomotive.

Chicago's L system is light rail. They do have commuter rail that runs parallel to certain segments. I believe the commuter rail is called METRA and it is a completely different system and offers no connectivity to the Chicago CTA or the L. All METRA fares are only good on Metra and cannot be used on the L or CTA buses.There is also a South Shore Line that slowly takes you to South Bend

The next generation diesel-electric locomotive of choice is the MPXpress made by the Idaho-based company MotivePower:

MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php)

These engines generate higher torque and acceleration and meet EPA Tier 2 emissions standards. They are powerful and quiet, with a whining hum on accerlation that sounds like an Indy race car or a small jet engine. Their increased power and acceleration allows for station spacings similar to light rail systems. They are being used by Metrolink, Caltrain, Frontrunner, Rail Runner, NorthStar, Metra, MARC, MBTA and others. Most pull Bombardier Bi-Level American coaches, which have comfortable seating, restrooms and work tables.

Here's a video of a Caltrain "Baby Bullet" MPxpress accelerating away from a station:

Caltrain Accelerating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LLYCHKMyNY)

Here's a video of a NorthStar MPxpress zooming by on a test run:

NorthStar Zooming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KocAzzn2rOA)

This isn't your parents locomotive.

I saw a few MP36's when I was in DC this summer and took Acela to Baltimore and at the VRE station in Crystal City. They are pretty impressive.

Chicago's L system is light rail. They do have commuter rail that runs parallel to certain segments. I believe the commuter rail is called METRA and it is a completely different system and offers no connectivity to the Chicago CTA or the L. All METRA fares are only good on Metra and cannot be used on the L or CTA buses.

Yes, the METRA is what I was referring to. Not the L. Sorry, to not point that out. There's a video on Faces of Death where a lady gets smashed by a BN F unit at a commuter station in the 1970s in the Chicago area...

The next generation diesel-electric locomotive of choice is the MPXpress made by the Idaho-based company MotivePower:

MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php)

These engines generate higher torque and acceleration and meet EPA Tier 2 emissions standards. They are powerful and quiet, with a whining hum on accerlation that sounds like an Indy race car or a small jet engine. Their increased power and acceleration allows for station spacings similar to light rail systems. They are being used by Metrolink, Caltrain, Frontrunner, Rail Runner, NorthStar, Metra, MARC, MBTA and others. Most pull Bombardier Bi-Level American coaches, which have comfortable seating, restrooms and work tables.

Here's a video of a Caltrain "Baby Bullet" MPxpress accelerating away from a station:

Caltrain Accelerating (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LLYCHKMyNY)

Here's a video of a NorthStar MPxpress zooming by on a test run:

NorthStar Zooming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KocAzzn2rOA)

This isn't your parents locomotive.

VERY GOOD INFO.

Do we have any idea how many train sets and passenger cars we would need to operate a commuter rail system?
What is the desired capacity per hour?

Surprised there is not a thread on this. I looked over the 7 pages and couldn't find a thread dedicated to a light rail for the greater OKC area. Anyways I came across this article from The Edmond Sun(of all places :p ) and thought I'd pass it along.

Group looks at light rail for metro » Local News » The Edmond Sun (http://www.edmondsun.com/local/x964884617/Group-looks-at-light-rail-for-metro)

Hmmmm....better check that link again....light rail for the metro?....the headline says we're looking at commuter rail:cool:

Hmmmm....better check that link again....light rail for the metro?....the headline says we're looking at commuter rail:cool:

Hutch, check out the link in your browser...it says light rail. Obviously the folks up at Edmond Sun think that the two are the same thing... Maybe we should refer to it as rail transit, mode a) b) and c) until it actually gets here, lol.

Hutch, check out the link in your browser...it says light rail. Obviously the folks up at Edmond Sun think that the two are the same thing... Maybe we should refer to it as rail transit, mode a) b) and c) until it actually gets here, lol.

Edmond Sun reporter James Coburn was kind enough to make the corrections to the article before it went to print in the Saturday edition. He also replaced the original online version with the revised article. It does still say "light rail" in the hyperlink, but I'm sure they left it that way so that wherever the original link had been posted or sent, it would connect to the new article. If they changed the hyperlink, the old link would not access the corrected article and would also no longer show the original article, as it has been removed.

In addition to the headline, they also corrected the Frontrunner reference to commuter rail and the revised the property value increase attributable to DART to 4.5 billion.

I appreciate their willingness and effort to make the corrections.

Well, with a new possibility of the Flyer going thru Edmond on its way to Tulsa, this could be a big player since Edmond does not currently have a station. If the Flyer is extended to Tulsa or Kansas then Edmond will need to at least build a platform of some kind which will eventually be used by commuter rail as well.

You have to admit - this looks pretty darn cool.

Tx_7K_W4A1I

25 mph in the middle

6 blocks of a 2.5 mile "boulevard".

VERY GOOD INFO.

Do we have any idea how many train sets and passenger cars we would need to operate a commuter rail system?
What is the desired capacity per hour?

I don't know the exact answer to those questions. The new "Commuter Corridor Analysis" that URS Corporation is beginning for ACOG will most likely answers those and many other technical questions about conerning commuter rail, including estimated ridershsip, service frequency, operational capacities, station locations, track and infrastructure improvements, train types and numbers, and development and operational costs. The study will be ongoing for the next year and a half or so. URS will hold a number of public meetings during that time to obtain public input and discuss their efforts. I encourage everyone to keep informed throughout the process and participate in the public scoping process.

There were some preliminary estimates made of commuter rail service frequency and operational capacities by Jacobs Engineering as part of the Intermodal Hub Study that was completed in 2011. Those estimates were used to analyze service and operational capacity of the proposed intermodal hub. You can find information on the hub study at ACOG's website:

ACOG Intermodal Hub Study (http://www.acogok.org/Programs_and_Services/Transportation_and_Data_Services/hubstudy.asp)

Based on the Jacobs analysis, there would be seperate trains that ran between a) Norman and Edmond, b) Norman and Midwest City and c) Edmond and Midwest City. All trains would connect through Santa Fe Intermodal Station in OKC. The Norman to Emdond trains would be on offsetting service times from the Norman to Midwest City and Edmond to Midwest City trains. With the offset service times, if the trains were initially all on one-hour headways, the effect would be 30-minute headways for the system. The number of train sets required to operate on 30-minute headways will depend on the number of stations, stop times and other factors. My guess would be that initially each train set would be made up of one locomotive and two or three bi-level coaches. As ridership grows, you don't add additional train sets, just additonal coaches. You would only need to add additional train sets if you went to shorter headway times.

I hope that helps answer your questions.

You have to admit - this looks pretty darn cool.

Tx_7K_W4A1I

We have provided links to a number of excellent commuter rail videos on the OnTrac website, including tours of the inside of coaches and explanations of system operations. The links are on the right side of the main page:

OnTrac Website (http://www.ontracok.org/)

There are two really cool videos of the Frontrunner on a trip from Salt Lake City to Ogden and back, where they have mounted a camera on the lower nose of the MXpress locomotive and sped the video up to give you a sense of flying along the tracks.

Does anyone think OKC will ever get a true light-rail system. I mean a commuter would be great, don't get me wrong. But, I want something this is built for its own purpose. Not just expanding what we have now and adding new cars to the tracks. I'm sure a light-rail is much faster than a commuter rail.

3280

Now this would be awesome! The chances of something like this being built across the OKC metro, not so awesome. :(

Commuter rail is much faster than light-rail. It isn't even close. Commuter rail can easily hit 90 mph. If you look on YouTube you can find videos of the New Mexico Rail Runner blowing by cars I-25 which are doing 65 to 75 mph. According to the speed app on my phone the train from downtown Philly to the airport hits 80 mph. Monorails are super expensive and really aren't that great at attracting riders or spurring development. Mass transit of all varieties work best at ground level where potential customers can see it.

Commuter rail is much faster than light-rail. It isn't even close. Commuter rail can easily hit 90 mph. If you look on YouTube you can find videos of the New Mexico Rail Runner blowing by cars I-25 which are doing 65 to 75 mph. According to the speed app on my phone the train from downtown Philly to the airport hits 80 mph. Monorails are super expensive and really aren't that great at attracting riders or spurring development. Mass transit of all varieties work best at ground level where potential customers can see it.Oh, I didn't really look into it that much. Why can't they design light-rail to hit 100 or more mph? If they have their own specially built tracks? I don't see how it wouldn't work? It's just like a "local" HSR except it wouldn't go as fast. You could make it work just as easy on the ground, yes? Forgive if I sound stupid on this matter. I'm not too knowledgeable on this matter and also too lazy to Google it at the current moment :p

Higher speeds over short distance create very small time differences.

While I had a fling in Edmond last year, I timed my average commute (living on the south side driving to Edmond to see her) for fun. Taking the same exact route every time, I averaged around 34 minutes at 60mph highway and 45 city (the speed limit). I averaged 33 minutes at 75mph highway and 50 city. This was over several months, so lots of data to average in.

This was kind of proof to me that speeding doesn't make you get anywhere any faster unless you have a very large distance to extrapolate the times over.

So, in conclusion. 80mph and 100mph, you are talking a matter of seconds time difference over such a short distance as our rail lines would be.

Does anyone think OKC will ever get a true light-rail system. I mean a commuter would be great, don't get me wrong. But, I want something this is built for its own purpose. Not just expanding what we have now and adding new cars to the tracks. I'm sure a light-rail is much faster than a commuter rail.

It all comes down to money. A light-rail system betweeen OKC, Edmond, Norman and Midwest City would cost $3-4 BILLION...commuter rail $300-400 MILLION. Most cities are now choosing to go with commuter rail due to the extremely high costs of light rail, which in most cases is simply not an affordable option unless the federal government is paying a considerable portion of the bill. Dallas, Salt Lake City, Denver, St. Louis and other cities received substantial federal funding for their light rail systems. Unfortuately, getting large amounts of federal rail transit funds is not an easy task in today's political and budgetary world. Which means we're most likley going to have to depend on ourselves and other local taxpayers to fund the system. Kansas City tried to get their voters to approve funding for a light rail system a number of years ago and failed miserably. Just recently though, Kansas City has rolled out a new rail transit plan based on a commuter rail system. That plan has gained broader support and goes to the voters later this year for approval.

I don't know the exact answer to those questions. The new "Commuter Corridor Analysis" that URS Corporation is beginning for ACOG will most likely answers those and many other technical questions about conerning commuter rail, including estimated ridershsip, service frequency, operational capacities, station locations, track and infrastructure improvements, train types and numbers, and development and operational costs. The study will be ongoing for the next year and a half or so. URS will hold a number of public meetings during that time to obtain public input and discuss their efforts. I encourage everyone to keep informed throughout the process and participate in the public scoping process.

There were some preliminary estimates made of commuter rail service frequency and operational capacities by Jacobs Engineering as part of the Intermodal Hub Study that was completed in 2011. Those estimates were used to analyze service and operational capacity of the proposed intermodal hub. You can find information on the hub study at ACOG's website:

ACOG Intermodal Hub Study (http://www.acogok.org/Programs_and_Services/Transportation_and_Data_Services/hubstudy.asp)

Based on the Jacobs analysis, there would be seperate trains that ran between a) Norman and Edmond, b) Norman and Midwest City and c) Edmond and Midwest City. All trains would connect through Santa Fe Intermodal Station in OKC. The Norman to Emdond trains would be on offsetting service times from the Norman to Midwest City and Edmond to Midwest City trains. With the offset service times, if the trains were initially all on one-hour headways, the effect would be 30-minute headways for the system. The number of train sets required to operate on 30-minute headways will depend on the number of stations, stop times and other factors. My guess would be that initially each train set would be made up of one locomotive and two or three bi-level coaches. As ridership grows, you don't add additional train sets, just additonal coaches. You would only need to add additional train sets if you went to shorter headway times.

I hope that helps answer your questions.

Thanks,
Your post and link contain great information and clear up most of my questions.

In a previous link you posted it contained links to meetings that you had participated in.
One concern raised was about getting votes for a commuter rail system from people who would not be taking the train. I believe very significant support could be gained from the public if our commuter rail system offered special service to large events, particularly on the weekends. This would require significant flexibility and enough system capacity.


I know that in Norman many people who don’t even go to the football games would like to see their parking and traffic congestion concerns addressed. Most fans would too!
Many fans who hate night driving or driving in heavy traffic would love to be able to take a train to the games from a park and ride facility… Special reserved game day train tickets may be helpful.

As you say “It all comes down to money” I know the following suggestion would be more expensive.
But I believe it would be well worth it in the long run.

I would suggest that an OU train station be located west of the OU Duck Pond, north of the OU track facility and south of Brooks street. The station would probably need to be elevated above the surrounding area. This location puts the train station much closer to the heart of OU and within eye sight and in the minds of many potential everyday riders and visitors. Many would not want to make the walk in the dark over to the current RR tracks and that would be a cold walk in the winter.

There are rumors that OU would eventually like to build a new arena just north of my suggested location for the OU commuter rail station.

Many people who attend OU events have significant influence in our state and in our area. I am willing to bet that the more exposure these people have to a commuter rail system when attending OU events that funding support for future transit projects will be exponentially increased by several times. It is for this reason that I also strongly suggest building a train stop near CHK on NW 63th in OKC.

I believe the location of a user friendly OU station is one of the biggest key’s for future success and is a great selling point for the entire commuter rail system.

I hope your committee give this location due consideration.
Thanks

I think a rail system would be nice between the cities around OKC, i.e. Edmond, Yukon, Norman, somewhere out to the SW, and maybe Choctaw. This could significantly help with traffic congestion. However, I wonder how efficient this would really be in the OKC area. You can get to just about every major suburbia city around here within 20 miles. Is this far enough to really make a difference in overall commute times?

Currently, I live about as far North as I ever want to live and commute downtown. My drive takes me 25 minutes in the morning and 35 minutes in the afternoon. When I leave work, I head downstairs, walk to the garage, and I am making progress towards home in 5 minutes tops. Now, if I had to take a train, I would have to walk to the hub, wait for the train, board the train, wait for everyone else to board which could take anywhere from 10-15 minutes. Now, once the train departs, it would get to where it needs to be in 10 minutes or so; however, I still have to wait for everybody to exit, get in my vehicle, and get stuck in a mass of traffic trying to leave the train station and still drive home from there. That process seems like it would take a really long time. Does the train make sense for commuting and decrease traffic congestion? Yes, absolutely. But does it seem practical for OKC? In my simple mind, it doesn't. Maybe it would be much more practical if you are driving from Edmond to Norman or Guthrie to OKC, but not many people do that.

Maybe it would be much more practical if you are driving from Edmond to Norman or Guthrie to OKC, but not many people do that.

A quick commuter rail system is vital to its success

I don’t know the exact numbers but there are tens of thousands who commute from Edmond and Norman to the down town OKC area…

For many professionals and students it’s an opportunity to get additional work done that they would have a hard time doing while driving…..

Putting fewer miles on a car usually saves money but since many employers help with the cost of riding the train it becomes far more cost effective than driving the full distance.

A long term cause is the fact that the more downtown grows, the fewer the parking spaces will be readily available. In many others larger cities, if you want to park downtown, you will be paying upwards of $14 a day for non peak/early bird slots. And can be double for peak usage. I paid the parking bill in Chicago a few months back...$37 for about 6 hours of peak usage. You also might be 10 blocks (although smaller than our blocks so about 3/4 mile away) from your destination. If you want to go downtown, you take the train or bus, or pay for the convenience of the automobile.

Right now it may be inefficient time-wise to take a train if we had one, but in 20 or 30 years from now (or even sooner if we hit a huge boom) the train might be the most cost effective method and rapid method.

Basically, we must plan for the future OKC and build our transit system now to build the city we want to build.

Austin, TX, metro population is 1.7 million and their 32 mile commuter route has been popular since it started operating in March 2010. There's nothing wrong with planning for the future of OKC by having a system implemented well in advance, so that however long it takes to gain half a mill more residents, there are plenty of viable options when it comes to transportation. Also, remember that Austin has a plethora of toll roads and highways so the automobile culture is active there as well even though they are more of a walkable and bike friendly city.

Chicago's L system is light rail. They do have commuter rail that runs parallel to certain segments. I believe the commuter rail is called METRA and it is a completely different system and offers no connectivity to the Chicago CTA or the L. All METRA fares are only good on Metra and cannot be used on the L or CTA buses.

Chicago's L is heavy metro subway not light rail. Heavy metro subway uses heavy rail cars on standard gauge tracks typically with 3rd rail electricity for power and completely grade separated underground or above. Chicago's L subway system is one of the oldest in the world and has lines that are both above and below ground. Chicago has no light rail.

You did correctly state that one of Chicago's commuter rail system is Metra. Commuter rail uses heavy rail cars with DMU or Diesel Electric locomotives.

The main difference I know between the systems are:

Subway/Metro Heavy Rail cars Multiple configuration/train lengths Typically 3rd rail power Always completely grade separated Usually below ground in ultra high density, above in less dense. Ultra-high capacity system with frequent stops

Commuter Rail Heavy Rail cars Train made of several pax cars Typically DMU or Diesel electric loco Grade Separated in Freight or dedicated CR track High capacity but not many stops

Light Rail Light Rail cars (hence the name) Usually in pairs of cars Typically overhead catenary power Mix with traffic or grade separated Medium capacity system with frequent stops

Streetcar Light Rail Cars Usually single car or two to make a train Typically overhead catenary power exists within traffic but can have grade separation Low capacity with ultra-frequent stops



OKC will have Streetcar and I am certain Commuter Rail in the near future. I think Light Rail and certainly Subway/Metro are out of the question, period.

Thank you for the correction, HOT ROD. :)

Maybe it would be much more practical if you are driving from Edmond to Norman or Guthrie to OKC, but not many people do that.

We have three people in our office that drive from Guthrie to the state capitol area every day.