I love mass transit as much as the nest person and take it every time I have a chance but I still don't see why someone would ride a train from downtown to a station in NE OKC and transfer to a shuttle bus that drops them off in a large free parking lot - with no way to walk to another Adventure District attraction without waiting for the shuttle bus again. In my opinion, attractions in the AD are too far apart once you get there to make mass transit serving the area viable. It would be different if once you got there everything was within walking distance but nothing is except maybe the Zoo and Science Museum. I know from personal experience that after hauling a couple of kids around the OKC zoo in the summer the last thing (and I mean the last thing) I would want to do is wait for a shuttle bus to take me back to a train that I have to wait again for.

If I suggested to my wife that we take this transit option she would tell me to go ahead, she is taking the car and will meet me there.

And sorry, but using a ROW simply because it exist is the worst idea ever. You have to go where the people want to go and where ridership will exist. You can build a train where it is easy but that doesn't mean anyone will ride it. WRWA has way more potential for ridership and should be built 20 years before the adventure line.

Now if it is going to be a line serving neighborhoods along the way - which high density neighborhoods would that be?

I agree. WRWA is one of the obvious assets that requires development. ( another reason Rail Road use makes all things more difficult ). Light Rail is a must in the selection of moving people ( large density first ) w/ WRWA to Downtown / Norman -OKC -Edmond / and HIgh Value Economic Districts.

I love mass transit as much as the nest person and take it every time I have a chance but I still don't see why someone would ride a train from downtown to a station in NE OKC and transfer to a shuttle bus that drops them off in a large free parking lot - with no way to walk to another Adventure District attraction without waiting for the shuttle bus again. In my opinion, attractions in the AD are too far apart once you get there to make mass transit serving the area viable. It would be different if once you got there everything was within walking distance but nothing is except maybe the Zoo and Science Museum. I know from personal experience that after hauling a couple of kids around the OKC zoo in the summer the last thing (and I mean the last thing) I would want to do is wait for a shuttle bus to take me back to a train that I have to wait again for.

If I suggested to my wife that we take this transit option she would tell me to go ahead, she is taking the car and will meet me there.

And sorry, but using a ROW simply because it exist is the worst idea ever. You have to go where the people want to go and where ridership will exist. You can build a train where it is easy but that doesn't mean anyone will ride it. WRWA has way more potential for ridership and should be built 20 years before the adventure line.

Now if it is going to be a line serving neighborhoods along the way - which high density neighborhoods would that be?

I feel the same way about this line as well. The customer base of the various businesses in the Adventure District is not in the downtown area. The customers are in the immediate neighborhoods and in suburbs such as Edmond. The existing track goes through no-man's land, and it terminates way too far from all the major attractions with the exception of the Softball Hall of Fame. It would be a four to six block walk to the east for the residents in that part of the city just to get to the track area. They might as well walk north to the Adventure District directly. The only attraction that would generate significant ridership from this line would be the Softball HOF during its big events. However, that adds up to only a few weeks every year.

I would much rather see money be spent on connecting the suburbs to the system before a line is established to the AD. Once the suburbs are connected, then the line may be more viable. However, I still don't like the proposed line even with the suburbs in the mix. Without regard to cost, I would rather see an extension of the streetcar that runs from downtown to the OUHSC, on to the Capitol, continue north up Lincoln, turn east onto 36th or 50th, and then turn north again on MLK. Going up the spine of the district on MLK would allow it to serve all of the major AD businesses.

I guess I can see the appeal for an AD line, I just don't understand why it is prioritized over other transit that would benefit OKC.

Echoing what others are saying, I would also add that the AD line appears to be one that would work - with a full network roll out. At least then you also have the option to divert assets (trains) to routes with more traffic while other routes slow down.

I'm just worried if this is put out there, and fails after spending $50-80 million, how badly is it going to sour the area on rail and put off the more substantial rail options (Norman, Edmond, WRWA, MWC, etc).

I wouldn't trip out too much folks. Doing the study essentially gives the city what the options are with it and subsequently will help "protect it" for future generations should Councilman Pettis not develop consensus with his constituents and demonstrate where the funding would come from to build it.

Plus, it has helped us illustrate further detail about what a aerial ramp connection to the Santa Fe Hub might entail. The same E/W connections / corridors needed for commuter rail to Tinker and potential rail to Tulsa.

The study was accepted unanimously this morning and gives us a much higher level of detail as to what is involved not only throughout ward 7, but also the connections to the hub in Bricktown.

It will help us negotiate with Union Pacific on all these other matters.

Who would actually be operating the trains? Is this something the city is going to do, or are we looking at something like Chicago where BNSF operates the commuter train on their rails and Union Pacific operates it on theirs? If it was in the report, my apologizes for speed reading.

Initially COTPA uhhh.... I'm mean EMBARK! But it could be done in the form of the Regional RTA or the Adventure District Association to subcontract directly with someone to run them. If its rapid streetcar, then it would presumably be part of the overall MAPS 3 streetcar system.

http://www.oklahoman.com/article/3891305?embargo=1


A streetcar running from Bricktown through northeast Oklahoma City on the “adventure line” would have limited value as a tool for economic development, a study prepared for the city says.
Only the streetcar has potential to foster mixed-use development at transit stops along the adventure line, the study found.

That potential is limited, though.

Such development would occur “only at the downtown stops and only if it is part of a broader city effort to facilitate redevelopment,” the study says.

why would a street car only be needed to spur development? Isn't the point kind of a street car to improve public transportation?

why would a street car only be needed to spur development? Isn't the point kind of a street car to improve public transportation?

But the point is that would spur development.

I disagree that it would only spur development at the downtown stops. This study was done primarily as an engineering study and didn't look at economic development in any depth. I think it would likely facilitate development at any stops. I see this line as possibly having a fourfold advantage: provide access to the Adventure District for downtown visitors and residents (which would be a great amenity for convention-goers), potentially offer park and ride option with all the day parking at Remington Park and Tinseltown, provide transit for residents of NE Oklahoma City and offer economic development opportunities for stops along the line. I think that this line might have a great chance of getting federal funds since it would offer transit to the NE side and connects to the intermodal hub.

why would a street car only be needed to spur development? Isn't the point kind of a street car to improve public transportation?

No

So let's say the line gets built, where would the new high-density TOD get built?

If you're going to do a streetcar, there's a lot of better options than that rail line. I followed in on Google Maps, and there's several miles of industrial, and gravel pits, and stuff like that. None of it is pretty to look at. I think you'd be better off going down Reno to the new bus station, and then straight up MLK, all the way to the zoo.

It's not just an existing right of way, it's an existing rail. Very little modification ($$$) needs to be spent to get that line working again. The cost to buy new rail and place it in the street would be hundreds of millions. (more than the MAPS3 streetcar budget). The streetcar can run on that line as it is. All you need is a power source and some small modifications to certain areas of the line.

It's not just an existing right of way, it's an existing rail. Very little modification ($$$) needs to be spent to get that line working again. The cost to buy new rail and place it in the street would be hundreds of millions. (more than the MAPS3 streetcar budget). The streetcar can run on that line as it is. All you need is a power source and some small modifications to certain areas of the line.

There is a lot more to it than that. The safety requirements for mixing passenger and freight probably takes any type of streetcar out of the mix. Plus, it could be free to build but with no riders what difference does it make?

What freight? No one uses that line....in fact, I believe the city owns it? (or part of it?)

Union Pacific uses it, plus the track is used by the Oklahoma Railway Museum so whatever passenger type is added would need to survive and impact with it.

Not going to address all the comments. Again, this was a technicall feasability study. The rest takes re-imagining Ward 7. The immediate benefit to ongoing MAPS 3 stuff is the Bricktown section.

The rest is up to the Adventure District, Councilman Pettis, and Ward 7 citizens.

So you are saying - toss out any ridership and development issues, it was simply - can the route physically support the transit?

Mostly. Again, it was a technical study. It helps us negotiate with Union Pacific and understand connectivity to Santa Fe Station. If councilman pursues it, a secondary study or an extension of this study needs to be engaged that would demonstrate where you would extend the line to beyond 50th street and whether you would follow a different alignment that would pick up OUHSC and more central sections of WARD 7.

This study will also help the rail road museum in their efforts.

Regardless, it is up to the Councilman and Ward 7 constituents to pursue this further.

It's not just an existing right of way, it's an existing rail. Very little modification ($$$) needs to be spent to get that line working again. The cost to buy new rail and place it in the street would be hundreds of millions. (more than the MAPS3 streetcar budget). The streetcar can run on that line as it is. All you need is a power source and some small modifications to certain areas of the line.

I beg to differ. That line hasn't seen major Class I freight activity since the early 1980s. While ORM volunteers have spent time rehabilitating the line, it would be in the city's best interest to bring this line up to full time active passenger status.

"In the US, rail weight varries from 80-90 lb/yd (pounds/yard) in small yards to 100-110 lb/yd on light duty track and between 130 and 141 lbs on heavy duty track. Rail of 141 lbs is the new main line standard."

Infrastructure (http://www.railway-technical.com/track.shtml)

I don't know if you've walked the fitness trail over in that area that hugs that line just west of I-35 but it is not the greatest line.

What freight? No one uses that line....in fact, I believe the city owns it? (or part of it?)
From the article...

The north end of the line now is used for slow-moving sightseeing trains. The Union Pacific Railroad uses another section to provide freight service to a couple of businesses.

Yeah, and my guess is, all traffic probably is limited to a 10-15mph restriction due to the condition the current rail line is in, not to mention switching operations for those businesses in and around NE 8th to 10th/MLK.

I beg to differ. That line hasn't seen major Class I freight activity since the early 1980s. While ORM volunteers have spent time rehabilitating the line, it would be in the city's best interest to bring this line up to full time active passenger status.

"In the US, rail weight varries from 80-90 lb/yd (pounds/yard) in small yards to 100-110 lb/yd on light duty track and between 130 and 141 lbs on heavy duty track. Rail of 141 lbs is the new main line standard."

Infrastructure (http://www.railway-technical.com/track.shtml)

I don't know if you've walked the fitness trail over in that area that hugs that line just west of I-35 but it is not the greatest line.

Sorry for not being more clear, relative to buying and installing new rail as the post I quoted suggested, the cost to rehabilitate and bring an existing line up to standard is very little in comparison.

Relative to streetcar, yes I agree with you ;-)

I beg to differ. That line hasn't seen major Class I freight activity since the early 1980s. While ORM volunteers have spent time rehabilitating the line, it would be in the city's best interest to bring this line up to full time active passenger status.

"In the US, rail weight varries from 80-90 lb/yd (pounds/yard) in small yards to 100-110 lb/yd on light duty track and between 130 and 141 lbs on heavy duty track. Rail of 141 lbs is the new main line standard."

Infrastructure (http://www.railway-technical.com/track.shtml)

I don't know if you've walked the fitness trail over in that area that hugs that line just west of I-35 but it is not the greatest line.

It would be great to have streetcar traversing every street in OKC but we're maximizing efficiencies, pinching pennies, and trying to make the most of the funding we are lucky to have. A $100M tourist streetcar line is not a good use of resources. If using the existing tracks only costs $10M that is a more reasonable proposition, but still begs the question as to whether rail service to the zoo should be a priority. Once again, for some reason the zoo is a higher priority than real transit service is.

I beg to differ. That line hasn't seen major Class I freight activity since the early 1980s. While ORM volunteers have spent time rehabilitating the line, it would be in the city's best interest to bring this line up to full time active passenger status.

"In the US, rail weight varries from 80-90 lb/yd (pounds/yard) in small yards to 100-110 lb/yd on light duty track and between 130 and 141 lbs on heavy duty track. Rail of 141 lbs is the new main line standard."

Infrastructure (http://www.railway-technical.com/track.shtml)

I don't know if you've walked the fitness trail over in that area that hugs that line just west of I-35 but it is not the greatest line.

It would be great to have streetcar traversing every street in OKC but we're maximizing efficiencies, pinching pennies, and trying to make the most of the funding we are lucky to have. A $100M tourist streetcar line is not a good use of resources.

nm

From the article...


UP leases a section from COTPA to gain access to the Miracle Oil Company. If the track is shared, it will require Positive Train Control and FRA compliant vehicles.

If it is isolated, with separation, and COTPA controls the entirety of the line, mixed traffic (both streetcar and heavy rail) can use the same tracks.

This is a complicated issue- thus the study.

UP leases a section from COTPA to gain access to the Miracle Oil Company. If the track is shared, it will require Positive Train Control and FRA compliant vehicles.

If it is isolated, with separation, and COTPA controls the entirety of the line, mixed traffic (both streetcar and heavy rail) can use the same tracks.

This is a complicated issue- thus the study.

and with those three sentences my head hurts. Thank GOD I don't mess with that for a living.

lol

What is the status of this?

So what is going on with this? Wasn't this supposed a light rail line? Have they moved forward or gotten closer to actual construction?

Judging by the results of the CentralOK!go commuter transit corridors study (http://acogblog.org/2014/12/10/commuter-corridors-regional-transit-rail-mpo/), I think it's pretty unlikely that this corridor will be activated for public transportation use anytime soon. If anything happens here short-term, my best guess would be an excursion train from Bricktown to the Oklahoma Railway Museum... but I think that at least for now, that's a pretty big "if".

As I understand it (based of course on second and third-hand knowledge) a big snag is the way the line runs through the Union Pacific (UP) yard just east of bricktown.
I still think there are some possibilities there. Imagine an un-filled parking lot or two at the zoo, Science Museum Oklahoma, and Remington Park and a major party venue or two downtown or in Bricktown on New Years' Eve. Throw in a couple strips of steel 4 feet 8 1/2 inches apart connecting the two areas.

I personally fought for the study to be completed. It was very detailed and included alternatives between excursion trains to rapid streetcar. The study only examined how to get to NE 50th street however and not actually how to get to the front door of each institution at the end of the line.

Councilman Pettis wants to see rapid streetcar along this corridor. That was the most expensive option in the alternatives.

The biggest problem with this coming into actual fruition is that the beneficiaries... i.e. zoo trust, Remmington Park, softball fields, Tinsel Town, etc have not actually fought to see it funded.

Tying into the 23rd street bus line changes the dynamic of the line into a public transit mechanism substantially. It could be a great opportunity with a bit of imagination and political clout. Unfortunately, there seems to be a deficit in both areas right now.

I'd love to see this line be more active! But, honestly, I don't think it's that likely. Another barrier to using the line for public transport is that this line goes right through the middle of the lubricants manufacturing facility there at 10th and Eastern. Unless they move, or reconfigure their facility, running any sort of passenger rail through here will probably not be easy.

I'd love to see this line be more active! But, honestly, I don't think it's that likely. Another barrier to using the line for public transport is that this line goes right through the middle of the lubricants manufacturing facility there at 10th and Eastern. Unless they move, or reconfigure their facility, running any sort of passenger rail through here will probably not be easy.

The processing plant was proposed to be dealt with three diferent ways. All doable.

UP, is the proposal posted publicly anywhere? I'd love to give it a read :)

UP, is the proposal posted publicly anywhere? I'd love to give it a read :)

http://www.okc.gov/agendapub/cache/2/eqvpnc55ckjs11jvqeo3jwjj/197234706162015025625989.PDF

Unfortunately, that link gives me a 404... but if I hadn't been a derp and just looked at the top of the thread I'd have seen the link to the full report. So yeah, I'm a derp. :P