Why not just cut off the water and the sewer service?
It would probably have more immediate results . . .
Wouldn't it?

Yep, but that would be against the law.

There has to be a better way. Suggestions?

Larry, if you look at the first few pages of this thread I have presented my ideas on a neighborhood centric bus system for the urban core. The key to ubanism is in making the neighborhood functional again.

That would be counter-productive from an urbanization stand point. Park and rides create the very low density development we are trying to get rid of.

Yet almost all decent mass transit systems have them. Look at Minneapolis. One of the best in the country.

Yet almost all decent mass transit systems have them. Look at Minneapolis. One of the best in the country.

I know, perplexing isn't it? Thank goodness we now have the "new urbanism" to guide us so we don't make the same mistakes. Making suburbia more convenient will only result in more suburbia. Increasing production of money losing products is the best way to go out of business.

I have an interesting side question, Kerry, where are growing populations supposed to live once "downtown" is full? Either towns have to grow or new towns have to appear. At some point towns have to grow outward. By definition, aren't the new fringes of a town going to be "the suburbs?" I guess I am needing a better definition of suburbs to thoroughly appreciate the finer details of this discussion (which I am enjoying :-) ) And, I think, I'm tring to find the moral center in all this and ain't havin' much luck.

USG60 - it all comes down to land use. There are so many advantage to higher density I wouldn't even know where to start naming them. If the new urbanism took off in OKC and everyone bought into it then at some point the urban core would become saturated. At that point each new block would have the same density as the proceeding black. Prior to WWII new blocks were built just the like the block that came before them. There were not subdividions like we know today, there was just a continuation of the existing urban fabric. After the automobile, everything changed. The houses got further apart, business got further apart, and people got further apart. The automobile stopped being a luxury and became a neccesity and then it became a self-perpetuating cycle. You had to have a car because it was too far to walk. You can't build things close together because you needed room for parking. So the cycle repeats.

Let me also add that the 50 sq mile urban core of OKC can hold a lot more people than is currently living there and a streetcar system paired with a neighborhood based bus system could go a long ways in bringing about that density. For example, places like Capitol Hill, Stockyard City, Classen/23rd, and Lincoln could easily become very high density with multiple mid-rise apartments and condos. 10 and 15 story residential units would not be out of the question and would be very similar to places like Little 5 Points or Buckhead in Atlanta. It just takes vision and a desire to get there. We need only look at Deep Duece to see what is possible, and the snowball isn't even rolling there yet.

...It just takes vision and a desire to get there...


VJdL65gSzzg

USG60 - it all comes down to land use. There are so many advantage to higher density I wouldn't even know where to start naming them. If the new urbanism took off in OKC and everyone bought into it then at some point the urban core would become saturated. At that point each new block would have the same density as the proceeding black. Prior to WWII new blocks were built just the like the block that came before them. There were not subdividions like we know today, there was just a continuation of the existing urban fabric. After the automobile, everything changed. The houses got further apart, business got further apart, and people got further apart. The automobile stopped being a luxury and became a neccesity and then it became a self-perpetuating cycle. You had to have a car because it was too far to walk. You can't build things close together because you needed room for parking. So the cycle repeats.

In the end even around WWII most of the block you talk about were closer to suburban than urban.

Oklahoma metro has pretty much always had cheap land and plenty of it, no real incentive to build in the core and up, instead of the outlying areas and out. Unless someone just really likes vertical and they don't care about the cost, they are probably going to go with the more bang for the buck option. Some people like being stacked on top of each other, others like elbow room etc. We just seem to have more of the elbow room folks than the stacked.

Greater Tokyo: 35 Million + people. Suburbs all over. Tokyo is a fair example of a city that naturally extended outward. Is that right?

In the end even around WWII most of the block you talk about were closer to suburban than urban.

Check out these photos of OKC prior to WWII.

http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/vintage/vintage.htm

Yep, but that would be against the law.

So . . . Like just change the law.
It's been done before . . .


"I have an interesting side question, Kerry, where are growing populations supposed to live once "downtown" is full? Either towns have to grow or new towns have to appear. At some point towns have to grow outward. By definition, aren't the new fringes of a town going to be "the suburbs?" I guess I am needing a better definition of suburbs to thoroughly appreciate the finer details of this discussion (which I am enjoying :-) ) And, I think, I'm tring to find the moral center in all this and ain't havin' much luck."

Go UP, Young Man and Grow UP With the City . . . =)
Remember The Urban Core in "Bladerunner"?
9CR5dY9kGr4

So . . . Like just change the law.
It's been done before . . .


No point in changing the law, just reduce the city limits. If people want to live out in the sticks that is fine, they just shouldn't expect paved roads, city water, police, fire, cable tv, etc.

Did you see the article today about the $50 million expansion of the Hefner water-treatment plant? 50% to 70% of water usage is to water the lawn.

If people want to live out in the sticks that is fine, they just shouldn't expect paved roads, city water, police, fire, cable tv, etc.

At this point in time--in Oklahoma County--isn't it a bit difficult to determine exactly where "the sticks" begin or end? (Surely not just north of the Cowboy Hall of Fame, as indicated on the maps on Page 1 of this thread.)

Did you see the article today about the $50 million expansion of the Hefner water-treatment plant? 50% to 70% of water usage is to water the lawn.

That sort of water squandering illustrates an entirely different form of "high density" . . .
(And there ought to be a law addressing the issue, since "Common Sense" is now pushing up daisies out in the boondocks.)

The images from the this thread were just of the mass transit zone. I have a whole other map of what the OKC City Limits should be.

BTW - I love your "Common Sense" is now pushing up daisies out in the boondocks comment. Let me add that those daisies are watered twice a week for 30 minutes.

Check out these photos of OKC prior to WWII.

http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/vintage/vintage.htm

OKC had full blocks built out to Grand Boulevard at the time, only a small percentage of the city was being built in an urban fashion even then.

OKC had full blocks built out to Grand Boulevard at the time, only a small percentage of the city was being built in an urban fashion even then.

The downtown urban core was denser than it is today because it was built when people had to walk (or ride a horse). However, it didn't take long for the first streetcars to be introduced that allowed people to live further away and thus reduced the density that would occur in a pedistrian only environment. However, the most recent parts of OKC (built since the 1960s) are the least dense parts of the city. OKC's lack of a massive expanse of high density areas reflects the time period in which the city was founded and developed.

To see how a town would be built today in a car dominated environment check out Nocatee, FL. It is a brand new town and it 100% requires a car, even to take kids to the local park. Their main street is a 6 lane freeway that runs through town. Single interchanges are larger than entire 1,000 person towns in Oklahoma.

http://www.nocatee.com/

Lack of population density would be a pretty bad argument for cutting service outside of the inner loop. Yes, the inner loop is probably densest area on average, mostly thanks to the southside. The average density on the southside (15th to 240, Shields to 44) is 5,481 ppm, which over the 12 square mile area is the highest density part of the city- certain areas of the southside will average 7-8,000 ppm. For the most populated parts of the northside, (44 to 235, 10th to 39th) the average density is just over 4,000 ppm. Granted, there are density pockets on the inner northside which are some of the best numbers in the city, ie 10th to 36th, Penn to Western which is about 5,700 ppm.

But look at those late 20th Century neighborhoods. Something way out there like NW Expressway to Memorial between Macarthur to Rockwell. Density of 4,563 ppm, currently barely served by transit with Route 8 at NW Ex and Mac. Or, 63rd to Memorial between Penn and May, density of 4,711 ppm. This selection includes some very wealthy areas with large lots. Currently served by transit by routes 8 and 7 at 63rd and May, and Route 5 along Memorial and Penn north of Hefner Road.

And perhaps the biggest piece of pie missed by a fantasy OKC transit system operating on arbitrary boundaries defined by highway routes would be the area west of 44 and north of 10th Street. For example, 10th to 39th, between Macarthur and Portland, with a density of 5,067 ppm spread over a 4.7 mile area. This last area is currently serviced by three significant transit routes (10, 23, and 38). It has high density and a fairly consistent residential grid. There is just no argument for removing this area, where there are no doubt people already relying on transit, including disabled and poor people, who may have made home purchases or signed leases based on transit.

I don't claim to be an expert, but I feel that you are ignoring the social complexities of transit planning in a big way.

Shane - the problem is limited funding. The challenge is operating a bus system that provides the most benefit at the lowest cost. If there is an isolated area of high density and a need for mass transit then maybe a local neighborhood system would be in order.

I have an interesting side question, Kerry, where are growing populations supposed to live once "downtown" is full? Either towns have to grow or new towns have to appear. At some point towns have to grow outward. By definition, aren't the new fringes of a town going to be "the suburbs?" I guess I am needing a better definition of suburbs to thoroughly appreciate the finer details of this discussion (which I am enjoying :-) ) And, I think, I'm tring to find the moral center in all this and ain't havin' much luck.

Well you do realize that population doesn't grow forever don't you. Even when you look at okc today there's still plenty area so let's say downtown fills up okay then people renovate and build house's on the east side, then the south side. Then they go further out but sooner or later our population is gonna crash or we end up like paris all the affluent people live near down town and and the working class people live in further out of the city and have hard time getting to work.:ohno:

I posted the following question last week in the Streetcar thread, but I don't think anyone saw it. It seems relevant to this topic as well, so I'll repost it here:

"Does anyone know if the city plans to consider hiring a company, other than Metro, to operate the streetcar, specifically, one that already operates a rail system? I sure hope so, considering the public and City Council have all acknowledged that there are serious issues with our current transit system. The funding issue is a biggie, no doubt about it, but it can't be the whole story. Perhaps we need to see our options and proposals from other transit companies to make sure OKC and the forthcoming RTA members get the best deal and best operator. If Metro comes out ahead, great, at least we will have seen all of our options."

Every presentation and news story I see from Metro staff, it appears they already think they're running the streetcar. I'm not sure I trust them running it if they can't operate transit effectively. How much longer should we allow the money excuse? Other transit systems seem to serve more people with less.

I posted the following question last week in the Streetcar thread, but I don't think anyone saw it. It seems relevant to this topic as well, so I'll repost it here:

"Does anyone know if the city plans to consider hiring a company, other than Metro, to operate the streetcar, specifically, one that already operates a rail system? I sure hope so, considering the public and City Council have all acknowledged that there are serious issues with our current transit system. The funding issue is a biggie, no doubt about it, but it can't be the whole story. Perhaps we need to see our options and proposals from other transit companies to make sure OKC and the forthcoming RTA members get the best deal and best operator. If Metro comes out ahead, great, at least we will have seen all of our options."

Every presentation and news story I see from Metro staff, it appears they already think they're running the streetcar. I'm not sure I trust them running it if they can't operate transit effectively. How much longer should we allow the money excuse? Other transit systems seem to serve more people with less.

Metro Transit is not a company it is the branding of the transit system run by the government agency OKC created (The Central Oklahoma Transportation & Parking Authority or COTPA) to plan/manage it's transit and parking assets. Most of the current issues are inherited from bad decisions made long ago made more difficult by how bad the system is most anyone who can do something else do something else and has for decades.

Which goes back to Frustratedoptimist's core point & one I have asked before, no matter if it is a city entity or a company:

I'm not sure I trust them running it if they can't operate transit effectively.

Thanks Snowman. So does this mean we can't fire them? No offense, but I don't buy the "inherited problem" excuse. The current staff have been there several years. Why would we give them more financial and operating responsibility, especially something as important to public and private investment as this streetcar, when they can't successfully manage thier current finances and operations? I don't think we citizens would have supported the streetcar as much if we had known city leaders were just going to let MT/COTPA operate it.

Anyone tasked with providing mass transit to 600 sq miles with a budget the size that is available in OKC would fail. The money and service is simply spread to thin. Keep the budget the same and reduce the service area is the best solution.

Anyone tasked with providing mass transit to 600 sq miles with a budget the size that is available in OKC would fail. The money and service is simply spread to thin. Keep the budget the same and reduce the service area is the best solution.

I think that's the only solution. Although, I'd really like to increase the budget and build covered bus stops, provide GPS bus tracking and actually have signage that includes route information. Those last three things would increase bus ridership significantly, I suspect.

I think that's the only solution. Although, I'd really like to increase the budget and build covered bus stops, provide GPS bus tracking and actually have signage that includes route information. Those last three things would increase bus ridership significantly, I suspect.

Reducing the service area (and the reduction in buses, drivers, and fuel cost that come with it) would allow for the very things you just mentioned. WiFi should also be available and I would even like to see 5 volt USB power ports added to the bus seats.

I agree that reducing and rerouting the service area will help reduce some costs, but I don't agree that adding more bells and whistles to each bus is going to increase riders. I'd like to see them focus more on running on time, service area, customer service, shelters, and signs, etc. Not to rag on them too much, but I really think we need to ask some hard financial questions before we give them a much larger budget and higher level of responsibility. Not to mention, rail operations is a whole different animal, shouldn't we hire a rail firm to handle that part? With all this said, where does the conversation of the regional system fit in?

No one is currently providing service to 600 square miles of Oklahoma City. 75% of the transit system is already within your imaginary inner core. The portion that currently served and is not within your transportation zone includes two very significant, high density commercial/medical/residential strips (Memorial Rd and the area around NW Expressway and Hefner Parkway), important low-middle income areas with large commercial areas (just west of 44 and between 10th and 39th Expressway), and low-income areas in the east and Mid-Del which includes one of the region's largest employment centers.

Just saying, they are already trying to serve only what is important.

I'm not disagreeing with you that transit service would be more efficient with a much smaller network area- that's obvious. Probably the best thing we could do would be cut back to two east-west routes on northside and southside, and three north-south routes (maybe May, Western, MLK), and try to run those 7 routes on 10-15 minute frequency. I just think you need to consider the greater social picture which Metro Transit obviously does- it leads them to reduce frequencies rather than coverage when they need to pinch pennies. It is no light matter to remove transit from people who depend on it. We could also make welfare programs more efficient by changing eligibility requirements- unfortunately, welfare programs are part of a greater social good and we can't do that. Transit has reached a similar state in most of America.

PS I know you are very stubborn and your way is right, but regarding your neighborhood scheme, I still think you need to realize the Oklahoman conception of neighborhood wayfinding is not some globular organic path. We think of getting around in terms of corridors. This is not exclusive to Memorial Road and the suburbs. Consider the linear Main Streets in small towns and small urban neighborhoods like the Plaza. Consider Western Avenue, Classen, 23rd Street, Automobile Alley... Because we have arranged our space linearly since 1889, that's how we imagine the space around us, so the most efficient service pattern would mimic that cognitive process.

Shane - are you talking about a 3 by 4 grid with 2 miles between lines for the entire system?

No one is currently providing service to 600 square miles of Oklahoma City. 75% of the transit system is already within your imaginary inner core.+1. A fact often either ignored or out right mis-stated by some on this board.

The area outlined in purple is the transit zone I suggested.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/bus1.jpg

(I couldn't find a thread about Union Bus station or greyhound that wasn't closed, so I'm asking here. Feel free to move wherever appropriate, moderators.)

Wasn't the Greyhound station supposed to move last month? Anyone know if it has and/or has heard any rumors about what might go in there or if Nick Preftakes is trying to buy it?

I don't recall the timeframe, but yes, the bus system will move. I believe it will land out there near or at the Petrol Place at I-40 and Eastern.

I don't recall the timeframe, but yes, the bus system will move. I believe it will land out there near or at the Petrol Place at I-40 and Eastern.

I remember one of Steve's articles saying December and that the East Reno location would be long-term temporary, with the new intermodal hub hoped to be its future home.

Anyone tasked with providing mass transit to 600 sq miles with a budget the size that is available in OKC would fail. The money and service is simply spread to thin. Keep the budget the same and reduce the service area is the best solution.

Bus service isn't needed for the entire 600 sq miles. Oklahoma City does not cover 600 sq miles. Why on earth should any one in their correct mind toss a bench out by the intersection of Memorial Rd and Choctaw Rd and expect someone to sit their and wait for a bus? Service is only needed to cover 250 sq miles of OKC.

There are a lot of complaints that bus service is non-existent. Okay, I'll buy that. But Oklahoma City DOES run +/- 80 buses around the city. Problem is, all of the routes are poorly configured. Why would I want to take a bus from the Mercy Hospital area to downtown when I can get there twice as quick in my own car?

Bus service isn't needed for the entire 600 sq miles. Oklahoma City does not cover 600 sq miles. Why on earth should any one in their correct mind toss a bench out by the intersection of Memorial Rd and Choctaw Rd and expect someone to sit their and wait for a bus? Service is only needed to cover 250 sq miles of OKC.

There are a lot of complaints that bus service is non-existent. Okay, I'll buy that. But Oklahoma City DOES run +/- 80 buses around the city. Problem is, all of the routes are poorly configured. Why would I want to take a bus from the Mercy Hospital area to downtown when I can get there twice as quick in my own car?

This is one of the main things that infuriates me about our bus service. It's built for failure. Not everyone wants to go downtown....I would love to take the bus to work, but that involves a 1 hour trip (backtracking to downtown of course or running across the Walmart and Penn Square parking lots to make a connection) just to get to 63rd and May from 36th and Walker. It's a joke. Why can't the city just make the buses run on the grid system? The boundaries could be Council to the west, Eastern to the East, SW 134th to the South and 150th to the North.

They spent way too much money on that beautiful new transfer station downtown to make it unnecessary by going to a grid system. lol

Besides, it makes too much sense for COTPA to go to a grid system.

A grid system would require far more buses than used today and nearly ever rider would have to transfer at least one time.

Make it so. (star trek cap'n quote)

A grid system would require far more buses than used today and nearly ever rider would have to transfer at least one time.

At least people would probably use the system.

At least people would probably use the system.

It would have to be a tight grid. No one is going to drive their car to a bus stop. All mass transit trips must start and stop with walking.

It would have to be a tight grid. No one is going to drive their car to a bus stop. All mass transit trips must start and stop with walking.

Valid point.

Just out of curiosity, what other types of bus systems are out there? Would it be possible to have a "hub and spoke" system?

... No one is going to drive their car to a bus stop. All mass transit trips must start and stop with walking.

Not necessarily. Numerous folks who use the express bus between Norman to OKC either get dropped off at the Norman stop or park there. I would imagine the same is true for the express from Edmond to OKC. Then there's the guy I used to see when I would ride. He rode his bike 2-3 miles to the express stop, clipped it to the rack, then rode from his okc area stop to his work, also about 2-3 miles. Then he repeated the process in the evening. So about 8-12 miles on bike a day. As one might suspect, he was rather slim and trim with that much riding.

It could be that we're taking the first step toward heading into the 21st century.

http://newsok.com/canadian-company-wins-metro-transit-contract-in-oklahoma-city/article/3639520

I like the technology but think it is best suited for commuter routes to Edmond and Norman, not local routes. I also agree with Sid, and hope the data is public too. However, it may not be good for METRO. BTW, has anyone heard the rumor that METRO is cleaning house? Heard the AD position is open.

I like the technology but think it is best suited for commuter routes to Edmond and Norman, not local routes. I also agree with Sid, and hope the data is public too. However, it may not be good for METRO. BTW, has anyone heard the rumor that METRO is cleaning house? Heard the AD position is open.

I think the GPS tracking is just part of running a modern transit system. Once you have the data, making it available to service providers like Google is a little step.

The on-bus wifi seems a bit silly, though.

Like giving the data to Google (converting to GTFS format), adding the ability for others to use the internet connection that is being used by the fleet management appliance on the bus, isn't a huge leap. If it doesn't come with a lot of bandwidth and features (i.e. max number of devices, advertising admin, etc) , it was probably added for not a lot of cost.

It is quite possible I am wrong though and they have plans for much more. I need to get my hands on that RFP and just haven't done it yet...

I'll admit to being fairly ignorant on the various commercial, mobile wifi offerings out there. I did a quick google search on it, and it looks to be around $1,000-$2,000 per bus. That's not bad at all. I do wonder how the bandwidth payments are structured. Do you know if they use a cellular service, or if it piggybacks of the municipal wifi network we already have?

I also don't think it's a bad idea as long as the bandwidth costs are reasonable. Many people have smart phones these days, even the poor. You can get a cheap Android phone for next to nothing on the budget carriers. And with bandwidth metering and absurd overage costs, I'm sure the bus riders wouldn't mind being able to use the internet on the city's dime. I know I would if I rode the bus daily, since that would be my highest usage time.

When we bought my wife's tablet we didn't go with a 3G/4G option. There are so many wifi hotspots to connect to we didn't think it was necessary. This is more proof that we were right.

Can someone explain to me why the Tinker Express service failed? The base is requesting solicitations again for service and I would like to find out more about prior efforts before responding. The internet has yielded very little information on the actual performance of the routes, but there are numerous projections for new routes as part of the efforts to implement commuter rail.

This sure won't help people change their image of the bus system:
http://www.news9.com/story/17175429/stabbing-victim-collapses-at-downtown-okc-bus-station

This sure won't help people change their image of the bus system:
http://www.news9.com/story/17175429/stabbing-victim-collapses-at-downtown-okc-bus-station

Unfortunately violent crimes happen everywhere in OKC. This was a domestic situation and the fact that it happened at the bus station is no reason for anyone to draw a conclusion that OKC buses are dangerous. I can't remember the last time I ever heard of any serious crime connected with the OKC bus system.

Unfortunately violent crimes happen everywhere in OKC. This was a domestic situation and the fact that it happened at the bus station is no reason for anyone to draw a conclusion that OKC buses are dangerous. I can't remember the last time I ever heard of any serious crime connected with the OKC bus system.

Ok, thanks for the info. This morning right after the news came out, it sounded like it was random. Still...

Ok, thanks for the info. This morning right after the news came out, it sounded like it was random. Still...

The late news said the couple had been sitting together aguing. When the woman got up and started to leave the man attacked her.

Our bus system is good.
Friendly drivers, friendlly passengers.
Responsive management.
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
OK?

EDITED TO ADD:
If you never actually ride the bus . . .
Bitching about it is [non-insert......]

"100% at ease" . . .
Dream On Sidewalk Guy . . .
(no offense intended or implied.=)

True, I guess I should mean, equal to the ease I feel when I am at the University Street station in Seattle. =) Zero sense of undesired activity around me.

One night while I was walking the neighborhoods around the edges of Center City Philly I came up with the idea for a fear-o-meter. It is a little hand held device with GPS tracking and a pushbutton scale from 1 to 10. It could be strapped to a volunteer who would walk and rate their comfort level every 30 seconds (prompted by an audiable beep). Communities could then use the data to identify items/features/areas that cause people to feel safe or unsafe. I guess it could even be created as an Android or Apple app. A good trial would be to give it to 30 to 50 people who are unfamiliar with a certian area and just let them start walking. Have some do it during a weekday, some at night, on weekends, etc.

Yeah, Microsoft filed for a patent (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,090,532.PN.&OS=PN/8,090,532&RS=PN/8,090,532) to do something like that. Here is an article about it as well: http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2012/01/06/microsoft-patents-avoid-ghetto-feature-for-gps-devices/

That application is to avoid unsafe areas - as defined by someone else. I am talking about a research device to detemine the general publics perception of safety. A street that might make the average person feel perfectly safe at noon could generate a different type of feeling at night because of an adjacent dark alley, a misplaced stree tlight, or the presence of patrons of a local business, etc. The data could be used to correct these types of personal safety issues and help establish the criteria defining personal safety.

For instance, I felt pretty safe walking in parts of Center City Philly but I did come to an area that had two borded up houses. The internal fear meter went up a notch. After I passed them it returned to normal. Those two houses led to a preceived threat to my personal safety. If that data could be extracted from a sample group then corrections could be made to increase the perceived safety of the area.

Looks like this finally may be happening, but in a different, neighboring location:
http://newsok.com/new-site-is-proposed-for-relocation-of-union-bus-station-operations-in-oklahoma-city/article/3659153