I was going to reply to a post on another tread but it seems that post really belongs here. As far as rapid translit and a regional system, if one is taking the .......bus, train, monorail etc into the city for shopping, a classes etc. and one has their books, brief case etc and then needs to go shopping ie stop at Sam's Club etc and then say the hardware store or other specialltiy stores, how does one do that. I cannot ammagine going to say a big box store and getting food, toliet paper, paper towels and all the usual stuff and stopping some where else for say a doctor's appointment and taking your medical records etc. How does one do this? If you can your truck you can stop at the feed store, then hardware store and then say Sam's club and then go to say a doctor's or denitist appointment. Or do you go to one place then say back to Edmond then catch another train/bus and go to another place and back home and repeats. Just trying to wrap my mind around why one would consider ridign such a thing. Does not seem practical to me. I usually ride around with a lot of stuff that I need in my truck and trying to figure out how one would carry that around when one is taking a train say to the city for shopping and doctor's appoinment and then on the the feed store.

Also how would this work say for a family with the mom doing grocery shopping and then having to have diapper bags, toys and snacks for her kids ?

I do this currently, ride the bus and stop for shopping. Often I'll have my work laptop. You just have to manage, multiple trips and such. I'll take two or three reusable bags with me. Whatever I can fit (the priorities usually) goes home with me that first trip. Sometimes I'll need to make a second trip for lower priorities later in the week. HUGE things like TP I'll order online. I get the recycled varieties anyway which most places don't carry. I'll do this on the way home from work instead of a dedicated trip usually. I see some people take collapsible baskets with them so they can carry more stuff home and only make one trip. When I was a kid, mom, sister, and I would walk a mile to the nearest grocery store and all three of us would have arms full of bags in the one trip back. Mom didn't want to take the bus (this was in Philly, and we didn't have a car). Taking the bus is an improvement. Sure a car is great, but it's doable if you want it.

Sometimes it’s not a case of “why would someone want to”, but rather a case of not having other options.

When I was a kid we didn't have a choice. Currently I have a car, but choose to take the bus as much as possible. It's probably been a month since I drove it last. I went a stretch last summer of 3.5 months without driving it.

For close to a year I did it by choice, but it was fairly easy because we still had one car that my wife took to work and we used for shopping. I used the bus to get to work and back.

I know whenever I stayed in places with public transit my trips to the store were closer together, which I really didn't mind much. I prefer to buy only a couples of meals worth of food at a time and return to the store frequently for more when needed. I find myself using up food more instead of letting it go to waste. As far as the bulk items such as dog food and larger items, most stores will ship to the doorstep so you wouldn't need to worry about carrying it on public transit. But I also have never noticed large wholesalers around public transit. It is just a difference in life style. When you live in the city you don't need to stock up for a month or two, and you usually have a store within a few minutes. Whereas out in the suburban/rural areas, stores can be up to 30 or 45 minutes away, making more sense to stock up on every thing in as few trips as possible.

I know whenever I stayed in places with public transit my trips to the store were closer together, which I really didn't mind much. I prefer to buy only a couples of meals worth of food at a time and return to the store frequently for more when needed. I find myself using up food more instead of letting it go to waste. As far as the bulk items such as dog food and larger items, most stores will ship to the doorstep so you wouldn't need to worry about carrying it on public transit. But I also have never noticed large wholesalers around public transit. It is just a difference in life style. When you live in the city you don't need to stock up for a month or two, and you usually have a store within a few minutes. Whereas out in the suburban/rural areas, stores can be up to 30 or 45 minutes away, making more sense to stock up on every thing in as few trips as possible.

Great reply. I did the same thing when I lived in a much more urban area. It was convenient to pick up items to cook for dinner on the walk or bike ride home, so that's what I did pretty often.

Great reply. I did the same thing when I lived in a much more urban area. It was convenient to pick up items to cook for dinner on the walk or bike ride home, so that's what I did pretty often.
Mirrors my experiences as well.

Not to mention that in the smaller urban residences floor space is expensive. You don’t want it taken up with big side-by-side refrigerators, freezers and pantries. In most of the world, those are minimized and food is not stored so much.

Details for tomorrow's event

http://www.acogok.org/all-aboard-mayors-of-six-cities-sign-historic-agreement-forming-regional-transportation-authority-of-central-oklahoma/

Great reply. I did the same thing when I lived in a much more urban area. It was convenient to pick up items to cook for dinner on the walk or bike ride home, so that's what I did pretty often.

Only issue with this and like-minded responses is that the post that these responses are all in reference to comes from a person who clearly hasn't lived in a legitimate urban environment. This of course is not a knock against the reference poster at all, it's just that when trying to imagine how this all fits into Oklahoma City, a leap of creative thinking is required and to be honest, as someone who has lived in an urban environment, that creative thinking is hard for even me to do.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kfor.com/2019/02/20/regional-transportation-authority-looks-to-connect-metro-cities-through-transit/amp/

https://twitter.com/davidfholt/status/1098327537468481536

RTA News: https://www.normantranscript.com/news/local_news/regional-transit-authority-moves-forward/article_0aaed216-c82a-5f5e-9481-f387de026da4.html

Does anyone think 4 stops in Norman is a bit much for commuter rail?


The current plan for the south corridor, which includes south OKC, Moore and Norman, would place four stops in Norman, with locations at Tecumseh Road, The Depot, Lindsey Street and Highway 9.

I think that'd be a max amount of stops for even light-rail...

RTA News: https://www.normantranscript.com/news/local_news/regional-transit-authority-moves-forward/article_0aaed216-c82a-5f5e-9481-f387de026da4.html

Does anyone think 4 stops in Norman is a bit much for commuter rail?



I think that'd be a max amount of stops for even light-rail...

i agree... i see tecumseh, depot, and lindsey street or highway 9... don't need both

Personally, I think that's too many stops if they're all in regular service. The Lindsey St stop makes a ton of sense if it's a special event station, only used on gameday or other large events on campus, but otherwise normally bypassed. The southern terminus of the line at Highway 9 would be the perfect location for a Park-N-Ride station. The downtown depot stop makes perfect sense. The Tecumseh Rd stop may be useful in the future, with how rapidly the gap between Norman and Moore is closing, but I am not sold on the need for one there when commuter service starts. That said, there is a lot of open, available land there so that could be a good location for a Park-N-Ride.

I absolutely think the station on OU’s campus is warranted. I mean look at any other commuter rail that passes through a tier 1 university and you better believe they all have a stop. And you actually have a young, often car-less population, in a dense and walkable environment. Most aren’t going to walk to OU from highway 9 or downtown Norman. And the station needs to be a regular stop. Not just for special events like games but there’s a lot of people who travel from Edmond/okc to OU and vice versa on a daily basis. Undergrad and graduate commuters, health science students and faculty, kids going home to visit family, students who have internships in the city, plus the couple thousand employees who work on campus. But there shouldn’t be a park and ride station smack in the middle of campus so then you have Tecumseh and highway 9 stations for that. And with how bad the traffic is going up I35, one more station is a drop in the bucket.

Also, this may be putting the cart before the horse but I honestly think the stop should be on Brooks St instead of Lindsey. Lindsey may be closer to the apartments east of the tracks and it looks like the city owns the land west of the tracks but Lindsey has a lot of fast moving traffic and it’s a bit farther from campus. Also, I actually walked that stretch of Lindsey from campus to that Braums once and there’s actually a hill there and the wind is terrible next to Brandt park. A Brooks stop is calmer, closer to campus/campus corner, has those apartments as a wind/monotony break, and directs you right to the heart of campus, the football stadium, and what I would bet is the future on-campus basketball stadium (if it ever happens, but it would be an amazing spot for people to take the train for all those weeknight games).

https://i.imgur.com/Frpq0WQ.jpg

If it helps, Brooks is already where the Sooner Express goes, so people are used to going there for commuter transit.

Personally, I think that's too many stops if they're all in regular service. The Lindsey St stop makes a ton of sense if it's a special event station, only used on gameday or other large events on campus, but otherwise normally bypassed. The southern terminus of the line at Highway 9 would be the perfect location for a Park-N-Ride station. The downtown depot stop makes perfect sense. The Tecumseh Rd stop may be useful in the future, with how rapidly the gap between Norman and Moore is closing, but I am not sold on the need for one there when commuter service starts. That said, there is a lot of open, available land there so that could be a good location for a Park-N-Ride.

I don't necessarily disagree, but for me who'd be going from OKC down to Highway 9, it makes it kind of hard to then get to South Campus without a car. Perhaps (hopefully) they'd make the Jenkins--Classen stretch of Highway 9 more walkable...

If it helps, Brooks is already where the Sooner Express goes, so people are used to going there for commuter transit.

this is what i kinda thought to... why lindsey, it should be here

I think it could help if Norman invested into a streetcar connecting downtown to OU Campus. If they started planning now it could have an opening around the time this opens given the current schedule of this commuter rail.

I absolutely think the station on OU’s campus is warranted. I mean look at any other commuter rail that passes through a tier 1 university and you better believe they all have a stop. And you actually have a young, often car-less population, in a dense and walkable environment. Most aren’t going to walk to OU from highway 9 or downtown Norman. And the station needs to be a regular stop. Not just for special events like games but there’s a lot of people who travel from Edmond/okc to OU and vice versa on a daily basis. Undergrad and graduate commuters, health science students and faculty, kids going home to visit family, students who have internships in the city, plus the couple thousand employees who work on campus. But there shouldn’t be a park and ride station smack in the middle of campus so then you have Tecumseh and highway 9 stations for that. And with how bad the traffic is going up I35, one more station is a drop in the bucket.

Also, this may be putting the cart before the horse but I honestly think the stop should be on Brooks St instead of Lindsey. Lindsey may be closer to the apartments east of the tracks and it looks like the city owns the land west of the tracks but Lindsey has a lot of fast moving traffic and it’s a bit farther from campus. Also, I actually walked that stretch of Lindsey from campus to that Braums once and there’s actually a hill there and the wind is terrible next to Brandt park. A Brooks stop is calmer, closer to campus/campus corner, has those apartments as a wind/monotony break, and directs you right to the heart of campus, the football stadium, and what I would bet is the future on-campus basketball stadium (if it ever happens, but it would be an amazing spot for people to take the train for all those weeknight games).

https://i.imgur.com/Frpq0WQ.jpg

This is a really good point actually and one that I didn't fully consider. Having a stop at Lindsey St or Brooks St would enable students to commute to school from farther away by train, and could help slightly lessen the demand for parking on campus.


I don't necessarily disagree, but for me who'd be going from OKC down to Highway 9, it makes it kind of hard to then get to South Campus without a car. Perhaps (hopefully) they'd make the Jenkins--Classen stretch of Highway 9 more walkable...

My thinking with a Park-N-Ride at Highway 9 is that would be an easier location for passengers from south Norman and Noble to get to, especially as Norman grows south past Highway 9. That station would be a more car-oriented one in my eyes (though making sure pedestrians can get to and from any station is always a good thing, especially since there are restaurants and retail nearby). Parking at a stop at Lindsey / Brooks would most likely be limited, as would parking at the downtown stop, so your main stations that would allow a lot of people to park and ride would have to be either north or south of Norman.

Purcell, Hw 9, Lindsey/OU, Main Street - those should be the "Norman" stops where:

*Purcell is a park-n-ride that is either in or just north of town [Terminal stop]
*Hwy 9 is a demand only South OU stop (in other words, no stop unless someone is there or is getting off).
*Lindsey/OU is a transit center with bus and shuttles fanning out. I'd love to see a streetcar from here going into and throughout OU as a master plan.
*Main Street - this is obvious and already exists.

As Panda mentioned, you dont want too many stops on Commuter Rail. Commuter Rail is warranted where you have mass of people moving long distance. Light rail would have more stops but the line wouldn't be as long.

Okay, quick question asked with apologies if the answer has already been clarified: Are we talking about using existing tracks, say on the bnsf corridor for north/south movements? Or simply using ROW and installing new trackage parallel to existing tracks? Or both? Or something else altogether?

Okay, quick question asked with apologies if the answer has already been clarified: Are we talking about using existing tracks, say on the bnsf corridor for north/south movements? Or simply using ROW and installing new trackage parallel to existing tracks? Or both? Or something else altogether?

Generally - but not always - commuter rail operates over the same trackage that already exists for freight use. In this case, we're talking about utilizing the existing freight trackage that BNSF already uses through town, which is also the assumption that transit planning up to this point has used. That said, it's extremely likely that RTACO will have to work with BNSF to double track the entire alignment through OKC before commuter service can begin; this will ensure there is sufficient rail capacity to enable both commuter and freight operations, as this rail line is already very busy with freight.

Off the topic of trains, but I'd love to see a trail exclusive for cycling and pedestrians created to connect these same cities. Similar to the NWA Razorback Greenway that connects Bentonville and Fayeteville. Accessible for small portions for quick rides/walks/runs/etc while also expansive for those looking to commute or exercise by bicycyle safely throughout the metro. I have no idea what route this would look like, but would love the newly formed regional group to consider it an option to connect the cities.

https://www.nwatrails.org/trail/razorback-regional-greenway/

^ and ideally along the commuter rail routes, so one could chose to ride the bike and/or rail.

another idea would be to develop trails along the interstate freeway network, something I thought was very cool thing about Wichita when I was a kid in the early 1980s (along I-135/35) and Denver when I lived there in the mid-1990s.

^^ I couldn't agree more. I think it's integral that when they double track the rail right-of-way they also add a pedestrian and bike corridor. One of things impressing me the most about Tulsa is being able to bike and run along an uninterrupted stretch of more than 10 miles from the southern most suburbs without hitting a single stop light or crossing a single lane of traffic.

We need a straight path from Edmond and Norman into central OKC and here we have the chance for our own commuter/recreation version of Tulsa's riverside or Atlanta's Beltline while we are already in the process of negotiating with the railroads and building infrastructure. Too many times OKC planning is shortsighted or lacks a cohesive vision or the different departments are not in communication. Same thing with tearing up the street between scissortail park and the convention center yet not thinking to put in a protected bike lane.

Looking up and down the corridor on google maps, it appears there is plenty of room for even 3 rail lines and a trail if we so desired. And where there isn't enough room or a business/rail yard needs access to the tracks, the trail could diverge to paralleling the road or the highway. Plus there's even the opportunity to tie together automobile alley/deep deuce/CBD/bricktown with a Highline-esq trail of sorts. Plus, we know that the commuter rail loses its purpose real quick when it has too many stops slowing it down, so this trail connects to those neglected areas along the commuter corridor -- especially when paired with bike share docks and Lime/Bird scooters at the stations. Anyway, fan of both commuter rail and bike/running trails so I feel like they should be a package deal in any future plans.

Rough outline of the trail:

https://i.imgur.com/QKZ2HZD.png

Able to connect to existing/near-term trails:

https://i.imgur.com/Opa5Lfd.png

Crossing I-44 with a new pedestrian bridge might be the most expensive part but the trail could be rerouted across the existing Western Ave if the funds aren't immediately available. Great connection spot to the planned Deep Fork Greenway trail which I presume is being built sometime soon:
https://i.imgur.com/kYGYi1T.png

This hidden creek/greenway (blue) between 50th and 36th, to the west of I-235, feels like a natural diverging point from paralleling the rail line as it starts go go through industry. Bonus points if boob church future development integrates the trail into their plans. Then south of 36th it could follow the path of Edgemere park until it reconnects with the tracks at the future 23rd street commuter rail station:
https://i.imgur.com/XXdrfyK.png

I leave you with this inspiratory rendering of what the Atlanta Beltline will look like and what we could potentially have in our very own OKC (but with maybe something more than grass as a barrier between fast moving trains and pedestrians):
https://i.imgur.com/oDaLoTj.jpg

What a dream that would be!!!

Not trying to be negative, but 38 years as a trainman, here in OKC for the BNSF, and even with double tracking, a serious commuter operation is really a pipe dream. Most places there is no freight competition, and if so, there has been a long history of passenger and commuter trains, with staff and infrastructure. Main two has trains parked for hours, leaving only main 1 to meet north and south bound trains, using Britton and Burnett sidings. Fingers crossed!

Not trying to be negative, but 38 years as a trainman, here in OKC for the BNSF, and even with double tracking, a serious commuter operation is really a pipe dream. Most places there is no freight competition, and if so, there has been a long history of passenger and commuter trains, with staff and infrastructure. Main two has trains parked for hours, leaving only main 1 to meet north and south bound trains, using Britton and Burnett sidings. Fingers crossed!

way way more than a pipe dream

Not trying to be negative, but 38 years as a trainman, here in OKC for the BNSF, and even with double tracking, a serious commuter operation is really a pipe dream. Most places there is no freight competition, and if so, there has been a long history of passenger and commuter trains, with staff and infrastructure. Main two has trains parked for hours, leaving only main 1 to meet north and south bound trains, using Britton and Burnett sidings. Fingers crossed!

Sounds like they aren't using the track efficiently if they are using a mainline track as a siding. If other cities can do it, so can OKC. Maybe some new sidings would be necessary.

Not trying to be negative, but 38 years as a trainman, here in OKC for the BNSF, and even with double tracking, a serious commuter operation is really a pipe dream. Most places there is no freight competition, and if so, there has been a long history of passenger and commuter trains, with staff and infrastructure. Main two has trains parked for hours, leaving only main 1 to meet north and south bound trains, using Britton and Burnett sidings. Fingers crossed!

Does BNSF use PTC (Positive Train Control) anywhere in Oklahoma yet? I think any double-tracking on the part of the RTA would have to include financing this as part of the federal mandate.

Does BNSF use PTC (Positive Train Control) anywhere in Oklahoma yet? I think any double-tracking on the part of the RTA would have to include financing this as part of the federal mandate.
They have installed it, it was having ‘issues’ when I retired, but they may have it up and running, as the FRA,with extensions, is mandating the Class 1 railroads to have it. The present infrastructure with single track bridges over Western, I-244, and 59th with the volume of freight makes any regular scheduled commuter trains between Edmond and Norman, an non starter. Maybe triple tracking would work, but that’s not financially possible. Trains are ‘staged’ on Main 2 as traffic fluctuates on the way to Ft. Worth, and that also depends on what level of service the freight customer has paid for.

RTA News: https://www.normantranscript.com/news/local_news/regional-transit-authority-moves-forward/article_0aaed216-c82a-5f5e-9481-f387de026da4.html

Does anyone think 4 stops in Norman is a bit much for commuter rail?



I think that'd be a max amount of stops for even light-rail...

I used to ride the Denver light rail downtown to a point within 3 blocks of my office. Unless the weather was bad, I stopped riding it most of the distance because there were 17 stops. As soon as the train got up a head of steam, it was already stopping again because RTD put stops at every mile street to catch feeder busses. While I understood the concept, it would have been better to re-route the busses towards downtown and have 4-5 fewer stops along the way. Only in bad winter weather when I knew the highway would be gridlocked did I ride the rail all the way in by the time I changed jobs to the suburbs.

Number of stops is a definite consideration. There should be fewer stops with the transit parking facilities directly next to the train stop for maximum convenience. I vote North Norman, downtown and Duck Pond at OU or a point slightly south of Lindsey.

couldn't have said it better.

Commuter Rail = much less stops
Light Rail = more stops than Commuter but at major interchanges. Overkill if so many.
Streetcar = most stops for rail. Less stops than bus but more than any rail.

The RTD focus right now is Commuter Rail so for Norman I'd say:

* North Norman/Moore Park N Ride (this stop is a demand stop only - keep going unless someone hits the button or is at the platform). Might want this is N Norman to give some distance from the OKC-Crossroads Mall PNR but there could be a case for this one to be more Moore oriented. ..
* Norman Downtown - Obvious
* OU/Lindsey - Obvious
* Purcell Park N Ride - Terminal stop

Some very perceptive comments.

At the last RTA meeting, our consultants briefed us on their detailed analysis of the BNSF corridor between Edmond and Norman. Based on the significant amount of freight service through the corridor, their recommendation is to acquire a portion of the BNSF right-of-way and install a separate dedicated commuter rail line. Throughout most of the corridor, the ROW has enough extra space to allow for it. And while there are several expected pinch points that would need to be resolved (mostly additional bridges), overall it appears very workable. Surprisingly, they were able to layout a preliminary alignment with only a single flyover to switch sides of the ROW that avoids all BNSF sidings and yards, does not interfere with freight service to companies along the line, and most importantly does not require switching across a single BNSF freight track. While additional technical reviews and discussions with BNSF are still required, the initial work is very positive.

Station spacing was also briefly discussed, and the consultants noted that the number of proposed commuter rail stations along the corridor from earlier studies likely needs to be reduced to some degree for optimal travel times and similar to other successful systems.

Some very perceptive comments.

At the last RTA meeting, our consultants briefed us on their detailed analysis of the BNSF corridor between Edmond and Norman. Based on the significant amount of freight service through the corridor, their recommendation is to acquire a portion of the BNSF right-of-way and install a separate dedicated commuter rail line. Throughout most of the corridor, the ROW has enough extra space to allow for it. And while there are several expected pinch points that would need to be resolved (mostly additional bridges), overall it appears very workable. Surprisingly, they were able to layout a preliminary alignment with only a single flyover to switch sides of the ROW that avoids all BNSF sidings and yards, does not interfere with freight service to companies along the line, and most importantly does not require switching across a single BNSF freight track. While additional technical reviews and discussions with BNSF are still required, the initial work is very positive.

Station spacing was also briefly discussed, and the consultants noted that the number of proposed commuter rail stations along the corridor from earlier studies likely needs to be reduced to some degree for optimal travel times and similar to other successful systems.

The rail overpass over 235 is one track if I am not mistaken. That is a major stumbling block.

^ facepalm. OMG, the railbridge at 235 ODOT just built last year - already obsolete?

As for the stations, I had proposed the following:

Commuter Rail North
**Guthrie (eventual metro terminus)
*Edmond North - Guthrie Airport PnR
*Edmond
*Edmond - Kilpatrick PnR
*OKC - 63rd Transit Hub
**OKC - Santa Fe Multimodal Hub (Metropolitan Hub)

Commuter Rail South
**OKC - Santa Fe Multimodal Hub (Metropolitan Hub)
*OKC - Crossroads PnR
*Norman - North PnR
*Norman
*Norman - OU Lindsey
**Purcell - (eventual metro terminus)

Stops in Green - these stops require signal from pax at station or train to stop, otherwise train keeps going.

Hutch, any thoughts on this?

The rail overpass over 235 is one track if I am not mistaken. That is a major stumbling block.

What a failure if they put in that brand new overpass last year and didn't make it wide enough to accommodate two tracks at some point in the future.

What a failure if they put in that brand new overpass last year and didn't make it wide enough to accommodate two tracks at some point in the future.

Agree, but you have single track bridges over I-44 and Western, just to the north of I-235. Believe me, after 38 years riding trains here in OKC, I don’t know who Hutch’s consultants are, but as I said before, commuter trains from Edmond to Norman aren’t going to happen, even with some new bridges.
As Hutch said, maybe with a separated, dedicated right of way, something like DART in Dallas.

As much as I like to crap on ODOT, I don’t think they are responsible for funding any future rail growth, be it for BNSF or a regional transit authority. They were responsible for replacing a bridge with one rail line due to their construction work on the interstate.

and ODOT should have anticipated the use of those bridges going forward and at least made the bridge wider so the new line could be added later.

Why is it their cost though? Wouldn’t BNSF or the transit authority be responsible for the cost of a second bridge?

Why is it their cost though? Wouldn’t BNSF or the transit authority be responsible for the cost of a second bridge?
Yes, and not either was going to do it. Remember when the new bridge over South 59th Street was built, to accommodate the new 4 lanes, and the then ATSF really needed double track from Flynn yard north to Burnett siding, and they tried to get two tracks without paying for the second one. And whoever built it (OKC), gave them what they had before, a single track bridge.

Yes, and not either was going to do it. Remember when the new bridge over South 59th Street was built, to accommodate the new 4 lanes, and the then ATSF really needed double track from Flynn yard north to Burnett siding, and they tried to get two tracks without paying for the second one. And whoever built it (OKC), gave them what they had before, a single track bridge.

the transit authority was not set up at the time the bridge over 235 was built and was also not yet funded

The recommendation basically reinforces what Mott has been saying. Their essentially saying its too difficult/impossible to work with BNSF so just buy ROW from them and build a dedicated commuter rail and minimize the interaction with BNSF and its freight traffic.

Of course that will be expensive. The whole idea of using existing track is that its cheaper.

true that the transit agency was not set up when the bridge was installed. However, ACOG had long before completed the fixed guideway study and the transit agency was being formed/in process. ODOT could and should have had incentive to consider this with the bridge replacement - being proactive as the cost may have been minimal to install a larger bridge that later could add a second or third rail(s). Being proactive recognizing the growing city/region is what Oklahoma lacks in most projects.

But who bears the cost of a second bridge? Does ODOT pay for any of it? Would they have saved money by paying for a bigger bridge?

I’m not disagreeing that it would have made sense and that we lack that kind of foresight. But ODOT cares mostly about $.

If we have learned anything after the Blvd fiasco is that you pretty much have to micromanaged ODOT if you want anything done the way you like it. You can't assume ODOT will do what's best for the city. If a second bridge gets built over I-235, their not paying for any of it.

ODOT is basically the Highway Department. The idea that the agency is multi-modal or gives precedence to multi-modal thinking is laughable at best. They might be technically multi-modal but seemingly their entire focus is on road building.

I was actually at the City council presentation where ODOT representatives were directly asked about double-tracking BNSF. They said to City Council that they thought it was a good idea just to double-track it for freight traffic alone. That led to a broader conversation about triple-tracking for commuter rail. They basically withdrew from the discussion on the funds premise.

My problem with ODOT is that they have known about their own long term intention to not build out I-35 further. They have also known about the metro's desire for a Regional Transit System to be seriously planned for and considered. They never leveraged those desires, intentions, and in some cases direct requests to apply for multi-modal federal funding to do things beyond road building that would allow the region to grow strategically in the future.

The one exception was in Tulsa where they applied for TIGER funds on the premise of a multi-modal design for a bridge. That was essentially to obtain the needed funds to build the road deck and to resolve freight issues. There are no meaningful plans for passenger rail there.

ODOT is basically the Highway Department. The idea that the agency is multi-modal or gives precedence to multi-modal thinking is laughable at best. They might be technically multi-modal but seemingly their entire focus is on road building.

I was actually at the City council presentation where ODOT representatives were directly asked about double-tracking BNSF. They said to City Council that they thought it was a good idea just to double-track it for freight traffic alone. That led to a broader conversation about triple-tracking for commuter rail. They basically withdrew from the discussion on the funds premise.

My problem with ODOT is that they have known about their own long term intention to not build out I-35 further. They have also known about the metro's desire for a Regional Transit System to be seriously planned for and considered. They never leveraged those desires, intentions, and in some cases direct requests to apply for multi-modal federal funding to do things beyond road building that would allow the region to grow strategically in the future.

Then it's time to replace the people in charge at ODOT.

So who owns the train track/bridge over 235? And even though the train left the station (so to speak), would it be cheaper to build another track above the existing one but using the same bridge? Of course thats provided it can carry the extra weight if bridge is “overbuilt” spec wise. Although expensive that might be way less than a whole new extra bridge?

Its bad planning on many peoples part but regardless any modal model is decades away at best. Just to do anything from Edmond to Norman you are talking billions of dollars. And then east//west cities who are part of regional transit will not support it since their cities are left out. The regional rail is DOA imo due to bad prior planning and funding. Any tax would take a few decades to cover costs and that would eliminate ability to do other projects like Peake replacement or any major downtown project. But with Streetcar and other annual maintenance and other operating costs we will need fo spend more and more of our taxes in just upkeep not new projects.

Years ago had they planned (not built) right of ways they could have created space in middle of 235/35/40 to build eventual rail. This would have meant engineering the bridge supports to leave room in middle for an eventual rail line. We are way down the road now and no going back. Could have had rail space in 40/35/245 from Shawnee to El Reno and Norman to Edmond/Guthrie.

A commuter rail system wouldn’t be “billions of dollars”. Short of major changes / conversions and implementation of autonomous cars / buses at some distant date, a bilateral corridor is warranted as the metro continues to grow. Your way of thinking is way too simplistic to resolve the long term issues and consequences that continued intransigence will create for the metro at large.

A commuter rail system wouldn’t be “billions of dollars”. Short of major changes / conversions and implementation of autonomous cars / buses at some distant date, a bilateral corridor is warranted as the metro continues to grow. Your way of thinking is way too simplistic to resolve the long term issues and consequences that continued intransigence will create for the metro at large.

So tell me then, all the bridges that will need built how much will they cost? Rights of way. Engineering and studies. Actual rail beds and lines. Stations. Repair depot. Actual trains/cars. Some here think we can piggyback on BSF but that will never work.

I cannot see this ever getting traction. Buses could.

Again, as in previous posts, feel free to do your own research. I have. Your statements are opinions.

Again, as in previous posts, feel free to do your own research. I have. Your statements are opinions.

Its an opinion board right? Or is there a test I missed?

If not mistaken your opinions are based on using existing rail line which is a pipe dream “in my opinion”.

We are decades away from a real rail solution and up and running. Where will funding come from?

Its an opinion board right? Or is there a test I missed?

If not mistaken your opinions are based on using existing rail line which is a pipe dream “in my opinion”.

We are decades away from a real rail solution and up and running. Where will funding come from?

You could try reading through this thread and finding out.