I am curious if one of the reasons for selecting Classen would be because it is six lanes from Sheridan to NW Expressway, whereas Western is two/three lanes from 23rd to 50th. This would be less invasive if they need to tear up a lane on either side and it might force the city to rethink Classen being an expressway out of DT and make it more pedestrian-friendly at the same time. Add a couple of bike lanes while you are doing all this work, you have the space for it. Also, Classen is only two blocks at the widest from Western, so having stops two blocks west of where the main attractions are would be a great idea. 42nd street would be a good stop because you have VZD's, Will Rogers Theatre, Musashi's, Barrell, Sushi Neko and The Sip all right there.

I suspect the main reasons that Classen rose to the top over Western are-

1. Survey-able car travel data
2. A direct interface with NWExpressway
3. Directly curves around and sets up a connection with 63rd street and the commuter rail stop
4. Cheaper as less invasive (more room as Warren points out)
5. Goes under I-44 instead of over it (would at western) forcing expensive bridge reconstruction

Between the car data that predicates these scoring decisions and the over all cost of one alignment over the other, I can understand why Classen rose to the top.

The density and urbanity arguments are sophisticated. Its obvious that that OKC Talker's understand urbanity. If this alignment is funded, the city needs to reimagine Classen. They need to do that anyway. Intersect the system with a future 23rd street line and Expand rapid transit up NW Expressway... that would be a pretty awesome rapid streetcar system.

The proposed streetcar line from downtown to 63rd is part of ACOG's Commuter Corridors Study. URS Corporation analyzed several different transit modes and corridors for providing commuter transit service between downtown, north Oklahoma City and Edmond, including Commuter Rail, Streetcar, Light Rail and BRT. Based on a number of factors, including ridership, cost and feasibility, the Steering Committee decided that Commuter Rail was the best solution. However, the modeling showed that there was significant ridership demand along an alternative corridor from downtown north along Classen to 63rd that would not be served by the Commuter rail option alone. So, the Steering Committee decided to include the streetcar line extension from downtown to 63rd along with the Commuter Rail option as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the North Corridor. In combination, the two rail transit modes will provide the most effective commuter transit solution, regardless of the fact that there are areas of lower density development along both of the corridors. The decision involved whether or not to include a streetcar line along that specific corridor as part of the LPA or not as part of a future commuter rail transit system.

Regional transit systems are typically developed by a regional transit authority created to represent specific local municipalities. The RTA operates within a specifically created regional transit district using funding derived through a dedicated local revenue source (typically sales tax) from within the RTD. So, the cities being served by the system are all funding its development and operation through local tax revenues collected from within the RTD, and the transit services being provided operate only within the RTD from where the revenues are generated. Ideally, the boundaries of the RTD and its transit service lines are created in order to serve all of the major population and employment centers throughout the region, as well as to maximize the capture of sales tax revenues for funding the system. The fact that there are pockets of low density development within the boundary of the RTD is not the single determining factor for developing transit service lines, especially rail transit.

From a ridership and farebox perspective, it might make sense to only develop and operate rail transit systems within and along areas of the highest population densities. However, cost and feasibility restraints do not always allow for development of a "perfect" corridor and there will almost always be areas of lower density within the system, especially as it initially develops. But that can be a good thing, as it allows for greater opportunities for transit oriented development, which in turn creates more future sales tax potential for increased funding for the system. Remember, it's the dedicated local revenue source that is primarily responsible for funding the system and not farebox receipts. As long as there is significant ridership demand at critical points along and at each end of a transit service line, it may very well be a viable component of the transit system whether or not it passes through areas of lower density.

If you exclude rail transit service to certain areas of Oklahoma City, and to Norman, Edmond, Moore, Midwest City and Del City simply because the service lines pass through some areas of low density, then you might as well just forget the idea of an RTA, RTD and a regional transit system and simply allow COTPA to continue to operate a very limited and ineffective local transit system within the core areas of Oklahoma City using non-dedicated money from the City's general fund. And we all know just how successful that has been.

The URS Corp provided several pieces of "supporting data" and said Ridership will be greater w/ Light Rail. ( hold that thought for a second ). The Brand of Commuter Rail that is being ( streered our way ) is the Large Heavy Diesel Trains on traditional track. ( ??? ) The Steering Committee selected the "cheapest" mode of transit, not the Best Solution. They said the "up-front" cost will be less because we can utilize the existing track...... ? Also, the data is from ridership in the East Coast & Rustbelt markets. They have been using these "old trains" for decades now.

In the State of Oklahoma, we don't use our existing train now. The Oklahoma "Grandma" does not want to be taken to the Train depot and dropped off in the existing track locations. !!!!! This is the equation the Streering committee accepted. There will be very little ridership with this product ( Heavy Trains from Norman to OKC / Edmond to OKC ). I would not feel safe w/ my Grandma in this situation. Steering Committee members need to understand "why" things are cheap. The Yugo, The Ford Pinto.... very cheap. The land next to a landfill is always "cheap". The land next to a rail yard, is always "cheap". The reason why...., there is ZERO desire by consumers to be there. Thus, Zero Ridership. ....this is not my Opinion, this is fact.

If the Steering Committee recommends the Heavy Diesel Trains for our commute, then you will be the last customer that just purchased "the last buggy whip". ....congrats! That would be another GREAT OKIE move.

Light Rail ( modern technology ) is more flexible in locations. ..near existing highways or can be elevated. It can be placed in the High Traffic areas ( near a campus ) or health care facilities. It can use Mag-Lev technology and run quietly through existing residential neighborhoods. ...and the Oklahoma Grandma will be willing to ride this product. .....and we need to have less stops from Norman to Downtown OKC / Edmond to Downtown OKC / MWC to OKC / and yes, Yukon to Downtown OKC. IF, we do that, then the entire metro will be "on-board".

In the State of Oklahoma, we don't use our existing train now. The Oklahoma "Grandma" does not want to be taken to the Train depot and dropped off in the existing track locations. !!!!! This is the equation the Streering committee accepted. There will be very little ridership with this product ( Heavy Trains from Norman to OKC / Edmond to OKC ). I would not feel safe w/ my Grandma in this situation. Steering Committee members need to understand "why" things are cheap. The Yugo, The Ford Pinto.... very cheap. The land next to a landfill is always "cheap". The land next to a rail yard, is always "cheap". The reason why...., there is ZERO desire by consumers to be there. Thus, Zero Ridership. ....this is not my Opinion, this is fact.

Where are you getting the (facts) "from"?

I suspect the main reasons that Classen rose to the top over Western are-

1. Survey-able car travel data
2. A direct interface with NWExpressway
3. Directly curves around and sets up a connection with 63rd street and the commuter rail stop
4. Cheaper as less invasive (more room as Warren points out)
5. Goes under I-44 instead of over it (would at western) forcing expensive bridge reconstruction

Between the car data that predicates these scoring decisions and the over all cost of one alignment over the other, I can understand why Classen rose to the top.

The density and urbanity arguments are sophisticated. Its obvious that that OKC Talker's understand urbanity. If this alignment is funded, the city needs to reimagine Classen. They need to do that anyway. Intersect the system with a future 23rd street line and Expand rapid transit up NW Expressway... that would be a pretty awesome rapid streetcar system.

A rapid line connection through NW OKC would be amazing, no doubt. However, I would be highly resistant to to this idea (and I know UP and others would be too) until the connections to Capitol Hill, the Plaza, NW 23rd and other transit-prime locations are funded. Further subsidizing low density development along the expressway before investing in these areas would be a mistake.

The commuter rail map by ACOG is very exciting. One minor quibble is I would like to see more stops in OKC. There aren't enough.

A rapid line connection through NW OKC would be amazing, no doubt. However, I would be highly resistant to to this idea (and I know UP and others would be too) until the connections to Capitol Hill, the Plaza, NW 23rd and other transit-prime locations are funded. Further subsidizing low density development along the expressway before investing in these areas would be a mistake.

I don't think anybody is nor would be advocating for a line up NW Expressway before these other areas. NW Expressway will very likely never change into a more urban destination.

I also want to go on record to say that sending the street car through the Plaza is a horrendous idea. If a walkable experience from a drop-off point at Classen/NW16th is not in the cards, then the Plaza will be quite in the background of OKC's urban landscape within 20 years.

Be it rail, buses, or other mass transit forms, I still prefer a transit region where service and frequency can be maximized - even if it comes at the expense of far-flung area. I would rather serve a smaller area very well than a larger area poorly. If you want to have access to mass transit live in the mass transit zone and if you want to drive your car everywhere live outside the zone. Of course, with commuter rail there is the potential to have more than one mass transit zone across the metro area.

Where are you getting the (facts) "from"?

It is part of the report provided by URS.

Be it rail, buses, or other mass transit forms, I still prefer a transit region where service and frequency can be maximized - even if it comes at the expense of far-flung area. I would rather serve a smaller area very well than a larger area poorly. If you want to have access to mass transit live in the mass transit zone and if you want to drive your car everywhere live outside the zone. Of course, with commuter rail there is the potential to have more than one mass transit zone across the metro area.

This is why we need to keep this a Light Rail System that has flexibility in a growth area for Economics & People. Heavy Rail Commuter Trains are not flexible and restrict growth for any area that service is provided ( Norman / Edmond / Yukon / Moore / Midwest City ).

Light Rail can be added to as the growth warrants : ie, ... OU can run a line from campus to the Light Rail Line off I-35. OCCC can run a line to the East to the SE OKC Stop on I-35. ) This is easy, clean, and adaptable. The speeds can be increased if needed. Edmond can run a line from UCO.

JTF, you kwow where I am on this. It doesn't have to be High Speed Rail, but Light Rail w/ the same technology. We get all the advantages of today's technologies in a system that can be "add as we go". This doesn't lock us in a system that is "cheap" because someone has some "un-used train track" for us to buy at a really good price.

Will the future Regional Transit Authority work with surrounding municipalities to help plan or coordinate Transit Oriented Development?

We are looking at connecting many areas that are almost completely suburban. The metro area would gain a lot if the commuter stops would have a walkable mixed-use environment in the immediate area.

I grew up a Del City boy, so I am thinking specifically of the corner of Reno and Sooner Rd. https://maps.google.com/?ll=35.464082,-97.422997&spn=0.005067,0.008234&t=h&z=18

This is near the edge of Del City, and rather than using the nearby Anthony's parking lot as a big "park and ride" location (as I'm sure some people will want to do), there's the potential for a very nice mixed use development here. I think the RTA could help municipalities identify the best types of development to encourage in these areas. Smaller cities are probably less likely to have the expertise needed to benefit most from mass transit connections like this.

Will the future Regional Transit Authority work with surrounding municipalities to help plan or coordinate Transit Oriented Development?

Not to be a d!#k, but I believe that is the plan since it will be called a Regional Transit Authority, not just OKC Transit Authority.

I think commuter rail is the most efficient way to connect localized transit zones but the entire system relies on a multitude of transit options all playing the role the do with the most efficiency.

You have to start at the neighborhood level as the fundamental building bock of the city, and I don't mean the track-home subdivision builder's marketing department version of a neighborhood - I mean an actual neighborhood. So starting at the bottom it would work like this:

Level 1: small buses running short localized routes connecting residential areas to the central neighborhood commercial area
Level 2: streetcars connecting nearby central neighborhood commercial areas to each other radiating from a common regional hub
Level 3: commuter rail connecting common regional hubs radiating from a single metro hub
Level 4: statewide regional rail connecting single metro hubs


So let me give you an example of each level.

Level 1: Capitol Hill would serve as a central neighborhood commercial area and would have a transit station. This station would be served by 4 buses that make 15 minutes trips along routes through the residential areas around Capitol Hill. Also at the central neighborhood commercial station would be a streetcar connecting to downtown OKC. A Capitol Hill resident would catch their local bus to their local station and from there they catch a connecting bus to another area of the neighborhood or board the streetcar where the could go to downtown and connect to other levels of transportation.

Level 2: The Capitol Hill streetcar would take them to downtown OKC where they could connect to streetcars serving other downtown adjacent neighborhoods (Plaza District, Wheeler, Midtown, Deep Deuce, etc...). Once in those central neighborhood commercial areas they would transfer to the local buses in Level 1 to get to residential areas, or just enjoy the commercial area itself.

Level 3: Once downtown they could board a commuter train to Norman, Edmond, Yukon, Moore, etc... Once they arrive at the regional hubs they would again go back down the scale and board a streetcar to a neighborhood hub where they can transfer to a bus - or enjoy any type of amenity along the way.

Level 4: If their destination is outside metro OKC they could board a train Tulsa or Lawton.

A single transit trip could consist of many different modes depending on the origin and destination. Maybe people will choose to live commercial center and thus not need the local bus, on the other hand, grandma live a single family home and just needs to go to the pharmacy that in the local commercial center and only needs the local bus. Would it require lots of transfers? That all depends on where you want to start and end, but at least you would have the option.

Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver and Albuquerque all have and continue to expand their Commuter Rail systems as part of their overall regional transit system. Many of these newer Commuter Rail systems use modern MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php) diesel-electric locomotives manufactured by MotivePower of Idaho. These engines provide increased power and torque, greater acceleration, reduced operational noise, greater safety features, and meet EPA Tier 2 emission standards. These are typically coupled with Bombardier Bi-level Coaches (http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/projects/project.bilevel-canada-usa.html).

For serving longer distance suburbs like Norman, Edmond and Yukon, Commuter Rail offers numerous advantages for the transit user over Light Rail, including higher operational speeds (up to 79 mph), greater seating capacity, work tables and restrooms. So, it's not simply a matter of cost, although that is certainly another significant benefit of Commuter Rail over Light Rail, which requires full grade separation, the acquisition of all new right-of-way, construction of all new track and infrastructure, and full electrification. The difference in cost is staggering, especially for a metropolitan area such as Oklahoma City that does not have the population density or economy of scale of other larger cities that also operate Light Rail systems as part of their regional transit system.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Light Rail is very exciting and it will certainly continue to be selected as the rail transit option of choice for many situations. But that does not mean it is the best solution for every situation. I don't know about you, but my Grandma still drinks lots of coffee, makes frequent restroom stops, her legs are not what they used to be, and she loves playing Solitaire on her laptop. If she has the option between riding in a comfortable seat with a table for her laptop and a restroom nearby on a Commuter Train from Norman to OKC versus standing in the aisle on a Light Rail vehicle and holding it for 30 minutes, I can tell you without a doubt that she will choose Commuter Rail every day of the week, especially after you inform her that the additional sales tax on her local purchases will only be an additional 1/2 cent to fund the $350 million Commuter Rail line versus 2 cents to fund the $1.5 billion Light Rail line.

Granted the topography and built environment of Seattle significantly contributes to cost escalation, these projects provide a good idea of what light rail costs:

University Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/University-Link-Extension)
Northgate Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/Northgate-Link-Extension)
East Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/East-Link-Extension)

Will the future Regional Transit Authority work with surrounding municipalities to help plan or coordinate Transit Oriented Development?

Absolutely! In fact, it is the leaders of OKC and the surrounding municipalities who are currently directing the Steering Committee for ACOG's Regional Transit Dialogue (http://www.acogok.org/regional-transit-dialogue) and working towards creation of the Regional Transit Authority. Thanks to the leadership of Mayor Cornett, Mayor Rosenthal of Norman, Mayor Frye of Midwest City, Councilmembers Elizabeth Waner and Victoria Caldwell of Edmond, and many other elected officials, civic leaders and public representatives, Oklahoma City and many of the surrounding municipalities are in agreement on the need to move forward with creation of an RTA and are working to achieve that goal.

I think commuter rail is the most efficient way to connect localized transit zones but the entire system relies on a multitude of transit options all playing the role the do with the most efficiency.

You have to start at the neighborhood level as the fundamental building bock of the city, and I don't mean the track-home subdivision builder's marketing department version of a neighborhood - I mean an actual neighborhood. So starting at the bottom it would work like this:

Level 1: small buses running short localized routes connecting residential areas to the central neighborhood commercial area
Level 2: streetcars connecting nearby central neighborhood commercial areas to each other radiating from a common regional hub
Level 3: commuter rail connecting common regional hubs radiating from a single metro hub
Level 4: statewide regional rail connecting single metro hubs


So let me give you an example of each level.

Level 1: Capitol Hill would serve as a central neighborhood commercial area and would have a transit station. This station would be served by 4 buses that make 15 minutes trips along routes through the residential areas around Capitol Hill. Also at the central neighborhood commercial station would be a streetcar connecting to downtown OKC. A Capitol Hill resident would catch their local bus to their local station and from there they catch a connecting bus to another area of the neighborhood or board the streetcar where the could go to downtown and connect to other levels of transportation.

Level 2: The Capitol Hill streetcar would take them to downtown OKC where they could connect to streetcars serving other downtown adjacent neighborhoods (Plaza District, Wheeler, Midtown, Deep Deuce, etc...). Once in those central neighborhood commercial areas they would transfer to the local buses in Level 1 to get to residential areas, or just enjoy the commercial area itself.

Level 3: Once downtown they could board a commuter train to Norman, Edmond, Yukon, Moore, etc... Once they arrive at the regional hubs they would again go back down the scale and board a streetcar to a neighborhood hub where they can transfer to a bus - or enjoy any type of amenity along the way.

Level 4: If their destination is outside metro OKC they could board a train Tulsa or Lawton.

A single transit trip could consist of many different modes depending on the origin and destination. Maybe people will choose to live commercial center and thus not need the local bus, on the other hand, grandma live a single family home and just needs to go to the pharmacy that in the local commercial center and only needs the local bus. Would it require lots of transfers? That all depends on where you want to start and end, but at least you would have the option.

I absolutely agree with all of this. I would only add that there are destination zones that exist entirely apart from the fact that they are a neighborhood.

Berlin is a great example…you have neighborhoods like Prenzlauer Berg, Kreuzberg, and Charlottenberg…but you also have destinations like the Museum District, Brandenburger Tor, Alexanderplatz.

There is indeed residential and a general neighborhood aspect to places like Alexanderplatz, but the neighborhood makes up a minimal amount of the traffic that flows through that area every day. It's important that we recognize where those places are as well and make sure that they are serviced appropriately.

Those areas in OKC are a bit harder to identify but they do exist. Adventure District, OCU/Shepard Mall (hopefully someday), the Capital, Belle Isle/Penn Square/Western Retail hub, State Fair Grounds and depending on how they develop, Farmer's Market and Stockyard City. Some of those areas have a chance to incorporate elements of a neighborhood, but they will always be important areas in the centralized area of the city (by United States standards) for reasons other than being a hot neighborhood like Deep Deuce, the Plaza, or Midtown.

Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver and Albuquerque all have and continue to expand their Commuter Rail systems as part of their overall regional transit system. Many of these newer Commuter Rail systems use modern MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php) diesel-electric locomotives manufactured by MotivePower of Idaho. These engines provide increased power and torque, greater acceleration, reduced operational noise, greater safety features, and meet EPA Tier 2 emission standards. These are typically coupled with Bombardier Bi-level Coaches (http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/projects/project.bilevel-canada-usa.html).

For serving longer distance suburbs like Norman, Edmond and Yukon, Commuter Rail offers numerous advantages for the transit user over Light Rail, including higher operational speeds (up to 79 mph), greater seating capacity, work tables and restrooms. So, it's not simply a matter of cost, although that is certainly another significant benefit of Commuter Rail over Light Rail, which requires full grade separation, the acquisition of all new right-of-way, construction of all new track and infrastructure, and full electrification. The difference in cost is staggering, especially for a metropolitan area such as Oklahoma City that does not have the population density or economy of scale of other larger cities that also operate Light Rail systems as part of their regional transit system.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Light Rail is very exciting and it will certainly continue to be selected as the rail transit option of choice for many situations. But that does not mean it is the best solution for every situation. I don't know about you, but my Grandma still drinks lots of coffee, makes frequent restroom stops, her legs are not what they used to be, and she loves playing Solitaire on her laptop. If she has the option between riding in a comfortable seat with a table for her laptop and a restroom nearby on a Commuter Train from Norman to OKC versus standing in the aisle on a Light Rail vehicle and holding it for 30 minutes, I can tell you without a doubt that she will choose Commuter Rail every day of the week, especially after you inform her that the additional sales tax on her local purchases will only be an additional 1/2 cent to fund the $350 million Commuter Rail line versus 2 cents to fund the $1.5 billion Light Rail line.

I want to make one more point about costs.

Mayor Cornett and the OKC leadership were very wise in proposing a Modern Streetcar system under MAPS 3 that could stand alone whether or not we received federal funding to help pay for the system. And it's a good thing they did, because due to new federal funding constraints and criteria, we were not awarded any significant federal funds to pay for our system. We need to take the same approach in planning for our regional transit system. Apply for federal funding and hope for a grant, but plan the system so as to insure we can afford to build it with or without federal money.

Many, if not all, of the cities that have developed Light Rail did so based on substantial federal assistance from the FTA. Without the FTA money, most, if not all, of those systems would never have been built. In this day and age of high federal deficits, conservative government institutions, reduced federal funding for new transit infrastructure and increased applications for new transit project funding, we have to be pragmatic in our thinking and planning, and only propose a regional rail transit system that we can afford to build and operate based on our own local funding. And that is one of the most important things to remember as we move forward and make plans and decisions about an RTA. Because in the end, the only way we are going to be able to develop and operate a regional transit system is through a vote of our local citizens to pay for that system. Whatever we decide to do, we have to be able to convince the voters to tax themselves to pay for it.

Not to be a d!#k, but I believe that is the plan since it will be called a Regional Transit Authority, not just OKC Transit Authority.

Not to be a dick, but you know I'm talking about helping the surrounding areas plan housing at retail options, not just where the stops will be located, right?

Not to be a dick, but you know I'm talking about helping the surrounding areas plan housing at retail options, not just where the stops will be located, right?

Nope, didn't see that. Move along everyone, nothing to see here. Just a dumb@$$ (me) on the internet...

This is exactly who it works in Europe and I much prefer this. It is so much easier to utilize when transit is set up logically like this. Not having streetcars doing the work of a commuter or worse, buses. You've got to know your transit modes.
And Europe is such a great model of sustainability..... Just look at their economy.

I don't think anybody is nor would be advocating for a line up NW Expressway before these other areas. NW Expressway will very likely never change into a more urban destination.

I also want to go on record to say that sending the street car through the Plaza is a horrendous idea. If a walkable experience from a drop-off point at Classen/NW16th is not in the cards, then the Plaza will be quite in the background of OKC's urban landscape within 20 years.

You could have service to Plaza without running down 16th though. For instance, you could extend the soon-to-be-existing service down 10th and then run up a street like Blackwelder or Indiana to get within a block of 16th, or even cross it into Gatewood and on to OCU. This would better serve Classen-Ten-Penn and other neighborhoods in the bargain. I agree about not running down 16th. That would be tricky if not an outright nightmare.

Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver and Albuquerque all have and continue to expand their Commuter Rail systems as part of their overall regional transit system. Many of these newer Commuter Rail systems use modern MPExpress (http://www.motivepower-wabtec.com/locomotives/commuter/mpxpress.php) diesel-electric locomotives manufactured by MotivePower of Idaho. These engines provide increased power and torque, greater acceleration, reduced operational noise, greater safety features, and meet EPA Tier 2 emission standards. These are typically coupled with Bombardier Bi-level Coaches (http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/projects/project.bilevel-canada-usa.html).

For serving longer distance suburbs like Norman, Edmond and Yukon, Commuter Rail offers numerous advantages for the transit user over Light Rail, including higher operational speeds (up to 79 mph), greater seating capacity, work tables and restrooms. So, it's not simply a matter of cost, although that is certainly another significant benefit of Commuter Rail over Light Rail, which requires full grade separation, the acquisition of all new right-of-way, construction of all new track and infrastructure, and full electrification. The difference in cost is staggering, especially for a metropolitan area such as Oklahoma City that does not have the population density or economy of scale of other larger cities that also operate Light Rail systems as part of their regional transit system.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Light Rail is very exciting and it will certainly continue to be selected as the rail transit option of choice for many situations. But that does not mean it is the best solution for every situation. I don't know about you, but my Grandma still drinks lots of coffee, makes frequent restroom stops, her legs are not what they used to be, and she loves playing Solitaire on her laptop. If she has the option between riding in a comfortable seat with a table for her laptop and a restroom nearby on a Commuter Train from Norman to OKC versus standing in the aisle on a Light Rail vehicle and holding it for 30 minutes, I can tell you without a doubt that she will choose Commuter Rail every day of the week, especially after you inform her that the additional sales tax on her local purchases will only be an additional 1/2 cent to fund the $350 million Commuter Rail line versus 2 cents to fund the $1.5 billion Light Rail line.

Hutch - I am only concerned about the OKC Metro situation. All the others are not "voting" in this initiative. ...and my Grandmother does not live in Seattle or Portland. We are only speaking of the OKC Metro. The OKC metro topography is not San Francisco. ....flat. The suburbs Edmond / Norman / Yukon / Moore will be voting for a new way of business in the OKC area....it is called OKC Metro MAPS. We have already learned that throwing money to the same people, just gets us the same Unfulfilled results. ...so yes, we will vote on this.

I have more concern over my Grandmother, because there are a few places you would be ok sending you grandma on that be noisey track. Most of the existing areas that you are willing to send your grandmother for is because you want to save a $0.015 cents on a vote? ....My Grandmother is worth more than that. Her personal safety is exactly why those areas are abandoned in the first place. You may not be that familiar w/ our city... it has many abandoned areas ( and many are close to your train tracks ).

I will close w/ this, if you spend $350 - $500 Million and no one rides it, beause of the many personal reasons why they don't want to risk their lives ( Grandma's and Grandkids too )...? ...and thus OKC Metro will be missing out on the $ 1 Billion on additional economic impact to the OKC Metro Each Year..... ??? That is the TRUE COST of NOT using Light Rail for our Metro transit solution.

..and Hutch, I don't send my kids to school w/ flipflops in the winter, I spend more than that to keep them safe and warm. It has a higher up-front cost, but they are worth it.

OKC Metro will make a vote for the Best Solution for Metro Transit, not just pick the cheapest Ford Pinto.... ( it's not safe Hutch. )

And Europe is such a great model of sustainability..... Just look at their economy.

I'd take Germany's economy if we also got their transit network.

And the LIght Rail can exceed speeds greater than 79 mph. Your large heavy trains will be closer to 35 mph for an average rate of speed. :(

...and the Light Rail commuter transit has seats too. ...and w/ fold-out tables for laptops.

And Yes, the Light Rail can have the flexiblity to be on grade or above grade ( if the conditions ) warrant that. See, more flexibility. :)

I want to make one more point about costs.

Mayor Cornett and the OKC leadership were very wise in proposing a Modern Streetcar system under MAPS 3 that could stand alone whether or not we received federal funding to help pay for the system. And it's a good thing they did, because due to new federal funding constraints and criteria, we were not awarded any significant federal funds to pay for our system. We need to take the same approach in planning for our regional transit system. Apply for federal funding and hope for a grant, but plan the system so as to insure we can afford to build it with or without federal money.

Many, if not all, of the cities that have developed Light Rail did so based on substantial federal assistance from the FTA. Without the FTA money, most, if not all, of those systems would never have been built. In this day and age of high federal deficits, conservative government institutions, reduced federal funding for new transit infrastructure and increased applications for new transit project funding, we have to be pragmatic in our thinking and planning, and only propose a regional rail transit system that we can afford to build and operate based on our own local funding. And that is one of the most important things to remember as we move forward and make plans and decisions about an RTA. Because in the end, the only way we are going to be able to develop and operate a regional transit system is through a vote of our local citizens to pay for that system. Whatever we decide to do, we have to be able to convince the voters to tax themselves to pay for it.

Yes Hutch, we might have to pay for this ourselves. Just like we did for MAPSI .... MAPS II. .....MAPS III. and now our business model for future project endeavors like MAPS IV, OKC Metro MAPS, and so on.

Yes, the other cities send their representative here to learn "how did you succeed, when we can't?" And we tell them, we relied on ourselves for support. Not the FTA Hutch.

If we are talking about light rail for the entire metro (Edmond, Moore/Norman, MWC/Del City) how many miles of rail are we talking about? 2nd street in Edmond to Lindsey in Norman using 235/35 would be roughly 32 miles. Santa Fe train station to I-40 and Douglas would be about nine miles. Let's just round it to 40 miles.



University Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/University-Link-Extension)
Northgate Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/Northgate-Link-Extension)
East Link Extension (http://www.soundtransit.org/Projects-and-Plans/East-Link-Extension)

Using Cuatro's links to Seattle's costs and taking the low figure of $200 million per mile would cost the county ($200,000,000 x 40) $8 Billion dollars. Yeah, pretty sure I (and the most of the population of the OKC area) would prefer a lower cost for a slower train.

Let's use the USR estimate of $40 M / mile and the Texas HSR estimates that are the same . Roughly $1.6 Billion for 40 miles. The economic impact to the entire OKC metro will be an addtional $1 Billion p/year... !!!! Definately worth the ROI.

Texas to get shinkansen system | The Japan Times (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/08/02/business/economy-business/private-u-s-railway-wants-bullet-train-line-for-texas-by-2021/)

Texas is looking to add the Dallas / Houston @ 248 miles. for approx. $10 Billion. ...give or take a few dollars.

If we are talking about light rail for the entire metro (Edmond, Moore/Norman, MWC/Del City) how many miles of rail are we talking about? 2nd street in Edmond to Lindsey in Norman using 235/35 would be roughly 32 miles. Santa Fe train station to I-40 and Douglas would be about nine miles. Let's just round it to 40 miles.



Using Cuatro's links to Seattle's costs and taking the low figure of $200 million per mile would cost the county ($200,000,000 x 40) $8 Billion dollars. Yeah, pretty sure I (and the most of the population of the OKC area) would prefer a lower cost for a slower train.

I disagree. I think the rest of the OKC Metro will want the addtional $1 Billion in economical impact ( each year ). That is easy math for most all of us. If we spend 1.6 Billion, we will increase our revenue by $1 Billion each year....? ...so we could have it paid for in 2 years..???? YES !!!!!!!!!!!!

If we are talking about light rail for the entire metro (Edmond, Moore/Norman, MWC/Del City) how many miles of rail are we talking about? 2nd street in Edmond to Lindsey in Norman using 235/35 would be roughly 32 miles. Santa Fe train station to I-40 and Douglas would be about nine miles. Let's just round it to 40 miles.



Using Cuatro's links to Seattle's costs and taking the low figure of $200 million per mile would cost the county ($200,000,000 x 40) $8 Billion dollars. Yeah, pretty sure I (and the most of the population of the OKC area) would prefer a lower cost for a slower train.

On the plus side, $8 billion is cheaper than what it cost to build the OKC interstate system in current dollars.

I also want to go on record to say that sending the street car through the Plaza is a horrendous idea.

Please clarify. I don't understand why directly connecting to the Plaza District is a bad idea. Especially if it turns north on Blackwelder or Gatewood and runs straight up to OCU. Why is this concept bad?

Please clarify. I don't understand why directly connecting to the Plaza District is a bad idea. Especially if it turns north on Blackwelder or Gatewood and runs straight up to OCU. Why is this concept bad?

I'm pretty sure that the ONLY reason that the plaza exists was because it was originally a streetcar stop...

That's why Carey Place is a great street as well hidden in Gatewood, that was originally supposed to be streetcar through through there I believe.

Right.... Pick up the Journal once and a while. Many European nations are doing just fine.not what I've heard

I'm pretty sure that the ONLY reason that the plaza exists was because it was originally a streetcar stop...

The 1929 map that I have shows a streetcar line running north along Blackwelder to 16th and the heart of the Plaza District...

8897

Why you don't run to the Plaza:

1. It doesn't tease urban development to a main artery. Even in Europe, the major points of interest have major roads either through or very near to the different stops/stations. if the Plaza can't extend to Classen, every single one of us should be hoping it is an afterthought in the OKC urban landscape in 20 years. The Plaza is engulfed by blocks and blocks of single family homes…that's not a good thing.

2. It's a super narrow street with nothing but 2-3 blocks of 1 story buildings.

3. It can be very well served by Bus routes that lead to other major districts, particularly 23rd and downtown.

…Guys, I love the Plaza, and it is doing great things for OKC…but it's way way way too small to be of note in the OKC of 2030-40. It would need a very aggressive expansion plan that would make a stop at 16th/Classen plenty acceptable to be relevant as time continues to press forward. If we're not building our transit system for the OKC of 2030-40 (at the very least) we're missing the boat entirely.

Going north of downtown, the street-car simply has to go up Classen, Western or Penn.

The flat topography is The KEY to our cost structure for a Light Rail Commuter Line w/ Mag-Lev technology being so low. Also, our Non-Union state helps keep our cost at a very low & managable unit cost for labor.

Exclusive: FDOT OKs American Maglev?s Orlando airport-to-I-Drive route - Orlando Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2014/05/fdot-oks-american-maglev-s-orlando-airport-to-i.html)

This link also has a photo of what OKC Metro could have as well. A clean system that use renewable resources ( wind generates electricity and thus, powers the Mag-Lev ).

I would love it if all we did was go back to that 1929 map, with those same streetcar lines and bus interconnects and interurbans...

The flat topography is The KEY to our cost structure for a Light Rail Commuter Line w/ Mag-Lev technology being so low. Also, our Non-Union state helps keep our cost at a very low & managable unit cost for labor.

Exclusive: FDOT OKs American Maglev?s Orlando airport-to-I-Drive route - Orlando Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2014/05/fdot-oks-american-maglev-s-orlando-airport-to-i.html)

This link also has a photo of what OKC Metro could have as well. A clean system that use renewable resources ( wind generates electricity and thus, powers the Mag-Lev ).

You should get in touch with Phil Hughes...he shares your passion for an elevated light rail system throughout the OKC metro...Hughes Synergies Corporation (http://hughessynergies.com/home.html)

You should get in touch with Phil Hughes...he shares your passion for an elevated light rail system throughout the OKC metro...Hughes Synergies Corporation (http://hughessynergies.com/home.html)

Hutch, why would we ( OKC Metro ) want to pay for a $350 - $500 Million old freight train system ? The ACOG is anchoring us in an old techonoloy that will be out of date as soon as the ribbon is cut. ....and no one will ride this train that has to share the track w/ the freight lines.

This is NOT the product that we deserve!

Sharing a track with freight trains does not equal buying out of date trains to use for commuters. The trains themselves can still be very modern and enjoyable to be on, and the rider has no idea which track they're on.

8898 So are you saying this isn't what the are planning on getting? My grandma has been practicing the method to get to her quilting group. :Smiley259

Sharing a track w/ freight means

- Grandma will be walking in the "freight yard" to find her large heavy diesel trains.
- The single mom and her 2 kids will be going into many un-safe areas and their lives will be at risk.
- The Professional Commuter will have to be on the "freight schedule" and therefore the times will be slow and not worth the effort. ie: Drive to Dallas ( 3 hrs ) or Ride The Train ( 5 hrs ). ???
also, the times from Norman to DT / Edmond to DT will not be worth the effort. Longer commute times!!!!!
- The trains will be comfortable as you sit and wait for hours..............

Sharing a track w/ freight means

- Grandma will be walking in the "freight yard" to find her large heavy diesel trains.
- The single mom and her 2 kids will be going into many un-safe areas and their lives will be at risk.


You definitely won't be walking in the freight yard? The Amtrak uses freight lines and you board from Santa Fe...

Sharing a track w/ freight means

- Grandma will be walking in the "freight yard" to find her large heavy diesel trains.
- The single mom and her 2 kids will be going into many un-safe areas and their lives will be at risk.
- The Professional Commuter will have to be on the "freight schedule" and therefore the times will be slow and not worth the effort. ie: Drive to Dallas ( 3 hrs ) or Ride The Train ( 5 hrs ). ???
also, the times from Norman to DT / Edmond to DT will not be worth the effort. Longer commute times!!!!!
- The trains will be comfortable as you sit and wait for hours..............

So, the ACOG is offering us this? ....why would anyone want this? .... because the Ford Pinto is cheaper. Thank you ACOG for the Ford Pinto. Did you know the Ford Pinto explodes on impact when hit from the rear? ......This is a great example of what happens when we accept the Cheaper option when they tell us "it's ok".

ACOG, we are worth more than this.

You definitely won't be walking in the freight yard? The Amtrak uses freight lines and you board from Santa Fe...

Andrew, that is just one stop of many. People have chosen NOT to endanger their lives by moving away from those areas for the past 5 decades. Let's not confuse history here.

Light Rail Transit w/ Mag-Lev ( Electro Magnetic System ) uses a renewable energy source we already have in-place ( wind farms ) here in Oklahoma.

If the ACOG is recommending the Heavy Trains and sharing lines w/ the freight trains too, because of a .015 penny savings ???

This is what I call another Dumb Okie move.

While I do share you vision for the Mag-Lev and other alternate systems that are quite possibly the best decision, I personally have had to come to the realization that Oklahoma isn’t always comfortable with the cost of the best decision. I personally, and I think many others on here would agree, I would prefer a good decision that increases usage and awareness of the value of a commuter train that actually get built and is running instead of drawing a hard line of the best or nothing. When I imagine the Central Oklahoma Rail System I imagine something similar to the Metra rail in Chicago. None of those platforms we’re a rail yard or dangerous, in fact most were quite nice. I also wish the line would run to Guthrie. I would rather ride a diesel train that actually exists than talk about an awesome Mag-Lev system that does not. It’s all about the getting the low hanging fruit. Please understand that we agree on what the best decision would be, but that decision does not take into account feasibility in the Oklahoma Political environment. Thank you, OKVision for your passion. I am just trying to provide a different perspective.

Absolutely! In fact, it is the leaders of OKC and the surrounding municipalities who are currently directing the Steering Committee for ACOG's Regional Transit Dialogue (http://www.acogok.org/regional-transit-dialogue) and working towards creation of the Regional Transit Authority. Thanks to the leadership of Mayor Cornett, Mayor Rosenthal of Norman, Mayor Frye of Midwest City, Councilmembers Elizabeth Waner and Victoria Caldwell of Edmond, and many other elected officials, civic leaders and public representatives, Oklahoma City and many of the surrounding municipalities are in agreement on the need to move forward with creation of an RTA and are working to achieve that goal.

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't very clear.

I understand that the different cities in the area are working together to get rail transit established. What I am asking is, will the RTA provide assistance to those cities to help them best make use of the new transit options? Will they have advisors who can help Del City or Midwest City or Moore put together a mixed use development around their stops? Will they have suggested changes to zoning codes and city ordinances to ensure we get the right kinds of developments in those areas?

its not a matter of the quantity of ridership, but the quality of the riders that will ultimately either attract business or deter clients from riding it. if youve riden the local bus, then I dont need to explain further.

Why you don't run to the Plaza:

1. It doesn't tease urban development to a main artery. Even in Europe, the major points of interest have major roads either through or very near to the different stops/stations. if the Plaza can't extend to Classen, every single one of us should be hoping it is an afterthought in the OKC urban landscape in 20 years. The Plaza is engulfed by blocks and blocks of single family homes…that's not a good thing.

2. It's a super narrow street with nothing but 2-3 blocks of 1 story buildings.

3. It can be very well served by Bus routes that lead to other major districts, particularly 23rd and downtown.

…Guys, I love the Plaza, and it is doing great things for OKC…but it's way way way too small to be of note in the OKC of 2030-40. It would need a very aggressive expansion plan that would make a stop at 16th/Classen plenty acceptable to be relevant as time continues to press forward. If we're not building our transit system for the OKC of 2030-40 (at the very least) we're missing the boat entirely.

Going north of downtown, the street-car simply has to go up Classen, Western or Penn.

Thanks for the clarification. I am not sure that I entirely agree with you. But then again, many of these posts (including the earlier one regarding mixed use development and urbanity) seem to suggest that as usual, there needs to be a greater involvement from prospective city Planning Departments. Teher involvement doesn't necessarily have to involve creating master plans around each stop, but a zoning overlay that encourages mixed use and density seems appropriate.

I have seen Planning Departments choke awesome ideas and at the same time also create innovative plans that never see the light of day because the folks in charge of these departments do not have the political skills to carry them through. This being a complete contrast to Public Works Departments.

There should be some sort of integrated land use innovation with the millions that we may be spending on transit in the near future.

While I do share you vision for the Mag-Lev and other alternate systems that are quite possibly the best decision, I personally have had to come to the realization that Oklahoma isn’t always comfortable with the cost of the best decision. I personally, and I think many others on here would agree, I would prefer a good decision that increases usage and awareness of the value of a commuter train that actually get built and is running instead of drawing a hard line of the best or nothing. When I imagine the Central Oklahoma Rail System I imagine something similar to the Metra rail in Chicago. None of those platforms we’re a rail yard or dangerous, in fact most were quite nice. I also wish the line would run to Guthrie. I would rather ride a diesel train that actually exists than talk about an awesome Mag-Lev system that does not. It’s all about the getting the low hanging fruit. Please understand that we agree on what the best decision would be, but that decision does not take into account feasibility in the Oklahoma Political environment. Thank you, OKVision for your passion. I am just trying to provide a different perspective.

There are a couple of major issues I have with this position. If we are "voting" on this, then we deserve the Light Rail w/ Mag-Lev technology. This is not coming out of the city budget, but a dedicated tax for a single purpose.... ie MAPS. And if we are voting on this, then let us have (2) options..; A. Heavy Diesel w/ Existing Track, Shared Freight lines and Zero Economic Impact to OKC or any other city. or B. Light Rail w/ dedicated track that is placed in selected loctions and with a $ 1 Billion Dollar Economic Impact for the OKC Metro EACH YEAR. ... Light Rail has the best ROI for all cities involved.

I am not accepting the position of a few committee members decision ( ACOG ) for the rest of us. Not when the USR stated that Light Rail is the Best Solution too. If that is their position, then they need to be removed. Leading means to take us forward, not backwards. Are you ALL affraid of success? If spending a billion dollars makes you nervous, then you are not the one that should be making that decsion for the rest of us. And don't make this a case of low hanging-fruit for our economy, the Light Rail Mag-Lev will be placing us in a position to buy the tree w/ cash.

Let's not Okie down our future anymore. Light Rail w/ Mag-Lev technology is the right decision today. This should be a vote By the people, not a decision already made by a committee.

This is NOT a futuristic technology, Texas is doing it NOW w/ Japan Central . ...so why can't we? ...if we have a way of funding it, then wouldn't we want the Best for OKC Metro?

...again, Grandma is not riding the big heavy diesel loco to go see her Dr. at OU Health.

No one is spending a billion dollars + without voter approval. I would suggest running for city council, or lobbying your city councilors hard to make this the next MAPS election, because it would be the only thing on the ballot at that price. All the talk in the world on a message board accomplishes nothing. Without political involvement, other people are going to make the decisions they want to make. And that billion + dollars means the only thing we're spending money on is light rail. We're no Dallas, with a population to generate that kind of money and then some.

No one is spending a billion dollars + without voter approval. I would suggest running for city council, or lobbying your city councilors hard to make this the next MAPS election, because it would be the only thing on the ballot at that price. All the talk in the world on a message board accomplishes nothing. Without political involvement, other people are going to make the decisions they want to make. And that billion + dollars means the only thing we're spending money on is light rail. We're no Dallas, with a population to generate that kind of money and then some.OK so why even post opinions on a message board then if all you're going to get is someone telling you to take it to the politicians?

I for one, think Maglev would be great and Japan is currently testing technologies that could make MagLev exceed 400MPH....

We have a monster of a state directly to the south that is greatly interested in connecting to us via HSR, so why not put a billion up and rake in the returns? In my view, getting HSR in Oklahoma connecting to the Texas triangle HSR might be one of the biggest things in the states history and even the country. It truly would be something remarkable.

The problem is lack of ambition here. That is all I am going to say. Putting a bond proposal to secure a few billion over the next couple years would be well worth it. I honestly don't care what happens with Tulsa, but if OKC was connected to Dallas and the rest of Texas, the long term economic effects would be amazing. The only downside I could think of is a possibility more people might go to DFW International Airport, but whatever. If we won't ever get a hub like Venture and Catch22 say is unlikely, I say then we can keep our airport small and reek in the other benefits.

OK so why even post opinions on a message board then if all you're going to get is someone telling you to take it to the politicians?

Maybe because that is a very good suggestion for someone who seems to be so adamant with specific ideas about what should be done?

Borrowing Doug Loudenbeck's image here from his blog Doug Dawgz Blog, it's plain to see that a lot of history will be repeating itself with regard to the streetcar and expansion. It still holds true that 70+ years after the original lines were dismantled, certain parts of the city are still strongholds!

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/08/14/7enu4edu


Sent from my Inspiron 7537 using Tapatalk

Thanks for the clarification. I am not sure that I entirely agree with you. But then again, many of these posts (including the earlier one regarding mixed use development and urbanity) seem to suggest that as usual, there needs to be a greater involvement from prospective city Planning Departments. Teher involvement doesn't necessarily have to involve creating master plans around each stop, but a zoning overlay that encourages mixed use and density seems appropriate.

I have seen Planning Departments choke awesome ideas and at the same time also create innovative plans that never see the light of day because the folks in charge of these departments do not have the political skills to carry them through. This being a complete contrast to Public Works Departments.

There should be some sort of integrated land use innovation with the millions that we may be spending on transit in the near future.

Absolutely. There's no reason not to go ahead and overlay Classen, if we intend to shoot this line up to 63rd, with zoning that requires development to push to the curb, 12 to 20 ft. sidewalks, a required height between 2-3 and 6-8 stories, and any parking in the back portion of the lot. If Classen from 10th to NW Expressway had walkable development, it would as impressive as anything we've done downtown, and a major win for the city.

Well, if they're going to put a streetcar on Classen, then they need to make it walkable. Reduce the street from 3 lanes each way to two. Reduce the median width. Place protected bike lanes and add parallel parking and widen sidewalks. There's no reason to half ass it. Even though I'm against the street being narrowed, I think they should if they are going to run a street car on it.

anyways.. this is what I do to Classen if they are dead set on running the streetcar on it
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/t31.0-8/1500835_10203523945411788_8164515494085930792_o.jp g

kind of like the BLVD.