Streetcar

[shawnw]

The only transit projects that cater to the elite is building roads. The cost of using a vehicle is a barrier for many. Good public transit is leveling the playing field. This is a very bad take.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here (I'm a daily transit user), but it could be argued that the streetcar (in its current form) is not "good" _public_ transit (since it's TOD-based)....

[Quicker]

The only transit projects that cater to the elite is building roads. The cost of using a vehicle is a barrier for many. Good public transit is leveling the playing field. This is a very bad take.

Haha...It’s quite an impressive achievement to take a Steve Hunt quote and make it appear that his is the more logical one... I kinda get your point though... considering what it costs to live downtown, even for those that can afford to live there, there might be some that couldn’t afford the expense of owning a car too...so at least we’ve leveled the playing field...

[Plutonic Panda]

It's funny how many people have no problem with insane spending on roads to subsidize cars, but spend a nickel on public transit and they lose their minds.

Maybe because 80 percent of people in the US drive as a means to commute? Just thinking out loud.

[Plutonic Panda]

The only transit projects that cater to the elite is building roads. The cost of using a vehicle is a barrier for many. Good public transit is leveling the playing field. This is a very bad take.

Like many of your claims, this is flat out disingenuous to the max.

[GoGators]

Like many of your claims, this is flat out disingenuous to the max.

Care to elaborate on how my statement is disingenuous?

[GoGators]

Haha...It’s quite an impressive achievement to take a Steve Hunt quote and make it appear that his is the more logical one... I kinda get your point though... considering what it costs to live downtown, even for those that can afford to live there, there might be some that couldn’t afford the expense of owning a car too...so at least we’ve leveled the playing field...

I never said the streetcar as it stands now is good public transportation. What it is, is a good starting point. The streetcar should immediately be expanded to OCU, Capitol Hill, and OUHS. We have to connect the places where people live with the places where people work. These expansions would link some of the most affluent neighborhoods in okc AND link many lower and working class neighborhoods with job centers and entertainment. This would immediately make the streetcar a viable system for thousands of OKC residents of all incomes and push the needle of economic development along the entire route. This seems like a much better use of funds than widening some stretch of NW 122nd because a Walmart goes in...

Any alternative transportation investment Is more egalitarian than adding more lanes for cars. Bike lanes, sidewalks, buses, streetcars, light rail, etc, etc all have much lower barriers to use than roads.

[Pete]

FYI, from what I'm hearing there is almost no chance the streetcar will be expanded through MAPS 4.

[TheTravellers]

FYI, from what I'm hearing there is almost no chance the streetcar will be expanded through MAPS 4.

Because it doesn't bring in buttloads of money for corporations, which appears to be the Chamber's only driving force?

[OKC Guy]

FYI, from what I'm hearing there is almost no chance the streetcar will be expanded through MAPS 4.

Good!

We need to see how it operates over 3-4 years before we invest more. Need to see operating expenses. Breakdowns. Future costs of replacing cars. Other impacts.

We had them before and they eventually died out and were covered over. More cities than not are not seeing the rewards. I also think they made a huge tactical error in how they laid out the tracks. Making it circular was a mistake and any obstacle or breakdown or even car over white line shuts the whole system down. Should have made it checkerboard design which would have allowed easier expansion of selected areas. Also would only shut down a smaller fraction if problems or breakdowns.

I will say, its best calling will be tourists and once OMNI and Convention center and park open it will be great for them. Its great if a person lives close to route. But for 90+% of residents its not useful.

This is good news for me the voter as I want to vote for some other projects. I do hope they scale down MAPS list and would prefer to do less project votes but more often. Maybe do a few projects every 2 years so will only have a few to vote on each time. Would allow flexibility in changing dynamics and be easier to focus on public awareness of the items.

[Teo9969]

I'm fine with no streetcar expansion in MAPS 4. We need to commit to RTA funding and let that do its job.

[GoGators]

Good!

We need to see how it operates over 3-4 years before we invest more. Need to see operating expenses. Breakdowns. Future costs of replacing cars. Other impacts.

We had them before and they eventually died out and were covered over. More cities than not are not seeing the rewards. I also think they made a huge tactical error in how they laid out the tracks. Making it circular was a mistake and any obstacle or breakdown or even car over white line shuts the whole system down. Should have made it checkerboard design which would have allowed easier expansion of selected areas. Also would only shut down a smaller fraction if problems or breakdowns.

I will say, its best calling will be tourists and once OMNI and Convention center and park open it will be great for them. Its great if a person lives close to route. But for 90+% of residents its not useful.

This is good news for me the voter as I want to vote for some other projects. I do hope they scale down MAPS list and would prefer to do less project votes but more often. Maybe do a few projects every 2 years so will only have a few to vote on each time. Would allow flexibility in changing dynamics and be easier to focus on public awareness of the items.

Widening Rockwell and memorial road wouldn’t be useful for 99.99% of residents. Does that mean we don’t have to pay for that now?

[Laramie]

Do agree that we did for the first time build a streetcar system the doesn't need immediate expansion; something we may want to consider with MAPS V.

We all have our pet peeve projects; so let's spread the wealth.

[jn1780]

I'm fine with no streetcar expansion in MAPS 4. We need to commit to RTA funding and let that do its job.

Yeah, we need to at the very least have a funding mechanism to pay for the operations of our existing system before we go expanding it. Cant just go on cannibalizing other city services.

Plus, the main selling point of the street car is spurring development around it. It will take take several years to see these results.

[OKC Guy]

Widening Rockwell and memorial road wouldn’t be useful for 99.99% of residents. Does that mean we don’t have to pay for that now?

You picked one road lol. How about I pick a 50 foot section of SC for equal comparison? Most people drive several miles of roads each day. So the percent of road use is much higher. Its likely over 80% use roads each day and higher per week. How many use SC per day or week?

You ignored the the rest of post too. Its a poorly designed route than cannot be easily expanded as spurs. Checkerboard would have allowed that. If for example one like ran east/west on 10th street then its easier to extend that spur to the Medical district. Any expansion now has to still feed into a circular thus would clog it up.

Its a great tourist attraction and that will be its best calling.

[GoGators]

You picked one road lol. How about I pick a 50 foot section of SC for equal comparison? Most people drive several miles of roads each day. So the percent of road use is much higher. Its likely over 80% use roads each day and higher per week. How many use SC per day or week?

You ignored the the rest of post too. Its a poorly designed route than cannot be easily expanded as spurs. Checkerboard would have allowed that. If for example one like ran east/west on 10th street then its easier to extend that spur to the Medical district. Any expansion now has to still feed into a circular thus would clog it up.

Its a great tourist attraction and that will be its best calling.

So you think the SC route should have been aligned differently for expansion but also don’t want it expanded. Makes sense

And the argument that most people drive by you and others is so weak. There’s literally no other option in the majority of the city. Of course most people drive. Maybe if we spent money on things other than roads for cars people could use other means.

This “most people drive so let’s build more roads” is a circular argument. With this logic no one would ever build any bridges. Why should we build a bridge I’ve hardly seen anyone forge the river? Must not be enough demand for a bridge.

[OKC Guy]

So you think the SC route should have been aligned differently for expansion but also don’t want it expanded. Makes sense

And the argument that most people drive by you and others is so weak. There’s literally no other option in the majority of the city. Of course most people drive. Maybe if we spent money on things other than roads for cars people could use other means.

This “most people drive so let’s build more roads” is a circular argument. With this logic no one would ever build any bridges. Why should we build a bridge I’ve hardly seen anyone forge the river? Must not be enough demand for a bridge.

First, if it was straight lines its much easier and cheaper to expand. And can be done based on changing downtown area growth/patterns.

Second, we could have put $140,000,000 into buses and had the model system in the country. More would use it. Now you have a very limited scope expensive system which is best as a tourist trap. And thats fine if it had been sold that way. It sold as “the last mile” but they forgot about all the other miles just to get to it have to be by car.

Like I have said its gonna be good for OMNI and CC, and for bar hopping. But it fails as a great way to get people out of cars. $140,000,000 in buses and hubs woulda done that.

I realize you won’t change your mind nor me mine. We can at least agree on that. But for MAPS to survive this is great news that the SC will not be on it. That would have failed. Now we can move forward with other projects if they do them smartly.

[Zorba]

Maybe because 80 percent of people in the US drive as a means to commute? Just thinking out loud.

That doesn't explain why people think road spending is required, but public transit spending is a "subsidy." How many times do you see people complaining about how roads don't directly pay for themselves? But there are constant demands for public transit to directly pay for itself.

Also if we had better investment in public transit, that 80% number would shrink.

[Zorba]

I never said the streetcar as it stands now is good public transportation. What it is, is a good starting point. The streetcar should immediately be expanded to OCU, Capitol Hill, and OUHS. We have to connect the places where people live with the places where people work. These expansions would link some of the most affluent neighborhoods in okc AND link many lower and working class neighborhoods with job centers and entertainment. This would immediately make the streetcar a viable system for thousands of OKC residents of all incomes and push the needle of economic development along the entire route. This seems like a much better use of funds than widening some stretch of NW 122nd because a Walmart goes in...

Any alternative transportation investment Is more egalitarian than adding more lanes for cars. Bike lanes, sidewalks, buses, streetcars, light rail, etc, etc all have much lower barriers to use than roads.

While I am very pro public transit. I really don't understand what the benefit of expanding the SC would be over a high frequency, few stop trolley or buses to those places. Make them electric, or a NG/Hybrid to get the pollution benefits.

[Plutonic Panda]

Care to elaborate on how my statement is disingenuous?

Transit projects are used all the time to cater to the elite. Whether they actually use it or not is up for debate but you can’t say many light rail projects are always built in areas that would truly use them the most. Many, streetcar projects being no exception, are built in middle to upper class areas and just like in OKC’s case, having a streetcar where most people drive.

It’s nice to have some “feel good” stories like some of those on here where people claim they wouldn’t have done ‘x’ if it weren’t for the streetcar, but be real! I would bet an overwhelming majority of the people that use this have driving as part of a daily routine in their lives. For them this streetcar is nothing more than a novelty item. You and other transit advocates can claim that this is just the start or centerpiece to the system all you want. It’s bull. This isn’t good transit anyways as it won’t induce enough riders being vastly inferior to the automobile. Where is the incentive?

This streetcar is living proof of a mass transit project built to cater to the “rich.” Less you want to define rich in a way where you can spin what you said. This 250 million could have been spent way better. Look at how much BRT mileage(though it won’t be true BRT) we’re getting for the price. Compare it to this.

Even in Dallas I believe there was an article saying how much of their network was disproportionately built in wealthier areas that are able to choose between it or a car. Having a system that offers alternatives to get people out of their car is great and I’m all for it. Having one that offers a real means of travel for those who don’t have a choice and not have it taking twice as long as a car would is crucial.

[Plutonic Panda]

That doesn't explain why people think road spending is required, but public transit spending is a "subsidy." How many times do you see people complaining about how roads don't directly pay for themselves? But there are constant demands for public transit to directly pay for itself.

Also if we had better investment in public transit, that 80% number would shrink.

You make a good point and I’ve never been a fan of that logic which I agree many people possess of excepting public transit to pay for itself. Me being pro freeway, pro sprawl, etc. I’ll almost always get those who agree with me and respond to my comments saying something like that which I’ll always call them out on. But at the same time many transit advocates will attempt to spin that argument to support rail lines and the like claiming freeways are to expensive to build and don’t pay for themselves while a billion dollars a mile is slowly becoming the norm for many heavy rail projects in the city with light rail inevitably headed in the same direction.

[Plutonic Panda]

Widening Rockwell and memorial road wouldn’t be useful for 99.99% of residents. Does that mean we don’t have to pay for that now?

It still caters to a mode share that the majority of commuters use so you have more of argument to support that than mass transit. Js

[Ross MacLochness]

While I am very pro public transit. I really don't understand what the benefit of expanding the SC would be over a high frequency, few stop trolley or buses to those places. Make them electric, or a NG/Hybrid to get the pollution benefits.

If you build streetcar-like stops for the busses on key corridors, and pass ordinances either limiting sprawl, or encouraging density along transit routes, I'd be inclined to agree. However, as it stands now, the streetcar is an excellent way for someone like my mom to try public transit and dig it. If we are to make it as a world class city we have to step up our game in providing alternate modes of transport besides the automobile so that all people feel comfortable and normal using something other than a car.

[Pete]

The streetcar is really a real estate development tool. Tracks are permanent so people invest in adjacent areas.

It's a highly inefficient public transportation tool (much cheaper and better ways to move people) but there are big economic development advantages.

[Ross MacLochness]

The most important piece of implementing any semblance of an "efficient public transit tool" is to upzone, inrease density, and limit sprawl. The streetcar, by having fixed rails, is a density quazi-incentive. But for real change in how we get around, we must must must limit sprawl and somehow encourage density city wide. We can do this by updating policy and by "building it and they will come".

I think the low hanging fruit here is to build a vast protected bike network. would be the cheapest option by far and I thoink would see massive use if done right. I think it's the best thing we can do for ourselves right now, even as sprawling as we are.

[Ross MacLochness]

I often think about the huge amount of baby boomers who live in euclidian suburbs. What will happen to them when they can't drive anymore? Without public transit, many of them will age out alone, isolated, and unable to go anywhere. can't walk down the street to grab supplies or food, can't take public transit either.