Streetcar

[OKC Guy]

More on my painted line comment. China actually has an automated streetcar that actually relies on painted lines.
https://www.citylab.com/transportati...-a-bus/545189/

You will soon have automated buses. Which is why SC is a dead end money pit, its not moveable to changing dynamics. Buses can have routes changed pretty easy. Rails are stuck in place

[HangryHippo]

Rails are stuck in place

That's the point.

[GoGators]

Adding to my statement about miles driven, that along with other failed initiatives like congestion pricing(see London and how articles try and spin it as a success even with the Stockholm solution now ultimately being needed to keep it bringing in revenue) or doing away with R-1 zoning are the next steps for the quiet pro-urbanism crowds in the smaller cities to take while they push their agenda. I’m seeing it firsthand in LA. How much longer until GoGators proposes removing LOS a development requirement and substitutes it for miles driven even though it will bear little to no relevancy to a vast majority citizens.

But hey as long as it’s good for me, right? I fail to see how that logic is different from the evil suburbanite crowd mad about “their” money going towards mass transit and bike lanes.

I dont know what this means. what is a LOS a development requirement and why do i want to remove it?

[Plutonic Panda]

I completely agree with what you're saying. my point is that the people living in these car dependent environments shouldn't block alternative transport options in the dense areas just because they wouldn't use them.

There’s no disagreement with me there. But it’s important to remember they want to see improvements too. OKC is blessed to have little to no traffic issues. Now I feel inclined to state I understand and respect perspective and I only say that to prevent The Travellers from responding to me calling me rude.

The reason I say that is because mass transit NEVER reduces traffic. It adds to it and makes it worse. This is great for urban planners who openly admit this is a plan of theirs as an attempt to “encourage” people to use mass transit. Mass transit almost always encourages density which as studies have shown most people will drive if they can afford it less than option is less convenient than using transit IE NYC where even their system has been bleeding ridership(along with a grocery list of other transit agencies at a time where rail expansion has been hot).

Now people would be wise to question mass transit without road capacity improvements to account for induced/latent demand caused by any sort of infrastructure initiative which is no way shape or form limited to car based ones. This takes into account the car based infrastructure will be the most impacted as it is the least efficient form of travel.

Look no further than the largest metros and see why one might be hesitant to want an assurance their lifestyle will be protected and not the mantra of “out with the old and in with new” thrown at them. It happens all too. I remember when I first moved to LA I saw billboards claiming the Expo like would reduce traffic on the 10 from DTLA to SM. After it opened travel times became worse. I don’t think those issues are correlated much at all but you get my point.

[Plutonic Panda]

I dont know what this means. what is a LOS a development requirement and why do i want to remove it?

Because it exists to ensure car travel remains viable for the users or residents of a development and those around with little to no consideration of trying to reduce vehicle miles traveled which for whatever reason is a main goal nearly every city now.

This is trying to be forced on the population in every which way. With tolls or by closing streets completely like Cuomo and the anti freeway freeway agency NYSDOT want to do to NYC. It’s evident there and here in LA with the transit density bill attempting to be forced upon California every legislative season even though the residents have voted it down which is a bill to de facto eliminate R1 zoning almost completely. Or perhaps going after the LOS in favor of VMT.

PS, I realize many of these issues don’t affect OKC yet, but ACOG and the city is seemingly moving as close to it as possible while avoiding pissing off its residents who won’t let them get away with the sh!t that the LA city council and LAMTA(Metro) is able to. It’s a slippery slope, IMO. I don’t blame anyone living anywhere for having reason to be wary about it.

PPS, sorry for not adding this originally: LOS = level of service used for traffic measurements as well as VMT = vehicle miles traveled

[OKC Guy]

Something to ponder. America was putting railroads all over the country before the car was even invented. If rail was so great then every town would have had mini trains and railed roads. Yet when car came along it changed and expanded our country like never before. It opened up everything. It was the choice of a vast majority of people to use for a way of getting around.

Other forms are fine but there are limits. OKC is the most spread out city in the country with Jax and maybe one more. Cars are a part of our city and will be. We also have to be wise with spending. Jax has a great bus system and OKC messed up putting all their money in SC. Its a massive money pit to nowhere. We needed to do buses and serve way more people than the limited scope SC.

Extending the SC would be a bad move as then every neighborhood around downtown wants one. Plaza district will say extend it there and capitol will say me too and so on. The cost is astronomical for the buck. Buses coulda been added and not required town up streets and lost business.

Tell me, we have so much Class A space open in downtown where are all these businesses SC was gonna bring in? SC does not bring in it serves a small group of people and is a pet project. Roads are used by all.

Ironically the SC is built on live roads lol. Think about that for a moment

[Plutonic Panda]

Something to ponder. America was putting railroads all over the country before the car was even invented. If rail was so great then every town would have had mini trains and railed roads. Yet when car came along it changed and expanded our country like never before. It opened up everything. It was the choice of a vast majority of people to use for a way of getting around.

Other forms are fine but there are limits. OKC is the most spread out city in the country with Jax and maybe one more. Cars are a part of our city and will be. We also have to be wise with spending. Jax has a great bus system and OKC messed up putting all their money in SC. Its a massive money pit to nowhere. We needed to do buses and serve way more people than the limited scope SC.

Extending the SC would be a bad move as then every neighborhood around downtown wants one. Plaza district will say extend it there and capitol will say me too and so on. The cost is astronomical for the buck. Buses coulda been added and not required town up streets and lost business.

Tell me, we have so much Class A space open in downtown where are all these businesses SC was gonna bring in? SC does not bring in it serves a small group of people and is a pet project. Roads are used by all.

Ironically the SC is built on live roads lol. Think about that for a moment

+1

It should also be mentioned outright as you alluded to it that the streetcar cars were failing before they were bought out. Not only that, but the streetcar spurred the first variations of suburbs. Rail and bikes caused cities to sprawl. It’s a fact. Traveling great distances(more than a mile) between live, work, and play is a relatively new concept in the history of cities.

The automobile isn’t responsible for sprawl. The streetcar is. People choosing a superior form of transportation is what ultimately led to the demise of streetcars. IIRC, Henry Ford perfected the mass assembly line which didn’t help trains.

[OKC Guy]

That's the point.

And as demographics and downtown moves more west those same rails are still stuck in place - maybe the wrong place. What happens when west builds out and becomes entertainment hub. Say Bricktown slows down a lot and some of the clubs/bars move to new hot spot. Now you have a tram to nowhere and no way to fix it. Buses could adjust easily though.

All cities go thru phases of growth and moving targets. It will happen here too. It may be 10 years. But the problem with rails is you are stuck with them. Why do you think SC failed in OKC years ago? Part of it was a growing and changing city and people not using it. You can’t force people to use it so they abandoned and tore/covered it up. We are relearning an old lesson at a huge cost. Dallas used to have West End as a hotspot but then it died out and went elsewhere. Its come back but not like before. Thats an example of cities and things changing. But rails are not changeable.

[TheTravellers]

It's not all about demand, supply, driver/rider preferences, and not nearly as simple as some make it out to be - there are a few other things that affected the history of the streetcar and automobile.

https://fee.org/articles/the-great-a...treetcar-myth/

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ransit/568825/

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ed-desire/380/

[TheTravellers]

...Rail and bikes caused cities to sprawl. It’s a fact. ...

The automobile isn’t responsible for sprawl. The streetcar is. ...

Cite, please?

[Plutonic Panda]

Cite, please?

Just google streetcar suburbs if this article isn’t sufficient for you:

https://www.livingplaces.com/Streetcar_Suburbs.html

As for my bikes causing sprawl claim, I’ve invested no research into that theory. It’s one I came to—as I stated in my reply that you omitted parts of—that historically travel in cities was extremely local. The bicycle was invented AFTER the train, IIRC, and that’s why I believe bicycles contributed to sprawl before the car. I won’t argue this point any further, again, as I don’t have the facts to back it up.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's not all about demand, supply, driver/rider preferences, and not nearly as simple as some make it out to be - there are a few other things that affected the history of the streetcar and automobile.

https://fee.org/articles/the-great-a...treetcar-myth/

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ransit/568825/

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ed-desire/380/

Citylab is a joke of a publication. What’s next are you to cite Streetsblog? LOL!

I’ve actually read all three of of those articles and they don’t dismiss any of my claims and spin things to the way they want the viewer to take them as. I suppose in my statements I should have said it wasn’t the only reason, but to say the streetcar demise is a giant conspiracy by GM and the government that brainwashed an entire country is comical to the same extent of the those who claim the moon landing was fake.

[jn1780]

Those suburbs grew around the streetcar track basically. Which is what we hope to accomplish with OKC streetcar.

This movement though is nothing compared to what occurred in the 1950's when American's starting buying cars in mass after the war.

I don't see bikes causing anymore sprawl than the discovery of horseback riding. I would prefer a horse when traveling a good distance compared to a bike. Especially, in a pre-car world with less roads to ride on.

[Plutonic Panda]

So sprawl is okay so as long as it caused by streetcars?

I’m aware the sprawl was accelerated by private cars and freeways. I support suburban sprawl. I support large massive freeways. I prefer it. I will argue it provides a superior quality of life in many regards. I am simply point out facts to keep perspective on things.

[HangryHippo]

So sprawl is okay so as long as it caused by streetcars?

Streetcars don't cause the same kind of sprawl as automobiles. And the "sprawl" they do cause, tends to still be walkable, dense, and more sustainable.

[TheTravellers]

Citylab is a joke of a publication. What’s next are you to cite Streetsblog? LOL!

I’ve actually read all three of of those articles and they don’t dismiss any of my claims and spin things to the way they want the viewer to take them as. I suppose in my statements I should have said it wasn’t the only reason, but to say the streetcar demise is a giant conspiracy by GM and the government that brainwashed an entire country is comical to the same extent of the those who claim the moon landing was fake.

Why is Citylab a joke? The articles I posted seem to be accurate and valid. I never said anything about the conspiracy you reference, and the articles I posted say that the streetcar's demise is *not* a giant conspiracy by GM and the government, so you actually agree with Citylab, even though you think it's a joke.

[Rover]

I guess streetcars vs automobiles is Oklahoma’s modern version of the farmers vs ranchers. Lol.

[OKC Guy]

Streetcars don't cause the same kind of sprawl as automobiles. And the "sprawl" they do cause, tends to still be walkable, dense, and more sustainable.

Thing is, OKC was/is top 3 spread out city and thats not going to change. This happened before the new SC. You can’t put that back in the box we are a very big land wise city. So we can’t all the sudden be a core city like many want that ship sailed decades ago.

We can still do things smartly. The smarter play woulda been getting top notch bus service all over city. Since buses use roads and cars use roads you double down on keeping roads up to standards and this makes both drivers and bus riders happy. Once you do that you now have a feeder system into downtown (along with other areas). And then for much less cost some nice lux mini buses to route within the core. Now you have a system.

What we have now is a bad bad bus system and an expensive pet SC circular.

[jedicurt]

Thing is, OKC was/is top 3 spread out city and thats not going to change. This happened before the new SC. You can’t put that back in the box we are a very big land wise city. So we can’t all the sudden be a core city like many want that ship sailed decades ago.

We can still do things smartly. The smarter play woulda been getting top notch bus service all over city. Since buses use roads and cars use roads you double down on keeping roads up to standards and this makes both drivers and bus riders happy. Once you do that you now have a feeder system into downtown (along with other areas). And then for much less cost some nice lux mini buses to route within the core. Now you have a system.

What we have now is a bad bad bus system and an expensive pet SC circular.

Dang it... i Always Hate it when i have to agree with OKCGuy...

but sadly, he summed up my thoughts here better than i think i would have..

so this^^^^^

[jn1780]

Thing is, OKC was/is top 3 spread out city and thats not going to change. This happened before the new SC. You can’t put that back in the box we are a very big land wise city. So we can’t all the sudden be a core city like many want that ship sailed decades ago.

We can still do things smartly. The smarter play woulda been getting top notch bus service all over city. Since buses use roads and cars use roads you double down on keeping roads up to standards and this makes both drivers and bus riders happy. Once you do that you now have a feeder system into downtown (along with other areas). And then for much less cost some nice lux mini buses to route within the core. Now you have a system.

What we have now is a bad bad bus system and an expensive pet SC circular.

I will agree with buses. We should have a top notched bus system that people can be proud of and want to ride.

Things could change regarding sprawl. We don't know how economic conditions will look 15,30,45 years into the future. Personal automobile hasn't been around that long in human history and most people in the world can't afford to enjoy this benefit. Not to get too political, but one thing Democrats and Republicans seem to indirectly agree on is that standard of living is slowly going to crap. Hopefully, both sides are wrong on this.

[GoGators]

Why is Citylab a joke? The articles I posted seem to be accurate and valid. I never said anything about the conspiracy you reference, and the articles I posted say that the streetcar's demise is *not* a giant conspiracy by GM and the government, so you actually agree with Citylab, even though you think it's a joke.

He doesn't like these types of publications because they are for the most part anti-sprawl, anti -highway, pro mass transit publications.

[GoGators]

Thing is, OKC was/is top 3 spread out city and thats not going to change. This happened before the new SC. You can’t put that back in the box we are a very big land wise city. So we can’t all the sudden be a core city like many want that ship sailed decades ago.

We can still do things smartly. The smarter play woulda been getting top notch bus service all over city. Since buses use roads and cars use roads you double down on keeping roads up to standards and this makes both drivers and bus riders happy. Once you do that you now have a feeder system into downtown (along with other areas). And then for much less cost some nice lux mini buses to route within the core. Now you have a system.

What we have now is a bad bad bus system and an expensive pet SC circular.

We absolutely can reign is sprawl and become a decent city. It would just take a fraction of the effort it took to create the sprawling mess. I do not believe in throwing good money after bad. Just because OKC sprawls doesn't mean the city has to go broke making it easier to sprawl even more. Just because it has been the norm doesn't mean we cant learn from our mistakes.

Cheap land and cheap development makes a cheap city.

[TheTravellers]

He doesn't like these types of publications because they are for the most part anti-sprawl, anti -highway, pro mass transit publications.

Yeah, been tired of his single-lane (well, eighteen-lane) mind for a while, need to push back sometimes...

PluPan, did you even read the articles?

[d-usa]

To stop sprawl, you would have to convince Oklahoma City as an entity to not invest and promote the entirety of Oklahoma City.

It’s a giant ass city, sprawl is part of having giant city limits.

[Ross MacLochness]

Not necessarily. Mitigating sprawl doesn't have to mean that people already on the periphery or in sprawly areas have to be negatively impacted. We can do things like policy/zoning changes, smart TOD paired with things like no parking minimums, some kind of incentive for building in a particular style or near nodes of density, making it easier to build ADUs, multifamily units, live/work spaces, etc. just to throw out a few suggestions. Mitigating sprawl actually will help everyone, even in those areas you fear would need to not be promoted or invested in, as the tax base to spending ratio will go down, freeing up more money to fix things like potholes on the infrastructure we have already built.