OKC Regional Transit System

[Rover]

Who is demonizing successful people? You are correct that what is driving sprawl is middle income developments and that is exactly what a surcharge boundary would prevent. Seems like a win win for everyone.

I would love to see a map of OKC service area showing costs and revenue to see which neighborhoods ACTUALLY pay for themselves and who doesn’t. I doubt it works out strictly on a “distance from city-center” basis. For instance, water from Lake Hefner needs to be cheaper to residents close to the lake. Sorry downtown. How about sewer services? Etc, etc.

The heart is more important than the arm and we can get by with just one arm and save on the cost of material for a sleeve, and for an extra glove. Just amputate. Lol. Seems as though it all works together.

Focusing on only one aspect ignores the benefits brought to this city from its affordability and certain lifestyle. Believe it or not, people enjoy affordable houses with yards and not sharing a wall, floor and ceiling with a neighbor not necessarily of their choosing. Go figure.

[baralheia]

I would love to see a map of OKC service area showing costs and revenue to see which neighborhoods ACTUALLY pay for themselves and who doesn’t. I doubt it works out strictly on a “distance from city-center” basis. For instance, water from Lake Hefner needs to be cheaper to residents close to the lake. Sorry downtown. How about sewer services? Etc, etc.

The heart is more important than the arm and we can get by with just one arm and save on the cost of material for a sleeve, and for an extra glove. Just amputate. Lol. Seems as though it all works together.

Focusing on only one aspect ignores the benefits brought to this city from its affordability and certain lifestyle. Believe it or not, people enjoy affordable houses with yards and not sharing a wall, floor and ceiling with a neighbor not necessarily of their choosing. Go figure.

Reducing the size of the city and deannexing the least dense/lowest tax base areas wouldn't suddenly make the entire city an oasis of zero-lot-line development and high rise buildings. There would still be TONS of areas around town with affordable houses with yards that don't share walls with their neighbor. We're talking about cutting off the far flung rural areas, not deannexing 122nd and May. :P

Now, that point made: I do agree with you in that I too would love to see a map of costs vs city revenue. That seems like something that the City should be able to share on data.okc.gov without too much work. It'd be really nice to see actual data to better inform our conversation here.

[GoGators]

I would love to see a map of OKC service area showing costs and revenue to see which neighborhoods ACTUALLY pay for themselves and who doesn’t. I doubt it works out strictly on a “distance from city-center” basis. For instance, water from Lake Hefner needs to be cheaper to residents close to the lake. Sorry downtown. How about sewer services? Etc, etc.

The heart is more important than the arm and we can get by with just one arm and save on the cost of material for a sleeve, and for an extra glove. Just amputate. Lol. Seems as though it all works together.

Focusing on only one aspect ignores the benefits brought to this city from its affordability and certain lifestyle. Believe it or not, people enjoy affordable houses with yards and not sharing a wall, floor and ceiling with a neighbor not necessarily of their choosing. Go figure.

Strawman.

[Ross MacLochness]

Focusing on only one aspect ignores the benefits brought to this city from its affordability and certain lifestyle. Believe it or not, people enjoy affordable houses with yards and not sharing a wall, floor and ceiling with a neighbor not necessarily of their choosing. Go figure.

This model can not and will not be affordable long term, which is the problem.

[HangryHippo]

This model can not and will not be affordable long term, which is the problem.

Rover fails (refuses?) to acknowledge this.

[Plutonic Panda]

Strawman.

You love to cherry pick posts and conveniently don’t acknowledge ones that I’m guessing proved you wrong.

Also did you just discover the term straw man?

[David]

Since the topic of 'houses with yards and not sharing a wall, floor and ceiling with a neighbor' has come up here's something that might be of interest:

Cities Start to Question an American Ideal: A House With a Yard on Every Lot.

It doesn't have any OKC data unfortunately, but it does have some really interesting graphics for various other cities about single-family home zoning versus zoning for other housing.

[Rover]

So, this thread is officially "off the rails". We are re-litigating why it is wrong for people to want their own home, yard and privacy. LOL Thought this was a regional transit thread.

[David]

It's not like the two are unconnected.

[GoGators]

You love to cherry pick posts and conveniently don’t acknowledge ones that I’m guessing proved you wrong.

Also did you just discover the term straw man?

LOl no just a lot of strawman arguments as of late. If i dont respond then "im ignoring something that proved me wrong" and im not going to defend an argument i never made. So how exactly should i reply to meet your approval?

[Plutonic Panda]

LOl no just a lot of strawman arguments as of late. If i dont respond then "im ignoring something that proved me wrong" and im not going to defend an argument i never made. So how exactly should i reply to meet your approval?

Say 100 lane freeways are the GOAT.

[hoya]

So, this thread is officially "off the rails". We are re-litigating why it is wrong for people to want their own home, yard and privacy. LOL Thought this was a regional transit thread.

If we waved a magic wand and suddenly every new home within 5 miles of Devon Tower had to be built as a rowhouse, we would still have zero shortage of houses for people who wanted a front yard.

[GoGators]

Say 100 lane freeways are the GOAT.

Haha fair point

[Teo9969]

"Why do you not want people to have a home with a yard"

Because there are already TENS of thousands of these things all over the metro that are in complete disrepair because we build disposably, with EVERY intent for the area to plateau 20-30 years in and begin to slowly die away 10-15 years after the plateau starts. We are literally building these areas to last less than a generation. All because the people with deep enough pockets to build these areas out have the land for cheap and know that the same people they built and sold to 15-20 years ago will continue to consume again without concern for the long term economic, ecological, and infrastructural ramifications to themselves and the rest of the community.

If we don't want to draw a line in the sand, we need to at least establish rules that demand a much higher quality of construction: Houses and roads paid for by developers with 100% reinforced concrete and maintained by special taxes leveled in these areas depending on the cost burden they create on existing city resources. Sensical zoning to account for viable long-term commercial centers. And dozens of other great practices that have been used to develop sustainable communities.

No more throw away.

[citywokchinesefood]

How would you feel if the streetcar expansion was bundled inside of the regional transit system? What impact would a double track line a la kansas city have on the right corridor in Norman/Edmond? What expansion would you want to see in Oklahoma City? I agree that bus lines are important and that they have the added advantage of being easy to adjust, but rail provides more of a permanent presence that helps impact development. I would imagine that the systems would connect to the main stop in Edmond and Norman. This would put a much heavier emphasis on the last mile aspect of the streetcar as well as create greater connectivity to the region.

[Jeepnokc]

How would you feel if the streetcar expansion was bundled inside of the regional transit system? What impact would a double track line a la kansas city have on the right corridor in Norman/Edmond? What expansion would you want to see in Oklahoma City? I agree that bus lines are important and that they have the added advantage of being easy to adjust, but rail provides more of a permanent presence that helps impact development. I would imagine that the systems would connect to the main stop in Edmond and Norman. This would put a much heavier emphasis on the last mile aspect of the streetcar as well as create greater connectivity to the region.

I am pretty well traveled and feel pretty comfortable in strange environments. I have traveled Siberia, Moscow, Cuba (8 yrs ago before it was easy to go) and all over Europe and Hong Kong. What is interesting is that I have no issue jumping on the NY subway, the tube in London, Paris Metro, MARTA. or the mass transit in HK. I never use the bus system in any of the countries I travel to except one time in London where we just jumped on the next bus to see where it would take us (which led to an amazing little neighborhood pub that hadn't been bought out by the beer companies). Even in London, Atlanta or Paris, I will take the subway, tube, marta to the stop nearest and then grab an uber or walk before Uber.

My observation here isn't to brag about my travels but to illustrate that there is ( at least as far as me) a bias against buses. It takes too much effort to figure out the bus schedule and where it runs to and which bus to grab and when it will come along. Most websites for hotels or attractions will give you the nearest tube/subway stop but not which bus line to take. The bus isn't easy and there are other options. I do not think most tourists will take the time to learn our bus system. That doesn't mean it isn't a valuable resource for our citizens but also means that we need things like the streetcar or light rail to move tourists.

(I should get extra credit for trying to put together a cognizant thought after two bottles of rose' with my beautiful bride of 22 years.)

[catch22]

^ excellent example of first hand experience, Jeep.

The psychological connection with rail being more dependable is real. If you are at a station next to rails there is no doubt you are at the right place and a train will be there. If you’re at a bus stop, there’s not the same mental guarantee. Right or wrong, it exists.

[Teo9969]

How would you feel if the streetcar expansion was bundled inside of the regional transit system? What impact would a double track line a la kansas city have on the right corridor in Norman/Edmond? What expansion would you want to see in Oklahoma City? I agree that bus lines are important and that they have the added advantage of being easy to adjust, but rail provides more of a permanent presence that helps impact development. I would imagine that the systems would connect to the main stop in Edmond and Norman. This would put a much heavier emphasis on the last mile aspect of the streetcar as well as create greater connectivity to the region.

I think most people in this city who are on-board with the RTA are on-board provided that we're following relatively close to this:

http://www.acogok.org/wp-content/upl...-for-PRINT.pdf

[PaddyShack]

I am pretty well traveled and feel pretty comfortable in strange environments. I have traveled Siberia, Moscow, Cuba (8 yrs ago before it was easy to go) and all over Europe and Hong Kong. What is interesting is that I have no issue jumping on the NY subway, the tube in London, Paris Metro, MARTA. or the mass transit in HK. I never use the bus system in any of the countries I travel to except one time in London where we just jumped on the next bus to see where it would take us (which led to an amazing little neighborhood pub that hadn't been bought out by the beer companies). Even in London, Atlanta or Paris, I will take the subway, tube, marta to the stop nearest and then grab an uber or walk before Uber.

My observation here isn't to brag about my travels but to illustrate that there is ( at least as far as me) a bias against buses. It takes too much effort to figure out the bus schedule and where it runs to and which bus to grab and when it will come along. Most websites for hotels or attractions will give you the nearest tube/subway stop but not which bus line to take. The bus isn't easy and there are other options. I do not think most tourists will take the time to learn our bus system. That doesn't mean it isn't a valuable resource for our citizens but also means that we need things like the streetcar or light rail to move tourists.

(I should get extra credit for trying to put together a cognizant thought after two bottles of rose' with my beautiful bride of 22 years.)

I will say I have hardly ridden any buses in US cities. However, for my travels in Europe I found buses to be quite nice and used them just as often as the subway or streetcars (in Vienna). I thought the bus system in London to be one of my favorites, simply because they go anywhere and everywhere! Same goes for Vienna, however they have the added benefits of streetcars which seemed less crowded than buses.

I do agree that bus systems can be daunting, and most often look like a bunch of gibberish when looking at holiday schedules/ construction detours/ and rush hour variances. But buses are integral to the network and it seems that local residents are the primary users of buses when you have a full system of transit options. It seems that tourists and visitors only need the subways and streetcars.

[Rover]

In most large cities, visitors/tourists like busses because it is more helpful for their visual orientation, can almost be like sightseeing, and has more stops. Going short distances on busses is fine, but moving very many blocks is usually easier by subway in most developed cities. Not all cities in Europe or elsewhere have comprehensive streetcar systems, or at least not nearly so as busses. All have their advantages and disadvantages.

[BoulderSooner]

Hutch ???

the Mayor recently talked like the city bus system / streetcar would NOT become part of the RTA in the future is that still the current thinking ??

[Teo9969]

Buses are certainly more useful to the locals. The reason is that metros and streetcars are typically only used for the very most common destinations, but most locals are not going to the very most common destinations. In most urban cities, you can walk from your house 4 to 6 blocks to a variety of bus stops that will take you to 50 to 100 places that you may need to go, whereas the metro/streetcars may be 5 to 15 blocks away and will take you to 10 to 20 places you need to go.

Problem for Oklahoma City and the argument against going crazy with the bus system is that the bus system in this environment is not very likely to take the locals to many places they need to go because 1. most aren't within a mile of the bus stop 2. the bus they can access is only going to pass a few places on their way to another connection and trips are going to take a long time.

Obviously those who need it will take it, and we need to work to come up with a more comprehensive system that can serve the needs of those with less resources...but a comprehensive bus system really only works when it's creating an efficient network between spaces...when spaces people are trying to get to are miles and miles apart, efficiency is hard to achieve.

[Goon]

Even better: Don't put a "no more permits" boundary. Put a "surcharge" boundary (we can call it an "extension zone". You want OKC Utilities and services...developer pays all upfront capital costs (I think they currently do this anyway), + hefty impact fees, and then residents pay a surcharged rate for all utilities to the area along with increased taxes to cover maintenance in the "extension zone". If rich people want to go live out in the boondocks, let them go live out in the boondocks and pay the true maintenance cost of the area. You don't have to make it inaccessible to have a sensible cost structure to what usually starts out as premium areas. It's not like Deer Creek sprouted up with 1200 square foot homes and 300 unit apartment complexes.

Exactly.

I'm all for continuous progress in the city core, but the reality is we have a HUGE footprint. The 1OKC idea has a lot of merit when considering racial/ethnic/demographic unity, but also should stand for bringing together the urban and suburban contingents to a single idea on what a city would look like that services ALL of its residents.

I happen to live in SWOKC, but work near the capital. A significant portion of my expenditures feed into the OKC revenue system (aside from the property taxes that goGators failed to properly identify). To say my voice is irrelevant because I don't share a zipcode within the CBD or closely adjacent is small-minded and will limit the true potential of 1OKC.

[Rover]

So, it is rich people that create sprawl and cost us a regional transit system? That’s what seems to be the focus of this thread.

Surcharges, taxes, fees, whatever, aren’t going to keep people who can afford it from living wherever and however they want. It may however force middle, lower-middle, and lower income families to pay higher costs when they are seeking a preferred lifestyle and educational opportunities for their family that doesn’t exist in the inner city.

I have a novel idea.... improve schools and job opportunities in areas you wish people to live. Use carrots, not sticks.

[GoGators]

Exactly.

I'm all for continuous progress in the city core, but the reality is we have a HUGE footprint. The 1OKC idea has a lot of merit when considering racial/ethnic/demographic unity, but also should stand for bringing together the urban and suburban contingents to a single idea on what a city would look like that services ALL of its residents.

I happen to live in SWOKC, but work near the capital. A significant portion of my expenditures feed into the OKC revenue system (aside from the property taxes that goGators failed to properly identify). To say my voice is irrelevant because I don't share a zipcode within the CBD or closely adjacent is small-minded and will limit the true potential of 1OKC.

Where has it been said anywhere in this discussion that you or anyone else’s voice is irrelevant based on zip code?