Urban Transportation OKC 2020

[bubfloyd]

For years now, we in OKC have been wedded to the plan to relocate I-40 several blocks to the South and replace much of the existing I-40 with an at grade boulevard. “The D Option”. The process by which the overall design was arrived at was bathed in an aura of public input. And, there was considerable public input, press releases, copies of plans distributed, models displayed etc. But many of the facts that have come to light in the past few years as ODOT, OKC and The US Congress wrangled with the financing of this very expensive five miles of highway, were not disclosed or publicly discussed

What is becoming more and more clear, in my feeble mind at least, is that although this new stretch of roadway will remove most of the present I-40 eyesore and allow downtown to expand nicely to the south, the current design will require that a very functional railyard, that would be the envy of Dallas, Denver and Salt Lake City will be destroyed. And, in the process, the opportunity to easily and inexpensively develop a first rate urban transportation system with Union Station as its hub will be lost. The Union Station and its associated multi track railyard could form a transportation hub for light rail, heavy rail, street cars, busses, taxies etc. with existing rail links to Will Rogers Airport, The OKC Zoo area and much more.

When I-40 first hit the drawing boards several years ago, MAPS was only a twinkle in Mayor Norick's eye and only the homeless lived in Downtown OKC. In 2005 we see a major urban revitilization well under way and thousands of OKCityians will take up residnece downtown over the next few years. The game has changed. The need for a more diverse and effective urban transportaion system is now becoming a topic for discussion and OKC DOT is doing a new study. But the door to the Hub, Union Station, will soon be closed and locked. The Union Station building will remain, but the rail yard will be only a memory.

One of the most knowledgable and articulate individuals on the subject of transportation in general and rail transportation in particular, living in Oklahoma City, or anywhere for that matter, has to be Tom Elmore. Tom is sometimes way over the top but his case for Union Station and what its loss will mean to the future urban growth of OKC is right on target. Tom can be heard on AM 1520 tomorrow morning beginning at 7AM. Below is a copy of the text from an e-mail from him letting me know about the upcoming broadcast. I guarantee that it will be interesting and informative. Tune in and join in.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From Tom Elmore:

I'm scheduled to appear on KOKC Radio's Steve Summers show tomorrow morning at 7:00 am. KOKC is at 1520 AM, formerly known as KOMA. The plan is to discuss the future of Union Station, transit and the "New Crosstown."

In preparation for the show the host accompanied me on a tour of Union Station yesterday morning. As we walked down the ramp into the passenger tunnels, three guys with Poe and Associates were walking out. Undoubtedly, they were down there plotting the destruction of the tunnels.

We further noticed that behind the station the path of the highway appears to be staked. The stakes have yellow marker ribbons with elevations written on them.

I don't know the exact portent of all that, as to a time frame for ODOT's intended destruction. I wouldn't be surprised to find the ODOT folks straining every nerve and every available dollar to do as much damage as possible as quickly as possible thinking "that'll end the argument." After all, the current Crosstown deck needs an asphalt overlay to stabilize it for interim use, and I don't think they're gonna do that until they believe they've shut the detractors up once and for all. Leaving the Crosstown deck as it is now offers the prospect for "media events" occasioned by the predictable falling chunks of concrete. Not particularly dangerous, but valuable in convincing the public that it's all "about to fall down" -- part of the big lie that is Oklahoma's own "Little Big Dig," the "New Crosstown project."

Listen in tomorrow morning if you can.

TOM ELMORE

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Welcome to OKC Talk!

I am glad you brought this up. This is worth a very good debate.

Now, currently we see NO future prospects of light rail surfacing, yet we do see prospects of Downtown moving South. Look, I see it as both would be nice. Although I don't see Union Station necessary for urban rail to take shape in OKC. I don't think that the existing rail yard is the envy of Dallas & Denver either... or is this something that is going to be built?

Unfortunately I haven't heard about this. But I do completely support the relocation of I 40. I also think the boulevard would provide easier access to downtown, something we need.

And just why do we need urban rail anyway? Isn't it supposed to help our downtown, and provide easier access to it? Keepingthat option open, according to Tom Elmore, means we have to abbort our Little Big Dig which would do just that.

[soonerguru]

SoonerGrad,

One thing to keep in mind is that Istook has made it clear that we will have rail over his dead body only.

I've visited the Union Station site and it is absolutely phenomenal. It might be the most beautiful bldg in all of downtown OKC. I've also toured the rail yard and it is absolutely set up for urban rail right now.

Why would we want to destroy infrastructure that could be put to use for later rail service?

I'm not certain what they're destroying or not destroying but I've heard both scenarios. This is enough of a concern that we should probably pay attention to what's happening before it's too late.

One of the best arguments OKC currently has to eventually provide rail service is we have existing infrastructure. It wouldn't be as costly for us to build it as it was for Dallas and other cities to build infrastructure that wasn't there, get right of ways, etc.

[Midtowner]

SoonerGrad,

One thing to keep in mind is that Istook has made it clear that we will have rail over his dead body only.

That's not what I got -- and I researched it rather throroughly. He commissioned COTPA to do a study, COTPA spent $500,000 on a study, COTPA reported that currently, light rail would be a money pit for Oklahoma. Istook then, according to his fiscally conservative principles voted against it. I'm not sure what kind of feasibility studies were done in Salt Lake, but that's not even really germane to this topic.

I've visited the Union Station site and it is absolutely phenomenal. It might be the most beautiful bldg in all of downtown OKC. I've also toured the rail yard and it is absolutely set up for urban rail right now.

Why would we want to destroy infrastructure that could be put to use for later rail service?

I concur, the research I did said it would cost about $20-$40 milloin/mile to build light rail. At that cost, it's insane to destroy perfectly good infrastructure, if indeed that's what we have.

This isn't the site I originally got that info, but it has some info that you might enjoy on light rail:

http://www.tucsonlightrail.org/vsfreeways.htm

I'm not certain what they're destroying or not destroying but I've heard both scenarios. This is enough of a concern that we should probably pay attention to what's happening before it's too late.

One of the best arguments OKC currently has to eventually provide rail service is we have existing infrastructure. It wouldn't be as costly for us to build it as it was for Dallas and other cities to build infrastructure that wasn't there, get right of ways, etc.

I agree on the "eventually". I would like it to be a more assured thing that it wouldn't be a money pit. If it were fast (and if I didn't live only 1.5 miles from work), I would probably use light rail, especially if I had to commute downtown from someplace like Edmond.

That'll probably never be a reality for me though as I need transportation once I get to work, and I always will (to and from the courthouse)

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

I wouldn't mind it being put in the medians of streets in downtown, that would be efficient. Or we could probably wipe out a few streets and have a like a pedestrian mall with a light rail line, like in Houston.

And actually, Istook, while being influential in I 40's relocation, does not rule OKC. And will not 10 years from now even be elected. Someone better might come along.

I would love to see urban rail. But I think I 40 needs to be relocated more. I also think we can have both.

And, Union Station's beauty is irrelevant. The plans for relocation don't even touch it so... yeah.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Great link!

[Midtowner]

I wouldn't mind it being put in the medians of streets in downtown, that would be efficient. Or we could probably wipe out a few streets and have a like a pedestrian mall with a light rail line, like in Houston.

Which downtown are you referring to? There are only a few streets I can think of that even have medians -- Couch (because of the park there), E.K. Gaylord, and some of Broadway. The rest of the streets are too narrow for a median with the possible exceptions of Hudson and Walker -- and really, even then, it'd be a squeeze.

And actually, Istook, while being influential in I 40's relocation, does not rule OKC. And will not 10 years from now even be elected. Someone better might come along.

Not to mention, he's lost his seat of power, and is quickly becoming an irrelevant force in the House. We are/will be soon returning to donor status.

I would love to see urban rail. But I think I 40 needs to be relocated more. I also think we can have both.

And, Union Station's beauty is irrelevant. The plans for relocation don't even touch it so... yeah.

You missed his point. He was saying that Union Station would be a wonderful facility to have both because it is beautiful, and also because it is already functionally prepared to handle that kind of load -- which is not something I'm sure of. Does light rail use the same gauge track as is in that yard presently? There are other concerns, but that is what he was shooting for.

Yeah, I-40 does need to be relocated, but I concur, the current placement has created some real question marks for me.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Well actually I understand that it does. I'll have to look it up to be sure, I did just post that I was ignorant to it.



I think we'll find space, like Houston did. LOL

[Midtowner]

Houston has the 7th largest downtown in the world (or so I've read). We ain't Houston.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Yeah. I just posted that b/c Houston did not have much space either.

[renffahcs]

Does OKC have any abandon freight lines. Fort Worths line, Trinity Railway, is on the old Rock Island Line. The second line will be the old Cotton Belt Line. Yes, it is commuter rail instead of light rail but who cares. Since I don't live in OKC I am just asking if this would be an alternative to constructing new rail and right of ways?

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Well. None that are abandoned to my knowledge, but there may be something in Capital Hill. They wouldn't deserve (LOL) rail anyway.

[The Old Downtown Guy]

There is still lots of buried rail in OKC, but I don't think that is the issue that bubfloyd was trying to point out and that Tom Elmore has been harping on for years. The Union Station's rail yard could serve as the hub to link more than just on light rail line to another. If The City started today; planing a rail link to the airport it might be running by 2010. But a transportation hub is not just where you go to get on a light rail system. You get off rail there and catch a shuttle to your downtown hotel, a cab to your business meeting in far west OKC or get on one of the little rubber tired trollys that carry tons of folks today. It's not just about light rail and fixed rail trollys. Who knows, mono-rail might come back. Light Rail like in the photos of Houston is only one component. The important issue is that with the beginning of construction of the new I-40 as it is presently designed, the Union Station rail yard is history.

Also, Rep. Istook is already history. Remember, he lost his position on the Transportaion Appropriation Committee. I will be very suprised if Oklahoma accumulates the Federal dollars to build that project in twenty years. But, I am guessing that they already have the money to level the Union Station rail yard.

As a businessman, when conditions change dramaticly, like what is going on in downtown, I back up . . look around . . and adapt to the new situation. At this late date, it will take a lot of pressure from OKC and a lot of creative thinking by ODOT to get changes to the I-40 plan that would result in retaining any part of the rail yard.

I'll have the radio on in the morning to see what Tom has to say.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Well I have enough earsore when I get into work...

Can you improve on what you said about the Union Station rail yard being history?

[HOT ROD]

[QUOTE=soonerguru]SoonerGrad,

One thing to keep in mind is that Istook has made it clear that we will have rail over his dead body only.
[QUOTE]

Then its time for a big dig for Istook, and put him in it!

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

... t'would cost too much. Let's just dump him in the Oklahoma River and noone will notice.

[travis]

I have had mixed feeling about this for awhile. I believe that the current I-40 bridge needs to be replaced eventually; not because it is about to fall down, but because it does not meet current highway design standards. It has narrow lanes, no shoulders, and short merge lengths with the on-ramps. If the bridge were about to fail, why is a section of it being kept for use with the future boulevard. I don't know why it can't be kept in it's current location and widened to the south. Put it below grade for asthetics and noise reduction; allowing the cross street to go over it at grade. i know there are some problems with access, but these could be addressed through the use of frontage roads.

I am really not sure how the new location will work. I have yet to see any detailed plans, but I believe most of it is supposed to be below grade paralleling a rail line. To provide adequate clearance for the overhead cross street bridges, the rail line will have to be very deep, or the cross streets will have to be raised high. The rail line also can't handle steep grades (anything over 1%) like a highway. Other rail lines are being rerouted, raising the cost.

I am not sure of the future of rail transit in OKC, but the railyard should be considered an option. There are direct lines there to almost every corner of the metro area. Even if one or two lines are kept at the station, I think the line to the south west, right by the airport, will be severed. I don't know what the previous study involved, but I would be wary of anything done by COPTA. Also, I believe there is a conflict of interest with the current transit study being performe. Carter-Burgeis is a very reputable engineering firm, with a lot of experience with rail design, but they are also designing a section of the new I-40.

[okcpulse]

... t'would cost too much. Let's just dump him in the Oklahoma River and noone will notice.

I've always respected you Sooner&Rice. Now it's just flat out admiration. I've shared that single thought all along!!!

[Patrick]

When we put together OCART several years ago, Tom Elmore attended several of our meetings, and I got to know him fairly well. All I have to say, is the guy definiterly knows what he's talking about, and city leaders have basically given him the silent treatment. One of these days when we actually do have to build a commuter rail system, the city leaders of that die will curse the city leaders of today for wanting to destroy the Union Station Rail Yard. It isn't Union Station itself that's so valuable. It's the rail yard. You'd have to go looka tit to see what I mean....the number of tracks, the tunnels underneath the tracks, the elevation, etc. are all perfect for a commuter rail hub!

That yard is actually worth millions and our city leaders just don't understand that, or they don't care. Our children will care someday when they're having to pay $100 mill to replace what we destroyed to relocate I-40.

Mick Cornett, if you're reading, listen to Tom Elmore. The guy knows what he's talking about, and we as a city are about to make a huge mistake that will damage the future of rail transit in our city forever.

[TheImmortal]

I also believe the city is making a huge mistake my destroying this railyard. But honestly what can we do? well raise public awareness of course. I know there are a few groups out there with sites that are doing this. i dont have the exact links at the moment but will try to ge them up here sooner or later. I think light rail is going to be huge in OKC, especially say in 20 or 30 years. And like everyone else has said, the city will kicking itself in the foot for doing this. I think the development that could occur in between the new boulevard and new I-40 would be a definite plus, but i dont think it would be better in the long run than having to build a whole new hub 30 years from now. The infrastructure is in place, so lets take advantage of it. But the bottomline is I think public awareness about this issue needs to be considerbly more present in the media and this issue needs to be exposed as much as possible. I think the rail yard can be saved. But not without the issue being brought to the full attention of the public.

[HOT ROD]

why didnt the city use Union Station for AMTRAK? It sounds like a much better place for it (as it has a rail-yard) than Santa Fe. They should have used Union and turned Santa Fe into a museum!

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

The point stands. The thing needs to be knocked down.

And thank-you, Pulse. Never really knew much about you, but I knew you were a decent member here. I just like to raise ruckous occasionally.

[metro]

I dont understand why you think it needs to be torn down? Engineers, ODOT and others have said many times its structurally sound it just needs repairs and re-decking. Many larger downtowns have interstates intersecting their downtowns and they are raised as well. We can still develop our downtown southbound without tearing down our infrastructure. Keeping the rail yards is far more crucial than relocating our highway.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

No, we can't move downtown South. You don't put a decrepit freeway like that in the middle of a downtown.

[Sooner&RiceGrad]

Here's what light rail in OKC would look like: