MAPS 3 approaching...

[sgray]

Is Cornett smoking crack?

Cornett favors such a component, but said, "it’s hard to pass public transit when you don’t have traffic congestion.”

How would he know if public transportation would be hard to pass when it has never been tried? Our city has repeatedly put together a bus system that is undependable so that no one will ride them and then uses the lack of ridership as an excuse not to have a decent bus system. That is absolutely ridiculous.

Why don't he just admit that he opposes it? I'll tell you why... The people spoke in his MAPS3 ideas website saying they want it so he cannot just admit that he would rather eat glass than do it. I for one am not buying this for a minute.

Yup. He's a player. He's gonna wait to show his real position until the very last moment so the damage wont be drug out and publicized as much. You are right that "the people spoke" in the MAPS3 survey and this is clear evidence that our leaders make the decisions, not the people, and those decisions are bought by the highest bidder.

It is interesting what you mentioned about the bus system and how they craft solutions that are designed to fail and then preach a sob story to the community about how the solution couldn't work here, but won't answer questions related to how they manipulated the design.

[Midtowner]

I don't think you can get the city excited enough to tax themselves for a really big hotel and a nice park they'll never use/visit. Something for the rest of OKC has to go in the bill. An improved bus system or a commuter rail system might fit the bill.

Make it a package deal and folks will vote for it.

[progressiveboy]

I don't think you can get the city excited enough to tax themselves for a really big hotel and a nice park they'll never use/visit. Something for the rest of OKC has to go in the bill. An improved bus system or a commuter rail system might fit the bill.

Make it a package deal and folks will vote for it.

Why do you think that residents would not use or visit a nice park? That does not make sense to me?? OKC must continue to progress and advance because other cities in the region are adding extra attractions and making their cities more desirable. IMHO if OKC does not "choose" to tax themselves for MAPS 3 then it will probably be the beginning of OKC lapsing into decline, because the city has done great things but it is still far from being a city that can stand on it's own merits. Continue the Renaissance so we people in Dallas or Tulsa for that matter,will not have to bash OKC as being just a plain backwater town. Prove us wrong!

[Midtowner]

Why do you think that residents would not use or visit a nice park? That does not make sense to me?? OKC must continue to progress and advance because other cities in the region are adding extra attractions and making their cities more desirable. IMHO if OKC does not "choose" to tax themselves for MAPS 3 then it will probably be the beginning of OKC lapsing into decline, because the city has done great things but it is still far from being a city that can stand on it's own merits. Continue the Renaissance so we people in Dallas or Tulsa for that matter,will not have to bash OKC as being just a plain backwater town. Prove us wrong!

We already have a couple of nice parks which are scantly used. What makes you think a new park which is inconvenient for folks who don't live/work downtown to visit is going to get a lot of use? I'm sure I'll use it as I live/work down here. I'm just thinking it's going to be a hard sell to southsiders and folks in NE OKC.

Include public transportation and promote it as a 'package deal' and you have a winner even though I believe the items are going to have to be separate ballot issues.

Political realities have to be considered as OKC fanboyism isn't going to do anyone any good whatsoever. At any rate, I'm not going to be part of the effort, except maybe showing up to vote.

[Popsy]

Does anyone have access to the survey numbers. The last numbers I saw showed six people voting for public transportation, which I assumed probably came from members of this forum. Then a day or two after that Steve wrote an article which referenced there being a big demand for public transportation. I would really like to know what the final numbers are if they can be found.

[BDP]

Is this it?:

MAPS 3 | Oklahoma City

[Midtowner]

Here are rough breakdowns of some of the recurring ideas that were submitted, and how many times each was submitted (for space purposes, only ideas submitted at least 10 times are noted):
Suggestion Number
Outdoor Amphitheater 27
Aquarium 13
Youth Athletic Facility 23
Amusement Parks 20
Arts Funding 13
Beautification (includes trees, streetscapes) 117
Community Centers 20
New Convention Center 40
Lengthen Bricktown Canal 29
Cox Center Improvements 11
Downtown Retail 69
Downtown General Improvements 20
Downtown Housing 10
Education 77
Economic Development 20
Fairgrounds 22
Fire Department 11
Ford Center Improvements 41
Football or Soccer Stadium 65
Gateways to City 12
Homeless 27
Health Care 15
Old Neighborhood Restoration 17
Visual Icon 28
Infrastructure, Including Streets 188
More Outdoor Lighting 10
Major League Sports/NBA Practice Facility 40
More Museums 12
Opportunity Fund 16
Omniplex 11
Free Downtown Parking 33
Police 29
Downtown "Central Park" 36
Public Art 11
General Parks Improvement/Expansion 123
More Retail in General 13
Sidewalks 100
New Skyscraper 16
Senior Citizen Centers 36
Senior Citizen Housing 25
Trails 140
Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.) 668
Citywide Wireless Internet 23
Ensure Future Water Supply 10


-- if that's not an indication that public transit needs to be in the package, I don't know what is.

I realize it's a ridiculously unscientific survey, but c'mon. The two things we know are going to be part of Maps II aren't even that far up on the list... and Public transit is far and away #1.

[kevinpate]

If you looked only at those areas garning at least 50 responses, the CC falls well short, but transit, infrastructure and park improvements FAR AND AWAY top the list.

If the deck was stacked, at least it was stacked somewhat sensibly. Something tells me these results were not what was expected

[Midtowner]

If you looked only at those areas garning at least 50 responses, the CC falls well short, but transit, infrastructure and park improvements FAR AND AWAY top the list.

If the deck was stacked, at least it was stacked somewhat sensibly. Something tells me these results were not what was expected

Well, transit and infrastructure were pretty well taken care of in the last big bond election to the tune of $640 million, I believe. I don't think that'll be part of the deal since these projects will likely still be under construction when Maps III goes to the polls.

[okcpulse]

We already have a couple of nice parks which are scantly used. What makes you think a new park which is inconvenient for folks who don't live/work downtown to visit is going to get a lot of use? I'm sure I'll use it as I live/work down here. I'm just thinking it's going to be a hard sell to southsiders and folks in NE OKC.

Include public transportation and promote it as a 'package deal' and you have a winner even though I believe the items are going to have to be separate ballot issues.

Political realities have to be considered as OKC fanboyism isn't going to do anyone any good whatsoever. At any rate, I'm not going to be part of the effort, except maybe showing up to vote.

You're talking about simple parks that are scantly used, and they're scantly used for one reason... they are just a park. Imagine a park that is just as recreational as Lake Hefner, which isn't really a park but is Oklahoma City's must heavily used recreational area. Besides, the concept is otuside the traditional realm of parks and is supposed to serve as the centerpiece for Core To Shore.

That being said, city-wide beautification, a new convention center and better public transit are higher priorities.

[metro]

Why do you think that residents would not use or visit a nice park? That does not make sense to me?? OKC must continue to progress and advance because other cities in the region are adding extra attractions and making their cities more desirable. IMHO if OKC does not "choose" to tax themselves for MAPS 3 then it will probably be the beginning of OKC lapsing into decline, because the city has done great things but it is still far from being a city that can stand on it's own merits. Continue the Renaissance so we people in Dallas or Tulsa for that matter,will not have to bash OKC as being just a plain backwater town. Prove us wrong!

Even if MAPS 3 fails, Tulsa has no room to bash OKC. OKC is still a decade ahead in development of Tulsa.

[metro]

Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.) 668[/B]

-- if that's not an indication that public transit needs to be in the package, I don't know what is.

I realize it's a ridiculously unscientific survey, but c'mon. The two things we know are going to be part of Maps II aren't even that far up on the list... and Public transit is far and away #1.

Keep in mind, while this survey is unscientific, it was NOT the only poll taken on issues facing citizens. The city does an annual survey of a broad spectrum of citizens (about 2,000-3,000) from all different backgrounds and parts of the city, and Mass Transit was at the top of this list for the past 2 years as well. This is where the more scientific data comes in. There is an old thread on this and I belive links to the survey data, etc. Which is also what I believe Lackmeyer based his article on if I'm not mistaken.

[OKCMallen]

WHo in this thread would honestly give up driving more than half the time to utilize light rail? Now think about where you live and where you work, and whether a train would even be close to you. Would you take a bike to the rail if it's not walking distance to your abode?

[metro]

I for one would OKCMallen.

[CuatrodeMayo]

Me, as well.

[Joe Kimball]

Third. Wouldn't there be a transfer available, too, from the bus?

[OKCMallen]

Metro, I don't know where you work, but I know you live close to downtown. Would a train even run over by St. Anthony's? Just wondering....hard to hash it all out since it's all hypothetical

I live around 50th and Shartel. Assuming a rail would run up I-235, I would take the train downtown for leisure, but probably not for work. It would be very easy to walk to the railline for me. But let's say I lived at 36th and May. Doubtful a railline would be within a few miles from me. At that point, what do I do? Do I vote for the train?


For reasons of clarity, if you don't mind, state approx where you live and where you think the rail might be closest to your house/work.

[Richard at Remax]

Since light rail will be the most beneficial to the burbs, is there a way to get cities such as Edmond (my town), yukon, moore, norman, ect in with the vote? I don't know how that would work but I think if you made it a metro wide vote it would be better recieved. And I would vote and use the rail if it came up here.

[OKCMallen]

I'd vote for it regardless...just not sure how much I would use it. I don't want to end up with something that operates constantly in the red that we have to fund because no one uses it...

[sgray]

I would totally use it...goal would be 100%, but everywhere possible. It seems there is still a great deal of confusion because I hear people talking about "getting to the rail". Obviously, buses and other modes make up the arteries of the system and the rail is the backbone that moves a larger bulk of the pax between major areas. Having already used systems in other cities, so long as OKC designed/built the system correctly, it should work just fine as other cities do. If they purposely design it wrong (like Metro Transit), then that will likely force people not to use it.

[Joe Kimball]

If they purposely design it wrong (like Metro Transit), then that will likely force people not to use it.

I certainly don't disbelieve you, as a sometime passenger. But could I ask from where you cite this, be it your experience or something more documented? I'd like to read into this further---thanks!

[sgray]

I certainly don't disbelieve you, as a sometime passenger. But could I ask from where you cite this, be it your experience or something more documented? I'd like to read into this further---thanks!

From a 'documented' perpective, one could start with the route map...that alone reveals a lot. Or the lack of connectivity to the rail/commercial bus lines downtown, the airport, or many other places that a would-be passenger might want to use the system for. Pretty much just enough was kept out or removed from the system to keep a majority of the folks off of it. And the fact that such a spread out city is bus-only...well, that leaves you with the longest transit times from point A to B if you are going a ways across town. Finally, a lot can be done (as evidenced in Metro Transit) to choke a system by cutting off operating funds to below minimums.

I mean seriously, let's say you announce to everyone that you are gonna buy some person a car to get around efficiently (no relation to this topic). Behind the scenes, you hand said individual $200 and say "Ok, now go pick out your car." Shortly thereafter, you make another public announcement that cars are a bad idea because they are unreliable and so no one should buy them. (using the junker you just paid $200 for as proof) Is that really the car, in general, or the manufacturer's fault? That your motive was to purposely buy a junker to alter the outcome? Well, similar situation here. Is it the fault of the buses themselves, or Metro Transit for that matter, that funding is cut so low that it can't even operate the routes it needs? Sure, choke something before it has a chance to succeed and it's gonna die. Period.

From the 'experience' perspective, all you can see is the result: less frequency (slower service), missing routes, and a generally dysfunctional operation.

[metro]

Since light rail will be the most beneficial to the burbs, is there a way to get cities such as Edmond (my town), yukon, moore, norman, ect in with the vote? I don't know how that would work but I think if you made it a metro wide vote it would be better recieved. And I would vote and use the rail if it came up here.

What's to say they aren't working on that, to get burb cities in on the transporation portion of the projects.

[Midtowner]

WHo in this thread would honestly give up driving more than half the time to utilize light rail? Now think about where you live and where you work, and whether a train would even be close to you. Would you take a bike to the rail if it's not walking distance to your abode?

Not an option for me. I have to be able to take clients and myself to and from the courthouse, go file, etc. My time is too valuable to rely on public transit.

[metro]

You have clients and get paid for your time in lawschool? What if you the OCU lawschool moves downtown as intended, while you're still in school? Would you then take a reliable mass transit downtown?