MAPS 3 approaching...

[Midtowner]

C'mon man... the bus system was never adequate. They ran it into the ground in order to force widespread adoption of the automobile. The intent was never to run a successful bus operation.

[BPD]

First you say that it was never adequate. Then you say that it was run into the ground. Which is it that you allege?

[Midtowner]

I don't see how those statements are contradictory in the least. The system was designed to fail, thus inadequate.

[Mr Big]

A light rail? Its simply not needed. Forbes ranks us as one of the best cities in the nation for commuters. Best And Worst Cities For Commuters - Forbes.com Anyone who has traveled to other metros, knows this to be true. Because we are a horizontal city, versus a vertical city, its not possible for rail to be more convenient than car (see L.A.). At this point in time, a light rail is a complete waste of money. There's nothing wrong with taking a peak at what we might need in 20-40 years from now, but given that our traffic situation is one of the best in the country, any serious consideration for immediate application is just foolish.

We also need to consider that many cities have found when you connect low-income areas to higher-income areas for a buck for the ride, crime ends up costing them millions. In most cities, suburbs are actively campaigning and demanding that the light rails are NOT brought into their communities. They cannot afford to be robbed, the eventual rise in insurance, and they don't like their loved ones exposed to violent in-person crimes.

[BPD]

This sounds to me like vintage conspiracy theory.

[Superhyper]

I don't see how those statements are contradictory in the least. The system was designed to fail, thus inadequate.

I don't know if I would say it was designed to fail, but it certainly was not designed to succeed.....

[SouthsideSooner]

C'mon man... the bus system was never adequate. They ran it into the ground in order to force widespread adoption of the automobile. The intent was never to run a successful bus operation.

Nobody had to "force" widespread adoption of the automobile and to suggest otherwise is just ridiculous. This is from the link that YOU posted....

Randall O'Toole of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, argues that streetcars faded away at the invention of the internal combustion engine and rise of the private automobile and then the bus. At one time, nearly every city in the U.S. with population over 10,000 had at least one streetcar company. 95% of all streetcar systems were at one time privately owned.

Robert C. Post wrote that "nationwide, the ultimate reach of the alleged conspirators extended to only about 10 percent of all transit systems—sixty-odd out of some six hundred—and yet virtually all the other 90 percent also got rid of trolleys (as happened with all the tramcar systems in the British Isles and France)."

[bombermwc]

And who thinks that this wasn't common in every American city? Street cars were pulled out all over the country because their use was overtaken by the auto. A bus was and continues to be a more flexible transportation tool because it doesn't rely on tracks. It's route can be altered and the vehicle updated without having to meet specific requirements that the rail cars do/did.

There's no conspiracy or mystery about why or how it happened. In the 40's and 50's, we came back from WWII and everyone wanted a car. The boom of the families required a car for each family beacuse the sprawl of housing outpaced the ability of the rail line to keep up. Yet another reason why the busses took over...they could add a route overnight without any physical changes.

Yes many of the rail companies were bought by various groups around the country...many of them so they could kill the brand. You forget we still do that today. So what?

Now, back in the 50's if OKC had a non-sprawling population even half of what we have now, we'd probably still have rail cars and Grand Blvd would still loop the city. But it's not the case. Our bus system sucks and is completely worthless. But do we really know if a rail system that is stuck once put in, would be any better? I'm not sure that we have the population or the density yet to sustain it. If we infilled and didn't sprawl any more than we are now, but hit the 2M mark, maybe I'd see it otherwise, but I've become pretty cold on the light rail concept. Not because I don't want it, but because I think it will fail here.

People are fat and lazy here. If the rail doesnt take them within a parking lot of where they need to be, they'll still take the car. Hell people take their car from one end of a shopping center to the other, you really think they're gonna walk a few blocks after the leave a train station?

[warreng88]

I wonder if the people that complain that there is "no place to park in Bricktown" are the same people that will complain that the streetcar/rail/bus doesn't go right by or in front of whatever they are going to?

I live at 21st and May and work at 122nd and May. If there was a bus/rail/streetcar that could get me from one to the other in about 30-45 minutes, was reliable, and was only a quarter mile off, I would take it, but if not, I might only take it to BT/DT. JMHO