Streetcar

[Doug Loudenback]

My work schedule has so far prevented me from attending any of the live events. My involvement is limited to taking the online surveys and writing City Hall. I would encourage all those that can attend the "live" meetings to do so and maybe they can pass along some of the concerns expressed here.

Larry, Larry, Larry ... each of the meetings have had sessions beginning at 6 pm (1st had a pair, one midday, other at 6 pm which is the case with the upcoming final meeting, as well). Do you work nights?

If not, you might be able to make the last, on May 27. If you can, I look forward to meeting you.

[Platemaker]

It would have been great for the writers of the several preceding comments to have participated in the LetsTalkTransit meetings, with a final meeting (twice on the same day) yet to occur.

ME TOO!!! But what's a service industry guy to do?!?!?

[Doug Loudenback]

Platemaker, did 6 - 7:30 p.m. not work for you?

[Platemaker]

If I'm being honest... a weekday between 11am and 8pm is pretty much out of the question for me! LOL

My excuse aside I DO think more people could have shown interest by being present.

[betts]

I would have been there had I could. Too many pressing family concerns made it impossible for me. I'm going to try to make the May 27th one, but might end up having to miss it for the same reason I missed the others.

[Urban Pioneer]

Just a couple of reminders, the next public meetings are a week from today (next Thursday May 27th) in City Council Chambers. One is at 11:30 AM and one at 6:00 PM.

If I had an opinion about what is the most important undecided question pressing the project right now, I would say it is whether we should double track a key northbound street or spread a northbound alignment over several streets. One street is north, one street is south (a compressed loop). And that fundamental question depends a great deal on your personal belief as to how much density a streetcar line can generate.

The ULI folks think that in a city such as ours, you should only pick a few areas as TOD's (Transit Oriented Developments) and gravitate towards developable "fabric", not empty lots. So, Midtown is a tough call if you believe that as well.

The streets that are of issue are Walker, Hudson, Robinson, and Broadway.

Harvey is intrinsically questionable because it runs into Devon's superblock.

Rick Dowell opposes overhead wires on Walker and is going to fight it every step of the way, although he is fine with it on Hudson.

The 2007 bond issue provides for traffic circles on 9th/Hudson and 8th/Harvey. They are not insurmountable but may require larger circles than the existing one at 10th to deal with the turning radius.

Robinson is a quiet street through Midtown and narrower.

Finally, I have been involved in this a while. I want this thing to work "out of the box."

I believe that the streetcar will be a fundamental catalyst for density. However, if the people who own the vast swaths of vacant land in Midtown "don't get it", will people who do buy them out and build the kind of activity to support a streetcar?

So with all of this said, what do you think?

I would encourage you to post on here and also copy paste your comments also on the Let's Talk Transit website Dean Schirf blog as well if you want to have information directly collated and included in the input process.

Open Mic Night - Option 1, 2 or 3? | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho

[betts]

I don't understand the opposition to overhead wires on a commercial street, personally. It just adds to the urban appeal. And to me, Walker is a more logical street for the streetcar, especially given how it will ultimately connect with Core to Shore. But I think Harvey would work, although not as well. I agree that the streetcar will be a tremendous catalyst for density, and that's one of the reasons why I like Walker. I think that street will pop with development, given all that open land. Maybe it will take a new generation of owners, but I feel pretty confident it will happen.

I can see the benefit of using Robinson north and Harvey south (as outlined in plan number one in Doug's photobucket), as that eliminates the necessity of riding the loop to go both directions for part of the line. In essence the 8th and 4th street loop does the same thing, and I can definitely see the benefit of that. I like the idea of using two different streets more than a doubletrack on a single street because it makes the line very close, no matter where you are downtown, and I think that would increase people's likelihood of riding. It just feels more accessible.

It's hard for me to think of the street car not going down Broadway, however. That would take some getting used to, as I always thought of it as one of the primary streets for the line.

[Larry OKC]

NO traffic circles!

[rcjunkie]

NO traffic circles!

Traffic circles work great and can actually improve the flow of traffic---if you know how to drive.

[Larry OKC]

LOL...That is the key, remember where we live.

IMO, as a result they are dangerous, take up more land etc. Have not personally witnessed them being anything but an accident waiting to happen and have seen them snarl traffic more than they help.

When they decided to put the traffic circle back in the St. Anthony area, there was a quote to the effect "Due to advancements in technology, they are much safer"

What technology?

[soonerguru]

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

[Rover]

Traffic circles are used very successfully all over the world and don't necessarily create accidents. It avoids stopping every few blocks at a stop where people still ignore the traffic laws (roll through stop, don't go in the proper sequence, etc.) If you are an aware and courteous driver then traffic circles are great. If you are a jerk or ignorant of right of ways then you will have trouble in any intersection.

[CuatrodeMayo]

LOL...That is the key, remember where we live.

IMO, as a result they are dangerous, take up more land etc. Have not personally witnessed them being anything but an accident waiting to happen and have seen them snarl traffic more than they help.

I have worked right on the circle @ 10th & Walker for 2 years and have never witnessed an accident. Nor had I witnessed traffic backing up. But I have heard an occasional honk for ignorant drivers. =)

[CuatrodeMayo]

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

Keep in mind the bus terminal is on Hudson. If there is anything a modern transit system needs, it's connectivity.

Also, what happens when the streetcar gets to the circle in Midtown?

I would propose a route that travels north on Broadway, west on 10th, then south on Hudson.

[betts]

I hadn't thought about the bus station. You are right, the streetcar really should connect with the bus station, if the bus station is going to stay there for the long term. If it's planned to disappear when we create a transit hub elsewhere, then I would worry about the long term and not the short term, especially since the line would only be a block away anyway were it to run down Walker.

I'd really love to keep a line on 4th street, but that's probably because I live on 3rd. It's easy to be enthusiasti about 4th Street and Broadway because it would benefit me. I probably need to defer to those who have a less vested interest.

[Platemaker]

[B]The 2007 bond issue provides for traffic circles on 9th/Hudson and 8th/Harvey. They are not insurmountable but may require larger circles than the existing one at 10th to deal with the turning radius.

I totally forgot about this. Hopefully this plan moves forward. If so we may have better options for the streetcar route.



Check this out... potential spokes! Looks like a real transit map to me!

[okclee]

How many miles of track does that plan total?

[Urban Pioneer]

I hadn't thought about the bus station. You are right, the streetcar really should connect with the bus station, if the bus station is going to stay there for the long term. If it's planned to disappear when we create a transit hub elsewhere, then I would worry about the long term and not the short term, especially since the line would only be a block away anyway were it to run down Walker.

I have been generally been told that the bus station is not going anywhere as it is such new infrastructure. The new hub that is being studied is indeed a multi-modal hub. One of the challenges of compressing local bus service into a new facility is the extreme surface parking area that would be necessary to handle both local city buses and Bus Rapid Transit or commuter buses.

And if Santa Fe is destined to potentially be that location, the surface area for bus service is questionable.

In anything that we do, it is important that those linkages exist between our bus system and commuter hub if we are to "grow transit ridership" and service those who use it more effectively.

One other thing that often gets overlooked in the broad discussion is that our existing city buses make additional stops on their way into downtown to service downtown. According to Rick Cain, those additional stops will not be necessary as the streetcar will take on this new roll. So service will slightly improve on those routes just by the nature of this new system.

[Urban Pioneer]

That is tremendously disappointing to hear about Rick Dowell. What is his problem with the wires? Aesthetic? Walker is really the street that should have the streetcar, IMO. It is the most obvious north/south street. Can Mr. Dowell's opinion be swayed? It's sad to think one person could have so much influence.

Part of it is aesthetic. According to him though, the bigger part of it is he doesn't want himself or his tenants to deal with Walker dug up again. They recently renovated that street. He is fighting 180 as well. The way he sees it, they just went through it.

[Platemaker]

How many miles of track does that plan total?

That's more than 6.... but it could start like this (less than six miles of double track)

I think it's more important to plan for expansion than tho take our 5-6 miles and simply to to spread it out in a random fashion.

[PLANSIT]

First off, they are proposing roundabouts, which are typically smaller than traffic circles and entering traffic must yield to traffic already in the circle. Traffic circles are usually larger and traffic in the circle most often must yield to cars entering the circle.

Secondly, roundabouts/traffic circles are great for cars. They reduce the number of conflict points, significantly decreasing accidents.


But, what about pedestrians? No dedicated signal, no requirement to stop. If they get busy enough it's like running a gauntlet. Something to keep in mind when we design true pedestrian oriented places. I've seen hybrid signaled/roundabouts intersections and am curious to see if they help solve that potential problem.

[CuatrodeMayo]

But, what about pedestrians? No dedicated signal, no requirement to stop. If they get busy enough it's like running a gauntlet. Something to keep in mind when we design true pedestrian oriented places. I've seen hybrid signaled/roundabouts intersections and am curious to see if they help solve that potential problem.

I've never had a problem navigating across the currnt traffic circle on foot. They way the street connect will the circle means you never have to cross more than one lane of traffic at a time. Also, the vast majority of vehicles slow to nearly a stop at they approach the circle, making it easier to yield to pedestrians.

Strangely enough, the fact that people here are unfamiliar with and afraid of traffic circles works on the side of safety. As motorist approach the circle, they tend to be much more cautious and aware of what's going on due to the perceived threat of collision.

[Urban Pioneer]

Well, from what I have observed living over here, the traffic circle at 10th is much better solution from the 5 street intersection. I remember literally fearing for my life one time at the old intersection.

Regarding streetcar though, having it go around a circle probably is a bit more than a small one can handle.

[Larry OKC]

I have worked right on the circle @ 10th & Walker for 2 years and have never witnessed an accident. Nor had I witnessed traffic backing up. But I have heard an occasional honk for ignorant drivers. =)

The City even said when the removed them that they were dangerous (thus the odd statement when they decided to put some back in: "due to technology, they are much safer now".

If they were dangerous before, what technology changed that? Its a traffic circle...

[Larry OKC]

Well, from what I have observed living over here, the traffic circle at 10th is much better solution from the 5 street intersection. I remember literally fearing for my life one time at the old intersection.

Regarding streetcar though, having it go around a circle probably is a bit more than a small one can handle.

There is definitely a problem when you come to those multi street intersections (sometimes hard to tell which set of lights is yours). Maybe eliminate the 5th street? Diverting it into one of the other 4 before it gets there?