Streetcar

[Hutch]

Larry, we're not ready for a multi-county vote to impliment a multi-jurisdictional transit system, authority, and permanent funding source. It's that simple. If you want to volunteer some time, we'll send you to Moore and Yukon to help organize voters for transit. That's the type of campaign that it would take to see your wish above through.

I don't mean to be sarcastic, but wishing it so doesn't make it so. We got as much for transit as politically possible in Maps. If you could have swayed the Chamber for a smaller Convention Center, or lost some other project, we could gladly use another $150 million on more streetcar, hub, or built bus shelters. But what your describing doesn't fit into the MAPS program and it's structure.

It is propogating a misnomer just like Mr. White tried to do. He now seems to understand that we are working hard to establish THE precedent that will enable broad public support for implementation of the greater multi-city masterplan.

Urban is spot on. The reality of the matter is the only way we'll achieve a great comprehensive transit system, including bus, for the metropolitan area is through establishment of a regional transit authority, district and dedicated funding source, just like DART, Denver RTD or UTA. And the only way to garner the necessary public, political and business support for creating such a mechanism is through rail-based transit as the foundation, which unlike bus transit can gain the support of middle and middle-upper class voters who will use rail transit, as well as political and business interests who understand the economic development opportunities created by rail transit. But before we can get there, we must carefully educate and introduce to those whose support we'll need the value of rail-based transit, which has been gone from the Oklahoma City metropolitan area for more than 50 years. And that is without question the most valuable aspect of the modern streetcar project.

[Tier2City]

Tier2City,

Thanks for that excellent report. I watched the 1/4/2011 meeting earlier today, the part of it where Nick & Jeff spoke and Pete & other council members made comments. I will also follow up on your other suggestions. From the sound of it, you seem to think that the matter (that being, hands off of what was promised voters) is under control. Is that your sense?

Doug – I would indeed say the matter is under control for now. Again, I really do think a lot of positive benefits – at this juncture - have come from the whole conversation.

But the fundamental risks to this and any MAPS 3 project will always be there. The magic number is not $120 million, 6 miles or 7 years and 7 months. It’s five. Five votes by the current City Council at any the time, for potentially the next ten years until the last project is completed.

Here’s a possible challenge for you: Would you be able to do the same thorough analysis that you bought to bear on the MAPS 3 ballot and campaign to the upcoming Council candidate’s positions and general philosophy on MAPS 3?

To expose my ignorance (again), who is Hutch? Doesn't ring a bell.

Hutch, you have some fantastic ideas, and you have obviously put much thought into the possibilities.

Welcome to Okctalk too.

Marion Hutchison is probably "the citizen hub expert." He and OnTrac have been working on this for years. Marion also serves on our Hub Committee.

Marion Hutchison is one of the most tireless, technically informed, and - very importantly - politically astute and politically realistic activists in the central Oklahoma transit advocacy community. As well as considerable work on commuter rail he has recently been putting in a lot of work in on the streetcar.

[PLANSIT]

Urban is spot on. The reality of the matter is the only way we'll achieve a great comprehensive transit system, including bus, for the metropolitan area is through establishment of a regional transit authority, district and dedicated funding source, just like DART, Denver RTD or UTA. And the only way to garner the necessary public, political and business support for creating such a mechanism is through rail-based transit as the foundation, which unlike bus transit can gain the support of middle and middle-upper class voters who will use rail transit, as well as political and business interests who understand the economic development opportunities created by rail transit. But before we can get there, we must carefully educate and introduce to those whose support we'll need the value of rail-based transit, which has been gone from the Oklahoma City metropolitan area for more than 50 years. And that is without question the most valuable aspect of the modern streetcar project.

What an excellent time to plug Central Oklahoma's effort to establish a regional transit dialogue. Phase I is in the books, Phase II will most likely start this year.

Regional Transit Dialogue (RTD)

Thanks Mr. Hutchison!

[Doug Loudenback]

Doug – I would indeed say the matter is under control for now. Again, I really do think a lot of positive benefits – at this juncture - have come from the whole conversation.

But the fundamental risks to this and any MAPS 3 project will always be there. The magic number is not $120 million, 6 miles or 7 years and 7 months. It’s five. Five votes by the current City Council at any the time, for potentially the next ten years until the last project is completed.

Theoretically, if my understanding is correct, the magic number could be as low as three. I think that a quorum of mayor and council is 5, and a majority of the quorum would be 3. Not that such a thing would happen, of course.

Here’s a possible challenge for you: Would you be able to do the same thorough analysis that you bought to bear on the MAPS 3 ballot and campaign to the upcoming Council candidate’s positions and general philosophy on MAPS 3?

If the information is out there and I learn of it, sure. But I don't know how readily such information will be. Probably, not much will be learned from campaign brochures which will doubtless stress family values, conservative labels, support for police & fire, etc. If a candidate would include a statement such as, "I fully support implementation of the MAPS 3 projects exactly as they are identified in the resolution adopted by the city council on [whichever date]," now wouldn't that be something?

If some sort of a network of people could approach the candidates and learn their points of view, and then pool the information, I'd be more than glad to report it. Steve doesn't do political reporting, I don't think.

Marion Hutchison is one of the most tireless, technically informed, and - very importantly - politically astute and politically realistic activists in the central Oklahoma transit advocacy community. As well as considerable work on commuter rail he has recently been putting in a lot of work in on the streetcar.

Thanks, good to know. Hi, Hutch!

[Larry OKC]

Urban and Hutch:

I apologize in advance if some of this seems snarky, but here we go...

One nagging question that I have asked seems to keep getting over looked: what is the maintenance/operations cost on comparative systems (such as bus vs. streetcars). Keep hearing how much cheaper it is, but what is the hard data?

But to get back to your post...I'm not talking about a multi-county proposition and from most of the Mayor's remarks, it didn't sound like he was either. How much of the $394M announced price tag would have been for the multi-county part? According to the Mayor in 2007, which parts of the comprehensive system wouldn't fit into a MAPS format?

Now, the plan includes four distinct methods of public transportation:
Bus Rapid Transit,
Commuter Rail,
Downtown Streetcar, and
Enhanced Bus Service.

One of the earliest reports announcing the unveiling of MAPS 3 stated that commuter rail was included

MAPS 3 will include $130 million for public transit, including five to six miles of downtown streetcar lines, commuter rail lines and a downtown transit hub which will link the streetcar, rail and bus systems.

My reading of that indicated the hub would be a multi-modal one that housed rail, streetcars, Amtrak, City bus and possibly even Greyhound. Gleaning from the Council meeting, Mr. White mentioned that the Streetcar might be going to the existing bus transit center. Wasn't the bus transit center on the spot of the Ballpark and was moved to its current location (or am I thinking of something else?) So I am confused.

What part doesn't fit into the MAPS structure? Are you talking about maintenance/operations? If so, none of the MAPS projects account for those either. The same article that mentioned the $394M price tag, said it would cost $90M/year to operate. How much are the streetcars going to cost to operate and where is that money going to come from?

"...we must carefully educate and introduce to those whose support we'll need the value of rail-based transit..."

Huh? Educate and introduce it to the same 85% that said they wanted a MAPS 3 and the same people that said they wanted "Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.)", more than any other suggestion by a decent margin. Again, the same survey the Mayor often cited for the justification for anything MAPS 3 related? What about the scientific polling the Urban has mentioned that said the Streetcars were the most wanted part (still haven't seen a link or hard data on it either).

Since passage of MAPS 3 dropped down to the same "barely passing" 54% of the original MAPS, how well did that "education" work?

Now to get back to an earlier question I had, by delaying the implementation of the comprehensive system, what is the projected escalated price tag going to be? Just look at the 7.5 times increase in the cost of downtown streetcars in the original MAPS and now. As I asked in the earlier post, what was reported as costing the $274M balance could easily cost over $2 BILLION by then. Seems like it would be a much easier sell to raise $294M (roughly 3 years of a penny tax) than $2 billion+ (22+ years).

I understand the Chamber probably threw their support mainly due to the Convention Center and that was most likely going to be included in MAPS 3 no matter what. But instead of including the comprehensive system the Mayor often spoke of/what the respondents said they wanted, which would effect the entire city (much like MAPS for Kids transformed EVERY school in the Metro and many surrounding districts), they traded what would appear to be near universal support for pet projects to roughly equate the same areas of the city.

These are the things the Mayor consistently stated would be included in MAPS 3 (and just 3 days before MAPS 3 was unveiled), this is what I fully expected to be on the Ballot:
• "public transit improvements" ($394M)
• "a new convention center" ($280M
• "a large downtown park" ($130M)
For a total of $804M or an 8 year, penny sales tax. Nearly identical to the 7.75 span with MAPS 3.

Foreshadowing the other projects he added: "I expect there to be more projects, but the bulk of it is going to be those three,” He expects? He didn't know just 3 days before it was announced what was in there? That aside, if it was decided for political purposes to include the other projects, fine, then it would have been a 10.75 year tax instead. But again, they appear to have traded something that would have effected the whole City for some projects that may/may not. Maybe there was a resistance to go with a 10 year tax and maybe even resistance to an 8 year one (so that may be why we have a 7.75 year). But again, if part of the comprehensive plan included a multi-county element, that amount would be taken out and would shorten the tax.

One thing that I noticed in Mr. White's remarks at Council was that he was never a supporter of the DT streetcars, it was only when $10M was thrown in the mix for the hub that he decided to support the $120M (for something he stated he didn't support). Interesting.

[Kerry]

"Streetcars operate on electric lines, not fossil fuels so they are better for our environment and air quality." And how is the electricity generated (in OKC, isn't that primarily from fossil fuels)? During 2009, in the U.S., 69% is from fossil fuels (coal = 45%; natural gas = 23%; petro = 1%) Is it more efficient to use the fossil fuels to generate the electricity (streetcars) or direct fuel (buses) ...may balance the increased capacity component?

They are looking at using Wind power for the streetcars.

[Doug Loudenback]

Here are videos containing the audio of pertinent remarks made as follows:

City Council, January 4, 2011
Comments by Nick Roberts, Jeff Bezdek, Pete White, Sam Bowman & Skip Kelly


City Council, January 18, 2011
Comments by Larry McAtee & Pete White ... Pete appears to back off


Maps Advisory/Oversight , Committee Meeting on January 27, 2011
Comments by Larry McAtee ... says the council is committed to the modern streetcar project; notes the possibility of misunderstanding because of earlier comments by unnamed person(s)



Thanks Nick & Tier2City for pointing me in the right direction.

[Doug Loudenback]

Do you mean what he said on January 18? If he spoke publicly on the 27th, I'm not aware ... please educate me.

Sid, I've got very high opinions of Pete most of the time. But his remarks, had they been pursued by him or someone else would have had a disastrous effect not only upon street cars but the entirety of the MAPS process. It's not a matter of believing or disbelieving what anyone has to say ABOUT Pete, it's about what he spoke himself. No one was putting words into his mouth.

[Urban Pioneer]

RESPONSE TO LARRY

What is the maintenance/operations cost on comparative systems (such as bus vs. streetcars). Keep hearing how much cheaper it is, but what is the hard data?

As a general rule of thumb, streetcars cost less than buses to operate as seen over and over again in various cities where the two are compared. We are about to embark on a technical estimate of what the exact cost is (via the consultants) for our own city.


But to get back to your post...I'm not talking about a multi-county proposition and from most of the Mayor's remarks, it didn't sound like he was either. How much of the $394M announced price tag would have been for the multi-county part? According to the Mayor in 2007, which parts of the comprehensive system wouldn't fit into a MAPS format?

Now, the plan includes four distinct methods of public transportation:
Bus Rapid Transit,
Commuter Rail,
Downtown Streetcar, and
Enhanced Bus Service.

The only elements that council, mayor, city manager, felt they could (and would be willing) to afford is the streetcar, hub facility, and some permanent commuter rail improvements as recommended by the MAPS subcommittee.

Off the top of my head, BRT along NW Expressway and "enhanced" bus routes were the only elements that fall within our city limits. All the other commuter rail and BRT elements were inter-jurisdictional. This does not include the Adventure Line. It was not included in the FGS of which you are referring most of your comments from.


One of the earliest reports announcing the unveiling of MAPS 3 stated that commuter rail was included:

MAPS 3 will include $130 million for public transit, including five to six miles of downtown streetcar lines, commuter rail lines and a downtown transit hub which will link the streetcar, rail and bus systems.

Pete White helped obtain $10 million in the package for a transit hub geared primarily towards making commuter rail connections to start. The $10 million was also generally considered flex funds to help make those connections through improved commuter rail infrastructure to be advised by MAPS transit subcommittee. Mr. White has indicated that he would like to see us ultimately have a hub at which all major relevant transit connections are made.


My reading of that indicated the hub would be a multi-modal one that housed rail, streetcars, Amtrak, City bus and possibly even Greyhound. Gleaning from the Council meeting, Mr. White mentioned that the Streetcar might be going to the existing bus transit center. Wasn't the bus transit center on the spot of the Ballpark and was moved to its current location (or am I thinking of something else?) So I am confused.

My reading the above statement doesn't suggest that at all. However, it is our intention to figure out how to build capacity for all relevant transit connections in the facility as funds allow.


What part doesn't fit into the MAPS structure? Are you talking about maintenance/operations? If so, none of the MAPS projects account for those either. The same article that mentioned the $394M price tag, said it would cost $90M/year to operate. How much are the streetcars going to cost to operate and where is that money going to come from?


The early estimate for streetcar operation that was suggested by the consultants was between $3.2 and $4.5 million per year. It was the smallest estimated operational cost for an entire system within the overall planned future system. The council felt comfortable that they could find the ongoing funds enough to move forward with including it in MAPS. Some possible mechanisms for funding that have been discussed include discontinuing the "rubber tired trolleys" downtown specifically, on board and stop advertising, BID funds, special assessment mechanisms, fare collection, and absorption into the annual budget.


"...we must carefully educate and introduce to those whose support we'll need the value of rail-based transit..."
Huh? Educate and introduce it to the same 85% that said they wanted a MAPS 3 and the same people that said they wanted "Transit (light rail, streetcars, etc.)", more than any other suggestion by a decent margin. Again, the same survey the Mayor often cited for the justification for anything MAPS 3 related?

I can't speak for the Mayor and won't. But the online poll cited is unscientific. If it were even relevant, it only really speaks to OKC voters. I can assure you that a vote covering several counties and area cities to provide a permanent funding mechanism for ongoing operations would require broad support cannot be compared to the statement above in any real context.


What about the scientific polling the Urban has mentioned that said the Streetcars were the most wanted part (still haven't seen a link or hard data on it either).

The polling information that I have is privileged. It is critical information that I will not release nor do I have the authority to release. I do not own it. I can refer to it in general terms and have, to reassure people.

Feel free to criticize my unwillingness to make it available, but I think I have a stellar track record of being honest with people. My presence on this blog is evidence of that. For that matter, I think that the three of us who are formally placed on the committees who do blog, sends a signal that we care about factual information getting out. I don't know if anyone else on the other MAPS subcommittee's blog. Not to use a Doug Loudenbeck line, but "Trust Us." We're one of you.



Since passage of MAPS 3 dropped down to the same "barely passing" 54% of the original MAPS, how well did that "education" work?

It worked pretty well in light of real organized opposition.


Now to get back to an earlier question I had, by delaying the implementation of the comprehensive system, what is the projected escalated price tag going to be? Just look at the 7.5 times increase in the cost of downtown streetcars in the original MAPS and now. As I asked in the earlier post, what was reported as costing the $274M balance could easily cost over $2 BILLION by then. Seems like it would be a much easier sell to raise $294M (roughly 3 years of a penny tax) than $2 billion+ (22+ years).

That is infrastructure "raw cost". It doesn't take into account Federal Funding by which the brunt of most Regional Systems are paid for. Yes, it has and will become more expensive with time. That's too bad. Nothing that I or any of us can do about it individually. It will take collective leadership of area city governments.


These are the things the Mayor consistently stated would be included in MAPS 3 (and just 3 days before MAPS 3 was unveiled), this is what I fully expected to be on the Ballot:
• "public transit improvements" ($394M)
• "a new convention center" ($280M
• "a large downtown park" ($130M)
For a total of $804M or an 8 year, penny sales tax. Nearly identical to the 7.75 span with MAPS 3.

Foreshadowing the other projects he added: "I expect there to be more projects, but the bulk of it is going to be those three,” He expects? He didn't know just 3 days before it was announced what was in there? That aside, if it was decided for political purposes to include the other projects, fine, then it would have been a 10.75 year tax instead. But again, they appear to have traded something that would have effected the whole City for some projects that may/may not. Maybe there was a resistance to go with a 10 year tax and maybe even resistance to an 8 year one (so that may be why we have a 7.75 year). But again, if part of the comprehensive plan included a multi-county element, that amount would be taken out and would shorten the tax.

I think that you are "meshing" comments made at different times for different purposes into something that MAPS transit was never going to be. I don't ever remember the mayor ever putting the FGS 2005 price tag of $394 million out there. However, he serves as the Chairman of the RTD referred to above by Plansit (Regional Transit Dialogue) which aims to organize leadership support of central Oklahoma regional cities for a comprehensive implementation of the FGS. He has made comments about this in general contexts in many of his speeches. But he has never insinuated that MAPS would pay for it with transit improvements outside of our city limits as the $394 million is relevant to.

What I have said over and over again is that this is the START of the implementation of that larger plan as it is the centerpiece of the FGS system plan; along with the hub.


One thing that I noticed in Mr. White's remarks at Council was that he was never a supporter of the DT streetcars, it was only when $10M was thrown in the mix for the hub that he decided to support the $120M (for something he stated he didn't support). Interesting.

I think that perspective may rapidly be changing as he attend our meetings and now consults the people in the trenches. his comments caused a "bit of chaos", but they have actually "helped." They have made us more focused and more aggressive at getting done. More people are becoming re-educated as to why we are doing it the way we are doing it.

[Doug Loudenback]

Corrrected version of 1/18/2011 Council Meeting Excerpts -- McAtee & White

[Hutch]

Tier2...appreciate the comments.

Plansit...you're welcome.

I'm just one of many trying to move rail transit forward...it will take all of us and more working together over many years to get us where we need to go.

Doug...hello to you too...thanks for your efforts to inform the masses.

Larry...ditto Urban's follow-up...and to re-emphasize a few things:

1) The $394 million capital costs and $90 million annual operating costs you keep referring to in numerous posts are estimated cost figures directly from the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study, which is a regional system plan for the entire Oklahoma City metropolitan area.

2) I have never heard the Mayor or any other city official state or even insinuate that the regional system plan proposed under the Fixed Guideway Study should be fully paid for and implemented by Oklahoma City under MAPS 3.

3) MAPS 3 passed with just 54% of the vote. There's no question that between now and when the time comes for a single ballot proposition for a permanent dedicated regional transit funding source that additional public education will be requied.

4) The Intermodal Transit Hub Study being conducted by Jacobs Engineering on behalf of ACOG will make recommendatioins for a hub facility designed to effectively service and connect all transit and transportation modes for the next 30 years...commuter rail, high-speed rail, Amtrak, modern streetcar, bus rapid tranist, enhanced bus, regular bus, bicycle, pedestrian.

[Spartan]

It seems plausible that streetcar would have had a wider margin if it wasn't attached to highly unpopular projects like the convention center. Just talking from a voter standpoint, not from what's best for the city...

[Larry OKC]

Urban & Hutch

Thank you for the replies. I know that at times it seems we are on opposite ends of this dialog but it seems we are in agreement about a lot of things. Just not the specifics or the interpretation.

I didn't mean to imply that either of you are trying to hide information. Just that it has been asked for before and not answered previously (again, think it gets lost along the way for the most part)

I think that you are "meshing" comments made at different times for different purposes into something that MAPS transit was never going to be.

Indeed, that was a summation of the many speeches and articles where the Mayor has spoken about such MAPS 3 things. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a place where it has all been compiled in a neat, tidy organized format, so the info has to be pieced together. Usually try to stick with what an individual actually said (rather than what they didn't say or try to read between the lines type of thing). The items I did mention that were in quotes (not necessarily direct quotes of the Mayor), but the wording in the article that came out 3 days before MAPS 3 was announced and attributed to the Mayor). It aligned with what the Mayor had previously stated. Here is the text from the article:

The proposal will include public transit improvements, a new convention center and a large downtown park, Cornett said.
"I expect there to be more projects, but the bulk of it is going to be those three,” he said.
...
Whether those transit improvements will include better bus service, light rail, a modern streetcar or some combination of the three will be among the details city officials release at a news conference within two weeks, Cornett said. The cost of the proposal and length of the sales tax also will be announced.

I don't think I am alone in the interpretation of the expectation of the comprehensive plan. Seems that the writer was thinking along the same lines. While we discovered that enhanced bus service was no longer included, an article describing the announcement, indicated that other elements were still included (not just the streetcars). Here is the text from that article (same writer):

MAPS 3 will include $130 million for public transit, including five to six miles of downtown streetcar lines, commuter rail lines and a downtown transit hub which will link the streetcar, rail and bus systems.

The foreshadowing of it not being the comprehensive plan that the Mayor had spoke of previously and had started to back off of is certainly there. But again, he didn't know at that late date what the details were? Three days before it was announced? The City had been working on MAPS 3 back when Humphreys was still Mayor and MAPS for Kids and just passed. Not inconceivable, but still amazing that things weren't finalized at that point. Considering that the City had bought themselves another 12 to 15 months on MAPS 3 with the passage of the Ford tax.
Sorry if that wasn't clear, but believe it or not was trying to edit things down from the 25 page dissertation that my simple post had grown into. Hard for me to believe I had such a hard time coming up with word counts back in high school & college days. LOL

I don't ever remember the mayor ever putting the FGS 2005 price tag of $394 million out there.

True, that was not the Mayor's number that I know of, but from an 11/5/08 Oklahoman article where a presentation was given before Council? Unfortunately I don't have the complete article as it is archived, so rely mainly on the teaser paragraph the Oklahoman now provides. Can't recall who gave the presentation or what entity they were with. Here is the blurb where I got the $394M amount:

Oklahoma City's mass transit overhaul comes with a big price
BY BRYAN DEAN
Oklahoma City ’s mass transit plan isn’t the problem. It’s the money.
Metro Transit spent 18 months studying public transportation options, which included public forums.
The resulting plan included better bus service, commuter rail, a modern streetcar for the downtown area and bus rapid transit, which is a hybrid between bus and rail.
Total price tag: $394 million to build and $90 million a...

[Larry OKC]

It seems plausible that streetcar would have had a wider margin if it wasn't attached to highly unpopular projects like the convention center. Just talking from a voter standpoint, not from what's best for the city...

I agree completely, and think that a Mass Transit proposition (possibly subdivided into the individual components so we could actually determine what voters did/did not want) would have passed overwhelmingly. Think most of the MAPS 3 projects would have passed easily with various percentages.

Firmly believe (and the scientific polling that the Gazette published, and the internal Chamber memo) showed that the C.C. would have failed. While I didn't believe the numbers the Chamber stated with the C.C. (think they are over inflated, just as their MAPS investment numbers were heavily inflated), I actually supported the new C.C. because it is primarily NEW money being brought into the economy by tourists/visitors and not the reallocation of current spending within the City (say from Memorial to Downtown). Then their was the spin, half-truths and out right lies they posted in their "Facts" website about the C.C. in particular. But I digress <sigh>

[Urban Pioneer]

Pete. LIKE THE NEW TRANSPORTATION SUB-CATEGORY!

[Spartan]

Well, Larry, the convention center is what it is. Gonna be a Tier 2 City...that is good. What it takes is some selling out. I don't believe it will pay for itself in terms of tangible dollar amounts, but it will pay for itself in terms of having a quality city asset, hopefully an asset to Bricktown, and I know for a fact about several hotel developers who are currently in flux waiting to see where it gets built. So that will be some good development.

[Doug Loudenback]

Two Tea Party candidates have announced for the non-partisan city council election. In Ward 6, incumbent Meg Salyer is challenged by Adrian Van Manen. In Ward 8, incumbent Patrick Ryan is challenged by Clifford Hearron.

Gwin Faulconer Lippert interviewed both on January 28 for her KTOK radio show which aired on January 30. Excerpts are presented here, those dealing with the candidates' thoughts about MAPS 3. Both candidates had comments about the streetcar as well as MAPS 3 generally.



For the full interviews, go to http://www.ktok.com/cc-common/podcast.html and locate Gwin Faulconer Lippert's podcasts for January 30, 2011.

[Larry OKC]

I agree with the comment that MAPS should be about permanency, that something should last 30 or so years...think he mentioned people not worrying about if the library would be moved...I laughed when I heard it because it immediately brought to mind the Ford Center, how it was intended to be a long term, permanent structure (just as the Cox has been a long term facility w/improvements along the way) yet the Mayor openly talked about REPLACING the Ford (at that point it wasn't even 5 years old). Hopefully with the upgrades we will get at least another 5 years out of it before that kind of talk starts up again.

[Doug Loudenback]

Article on MAPS 3, including but not limited to streetcar: http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2011/01...g-earnest.html

[HOT ROD]

you want to stay ahead of the curve and not take the approach Seattle took. .....

[Larry OKC]

Hot Rod: want to elaborate?

[Kerry]

Hot Rod: want to elaborate?

Not to speak for HotRod, but Seattle just kept adding lanes of freeways and they finally got to the point where they couldn't do that anymore. Now they have to spend billions to put in streetcars, lightrail, and bus rapid transit when they could have done it 20 years ago and saved the billion. Correct my if I am wrong HotRod but isn't Seattle on the hook for like $5 billion to pay for mass transit? In the meantime Seattle has to live with all the congestion. Once you get behind the curve you have to work twice as hard to get in front of it again. That is true with anything.

[Urban Pioneer]

you want to stay ahead of the curve and not take the approach Seattle took. .....

Yes. What do you mean about this?

[PLANSIT]

Not to speak for HotRod, but Seattle just kept adding lanes of freeways and they finally got to the point where they couldn't do that anymore. Now they have to spend billions to put in streetcars, lightrail, and bus rapid transit when they could have done it 20 years ago and saved the billion. Correct my if I am wrong HotRod but isn't Seattle on the hook for like $5 billion to pay for mass transit? In the meantime Seattle has to live with all the congestion. Once you get behind the curve you have to work twice as hard to get in front of it again. That is true with anything.

Actually, it's closer to $18 billion over 15 years via a 2008 vote.

Source

[warreng88]

Consultants suggest BT as top spot for transit hub:

A convergence of improvements to public transportation — some real, some only hoped for — have planners circling downtown Oklahoma City trying to pinpoint the best site for an intermodal transit station.

The MAPS 3 ballot approved by voters in 2009 includes an estimated $10 million for a transit hub to serve a new $120 million streetcar system. Consultants working with the city and the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments say the metro area has one shot at picking a spot that could spur economic development throughout the region.

Read the rest of the article at:
http://newsok.com/consultants-sugges...#ixzz1D9YHnToF