Streetcar

[Tier2City]

I read your articles often. Your coverage of the streetcar has not been up to the standards of your other work. How many of the subcommittee meetings have you attended? I'm sorry, but your efforts in this regard have been beneath your standards. Also, you seem to have an issue with Jeff.

I'm sorry to have to add it, but how many of the five Alternatives Analysis Steering Committee and the two AA Ad Hoc Working Group meetings have you been to, Steve?

[Kerry]

After hearing that the objection from some of the Devon folks with the streetcar was with the "vibrations" I started to worry about alternative intentions. A quick amount of research and reading of other noise and vibration studies done surrounding streetcars have all yielded evidence there are no risks nor are special mitigation efforts needed.

I laughed when I heard Devon say that. Do they have any idea how old some of the building in Europe are that have streetcars running right in front of them 100 times a day? I actually felt sorry for the person that raised such a ridiculous question. And it isn’t like the building isn’t on a major thoroughfare with an 850’ tower under construction right next door.

I’ll bet you one million dollars if the previous owners of the Colcord had opposed construction of Devon Tower over ‘foundation cracking’ concerns Devon would have been able to produce study after study after study saying vibrations would not be a problem.

[betts]

Precisely. If vibrations are an issue, they need to close Robinson to all truck traffic and construction of the Devon Tower should never have begun. I remember having dinner at La Baguette when the Tower was first being constructed. I heard some of the most ungodly banging and crashing noises while there. I think it would take a month of streetcar vibration to equal what I heard that night. I think we need to send a bunch of these people on a field trip to Portland to ride the streetcar, as there is so much ignorance on this subject among people who have the opportunity to influence opinion.

[Urban Pioneer]

Ok Steve. Here is a question that you should ask that I can't answer that is totally relevant to P180.

I just received the email updating P180 announcing the beginning the Project around the National Memorial seen via this link:

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact....k_58o_bg%3D%3D

1st Question: Will the MAPS 3 Transit Advisory Committee's route recommendation cause for integration of streetcar equipment allowances and utility relocation on the Robinson "rail spine" considering that construction is set to begin and council has not ratified the committee's recommendation yet?

(Assuming that it is approved by the Oversight Board, it goes to council on March 29th.)

2nd Question: How do you know what provisions to make if an engineer has not been hired yet? Where do the specs come from?


We have done our part to accommodate and inform the P180 process. Now it really is up to the city to preserve taxpayer funds by making allowances for utilities, stops, and actual rail to be installed later.

[Urban Pioneer]

For those engineers and contractors reading this thread, we will be on the east side of the street headed northbound on Robinson.

A later, future, presumably Federally Funded line is conceived to be on the north side of the street on 4th headed Westbound.

Major intersection of rail lines at 4th/Robinson.

[Spartan]

Precisely. If vibrations are an issue, they need to close Robinson to all truck traffic and construction of the Devon Tower should never have begun. I remember having dinner at La Baguette when the Tower was first being constructed. I heard some of the most ungodly banging and crashing noises while there. I think it would take a month of streetcar vibration to equal what I heard that night. I think we need to send a bunch of these people on a field trip to Portland to ride the streetcar, as there is so much ignorance on this subject among people who have the opportunity to influence opinion.

Well, I think they meant the laying the tracks in front of the Colcord, but I agree that it seems bogus. I think it's patently obvious that Devon is expressing a preference for the streetcar route. It's kinda creepy how subtle they're being about that though.

[BoulderSooner]

Well, I think they meant the laying the tracks in front of the Colcord, but I agree that it seems bogus. I think it's patently obvious that Devon is expressing a preference for the streetcar route. It's kinda creepy how subtle they're being about that though.

they said in the AA that they would want the route on hudson

[Kerry]

$100 says this system is going to get all screwed up.

[Tier2City]

$100 says this system is going to get all screwed up.

I'd be happy to take that bet but first could you define screwed up - what have we got to avoid (couplets excepted)?

[soonerguru]

Steve,

I'm not Jeff, but as a voter who actually worked hard to campaign for the passage of Maps 3 on the basis of the streetcar project alone (and the potential for expanded future transit), I would like you to ask people in the know if there's an effort to needlessly move back -- or even sabotage -- the streetcar. I know -- and apparently Kirk Humphreys acknowledged -- that all the insiders really care about is the convention center. But I want to know if the streetcar was used as a pawn to get the CC that will now be shuttled.

I would like to know what opposition people have to it going down Robinson, for example. Is this a classic NIMBY example?

There's a lot more for you to report here.

[Kerry]

I'd be happy to take that bet but first could you define screwed up - what have we got to avoid (couplets excepted)?

Honestly I can't define 'screwed up' although I think couplets would be a step in that direction. This line that takes the loop around Walker, is it single track? If so that would be another step towards 'screwed up'.

I'll tell you what, let me hold the $100 and then I will tell you in 5 years if it is screwed up or not.

[Urban Pioneer]

Steve,

I'm not Jeff, but as a voter who actually worked hard to campaign for the passage of Maps 3 on the basis of the streetcar project alone (and the potential for expanded future transit), I would like you to ask people in the know if there's an effort to needlessly move back -- or even sabotage -- the streetcar. I know -- and apparently Kirk Humphreys acknowledged -- that all the insiders really care about is the convention center. But I want to know if the streetcar was used as a pawn to get the CC that will now be shuttled.

Personally, I haven't seen a concerted effort to move the Convention Center to the front of the line. The programming consultants at ADG are professional and their preliminary time-lines reflect a "streaming" process.

I do not understand why so many people think that the projects might be in a certain order. That is a bit of an oversimplification of how public projects of this scale work. The certainly will probably be an order in which some might finish earlier than others.

But with rail for example, ADG is talking about purchasing materials such as the cars and physical rail early on since the lead time is at least 3 years out for receiving them. This sort of discussion confirms that they have an understanding of what sorts of lead-time is attached to our project. They (ADG) have also hired an outside consultant who seems fairly competent thus far. I have met him several times in my travels across the country at rail events.

[Urban Pioneer]

I do find Swinton's comments about shoving it behind the convention center the only publicly alarming thing said recently (that I am aware of) by a potential leader. I am alarmed by it.

[Urban Pioneer]

I would like to know what opposition people have to it going down Robinson, for example. Is this a classic NIMBY example?

There is some "nimbyism" present. It has to do with the overhead wire. There are people that are vehemently against it. It is almost always an issue with streetcar projects no matter what city it is in unless they already have one. Devon has publicly acknowledged that they would prefer not to have an overhead wire near their buildings and around Myriad Gardens. Whether that has any bearing on the Colcord concerns I have no idea.

I will say that I have actively pursued information about the electromagnetic streetcar. It is possible that there is more to come on this. We will also assess CNG and other possibilities as we move forward.

It does irritate me that the question has been posed that we might be trying to propagate a certain technology. I think that being traditional overhead wire. We are not. But one has to understand that this committee is committed to avoiding recommendations that make our city a "guinea pig" for something that does not have some accountability attached to it. We also don't want to use a technology that inhibits consistent operation and prevents the system from having successful consistency.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the $20 million a mile number is based on a "composite" of traditional modern streetcar systems that run on an overhead wire. If significant cost savings are derived from proper integration with P180, then that presumably will provide an option to spend more on the "technology side" of things.

[Urban Pioneer]

Steve,

There's a lot more for you to report here.

I agree with that.

[Kerry]

I will say that I have actively pursued information about the electromagnetic streetcar. It is possible that there is more to come on this. We will also assess CNG and other possibilities as we move forward.

It does irritate me that the question has been posed that we might be trying to propagate a certain technology. I think that being traditional overhead wire. We are not. But one has to understand that this committee is committed to avoiding recommendations that make our city a "guinea pig" for something that does not have some accountability attached to it. We also don't want to use a technology that inhibits consistent operation and prevents the system from having successful consistency.

From what I have been reading about the European systems that went with alternative propulsion systems, they have run into significant cost over-runs and performance issues. The system in Bordeaux, France uses the ground-level power supply system and they claim to have solved their performance issues.

Look - no wires.

[Urban Pioneer]

From what I have been reading about the European systems that went with alternative propulsion systems, they have run into significant cost over-runs and performance issues.

I have looked at some of those issues. A great many of them have to do with the involvement of a "3rd rail" in the ground that powers the tram. The great thing about the new ones is that many of them are starting to offer essentially a "backup" system that uses super capacitors or lithium batteries to operate is their is a failure with a section of the primary system. This is kind of like thinking of a streetcar operating the same way the Cherolet Volt does, except the other way around. The magnetic field is the "battery" and the capacitor/battery is the "gasoline."

[Kerry]

Precisely. If vibrations are an issue, they need to close Robinson to all truck traffic and construction of the Devon Tower should never have begun. I remember having dinner at La Baguette when the Tower was first being constructed. I heard some of the most ungodly banging and crashing noises while there. I think it would take a month of streetcar vibration to equal what I heard that night. I think we need to send a bunch of these people on a field trip to Portland to ride the streetcar, as there is so much ignorance on this subject among people who have the opportunity to influence opinion.

Thought I would post these two photos of the new extension in Bordeuax, FR. These tracks were put in about 3 years ago.

[Larry OKC]

... I do not understand why so many people think that the projects might be in a certain order. That is a bit of an oversimplification of how public projects of this scale work. The certainly will probably be an order in which some might finish earlier than others. ...

Could it be because the Mayor has set up the "bookends" of MAPS 3? He has gone on record as it is his desire, placing the Park 1st (completed by 2014) and the Convention Center as being "staged last" (10 years or so). Of course the actual order is up to the Oversight recommendation and Council approval. That puts everything else somewhere in between and people are naturally curious when their particular pet project might happen. Then you have the idea that the projects are going to be done in a linear fashion (#2 not starting until #1 is completed etc), but undoubtedly, most of the MAPS 3 projects will be in various stages of planning, design, development, "ground-breaking" and completion. Then there is the sometimes confusing nature of the funding itself. How many times have we heard, "we don't do a project until we have the money collected"? Which leads to the linear timeline concept. But you don't have to have all $120M "in hand" before you can spend money on land acquisition, architects etc etc etc. With the exception of "shovel ready" projects like Trails & Sidewalks, it is going to be a few years before any major visible signs of progress are made (just as with the original MAPS). It was 5 years after the tax passed that the 1st project, the Ballpark, was completed. Similar story with MAPS for Kids. And the final projects won't be completed for a few years after the tax ends.

[Doug Loudenback]

Part of the problem in knowing if some conspiracy theory is present for the possible proposition that some want to press for the Convention Center as the main downtown item to accomplish at the risk of the streetcar element is the transparency and/or lack thereof in those working for those individual aspects.

The streetcar element is the most transparent element I can recall ever seeing in any MAPS project ... lots of public input, lots of public meetings, all meetings, in fact, public. In the sense of an objective observer being in a position to be critical of the transit project's processes, since they are an open book they are also something like sitting ducks, should those who scrutinize public processes be so inclined.

On the other hand, principal powers that be which may favor the convention center even at the expense of downtown streetcar are anything BUT transparent and/or sitting ducks. The public has no access to chamber meetings or anything else "chamber" for that matter. The chamber does not share with the public any polls it makes or any studies it undertakes ... unless it wants to. The public has no access to what, if anything, elected pubic officials may have to say in chamber proceedings or to chamber members. The public has no access to what, if any, relevant conversations may occur between the principal high-rollers in the city, be it the leaders of Devon, Chesapeake, the Oklahoman, MidFirst, whoever. Nothing new in that. If there is any validity to a conspiracy theory to derail downtown transit in favor of the convention center, it would likely come from such hidden meetings and conversations. And, as far as I'm aware, there is nothing that can be done about that, if such happenings be true.

Please don't misunderstand me ... I'm a general fan of what the Chamber has done over this city's history and particularly with regard to MAPS. The Chamber was responsible for getting Wilson & Co. and Morris & Co (later Armour) to locate here, a very very big item in our city's earliest days ... and the same can be said for rail development in Oklahoma City when rail still made money. Oklahoma City was blessed by lots of rail lines which caused Oklahoma City to be a rail axis and hub in days gone by. The Chamber attempted to, but did not succeed, to get the Rock Island line to use Okc as its principal north/south route hub instead of El Reno. Lots lots more that the Chamber did to benefit our city could be mentioned. In the main, the Chamber has meant and will mean a lot for the city. In modern times, the genesis of the idea for the original MAPS came from a Chamber retreat and Mayor Norick picked up on that and ran with it. Who complains about that? Not me, for sure.

But, as we observed during the MAPS3 campaign, the marriage between the Oklahoman (Thompson was the Chamber president during the MAPS 3 campaign) and the Chamber means that we have no reason to expect that any Oklahoman reporter will be in a position to be a serious inquirer and reporter of and about things such as those which may relate to the possible conspiracy being discussed here. If there is such a conspiracy, we will not be finding out about it in the Oklahoman -- that's just not gonna happen. The Oklahoman censored and restricted reporting as to MAPS 3 and if the Chamber has a notion to press the convention center over and above downtown transit, we're never going to hear about it from an Oklahoman reporter. That just won't happen.

Maybe this might be a factor in deciding who to support in the Ward 2 runoff ... I don't live in that district but I'm blogging about it. But if it should become clear that Swinton favors going slow on transit and fast on the convention center, but that Shadid favors (as he has said in his present web postings) that he favors all projects being completed, particularly including transit ... and that's a big series of IF's ... it may well be that the only input the public may have at this point may be to elect a Ward 2 council member who is NOT a member of the inner circle but instead elect one who is independent of and from them but who regards the MAPS 3 concurrent council resolution as being promises made which are sacrosanct and all of which should be kept.

That's just me thinking out loud. There may be no sense to it at all. I've reached no conclusions.

[Larry OKC]

As usual, Doug has it... we don't always agree on the same conclusions, but often see the same critical facts. That said, I never understood why it is the Mayor's preference that the Convention Center be "staged last". Other than the scientific polling that showed it never got 50% approval (and almost sank the rest of MAPS 3 with it). I am sure it would be unpopular to press ahead with it first. Especially if it meant it would be at the expense of Transit. But sometimes unpopular decisions have to be made.

IF the Chamber's numbers can be believed, the Convention Center needs to be built sooner rather than later for so many reasons. Reportedly, we are slowly going out of the convention business and a 10 year delay doesn't do anything to correct that. IF the convention center is THE economic engine that the Chamber claims, again, that is NEW money coming into the economy, NEW money being collected that can go towards the inevitable cost over runs etc that are sure to come with the remaining MAPS 3 projects. We already have to come up with another $40M just to complete the Trails Master Plan as promised.

[Spartan]

Funny... I will actually be visiting a friend in Bordeaux in a month.

[BoulderSooner]

With the exception of "shovel ready" projects like Trails & Sidewalks, it is going to be a few years before any major visible signs of progress are made (just as with the original MAPS). It was 5 years after the tax passed that the 1st project, the Ballpark, was completed. Similar story with MAPS for Kids. And the final projects won't be completed for a few years after the tax ends.

just a note .. the lights for the river and the river wind screen will be done this summer/fall

[Spartan]

Yeah, I'm a big patsy. Wow... it's like none of you have ever read a word I've ever written. This thread is getting ridiculous.

No, it's just that you have not done an equally hard interrogation or an article doubting (or we haven't seen the results of it) the following people about the streetcar integration:

1) P180 planners
2) city engineers (although you deserve big kudos for riding them hard on the sidewalk issues)
3) Charlie Swinton
4) anyone who is pro-convention center
5) the convention center committee themselves
6) the mayor's office
7) others, I'm sure you know who

You also haven't asked Jane Jenkins any hard questions, and I can think of a LOT of hard questions for her. But you do have her comment on every other downtown development article you write, something she has no involvement in (i.e., she has no role in getting Deep Deuce developed, yet she always gets to comment on how it is good..um..)

[Doug Loudenback]

I do find Swinton's comments about shoving it behind the convention center the only publicly alarming thing said recently (that I am aware of) by a potential leader. I am alarmed by it.

Jeff, I'm working on updating my blog article, March 1 City Council Election Returns & Ward 2 Runoff. I'm having difficulty finding an on-line report of what you mentioned above.

Can you or someone else give me a link or an explanation of when/where/what Swinton said?

ON EDIT: Never mind, I found it. Oklahoman, February 23:

What do you think of the MAPS 3 projects?

[Swinton's reply] “I voted for every one of the MAPS. It's just a priority on which one we do first. I think there's one that ought to be shoved back and that's the trolley system. I hear there's some technology issues that might be happening that might help us do more with less ... I'm not saying not do it. I'm just saying there might be some technological changes that might be coming so why not wait and see if they do come.”