Streetcar

[soonerguru]

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.”

Wow. The more I read this the more incoherent Swinton seems. He's definitely trying to "slow play" the streetcar. Something smells. I've personally spoken to Shadid and he's really into the streetcar. He will have my enthusiastic support and should have the support of anyone who supports getting the transit portion of MAPS built and built right.

[Larry OKC]

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

True. I may have phrased it wrong, what I meant was major projects being done/finished. A river improvement here and there or a sidewalk trail isn't the same thing as 57 miles of Trails being completed or the opening of at least 1 of the Senior Aquatic centers, much less major/high dollar projects like Streetcars, Park, Convention Center type stuff or even the Whitewater Kayaking venue. Wind screens and some lighting seem like low dollar stuff that they can throw out there and say, "see we are doing stuff".

[ljbab728]

Wind screens and some lighting seem like low dollar stuff that they can throw out there and say, "see we are doing stuff".

I haven't heard anyone from the city making that kind of statement. It was only brought up by a poster here. Don't start finding fault with something before it happens.

[Larry OKC]

I haven't heard anyone from the city making that kind of statement. It was only brought up by a poster here. Don't start finding fault with something before it happens.

Didn't find fault with it at all. Just saying that you know they are sensitive to criticism with the rate substantial, visible progress is perceived. It was that way with the original MAPS, unless they go out of their way to point it out. I wouldn't be at all surprised if a similar sentiment hasn't already been expressed by a Council member or two (Kelly in particular seems to get real defensive on a lot of subjects from what I have seen). There was emphasis placed in a recent Council meeting clarifying what was being paid for with P180, MAPS 3, Bond issue etc. Not unusual for folks to get things confused or think nothing is being done at all. Just look at the frequent complaints about roads (that we need to use MAPS money to take care of it) when they seem ignorant to the half a billion specified on the Ballot for roads in the 2007 G.O. bond. Or the City needs to spend money to improve schools (ignorant that the City has nothing to do with the operation of the OKC school district). Or the County jail (ignorant that it is a County responsibility and not a City one. Or some other issue that is a State responsibility and not City.

[Spartan]

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.”

What on earth?? What about "technological changes" (ignorant wording alert) for convention centers? Or the fact that the convention center is not a pressing need. Or the obvious glaring fact that there is only $120M for streetcar and obviously that is going to buy less in the future. Wow.

[Larry OKC]

But if you ask the good folks at the Chamber there IS a pressing need for a C.C., since we are slowly going out of the convention business and all. LOL

[Snowman]

I haven't heard anyone from the city making that kind of statement. It was only brought up by a poster here. Don't start finding fault with something before it happens.

It was brought up in recent sub committee meetings for the river development and the MAPS3 committee. The stadium lights will probably happen for the US rowing master nationals, the wind screen is less likely to happen by then as it had some new engineering concerns come up though they still would like to do it before then if it is possible.

[Spartan]

But if you ask the good folks at the Chamber there IS a pressing need for a C.C., since we are slowly going out of the convention business and all. LOL

I don't think that's the Chamber line. I just think the convention center is part of the bigger picture. If the Chamber is willing to put the brakes on everything until we get the C.C. (aka something the citizens don't really want) then they must have learned that from the union playbook over the last 3 years. That's a position that does nothing but alienate whoever uses it, as we're now seeing with the unions.

MAPS is the Chamber's baby, we all know that. I think they are willing to take the bigger picture view, for the sake of the future franchise of the program, in other words, for the sake of Maps4 which will have to be how we address metro-area transit. And I do think the Chamber still has a real interest in streetcar and downtown development..don't forget that the streetcar was also a Chamber priority through the 2000's, and it was always in the exact same discussions that a new convention center was. I think they envisioned both would be a tough sell. Well, turns out streetcar really wasn't.

[Kerry]

The streetcar is the only MAPS III project that generates private sector devlopment over the long run. It has to go first. The sooner we generate private sector development the better it will be for everyone. Building the CC before the streetcar would be like saying, "I've got this great idea that will make me a million dollars, but first I am going to do this other one that I will probably lose money on." Who does that?

[Spartan]

Well I think the idea is that all of them are going to be economic engines to help power OKC forward. I definitely agree with you though that the streetcar has the potential to rise about the rest of the pack...

"Who does that?" is a good question. The answer to your question: I'm afraid to answer that. LOL

[Larry OKC]

OK, lets do the Convention Center & Streetcars 1st and at the same time!

[Spartan]

Well the park will be first just because the land is already acquired and the project is closest to being shovel-ready. I do think there is a real benefit to having the park open first, because it will give the public the chance to fall in love with one of the projects soon, before MAPS3 is even close to being finished.

[okclee]

With all of these other cities adding or expanding streetcar / light rail.

What does this do to Okc?

I was hoping our streetcar would help Okc move up a notch or two into a higher "Tier 2" type of city. But with so many other cities currently with streetcar or future streetcar expansion, it seems all Okc will do is try to keep pace and not really move upward.

Remind me again, where the Okc streetcar will place in comparison to other cities with streetcar. Will the Okc streetcar system be over and above others or does Okc fall somewhere in the middle?

I posted this in the thread titled "streetcar routes in other cities", but I think it would be answered better in this thread.

[Urban Pioneer]

With all of these other cities adding or expanding streetcar / light rail.

What does this do to Okc?

I was hoping our streetcar would help Okc move up a notch or two into a higher "Tier 2" type of city. But with so many other cities currently with streetcar or future streetcar expansion, it seems all Okc will do is try to keep pace and not really move upward.

Remind me again, where the Okc streetcar will place in comparison to other cities with streetcar. Will the Okc streetcar system be over and above others or does Okc fall somewhere in the middle?

I posted this in the thread titled "streetcar routes in other cities", but I think it would be answered better in this thread.

Have no fear. The size of our local investment positions us to keep pace and remain #2 or #3 in overall size of systems in the near future.

Chronologically in order of existing and to be completed/expanded:

1. Portland (Always pursuing expansion)
2. Tacoma (No major change/expansions planned)
3. Seattle (being expanded)
4. Tuscon (Started dirt-work a year ago)
5. OKC (5-6 miles start) (2-4 miles of supplemental possible)

Washington and Cincinnati are probably the most likely projects of any comparable size being discussed, planned, building a modern streetcar system that will rival the first five.

There are many "small starts" happening through small federal grants, but they are for fairly minimal systems comparable.

Our local investment will in theory position us to receive Federal matching funds that should keep us in the top 3 o 4 slots for the next decade. That of course could change if the criteria at FTA changes and makes larger amounts more readily available to cities. It is somewhat unlikely though if history is any reference.

[Snowman]

With all of these other cities adding or expanding streetcar / light rail.

What does this do to Okc?

I was hoping our streetcar would help Okc move up a notch or two into a higher "Tier 2" type of city. But with so many other cities currently with streetcar or future streetcar expansion, it seems all Okc will do is try to keep pace and not really move upward.

Remind me again, where the Okc streetcar will place in comparison to other cities with streetcar. Will the Okc streetcar system be over and above others or does Okc fall somewhere in the middle?

I posted this in the thread titled "streetcar routes in other cities", but I think it would be answered better in this thread.

Making a good system here that is useful to locals and visitors is the first priority. It does not matter about them having one, it matters how many people are using it. Traffic to the point developers, entertainment or retail are investing their money at is what they care about. Total length of track or type of train they could care less about.

[Doug Loudenback]

It certainly does appear that Ward 2 candidate Ed Shadid is very much more committed to the MAPS 3 downtown transit element being completed, in a timely manner, than is Ward 2 candidate Charlie Swinton.

Compare what Swinton said in the February 23 Oklahoman article ...

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.”

... with what Ed Shadid said in his March 9 Gazette ad (though he'd said the same earlier)

Dr. Shadid believes that MAPS 3 should be completed as it was promised to voters, with a maximum transparency, honesty and public deliberation. Needlessly delaying the rail component of MAPS 3 could cost the city $60-$120 million in federal matching funds, reducing the project's connectivity to neighborhoods.

It has become apparent to me after regurgitating all of the campaign rhetoric that candidate Shadid is much more inclined to protect, and complete, the downtown rail elements of MAPS 3 than is candidate Swinton who appears to have some other unspoken agenda.

In this same context, the words of councilman Sam Bowman in the March 8 city council meeting are not lost on me. Although Bowman never named names, in the context presented he could not possibly have been referring to anything but what's going on in the Ward 2 runoff election:

Sam Bowman speaking on March 8
And then, in these last few weeks, big money has gotten involved to the extent, my opinion, it has just made a mockery of our city elections. * * * The people, I think, need to know who's behind the money..."

The Committee for Oklahoma City Momentum, which has yet to file a Form C-1 with the city clerk (Form C-1 shows receipts and expenditures) is the obvious reference. Reading the tea leaves tells me that the "big money" interests favor the convention center as its priority with downtown transit being moved to the back if not being altogether expendable.

[Urban Pioneer]

The next transit subcommittee meeting is Wednesday, March 23rd, 3:30 PM at 420 Main on the 10th floor.

There will be an overview of ADG's projected schedule for MAPS and how the streetcar relates to that proposed schedule.

The Adventure Line will also be discussed.

We will be discussing stops. Where do you think stops ought to go on the newly unveiled Preferred and Protected Routes?

[okclee]

Urban Pioneer.......Can you give us the latest map / picture of the "Preferred and Protected Routes"? (I need to see the map to determine stops)

I searched the Let's Talk Transit website and couldn't find any new info, is that website staying up to date?

Thanks.

[Urban Pioneer]

That website is for the AA not MAPS transit.

Sure, when I return to the office I'll post one for reference.

[NWOKCGuy]

It certainly does appear that Ward 2 candidate Ed Shadid is very much more committed to the MAPS 3 downtown transit element being completed, in a timely manner, than is Ward 2 candidate Charlie Swinton.

Thanks for making my decision for me.

[Urban Pioneer]

Urban Pioneer.......Can you give us the latest map / picture of the "Preferred and Protected Routes"? (I need to see the map to determine stops

Here you go. This is my version of the official map. I think it is easier to read. lol

The blue line is essentially the Phase 1a promoted to be paid for through MAPS funds.

The Red Line would probably be financed through Federal supplemental as the "back end" or the "western side" of the line going out to Health Sciences/PHF. We are trying to "protect" the corridor to minimize future costs.

The next question is what are the preferred stop locations.

[okclee]

I have a question concerning Politics and the acceptance of the Federal supplemental money. I have read lately that many "red" states are turning down the Federal money in order to play the political game.

Would Oklahoma politicians willing accept or decline Federal transit money, if it is coming from a Democrat President?

[Urban Pioneer]

I have a question concerning Politics and the acceptance of the Federal supplemental money. I have read lately that many "red" states are turning down the Federal money in order to play the political game.

Would Oklahoma politicians willing accept or decline Federal transit money, if it is coming from a Democrat President?

At the municipal level, I think it is easier to justify. In fact, the process can almost feel "automated" as FTA "transit" projects are a common supplement to city projects.

At a state level, it would be more difficult if it were a publicized endeavor. Most of the high-profile FTA refusals have centered around High Speed Rail.

Fort Worth is one of the few exceptions. Their money was for a modern streetcar such as our. The difference was, the locals had not come up with a "match." They had filed an application under pretenses that now might be considered "questionable." The pretenses to the FTA were that they had the support and mechanisms in place to come up with the match.

Their mechanism promoted after-the-fact was Tax Increment Financing. However, they did not have the political support in place to actually "see it through." The council balked. Part of the balking surrounded the fact that they did not have a solid majority support for a streetcar in the first place.

Our situation is completely different. We had/have a solid majority support at city council and we had a city-wide voter referendum to provide any local monies (being MAPS). That certainly displays a broad citizen based and ballot majority support that most projects do not have.

Our streetcar system is not predicated by Federal Funds to be constructed. It will be constructed irregardless if we receive FTA funds. FTA funds will simply enable us to put a larger system in that covers more ground.

Also, we historically have been a "giver state" where we send more tax money into the Federal Transportation/Transit pool than we receive. It is an easy argument to make that we should get back at least what we send for transportation projects across the board.

It doesn't matter if you are anti-tax/anti-deficit, Oklahoma often gets the short end of the stick and funds projects in other reaches of the country. That is money that could be creating jobs here. It is certainly not going to be used to pay down the deficit. We do not have control over it. So we should demand that it return here at a minimum. That is something we have control over via our leadership.

[Snowman]

I have a question concerning Politics and the acceptance of the Federal supplemental money. I have read lately that many "red" states are turning down the Federal money in order to play the political game.

Would Oklahoma politicians willing accept or decline Federal transit money, if it is coming from a Democrat President?

I don't know about this one but some of them have riders along with it for things have to be done if you accept federal money, hypocrisy rarely stops either side from accepting money as long as they can claim a win with their base supporters.

[Kerry]

I have a question concerning Politics and the acceptance of the Federal supplemental money. I have read lately that many "red" states are turning down the Federal money in order to play the political game.

Would Oklahoma politicians willing accept or decline Federal transit money, if it is coming from a Democrat President?

okclee - the reason we turned down the HSR money here in Forida is because if the HSR line didn't meet ridership numbers the State was going to have to make up the revenue shortfall. We are already having this exact problem in Jacksonville with out Skyway System. After 25 years of operation it is only getting 10% of the expected ridership so the city has to pay $5 million per year in revenue shortfalls. If we take the system out the Feds say they want their $90 million back. So we are stuck with system that doesn't work and that we can't fix.