Streetcar

[HOT ROD]

it's just one wire, very thin, on an overhead catenary. Not very noticeable here in Seattle, AND we have that for our streetcar AND a separate (with two wires) for trolley busses. Again, not very noticeable unless you really look hard enough.

OKC sure could redo their poles and lines, but if done right (which all modern systems now-days are) streetcar power lines are hardly noticeable (particularly compared to Light Rail and HSR).

[catch22]

I think the streetcar wire is sexy and elegant, IMHO.

[Plutonic Panda]

Because the City would have to pay that extra cost; or the ratepayers if we wanted that included in our rates... It's not some magical, inexpensive thing to do.

were did I say it would be inexpensive? I have been seeing a bunch of major cities do this, if OKC wants to lag behind, that is their problem I guess.

I guess this just further proves people here really don't care about beautification.

[Bullbear]

I don't think it proves anything about how we feel about beautification.
it proves its expensive and not a current priority. Cost vs benefit type of scenario.
I think everyone would LOVE to see it done. its just not in the budget at the moment.

[Plutonic Panda]

I don't think it proves anything about how we feel about beautification.
it proves its expensive and not a current priority. Cost vs benefit type of scenario.
I think everyone would LOVE to see it done. its just not in the budget at the moment.

fair enough.

My main beef is though when we completely reconstruct roads. Take Edmond's Covell reconstruction for example, they completely rebuilt the road. Widened it, reconstructed in cement, new median added, large sidewalks on both sides..... and they built new utility poles above ground.

Now of how much they spent to widen it, how much more could the lines possibly be to put underground? After they are underground, no more worries about windstorms, ice storms, cutting trees, people running into them etc.. That part right there is what is mind blowing to me.

So whenever we widen or reconstruct roads, why not bury the lines? I'm not asking to bury every single one at once, just as we go along.

It is a win win situation. I'm kind of in shock that people are even debating me in this right now. Name one con besides the up front cost which is recovered shortly down the road by reduced maintenance.

I'll name what I can think, and so far, only one con comes to mind.

Con(s)

1. Upfront cost

Pros

1. Long term savings by reduced line maintenance(no downed lines due inclement weather or human error and no more cutting trees that overgrow on the lines)

2. Cleaner and less cluttered look

3. Overall better beautification(tree can grow taller along the roads)

Here is a good read on the matter

The winds may howl. The trees may fall. But in Germany, the lights stay on.
There's no Teutonic engineering magic to this impressive record. It's achieved by a very simple decision: Germany buries almost all of its low-voltage and medium-voltage power lines, the lines that serve individual homes and apartments. Americans could do the same. They have chosen not to.

Opinion: Why we should bury the power lines - CNN.com

[LakeEffect]

Con(s)

1. Upfront cost

Add more cons:

Much harder to find a problem if the cable deteriorates
More expensive to add a connection of needed
More inherent danger to others that may dig into the line during other construction
60% longer time to repair

Electric users ask: Why not put power lines underground? - CNN.com

"After a 2002 storm that knocked out electricity to 2 million customers in North Carolina, regulators there took a look at what it would cost to bury the three major power companies' overhead lines. The state Utilities Commission concluded the project would be "prohibitively expensive.

"Such an undertaking would cost approximately $41 billion, nearly six times the net book value of the utilities' current distribution assets, and would require approximately 25 years to complete," the report states. Customers' rates would have to more than double to pay for the project, the commission' staff found."

[Plutonic Panda]

Add more cons:

Much harder to find a problem if the cable deteriorates
More expensive to add a connection of needed
More inherent danger to others that may dig into the line during other construction
60% longer time to repair

With the new smart power grids, I'm sure new techonology can be made to find out where the problem is accurately without having to spend time looking for it.

More expensive to add a connection, maybe, but again, after you subtract the costs from trimming trees and no having to worry about the weather damaging the lines, it sorts itself out.

There is no danger if they are along the street with proper signage.

[LakeEffect]

With the new smart power grids, I'm sure new techonology can be made to find out where the problem is accurately without having to spend time looking for it.

More expensive to add a connection, maybe, but again, after you subtract the costs from trimming trees and no having to worry about the weather damaging the lines, it sorts itself out.

There is no danger if they are along the street with proper signage.

Contractors hit lines all the time, even when properly marked, not to mention when properly marked. Smart grids are much more about the supply and delivery points than the lines themselves; detecting and repairing underground issues is still going to require access and appropriate, safe construction techniques.

[Bullbear]

nobody was really debating you about it.. just pointing out that it has nothing to do with beautification and everthing to do with money. you could just list upfront cost as the con.. and that pretty much is what is killing it.

[Plutonic Panda]

Contractors hit lines all the time, even when properly marked, not to mention when properly marked. Smart grids are much more about the supply and delivery points than the lines themselves; detecting and repairing underground issues is still going to require access and appropriate, safe construction techniques.

Like I said, the benefits would outweigh the cost. As much as we spend repairing lines that have been damaged because they are exposed, I'm sure we would save money with them being underground during the long-term, not to mention how much more nice it would be not to have to look at them.

[Laramie]

I remember when Dallas first started the DART street car system. I didn't notice the hanging lines/wires above. Unless you're really looking for the details of the lines, you probably won't see them.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit - DART

Remember the commercials about wires?

...but are my wires ugly?

"Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ...as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.

[HOT ROD]

DART is light rail (not streetcar) and those are higher capacity wires in its own ROW, as you can see in the pic. I agree that you barely notice the wires. ...

OKC's streetcar wires will be even less noticeable since they are even thinner/smaller poles etc and ONE wire.

Streetcars 4 DC » 2009 » September

[Spartan]

Next week, I'll try contacting both Republican and Democrat House & Senate leaders as well as my own Senator & House Representative to see what they think. Remember, we citizens have already passed MAPS 3 & the intent of our tax on ourselves was to complete all the MAPS 3 projects that were proposed. I doubt any Republican or Democrat would want to anger the citizenry of Oklahoma City. I think everyone in the state is proud of OKC & what a shining example we are setting for the rest of the nation. -- John

There is no guarantee that MAPS will happen as promised, in fact we can almost be guaranteed it won't. And it will be for the worse if the State Legislature senses there is interest from anyone in OKC to intervene and assert the Legislature's idea of what communities should be doing.

OKC already passed a common sense proposal (mirrored after what has worked in many other major urban cities) and the State Legislature got involved bc a private interest group called for it. They don't need a lot of tempting to knowingly damage the state's biggest city!

[soonerguru]

The Texas Republican Legislators hate Austin, and they've started monkeying around with Austin's city laws. Greg Abbot, the Republican candidate for governor, has proposed a law to ban Austin's ban on plastic bags. They've also tried to screw up Austin's attempts to protect its water and environment. I'm sure the craven morons in Oklahoma's state government would love to mess with OKC, too, if given the chance. They already have.

[Snowman]

The Texas Republican Legislators hate Austin, and they've started monkeying around with Austin's city laws. Greg Abbot, the Republican candidate for governor, has proposed a law to ban Austin's ban on plastic bags. They've also tried to screw up Austin's attempts to protect its water and environment. I'm sure the craven morons in Oklahoma's state government would love to mess with OKC, too, if given the chance. They already have.

Did you miss the last couple years, they had already started preemptively passing state laws banning municipalities from enacting legislation OKC had been drafting.

[hoya]

One of the reasons we need OKC and Tulsa to be successful, we need a larger percentage of the state's population to be urban. Right now rural legislators have a lot of power, and they'd rather screw with the city than implement laws that benefit the state as a whole.

[bchris02]

One of the reasons we need OKC and Tulsa to be successful, we need a larger percentage of the state's population to be urban. Right now rural legislators have a lot of power, and they'd rather screw with the city than implement laws that benefit the state as a whole.

While I definitely agree with this and think that Oklahoma's legislature leans too much towards rural interests, some of the state's worst legislators i.e. Sally Kern come from the the metro areas. What Oklahoma needs is more legislators with an agenda to move the state forward rather than fighting the culture wars.

[Spartan]

One of the reasons we need OKC and Tulsa to be successful, we need a larger percentage of the state's population to be urban. Right now rural legislators have a lot of power, and they'd rather screw with the city than implement laws that benefit the state as a whole.

That's because of gerrymandering. It's already 2/3 OKC and Tulsa, but people in Tulsa and Edmond prefer to keep electing bumpkins.

Look at someone like.... Screw it all of our esteemed GOP state legislators.

[tpg4635]

Hope this isn't a sign to future progression of our streetcar...

Its Streetcar Stalled, Kansas City Mulls the Best Way Forward - CityLab

[LakeEffect]

Hope this isn't a sign to future progression of our streetcar...

Its Streetcar Stalled, Kansas City Mulls the Best Way Forward - CityLab

It was killed in part because of a very well run misinformation campaign against the ballot initiative. We'll likely have to fight the same battles, but at least we're aware.

[bchris02]

nm

[Mr. Cotter]

The Kansas decision also has a lot to do with the method of funding, doesn't it?

[LakeEffect]

The Kansas decision also has a lot to do with the method of funding, doesn't it?

Yep, which helped play into the misinformation campaign...

[TheTravellers]

Sounds like the KC residents didn't want to approve a MAPS-like tax, whereas OKC residents don't seem to have a problem with that (since we've been doing it for years), and hopefully OKC residents will keep doing it instead of stopping after this MAPS.

[Teo9969]

I haven't followed KC's system close enough, but I don't think they were doing an RTA. The RTA would be a massive, multi-community initiative, and I think that pretty well makes it an entirely different scenario. Pretty sure this will be an issue that gets talked about quite a bit around the time it comes up to a vote, possibly more than MAPS ever has because it will involve the entire metro area.