Streetcar

[Steve]

What are you talking about, Steve?

Are you suggesting the "divergent view" of taking money from the MAPS Streetcar, which was approved by voters, should be embraced?

Your innuendo is ridiculous.

In who's endo? Huh?

[Just the facts]

How about we split the difference..... and do a couplet?

I would rather it go down Robinson than do that.

Sorry my previous post on this subject was a bit short. I was in a hurry so let me add a little now.

A couple of reason why I think it should go down Broadway through AA is that you need to reward the early adopters of urbanism. They spent a long time, a lot of money, and tons of effort and in my opinion putting the streetcar a block away would be an insult to them - but more importantly, AA provides a destination with good opportunity for in-fill. We don't have the luxury of building ridership from scratch through TOD, we need riders on day one and AA can help delver that.

As for the streetscape itself, to answer Sid's question/comment, putting angled parking adjacent to streetcar tracks is not best practice.

[boitoirich]

Perhaps this has been covered earlier in the thread, but does anyone know how frequently the streetcar is expected to run?

[soonerguru]

OK. So this is a new one. Shadid just posted the following on Facebook:

Ed Shadid
Streetcars are cool but we need to understand what they can and cannot do and what we need to do to make them successful. If not running in it's own lane the streetcar does not represent rapid transit. The Portland streetcar is scheduled to travel at 6mph assuming it isn't stopped by someone double parked or a car accident. At that speed are streetcars competing with cars or with walking? Gazette quote prior to MAPS3 vote "It will be able to cut through traffic like a hot knife through butter"

Is he saying the Portland streetcar travels at 6 mph? Also, won't the planned OKC streetcars have the technology to change traffic signals? Anyone care to answer this charge with some substance?

[Urban Pioneer]

That quote was made by me in the very first article. It was based on the assumption that we would indeed follow "best practices" in streetcar design though using signal prioritization.The 6mph is probably "average speed" incorporating the stopping periods at streetcar stations. So that's a misnomer. Streetcars can typically move 30 - 40 mph along with the speed of regular automobiles. The 6mph is probably factoring "dwell times" and obviously the quantity of stops on a line.Quite frankly, Portland cannot be compared to OKC in every instance.

[OKCisOK4me]

I've not seen angled parking along a streetcar route. Is that best practice?

As I know by now that you're being facetious, I think it was a plan before the streetcar came along. They may have thrown it out when Broadway was chosen as a streetcar corridor. It was around the time that they had also been talking about adding on street parking on Reno though Bricktown, thus turning it into a 2-lane thoroughfare.

[betts]

That quote was made by me in the very first article. It was based on the assumption that we would indeed follow "best practices" in streetcar design though using signal prioritization.The 6mph is probably "average speed" incorporating the stopping periods at streetcar stations. So that's a misnomer. Streetcars can typically move 30 - 40 mph along with the speed of regular automobiles. The 6mph is probably factoring "dwell times" and obviously the quantity of stops on a line.Quite frankly, Portland cannot be compared to OKC in every instance.

It would seem to me that a streetcar that has a 3 mile route only competes with walking if you're happy to walk 1-3 miles to your destination. Given the weather in Oklahoma at least 6 months of the year, I rarely walk that far for anything but exercise. Then we have the people who complain about the distance from the parking lot to their destination. Combine that with signal prioritization and I don't think we have to worry about competing with walking as a transit option.

[BoulderSooner]

As I know by now that you're being facetious, I think it was a plan before the streetcar came along. They may have thrown it out when Broadway was chosen as a streetcar corridor. It was around the time that they had also been talking about adding on street parking on Reno though Bricktown, thus turning it into a 2-lane thoroughfare.

the city was against the idea of making broadway 2 lane the parking plan was scaled down to parking on 1 side of the street .. with 2 lanes south bound and 1 lane north bound .. that is if it even will be completed

[Just the facts]

It would seem to me that a streetcar that has a 3 mile route only competes with walking if you're happy to walk 1-3 miles to your destination.

Thank you - I was thinking the exact same thing the second I read that comment.

[Hutch]

"Nobody knew they were voting for a streetcar"..."we'll be sued if we build a streetcar"...and now the latest..."people can walk faster than a streetcar"

Just can't wait for the next one..."streetcars contribute to global warming"...or..."riding streetcars leads to obesity"...LOL

[Urban Pioneer]

Folks, if you really care about these issues, this is EXTREMELY important stuff here. Litterally a transcendental opportunity to fundamentally change how things are done. Enough with the pseudo controversy's for now. lol Let's get the inaction on rail issues out of ODOT.

WANTING A BROADER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM BEYOND MAPS 3 STREETCAR?

Read this from Rep Charlie Joyner.

These initiatives are happening now and needs your help!

1. HB2180 would remove the Rails Division from ODOT and create the Oklahoma Railways Commission whose Commissioners, appointed by the Governor, would be rail experienced and knowledgeable. This act will not grow government but instead makes government smarter and more focused. Oklahoma is seventh in the nation in total tonnage, equaling 882-million tons per year shipped by rail into, from, or through Oklahoma and projections are for it to increase by 88% by 2030. There is also a huge interest in developing and expanding passenger and commuter rail in Oklahoma. I feel it is vital Oklahoma takes these steps looking to its future economic development and recognizing the success of the Space and Aeronautics Commission who was similarly established.

2. HB 2187 establishes the ‘right of first refusal’ on the sale of any rail property owned by the Department of Transportation and being leased or operated by a private entity. This bill if enacted would protect railroad companies that invest millions of dollars in the lines they presently lease, as well as their shippers who have chosen to locate along those lines; shippers who count on the railroads as part of their supply chain and their distribution network. SB584 is a similar bill that I am supporting as the House Author. This is the correct thing to do when dealing with companies doing business with the state of Oklahoma.

As the previous House Vice-Chair of Transportation and presently the House Chair of the Transportation Committee, I have been very involved on issues concerning our Rail industry in Oklahoma. This email is to advise you of the two railroad bills I have authored with Speaker T.W. Shannon as co-author and Senator Mike Schultz as the Senate Principal Author.

Attached are HB2187 and HB2180 for your review. I ask for your support in my effort at strengthening the rail industry in Oklahoma. Please contact your senators, representatives, and Governor immediately, asking for interest and passage of these bills as they are moving through the Legislative process.

Thank you for your consideration,
Charlie Joyner
Representative Charlie Joyner
Oklahoma House of Representatives
District 95

CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE AND TELL THEM TO PASS THESE TWO BILLS!

From Bob Kemper, leading this issue, on Facebook last night-

Friends: We won the second battle on HB-2187 on the House Floor by a 92-0 vote! Now to do the same in the Senate.

HB-2180. The Oklahoma Railways Commission bill promises to be more of a dog fight, but it is not too late for you to call or email your Rep or Sent offering your support for passage.

[CaptDave]

HB 2180 passed the House 72-18 this morning. Write your Senators and ask them to pass these bills. Then ask your legislators to override a very possible veto by Governor Fallin.

[Plutonic Panda]

HB 2180 passed the House 72-18 this morning. Write your Senators and ask them to pass these bills. Then ask your legislators to override a very possible veto by Governor Fallin.

Done! Really hope to see these two bills pass.

[Larry OKC]

Can MAPS 3 money be used for buses? The very vague language in the Ordinance 23,942 www.okc.gov/maps3/resolution.pdf (numbered pages 2 & 3) seems to be pretty inclusive/all encompassing as to what the money can be used for. Can anyone point to specific language in it that would exclude buses? While it does say "only for the limited purpose of City capitol improvements", it goes on to define it like this: "the term 'City capitol improvement' shall mean without limitation any one or more of the following..."

When it comes to "capitol improvements", is there a legal distinction between Streetcars and Buses? In other words, if they can use MAPS 3 money to purchase a Streetcar, what is stopping them from using the money to buy a Bus?

Does that mean that they will spend it on something other than what was promised in the campaign? Maybe. Maybe not. It all depends on if the voters will hold them accountable if they try.

[Snowman]

When it comes to "capitol improvements", is there a legal distinction between Streetcars and Buses? In other words, if they can use MAPS 3 money to purchase a Streetcar, what is stopping them from using the money to buy a Bus?

Mostly that it is already unlikely they can buy everything they promised with the money they are projected to have, so they are going to have to get as much of what they promised with what they have. Without some new stream of money they would not have the money to operate it but that is a different issue.

[betts]

Can MAPS 3 money be used for buses? The very vague language in the Ordinance 23,942 www.okc.gov/maps3/resolution.pdf (numbered pages 2 & 3) seems to be pretty inclusive/all encompassing as to what the money can be used for. Can anyone point to specific language in it that would exclude buses? While it does say "only for the limited purpose of City capitol improvements", it goes on to define it like this: "the term 'City capitol improvement' shall mean without limitation any one or more of the following..."

When it comes to "capitol improvements", is there a legal distinction between Streetcars and Buses? In other words, if they can use MAPS 3 money to purchase a Streetcar, what is stopping them from using the money to buy a Bus?

Does that mean that they will spend it on something other than what was promised in the campaign? Maybe. Maybe not. It all depends on if the voters will hold them accountable if they try.

Which is precisely what the anti-MAPS people would like to see. Right, Larry? Because nothing will increase the likelihood of the next MAPS vote losing like not giving the voters what they think they voted for. Best way to scuttle MAPS once and for all.....

[CaptDave]

Which is precisely what the anti-MAPS people would like to see. Right, Larry? Because nothing will increase the likelihood of the next MAPS vote losing like not giving the voters what they think they voted for. Best way to scuttle MAPS once and for all.....

If scuttling future MAPS initiatives is the underlying motivation (even if ancillary) for creating this ridiculous, artificial rift between groups who support improving transit in OKC, that is not a positive commentary on those responsible. There is absolutely nothing productive to come out of the divisive nature of the discussions we have seen lately.

The goal for just about every transit advocacy group I know of is a regional transit authority. MAPS is the most likely funding mechanism to jump start a long overdue rebuilding of our neglected transit system as basically defined in the Fixed Guideway Study. While certain aspects of FGS are likely obsolete, the streetcar circulator with connections at a transit hub is a logical place to begin. Our pathetic bus system is a SEPARATE issue and could be fixed with a little political will and administrative backbone. Integrate the two effectively and then work on getting the RTA approved and established.

[Hutch]

Read Exhibit A of the MAPS 3 City Council resolution approved on September 29, 2009:

MAPS 3 Resolution

"The intended MAPS 3 projects include the following:

2. A new rail-based streetcar system..."

Obviously, buses are not rail-based. No room for misinterpretation on that one.

[OkieDave]

Hutch it also said: ...plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, And no numbers were put to these maps projects. What about gps, text, smartphone apps, better shelters, wifi, traffic signal coordination, and other things to help the transit system that would help buses and the street car for people that live and work in OKC?

[Urban Pioneer]

David, I suspect we are going to need all $130 million to actually do what we promised the voters. A 5 - 6 mile modern streetcar system and buying Santa-Fe Station and fixing it up.

If Ed wants more, you can be rest assured that the entire transit constituency will jump right behind him. But my guess is that it will have to come from some of the other ambiguous areas in the overall MAPS that the Council has yet to hash out. IE- changes, contingencies, and such.

But right now, I would suggest he actually work with some of us that have been around a lot longer to accomplish those broader changes.

If not, oh well. You can't say that hands weren't extended many times and promptly chopped of.

[OKCisOK4me]

Hutch it also said: ...plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, And no numbers were put to these maps projects. What about gps, text, smartphone apps, better shelters, wifi, traffic signal coordination, and other things to help the transit system that would help buses and the street car for people that live and work in OKC?

Yeah, but you don't get the latter without the former. If Shadid gets the city to only spend the tax money collected on only the latter then that is a failure of MAPS 3 appropriations.

[CaptDave]

What the heck is wrong with COTPA - or paying someone with the capability - conducting a thorough analysis of what can be done to improve bus service right now with the equipment available right now? There is nearly universal agreement the present service model is far beyond broke - hub and spoke does not adequately serve any current or potential rider demographic.

Of course we need to improve bus service, but not at the expense of the first step toward restoring a multimodal transit system. If there is a real desire to improve the bus system (and not just kill MAPS), then get to work and better use the assets we currently possess. The new CNG busses are a very good acquisition that appeal to many people as are the smaller vehicles that replaced those silly trolleys with tires. COTPA needs to regard its users as customers, not riders; and figure out exactly who their customers are, where they are located, and what COTPA can do now to serve them better.

Has there been any serious evaluation of a grid based system with special service for disabled riders?
Has there been serious evaluation of ending the ridiculous advertising/bus stop arrangement?
Should we reduce service area? 622 square miles is a ridiculous area to try to effectively serve with the funding and equipment available.
Reduce service area and increase service frequency?
Identify express corridors and evaluate the viabilty of such corridors?

These issues are all SEPARATE from the streetcar project. To divert funds from the MAPS Streetcar system would be a gross betrayal of the public trust regardless of any semantic games one plays with the language of the council's resolution. The intent of the MAPS3 ballot and the citizens who approved it is very clear.

[Hutch]

Hutch it also said: ...plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, And no numbers were put to these maps projects. What about gps, text, smartphone apps, better shelters, wifi, traffic signal coordination, and other things to help the transit system that would help buses and the street car for people that live and work in OKC?

The complete wording is "...plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, such as connections to other rail-based systems and/or a transit hub."

While the total dollar amounts allocated for each of the eight MAPS 3 projects were not specifically set out on exhibit A of the resolution, it was made clear to the public by City Council on numerous occassions that of the total $777 million in MAPS tax revenues to be collected, $120 million was to be dedicated to construction of a 5-6 mile, rail-based streetcar system, and that an additional $10 million was to be dedicated to acquisition and development of an intermodal transit hub, including acquisition and development of commuter rail infrastructure necessary to provide connectivity to the hub and streetcar system. The final decisions and funding commitments by those on Council at the time with regard to the transit component of MAPS 3 specifically involved rail transit infrastructure only. There were no decisions or commitments by Council to use any of the $130 million for bus system infrastructure.

Based on the language of the resolution and the stated intent of Council at the time of its passage, my opinion would be that any technological devices, software or other equipment that is employed as part of the streetcar system, intermodal hub or commuter rail system are valid infrastructure components and qualify for funding.

[OKCisOK4me]

Anyone else not noticing that Ed Shadid is like the second coming of Ernest Istook? He's trying to do his best at keeping the wheels on the bus going round and round, round and round, round and round.

[OkieDave]

People seem to think that the citizen's voted for specific projects on the ballot. Never happened. The ballot only talked about a tax for a certain period for capital expenditure projects. Sr. Aquatic Centers, how are those coming? Chamber backed the campaign so they get the huge return on their investment. I want the council to make changes when and if they get new/better information. People voted because they want their city to improve. 5 council people could build a 900' Jesus if they want to. How many people think there would be some major backlash from the people if evidence proved building a new expensive convention center was a bad economic idea? Maybe Maps4 should have an open process that picks projects people really want and need, not what a few cook up in back rooms. Almost every neutral observer knows we need improved real transit and a little money for our bus system would go very far in improving.