Does OKC really have traffic issues?

[jedicurt]

i'm still of the belief that we don't have a traffic problem, we have a good mix of drivers who have bad habits and those habits conflict with other peoples bad habits. things like, "O, i just pulled up next to this guy on the highway who is doing only 50 in the 60 zone, i guess i better slow down and match him so that no one can get around!"

[Just the facts]

When someone can point to a major city that has free-flowing traffic 24/7 then we can use their freeway system as a model - but why people look at failed interstate system all around the country and say, "We should use that as a model" is beyond me. Look at Dallas traffic. If that is what you want then by all means keep building freeways because that is how Dallas traffic BECAME Dallas traffic. Atlanta traffic didn't become Atlanta traffic because they didn't build freeways. Atlanta built freeways and people used them - just like you would expect them to do. Does anyone honestly think we can add more freeways and have more people NOT use them?


The Traffic Equilibrium Problem
http://www.ifor.math.ethz.ch/about_u...tober_2006.pdf

[bradh]

Chicago has park & ride lots for the trains that go into the city, and they work well.

I would also like to see semis banned from the left lane unless there is a left exit approaching. Not saying they are a major issue, but the attempting to pass by going 0.5 mph more than the big rig next to it doesn't really help traffic flow.

Texas has the great "Don't Slow Texas Down" signs on highways encouraging slower traffic to keep right. Not sure how effective they are, but I like them.

[venture]

Chicago has park & ride lots for the trains that go into the city, and they work well.

Texas has the great "Don't Slow Texas Down" signs on highways encouraging slower traffic to keep right. Not sure how effective they are, but I like them.

Yeah I really though the park and ride lots in Chicago were pretty useful. I'm up there a few times a year in the West burbs and take the Metra in a few times when I'm there when I want to go into Chicago. That area is sprawled out probably worse than we are, but with higher pop densities of course, so I could see their setup being more feasible here.

A good number of states now ban trucks from the left lane on interstates from what I've seen, so I'm pretty shocked that Oklahoma hasn't followed suit yet.

[Just the facts]

Chicago has park & ride lots for the trains that go into the city, and they work well.

They worked so well that metro Chicago now stretches half way to Iowa.

[bradh]

They worked so well that metro Chicago now stretches half way to Iowa.

You're typical drivel doesn't really apply here, I'm not sure there are anymore places for infill in Chicago. I can't figure out what your ideal community is, but you seem to have problems with all of them.

[Just the facts]

I am simply saying that park and ride lots promote more sprawl, which the train was put in place to mitigate in the first place. When the solution causes more of the problem there is something inherently wrong with the solution. We (at least me) are not trying to create more sprawl by making it more convenient for the sprawler. Now granted, there are some people who are trying to do that.

[Dubya61]

You're typical drivel doesn't really apply here, I'm not sure there are anymore places for infill in Chicago. I can't figure out what your ideal community is, but you seem to have problems with all of them.

Your reaction seems to ignore fact. JTF's "typical drivel" includes the point that park and ride at its worst, only spreads a city out. Can you say that park and ride was not a causal factor to Chicago now extending "half way to Iowa?"

[venture]

I am simply saying that park and ride lots promote more sprawl, which the train was put in place to mitigate in the first place. When the solution causes more of the problem there is something inherently wrong with the solution. We (at least me) are not trying to create more sprawl by making it more convenient for the sprawler. Now granted, there are some people who are trying to do that.

So let's say we put up commuter rail from Norman to Downtown OKC tomorrow. No park and ride lot. Exactly how many people do you think will actually take it? Will you be willing to fully subsidize the service until the close in development actually takes place to increase its ridership?

At some point we need to accept the fact that the damage is already done, especially to the OKC area, when it comes to sprawl. There isn't any going back, we can mitigate only so much, but if we don't want a rail service to completely fall on its face - we need to have park and ride lots.

Blaming all of Chicago's sprawl on the Metra and park and ride isn't really fair to the fullest extent. Did it help? Absolutely. However, train service on some of those lines have been ongoing now for over 150 years. So it isn't like they just tossed the rail lines in there and to combat commute issues on the interstates (which didn't exist yet).

[Rover]

Your reaction seems to ignore fact. JTF's "typical drivel" includes the point that park and ride at its worst, only spreads a city out. Can you say that park and ride was not a causal factor to Chicago now extending "half way to Iowa?"

Like many zealots, JTF seems to often casually and incorrectly assign cause and effect, or assign a singular cause. Chicago grew for many reasons and the suburbs grew for many reasons. Putting in a commuter system without parking lots would be pretty silly. Thinking that making ridership hard so as to force society to conform to one's notion of propriety and right order is pretty arrogant thinking. If we are going to invest in rail, let's make sure of the greatest ridership we can and not try to make it some hipster rail hangout.

[Just the facts]

A train from downtown Norman to downtown OKC will take longer to build ridership than a train from a park and ride lot in north Norman to downtown OKC - but I'm not trying to solve a low train ridership problem. I am trying to solve sprawl. How can I possibly support a solution that creates more of the problem? Maybe people need to decide for themselves what problems they are trying to solve.

On a side note, here is the folly in commuter rail logic - commuter rail does NOT solve traffic congestion for people who continue to drive. Up to 30% of all traffic is latent demand. If I take the train to work today someone else will take my place on the interstate. There won't be a gap on the road where my truck would normally be; someone else's car will be in that spot. However, if I take the train 100% of congestion will go away for me. So people will have to decide for themselves, do I want congestion or do I not want congestion.

.

[bradh]

But if you don't have the commuter bus/rail, you're saying the traffic on the interstate would be the same with it?

[Just the facts]

But if you don't have the commuter bus/rail, you're saying the traffic on the interstate would be the same with it?

I am saying there is no decrease in congestion after commuter rail is put in place - for people who continue to drive. For every person who takes the train there is someone else right behind them to take their place on the freeway.

[G.Walker]

I know the Route 24 bus on the Metro Transit from Norman to OKC is full every morning, ironicly it passes me almost every morning on I-35. Maybe they need to add another bus to this route, I think it would help.

Route 24 | METRO Transit Providing Central Oklahoma Transportation & Bus Service Options

[venture]

A train from downtown Norman to downtown OKC will take longer to build ridership than a train from a park and ride lot in north Norman to downtown OKC - but I'm not trying to solve a low train ridership problem. I am trying to solve sprawl. How can I possibly support a solution that creates more of the problem? Maybe people need to decide for themselves what problems they are trying to solve.

On a side note, here is the folly in commuter rail logic - commuter rail does NOT solve traffic congestion for people who continue to drive. Up to 30% of all traffic is latent demand. If I take the train to work today someone else will take my place on the interstate. There won't be a gap on the road where my truck would normally be; someone else's car will be in that spot. However, if I take the train 100% of congestion will go away for me. So people will have to decide for themselves, do I want congestion or do I not want congestion.

.

Which goes back to what I said that solving sprawl is dead. We can only restrict it from progressing, but the damage is already done.

It seems pretty illogical to want the system to be setup to fail for years and years (a la Amtrak) to wait for an inflill of people into areas that likely won't allow for it.

Will congestion go away with commuter rail? Nope. I agree with you on that. It will however give people more options to get to work. Not to mention open up more of the area job market to those that may not have the ability to commute. If we want to start impacting congestion issues, start pushing tolls on the free interstates. Note I said impact...not solve.

[Just the facts]

I know the Route 24 bus on the Metro Transit from Norman to OKC is full every morning, ironicly it passes me almost every morning on I-35. Maybe they need to add another bus to this route, I think it would help.

Route 24 | METRO Transit Providing Central Oklahoma Transportation & Bus Service Options

Maybe this is a stupid question but what time does the Sooner Express arrive/depart the Sooner Express Parking lot?

[G.Walker]

I think if surburban commuters had more options to get to there employers in the heart of OKC they would. If the MetroTransit had a park & ride in Moore, I would utilize it. Not everyday, but I would use it at least 3 times a week. It also seems like The Link in Edmond has been pretty successful and has high ridership.

[Just the facts]

Which goes back to what I said that solving sprawl is dead. We can only restrict it from progressing, but the damage is already done.

People are opting out of suburbia in growing numbers every day - and many of the are paying high dollar amounts to do it.

[BoulderSooner]

People are opting out of suburbia in growing numbers every day - and many of the are paying high dollar amounts to do it.

then why are the burbs growing faster than the city??

[G.Walker]

Maybe this is a stupid question but what time does the Sooner Express arrive/depart the Sooner Express Parking lot?

From what I can tell, the park and ride location at the Homeland departs at 6:34am, and returns 6:13pm. But the downtown Norman stop at Webster/Main departs at 6:24am, and returns at 6:21pm.

[Just the facts]

From what I can tell, the park and ride location at the Homeland departs at 6:34am, and returns 6:13pm. But the downtown Norman stop at Webster/Main departs at 6:24am, and returns at 6:21pm.

So you are saying GPS# 152 is the park and ride lot?

[G.Walker]

So you are saying GPS# 152 is the park and ride lot?

Yes

[Spartan]

then why are the burbs growing faster than the city??

Because home finance is complicated, complex, and resistant to change. Construction is reliant on finance.

[Just the facts]

Let's go back to the basic question of the thread: Does metro OKC have a traffic issue, yes or no?

The answer depends on when you use the road. If you drive on the freeway at 8AM or 5PM then yes, there is a traffic problem. If your time on the freeway is 2AM Saturday morning of a Tuesday afternoon then your answer is no.

[Spartan]

Let's go back to the basic question of the thread: Does metro OKC have a traffic issue, yes or no?

The answer depends on when you use the road. If you drive on the freeway at 8AM or 5PM then yes, there is a traffic problem. If your time on the freeway is 2AM Saturday morning of a Tuesday afternoon then your answer is no.

I don't understand the point or distinction you're trying to make here. We don't have traffic.