Streetcar

[shawnw]

SW 25 to NW 23 on Walker has been my suggestion since the beginning. Connect HH, Mesta, Paseo, Capitol Hill. Actual neighborhoods with people that might want or need to come downtown. Less than 4 miles of track. No complications (aside from HH/Mesta NIMBY's maybe).

[baralheia]

SW 25 to NW 23 on Walker has been my suggestion since the beginning. Connect HH, Mesta, Paseo, Capitol Hill. Actual neighborhoods with people that might want or need to come downtown. Less than 4 miles of track. No complications (aside from HH/Mesta NIMBY's maybe).

I really love the idea and agree that it needs to be built - however, one big complication is the Stillwater Central (SLWC) railroad crossing on Western a few blocks north of SW 25th. This is point #1 in Urban Pioneer's post above. That railroad crossing will make expansion south of roughly SW 21st St a costly endeavor.

[shawnw]

Apologies, I missed that.

[Urban Pioneer]

How easy (or not) would a short extension to 23rd St. be? That seems like a no-brainer.

It would be reasonably easy aside from potential vocal opposition from some residents in Heritage Hills and Mesta Park. A Paseo extension would definitely get James Cooper's support as long as it didn't infringe on bus system improvements. Currently, the natural extension opportunity exists most easily at Broadway, Robinson, and/or Dewey due to turning radius clearances to connect to the existing lines.

[shawnw]

Currently there is ZERO bus coverage for Paseo aside from the 23. It's pretty ridiculous that we can't go directly from downtown to Paseo via our transit system currently. You can get to Plaza. Farmer's Market. Bricktown obvs. Almost to Western Ave. Uptown indirectly (have to transfer to 23).

[Urban Pioneer]

Great point!

[Urban Pioneer]

Paseo is really coming into its own. I am a big believer in Capitol Hill and have been working on the Yale Theatre over the past year via my day job. However, if we are talking about potential immediate ridership, I suspect that Mesta, Heritage Hills, Jefferson Park, Paseo, and Edgemere would have significant immediate ridership dumping into the current system. This is a very useful discussion ahead of this meeting.

[shawnw]

This is why I want to go up Walker instead of Robinson or Broadway, but I would take Dewey. We can start by going north to NW23rd first and go south after the SW21st rail issue is addressed. Two miles or less of track. Less than five stops probably.

[Ross MacLochness]

Currently there is ZERO bus coverage for Paseo aside from the 23. It's pretty ridiculous that we can't go directly from downtown to Paseo via our transit system currently. You can get to Plaza. Farmer's Market. Bricktown obvs. Almost to Western Ave. Uptown indirectly (have to transfer to 23).

Yep. I live near 23rd and rob. It takes less time to walk to downtown than it does to take the bus (however, it also takes less time to bike than it does drive and park in traffic)

[HOT ROD]

I wonder if they aren’t including the streetcar because of a future vote on an RTA tax.

RTA wont include Streetcar as it's OKC specific and not regional. No way would the suburbs fund anything streetcar and we shouldn't expect them to when it will be hard enough for them to fund their part of the commuter rail and their local bus.

One thing to think - if the Streetcar isn't seen as a success it could cause the RTA to fail. I think it is critical to connect the Streetcar network to an actual neighborhood or section of the city. Capital Hill is the political and probably least costly to implement and it would add a another stop at the park and at the river/Boathouse district.

[HOT ROD]

1. Significant extensions to Capitol Hill will involve going under the "Packingtown Lead" which is the freight railroad tracks that Stillwater Central Railroad operates on. This would involve going under or over these tracks. The most logical place is to do it on Harvey due to the city-owned parkland. This underpass, however, would cause a Capitol Hill extension to be an approximate $80 million+ cost. The system would need to operate on Robinson or Walker in much the same manner as the Dallas Oak Cliff line with an isolated, dedicated lane and Positive Train Control. It is all doable and this particular streetcar line could operate higher speeds if properly separated from auto traffic with bollards or Jersey barriers.

2. Health Sciences is also an $80+ million dollar project as it involves significant track length to properly serve the Health Sciences Center neighborhood due to the area's sprawling, suburban design. It is also doable but would best be done if supplemented by Federal Dollars, imhop. It would be cool to go further into Ward 7 and serve beyond Health Sciences. That cost would be about $120 million - $180 million and involve significant corridor redevelopment with bike lanes, beautification, and such.

The councilors have made it clear that they would like to see significant improvements made to the bus system and the broad use of BRT out of the proposed transit budget in MAPS 4.

Personally, probably one of the best short extensions that we could make would involve better connecting Film Row and the Farmer's Market areas into the existing system. This could be done without too much impact on the overall proposed MAPS 4 budget and help stimulate and reinforce activity in those nearby areas that are out of reasonable walking range. This would be accomplished by extending the "B" Line of the existing system.

Thanks for these great points Perhaps it might be a bit too expensive to prioritize Capital Hill this go around considering the much needed focus on local bus and implementation of BRT down NW Expressway.

However, I do agree and hope we can get a smaller extension that you mention to fully complete downtown to film row and farmers. I hope this could also dual track Sheridan in the CBD (maybe have it loop to Main St in Film Row) and maybe a few more switches for full route flexibility (trains can go around trouble) and also make for easier future extension without disrupting existing routes. We wouldn't need to get any new cars unless there's deal(s) to be received.

With the above knowledge Im all in favor of most of the transit focus to go to bus. But I do hope we can keep the streetcar momentum going with say $50M in MAPS IV to finish the streetcar in west downtown - which likely would assure its success opening up what will be all of the hotspots of downtown and from bus and BRT feeding it.

[Urban Pioneer]

RTA wont include Streetcar as it's OKC specific and not regional. .

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.

[aDark]

Anyone have the updated ridership numbers through June? 6 months of data will be good info!

[hoya]

RTA wont include Streetcar as it's OKC specific and not regional. No way would the suburbs fund anything streetcar and we shouldn't expect them to when it will be hard enough for them to fund their part of the commuter rail and their local bus.

The point isn't that the streetcar would service suburban areas. It's that if people vote for a streetcar expansion, and then an RTA comes up for a vote two years later, voters in OKC may think "didn't we already vote for that?"

So the idea is, maybe they're saving it for the big one.

[HOT ROD]

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.

that;s the vehicle mode of choice, but its not being operated nor paid for by Oklahoma City.

[HOT ROD]

The point isn't that the streetcar would service suburban areas. It's that if people vote for a streetcar expansion, and then an RTA comes up for a vote two years later, voters in OKC may think "didn't we already vote for that?"

So the idea is, maybe they're saving it for the big one.

I understand and maybe that is the case.

But I think it should be high priority for the RTA to distinguish themselves from Embark/Oklahoma City. Make darn sure that everyone understands the RTA is regional and in addition to Embark/Oklahoma City.

On that note, it will be interesting to see how they do local bus in the metro suburbs. Embark belongs to OKC. Will the RTA do bus in the suburbs and CR into the city? or will the RTA assume all transit for the OKC region, displacing Embark entirely?

Food for thought: Here in the Seattle area, King County operates the local bus network within King County (including the city of Seattle and all cities/unincorporated in the county). In other counties, there are either county operated local bus (Pierce County transit) or a combination of regional and city (Community Transit and Everett Transit for Snohomish County). Sound Transit is the RTA and they operate all rail lines in the three counties themself but contract commuter bus to/from downtown Seattle, downtown Bellevue, downtown Tacoma to the agencies (they use their own Sound Transit flag though for buses).

Sound Transit is funded largely via property taxes in the ST region (most of King County, parts of Snohomish and Pierce Counties). Property taxes ALSO fund King County Metro in KC and Pierce Transit in Tacoma/Pierce county. I'm not sure how Community Transit is funded but I bet Everett Transit is sales tax. I believe gas tax is used for all agencies (so where Sound Transit operates, the gas tax is likely double).

So you can see, in Seattle you will pay property tax and gas taxes to King County metro AND Sound Transit. I think/hope OKC can adopt similar model making transit county wide or just let the RTD do it all under one agency. It wouldn't be fair for OKC city/Embark to pay for everything and operate everything despite being the largest player. Yet there needs to be local bus outside of Oklahoma City limits for the RTD to fully function. ...

It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

[Plutonic Panda]

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.

That sucks.

[shawnw]

"behaving like traditional light rail" means going onto existing tracks with a dedicated ROW, which is what I'd think you'd want, so why does it suck?

[Plutonic Panda]

"behaving like traditional light rail" means going onto existing tracks with a dedicated ROW, which is what I'd think you'd want, so why does it suck?

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

[LordGerald]

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

You should probably read the Commuter Corridors Study. The reason why DT to MWC can't work for commuter rail transit is that the distance between DT and MWC is too short. By the time the train would get up to speed, the trip is over.

[Plutonic Panda]

You should probably read the Commuter Corridors Study. The reason why DT to MWC can't work for commuter rail transit is that the distance between DT and MWC is too short. By the time the train would get up to speed, the trip is over.

I'm not suggesting commuter rail.

[shawnw]

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

If I'm referencing the right rail, I count 7 at grade intersections with streets. But keep in mind, the automobiles would have to stop and the rail barriers would come down, so I don't _think_ it would slow down the streetcar any, but not 100% on that obvs. If we were going to MWC on streetcar over the roads I would balk as much as you in this case. But I think this might be an okay compromise instead of "true" light rail (streetcar is still technically a form of light rail). I'm going to suggest a wait and see attitude on this particular implementation.

[Urban Pioneer]

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

I'm not following this line of logic. Our streetcars can easily go 50 - 60mph without modification to the existing vehicle spec. The projected ridership is not so high nor the available alignment so long that it necessitates the heavier and longer Light Rail vehicles that DART or Denver use such as the Siemens or Kinkisharyo trains.

In this case, it is kind of a perfect marriage. There is an existing alignment that goes straight to Midwest City onto Tinker. Basically, the streetcars would be able to go much faster than they can on city streets and operate as a modern Interurban. Later on, if demand were so high or the line broadly expanded, they could switch to a new vehicle type.

[Plutonic Panda]

I understand what you're saying but my point is a higher capacity system should be in order and not one being affiliated with the streetcar system in any way. Longer distance(inter-city)rail line should be grade separated and able to handle at least 3 car trains. A streetcar runs in the street and a hybrid is nothing more than a glorified streetcar. I'm even pissed at LAMTA for some of their recent lines like the Expo(soon to be E line) and the likes of the proposed design of the Van Nuys line. A street car is a street car and I say that at the risk of some criticizing me for making non statements but my point is we need real transit in OKC.

I think the case to be made for real transit in cities like OKC that have so little is more important than building rail lines the right way in cities like LA as any minor delay or inconvenience could be enough to make a potential rider switch back to car. This is especially true as cities like OKC have virtually no traffic issues and extreme ease of parking anywhere. Any minor improvements for end to end travel times not even mentioning frequencies could be what induces a would be rider to use the system. It has to compete with cars to a reasonable extent other than simply being an alternative.

If any at grade rail is proposed they might as well just build BRT. Even if the cost difference per mile(assuming any figures are reliable for OKC[not having constructed such a route and time will tell if a true BRT setup is proposed for NWE]as such figures vary city to city) is not drastic BRT can operate 24/7 at a lower cost not having to take tracks offline for maintenance. NYC among various other cities that have 24 hour service have quad tracks to my understanding or redundant routes.

[Urban Pioneer]

If any at grade rail is proposed they might as well just build BRT.

I’m still confused. The proposal is for streetcar to be completely separated from automobiles for most of the alignment. The numbers to the east do not warrant higher capacity trains. BRT would be a step down.