Wow, Betts -- I'm sure your generous offer to shunt the stuff you think you don't wanta hafta look at down Robinson and Walker a ways to the nice folks in Capitol Hill and South Town will be seen by them as truly noble and endearing gesture. "Real neighborly."

"Let them eat cake," and all that -- right?

Does what you'd rather not have in your idyllic, arboreal, urban-heavenscape include the Latino Center and Little Flower Church? If memory serves, I think both the current Latino Center and Wheeler Park, at least, look a lot like condos or somesuch in one of the Core to Shore color maps.

I once suggested to Pat Fennell that it looked like a fair bet that when the big shots were done with Riverside, there'd be about as many brown folks left there as there are black folks in Deep Deuce.

Whaddaya think?

TOM ELMORE

I think nobody likes your plan, and you've now resorted to calling us a bunch of racists. Because not wanting freight shipping downtown means that I'm a member of the Klan, apparently.

Tom, the freight yards are already there south of the river. I'm not "shunting" anything. And if you're agreeing that they're "not worth looking at", then why would you think we would want them next to our Central Park? Core to Shore has Little Flower staying intact. I don't know about the Latino Center. I would assume it would stay there unless they wanted to sell. Now, there is abandoned commercial land south of Little Flower than only a bulldozer can cure, but Core to Shore has land that can be used for many income levels. It has a school on the Riverside that I would assume would serve people north and south of the river, which might make it a school that serves multiple ethnicities and income levels. That's the kind of schools we need to encourage in our city. I think most people who are going to live in condos downtown are the type of people that would welcome any ethnic group.

So, you don't think Latinos would benefit from am "idyllic, arboreal, urban-heavenscape"? They don't have the sensibility to enjoy parkland? The wonderful things about parks is that they're free, and they provide free leisure time activity to anyone, no matter what their income level. They're a place people can join together as a community to recreate. I've not seen much sense of community on commuter trains, necessary as they might be in some places. We all need things that uplift us, that allow us to escape the daily grind. You are showing your disdain for parkland with your words. We clearly have a difference in what we value that discussion cannot erase.

Ahh yes -- so you fellers can dish it out -- but you're not much on "taking it," are you?

And, no, Betts -- I never said that anything that's already there in the Union Station corridor "wasn't worth looking at." I like the real stuff -- the historic stuff -- the stuff that makes life and commerce possible for us real Oklahomans.

Have you walked the north bank of the river from Western to Exchange and on, westerly, to Penn? It's like a natural extension of Wheeler Park.

I recently did so. I'd say it qualifies as a broad, beautiful, green space -- that might make you want to kick the soccer ball around with the kids or just run and jump and play.

...and, heck -- it's already there!

Of course, not for long if ODOT has its way.

Is it just "less desirable" because we already have it -- and don't have to take it away from anybody?

I was envisioning a rail transit stop -- right there on the former Frisco line linking the Stockyards and Union Station.

Pretty handy.

TOM ELMORE

No, those will stay right were they are, unless you are successful in getting I-40 moved south--then they will be demolished.

It's time to listen to an ODOT bridge engineer who stated we can redeck that bridge for $50 million, keep the parks, keep Union Station, keep our life.

But of course Oklahoma isn't 47th in the nation per capita income with a loss of a congressional seat with ignorant planning such as the I-40 realignment.

We destroyed Deep Deuce losing all that heritage for 'new' apartments and we'll destroy Union Station for a 'new' highway.

Oklahomans doesn't know how to use what they have.

If we redeck the current crosstown, it's still an ugly eyesore and there will NOT be a park. We can't have C2S with the elevated highway remaining. And if we don't clean up that area, Union Station sure as heck won't work as a passenger rail hub.

So destroying Union Station is 'cleaning' it up? How is that even possible? What about that park south and west of Union Station that's there now?

Don't be so dense.

The area around Union Station is severely blighted. It will not become otherwise (and the park will not happen) unless the elevated highway is removed as a visual and psychological barrier.

Why would we want to have our primary rail hub in the middle of a slum? That is what you are suggesting.

You did NOT answer the question. What about the park that is there now?

The area around Union Station can be improved but there's so much a political (not logical) push to get I-40 realignment that people are blind.

Again you use feelings regarding Union Station and not facts.

The park's name that's just south and west of Union Station now is Wheeler Park. Part of that will be affected by the realignment. So don't tell me there won't be a park if we don't realign. That's part of the massive disinformation going on along with the Oklahoman.

If there was no fraud involved, the STB would NOT throw out the BNSF application to abandon the rail lines. They were using that lie to expedite Union Station's destruction.

People are so uneducated about this that they even call Union Depot the 'station'. According to railroading definitions, a station is simply a stop on the tracks. How else does a train pull into a station if it has no tracks? It can't. It's like ripping all the runways out at an airport and still call it an airport. It makes no logical sense.

Oklahoma is 47th per capita income and has lost a congressional seat and pathetic planning such as the I-40 realignment keeps us there.

What does that have to do with anything? Wheeler Park is not a nice park at all, and in no way substitutes for the C2S iconic park. It's a glorified ballfield.

TWO SETS OF TRACKS will remain!

RichardR369,

As much of a critic as I am of the whole C2S thing, you've got to admit that that existing I-40 bridge looks like an emergency overnight replacement for a broken bridge...it's the work of a madman, honestly!!! that is the weirdest thing I've ever seen. And also consider, that it also has ZERO means of expansion for more lanes.

I can appreciate your cost-saving approach to just re-deck the thing, but I think it would cost us dearly in the long-run.

I just wish that we could get rid of all the wacky curvature and have the interstate as straight as possible through the city...I mean it's bad enough with I-35 taking it's wacko merge thing, veering back and forth, with I-40 for that short distance...

BUT, we are here now and they are geared to move the thing.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I dont think union station was ever in the 'destroy' path of the new interstate, just some of the rails were...???

Glad to correct you. ODOT's plan has always called for the entire existing Union Station rail terminal facility yard to be excavated. Every square inch -- including the platforms and underground tunnels, which, of course, are part of the terminal building.

They've always claimed they would "put the UP line back" -- but sort of "down in a ditch with the new 10-lane road" instead of at its current elevation, which, of course, cripples its usefulness. And, of course, they are very, very determined to destroy the beautiful "iconic underpasses" at Robinson and Walker. You sort of get the idea that it really, really bugs ODOT that these structures are not only still looking great, but unlike the stuff ODOT always builds, still working just fine after 77 years.

Maybe instead of destroying the underpasses, they should carefully preserve them so that all their experts can come down and look at them to learn how to build good stuff -- instead of the sort of stuff ODOT always builds. After all -- according to the courageous, nameless editorial writers at the state's largest newspaper, the first "really big crack" appeared in the Crosstown bridgework in 1989 -- which would mean the bridge was only 23 years old. And, of course, ODOT built it.

And who would keep on lettin' people who'd build bridges that crack up after only 23 years tear up far better bridges that others built -- that are still working just fine after 77 years and don't have any "big cracks" in 'em -- to build more of the sort of stuff they always build?

I mean -- do you see what I mean?

TOM ELMORE

Yeah, I totally get the feeling that ODOT goes around looking for scenic underpasses to destroy. Hell, I bet they did it just to get under your skin.

Dude, you're a loon. I'm done with you.

Don't feed the troll guys. He's like a broken record.

You can redeck i-40, but that doesn't help the fact that it's got 40% more daily traffic than it was designed for. It also doesn't help the fact that it's a an eyesore that completely blights all the land under and around it.

And I fail to see the connection between 47th in the nation in per capita income with loss of a congressional seat having anything to do with I-40.

What park? Sorry, but there are a lot of us who have no political connections who think the I-40 realignment is reasonable. I wanted it to go south of the river, but apparently that's rather crass of me, so I'll stick with the current plan.

I find this subject fascinating, but since I'm not from here I know very little about it.

Where exactly is Union Station. A street address would be great.

Why wasn't it ever designated as a historical site?

I think if at all possible the rail lines should be saved for future light rail use, it's always cheaper than putting in an all new line.

Why are people here so opposed to mass transit?

hoyasooner sez: Dude, you're a loon. I'm done with you.
_____________________________

You're done with me, you say hoya?

Well, I'd just have to say that's certainly a relief. You had me worried there for a minute.

TOM ELMORE

300 SW 7th St.

Don't know, but it really doesn't matter because NO ONE wants it torn down. The people who talk about relocation plans "destroying" Union Station are being histrionic.

I'm not sure any of us know how much money it would cost to move the planned Crosstown, compared to what the amount of track being removed would cost to replace. I don't even know if the track being removed is currently in need of repair or replacement, and if it is, what that would cost. I'm not sure who does have that data. The lines under discussion are heavy rail lines, not light rail lines.

I'm not sure who you mean by "here". If you mean people posting here, then you probably need to wade through this thread again, as I don't believe anyone posting here, regardless of their position on how Union Station should be used, is against mass transit. If you're talking about the information offered by various posters here that there are people in positions of power in the city who are opposed to mass transit, none of us seem to have the answer to that question. It doesn't really make sense that they would be, but there does seem to be some footdragging that implies opposition.

By the way, folks -- to answer another question or two, OKC Union Station, of course, may be found where Hudson Street, leading south out of downtown, crosses SW 7th. If you go further, you run right into the rail yard, which is how the facility was designed. Hudson and Harvey come to the terminal yard at-grade, Robinson and Walker, one block east and west, respectively, flow under the yard at the spectacular, purpose-built underpasses that were key, integral design elements of the new-in-1931 terminal facility. The street address is 300 SW 7th. Look it up on Google Earth or maps.live.com

And, yes, the OKC Union Station terminal building is listed on the National Historic Register. And the Robinson and Walker underpasses are said to be "candidates" for the register. But this doesn't necessarily protect any of them. Meanwhile, the "station" is actually the terminal rail facility yard, which could handle trains up to a certain level with or without a terminal building.

The problems Union Station was built to solve were actually addressed in the design of the terminal yard and underpasses. Without them -- as folks in Capitol Hill are already discovering -- many of those problems are likely to reappear.

TOM ELMORE

Regarding Union Station destruction, it's by definition.

Union Depot (the building) was placed on the National Register of Historic Places. That cannot be torn down but if OKC had the chance, they would.

According to the General Code of Operating Railroads (GCOR) that all railroads have to comply with, a station is simply a timetable. A stop on the tracks. So you can have have a terminal building like Union Depot at a station, a hut, a bench or even nothing at a station. All the tracks will be removed and one (maybe 2) would be put back so thus by definition, Union 'Station' will be destroyed.

Those that advocate otherwise aren't defining their terms.

Fact 1 - Union Station is not currently used as a train station.
Fact 2 - There is not a plan by anyone to use Union Station as a train station.
Fact 3 - The 2 existing active rail lines passing by Union Station will not be removed.
Fact 4 - Union Station will not be torn down.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

That's what you say are facts. I used outside resources. Where's yours?