You just made me realize something. When people like you call those 'facts', it's hopeless to convince you otherwise. So why am I even wasting my time?

Matthew 7:6 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)

6"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

You just made me realize something. When people like you submit opinions as facts without quoting sources, it's useless to teach you anything.

Matthew 7:6 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)

6"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

No existing active rail lines at Union Station will be removed - only the abandoned lines will be taken out. Actually, most of the actual track isn't even there anyhow. Either you don't know the situation on the ground at Union Station or you are lying about it to push an agenda. Which is it?

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

Are you serious? These statements are not opinion, they are undeniable facts. Please show me where anyone of them is false.

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.

I just gave you the information you needed, National Register and GCOR. You gave me nothing but your statements.

I could say "FACT: People who support the I-40 realignment are mongoloid idiots" but that doesn't say much. Where's your external references to support your claim?

Apparently you don't pay attenion Richard.

Fact 1 - Union Station is not currently used as a train station.
Unless you know of some ghost train that currently uses the station.....or why the lines were abandoned if a train still uses them....?

Fact 2 - There is not a plan by anyone to use Union Station as a train station.
No one had any plans to reutilize the station as a train station when all of this started. The ontrac folks are still the only ones that even talk about it and they aren't the ones that would actually pull the plan off. It would be the city and they don't have any plans for it....go ask, we have.

Fact 3 - The 2 existing active rail lines passing by Union Station will not be removed.
This has been clearly stated in the i-40 discussions, you can even find it on their website. The plans have been out for months and proposals for years. It's not new news.

Fact 4 - Union Station will not be torn down.
Again, look at the i-40 website. They very clearly say it won't be torn down.

So now would you like to put your foot in your mouth about anything else? Because if you don't do your homework and just talk our of your rear, be prepared to have it handed to you.

FACT: The National Register states "Union Depot". What part of 'depot' and 'station' don't you understand? The depot is the building and that's not what's being torn down. The station 'GCOR defined' is being destroyed for the realignment save enough track space for 2 tracks leaving the depot behind.

And FACT - if the city's plan were actually taking part of the DEPOT, then they wouldn't have been federally approved. It's not like they were trying to hide it. Rail lines feeding into the depot do not count as part of the depot. There is a limit on how far out the DEPOT goes. You can't claim lines a mile out bud.

I love how you twist all that around. You can't even tell the difference between a station or a depot.

And by the way, just because OKC says they're not destroying the station and GCOR states they are doesn't mean they aren't. Just remember, OKC is so corrupt even the state auditor went to jail. I trust nobody. It's this kind of government that keeps us at 47th per capita income and we also lost a congressional seat to where Utah picked it up.

Sorry, but I call BS on that. I know of no one who does not recognize the charm of Union Station. I'd probably chain myself to the door before I allowed a wrecking ball to come near it. Who is "OKC"? Define that term.

Again. BS. I have yet to see anyone who is talking about Union Station being "destroyed" give any sort of definition unless pressed. Regardless, Union Station is not currently a schedule for anyone, so by your definition it's already too late. It's already been destroyed. With even one track it has as much potential to be a "schedule" as it does with three, so even if you alter your definition to say it currently has the "potential" to be a "schedule" if track is not destroyed, your definition doesn't work.

The people who are not defining their terms are the ones using sensationalistic words like "destroyed" to the gullible public. I'm pretty honest about what I want for Union Station. I'd be fine with it being one stop on a light rail line. That would actually make it a station, by your definition. Then, it could house a wonderful rail museum, if the rail lovers would like. It could hold an art gallery and a great restaurant. I'd also like to see if have a casual restaurant where people could bring their children for lunch on a Saturday when they're enjoying the park. It could have an event space, for things like wedding receptions and parties. Tavern on the Green does pretty well for itself. Union Station could be an icon as well.

I'd rather see it used as a space the people in Oklahoma City can enjoy than satisfy the train obsessed people of the world, so they can put pictures of it in Trains magazine, stop to visit it once in their life so they can say they've been there and throw around words like GCOR. Even my train obsessed husband thinks plans to use Union Station as a multimodal station are ridiculous. He thinks the only logical place for a multimodal station is at the intersection of a north-south/east-west line. It does sound rather sensible.

When I refer to OKC, I refer to the corrupt government that runs this place.

You are correct in that there's no more timetables in use for Union Station but that doesn't negate the definition of what a station is. People in Oklahoma City just can't change the dictionary because they want something done.

Blah blah corupt government blah blah blah ODOT evil blah blah Istook blah blah blah Mormons blah blah. What kind of kool-aide are you guys drinking over there at OnTrac?

ooops - I forgot:

blah blah mail blah blah...

Undeniable Facts
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.

Actually Kerry, the Mormons put together a pretty good system so far... rail, bus, wide residential streets with bike lanes and room to park without taking up lanes. I dont think they belong in the list of 'evil', at least not for the transit stuff. See pics...

DSCN0058 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

DSCN0029 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

DSCN0072 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Fact: Rocky Anderson called OKC fools for destroying Union Station. Dallas DART has warned OKC not to make this mistake.

I support OnTRAC but I'm not an official member.

Undeniable Fact: 47th per capita income and lost congressional seat. Keep up the good work. It's funny what you call facts the rest of the nation calls opinion.

We're Okies...blah..blah...blah...we're too smart to do proper studies to see if what we're doing is right...blah...blah...blah.

I'm proud of you for keeping us near the bottom in every conceivable ranking in the US. In the 80's our school system was 7th worst in the nation. I haven't keep up to see if we finally hit bottom or not. I have to listen to morons like you say "undeniable fact: We're not destroying the station" when 49 other states say you are.

You, my friend, are a piece of work.

Last year, I went to Union Station. Before ODOT showed up, it was a happy place. They had... flowery meadows and rainbow skies and, and rivers made of chocolate where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.

Ya, I think they originally filmed Willa Wonka there...

RichardR369,

Couple of logic points.

-we are then NOT fools UNTIL we destroy the station, correct?

-For some reason, I must have missed the other 49 states' presence here checking out all that is going on. If we have that much interest in OK's union station--from 49 states--then let's bargain with them. Each of them can pitch in a little $ and we'll make union station anything they want! Anything... If they will buy our transit system, we'll turn that thing in to a transit center, fruit stand, hell a WAL-MART!

If they're buying.

Sir, you seem to have a drive to save union station. What would you like to see it's future become? I don't want to demolish the thing, but to invest in making it a functional mass transit center would mean the need to plan extra space for expansion. There's only so much space down there.

I mean the people of OKC in general, not necessarily anyone that posts here. Just look at the state of the bus system here.

That is a great idea.

Explain to me please, what you mean by multimodal station

I recognize that arguing with you is a waste of time, but at this point in time, I don't believe anyone's plans for Union Station negate the definition of a station.

Personally, mine would, because I'd like to see light rail run along the boulevard, but I've come to realize that a compromise is probably necessary. So, I'm not thrilled with, but would be OK with light rail stopping at Union Station. That would make it a station, according to your definition.

Regardless, who cares about definitions? What we care about is what is best for Oklahoma City. What I care about is, if we're going to have light rail, (and I'm still not sure that's the best option for Oklahoma City at this point in time), coming up with a plan for location of lines so that people will actually use it. A station at the intersection of north-south and east-west lines makes far more sense. Practicality and ease of use are what might make mass transit a reasonable option for people who are accustomed to getting in their cars and driving directly to where they want to go.

And again, please come up with a city other than Dallas to give us as an example, or whose experts to quote. There's a city that has very few redeeming virtues when considered as an example of urban living, IMO.

A multimodal station is one that has multiple modes of transportation as options. Buses, heavy and light rail and commercial rail/truck traffic is what the OnTrac people would like to see.

OnTrac's plan to move the relocation of I-40 a bit south would also destroy (see I can use that word too) the Little Flower Church, which I would hate to see happen.

As a compromise, I'd be willing to accept light rail and trollies at Union Station. They would offer mass transit to locals and visitors around the city, without destroying (there's that word again)) the beauty of Union Station like I think commercial rail and buses would. They would also be more acceptable to potential residents, as all that blighted land around Union Station gives us a remarkable opportunity to create a downtown neighborhood that is higher density and aesthetically pleasing

Freight rail/truck traffic doesn't belong downtown. I would like to see the rails saved for future light/passenger rail .

What is the Little Flower Church and could it be moved?

I'm not too fond of Dallas either, it's a fun place to go spend a weekend but I wouldn't want to live there. There are lessons that OKC could learn from Dallas, Austin , Portland, Seattle ect. on how to make a transit system work here.

This is Little Flower Church.

http://newsok.com/off-track-this-tra...rticle/3316641

Answering yesterday's OKLAHOMAN "anti Union Station" editorial, and some recent comments on that website:

As the late Dr. Marvin D. Monaghan, longtime Dallas Area Rapid Transit board member recalled, like most "new transit city" leaders, DART officials faced a lot of static getting their rail transit development underway. What we who've fought for OKC Union Station since 1989 have faced was very familiar to him. He'd met plenty of "Jills," and plenty of blustering bureaucrats and elected officials protecting their own fiefdoms.

Interviewed by KTOK's Jerry Bohnen in 2002, Dr. Monaghan reflected that, six years into DART Rail service, suburban and other leaders who'd thrown in with the highway lobby to fight rail, costing the effort tremendous time and money, were now lined up at DART's door, hats in hands, meekly requesting service extension for their communities ASAP. "They're eating crow by the platter," he said. Why? Because of the nearly unbelievable development and redevelopment that immediately flowed to the rail transit lines.

The first trains ran in June, 1996. DART Rail's first phase, built mostly on former freight railway corridors centered at Dallas Union Station, quickly drew 40,000 daily riders. Dallas Zoo visitors tripled in the first year. New business, hotels and convention centers sprang up along the lines and old urban neighborhoods suddenly reborn. In 2001, Metroplex voters who'd defeated a 1988 startup funding proposal approved $2.9 billion to speed system extensions -- 4-to-1. Similar success followed Denver and Salt Lake's first phases.

"A start" draws overwhelming local support. A start is what's been methodically denied Oklahomans, despite our amazing wealth of superb rail assets, despite high gas prices, terrorist bombings, world turmoil and economic meltdowns.

A DART Rail day pass is $3. Commuters ride all month for $50. Who knew money we send in to the Federal Transit Trust Fund with every motor fuel purchase was building such systems for others -- while our own elected officials sought to destroy our magnificent rail center, best in the West? Did you read it in THE OKLAHOMAN? See it on 4,5 and 9? No? And why, despite the repeated pleas and warnings of surrounding "new transit city" officials would debt-ridden, perpetually-money-grubbing ODOT continue its hell-bent rush to destroy our statewide railway network's center -- for a mere four miles of highway?

Who and what is THE OKLAHOMAN and the rest of the state's big media protecting? Are they really so hungry for auto dealer ad revenue that they'd cripple, forever, the state's ability to compete with our newly-transit-mobile neighbors in the West? OKLAHOMAN readers may remember that if we'd listened to its nasty editorials a few years back, the landmark Walnut Bridge would now be gone, replaced with "another at-grade rail crossing."

Considering the staggering failures of OKC leadership in the urban renewal disasters of the 1970s, OKC Union Station should plainly be seen by all of us as a second chance -- an elegant gift of our great-grandparents' generation to our own grandchildren, reaching down through time to give us all exactly what we need at this moment. If this is your thinking, now would be the time to ask Governor Henry to call the "debt kings" at ODOT off of this treasure.

Most recent OKLAHOMAN comment -- http://newsok.com/off-track-this-tra...rticle/3316641

ODOT'S "Revised Financial Plan February 2008 Update" sign by Mr. Ridley on 5/27/2008 shows $624 million for the current cost estimate of the I-40 Crosstown Project. This is almost 300% over the orginal cost estimate. Someone should be doing an investigation.
chuck, oklahoma city - Oct 30, 2008 2:20 PM

WE CAN STILL HAVE LIGHT RAIL WITHOUT HAVING UNION STATION AS A MULTIMODAL STATION.

Sorry to capitalize, but there are two separate arguments here. You can be pro one and anti the other.

I am not anti light rail, although I want thoughtful decisions to be made about its' location so that it is practical and useful. I think mass transit in Oklahoma City would be better served by first improving our bus and trolley system, which is flexible and runs on existing streets. No one on this thread is anti-light rail that I've seen. Don't lump people who are against using Union Station as a multi-modal station with people who are not interested in mass transit. That's as false as saying it would "destroy" Union Station were it not used as a multi-modal station. If you want to accuse ODOT of falsifying things, you have to keep your own nose clean or you lose all credibility.