Streetcar

[Steve]

Urban, part of the problem is we didn't communicate as well as we could have. I'll accept part of the blame. I had no idea you were unhappy with what I wrote until well into this online discussion. In the future, call me and we'll talk about these things.
There will probably be some people who will want to drag out this bit of a flare up and discuss it more. I suggest we move on, and use this as an opportunity to delve more into how this process works, and what's next.

[BoulderSooner]

Urban, part of the problem is we didn't communicate as well as we could have. I'll accept part of the blame. I had no idea you were unhappy with what I wrote until well into this online discussion. In the future, call me and we'll talk about these things.
There will probably be some people who will want to drag out this bit of a flare up and discuss it more. I suggest we move on, and use this as an opportunity to delve more into how this process works, and what's next.

the problem is that you wrote a slanted one sided article .. ... how does everyone else see that except for you?

[Steve]

Not everyone does. Just some folks in this thread Boulder. I've gotten a lot of positive response to it as well. I've heard your complaints...

[Tier2City]

Steve:

We’re passed close of business. How did you get on at the City today? Has anybody contradicted the 2014 deadline for Project 180 that has been repeatedly stated in the many instances that Larry has identified?

[Steve]

Klay Kimker, vice president of Devon Energy, has stated repeatedly they don't require all of Project 180 to be completed by 2014. Eric Wenger, confirmed they are following a schedule that they are trying to follow, but wasn't aware of a deadline required by Devon. I posted this info this morning.

[Tier2City]

As Larry has clearly identified and as I’ve heard City Staff say repeatedly on numerous occasions at public presentations, there’s a 2014 deadline for the whole project. Yet you said last night “City officials long ago acknowledged they were mis-spoken on the Devon deadline.” Is that on the record? Who said that? When did they say that? What exactly did they say? Certainly it’s the first I’ve heard of this.

Are City Staff trying to backpedal and contradict all of their statements that are on the record?

[Steve]

Yep. Laura Story a year ago after Kimker first said Devon didn't require everything to be done by 2014.
Tier2City, I'm still uncertain as to what is going on with the Project 180 schedule. I'll let you know as I find out.

[mcca7596]

It doesn't seem like it would be such a bad thing to stick to a self-imposed schedule of road construction in this city, regardless of outside requirements.

[Steve]

The question is whether by sticking to that schedule, is there harm done to staging the streetcar system, or vice versa, will much of the street work be ripped a couple years after it's completed to make way for the streetcars. And that's the challenge the committee has been dealing with. I've been trying to find out whether they've been properly informed about deadlines and schedules involving Project 180

[mcca7596]

I think then, if there is no required deadline, the main concern isn't even connecting important destinations, cost estimates, etc... The real question is what is more important to finish first: creating a modern, walkable streetscape or implementing a core streetcar system? Yes, both are important for the success of the other, and I realize the subcommittee is trying to do both simultaneously, Steve seems to just be asking if that is feasible.

[Spartan]

Yep. Laura Story a year ago after Kimker first said Devon didn't require everything to be done by 2014.
Tier2City, I'm still uncertain as to what is going on with the Project 180 schedule. I'll let you know as I find out.

So why can't you accept that the city is still going do P180 by 2014/2013/whenever irregardless of a Devon deadline? That certainly seems to be the case. My opinion of this matter, aside from understanding where you're coming from, is that P180 is moving forward and now it's settled that it's not because of Devon, it's just because the city wants to. The city is tearing up the next batch of roads in the next few months and they are doing the final drafts as we speak. And it's not because of Devon.

So for the third time, it's not because of Devon. Doesn't mean P180 isn't moving forward. The streets will be torn up in a few months and the reason won't matter. Personally, I think expediting these things actually is a good idea. Less construction headaches, less lost business for downtown cumulatively. It's like a bandaid that you have to just pull it off fast. But that's a reason, which it seems best not to get into. Reasons are irrelevant, they don't change the fact that the streets will be torn up.

Honestly, what needs to happen is that the committees behind the planning for EVERY downtown investment project right now need to get together in one room for a massive symposium. The people behind Devon, P180, streetcar, convention center, river improvements, sidewalks, Ford Center, boulevard planners, retail strategists, Deep Deuce developers, the Bricktown Association, C2S things, etc--all need to have a massive downtown decision day altogether and share knowledge.

[mcca7596]

Honestly, what needs to happen is that the committees behind the planning for EVERY downtown investment project right now need to get together in one room for a massive symposium. The people behind Devon, P180, streetcar, convention center, river improvements, sidewalks, Ford Center, boulevard planners, retail strategists, Deep Deuce developers, the Bricktown Association, C2S things, etc--all need to have a massive downtown decision day altogether and share knowledge.

Probably the most logical, yet overlooked idea I've seen proposed for downtown development.

[Steve]

It's not a matter of me accepting anything. I'm asking questions, delving into the process and trying to figure out if people are being properly informed and whether concerns being expressed are accurate or not. Some folks aren't happy with me doing that. Some folks aren't happy with what I've written. I get that. And I'm listening. Jeff, Betts and Sid, along with city staff today, answered some of my questions. Now I'm moving on to looking at what it all means.

[Steve]

I think then, if there is no required deadline, the main concern isn't even connecting important destinations, cost estimates, etc... The real question is what is more important to finish first: creating a modern, walkable streetscape or implementing a core streetcar system? Yes, both are important for the success of the other, and I realize the subcommittee is trying to do both simultaneously, Steve seems to just be asking if that is feasible.

Thanks mccca. But I'll also acknowledge I was too aggressive in my questioning last night.

[soonerguru]

Not everyone does. Just some folks in this thread Boulder. I've gotten a lot of positive response to it as well. I've heard your complaints...

I'm sure you have received a lot of positive response from Jane Jenkins, Larry Nichols, Charlie Swinton, and everyone else who wants to "slow down" on the streetcar. Reading the multiple pages of this thread, no one really provides any positive commentary about your piece. That seems like a fairly decisive repudiation. The pettiness of your tone and thorough lack of research (which Larry provides in a massive smackdown) are very clear to the people who comment on this board. We are paying attention.

[Spartan]

...,Charlie Swinton, and everyone else who wants to "slow down" on the streetcar..

This is my biggest fear right now.

There is NO question in my mind that first we hear "whoa whoa slow down this process, let's get it right," and then we hear, "are we sure about streetcars? rubber tire trolleys are a great alternative, ya know..."

Come on. There is not a single person in this thread (maybe Kerry) who doesn't know how this game is played. And one thing is for sure, this is turning into a game, and it is being played. I don't think by Jeff, in fact, in my mind I see Jeff trying to prevent the game with damage control and moving the chess pieces around. No doubt there are still opponents, even downtown bankrollin' opponents, of the streetcar, who really want that money for other things, or would like to move with other projects sooner.

We have to stay the course and stay true to the voters who wanted transit above anything else. AND specifically approved a downtown modern streetcar and nothing more, nothing less. Period.

[Tier2City]

Yep. Laura Story a year ago after Kimker first said Devon didn't require everything to be done by 2014.

Wow. That really is quite a change to the 2014 meme. Did I miss you writing about that at the time?

Tier2City, I'm still uncertain as to what is going on with the Project 180 schedule. I'll let you know as I find out.

Where is the Implementation Agreement? It is referenced even in the 24 page PDF presentation on @ OKC.gov, but no speciifics are given.

Why is Devon saying there are no deadlines when Mr. Nichols stated there were?

Do the deadlines only include the property adjacent to the Devon tower or all of P180 as the articles suggest?

The answer would be in that agreement, where is it?

Hopefully you'll be able to check out the Devon/City agreement which is at the root of all this.

[Kerry]

This is my biggest fear right now.

There is NO question in my mind that first we hear "whoa whoa slow down this process, let's get it right," and then we hear, "are we sure about streetcars? rubber tire trolleys are a great alternative, ya know..."

Your comment about me withstanding, you are correct about the 'slow it down' crowd; they have no desire to get it right. They want to slow it down so they can offer up non-rail alternatives.

[Tier2City]

Your comment about me withstanding, you are correct about the 'slow it down' crowd; they have no desire to get it right. They want to slow it down so they can offer up non-rail alternatives.

One could also think they simply want to get other, much less popular Maps 3 projects done first.

[soonerguru]

I actually have wondered if some of the people at the City are intentionally trying to exclude the streetcar from the Project 180 timeline to sabotage it. It's ridiculous that Steve isn't hounding everyone involved with Project 180 about why they aren't accommodating the streetcar into the project as much as possible.

It would be an egregious waste of taxpayer money not to make every effort to combine the projects whenever possible.

Oddly, Steve has chosen to target what is possibly the most transparent group associated with MAPS construction in the history of any single project while at the same time letting the real under-the-table operators maneuver in the dark. The openness, thoroughness and transparency of the streetcar subcommittee are to be lauded. Meanwhile, the powerful continue to play games behind closed doors.

Journalists are supposed to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Steve seems to have this in reverse.

[soonerguru]

I'm also somewhat concerned that Charlie Swinton is a Trojan Horse who will come in and muck up the streetcar. He needs to be called out and queried about his bizarre comments.

[Tier2City]

Bingo. Every year that CC isn't built...

On a side note, I must say it was incredibly refreshing and honest to hear Kirk Humphries bluntly say at the ULI Council Candidates Forum last week that the reason Maps 3 was set up as a single package was to get the Convention Center through.

[okclee]

I'm wondering if Steve hasn't been used in this entire ordeal?

[Steve]

Yeah, I'm a big patsy. Wow... it's like none of you have ever read a word I've ever written. This thread is getting ridiculous.

[soonerguru]

Yeah, I'm a big patsy. Wow... it's like none of you have ever read a word I've ever written. This thread is getting ridiculous.

I read your articles often. Your coverage of the streetcar has not been up to the standards of your other work. How many of the subcommittee meetings have you attended? I'm sorry, but your efforts in this regard have been beneath your standards. Also, you seem to have an issue with Jeff.