The new Gazette has an article outlining what appears to be a mushrooming scandal involving the new I-40, former Congressman Istook, the railroad, ODOT, and the former commuter rail track which still lies next to Union Station, awaiting destruction.

In my quickie reading of the article (I will spend more time with it tonight), it seems:

1. The railroad falsely claimed that the aforementioned commuter rail track, which was destined to be destroyed to make way for the new highway, had NOT been used for rail traffic, when in fact it had been -- one month earlier.

2. Citizen groups exposed this blatant misrepresentation of the facts.

3. A governing board, which initially gave clearance for the destruction of the rails, has now voided that decision, opening up the discussion for future debate.

4. Istook was at the heart of the matter, with ODOT a shadow player. Istook, who steered a ton of transportation money to his ancestral Mormon homeland, is now caught up 100 percent in the crosshairs of the Abramoff public corruption scandal that has engulfed the GOP.

This article is a must read for everyone on the board. If we were willingly mislead, and it appears we were, we need to put forth public protest that will put to shame the efforts behind saving the Gold Dome. This deal stinks to high heaven. It always has felt very "good ol' boy," but now, it appears, there's a smoking gun.

Board rules railroad company falsified Crosstown Expressway documents

Wednesday, June 18, 2008
By Ben Fenwick

TOC-BNSF-Union-Station-vert.jpgOn Aug. 30, 2005, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad signed an agreement with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation that ODOT, at taxpayer’s expense, would haul lumber in trucks for the Mid-States Wholesale Lumber Co., 101 S.E. Fourth. The estimated cost was $22,800.

‘FALSE’ MEANING
‘PREMATURE’ SPECULATION

The reason? BNSF was to abandon nearly three miles of track so that ODOT could build the new Crosstown Expressway, also known as the Interstate 40 Relocation Project, through a section of that rail line — and, incidentally, wipe out the rail yard for Oklahoma City’s Union Station.

However, when BNSF officials filed for permission with the U.S. Surface Transportation Board, they told a different story. The paperwork the company filed to give the track to ODOT claimed it had not been used for the previous two years — about 23 days after the railroad agreed to let trucks instead of trains haul the lumber.

When metro-area activists opposed to the Crosstown project presented the discrepancy to the board, the board ruled that BNSF falsified its application and threw out the paperwork.

“This means that its certification in September 2005 was false or misleading. As a result, we will reopen the January 2007 decision and reject BNSF’s notice of exemption as void,” the board ruled this month.

State transportation officials said the ruling might stop some construction on the Crosstown — for now.

“We are still pretty confident they will work it out,” said ODOT spokeswoman Brenda Perry. “We are not directly involved, but it affects us.”

A spokesman for BNSF refused an interview, instead issuing a statement prepared by the company.

“The ‘false or misleading information’ referenced in the STB decision dated June 3, 2008, was the result of a technicality that resulted in BNSF retaining and using less than 100 feet (the length of about one rail car) at the eastern end of this trackage near Shields Boulevard to serve a large shipper located nearby,” the release said.

Opponents to the Crosstown have a different view: The BNSF decision is proof that Oklahomans are being misled about the whole project, including its cost, its purpose and its would-be benefits for the city. With gas projected at $5 a gallon and beyond, does Oklahoma City need another highway, or a citywide commuter rail?

“Are they going to build a 10-lane highway across a rail line that is part of the national rail system and has jurisdiction?” asked Norman attorney Micheal Salem, who is working on the case. “Should ODOT continue to commit hundreds of millions of dollars to build a highway for which they have no authority, over the land that they’ve chosen already? Can they build a highway over an existing railroad without the authority of the federal government to do that?”

‘FALSE’ MEANING
For Common Cause community activist Edwin Kessler, a retired meteorologist who filed the protest, the very first action of the Crosstown Expressway was a deliberate attempt to mislead Oklahomans.

“There have been some lines cut and there is a controversy about that indicated in the STB ruling,” Kessler said. “It means they are not authorized to abandon the line, and if they want to abandon it, they will have to reapply.”

To others on the opposition, Kessler’s work — which includes photographing BNSF’s actions on-site, developing the legal angles and other behind-the-scenes actions — the victory before the STB is a stunning upset.

“He accomplished a most significant task,” said Washington, D.C., attorney Fritz Kahn, who represented Common Cause to the board. “To get the STB to reopen a proceeding almost never happens. Moreover, to get the STB to rule against one of the Class I railroads as it did in ruling against Burlington Northern is something quite extraordinary.”

In its ruling, the board noted Kessler’s work as instrumental to the outcome of the case, and gave a scathing rebuke to BNSF, saying the company appeared to obfuscate the truth about the rail usage and the Crosstown construction.

“BNSF’s own evidence shows that it operated over a portion of the line during the (two)-year period prior to Sept. 23, 2005, confirming Mr. Kessler’s allegation that BNSF’s certification in its notice (that no local traffic had moved over the line for at least (two) years prior to the filing date) was false or misleading,” the board stated in its ruling. “Furthermore, despite multiple opportunities, BNSF has failed to provide an adequate explanation for the 2005 letters, in which BNSF seems to indicate that it provided rail service to Mid-States via the line within the (two)-year period prior to Sept. 23, 2005.”

Because of the misleading information, the board stated, it is reopening the proceedings. BNSF will have to reapply. This filing will be more involved, with proceedings on why removing the rail line is in the public’s interest.

“First of all, one of the questions that will have to be answered in additional proceedings, is what will be the purpose of rail use in Oklahoma City — that will be part of the ‘public interest, convenience and necessity’ that will be decided in a new abandonment proceeding,” Salem said.

Kahn agreed that BNSF’s task is likely to be widened considerably.

“The environmental-assessment report will be much more complex than BNSF had to file with this notice,” Kahn said. “The environment process will give citizens who are not shippers but have an interest in that line an opportunity to come in and testify. Before they file either a petition or an application, they have to consult with the specified Oklahoma and federal agencies to get their reaction on the environmental and historic effects on the proposed abandonment.”

‘PREMATURE’ SPECULATION
Among those watching it closely will be Tom Elmore, executive director of North American Transportation Institute, whose work against the Crosstown and for light-rail contributed to the recent decision. Former Oklahoma City U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook shepherded funding for the Crosstown project through Congress in 2004. The federal funding favored many of Istook’s political donors, who received contracts for the highway. Istook, however, did the opposite for political donors in Utah, Elmore said, earmarking funding for a light-rail and commuter rail system that serves an Air Force logistics base considered to be a competitor to Tinker Air Force Base.

“Istook provided the startup funding for commuter trains between Provo and Ogden linked to Hill Air Force Base,” Elmore said. “They will soon have 60 commuter trains a day between those communities in full operation. It is such a high-tech corridor that the trains don’t even have to whistle at crossings — the crossings have their own whistles. Hill is now the only air logistics center in the nation with oil-crisis-proof workforce mobility.”

But not Oklahoma, he said.

“The same guy, while he was funding that, was funding the Crosstown so Union Station would be destroyed — and don’t ever believe that he had anything other than that in mind,” Elmore said.

Istook did not return calls for comment.

Union Station — its rail yard slated for destruction because it lies in the path of the proposed Crosstown — was once the center of a massive commuter rail system in Oklahoma City that provided passenger service to Tinker, Norman, Edmond, Bethany and other surrounding communities. The easements and even lines for these still exist, but Elmore said the rail hub at Union Station will be wiped out by the Crosstown if it is allowed to proceed. However, ODOT’s Perry said a single rail line will be brought into Union Station should commuters wish to use it as a rail stop.

But now, Elmore said, there is a chance to reverse the destruction of the Union Station rail yard. Elmore said the ruling concerning the rail line has an effect similar to that of the movement to save the Walnut Avenue Bridge. That bridge, from Deep Deuce to Bricktown, was slated for destruction until civic activists opposed it in hearings at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. Now, the bridge is considered a vital link between new, upscale loft apartments and Bricktown’s establishments.

“Remember the Walnut Bridge? We didn’t fight it before the council, we didn’t fight it before the planning commission — we took it to the Corporation Commission because that’s where the fight was,” Elmore said. “Well, same thing here. We quit arguing with them, we took it to the STB, because that’s where the fight was, and that is where the fight’s been won.”

As for BNSF, the company’s release states that it intends to continue seeking to destroy the rail line in question so the Crosstown can go through.

“BNSF will be following up with the Surface Transportation Board to ensure the highway project’s objectives are met,” the company wrote. “BNSF emphasizes that service to area shippers has been and will continue to be uninterrupted by this or any subsequent trackage removal activity associated with the I-40 relocation project.”

John Bowman, ODOT Crosstown development engineer, said the ruling affects little work so far.

“There isn’t any work that is ongoing at the moment that is really predicated on that hearing,” Bowman said. “We have a number of projects ongoing and we are working with those contractors. … We are working at the east end, and the west end and those projects are out of the way.”

Might there be a way to bypass the rail yard, or perhaps bridge it, so the rail hub for Union Station is still usable? Bowman said ODOT will wait and see if it has to.

“I think it would be premature to speculate on that at this point in time until we see what the ruling will be,” he said. —Ben Fenwick

I'd be nice if Istook's is finally exposed.

one has to wonder why Istook offered no response. I'm hoping there is a follow up...

I love the tone of this editorial !!! Thank Jeebus for the Gazette to offer another perspective!

-----------------------------------

Off track: Crosstown foes revel in slowing progress

The Oklahoman Editorial
You could almost hear the delight in a local rail enthusiast's reaction to a ruling that may delay construction of the Interstate 40 Crosstown in Oklahoma City. "It will mean a massive delay for them, we believe,” Tom Elmore said in a story Tuesday in The Oklahoman.

Isn't that swell? A highway project that's vitally important to Oklahoma City — indeed, to the nation — and has a price tag in the hundreds of millions of dollars may be delayed over a squabble involving abandoned railway line. Someone pass the champagne!

The stretch of track in question runs along the new Crosstown Expressway route. The hope is that the new expressway will be ready in 2012. The elevated portion of the current I-40 Crosstown is in bad shape and handles far more traffic than it was designed for. Delays in completing the new I-40 Crosstown would only exacerbate that problem, which has safety ramifications for motorists and truckers.

Of course that means little to Elmore and other obstructionists who have fought the new Crosstown because of their love of the rails. The owner of the tracks in question, BNSF Railway Co., wishes to abandon them. Three years ago, the railroad said the tracks hadn't been used for at least two years. Later it was discovered the railroad had moved some local traffic over the line during the time when it said the track hadn't been used. As a result, a federal transportation board has agreed to take another look at the abandonment request.

A delay in constructing the new I-40 Crosstown isn't a certainty. What is a certainty is that regardless of what rail lovers may think, the new highway must be built, and will be.

I hope that the persons responsible for the delays are required to pay the public back the millions of dollars the delays will cost. Some people have their own petty agenda and don't care that it costs everyone else. I guess they will be satisfied if the current crosstown collapses and causes severe catastrophic events. :(

How much would it cost to make the crosstown go over or around the rail yard?

How much would it cost to build a new railyard in a better location?

Pick the cheaper one and do it, it isn't that hard.

This editorial is a case of the Oklahoman's ownership forcing its agenda on the taxpayers. Changes can be made to save the track. Period. Don't listen to the lies, deflections and protestations from ODOT, etc.. This backroom alliance reminds one of the way Urban Renewal operates.

Without having looked at most of the concepts you guys have been posting for the rail stuff....I say we run the track down the center medians of I-35 and I-40 with a couple of spurs for Tinker and the airport...Maybe NW Espresso.

This editorial is a case of the Oklahoman's ownership forcing its agenda on the taxpayers. Changes can be made to save the track. Period. Don't listen to the lies, deflections and protestations from ODOT, etc.. This backroom alliance reminds one of the way Urban Renewal operates.

Some of the taxpayers agree with the agenda. I don't care about the track, nearly as much as I care about revitalization of downtown. No one has yet shown me how much it would cost to relocate light rail track to a more convenient location for commuters, versus how much it would cost to acquire right of way to relocate the Crosstown elsewhere. No one is saying ODOT is wonderful, but perhaps there are a lot of people who want the Crosstown at grade level or below, want the eyesore moved and want Core to Shore. It seems a shame to me to completely destroy what I consider an inspired plan to revitalize an incredibly large, blighted area, and make it a showpiece of urban renewal. Again, were the track in an incredibly convenient location for commuters, I might be more inclined to agree. But when people start talking about rail commuters having to catch buses because this marvelous hub isn't even in the proper location, I think the hub needs to go elsewhere.

Some of the taxpayers agree with the agenda. I don't care about the track, nearly as much as I care about revitalization of downtown. No one has yet shown me how much it would cost to relocate light rail track to a more convenient location for commuters, versus how much it would cost to acquire right of way to relocate the Crosstown elsewhere. No one is saying ODOT is wonderful, but perhaps there are a lot of people who want the Crosstown at grade level or below, want the eyesore moved and want Core to Shore. It seems a shame to me to completely destroy what I consider an inspired plan to revitalize an incredibly large, blighted area, and make it a showpiece of urban renewal. Again, were the track in an incredibly convenient location for commuters, I might be more inclined to agree. But when people start talking about rail commuters having to catch buses because this marvelous hub isn't even in the proper location, I think the hub needs to go elsewhere.

Exactly!

Why is Union Station being excluded from C2S plans? Shouldn't it be the centerpiece of a massive Transit-Oriented-Development? Wouldn't it make Core To Shore a guaranteed success? I simply don't understand why its capacity as a commuter rail station must be diminished. Rail and freeways can peacefully coexist. Why is ODOT hellbent on this issue? Why is there no compromise or even a consideration of other issues? It would seem that other agendas are being served, and they're trying to shove this through before anyone notices the loss.

We lament the destruction of the Criterion and other glorious buildings in downtown. If the Union Station yard is what I've read, it would be a terrible loss to the city. It would mean forfeiting a significant commuter rail asset that could be developed into a gem. It could the hub of the single largest economic revitalization in our city's history.

Why is Union Station being excluded from C2S plans? Shouldn't it be the centerpiece of a massive Transit-Oriented-Development? Wouldn't it make Core To Shore a guaranteed success? I simply don't understand why its capacity as a commuter rail station must be diminished. Rail and freeways can peacefully coexist. Why is ODOT hellbent on this issue? Why is there no compromise or even a consideration of other issues? It would seem that other agendas are being served, and they're trying to shove this through before anyone notices the loss.

We lament the destruction of the Criterion and other glorious buildings in downtown. If the Union Station yard is what I've read, it would be a terrible loss to the city. It would mean forfeiting a significant commuter rail asset that could be developed into a gem. It could the hub of the single largest economic revitalization in our city's history.

Go down and actually look at Union Station and the rail lines. Then drive to anywhere in the CBD and think about getting on a bus and having to ride to whereverer you work after riding the train. It's a great location for a restaurant/events center in the middle of our Central Park. I see it as a Tavern on the Green type place. But it's in the wrong location for a transportation hub. No one is talking about getting rid of the building, just the rail. It's not light rail rail anyway. That would have to be added, at the same cost it would be to add it in a far better location.


I

Istook should lose his law license over this if he knowingly falsified this information.

-- not that he will.

betts, I can actually see it as a multi-modal hub. I've seen similar setups in Atlanta, New York, Philly, and Miami. If the BRT's run on time and frequently, I don't think people will have a problem riding a bus a few blocks to the inner core. Remember we're "extending downtown south" so by the time everything gets established, this area may be "downtown" or at least in the middle of everything. City and state leaders are bent on making Core To Shore the centerpiece of our state, so why not have a modern multi-modal transporation hub that is already ready to go in the middle of the states future showpiece district? There is tunnels and many lines already ready to go at Union Station. Possibly we could have more than one multimodal hub at some point down the road?

@#%@^@^!!!!!!!!

Istook lose his law license? Consiracy theories about ODOT? For crying out loud already. In 2 years a 100 foot section of track was used to stage a rail car why it waiting to be loaded at a business that will now be using trucks. Why is this a big deal? Tom Elmore is an idiot and he is lying to push his own hatered of ODOT. Union Station cannot be used for light rail. Light rail and the tracks at Union Station are different. Light rail requires electricity. The only kind of passenger service that can exist at Union Station is heavy commuter rail and I doubt that will ever be done in Oklahoma.

What happened Tom, did ODOT take some land from your family 50 years ago to build an off ramp or something?

Id love to see Tom Elmore himself have to pay for delaying the crosstown. These people are pissing me and everyone else that drives I-40 off to no end. GIVE IT UP AND LET IT DIE!

@#%@^@^!!!!!!!!

Istook lose his law license? Consiracy theories about ODOT? For crying out loud already. In 2 years a 100 foot section of track was used to stage a rail car why it waiting to be loaded at a business that will now be using trucks. Why is this a big deal? Tom Elmore is an idiot and he is lying to push his own hatered of ODOT. Union Station cannot be used for light rail. Light rail and the tracks at Union Station are different. Light rail requires electricity. The only kind of passenger service that can exist at Union Station is heavy commuter rail and I doubt that will ever be done in Oklahoma.

What happened Tom, did ODOT take some land from your family 50 years ago to build an off ramp or something?

What is valuable about the tracks at Union Station is the right of way, not the tracks themselves. Tracks are relatively cheap. Right of ways are not.

Also, like Metro said, the intent is to develop the C2S area -- a rail hub would only guarantee success there (but yeah, let's ignore little well-established facts like development following transit).

If Istook knowingly ran a conspiracy to defraud a judicial body, I don't think he should be practicing law. It's hard to tell if that's the case here, but I suppose the facts will come out. What he knew or did not know is crucial here. At the very least, he, counsel for BNSF and ODOT are guilty of not investigating the claims which went into their submission to the tribunal -- there's no excuse for that. Such a "little mistake" has the potential to cost the state millions of dollars, not to mention the area with a now partially constructed road which might never be finished which will probably be permanent blight if the tribunal doesn't approve the action on the second go-round.

I think some on here are letting their political biases take precedent over what is best for the city. Istook is out of office, so who cares about him now. As someone posted, what if someone dies over this by falling concrete or a collapse? Would you feel better then if this situation really blew up?

The new crosstown needs to get done ASAP.

I have no problem with rail coexisting with development. However, I have a major problem with not removing the Crosstown and locating it at or below grade. My question is: if right of way is so expensive, why not use the boulevard that will replace the crosstown as right of way for light rail? The city will own it, and it's a far more practical location for light rail. Heavy rail is already primarily running south of the river, as far as I can tell...perhaps I'm wrong there, and Amtrak is currently coexisting with heavy rail, so if there is some future major interest in cross country passenger rail, those lines could be used and a station could be built there. If I sit and think about how I would feel about taking mass transit somewhere, I can guarantee you I don't want to take a train and then get on a bus just because we have a rail station preexisting somewhere out of the way. As I said, we'd have to add light rail lines at Union Station anyway, as those are all heavy rail lines. If we've got useable right of way at the Boulevard, why not use it since it's so convenient to downtown, Bricktown, the Ford Center, etc?

Betts you are exactly right. The new rail could go under the new boulevard and then connect with existing right-of-way once it leaves downtown. It can do all of this underground. Move I-40 6 blocks south and the rail r-o-w 6 blocks north. It is that easy.

just for the record i proposed that on the union station thread... 5.26.08

i'll post it all again.

the problems i see with what TOM ELMORE is proposing.

1. he wants patrons to ride to union station and catch a bus to the CBD, the FORD CENTER, BRICKTOWN / BALLPARK, HOTELS, the future CONVENTION CENTER...
does it not make more sense to have an intermodal station on the cusp of those popular destinations like many other cities do?

2. he doesn't want the train yard destroyed because it has rail that connects to outlying cities across the state.
the reason why the heartland flyer only runs twice a day is due to the fact that it shares the tracks with freight traffic.
if any of these rail lines is being used by freight traffic... then they too will only be able to run twice a day. this is not the 1900's. even people from small towns would rather come to the city and leave as they please than spend all day in town everytime they come to the city.
HE HAS ALSO FAILED TO MENTION THAT THE HEARTLAND FLYER HAS TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY 2 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MAKE MONEY!!!
so if the heartland flyer can't support itself (and there are a million reasons one would need to travel to dallas) then please tell me how a train to elk city is gonna make it.

3. if you look at any city that has light rail... they follow the highways. there are stops at every highway junction and multiple points in between. have you ever rode the TRINITY RAILWAY EXPRESS? this is the type of heavy rail that i believe he is proposing. there are VERY few stops and you get incredible views of the beautiful FT. WORTH BARRIO! it's the grossest thing i've ever seen and leaves one with the worst impression of that town. however, it is a necessity to link the DFW METROPLEX in that way. i don't recall us having another major city that travels to ours to work every day. anyways, do many of these local lines not go thru some of the ugliest parts of our city as well in order to get to these destinations around the state?

4. i do not want to go out of my way 10 miles to drive straight thru my city. that is just retarded, bro! also, i love driving I-40 because i have a PASSION for OKC's downtown.

5. once the old crosstown is destroyed... wouldn't the new boulevard provide a right of way for light rail? (this isn't a problem, but a counter to one of his arguments.)


look guys, we have millions of visitors that drive on I-40 thru our city and whether we like it or not... we get judged by what they see when they do make that drive. when DALLAS redid 75/CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY... they turned that highway into a work of art, just like we're doing. whenever we brought in out of town bands or dj's to dallas... i purposely drove them down that highway to go eat or what not. just cuz i wanted them to leave with a good impression of my city.
this is okc's chance to do that. the street bridges over the crosstown and the pedestrian bridge are gonna be something fantastic. C2S is not only gonna allow our CBD to expand, but also give us a chance to beautify our city. i can't wait for the retail, the condos and that big green park! hanging out by the river... watching boats, kids flying kites, a big ass ferris wheel on the other side! it's gonna set okc in a positive new direction for the next 30 years.
yes, union station will be it's center piece! it's a grand building and once the post office and the all the other crap is razed and C2S starts to take shape... it will be our crown jewel. whatever it morphs into will be a storied building with an amazing past. it won't lose it's history or it's soul despite what some may say.


[steps off soapbox]

o0 3DW@RD!CU$$ 0o

MySpace.com - 3DW@RD!CU$$ [crunktronic] - 35 - Male - OKLAHOMA CITY [four oh five], OKLAHOMA - www.myspace.com/edcrunk (http://www.myspace.com/edcrunk)

proud2besooner,

I couldn't care less about Istook's looney politics, although I don't and didn't subscribe to them. My concern is the whole crony affair of deceiving the public, if that indeed happen, and stifling public debate to ensure execution of backroom deals. Frankly, as a citizen, such dealings should concern you, too, regardless of the politics of the participants.

This board is doing great things for this city by exposing a lot of old time systems that have run things -- often poorly -- in secrecy and out of the purview of the public's input or comment for generations.

It's not unlike "creative destruction" in capitalism.

This city is charting an upward path forward, and since we're getting all grown up and all maybe we can join other big cities and have spirited public debate. Have you watched the news in NYC or Chicago? The citizens there are involved and fighting to get their positions heard. It's a great thing in a democracy.

Remember, we're dealing with tax dollars, here, both federal and state. It's our right to know what's happening, why, and who is involved. If malfeasance is involved, we have every right and even a duty to expose deception and wrongdoing.

You seem to be suggesting a "you broke it, you buy it" philosophy. We must "hurry and up and finish this" without further discussion. Why? Trust me, there are workarounds available if the parties involved have to go that route.

What's most important is the future of our city. Period.

If the people in charge are not willing to tell us how much it would cost to build a new railyard compared to how much it would cost to build the crosstown around/over the yard... they are not doing their job.

How can anyone say that they are making the right choice if they do not even have the facts in front of them? How much would it cost to keep the current highway in safe condition while we find out the facts?

How bad of shape is our crosstown right now anyway? If it is really inches to collapse and people are going to die, why is it still open? I think that has nothing to do with the railyard and should be treated as a different issue.

If someone dies due to the overpass collapsing it would have nothing to do with the railyard so it is kind of dumb to even bring it up.

How bad of shape is our crosstown right now anyway? If it is really inches to collapse and people are going to die, why is it still open? I think that has nothing to do with the railyard and should be treated as a different issue.

If someone dies due to the overpass collapsing it would have nothing to do with the railyard so it is kind of dumb to even bring it up.


I don't think they can be treated like completely different issues, because the new Crosstown cannot be completed if the railyard cannot be dismantled. They're not really working in that area right now anyway, so some delay doesn't matter, but when they're ready to build the main road, if it is delayed due to a fight over the railyard, and I-40 collapses, those who obstructed construction of the new road would have some degree of responsibility, IMO.

I don't think they can be treated like completely different issues, because the new Crosstown cannot be completed if the railyard cannot be dismantled.

i personally hope the crosstown is delayed long enough to get us to the point where the price of gasoline is exorbitant. the long term interest will be better served by this.

only then will people realize their personal preference for solitary vehicular transport is based on a giant road subsidy. and cheap nonrenewable, polluting inputs.

how much is the crosstown realignment? close to a billion? who cares, its a taxpayers subsidy. taxes dont matter, as long as its roads and bridges?

build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road
build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road build my road

i wish the intellectual capability of oklahoma folks were more elevated.

i am going to bed praying for exorbitant oil prices!

I don't think they can be treated like completely different issues, because the new Crosstown cannot be completed if the railyard cannot be dismantled. They're not really working in that area right now anyway, so some delay doesn't matter, but when they're ready to build the main road, if it is delayed due to a fight over the railyard, and I-40 collapses, those who obstructed construction of the new road would have some degree of responsibility, IMO.

Is there really no way for the crosstown and railroad to both exist? Obviously it would cost some money, but how much? Maybe people would be willing to pay that price.

If I-40 is going to collapse it should not carry traffic while we wait for the crosstown to be built, I-40 should be closed NOW and all traffic should be diverted. I think that argument is stupid because if I-40 is really at risk, we shouldn't be crossing our fingers and praying in the meantime.

Obviously keeping I-40 in good shape and inspecting it in the meantime must cost some money.. that money saved by finishing the crosstown earlier could be spent on a new and better railyard.

Someone has to know how much this stuff costs...

Toadrax,

You just demolished that argument. If the road is facing imminent collapse, the state and federal government should close it now. And yes, the road and track are not mutually exclusive, as they have been portrayed by the parties forcing this deal through.

This is one big huge mess.

I'm all for a redesign of the new crosstown to avoid the railyard/go under it/whatever, but as far as I've heard, that's not on the table.

I asked that pointed question to Mr. Elmore and his answer was "just fix the current crosstown."

Well, that's just not acceptable Mr. Elmore.

I don't think they can be treated like completely different issues, because the new Crosstown cannot be completed if the railyard cannot be dismantled. They're not really working in that area right now anyway, so some delay doesn't matter, but when they're ready to build the main road, if it is delayed due to a fight over the railyard, and I-40 collapses, those who obstructed construction of the new road would have some degree of responsibility, IMO.

WHAT?!? People who exposed the fraud, lies, corruption behind the realignment are AT FAULT???

I knew the majority of Oklahomans were senseless, which is why this was allowed to begin with, but that statement takes the cake.

Way to insult someone on your first post...good job.

Way to insult someone on your first post...good job.

Thank you.

Like I stated, it took my breath away when I saw that post.

WHAT?!? People who exposed the fraud, lies, corruption behind the realignment are AT FAULT???

I knew the majority of Oklahomans were senseless, which is why this was allowed to begin with, but that statement takes the cake.

If the Crosstown collapses, because the new road is delayed due to people opposing it's construction, then I think that the people exposing the "fraud, lies and corruption behind the realignment" would certainly have to share responsibiity withthose responsible for the "fraud, lies and corruption". I fail to see how a few rail lines are worth human lives, personally.

Now, this is assuming it will happen, which is obviously not a given at all. But, if it's a risk, then opposing a structure which will eventually allow the Crosstown to be dismantled is a rails for lives opinion, in my opinion.

Insult away. Posting on message boards over time pretty much makes one immune to it.

Betts,

No offense, but if the Crosstown is endangering human lives, it needs to be closed NOW. No ifs, ands or buts. We cannot afford another situation like Minneapolis.

I'm repeatedly told by my relative who works at ODOT that it is fine for now -- and that they are constantly monitoring it.

You're using alarmist logic to whitewash the deliberate effort of the players involved to stifle debate and discussion on our city's transportation needs from the beginning.

just for the record i proposed that on the union station thread... 5.26.08

i'll post it all again.

the problems i see with what TOM ELMORE is proposing.

1. he wants patrons to ride to union station and catch a bus to the CBD, the FORD CENTER, BRICKTOWN / BALLPARK, HOTELS, the future CONVENTION CENTER...
does it not make more sense to have an intermodal station on the cusp of those popular destinations like many other cities do?

2. he doesn't want the train yard destroyed because it has rail that connects to outlying cities across the state.
the reason why the heartland flyer only runs twice a day is due to the fact that it shares the tracks with freight traffic.
if any of these rail lines is being used by freight traffic... then they too will only be able to run twice a day. this is not the 1900's. even people from small towns would rather come to the city and leave as they please than spend all day in town everytime they come to the city.
HE HAS ALSO FAILED TO MENTION THAT THE HEARTLAND FLYER HAS TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY 2 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MAKE MONEY!!!
so if the heartland flyer can't support itself (and there are a million reasons one would need to travel to dallas) then please tell me how a train to elk city is gonna make it.

3. if you look at any city that has light rail... they follow the highways. there are stops at every highway junction and multiple points in between. have you ever rode the TRINITY RAILWAY EXPRESS? this is the type of heavy rail that i believe he is proposing. there are VERY few stops and you get incredible views of the beautiful FT. WORTH BARRIO! it's the grossest thing i've ever seen and leaves one with the worst impression of that town. however, it is a necessity to link the DFW METROPLEX in that way. i don't recall us having another major city that travels to ours to work every day. anyways, do many of these local lines not go thru some of the ugliest parts of our city as well in order to get to these destinations around the state?

4. i do not want to go out of my way 10 miles to drive straight thru my city. that is just retarded, bro! also, i love driving I-40 because i have a PASSION for OKC's downtown.

5. once the old crosstown is destroyed... wouldn't the new boulevard provide a right of way for light rail? (this isn't a problem, but a counter to one of his arguments.)


look guys, we have millions of visitors that drive on I-40 thru our city and whether we like it or not... we get judged by what they see when they do make that drive. when DALLAS redid 75/CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY... they turned that highway into a work of art, just like we're doing. whenever we brought in out of town bands or dj's to dallas... i purposely drove them down that highway to go eat or what not. just cuz i wanted them to leave with a good impression of my city.
this is okc's chance to do that. the street bridges over the crosstown and the pedestrian bridge are gonna be something fantastic. C2S is not only gonna allow our CBD to expand, but also give us a chance to beautify our city. i can't wait for the retail, the condos and that big green park! hanging out by the river... watching boats, kids flying kites, a big ass ferris wheel on the other side! it's gonna set okc in a positive new direction for the next 30 years.
yes, union station will be it's center piece! it's a grand building and once the post office and the all the other crap is razed and C2S starts to take shape... it will be our crown jewel. whatever it morphs into will be a storied building with an amazing past. it won't lose it's history or it's soul despite what some may say.


[steps off soapbox]

o0 3DW@RD!CU$$ 0o

MySpace.com - 3DW@RD!CU$$ [crunktronic] - 35 - Male - OKLAHOMA CITY [four oh five], OKLAHOMA - www.myspace.com/edcrunk (http://www.myspace.com/edcrunk)

And again, I could not agree more.

Saying that the location sucks and we can just move the lines or tunnel under the boulevard and build a new station later is short-sighted and unlikely to happen in the near future. The costs would be huge, particularly for tunneling and it would have to go to a vote. There is no telling what shape the local economy might be in by the time something like that happens; we might not have the money to even think about that in a few years.

If you're looking to the future, you can imagine that a working station dropping passengers off right at our central park might not be such a bad deal. Right now all of downtown lies to the north of that, but give it 30 years. Long term it would actually probably end up being the best location. We need the new crosstown, but I would like to see the two coexist.

If the Crosstown collapses, because the new road is delayed due to people opposing it's construction, then I think that the people exposing the "fraud, lies and corruption behind the realignment" would certainly have to share responsibiity withthose responsible for the "fraud, lies and corruption". I fail to see how a few rail lines are worth human lives, personally.

Now, this is assuming it will happen, which is obviously not a given at all. But, if it's a risk, then opposing a structure which will eventually allow the Crosstown to be dismantled is a rails for lives opinion, in my opinion.

Insult away. Posting on message boards over time pretty much makes one immune to it.

If the crosstown is that dangerous. Shut it down now and get maximum weight trucks off it by the thousands.

Why doesn't this happen? Because it's NOT THAT DANGEROUS!!!!

I'll hold public officials accountable where no others will.

The initial critiques that led to the start of this thread are still valid -- and unanswered by the responses. That said, much has changed with local thinking since this inside job was foisted on the Oklahoma City public. Namely, more and more local leaders are coming around to a multifaceted public transit system.

I don't think these folks are necessarily predisposed to support -- or use -- transit, but they are swayed by the argument that in order to be a real major league city, we need transit. That is what will separate us from the Kansas Citys and Fort Worths of the world.

The point has been made to me by a fierce advocate of rail transit solutions that the destruction of this one track does not in and of itself negate the potential for new track in the future, elsewhere.

The critics of transit rightly point out that it won't be cheap, but neither is a highway. It would be an investment, and it would certainly lead to an explosion of development. Infrastructure drives private sector investment. We know this as a city better than others, because we can see what the investments we made in MAPS have yielded for our city.

My biggest fear of MAPS III is that the leaders will think too small. As a brand, MAPS is as good as it gets. I'm hoping the next MAPS will contain AT LEAST a billion in projects. It takes so many years to tee up the projects and we won't have another MAPS for at least a decade, so let's make it BIG!

The crosstown is not going to fall down tomorrow. All of you armchair bridge engineers should keep quiet.

I've said it in another place, but perhaps it bears repeating. Light rail does not discourage urban sprawl, and perhaps encourages it. If we want to get people out of their automobiles, density is at least as important as transportation. So, it is shortsighted to promote transit that doesn't encourage density. The best thing (besides the wonderful park), IMO, about Core to Shore is that is removes blighted land immediately adjacent to the CBD and replaces it with high density housing. Within the Core to Shore, Triangle and midtown areas, the far cheaper bus or trolley system (if run efficiently) would be perfectly adequate to move these people around. Maybe they would even walk to restaurants, leisure time activities and work! As those areas improve, I can envision areas adjacent to them improving, and perhaps begin a reversal of our urban sprawl. If we simply spend all our money making it easier for people to live in Edmond, Norman, El Reno and Yukon to work downtown, how much have we really changed? How much of Oklahoma City proper have we improved with our tax dollars?

I've said it in another place, but perhaps it bears repeating. Light rail does not discourage urban sprawl, and perhaps encourages it. If we want to get people out of their automobiles, density is at least as important as transportation. So, it is shortsighted to promote transit that doesn't encourage density. The best thing (besides the wonderful park), IMO, about Core to Shore is that is removes blighted land immediately adjacent to the CBD and replaces it with high density housing. Within the Core to Shore, Triangle and midtown areas, the far cheaper bus or trolley system (if run efficiently) would be perfectly adequate to move these people around. Maybe they would even walk to restaurants, leisure time activities and work! As those areas improve, I can envision areas adjacent to them improving, and perhaps begin a reversal of our urban sprawl. If we simply spend all our money making it easier for people to live in Edmond, Norman, El Reno and Yukon to work downtown, how much have we really changed? How much of Oklahoma City proper have we improved with our tax dollars?

Here's the deal kids. OKC will NEVER rely heavily on public transit. I don't care how high gas prices get. This city was laid out for the automobile, as was many western cities.

As for the I-40 project... it needs to be done yesterday. Screw the rail lines that are in a bad area anyway. I-40 is a major (if not THE major) East/West interstate in the country and the entire national transportation network relies on it. This project is vital to the national infrastructure and the relocation of I-40 needs to happen.

While I'm all about a light rail network of some sort in OKC, it'll never be the main option for many here. Fact is, we're still a society of cars and making sure I-40 is taken care of is job one. Everything else is just secondary.

betts, sounds like you are espousing similar ideas to TOD:

COMPONENTS OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DESIGN

-Walkable design with pedestrian as the highest priority
-Train station as prominent feature of town center
-A regional node containing a mixture of uses in close proximity including office, residential, retail, and civic uses
-High density, high-quality development within 10-minute walk circle surrounding train station
-Collector support transit systems including trolleys, streetcars, light rail, and buses, etc
-Designed to include the easy use of bicycles, scooters, and rollerblades as daily support transportation systems
-Reduced and managed parking inside 10-minute walk circle around town center / train station

Transit Oriented Development (http://www.transitorienteddevelopment.org/)

there are some very cool examples in Dallas where its proven effective, like Mockingbird Station:ou

Mockingbird Station (http://www.mockingbirdstation.com/)

Betts,

You make a good point. However, no one has specifically called for transit lines running to Piedmont here. We all -- generally -- support more density. And while your central point is sound, you don't mention that in EVERY city where transit lines have been developed, development exploded along the lines. That would create more density, period.

i used to live a mile from mockingbird station and kicked there often. i love that place.

Betts,

You make a good point. However, no one has specifically called for transit lines running to Piedmont here. We all -- generally -- support more density. And while your central point is sound, you don't mention that in EVERY city where transit lines have been developed, development exploded along the lines. That would create more density, period.

I understand that, and was really playing Devil's advocate to make my point. My main point is, don't screw up Core to Shore for a few rail lines, when, in my opinion, it will have a far greater impact on our city than rail, especially east-west, which I think is less crucial.

Again, I'm all in favor of light rail, recognizing that it is not the be all and end all that some people make it out to be. I'm also in favor of a multi-modal station, just NOT Union Station, which I think is in a lousy location and would far better serve our city as a lovely part of our Central Park, ala Tavern on the Green.

don't screw up Core to Shore for a few rail lines, when, in my opinion, it will have a far greater impact on our city

You may be right, however, Core to Shore sounds like something that came from a few too many bong hits, given the city's recent history. We're trying to build density by creating more undeveloped space? It's taken decades for the city to overcome Urban Renewal and fill in to the current I-40 location (and spottily, at that).

I'm concerned that we will just be spreading the infill problem even further, creating more unused space that will take another 25-50 years to infill.

Feel free to talk me off the ledge. But when I hear otherwise sober people compare the "pedestrian boulevard" to the Champs Elysee, my BS detector goes off. And perhaps the real question we should be asking right now is which good old boys stand to profit from it, as that is usually a good indicator of its likelihood to be a good, sound project. Not to be overly cynical, of course.

You may be right, however, Core to Shore sounds like something that came from a few too many bong hits, given the city's recent history. We're trying to build density by creating more undeveloped space? It's taken decades for the city to overcome Urban Renewal and fill in to the current I-40 location (and spottily, at that).

I'm concerned that we will just be spreading the infill problem even further, creating more unused space that will take another 25-50 years to infill.

Feel free to talk me off the ledge. But when I hear otherwise sober people compare the "pedestrian boulevard" to the Champs Elysee, my BS detector goes off. And perhaps the real question we should be asking right now is which good old boys stand to profit from it, as that is usually a good indicator of its likelihood to be a good, sound project. Not to be overly cynical, of course.

I'm not as interested in the boulevard as I am an iconic downtown park and all the denser residential housing slated adjacent to the park and the river. That's why I'd be fine with light rail running down the boulevard, if we're going to have an east-west line. I also don't really care who is profiting if they build great spaces in which people can live.

This thread is, in my opinion, such a bunch of crap. The I-40 crosstown relocation WILL go on and WILL be completed as planned. And, in the main, as I see it, it will be a good thing for Oklahoma City. Light rail, a good but prospective development, will find its way as its time comes to be. But, not now. The I-40 crosstown relocation IS now.

Well, Doug, I beg to differ. The original content in this thread has not been disproved. This thread in no way suggests the I-40 is NOT going to happen, or should be delayed. This thread brought into greater discussion how debate was absolutely shut down by insiders at the beginning of the process, and even used incorrect information to justify their project designs. Sound a bit like the Iraq War? Perhaps that discussion is crap, too, since we're there.

I disagree. We have so many good things happening in our city, but that doesn't mean public officials don't deserve scrutiny in their decisionmaking, which is paid for by our tax dollars. Decisions like this will affect the city for decades.

We need accountability and transparency from our public officials. Your attempt to shut down otherwise civil and intelligent discussion doesn't seem to represent the ethos of this board.

I suspect you agree with these general principles.

This thread is, in my opinion, such a bunch of crap. The I-40 crosstown relocation WILL go on and WILL be completed as planned. And, in the main, as I see it, it will be a good thing for Oklahoma City. Light rail, a good but prospective development, will find its way as its time comes to be. But, not now. The I-40 crosstown relocation IS now.

THANK YOU, i think that is the general concensus, doug!
hmmm.... this might be good poll fodder. perhaps we should take one.

Well, Doug, I beg to differ. The original content in this thread has not been disproved. This thread in no way suggests the I-40 is NOT going to happen, or should be delayed. This thread brought into greater discussion how debate was absolutely shut down by insiders at the beginning of the process, and even used incorrect information to justify their project designs. Sound a bit like the Iraq War? Perhaps that discussion is crap, too, since we're there.

I disagree. We have so many good things happening in our city, but that doesn't mean public officials don't deserve scrutiny in their decisionmaking, which is paid for by our tax dollars. Decisions like this will affect the city for decades.

We need accountability and transparency from our public officials. Your attempt to shut down otherwise civil and intelligent discussion doesn't seem to represent the ethos of this board.

I suspect you agree with these general principles.

it didn't seem like it ever brewed. maybe it should be renamed... scandal fizzling.

Just build the road

F the Crosstown I-40!

No, for realz, its a terrible thing that the ODOT/DEQ have to investigate the building of acid trenches in the line of the new roadway. that seems to indicate serious oversight problems. plus piers in a toxic dump to gird the way, hmm.

Core 2 Shore seems like a good place to speculate on downtrodden property before the plan was publicly announced. I know if I had an inside connection, I would.

What about that cotton exchange building? is it gonna become condos or something?

:bright_id

what about a compromise?

Build the crosstown but move it so the rail yard can be saved.

We need BOTH to make OKC move forward, and we dont want to keep delaying any of this. Road proponents get their crosstown and central boulevard, Rail/Mass Transit proponents save their multi-modal facility.

End of debate.

:bright_id

what about a compromise?

Build the crosstown but move it so the rail yard can be saved.

We need BOTH to make OKC move forward, and we dont want to keep delaying any of this. Road proponents get their crosstown and central boulevard, Rail/Mass Transit proponents save their multi-modal facility.

End of debate.

But with Union Station we get an outdated single modal facility in a lousy location. I'm more about the location of the facility than I am the line. I'd be fine with moving the Crosstown south of the river, but then we've got to buy all that right of way, which would probably cost far more than running light rail down the boulevard, the right of way to which we already own.

Is this about money, or something else entirely? Anyone who thinks the Crosstown should stay where it is isn't worried at all about Oklahoma City growing and developing, IMO. And no one is talking about tearing down Union Station, but rather about what its' function should be.

There's the real question. Would it cost more to acquire the right of way to move the Crosstown to a different location than we're saving by using existing rails and right of way south of Union Station? Especially since we'll have a natural right of way on the Boulevard.

I don't think you people realize how much it would clost to build the Union Station railyard from scratch. It's millions of dollars. City leaders in Dallas wish they had had a system like ours in place. They think we're really stupid for destroying it.

I don't think you people realize how much it would clost to build the Union Station railyard from scratch. It's millions of dollars. City leaders in Dallas wish they had had a system like ours in place. They think we're really stupid for destroying it.

Would it really cost more than buying all the land to move the Crosstown somewhere else?

Screw the piece of crap rail, build the road, keep the building, move on.

in it's condition today, I agree.

But a multi-modal facility means there's more than one mode. And we can reconfigure Union Station to accomodate bus, heavy commuter rail, and the downtown streetcar trolley.

This will solve your out-of-way concerns since the trolley will be part of MAPS III anyways.

Here's food for thought, most if not ALL multimodal facilities are out-of-the-way, because they require a HUGE footprint and most CBD land is far to valuable. The ONLY way to have a multi-modal facility in a CBD would be to bury it - hugely expensive.

As for the comment someone made about having CR making it easier for commuters to live in suburbs - well, they'll be spending money in downtown wont they? Also, we can have a few stops in the OKC city limits, not as many as LRT but I could see a stop at Crossroads Mall PnR (for example) on the South Commuter Rail route which would be HUGELY viable.

Heavy Commuter Rail is ACTUALLY the easiest and cheapest form of Mass Transit to implement, especially when you already own the right-of-ways, which OKC does. It would be a piece of cake to implement the South route to Norman and Purcell; we'd only need to build a platform at Crossroads Mall PnR and retrofit stations in Norman and Purcell as well as Union Station. Then, buy the trainsets. That's it.

$10M if that? and we'd have a heavily NEEDED commuter rail route.

Going North for the North route, I say we could use a stop at 63rd (so a station there), a stop in S. Edmond PnR (so a platform there), and then retrofits to Edmond and Guthrie stations. And another trainset. What is that, $20M?

So. for a mere $30M by my estimates, we could have a true bonafide Commuter Rail network with two lines running on 60 miles of track. We would unite a heavily underserved area of the metro (Guthrie and the north and Purcell in the South) and do this for cheaper amount than building the downtown streetcar trolley (which is expected to be roughly $50M for the first implementation).

See what owning the ROW and Union Station does fur ya?

Oh, and to people who said why not have the multimodal facility at Santa Fe; you can't. It's platform is designed for Amtrak, not Commuter Rail (which requires more than one platform by the way). Also, where would the Commuter Busses go? EK Gaylord Blvd?

That's the beauty of Union Station. The building itself is Grand and the land it's on is removed enough to accept multi modes of transit (local city bus, commuter bus, commuter rail, downtown streetcar, intracity LRT - future) - while at the same time is less than one mile from the existing city centre (which will migrate south and only be 5 blocks away in 5-10 years.

Let me give you some successful examples of this.

Denver's Union Station (they also do Amtrak but that's the way it was designed). Union Station is on the edge of downtown Denver, and has bus shuttles to funnel people into the CBD, more than a mile away.

Also, we (in Seattle) have a good example - Union Station, which links the new LRT, with BRT, commuter bus, local bus, and regional bus. Right across the street is King Street Station, where AMTRAK ONLY platforms are. Both stations are on the edge of downtown Seattle (out-of-the-way). Seattle also has another multimodal facility called Convention Place, which is on the opposite side of downtown than Union Station. Both are connected via an underground bus/LRT tunnel (and there are several stops).

Seattle is sort of a unique example, because it was always planned this way but is JUST NOW being implemented.

The key idea is, the multimodal facilities in both cases, are on the edge of downtown. In NYC and Chicago, multimodal facilities are underground.

Im not suggesting OKC follow NY and Chicago, as it would be prohibitively expensive. And it would be stupid to bury LRT under the new boulevard at this point when we need commuter rail moreso (since OKC is not yet dense enough for LRT).

The new downtown Streetcar trolley network will help densify downtown but that will be exclusive to the inner core, you wouldn't want to have a streetcar go out more than a couple of miles due to all of the stops (driving a car would be faster going 3 miles away - for example).

We've been throwing around a lot of terms regarding rail and mass transit, I thought I'd construct a list of them for definiton's sake.

Review:

Modes of Transit

Commuter Rail - Heavy Rail trains typically using existing Freight railway track. Moderate to very long trainsets, typically diesel or electric. CRT has very infrequent yet very high capacity stops usually at park n rides, train stations, or large transit centers. Commuter rail requires a single terminus (ala Union Station) that typically is multimodal in nature. CRT's typically run during commute rush hours, but Chicago's runs practically all day. Examples include Metra Rail in Chicago, West Coast Express in Vancouver, CalTrain in SFO.

Subway/Metro - Heavy Rail trains typically underground in high density areas and on or above ground in less dense areas. Metros are in grade separated railways for their exclusive use. Metros are powered by electic motors via a 3rd rail and typically use heavy rail cars. Metros often have numerous stops in urban high density areas and may have express trains. Subways have limited stops in areas outside of the core dense urban area, mostly due to cost of exclusive 3rd rail right of way. Examples include NYC Subway, Chicago EL, BART in SFO, SkyTrain in Vancouver (uses light cars not heavy).

LRT - Light Rail trainsets typically are powered by overhead catenary wires or diesel and are in exclusive railways. However, these railways are often NOT grade separated and therefore have crossings in the streets, though may be grade separated in dense downtown areas. LRTs have more stops than Commuter Rail but they are usually just a platform though often can be in transit centers in high dense urban zones. LRT's often serves as commuter lines outside of dense urban areas - though it can make for extremely long rides due to the number of stops when you finally get to downtown. Examples include Portland's MAX Light Rail, Calgary's C-Train, DART in Dallas.

Streetcar/Tram/Trolley Light Railway - These are light rail cars typically one or two in nature (whereas LRT usually has at least 3 traincars per set). Streetcars ride on exclusive tracks that are not grade separated and therefore exist right in city streets. Streetcars have numerous stops, the most out of all rail based transit and therefore typically are confined to dense downtown areas, airports, or university campuses. Streetcar trams are almost exclusively powered by overhead catenary wire though may also be powered by diesel. Examples include El Reno's Heritage tram (the only pax rail in the state aside from Amtrak), Little Rock's heritage railway, Portland Streetcar (probably the most famous and successful), Vancouver's Downtown Streetcar, Seattle's S.L.U.T. (south lake union trolley).

Monorail - as the name says, its basically a streetcar or light rail trainset that resides on a single overhead or ground level rail, therefore grade separated. They are powered by electric railing on either side of the monorail or may be diesel in some cases. Examples include: Las Vegas Monorail, Seattle Center Monorail, State Fair of Oklahoma monorail.

Commuter Bus - see commuter rail, just substitute a big bus (typically double section). Usually express outside of downtown direct to the listed commute destination.

Regional Bus - like commuter rail/bus but with more regionally significant stops (like malls, employment centers, universities, etc).

BRT - bus rapid transit, in a grade separated area (no cars/trains) with limited stops.

local bus - city bus with lots of local stops.

bus trolley - city bus using overhead catenary electric power though sometimes replica using diesel (like OKC's).

---

Again, I think Commuter Rail is the most likely and least expensive option for OKC - that will make a HUGE impact. Think of the number of commuters into downtown OKC and the capitol campus from Purcell, Norman, Moore, S. OKC, N. OKC, Edmond, and Guthrie. ... The line could pay for itself, especially as we gain events in downtown OKC and rely on suburbanite visits to make this all a success. Since Istook was successful in getting this sort of line for SLC, it shouldn't be too difficult to procure the $30M or so to do it here.

The other currently viable rail option for OKC is the streetcar. Given the number of stops though, this would be just downtown maybe extending into midtown as far as the Asia District/OCU/Paseo area. Go further than that, and it becomes not so viable due to the duration of the trip (and the streetcar's impact on auto traffic). METRO's idea is to use the streetcar as a circular - which is the case in most cities and a very good idea. Just see dowtown Portland for an example of how their Portland Streetcar turned a once segregated downtown section into a lucrative investment opportunity and series of dense urban neighbourhoods.

I personally can remember the OLD Pearl district area in Portland prior to the streetcar (full of old warehouses and factories falling down and disconnected from the CBD) and to see the Pearl District now is amazing (full of mid and high rise dense urban towers ala Vancouver's Yaletown district). This was ALMOST exclusively due to the Portland Streetcar, by the way.

Until we get commuter rail set up, we could do commuter and regional bus - to get people used to commuting into downtown.