Message to danielf,

You seem particularly hostile to the use of any rail in our transportation, but you seem to have no problem with them continuing to spend BILLIONS on highways.

Look, we may not have the density of some cities, but building the rail will CREATE DENSITY, just as it has in Dallas and every other city.

Many of the citizens of these cities, such as Portland, Dallas, even Houston, said the same things you are saying. Now, years after their completion, these projects have all been successful.

Your commentary on the bus ridership is also misleading. WE don't have a bus schedule /system that actually works for riders -- or even routes that make sense. If we did, more people would ride the bus.

You need to back off a little bit, consider the world beyond your Brookhaven, suburban realm, and realize that there may be more to this than you know right now.

I think good mass transit, if anything, is more essential for cities with less density. You can walk a lot of places in Manhattan, and many times I don't even bother to use the bus or subway when I'm there. Here, since very little of the city is walkable, a good mass transit system is necessary to get us out of our cars. As far as what kind of system we have, I'm rather indifferent. I spent years riding the bus in Denver and was perfectly happy with that option, as the routes were great and the buses ran frequently and reliably. So, bus, trolley, train doesn't really matter to me. But, for me to consider us a real city, we need real mass transit options.

You need to back off a little bit, consider the world beyond your Brookhaven, suburban realm, and realize that there may be more to this than you know right now.

Remember, they don't even live in Oklahoma anymore. They are in Florida, and would tend to explain their lack of understand on mass transit needs in the Metro.

I've always liked the clean look of a monorail system, but I think it would be too prohibitive in Oklahoma with the wind. I remember many days at Disney World where they had (have?) to shut the system down due to winds being too high. Remember, go up just a bit above the surface and the winds pick up a bit. However, a monorail system would be easier to deploy with the smaller foot print needed. Not sure I would say have it go down the median of highways or anything, because I can just see a vehicle go left of center into a support and shut the system down for awhile.

Message to danielf,

You seem particularly hostile to the use of any rail in our transportation, but you seem to have no problem with them continuing to spend BILLIONS on highways.

Look, we may not have the density of some cities, but building the rail will CREATE DENSITY, just as it has in Dallas and every other city.

Many of the citizens of these cities, such as Portland, Dallas, even Houston, said the same things you are saying. Now, years after their completion, these projects have all been successful.

Your commentary on the bus ridership is also misleading. WE don't have a bus schedule /system that actually works for riders -- or even routes that make sense. If we did, more people would ride the bus.

You need to back off a little bit, consider the world beyond your Brookhaven, suburban realm, and realize that there may be more to this than you know right now.



Not hostile, I just prefer to live n the real world. Light rail will never work in this area, we build highways because they are used. I don't see how anyone can justify spending millons/billons on light rail transit "Hoping people use it".

Remember, they don't even live in Oklahoma anymore. They are in Florida, and would tend to explain their lack of understand on mass transit needs in the Metro.

I've always liked the clean look of a monorail system, but I think it would be too prohibitive in Oklahoma with the wind. I remember many days at Disney World where they had (have?) to shut the system down due to winds being too high. Remember, go up just a bit above the surface and the winds pick up a bit. However, a monorail system would be easier to deploy with the smaller foot print needed. Not sure I would say have it go down the median of highways or anything, because I can just see a vehicle go left of center into a support and shut the system down for awhile.

Venture, I think this is the second time you've said that I live in Florida, the last time I checked, Norman was still in Oklahoma, it's about 20 miles S. of OKC, if you go to mapquest, you'll find it.

Light Rail Tranist in Oklahoma--"If you build it, they still won't ride it".

Light rail will never work in this area

Wow. You're a real know-it-all. Do you have any facts to back your boast? Admit it. You're obsessed about seeing this fail, even though you don't live in OKC. Thanks but no thanks.

Not to mention, we had rail transit in Central Oklahoma and it worked quite well for forty years.

Your know-it-all boasts are opinions presented as fact, nothing more. And you're a hater. Not a good combination for intelligent discussion.

Furthermore,

You didn't address key facts in my commentary:

1. Rail transit corridors create density.

2. Haters like yourself made similar know-nothing comments in cities from Portland to Dallas, only to be proven wrong by strong ridership and increased density.

Suburbs like Norman would benefit from this. In Dallas, people in the 'burbs pooh-poohed DART in the same sneering, derisive way you do. Now, those same 'burbs are begging and paying to have extensions to DART built to their towns.

You only see the present in your arguments, not the future. If you want a world of even more highways and even more sprawl, and longer commute times, and more pollution, then by all means, let's keep the status quo.

However, if you believe OKC and Norman and other areas of Central Oklahoma will eventually outgrow their transportation infrastructure, then you will at least OPEN YOUR MIND to the fact that some rail should be built alongside the billions being spent on highways to serve people who don't want to live in the city but continue to work here.

Furthermore,

You didn't address key facts in my commentary:

1. Rail transit corridors create density.

2. Haters like yourself made similar know-nothing comments in cities from Portland to Dallas, only to be proven wrong by strong ridership and increased density.

Suburbs like Norman would benefit from this. In Dallas, people in the 'burbs pooh-poohed DART in the same sneering, derisive way you do. Now, those same 'burbs are begging and paying to have extensions to DART built to their towns.

You only see the present in your arguments, not the future. If you want a world of even more highways and even more sprawl, and longer commute times, and more pollution, then by all means, let's keep the status quo.

However, if you believe OKC and Norman and other areas of Central Oklahoma will eventually outgrow their transportation infrastructure, then you will at least OPEN YOUR MIND to the fact that some rail should be built alongside the billions being spent on highways to serve people who don't want to live in the city but continue to work here.


Soonerguru, why are you so shallow that you resort to name calling. I have the right to voice my veiws against light rail, just as you have the right to voice yours for it. My mind is open, your's are as well, it's just that you have on rose colored glasses, LIGHT RAIL WILL NOT WORK!!!!!!!

Light Rail Brings Housing Values Up in Denver
(http://www.planetizen.com/node/35854)

While home values in the rest of the region decline, homes near Denver's light rail system have experienced an increase in values over the past two years.

"Homes near light-rail stations along the southeast line, which opened in November 2006, have increased by an average of nearly 4 percent over the past two years, according to an analysis by Your Castle Real Estate. But the rest of the Denver market declined an average of 7.5 percent."

"The closer a home is to the station, the more its value increases, according to the Your Castle analysis. Homes less than a half-mile from a station increased an average of 17.6 percent, while those 1 1/2 to 2 miles away increased just 0.1 percent on average.

Planetizen

Soonerguru, why are you so shallow that you resort to name calling. I have the right to voice my veiws against light rail, just as you have the right to voice yours for it. My mind is open, your's are as well, it's just that you have on rose colored glasses, LIGHT RAIL WILL NOT WORK!!!!!!!

This is the way liberals operate. If you don't agree with them they resort to name calling. I can't count how many times I was called a racist from people just because I didn't vote for THE ONE. That's the way they operate. Disagree with them, you're a racist, hater, bigot and so on. Remember, these are the people who preach tolerance. I've got a name for them too--hypocrites.

Soonerguru, why are you so shallow that you resort to name calling. I have the right to voice my veiws against light rail, just as you have the right to voice yours for it. My mind is open, your's are as well, it's just that you have on rose colored glasses, LIGHT RAIL WILL NOT WORK!!!!!!!

Danielf, do not change the subject. Soonerguru highlighted a very good point. In the last several days you have made some wild claims that you are so sure about, yet you provide no facts to back up your statement. You have posted NO supporting facts, therefore your views carry no weight. All you say is "IT'S BAAAAD! IT'S GONNA FAIL! WASTE OF MONEY! OOoooooo..." You know, the FUD-type of stuff. So, unless you are going to step up to the plate and defend your statements, you cannot place blame on someone who is just pointing out your lack of backing facts. Understand?

Here's a good fact you can take with you: Less than 1% of the Oklahoma stimulus package, if approved, would ever be for mass transit. Only $4 million (maximum) was to go for that MWC project. Period. The remaining bulk of that package is strictly for more asphault roads! Talk about hypocrisy!


This is the way liberals operate. If you don't agree with them they resort to name calling. I can't count how many times I was called a racist from people just because I didn't vote for THE ONE. That's the way they operate. Disagree with them, you're a racist, hater, bigot and so on. Remember, these are the people who preach tolerance. I've got a name for them too--hypocrites.

GWB, the fact that you seem to have been able to draw ties to a particular poster's political affiliations based on a poster's comment (where they simply pointed out that the comment still, to-date, has no basis or supporting facts) doesn't make you look too intelligent. In fact, you are directly name calling. Again, talk about hypocrisy!

I have to admit, while some of us have had good, constructive debate over the last few days on this thread, the only thing I've seen of you is the alleged "name calling". I see no name calling, and have to say that I, too, am getting tired of having to scroll through the FUD just to get to the good debate posts.

Danielf is, through his posts, painting himself as "know-it-all" and has seriously discredited any and all of his statements due to the ever-so-present lack of ability to post supporting facts.

Please either post something constructive and appropriate or don't post at all.

This is constructive debate, not drama class! Or the political section for that matter.

So yeah, back to the debate.

Soonerguru, you are right about the density thing. We have seen that happen in every area where mass transit has been done halfway decent. We've actually seen the results and it is not just hearsay. Indeed, with us being a spread out city, we should expect to see things start to pack in tighter...the way it should be. You know, here is some interesting food-for-thought. Without bashing automobile travel too hard, we are definitely a unique city in that there is really no other city of our size and spread, that doesn't have mass transit at all. Having said that, it's easy to see how the city has spread so rapidly without running into the density issue, you know? Driving further and further out has really not been a problem because folks are already in their car. Obviously, that works okay until the population grows enough (like it has been doing) and density starts to take place, then all of a sudden it is no longer so easy to get around only by car.

With regard to the way some folks see this as a waste of money...it's interesting to watch that story from PBS. You are right about Dallas. If it was gonna go up in smoke somewhere, I would have expected it to there. They are automobile-crazy like we are here...and it has been such a great success there. Look at how fast they are expanding now, compared to when they started. I think what a lot of folks don't realize is that a mass transit solution has to be crafted for each and every city to meet it's needs. Some folks seem to think that mass transit in OK means that we would be implementing the same system as other cities. Obviously, that is not the case.

In Dallas, people in the 'burbs pooh-poohed DART in the same sneering, derisive way you do. Now, those same 'burbs are begging and paying to have extensions to DART built to their towns.


That is the funny part. The leaders in those few communities outside of Dallas made a big stink about it and got enough citizens behind them to pull funding. Like it was some big conspiracy to steal money from the other communities.

Then some several years later, when all the buzz about Dart is occurring, the citizens in those surrounding communities saw what they had bought into. F-U-D! No doubt, they learned their lesson. They now had no access to what everyone else was able to put to good use! I'd hate to be one of those city leaders who was involved in that scam.

What is so interesting though. Now the citizens see exactly what they have to pay to connect to the system. When those city leaders had convinced them that they were paying more than their fair share. Now they see that the price was actually just their portion of the funding and not some big conspiracy, like the city leaders had beat into their head.

Please either post something constructive and appropriate or don't post at all.

I will continue to write as I see fit. It isn't for you to dictate to me, or anyone else, whether what I post is "constructive" or "appropriate". You can disagree with what I say, and make any judgement you want about it, but you don't get to tell me what is or is not appropriate. That's what they have moderators for.
If you don't like what I post use the ignore button.

Moderators also came to be due to folks not being able to be mature and control themselves. You may write as you see fit, so long as it complies with the rules of the forum. I didn't dictate the rules.

In an attempt to stay on-topic, where do you stand on the issue of the aid and how it fits into the MWC project. I don't think you've shared that with us yet.

Can one of the pro-light rail folks please post information showing the success of the dallas based dart? TIA

Can one of the pro-light rail folks please post information showing the success of the dallas based dart? TIA

Well, I'm not really pro light-rail, but both wikipedia and dart.org are great places to start. The reason there has been so much focus on DART (as opposed to other cities around the country) is because the folks in that area are glued to automobiles just like we are. Similar situation. So, one would expect a plan for such a system in that kind of area to be voted down and fall flat on it's face, right? Well, that's what's so interesting. The buildout of that system is accelerating, with more support from the people and the government than when it started. Sure, there are still certain areas surrounding dallas that refuse to have anything to do with it, but a majority of the area supports it! I also think it's important to note that the cities that oppose it have never tried it in their city, so it's clearly a matter of them not wanting it as opposed to it not being able to work in their community. It's just impressive to see a system be successful at all in an area which is so dominated by automobiles, like we are.

I would write up more, but the topic is obviously not on Dallas. Hopefully the links help you out.

[QUOTE=sgray;200601]Danielf, do not change the subject. Soonerguru highlighted a very good point. In the last several days you have made some wild claims that you are so sure about, yet you provide no facts to back up your statement. You have posted NO supporting facts, therefore your views carry no weight. All you say is "IT'S BAAAAD! IT'S GONNA FAIL! WASTE OF MONEY! OOoooooo..." You know, the FUD-type of stuff. So, unless you are going to step up to the plate and defend your statements, you cannot place blame on someone who is just pointing out your lack of backing facts. Understand?

Here's a good fact you can take with you: Less than 1% of the Oklahoma stimulus package, if approved, would ever be for mass transit. Only $4 million (maximum) was to go for that MWC project. Period. The remaining bulk of that package is strictly for more asphault roads! Talk about hypocrisy!



GWB, the fact that you seem to have been able to draw ties to a particular poster's political affiliations based on a poster's comment (where they simply pointed out that the comment still, to-date, has no basis or supporting facts) doesn't make you look too intelligent. In fact, you are directly name calling. Again, talk about hypocrisy!

I have to admit, while some of us have had good, constructive debate over the last few days on this thread, the only thing I've seen of you is the alleged "name calling". I see no name calling, and have to say that I, too, am getting tired of having to scroll through the FUD just to get to the good debate posts.

Danielf is, through his posts, painting himself as "know-it-all" and has seriously discredited any and all of his statements due to the ever-so-present lack of ability to post supporting facts.

Please either post something constructive and appropriate or don't post at all.

This is constructive debate, not drama class! Or the political section for that matter.[/QUOTE

How sad!!!!!!

Can one of the pro-light rail folks please post information showing the success of the dallas based dart? TIA

They can't post what's not available, oh no, I shouldn't have said that, they'll start calling me names again.

Is there a website somewhere that has the MWC light rail proposal that we could read and see exactly what they are planning on doing with that 4 mil that has been requested?

I'm not opposed to light rail at all, nor do I think it's doomed to failure. But I do think that we need to know precisely where people are driving to work. Do we have enough people working downtown or going downtown to support it? When I see traffic at rush hour, it seems like it's the worst between Norman and downtown. It would seem to me that that's the most reasonable place to start a line, with access to downtown and the Health Sciences Center. And, again, since rail has limitations, it needs a great supporting cast: bus service that has good routes, reliable and frequent service.

ok, people... this is a friendly reminder to keep things civil. try to stick to the topic.

-M

I'm not opposed to light rail at all, nor do I think it's doomed to failure. But I do think that we need to know precisely where people are driving to work. Do we have enough people working downtown or going downtown to support it? When I see traffic at rush hour, it seems like it's the worst between Norman and downtown. It would seem to me that that's the most reasonable place to start a line, with access to downtown and the Health Sciences Center. And, again, since rail has limitations, it needs a great supporting cast: bus service that has good routes, reliable and frequent service.

I think that's pretty easy to do, even for a layman. If we hire consultants and such, it should be pretty easy, we should be okay as long as ODOT or COTPA isn't behind the wheel. We all know the busy thouroughfares, employment centers, and attractions here in the metro.

Light rail works all over the world in cities both bigger and smaller than OKC. If done correctly it will reshape our city and make higher density more possible. If we continue along the current growth patterns we will continue to have underdeveloped and crumbling large portions of our city, mass sprawl and highly levels of pollution. We are too poor of a city to waste money NOT doing light rail.
IMHO

I am a bit confused about something. I thought all the stimulus package-funded projects had to be "shovel-ready." Is this BT-Tinker line shovel ready?? Why are other more promising lines not shovel ready? Why is a better bus system not shovel ready?

I was recently reading an article about the stimulus money other cities are receiveing. It is incredible and disheartening. Millions of dollars are being thrown at Philadelphia and other cities to make improvements to the streetscape (i.e., more and better street lamps, brick sidewalks, trees, prettier awnings, etc.). Why is OKC spending millions of its own money on projects in the Asian District, Plaza District, Stockyards, etc., then passing up the stimulus money? How is Albuquerque in line for millions in federal aid for its mass-transit rail line when it's half the size of OKC?

I am a bit confused about something. I thought all the stimulus package-funded projects had to be "shovel-ready." Is this BT-Tinker line shovel ready?? Why are other more promising lines not shovel ready? Why is a better bus system not shovel ready?

I was recently reading an article about the stimulus money other cities are receiveing. It is incredible and disheartening. Millions of dollars are being thrown at Philadelphia and other cities to make improvements to the streetscape (i.e., more and better street lamps, brick sidewalks, trees, prettier awnings, etc.). Why is OKC spending millions of its own money on projects in the Asian District, Plaza District, Stockyards, etc., then passing up the stimulus money? How is Albuquerque in line for millions in federal aid for its mass-transit rail line when it's half the size of OKC?


Light rail transit projects are not ready because the "Powers that Be" are smart enough to know that it will not work in OKC, and don't want to see the money wasted.

I am a bit confused about something. I thought all the stimulus package-funded projects had to be "shovel-ready." Is this BT-Tinker line shovel ready?? Why are other more promising lines not shovel ready? Why is a better bus system not shovel ready?

I was recently reading an article about the stimulus money other cities are receiveing. It is incredible and disheartening. Millions of dollars are being thrown at Philadelphia and other cities to make improvements to the streetscape (i.e., more and better street lamps, brick sidewalks, trees, prettier awnings, etc.). Why is OKC spending millions of its own money on projects in the Asian District, Plaza District, Stockyards, etc., then passing up the stimulus money? How is Albuquerque in line for millions in federal aid for its mass-transit rail line when it's half the size of OKC?

Experts for the most part agree that in order for light rail mass transit to work, you need density, with that said, OKC is to large/spread out for light rail to even come close to being successful, with that said, the following is from the latest census:

Albuquerque Pop. 518,277 Land 180 sq. miles
Oklahoma City Pop. 537,000 Land 625 sq. miles

With these numbers, is easy for any one with common sense to see/understand why light rail will not work here.

I am a bit confused about something. I thought all the stimulus package-funded projects had to be "shovel-ready." Is this BT-Tinker line shovel ready?? Why are other more promising lines not shovel ready? Why is a better bus system not shovel ready?

I was recently reading an article about the stimulus money other cities are receiveing. It is incredible and disheartening. Millions of dollars are being thrown at Philadelphia and other cities to make improvements to the streetscape (i.e., more and better street lamps, brick sidewalks, trees, prettier awnings, etc.). Why is OKC spending millions of its own money on projects in the Asian District, Plaza District, Stockyards, etc., then passing up the stimulus money? How is Albuquerque in line for millions in federal aid for its mass-transit rail line when it's half the size of OKC?

For a project to be shovel ready, there would have to be a plan in place first. The city has no functional plans for mass transit at the moment, not even bus-wise, therefore nothing could be "shovel ready". The MWC project had a plan in-place because the individuals involved with the project had already prepared the plan. To get money thrown at us too, we'd have to have done our homework and it was never done. Our neighboring states have plans and most have functional systems already running.


Experts for the most part agree that in order for light rail mass transit to work, you need density, with that said, OKC is to large/spread out for light rail to even come close to being successful, with that said, the following is from the latest census:

Albuquerque Pop. 518,277 Land 180 sq. miles
Oklahoma City Pop. 537,000 Land 625 sq. miles

With these numbers, is easy for any one with common sense to see/understand why light rail will not work here.

You must just be playin with us. Obviously, you know that density skyrockets when people have a nice transit system that allows them to move about by foot--and then on the flip-side Oklahoma is an excellent case study for anyone to see how out of control the density issue becomes when people are forced to use cars as the only means to get around. 10 miles here 10 miles there. Very wasteful. Your numbers on Albuquerque suggest that they are nearly 3.5 times as dense as we are. Shows how well we are using our land, eh?

Take a look at any of the areas around the country where mass transit has been implemented, and then pay close attention to the areas along the transit routes, both before and after implementation. You'll notice something interesting...growth and density.


Light rail transit projects are not ready because the "Powers that Be" are smart enough to know that it will not work in OKC, and don't want to see the money wasted.

Ahh, yes. The "Powers that Be" that make the decisions because they "know what's best for us better than we do" right? Now how is that dissimilar to a dictatorship? Kind of like the previous governor's standpoint on the casinos...regardless of what the will of the people is or how right or wrong it is, don't let the people vote on it because it's for their own good, right? You are correct in labeling them the "Powers that Be". Obviously not us, "the people".


Light rail works all over the world in cities both bigger and smaller than OKC. If done correctly it will reshape our city and make higher density more possible. If we continue along the current growth patterns we will continue to have underdeveloped and crumbling large portions of our city, mass sprawl and highly levels of pollution. We are too poor of a city to waste money NOT doing light rail.
IMHO

Yup. True True.

Experts for the most part agree that in order for light rail mass transit to work, you need density, with that said, OKC is to large/spread out for light rail to even come close to being successful, with that said, the following is from the latest census:

Albuquerque Pop. 518,277 Land 180 sq. miles
Oklahoma City Pop. 537,000 Land 625 sq. miles

With these numbers, is easy for any one with common sense to see/understand why light rail will not work here.

I don't think that's true at all. What I do think is that you need employment and entertainment density. In other words, people need to have jobs or need to want to recreate primarily in areas that the light rail goes. My question has always been whether enough people work downtown or go downtown for light rail to function well. I think it you include the health sciences center with a trolley link, probably there are enough, especially if we start with simple lines running down I-35 to Norman and up the Broadway Extension to Edmond. I don't know that absolutely, but I think it's too simplistic just to look at our population density and assume light rail won't work. If we do spend the money, then we need to study it well and come up with a sensible plan that will serve the greatest number of people. And, it would be nice if we already had a great mass transit infrastructure that would serve any available stops, since you've got inflexibility with light rail. Now would be a good time to start looking seriously at improving our bus and trolley service, while the studying and planning for light rail ensues.

Experts for the most part agree that in order for light rail mass transit to work, you need density, with that said, OKC is to large/spread out for light rail to even come close to being successful, with that said, the following is from the latest census:

Albuquerque Pop. 518,277 Land 180 sq. miles
Oklahoma City Pop. 537,000 Land 625 sq. miles

With these numbers, is easy for any one with common sense to see/understand why light rail will not work here.

Nope. Wrong again.

This density argument is getting old. Just because our city has lands extending and spreading out over 625 sq. miles, does not mean that our urbanized center encompasses that whole mass of land.

That's ridiculous. Our urban area is actually very similiar to Albuquerque. We only use roughly 1/3 of our land area for urban development, the rest is rural.

Get that straight.

Please tell us, danielf. What are the "powers that be" thinking? Are you invited to the meetings?

The Mayor of Oklahoma City said we will have transit, including rail transit. Does he fit your definition of "power that be," or is he misguided? Perhaps we should have Mayor Cornett and the OKC Chamber get in touch with you to determine OKC's transit future.

And your opinion would be highly relevant, of course, because you are neither an OKC or Oklahoma Country resident, do not pay OKC sales or property taxes, do not vote in OKC municipal elections, and will not be a voter for or against MAPS III.

A serious question: aside from serving as a general annoyance, why do you spend so much time here? Wouldn't your presence be more appropriate on the Norman forum, considering you choose not to be a resident of OKC?

Ok...my two cents for what it's worth. I have ridden a train half-way across the U.S. and I have also ridden DART. DART was crowded at rush hour and empty at all other times. I personally do not think light-rail will work in OKC, just my opinion. In order for rail to be successful it must be equal to or better than driving your automobile. That means it must be either faster, significantly cheaper, more convenient, or offer more utility. Since OKC traffic is not that bad even in peak hours, I do not see the train being faster, particularly when you add in the time to walk/drive to the station, stops along the way, depart from destination station, walk to work/dinner, etc. It might possibly be cheaper to ride, but from my past experiences with trains, they really were no cheaper to ride than it was to fly or drive, particularly when you factor in the cost of your time (assuming alternative forms of transportation are faster than the train). Also, in large dense cities, many of those who utilize mass transit do not have alternative forms of transportation, so, this in turn drives down the cost of riding the train. However, in OKC, people would still have their autos even if they rode the train daily for work commute. Therefore they still have to pay insurance, maintenance, cost of vehicle, tags, etc. A train will never offer more utility than your own vehicle, particularly if it is crowded (which is needed to be profitable). If the train is crowded it makes it difficult to read, work, read the paper, etc...so the utility is very limited. I can buy the convenience factor particularly as it relates to a particular site or venue (i.e. downtown, bricktown, warren theatre, etc.). But in order for it to be more convenient there must be quick access to stations.

Again, just my opinion, but I do believe one or more of those factors have to be present in order for light rail to be successful. Of course, mass transit is most often utilized by those whose transportation modes are most limited (poor, elderly, etc.). Nobody wants to ride a train that is being frequented by the underpriveleged.

Get that straight.


Nicely played!

Please tell us, danielf. What are the "powers that be" thinking? Are you invited to the meetings?

The Mayor of Oklahoma City said we will have transit, including rail transit. Does he fit your definition of "power that be," or is he misguided? Perhaps we should have Mayor Cornett and the OKC Chamber get in touch with you to determine OKC's transit future.

And your opinion would be highly relevant, of course, because you are neither an OKC or Oklahoma Country resident, do not pay OKC sales or property taxes, do not vote in OKC municipal elections, and will not be a voter for or against MAPS III.

A serious question: aside from serving as a general annoyance, why do you spend so much time here? Wouldn't your presence be more appropriate on the Norman forum, considering you choose not to be a resident of OKC?


Where do I start:

Mayor Cornett has never said we will have "light rail". (MASS TRANSIT-YES, LIGHT RAIL-NO)
I have been a member of the OKC Chamber for 17 years and I attend almost, all meetings.
I have/own several property's in OKC, both Commercial and Residential, so I pay more than my fare share of property taxes.
I hire a Rental Management Co, in OKC, my Property Maintenance Co. is in OKC, my Exterminator is in OKC, I buy my cars, groceries, furniture and clothing in OKC, my Barber is in OKC, so I pay my fair share of City Sales Tax.

Despite what some may feel, this is a free Country, as such I will look/read/respond to any blog or thread I please.

And if I happen to be a big annoyance to you, well, that sounds like you have a personal problem!!!!!!!

Nope. Wrong again.

This density argument is getting old. Just because our city has lands extending and spreading out over 625 sq. miles, does not mean that our urbanized center encompasses that whole mass of land.

That's ridiculous. Our urban area is actually very similiar to Albuquerque. We only use roughly 1/3 of our land area for urban development, the rest is rural.

Get that straight.


Architect2010, it's OK to disagree, isn't it great to live in a Free Country, call me in a year or two, and let's see who has it STRAIGHT.

please tell us, danielf. What are the "powers that be" thinking? Are you invited to the meetings?

The mayor of oklahoma city said we will have transit, including rail transit. Does he fit your definition of "power that be," or is he misguided? Perhaps we should have mayor cornett and the okc chamber get in touch with you to determine okc's transit future.

And your opinion would be highly relevant, of course, because you are neither an okc or oklahoma country resident, do not pay okc sales or property taxes, do not vote in okc municipal elections, and will not be a voter for or against maps iii.

A serious question: Aside from serving as a general annoyance, why do you spend so much time here? Wouldn't your presence be more appropriate on the norman forum, considering you choose not to be a resident of okc?


111

In danielf's defense (though I disagree with him on most everything) this is the OKC Metro Area forum, not just the OKC forum....being from Norman includes him (and myself) in that discussion.

111


In danielf's defense (though I disagree with him on most everything) this is the OKC Metro Area forum, not just the OKC forum....being from Norman includes him (and myself) in that discussion.

Thanks.
I'm just glad to live in a Country that allows us to openly disagree, and just think how boring it would be if everyone thought the same!!

Thanks.
I'm just glad to live in a Country that allows us to openly disagree, and just think how boring it would be if everyone thought the same!!

I couldn't agree more! Take that China!

In danielf's defense (though I disagree with him on most everything) this is the OKC Metro Area forum, not just the OKC forum....being from Norman includes him (and myself) in that discussion.

No one said he was not or could not be part of the discussion. One poster simply made the point that his vote lies in Norman, which is where he told us that he lives. Regardless of what other properties he may own, individuals may only register to vote in one place and their one vote will be valid in that one place. So what soonerguru sais is correct, danielf will not be participating in any OKC votes unless he changes his place of residence to okc and registers to vote here.


Architect2010, it's OK to disagree, isn't it great to live in a Free Country

It is okay to disagree, but you haven't challenged his claims and actually backed them up with facts. Yes it is great to live in a free country. We should start a thread on that subject.


call me in a year or two, and let's see who has it STRAIGHT.

What the heck is this supposed to be?


Where do I start:

Mayor Cornett has never said we will have "light rail". (MASS TRANSIT-YES, LIGHT RAIL-NO)
I have been a member of the OKC Chamber for 17 years and I attend almost, all meetings.
I have/own several property's in OKC, both Commercial and Residential, so I pay more than my fare share of property taxes.
I hire a Rental Management Co, in OKC, my Property Maintenance Co. is in OKC, my Exterminator is in OKC, I buy my cars, groceries, furniture and clothing in OKC, my Barber is in OKC, so I pay my fair share of City Sales Tax.

Despite what some may feel, this is a free Country, as such I will look/read/respond to any blog or thread I please.

And if I happen to be a big annoyance to you, well, that sounds like you have a personal problem!!!!!!!

Perhaps you haven't been paying attention (again). The fixed guideway study already has rail written into it along with bus as well. How could you be so sure that Mick is all of a sudden gonna step up on his soapbox and say that he is going to approve all but the rail portion of the recommendations?

You are welcome to post as you please so long as it is in line with the rules here, but keep in mind that if you expect your posts to carry any weight, they'd better include some pretty strong supporting facts. To-date, they have not.

No one said he was not or could not be part of the discussion. One poster simply made the point that his vote lies in Norman, which is where he told us that he lives. Regardless of what other properties he may own, individuals may only register to vote in one place and their one vote will be valid in that one place. So what soonerguru sais is correct, danielf will not be participating in any OKC votes unless he changes his place of residence to okc and registers to vote here.



It is okay to disagree, but you haven't challenged his claims and actually backed them up with facts. Yes it is great to live in a free country. We should start a thread on that subject.



What the heck is this supposed to be?



Perhaps you haven't been paying attention (again). The fixed guideway study already has rail written into it along with bus as well. How could you be so sure that Mick is all of a sudden gonna step up on his soapbox and say that he is going to approve all but the rail portion of the recommendations?

You are welcome to post as you please so long as it is in line with the rules here, but keep in mind that if you expect your posts to carry any weight, they'd better include some pretty strong supporting facts. To-date, they have not.


I may not live in OKC, nor can I vote in OKC, but I will support, work for and promote a MAPS3 when/if, it's offered to the voters.

As for my posts not carrying any weight, that's your opinion, and who are you to tell me my posts "better include strong supporting facts"

Let's get that straight!!!

I may not live in OKC, nor can I vote in OKC, but I will support, work for and promote a MAPS3 when/if, it's offered to the voters.

And you may do just that. No one has said otherwise.


As for my posts not carrying any weight, that's your opinion, and who are you to tell me my posts "better include strong supporting facts"

That's not an opinion, that's your choice, meaning do not be surprised when folks don't take you seriously. In order to carry any weight, your comments would need to include supporting facts.

Because your statements are being presented as fact!!! You are presenting them as fact! I mean, seriously man. Where are your supporting facts? Remember one very important thing: your comments stated not that you don't believe light rail will work, but that light rail will not work here (in okc). That is quite a statement and for such a statement to carry any weight you would have to provide verifiable facts to support it. You could always just say that you don't believe light rail would work here and that would be an opinion. But if you are stating something as fact, it has to be supported otherwise it is yet to be proven.

Others and myself have provided valid facts and references (from actual places not dissimilar to us) supporting the claim that rail will work here.



Let's get that straight!!!

Factor that into your calculations!!!

And you may do just that. No one has said otherwise.



That's not an opinion, that's your choice, meaning do not be surprised when folks don't take you seriously. In order to carry any weight, your comments would need to include supporting facts.

Because your statements are being presented as fact!!! You are presenting them as fact! I mean, seriously man. Where are your supporting facts? Remember one very important thing: your comments stated not that you don't believe light rail will work, but that light rail will not work here (in okc). That is quite a statement and for such a statement to carry any weight you would have to provide verifiable facts to support it. You could always just say that you don't believe light rail would work here and that would be an opinion. But if you are stating something as fact, it has to be supported otherwise it is yet to be proven.

Others and myself have provided valid facts and references (from actual places not dissimilar to us) supporting the claim that rail will work here.




Factor that into your calculations!!!


If you don't like my posts, why do you continue to read them and respond, there is an ignore button for a reason. Please ignore anything I post on this thread, I promise, I'm a big boy, I won't loose any sleep, I am a survivor!!

How sad and pathetic!!

And you may do just that. No one has said otherwise.



That's not an opinion, that's your choice, meaning do not be surprised when folks don't take you seriously. In order to carry any weight, your comments would need to include supporting facts.

Because your statements are being presented as fact!!! You are presenting them as fact! I mean, seriously man. Where are your supporting facts? Remember one very important thing: your comments stated not that you don't believe light rail will work, but that light rail will not work here (in okc). That is quite a statement and for such a statement to carry any weight you would have to provide verifiable facts to support it. You could always just say that you don't believe light rail would work here and that would be an opinion. But if you are stating something as fact, it has to be supported otherwise it is yet to be proven.

Others and myself have provided valid facts and references (from actual places not dissimilar to us) supporting the claim that rail will work here.




Factor that into your calculations!!!


I forgot one thing, Have a Wonderful Day :kicking:

Architect2010, it's OK to disagree, isn't it great to live in a Free Country, call me in a year or two, and let's see who has it STRAIGHT.

Yeah. I agree. Free County. Wewt.

But unless our city is going to suddenly engulf the remaining 2/3 of our land area, then I don't know what you mean by, "let's see who has it STRAIGHT."

I'm not worried. :beaten_fi

i read the odot press release from yesterday, but it didn't break down the $39 million for urban and rural transit systems. anyone seen where it is broken down? an aside, the odot webpage is atrocious.

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/09-013_odot_announces_plans_for_stimulus_funding.pdf

If you don't like my posts, why do you continue to read them and respond, there is an ignore button for a reason. Please ignore anything I post on this thread, I promise, I'm a big boy, I won't loose any sleep, I am a survivor!!

How sad and pathetic!!

I never posted anything about liking or disliking your posts, therefore my claim to you not paying attention holds true.

Understand that this is a public forum for discussion. Anything posted on here is subject to criticism and debate and is openly viewable by all.

The last 7 POSTS you've made to this thread have had nothing to do with the topic of the thread. Perhaps we should ask the moderaters if it is necessary for us to ignore posts that are off-topic and not posted in the correct thread.

Please follow the rules and post on the topic. Thanks.

I never posted anything about liking or disliking your posts, therefore my claim to you not paying attention holds true.

Understand that this is a public forum for discussion. Anything posted on here is subject to criticism and debate and is openly viewable by all.

The last 7 POSTS you've made to this thread have had nothing to do with the topic of the thread. Perhaps we should ask the moderaters if it is necessary for us to ignore posts that are off-topic and not posted in the correct thread.

Please follow the rules and post on the topic. Thanks.


You forgot to say How wonderful and terrific you are, that you never wrong and all of your posts have nothing but the FACTS.
:poke:

i read the odot press release from yesterday, but it didn't break down the $39 million for urban and rural transit systems. anyone seen where it is broken down? an aside, the odot webpage is atrocious.

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/09-013_odot_announces_plans_for_stimulus_funding.pdf

My understanding was that $4 million of OK's package, if approved, would go to the MWC project. Have you heard of any other transit projects in the metro area? I'm pretty sure that is the only one we had for our area. I see the $39 million that you mentioned as well. Who knows, maybe they got something else in there at the last minute. Of course, at $39 million for the whole state, there couldn't have been much more for just OKC.

Yeah, digging for data on the ODOT site is a lot of fun.

Let's refrain from personal attacks and discuss the topic at hand.

Nobody wants to ride a train that is being frequented by the underpriveleged.

What is this supposed to mean? Maybe this is the way people in Oklahoma City feel, but I see people utilizing public transit from all socioeconomic groups when I visit other cities.

Are OKC people more snobby toward the poor? I really don't think so, at least I hope that's not the case.

Actually, danielf, Mayor Cornett said the city will have mass transit, including some rail transit, in MAPS III. It wasn't much specified beyond that.

[deleted by admin]

What is this supposed to mean? Maybe this is the way people in Oklahoma City feel, but I see people utilizing public transit from all socioeconomic groups when I visit other cities.

Are OKC people more snobby toward the poor? I really don't think so, at least I hope that's not the case.

That's been my experience as well. I found it kind of amusing that one of the OKC news stations did a piece that was basically them being amazed that middle and upper class people were riding the bus during the high gas prices of the summer. I guess they expected to get on and see a slum...I wish I could find the video :(

That's been my experience as well. I found it kind of amusing that one of the OKC news stations did a piece that was basically them being amazed that middle and upper class people were riding the bus during the high gas prices of the summer. I guess they expected to get on and see a slum...I wish I could find the video :(

Let me clarify...if light rail occurs and it is a failure (i.e. not more advantageous/convenient than driving your auto), then the only ridership you will have are those without auto (for the most part)...elderly and underpriveleged are those without autos in OKC.

Let me clarify...if light rail occurs and it is a failure (i.e. not more advantageous/convenient than driving your auto), then the only ridership you will have are those without auto (for the most part)...elderly and underpriveleged are those without autos in OKC.

Mcgrawsdad,

I think we understood the main part of your post. What I take issue with is what you said at the end of your post.


Nobody wants to ride a train that is being frequented by the underpriveleged.

While I respect your position on the issue, I do not place myself into a social bubble where I cannot be around or talk to others just because they are "underprivileged". I think we could use some clarification on why you think that nobody would want to ride a train just because it was being frequented by folks who can't afford or who choose not to buy a car.

Aw, come on!! Way too easy!!

:calvin:

YouTube - Another One Rides The Bus! -Weird Al, (Bites The Dust) G-mod (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmEEnWEaeRk)

(substituting bus for train referenced below)


Mcgrawsdad,
I think we could use some clarification on why you think that nobody would want to ride a train just because it was being frequented by folks who can't afford or who choose not to buy a car.

Aw, come on!! Way too easy!!

YouTube - Another One Rides The Bus! -Weird Al, (Bites The Dust) G-mod (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmEEnWEaeRk)



This is friggin retarded!!! But funny as hell nonetheless!

and another one rides...and another one rides...

SGRAY...if light rail is implemented and it is less than a success at first, the majority of the ridership WILL be from those individuals that mass transit is the only transit choice they have. Sure some people choose to not own a car, but most do not choose, but rather can not afford or are (for one reason or another) unable to legally or physically drive. Assuming light rail is not a success, then the ridership will be those individuals described above. Half the battle with light rail is the perception of the general public, if the public perceives light rail to be those individuals described above, then public perception alone will be enough to doom light rail. In essence, if light rail has any chance to succeed, then it must do so from the outset. It must have so much greater marginal utility than driving your own automobile that it is frequented by both those who have alternative forms of transportation and those that do not. I hope that clarifies my position and statement.