From what I read, TxDot wants this implemented by 2020, now for ODOT, well that might be a problem. I have feeling ODOT will drag their feet on this, and delay implementation.

I think we will see HSR to Dallas a lot sooner as well and I think you are right about ODOT, which is why they need to be taken out of the loop as soon as possible. ODOT is the single biggest obstacle to transportation alternatives in Oklahoma. You know it is ass-backwards when TxDOT is hosting HSR presentation in OKC and ODOT says that didn't know anything about it.

From what I read, TxDot wants this implemented by 2020, now for ODOT, well that might be a problem. I have feeling ODOT will drag their feet on this, and delay implementation.

When you say implemented by 2020, do you mean the HSR line is completed by 2020, construction has begun by 2020, or something else? Since that 2020 is only 7 years away, I would be very surprised to see a HSR line completed between OKC and Dallas during that time frame given the natural time delays in the process. (environmental studies, input from impacted property owners, right-of-way-acquisition, moving utilities, obtaining funding, and, lastly, constructing the HSR line.)

What happened with the legislation to transition rail away from ODOT?

What happened with the legislation to transition rail away from ODOT?

It was held in the Senate and never made it to the Governor's desk - likely at the bidding of Ridley and ODOR. Another excuse I heard was the Senator over the committee didn't want a veto "on his record" - sorry I cannot recall the Senator's name right now. The good news is Speaker Shannon and the House are solidly behind it and a large majority of the Senate favored it. It will come up in the next legislative session and hopefully the governor will be forced to either sign or veto. Veto will likely be overridden according to what I have heard.

It was held in the Senate and never made it to the Governor's desk - likely at the bidding of Ridley and ODOR. Another excuse I heard was the Senator over the committee didn't want a veto "on his record" - sorry I cannot recall the Senator's name right now. The good news is Speaker Shannon and the House are solidly behind it and a large majority of the Senate favored it. It will come up in the next legislative session and hopefully the governor will be forced to either sign or veto. Veto will likely be overridden according to what I have heard.

Hopefully. Unanimous House approval and a 43-8 (I think?) Senate vote should always go to the Governor. They held it in Conference Committee and couldn't agree on the Senate changes, which only struck some words from the title of the bill, nothing else. It was a silly cop-out to a well-supported bill.

The State of Kansas and City of Wichita submitted a grant application to fund an extension of the Heartland Flier. I'm not sure what time the train would leave Wichita but getting into OKC about 8AM would be perfect. I wonder if it will have a stop in Edmond (thus allowing an Edmond to OKC commuter option).

Wichita seeks grant for rail extension to Oklahoma City | News OK (http://newsok.com/wichita-seeks-grant-for-rail-extension-to-oklahoma-city/article/3854936)

Eventually I would like to see a second train originating in Ft Worth at about 7AM and make its way north to Wichita.

That would work well in conjunction with the departure from OKC to Ft. Worth as it is now.

In a more in-depth article on the Wichita Eagle site there was this blurb at the bottom of the article.

A private study group in Tulsa is examining the possibility of private passenger trains between OKC and Tulsa.
There was also a related article from May, 10 2013 about the proposed private Tulsa to OKC rail service.

After reading that article I couldn’t help but wonder if perhaps private passenger rail service between Dallas and OKC would be a viable supplement to Amtrak or as a replacement. Could then get direct service to Dallas two or more times a day. Plus a private carrier could run daily service from Dallas to Thackerville (Winstar).

Here are a couple of excerpts from that related article about private passenger rail between Tulsa and OKC. There is also a link to the story at the bottom.

A Tulsa group is weighing a privately operated passenger train line between their city and Oklahoma City, potentially removing an obstacle for Wichita’s pursuit of the Heartland Flyer.

Former Tulsa City Council member Rick Westcott, an attorney, said his group thinks the city would by benefit from a public-private partnership offering passenger rail between the two cities.

“These were people who have an established record of successful private operations … all who have a demonstrated capacity of providing service over the distance we’re requiring.”
Since the lines between Oklahoma City and Tulsa are operational, and currently under lease by a freight provider, Westcott said the tracks can be upgraded for passenger rail at the $50 million figure.
And passenger rail can be established quickly between Tulsa and Oklahoma City, he said.
“That’s one of the big things that surprised me,” he said. “One carrier we talked with said that from the date a contract might be signed, they could make the upgrades and improvements for four round trips a day and be up and running in six months.”

Read more here: Proposed Oklahoma passenger rail line could boost chances Heartland Flyer comes to Wichita | Wichita Eagle (http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/02/2660567/proposed-oklahoma-passenger-rail.html#storylink=cpy)

Oklahoma City is in the process of being to Tulsa to Wichita what Dallas/Ft Worth is to Oklahoma City.

And what I mean about that is, we are finally reaching the point where smaller communities are trying to connect to us rather than us always trying to connect to them.

I wonder if it will have a stop in Edmond (thus allowing an Edmond to OKC commuter option).

I don't see how it possibly would allow for an Edmond-OKC commuter option. For that you are going to need frequency and also well timed return trips...but you know this. One train a day each way isn't going to get people out of their cars. I believe nearly all the lines are owned by BNSF and discussions need to get going with them about operating commuter rail. They already do it in Chicago with Metra, and probably other cities, so they have the experience and resources to do it.

I'm just tossing this out there...

One of the struggles I've had in regional rail discussion is how rarely, if ever, other uses of the infrastructure is brought up. If we isolated places like Edmond and Oklahoma City and could see everything, not just everyone, that went between these two cities, we might see a variety of uses.

I'm not sure the goal only needs to be "how do we get people out of their cars". Produce, service companies, mail, all use that corridor. None of these really would use conventional freight. One of the advantages I think to considering them is they bring a pretty measurable value exchange proposition.

Should we go to these prospective uses and solicit support. In this way, passenger rail would have passenger cars with other cars or space leased by companies or logistic services.

There is just SO MUCH stuff that is transported by box truck, van, and even semi-trucks for those last 5-50 miles that never would be considered for freight but might start to make sense if there was a redundant, dense, regional rail network.

I see what you are saying Sid, but are there any examples of cargo/freight being used on a commuter rail system? Outside of courier service carrying it on and off, I haven't seen it. Of course, Chicago is really the main one I'm most familiar with and they don't offer a service for it. The trains stop for maybe 5-10 minutes which doesn't really allow a significant amount of time to load/unload anything of significant mass. Perhaps an option for a new hybrid model, but if people are on a train trying to go from Norman to Edmond, they aren't going to want to sit in OKC for 30+ minutes.

Sid - One of the videos I posted in the New Urbanism Library thread was the re-urbanization of Christchurch, NZ. The speaker proposed a multipurpose use for their streetcar lines. They want to extend service to the airport which is where most of warehouse and distribution businesses are located and serve people during normal hours while delivering freight to downtown business in the over-night and early morning hours. It would removed all trucks and delivery vehicle from downtown streets and provide a new path of revenue.

I think if existing examples were out there, they probably wouldn't be in the US. No regional system has really been in place long enough nor/or had the independence to do it.

The only thing that I could think of then is have two or maybe three different options available.

1) Express trains - These are your Norman > OKC, Edmond > OKC, OKC > Tinker trains that make zero stops along the way.

2) Pax Only trains - Your typical commuter rail with stops but no cargo. Station stops are going to be the average 5 minutes.

3) Combi trains - Pax and small cargo trains. They'll have longer 20 minute stops but won't operate as frequently.

In order to make the combi trains work there is going to need to be an option to have essentially containers for packages like with widebody airliners. Train gets to the destination the ones marked for that stop get pulled off, the new ones get loaded in. Who ever is shipping/receiving needs to be there to meet it and the items just remain on the cart/container.

We then run into issues with staffing though. Are the cargo handlers going to go with the train like most staff does now? Are people going to be willing to pay the rates needed to have staff at every stop? I wonder the cost price point for cargo is just going to make it too unprofitable to even touch.

State Representative David Perryman (D-Pocasset) has requested an interim study be conducted between now and the next legislative session, which would look at the feasibility of creating high speed rail line connecting Lawton to Oklahoma City, and Oklahoma City to Tulsa. -

Perryman says all aboard for Oklahoma mass transit plan » Top News » Chickashanews.com (http://chickashanews.com/topnews/x596946075/Perryman-says-all-aboard-for-Oklahoma-mass-transit-plan#sthash.BifZ3Jqr.dpuf)

And a link to a blog article supporting the idea;

BLOG: Send in the trains » Top News » Chickashanews.com (http://chickashanews.com/topnews/x596947475/Send-in-the-trains)

State Representative David Perryman (D-Pocasset) has requested an interim study be conducted between now and the next legislative session, which would look at the feasibility of creating high speed rail line connecting Lawton to Oklahoma City, and Oklahoma City to Tulsa.

Sounds like my Red Line

https://sites.google.com/site/okcrail/

This is one of the reasons we need a streetcar/better local transit system. If you take the train here from Tulsa or Chickasha, how do you get around once you get here? If you can get off at the hub and get on a streetcar that takes you to places you want to go, you're far more likely to go to OKC on a train for the day or weekend.

This is one of the reasons we need a streetcar/better local transit system. If you take the train here from Tulsa or Chickasha, how do you get around once you get here? If you can get off at the hub and get on a streetcar that takes you to places you want to go, you're far more likely to go to OKC on a train for the day or weekend.

I agree Betts -you have to be able to get around once you get there. However, many of Oklahoma's smaller communities were centered around the original train stations so most everything is still within walking distance at that end. For the little towns whose downtowns have died it would be a huge boost for them and could easily recreate small town America.

Downtown Chickasha is pretty cool, even if most stores are vacant. A rail link between Lawton and OKC would have stop directly adjacent to it. People who don't want to live in a big city but work in downtown OKC could easily live in downtown Chickasha or one of the downtown adjacent neighborhoods and be in downtown OKC in less than 30 minutes.

I agree Betts -you have to be able to get around once you get there. However, many of Oklahoma's smaller communities were centered around the original train stations so most everything is still within walking distance at that end. For the little towns whose downtowns have died it would be a huge boost for them and could easily recreate small town America.

Downtown Chickasha is pretty cool, even if most stores are vacant. A rail link between Lawton and OKC would have stop directly adjacent to it. People who don't want to live in a big city but work in downtown OKC could easily live in downtown Chickasha or one of the downtown adjacent neighborhoods and be in downtown OKC in less than 30 minutes.

This is what I would love to see. Downtown Chickasha, downtown Guthrie, these are places that have tremendous upside. You could live in a small town, have a vibrant small town experience (with shops and stores and old historic buildings), and still work in the city. When our more rural State Representatives start seeing the type of impact this could have on their communities, perhaps they'll get behind this program.

State Representative David Perryman (D-Pocasset) has requested an interim study be conducted between now and the next legislative session, which would look at the feasibility of creating high speed rail line connecting Lawton to Oklahoma City, and Oklahoma City to Tulsa. -

Perryman says all aboard for Oklahoma mass transit plan » Top News » Chickashanews.com (http://chickashanews.com/topnews/x596946075/Perryman-says-all-aboard-for-Oklahoma-mass-transit-plan#sthash.BifZ3Jqr.dpuf)

And a link to a blog article supporting the idea;

BLOG: Send in the trains » Top News » Chickashanews.com (http://chickashanews.com/topnews/x596947475/Send-in-the-trains)

This study didn't get included in this year's list, however, it is a start. The editorial in the Oklahoman which came out against this idea raises an issue that we rail supporters need to be careful about - we have to get the terminology correct because there are huge cost differences between the different options. Perryman called this High Speed Rail which means trains running on dedicated track, powered by cantilever electric, and traveling at close to 200 mph. I seriously doubt that is what Perryman meant, but that doesn't stop the Oklahoman from saying that connecting Lawton to OKC by rail would cost a $1 billion just for the track. That really puts us in a hole to build public support because not only do we have to sell the idea of rail, but now we also have to correct the dollar figure thrown out there.

Oklahoma lawmaker's dream of high-speed rail is left at the station | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-dream-of-high-speed-rail-is-left-at-the-station/article/3862872)

I think what Perryman meant is connecting Lawton and OKC with commuter rail which runs on diesel at about 90 mph

HSR - billions of dollars
I8lHFJ2-yxA

Commuter Rail - hundred million dollars
Tx_7K_W4A1I

This study didn't get included in this year's list, however, it is a start. The editorial in the Oklahoman which came out against this idea raises an issue that we rail supporters need to be careful about - we have to get the terminology correct because there are huge cost differences between the different options. Perryman called this High Speed Rail which means trains running on dedicated track, powered by cantilever electric, and traveling at close to 200 mph. I seriously doubt that is what Perryman meant, but that doesn't stop the Oklahoman from saying that connecting Lawton to OKC by rail would cost a $1 billion just for the track. That really puts us in a hole to build public support because not only do we have to sell the idea of rail, but now we also have to correct the dollar figure thrown out there.

Oklahoma lawmaker's dream of high-speed rail is left at the station | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-dream-of-high-speed-rail-is-left-at-the-station/article/3862872)

I think what Perryman meant is connecting Lawton and OKC with commuter rail which runs on diesel at about 90 mph

HSR - billions of dollars
I8lHFJ2-yxA

Commuter Rail - hundred million dollars
Tx_7K_W4A1I

When did the Oklahoman become such a wet blanket for transit initiatives? I realize they hate Democrats, and this was proposed by a Democrat, but Anschutz must hate public transit; they seem quite strident in their opposition these days, with the exception of a vague, milquetoast editorial suggesting improvements to the bus service.

On edit: it occurs to me that the new ownership of the newspaper probably doesn't care at all about OKC. He lives in Colorado and is a known right winger of the Koch variety. Why would he editorially support initiatives designed to improve our state's transportation infrastructure? It makes no difference to him in his life short of giving him another opportunity to lob an ideological grenade.

This study didn't get included in this year's list, however, it is a start. The editorial in the Oklahoman which came out against this idea raises an issue that we rail supporters need to be careful about - we have to get the terminology correct because there are huge cost differences between the different options. Perryman called this High Speed Rail which means trains running on dedicated track, powered by cantilever electric, and traveling at close to 200 mph. I seriously doubt that is what Perryman meant, but that doesn't stop the Oklahoman from saying that connecting Lawton to OKC by rail would cost a $1 billion just for the track. That really puts us in a hole to build public support because not only do we have to sell the idea of rail, but now we also have to correct the dollar figure thrown out there.

Oklahoma lawmaker's dream of high-speed rail is left at the station | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-dream-of-high-speed-rail-is-left-at-the-station/article/3862872)

I think what Perryman meant is connecting Lawton and OKC with commuter rail which runs on diesel at about 90 mph

HSR - billions of dollars
I8lHFJ2-yxA

Commuter Rail - hundred million dollars
Tx_7K_W4A1I

Is Denton's A train a diesel train? Diesel trains seem a little cumbersome for fast connectivity between all these points. Can't we electrify it like what Europe has between cities? Or is that just too expensive?

When did the Oklahoman become such a wet blanket for transit initiatives? I realize they hate Democrats, and this was proposed by a Democrat, but Anschutz must hate public transit; they seem quite strident in their opposition these days, with the exception of a vague, milquetoast editorial suggesting improvements to the bus service.

On edit: it occurs to me that the new ownership of the newspaper probably doesn't care at all about OKC. He lives in Colorado and is a known right winger of the Koch variety. Why would he editorially support initiatives designed to improve our state's transportation infrastructure? It makes no difference to him in his life short of giving him another opportunity to lob an ideological grenade.

It's unfortunate that transit becomes an ideological grenade. We already MASSIVELY SUBSIDIZE the automobile and highways, sigh. Driving a car is actually the most subsidized action that any person can do in the United States ;)

Is Denton's A train a diesel train? Diesel trains seem a little cumbersome for fast connectivity between all these points. Can't we electrify it like what Europe has between cities? Or is that just too expensive?

Perhaps it depends on the way an electric line would be ran. I would imagine though that the cost would simply be too much above diesel trains. We also have to take into consideration that many lines will be shared with existing freight traffic at first and also our weather isn't always the most favorable towards the power grid. :)

Is Denton's A train a diesel train? Diesel trains seem a little cumbersome for fast connectivity between all these points. Can't we electrify it like what Europe has between cities? Or is that just too expensive?

The A-train is diesel. Diesel trains can top out at 120 mph. The New Mexico RailRunner in the video I posted is blowing by the cars on I-25. You can electrify it but that is where you get into the billion dollar stuff.

When did the Oklahoman become such a wet blanket for transit initiatives? I realize they hate Democrats, and this was proposed by a Democrat, but Anschutz must hate public transit; they seem quite strident in their opposition these days, with the exception of a vague, milquetoast editorial suggesting improvements to the bus service.

On edit: it occurs to me that the new ownership of the newspaper probably doesn't care at all about OKC. He lives in Colorado and is a known right winger of the Koch variety. Why would he editorially support initiatives designed to improve our state's transportation infrastructure? It makes no difference to him in his life short of giving him another opportunity to lob an ideological grenade.

I couldn't let that crappy Oklahoman editorial go unanswered:

Once again The Oklahoman editorial board's ignorance of and bias against passenger rail transportation is on display. Rep Perryman was not advocating Asian or European style High Speed Rail for the Lawton - OKC - Tulsa line he described. He was talking about optimized conventional rail and wanted to study improving the existing (partially state owned) corridor for upgrading it to permit operation of Amtrak style equipment at speeds up to 110 mph. These upgrades will cost far less than the $2 Billion disinformation being used by ODOT and The Oklahoman editorial board. The cost would be far less than we paid for only four miles of interstate highway when the Crosstown was relocated. Several states have already started looking to the future and rid themselves of the Department of Transportation's highway only mentality. I hope Oklahoma will eventually realize the benefits of a more diverse transportation network, but it is obvious a concerted effort to combat false and / or misleading information will be required.

The A-train is diesel. Diesel trains can top out at 120 mph. The New Mexico RailRunner in the video I posted is blowing by the cars on I-25. You can electrify it but that is where you get into the billion dollar stuff.

And these type of vehicles can still be considered a "green" option. The fuel consumption per passenger mile and emissions control of modern DMU's make them a great option.

Here is a video clip of the Stadler DMU's on the A-Train:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H1-b1X9wMM

And these type of vehicles can still be considered a "green" option. The fuel consumption per passenger mile and emissions control of modern DMU's make them a great option.

When you consider how most electricity gets generated diesel is pretty darn green, and compared to the cars it would replace it is even more green.

When you consider how most electricity gets generated diesel is pretty darn green, and compared to the cars it would replace it is even more green.

Yes. People think of wind turbines when most of what we get derives from coal-fired power plants, a major source of mercury in the atmosphere. The recent article about not eating fish from Oklahoma lakes more than once a week should be an eye-opener to many.

The A-train is diesel. Diesel trains can top out at 120 mph.
The A-train may be able to top out at 120 MPH but the reality is that its an infrequent service and that with a DART light rail connection it takes nearly 2 hours to get to down town Dallas. Most people still drive because its much faster.

The A-train may be able to top out at 120 MPH but the reality is that its an infrequent service and that with a DART light rail connection it takes nearly 2 hours to get to down town Dallas. Most people still drive because its much faster.

There is always going to be a time trade off in most cases if you need to make a connection. However it all depends on where you are wanting to go. If I'm going from the west burbs in Chicago to Union Station...the ride will be 1hr to 1.5hrs. During rush hour it is going to take about that same amount of time, if not longer, to get there. Then you are worrying about parking and everything else.

If we had commuter rail with links to areas that I need to get to, I'll take it in a heartbeat.

If time is your only concern the train might not be for you. For me, time is the one thing I have the most of so it is the least of my driving concerns.

A commuter rail service to Oklahoma City on July 17, 2013, does not make sense. You can't get around the city. A commuter rail service to Oklahoma City on July 17, 2020 could make extraordinary sense, when we've got a streetcar and downtown growth patterns have begun to reflect it. The editorial is penny wise and pound foolish. When we just spent $700 million to rebuild the new Crosstown Expressway, $2 or $3 billion to introduce a high speed rail line from OKC to Tulsa doesn't sound bad at all.

What is the latest word on a streetcar connecting downtown Lawton and Ft. Sill? I know it was under consideration at one time.

I agree hoyasooner - but I think realistically HSR will connect major metro areas such as OKC-DFW-Houston and other corridors identified in the FRA HSR Vision or similar concepts. Those corridors will be served by conventional rail running at higher speeds (110mph) branching off the HSR corridors to places like Lawton. JTF has drawn up a pretty good Oklahoma regional network that is quite extensive and would serve the state very well. We have systematically destroyed our rail network over the past 40 -50 years and it is going to take time and significant investment to restore sanity to surface transportation policy and infrastructure. Illinois and Texas are actively moving forward and it would be foolish for Oklahoma to not do so and find ourselves unprepared to connect to neighboring states networks in 10 - 20 years.

http://transbay.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/hsr_strategic_corridors_map_april20091.jpg?w=750

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/rail-network-hsr-routes4.jpg

You're right. If other states move forward with it, we'd be stupid not to. "What are these newfangled 'airports' people keep building. I don't see no need for one. I'll be derned if my tax dollars go to pay fer one of them."

JTF has drawn up a pretty good Oklahoma regional network that is quite extensive and would serve the state very well

I did it for Kansas and Nebraska as well.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Oklahoma-Kansas-NebraskaRail2.jpg

This is the entrenched attitude that must be overcome:

http://peoplesgeography.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/singer-public-investment-and-pt-wasteful-subsidy.jpg?w=547

I need to put that on a t-shirt.

I need to put that on a t-shirt.

I'd wear one - it would be hilarious to wear one to an interview with ODOT!

If time is your only concern the train might not be for you. For me, time is the one thing I have the most of so it is the least of my driving concerns.When time = money for most folks in their daily commute the amount of total travel time is critical.
Building slow commuter rail systems with infrequent service isn't very practical and we need practical solutions.

I am not sure but it may have been smarter to expand DART to Denton? ….Rather than requiring a time delaying connection to DART.

If and when we ever build a commuter rail system in the OKC area the speed of the system can be a selling point to riders and to business relocation’s,,,,, if we build it for speed from the start.

The A-train may be able to top out at 120 MPH but the reality is that its an infrequent service and that with a DART light rail connection it takes nearly 2 hours to get to down town Dallas. Most people still drive because its much faster.

Took a look at the DCTA/DARTschedule:

A-Train departs from Downtown Denton Transit Center at 0504, 0525, 0548, 0610, 0632, 0654, 0716, 0738, and 0757. It takes 32 minutes to get from DDTC to the Trinity Mills DART connection.

Maximum wait time between scheduled A-Train arrival and DART Green line departure is 10 minutes. There are a couple connections with only a 1 minute wait.

On weekdays there are four Green line trains per hour departing Trinity Mills between 6 and 10 AM (three per hour off peak). Earlybirds can catch the 0514, 0543, or 0558 departures. Travel time on DART Green line from Trinity Mills to West End station is 39 minutes.

So scheduled travel time from Denton to downtown Dallas is between 72 and 81 minutes. Arriving at DDTC very early or just missing a Denton departure could add another 20 minutes worst case.

Knowing DFW Metroplex morning rush traffic - these DCTA/DART times are not too much longer than sitting in traffic. So to me, if I lived and worked anywhere near a DCTA/DART stop, I would rarely drive to work. I'd leave a few minutes early, enjoy a cup of coffee on the ride, and be very glad I wasn't dealing with the DFW highway madness.

Looking at the on going discussion in the OU Projects thread when it concerns Lindsey Street and Norman's transit projects...I think we just have to accept some people are set in their beliefs when it comes to mass transit. Regardless of the inaccuracies of their assumptions, it is what it is.

Are we going to start planning for the growth the area will have, and already has had, or are we just going to patch things together and kick the can down the road. No pun intended.

We have very clear sides to this. Those arguing rail is a waste of time and not worth it unless it travels at light speed is also the same group that wants I-35 to become 20 lanes each direction and new highways looping around until we look like a bullseye.

Then we have the other side that is advocating for rail to start to get introduced before we head down the path of paving our way to become the next large scale parking lot.

We must have a balanced approach going forward but also must accept that $0.80 gasoline is gone and it will only keep going up. We also need to understand that we need to start filling it before the sprawl monster consumes us.

Perryman train study down, not out. new article

Perryman train study down, not out » Local News » Chickashanews.com (http://chickashanews.com/local/x596949636/Perryman-train-study-down-not-out)

Looking at the on going discussion in the OU Projects thread when it concerns Lindsey Street and Norman's transit projects...I think we just have to accept some people are set in their beliefs when it comes to mass transit. Regardless of the inaccuracies of their assumptions, it is what it is.

Are we going to start planning for the growth the area will have, and already has had, or are we just going to patch things together and kick the can down the road. No pun intended.

We have very clear sides to this. Those arguing rail is a waste of time and not worth it unless it travels at light speed is also the same group that wants I-35 to become 20 lanes each direction and new highways looping around until we look like a bullseye.

Then we have the other side that is advocating for rail to start to get introduced before we head down the path of paving our way to become the next large scale parking lot.

We must have a balanced approach going forward but also must accept that $0.80 gasoline is gone and it will only keep going up. We also need to understand that we need to start filling it before the sprawl monster consumes us.

3 or 4 days ago I heard someone on a financial TV show say that when adjusted for inflation gasoline is now cheaper than it was in 1980.

The thought that transportation fuel prices are going to escalate beyond inflation for many years to come is not a known fact and is a situation that very clearly doesn’t need to happen. But it will happen if we let stupid and or uninformed people control our future transportation fuel options.

The fact is that many people particularly on the far left just don't understand that we now have the means to provide low cost cleaner fuel ( currently at significantly lower than current gasoline prices) that would last our nation for century's. The energy reserves necessary are North American based.


The conversions are said to cost $90 a vehicle and come with out range problems and it's already a very proven technology. The problem is that we lack the political will mostly from the far left to move in this direction. It makes most trains except for issues of congestion mostly not economical.

This is when you get to see the intolerance of people don't understand the energy issue very well and sometimes there lack of tolerance of different view points that are completely valid.

We don't need to spend tens of billions on trains in places where ridership will be only a tiny fraction of the daily traffic count of about a 3 mile dangerous stretch of Lindsey street in Norman.

OKC to Tulsa high speed rail is not an economically viable option.



Oklahoma lawmaker's dream of high-speed rail is left at the station | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-dream-of-high-speed-rail-is-left-at-the-station/article/3862872)

Oklahoma House Speaker T.W. Shannon recently approved 68 interim studies, half the number requested. One of those left wanting, thank goodness, was a study into the feasibility of high-speed passenger rail service along the Interstate 44 corridor from Lawton to Tulsa.


Rep. David Perryman, D-Pocasset, had hoped to review costs, ridership potential and other issues related to rail service. Before getting turned down, Perryman told the Express-Star newspaper in Chickasha that he foresaw a system similar to one that sends trains between St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo., about 110 mph and takes 600 cars a day off roads in the state. A driver who sees a train passing them “gets the idea that this is something they could look into for themselves,” he said. “This is a viable alternative.”
Actually, it's not. Not when estimates show it would cost up to $2 billion just to make the track improvements needed to run high-speed rail from Oklahoma City to Tulsa. The cost to prepare track from Lawton to Oklahoma would likely be comparable. But even if it were half as much, that would be a $3 billion investment — before placing a single car on those tracks or subsidizing daily operational costs. That's quite a commitment for a little less wear and tear on the turnpike.

Perryman said as gasoline prices rise, rail service would be less expensive than driving and would allow users to “spend the day in the city while still being able to make it home at night.” That sounds good, but once arriving at the station, train travelers would need to be able to get around Oklahoma City or Tulsa or Lawton.
Perryman said it would be irresponsible not to study this issue, given the potential benefits to citizens and the state. On the contrary, Shannon did the responsible thing by rejecting this bad idea.

3 or 4 days ago I heard someone on a financial TV show say that when adjusted for inflation gasoline is now cheaper than it was in 1980.

The thought that transportation fuel prices are going to escalate beyond inflation for many years to come is not a known fact and is a situation that very clearly doesn’t need to happen. But it will happen if we let stupid and or uninformed people control our future transportation fuel options.

The fact is that many people particularly on the far left just don't understand that we now have the means to provide low cost cleaner fuel ( currently at significantly lower than current gasoline prices) that would last our nation for century's. The energy reserves necessary are North American based.


The conversions are said to cost $90 a vehicle and come with out range problems and it's already a very proven technology. The problem is that we lack the political will mostly from the far left to move in this direction. It makes most trains except for issues of congestion mostly not economical.

This is when you get to see the intolerance of people don't understand the energy issue very well and sometimes there lack of tolerance of different view points that are completely valid.

We don't need to spend tens of billions on trains in places where ridership will be only a tiny fraction of the daily traffic count of about a 3 mile dangerous stretch of Lindsey street in Norman.

Turning this into a left vs right discussion just highlights why your position is tainted. This is about quality of life and about improving the communities we live and utilizing our resources better. Tens of billions? We are talking about the ability to use a lot of existing track and as Kerry pointed out, we could get the DMUs similar to the Denton system. They paid around $73 million for the 11 they received. Where are you getting billions?

You also refuse to accept, when looking at the Norman/Lindsey Street thread, that there has been a 10 year document decline in traffic - yet continue to say it is a small bump or that traffic is increasing. Please provide your sources and proof for your numbers you are presenting here. You may quickly find your sources are either ill informed or you are preferring sources that are biased to what YOU personally want.

Commuter rail isn't going to be for everyone. However not everyone wants to sit in traffic every single day driving back and forth. It also would do wonders for improving the areas near the rail stops for higher density developments and building more walkable communities. Of course, that goes against the religions of those that love their sprawling suburban developments.

I really like it that local media in Chickasha and Edmond are driving this issue from their end. That is the definition of 'grass-roots'.

OKC to Tulsa high speed rail is not an economically viable option.

Oklahoma lawmaker's dream of high-speed rail is left at the station | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-dream-of-high-speed-rail-is-left-at-the-station/article/3862872)

You realize this is an editorial right? So you are using someone else's opinion to derive facts from when you went after Trey for posting a supposed opinion (which was disproven because he came back with ACTUAL numbers). Unbelievable.

What are you so afraid of from rail becoming a more viable travel option? Are you afraid it is going to impact your retirement accounts in oil stocks? Are you afraid that the suburban sprawl way of thinking is actually finally fading away?

I really like it that local media in Chickasha and Edmond are driving this issue from their end. That is the definition of 'grass-roots'.

I believe they are all owned, including the Norman Transcript, but the same parent company. They tend to focus much more on the local communities are very neutral politically as well. Whereas the Oklahoman is decidedly biased with its editorial staff and it shows.

Turning this into a left vs right discussion just highlights why your position is tainted. This is about quality of life and about improving the communities we live and utilizing our resources better. Tens of billions? We are talking about the ability to use a lot of existing track and as Kerry pointed out, we could get the DMUs similar to the Denton system. They paid around $73 million for the 11 they received. Where are you getting billions?

You also refuse to accept, when looking at the Norman/Lindsey Street thread, that there has been a 10 year document decline in traffic - yet continue to say it is a small bump or that traffic is increasing. Please provide your sources and proof for your numbers you are presenting here. You may quickly find your sources are either ill informed or you are preferring sources that are biased to what YOU personally want.

Commuter rail isn't going to be for everyone. However not everyone wants to sit in traffic every single day driving back and forth. It also would do wonders for improving the areas near the rail stops for higher density developments and building more walkable communities. Of course, that goes against the religions of those that love their sprawling suburban developments.

It's about economic intelligence and being not blinded by political forces that have convinced some people that we are running out of energy when we actually have centuries worth of it right in our own back yard. In our state its mostly been the political left who has been pushing high speed rail. When it comes to Oklahoma they are economically wrong.


Don't get me wrong high speed trains have their place but they make zero economic sense when the same resources would benefit far more people by a very large percentage in our state.
When we can't even keep our school kids safe at school in our state a OKC to Tulsa high-speed train is without question wasteful beyond all doubt + there are many other things that need major funding.

This simply isn't going to happen in our sate in the next 50 years unless the federal government pays for almost all of it.

But as I have said several times elsewhere I like the idea of commuter rail for OKC so please remember that fact.

You realize this is an editorial right? So you are using someone else's opinion to derive facts from when you went after Trey for posting a supposed opinion (which was disproven because he came back with ACTUAL numbers). Unbelievable.

What are you so afraid of from rail becoming a more viable travel option? Are you afraid it is going to impact your retirement accounts in oil stocks? Are you afraid that the suburban sprawl way of thinking is actually finally fading away?
You seem rather limited on your views of investments. I go where I believe the opportunites exist world wide and regardless of industry. Prosperity doesn’t occur for the community if you spend it into oblivion on trains that nobody rides. We have our limits. You can look a Spain and their economic problems that largely have their roots in being too Green!

You realize this is an editorial right? So you are using someone else's opinion to derive facts from when you went after Trey for posting a supposed opinion (which was disproven because he came back with ACTUAL numbers). Unbelievable.

What are you so afraid of from rail becoming a more viable travel option? Are you afraid it is going to impact your retirement accounts in oil stocks? Are you afraid that the suburban sprawl way of thinking is actually finally fading away?

It is also an editorial with blatantly false information. It will not cost $2 billion to make the necessary improvements to the state owned rail corridor between OKC and Tulsa to permit up to 110 mph operation of conventional passenger rail equipment. That figure has been used by ODOT to muddy the water thereby maintaining the status quo their Asphalt Paving Association handlers have ordered. The $2 billion is if European High Speed Rail was constructed and that is likely inflated. Conventional rail is about 1/10 of that cost - less than we spent for 4 miles of interstate in OKC.

It is clear ODOT, the Daily Oklahoman, and others are intent on spreading false information to the public on this and any other mass transit proposal. Fortunately, now there are enough people looking to the future that have decided to challenge this public disservice whenever possible. Most people don't know any better and the DOK is betraying the public trust by not correcting the record - they choose to go all in and support ODOT's betrayal of the public trust. Then you have others with a vested interest in keeping people slaves to the automobile and that is easily accomplished by blocking all efforts to diversify the transportation options available with a disinformation campaign.

It's about economic intelligence and being not blinded by political forces that have convinced some people that we are running out of energy when we actually have centuries worth of it right in our own back yard. In our state its mostly been the political left who has been pushing high speed rail. When it comes to Oklahoma they are economically wrong.


Don't get me wrong high speed trains have their place but they make zero economic sense when the same resources would benefit far more people by a very large percentage in our state.
When we can't even keep our school kids safe at school in our state a OKC to Tulsa high-speed train is without question wasteful beyond all doubt + there are many other things that need major funding.

This simply isn't going to happen in our sate in the next 50 years unless the federal government pays for almost all of it.

But as I have said several times elsewhere I like the idea of commuter rail for OKC so please remember that fact.

Therein lies the primary fallacy of your argument. Rep Perryman is not advocating for High Speed Rail from Lawton to Tulsa via OKC. He is talking about refurbishing the existing conventional rail corridor to enable faster operation of Amtrak style equipment. Illinois recently did this and has sections of the Chicago to St Louis line operating at 110 mph. HSR would be very expensive - no debate on that point. But the entire 200 mile corridor could be refurbished for less than the cost of the new Crosstown in OKC. When people understand the differences in HSR and conventional passenger rail and the capabilities of each, many change from being skeptical to supportive of restoring our passenger rail network that was systematically destroyed during the last 50 years.

Well, let me say that I am as right-wing as anyone and am a card carrying member of the Tea Party. I will put my conservative credentials up against anyone's - and I 100% support mass transit over the public subsidy of the private automobile.

But you are an odd bird JTF! I say that as an Eisenhower Republican who generally cannot stand the TP, but can have an adult discussion with you! ;)

Well, let me say that I am as right-wing as anyone and am a card carrying member of the Tea Party. I will put my conservative credentials up against anyone's - and I 100% support mass transit over the public subsidy of the private automobile.

You also approach this with facts, which helps and others can't use that claim.

Well, let me say that I am as right-wing as anyone and am a card carrying member of the Tea Party. I will put my conservative credentials up against anyone's - and I 100% support mass transit over the public subsidy of the private automobile.

That's why I said “its mostly been the political left”
The right also has more than enough economically challenged people but it seem like that's more of national problem than a state wide problem in Oklahoma.
But regardless don't expect to see high-speed rail from OKC to Tulsa in your life time.

I think that TW Shannon shooting down the rail corridor study between the two largest cities is because he has money in his pockets from big oil companies. The study will eventually need to be considered and the longer we wait on that will be the longer it is before we have the corridor available. I think the reason for a hurry for this is that the state is going to sell the line back to BNSF and in the long run it will cost the state more to run a train via Amtrak than it would be a privatized company.

I too am for setting up regional rail and establishing that for each city before we connect the two with a rail line that gets you nowhere beyond the two downtown's.

With regard to rail providing a transportation service that a "vast majority" of Oklahomans don't need... How do we know that? How do we know that I might want to sell my car and not rely on a monthly car payment and monthly vehicle insurance dues because if our transportation infrastructure was a lot better than the crap we have now, that that could be a viable option for me? We'll never know until that has been established.

This is why projects like the MAPS3 streetcar are critical not only to OKC, but to the state overall. These systems will be the "last mile" means of transportation we are missing in nearly every city. Regional rail becomes viable and usable once a passenger can get to their final destination from the rail station. Regional rail supports a future high speed interstate network by moving people from HSR hubs throughout the state. 'Murica loves to claim we are the best at everything, but we are at least 30 years behind the developed world in transportation infrastructure and we got there by selling our collective souls to the automobile and highways.