1. Significant extensions to Capitol Hill will involve going under the "Packingtown Lead" which is the freight railroad tracks that Stillwater Central Railroad operates on. This would involve going under or over these tracks. The most logical place is to do it on Harvey due to the city-owned parkland. This underpass, however, would cause a Capitol Hill extension to be an approximate $80 million+ cost. The system would need to operate on Robinson or Walker in much the same manner as the Dallas Oak Cliff line with an isolated, dedicated lane and Positive Train Control. It is all doable and this particular streetcar line could operate higher speeds if properly separated from auto traffic with bollards or Jersey barriers.

2. Health Sciences is also an $80+ million dollar project as it involves significant track length to properly serve the Health Sciences Center neighborhood due to the area's sprawling, suburban design. It is also doable but would best be done if supplemented by Federal Dollars, imhop. It would be cool to go further into Ward 7 and serve beyond Health Sciences. That cost would be about $120 million - $180 million and involve significant corridor redevelopment with bike lanes, beautification, and such.

The councilors have made it clear that they would like to see significant improvements made to the bus system and the broad use of BRT out of the proposed transit budget in MAPS 4.

Personally, probably one of the best short extensions that we could make would involve better connecting Film Row and the Farmer's Market areas into the existing system. This could be done without too much impact on the overall proposed MAPS 4 budget and help stimulate and reinforce activity in those nearby areas that are out of reasonable walking range. This would be accomplished by extending the "B" Line of the existing system.

Thanks for these great points Perhaps it might be a bit too expensive to prioritize Capital Hill this go around considering the much needed focus on local bus and implementation of BRT down NW Expressway.

However, I do agree and hope we can get a smaller extension that you mention to fully complete downtown to film row and farmers. I hope this could also dual track Sheridan in the CBD (maybe have it loop to Main St in Film Row) and maybe a few more switches for full route flexibility (trains can go around trouble) and also make for easier future extension without disrupting existing routes. We wouldn't need to get any new cars unless there's deal(s) to be received.

With the above knowledge Im all in favor of most of the transit focus to go to bus. But I do hope we can keep the streetcar momentum going with say $50M in MAPS IV to finish the streetcar in west downtown - which likely would assure its success opening up what will be all of the hotspots of downtown and from bus and BRT feeding it.

RTA wont include Streetcar as it's OKC specific and not regional. .

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.

Anyone have the updated ridership numbers through June? 6 months of data will be good info!

RTA wont include Streetcar as it's OKC specific and not regional. No way would the suburbs fund anything streetcar and we shouldn't expect them to when it will be hard enough for them to fund their part of the commuter rail and their local bus.


The point isn't that the streetcar would service suburban areas. It's that if people vote for a streetcar expansion, and then an RTA comes up for a vote two years later, voters in OKC may think "didn't we already vote for that?"

So the idea is, maybe they're saving it for the big one.

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.
that;s the vehicle mode of choice, but its not being operated nor paid for by Oklahoma City.

The point isn't that the streetcar would service suburban areas. It's that if people vote for a streetcar expansion, and then an RTA comes up for a vote two years later, voters in OKC may think "didn't we already vote for that?"

So the idea is, maybe they're saving it for the big one.

I understand and maybe that is the case.

But I think it should be high priority for the RTA to distinguish themselves from Embark/Oklahoma City. Make darn sure that everyone understands the RTA is regional and in addition to Embark/Oklahoma City.

On that note, it will be interesting to see how they do local bus in the metro suburbs. Embark belongs to OKC. Will the RTA do bus in the suburbs and CR into the city? or will the RTA assume all transit for the OKC region, displacing Embark entirely?

Food for thought: Here in the Seattle area, King County operates the local bus network within King County (including the city of Seattle and all cities/unincorporated in the county). In other counties, there are either county operated local bus (Pierce County transit) or a combination of regional and city (Community Transit and Everett Transit for Snohomish County). Sound Transit is the RTA and they operate all rail lines in the three counties themself but contract commuter bus to/from downtown Seattle, downtown Bellevue, downtown Tacoma to the agencies (they use their own Sound Transit flag though for buses).

Sound Transit is funded largely via property taxes in the ST region (most of King County, parts of Snohomish and Pierce Counties). Property taxes ALSO fund King County Metro in KC and Pierce Transit in Tacoma/Pierce county. I'm not sure how Community Transit is funded but I bet Everett Transit is sales tax. I believe gas tax is used for all agencies (so where Sound Transit operates, the gas tax is likely double).

So you can see, in Seattle you will pay property tax and gas taxes to King County metro AND Sound Transit. I think/hope OKC can adopt similar model making transit county wide or just let the RTD do it all under one agency. It wouldn't be fair for OKC city/Embark to pay for everything and operate everything despite being the largest player. Yet there needs to be local bus outside of Oklahoma City limits for the RTD to fully function. ...

It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

Actually, the Del City and Midwest City connections in the approved RTA plan are done with Rapid Streetcar behaving like traditional Light Rail.
That sucks.

"behaving like traditional light rail" means going onto existing tracks with a dedicated ROW, which is what I'd think you'd want, so why does it suck?

"behaving like traditional light rail" means going onto existing tracks with a dedicated ROW, which is what I'd think you'd want, so why does it suck?
Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

You should probably read the Commuter Corridors Study. The reason why DT to MWC can't work for commuter rail transit is that the distance between DT and MWC is too short. By the time the train would get up to speed, the trip is over.

You should probably read the Commuter Corridors Study. The reason why DT to MWC can't work for commuter rail transit is that the distance between DT and MWC is too short. By the time the train would get up to speed, the trip is over.
I'm not suggesting commuter rail.

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

If I'm referencing the right rail, I count 7 at grade intersections with streets. But keep in mind, the automobiles would have to stop and the rail barriers would come down, so I don't _think_ it would slow down the streetcar any, but not 100% on that obvs. If we were going to MWC on streetcar over the roads I would balk as much as you in this case. But I think this might be an okay compromise instead of "true" light rail (streetcar is still technically a form of light rail). I'm going to suggest a wait and see attitude on this particular implementation.

Because it isn't true light rail and I suspect itd have many at grade intersections. Streetcars are an outdated form of transportation and we need to true rapid rail to move people and induce riders if you want transit to he successful in OKC. Having a senior quasi streetcar won't cut it.

I'm not following this line of logic. Our streetcars can easily go 50 - 60mph without modification to the existing vehicle spec. The projected ridership is not so high nor the available alignment so long that it necessitates the heavier and longer Light Rail vehicles that DART or Denver use such as the Siemens or Kinkisharyo trains.

In this case, it is kind of a perfect marriage. There is an existing alignment that goes straight to Midwest City onto Tinker. Basically, the streetcars would be able to go much faster than they can on city streets and operate as a modern Interurban. Later on, if demand were so high or the line broadly expanded, they could switch to a new vehicle type.

I understand what you're saying but my point is a higher capacity system should be in order and not one being affiliated with the streetcar system in any way. Longer distance(inter-city)rail line should be grade separated and able to handle at least 3 car trains. A streetcar runs in the street and a hybrid is nothing more than a glorified streetcar. I'm even pissed at LAMTA for some of their recent lines like the Expo(soon to be E line) and the likes of the proposed design of the Van Nuys line. A street car is a street car and I say that at the risk of some criticizing me for making non statements but my point is we need real transit in OKC.

I think the case to be made for real transit in cities like OKC that have so little is more important than building rail lines the right way in cities like LA as any minor delay or inconvenience could be enough to make a potential rider switch back to car. This is especially true as cities like OKC have virtually no traffic issues and extreme ease of parking anywhere. Any minor improvements for end to end travel times not even mentioning frequencies could be what induces a would be rider to use the system. It has to compete with cars to a reasonable extent other than simply being an alternative.

If any at grade rail is proposed they might as well just build BRT. Even if the cost difference per mile(assuming any figures are reliable for OKC[not having constructed such a route and time will tell if a true BRT setup is proposed for NWE]as such figures vary city to city) is not drastic BRT can operate 24/7 at a lower cost not having to take tracks offline for maintenance. NYC among various other cities that have 24 hour service have quad tracks to my understanding or redundant routes.

If any at grade rail is proposed they might as well just build BRT.

I’m still confused. The proposal is for streetcar to be completely separated from automobiles for most of the alignment. The numbers to the east do not warrant higher capacity trains. BRT would be a step down.

I’m still confused. The proposal is for streetcar to be completely separated from automobiles for most of the alignment. The numbers to the east do not warrant higher capacity trains. BRT would be a step down.BRT would not be a step down from a hybrid street car.

I do not like the streetcar at all and if it’s expanded I should only be the core area. Having it connected to a metro wide rail system is a mistake.

BRT would not be a step down from a hybrid street car.

I do not like the streetcar at all and if it’s expanded I should only be the core area. Having it connected to a metro wide rail system is a mistake.

Light rail is essentially 2 streetcars coupled together. Outside of the major cities like NY and Chicago, long distance grade separation is not used. Portland with one of the most successful light rail systems in the country has pretty much all at-grade crossings. The arms come down, the train goes through, the arms come back up.

Portland’s light rail sucks and if it wasn’t for their horrid traffic that is worse than cities 3 times it’s size it probably wouldn’t be as successful regardless of its nature which also likely boosts higher ridership. I’m aware of what light rail is and I’m also aware that most major US cities like Denver build sh!tty light rail. NY and Chicago mainly use heavy rail.

It’s much more impactful than arms to prevent passing traffic coming up and going down. Trains have to slow down and a matter of end to end travel times being reduced by 5-10 minutes adds up on top of the already con of having to wait for the train.

I'm not following this line of logic. Our streetcars can easily go 50 - 60mph without modification to the existing vehicle spec. The projected ridership is not so high nor the available alignment so long that it necessitates the heavier and longer Light Rail vehicles that DART or Denver use such as the Siemens or Kinkisharyo trains.

In this case, it is kind of a perfect marriage. There is an existing alignment that goes straight to Midwest City onto Tinker. Basically, the streetcars would be able to go much faster than they can on city streets and operate as a modern Interurban. Later on, if demand were so high or the line broadly expanded, they could switch to a new vehicle type.

Am I correct in remembering that there's an existing money source that can be tapped for the line out to Tinker? Federal funds, maybe? If so, do we have any sort of timeline as to when it might happen?

BRT would not be a step down from a hybrid street car.

I do not like the streetcar at all and if it’s expanded I should only be the core area. Having it connected to a metro wide rail system is a mistake.

there is no full BRT planned for the OKC metro currently

there is no full BRT planned for the OKC metro currently
Are we sure? I don’t know what’s planned for NWE corridor. I suspect you’re right but I wanted to be sure.

Portland’s light rail sucks.

I was just in Portland and found their lightrail easy to use and get around. I've been traveling the country (and Canada) quite a bit lately and pretty much every major city has lightrail now.

I was just in Portland and found their lightrail easy to use and get around. I've been traveling the country (and Canada) quite a bit lately and pretty much every major city has lightrail now.
Calgary had some pretty nice light rail when I was there a few years ago

If I’m listing my #1 streetcar city it’s Amsterdam. The car gets the snub in that town but the bike/walk/scooter/streetcar/microcar infrastructure is incredible.

If I’m listing my #1 streetcar city it’s Amsterdam. The car gets the snub in that town but the bike/walk/scooter/streetcar/microcar infrastructure is incredible.

Without a doubt Amsterdam’s infrastructure is built how a city should be built. It works flawlessly. If you look at Amsterdam in the 1960s you’ll see a city inundated with traffic, wide lanes and narrow sidewalks similar to every American city then and now. The only difference is they decided to fix it. Massive improvements can be done in any city in the world including here. We just have to decide if we want to be a little tiny bit more like Amsterdam, or a whole lot more like Houston. I’ve been to both and I know which one I would pick.

Portland’s light rail does suck. But nothimg is as laughable as OKC. bezdek lined his pockets on behalf of the manufacturer while the influencers got the route to loop past their businesses. It’s a disaster.

This post is laughable. This bizarre theory belongs on some History Channel conspiracy program at 3am before the MyPillow Infomercial.

Without a doubt Amsterdam’s infrastructure is built how a city should be built. It works flawlessly. If you look at Amsterdam in the 1960s you’ll see a city inundated with traffic, wide lanes and narrow sidewalks similar to every American city then and now. The only difference is they decided to fix it. Massive improvements can be done in any city in the world including here. We just have to decide if we want to be a little tiny bit more like Amsterdam, or a whole lot more like Houston. I’ve been to both and I know which one I would pick.
So hopefully you and me can have a cheers to mass transit needing serious investment in the US regardless of my opinion of freeways. Portland streetcar network is a poster child of why US transit in the US is a joke compared to other modern countries and that isn’t due to a conspiracy theory.

PS, just so this isn’t misconstrued this isn’t a shot against any poster here. I agree with Uptowner and I want the best transit for OKC and not something half assed. I love mass transit and want the right kind for OKC. Streetcars and a half assed bus system isn’t that for OKC.

I was just in Portland and found their lightrail easy to use and get around. I've been traveling the country (and Canada) quite a bit lately and pretty much every major city has lightrail now.
Good for you but you don’t live there and it doesn’t hold a candle to major mass transit systems around the world. I’m not talking about comparing it a slob of a system like Dallas’s nor many US cities least of all OKC. I would like OKC to have a transit system that works for its people and if its tourist like it than icing on the cake but not geared towards such.

[Citation Needed]
https://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=13719

https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-portland-oregon-struggles-to-remain-leader-in-public-transit.html?AMP

Portland is a failure in every sense of the word. Homeless at the peak. Disproportionately white population claiming to be for diversity while advocating for counterintuitive policies with nothing but their own f@cking ignorance for excuses. A horrible urban growth policy artificially ensuring high housing costs. A horrid city council that makes sure mayor can’t last more than a single term in. A joke of a transit system that major nearby cities want no part of. Get real man.

https://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=13719

https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-portland-oregon-struggles-to-remain-leader-in-public-transit.html?AMP

Portland is a failure in every sense of the word. Homeless at the peak. Disproportionately white population claiming to be for diversity while advocating for counterintuitive policies with nothing but their own f@cking ignorance for excuses. A horrible urban growth policy artificially ensuring high housing costs. A horrid city council that makes sure mayor can’t last more than a single term in. A joke of a transit system that major nearby cities want no part of. Get real man.

The citation needed bit was about the "bezdek lined his pockets on behalf of the manufacturer" claim, I thought that was obvious since that was the majority of the post I was replying to but maybe I should have been more specific.

Good for you but you don’t live there and it doesn’t hold a candle to major mass transit systems around the world. I’m not talking about comparing it a slob of a system like Dallas’s nor many US cities least of all OKC. I would like OKC to have a transit system that works for its people and if its tourist like it than icing on the cake but not geared towards such.

OKC as a city was not constructed to make large scale mass transit viable ..

OKC as a city was not constructed to make large scale mass transit viable ..
The hell it wasn't. It worked fine until they ripped out the streetcars and train tracks and let sprawl continue unabated.

Good for you but you don’t live there and it doesn’t hold a candle to major mass transit systems around the world. I’m not talking about comparing it a slob of a system like Dallas’s nor many US cities least of all OKC. I would like OKC to have a transit system that works for its people and if its tourist like it than icing on the cake but not geared towards such.

If you're going to say Portlan's light rail is terrible in post after post, how about actually explaining your reasons and what you want? Provide some details and explanation.

Ive used Portland light rail several trips and didn't think it was terrible. My bestie lives in Portland and uses it regularly. not sure what makes it terrible either.

OKC as a city was not constructed to make large scale mass transit viable ..

This is Just ridiculous . You spend 60+ years pouring every dime into widening roads while neglecting everything from buses to sidewalks and then say we aren’t built that way and shrug your shoulders. In 1920 did okc say we can’t be car oriented we aren’t built that way?

If you're going to say Portlan's light rail is terrible in post after post, how about actually explaining your reasons and what you want? Provide some details and explanation.
I have links to back my opinions as to why it’s terrible. Like I said with OKC’s proposed transit if it isn’t built to serve as rapid transit and will end up like some half assed system or worse a network of streetcars like Portland’s system then good luck. OKC had a great streetcar network that served its purpose and while subways were being built left and right in many cities OKC’s streetcars sufficed and allowed the city to sprawl out. But new technologies came along not just bicycles and cars being new concepts for travel but innovations in building inter city rail allows for a completely grade separated network reducing conflict points, allowing higher speeds, and making longer trains more feasible.

As for Portland it’s a beautiful place and without going too much into politics it has its fair share of issues not least of which is it’s urban growth boundaries and mobility problems.

This is Just ridiculous . You spend 60+ years pouring every dime into widening roads while neglecting everything from buses to sidewalks and then say we aren’t built that way and shrug your shoulders. In 1920 did okc say we can’t be car oriented we aren’t built that way?

okc had 90k people in 1920 okc grew with the car not inspite of it OKC as a major city didn't exist in 1920

amsterdam for instance was over 240k in 1750 and had 650k in 1920 it was built before the auto as were most of the european cities as well as the big us east coast cities

OKC as a city was not constructed to make large scale mass transit viable ..
That doesn’t mean OKC can’t have successful mass transit lines. If planned and built right they can have success in ridership numbers being critical for those who depend on it and currently have no other convenient options.

okc had 90k people in 1920 okc grew with the car not inspite of it OKC as a major city didn't exist in 1920

amsterdam for instance was over 240k in 1750 and had 650k in 1920 it was built before the auto as were most of the european cities as well as the big us east coast cities

Yet despite the population increase, we are only at like 33% the population density in the core area we had in those days. Yes, we had streets that cars could drive on, but most people got around via streetcar. Ask anyone who grew up in that time. Both of my grandmothers, who lived in rural areas, used the streetcars almost exclusively when they visited the city. One of my grandmothers worked at st anthony's at one point and used the streetcar every day. She has told me stories of taking the cars to Norman and to Guthrie.

That doesn’t mean OKC can’t have successful mass transit lines. If planned and built right they can have success in ridership numbers being critical for those who depend on it and currently have no other convenient options.
Just curious if anyone has done a study on the theoretical demand for mass trans in OKC and what that system actually looks like? To be used does access need to be a block away...2...10?

As for Portland it’s a beautiful place and without going too much into politics it has its fair share of issues not least of which is it’s urban growth boundaries and mobility problems.

Every city in the U.S. should institute urban growth boundaries. OKC would be a dramatically better city with them. Cities with natural geographic boundaries are evidence how well they work. Curbing sprawl is not only better for cities, it's an important nod towards addressing the ecological catastrophe the world is facing.

Every city in the U.S. should institute urban growth boundaries. OKC would be a dramatically better city with them. Cities with natural geographic boundaries are evidence how well they work. Curbing sprawl is not only better for cities, it's an important nod towards addressing the ecological catastrophe the world is facing.

Keep in mind, OKC's Chamber of Commerce and all its powerful allies openly advocated for the 2 new turnpikes being built in far west and far east OKC.

So, we can talk about this problem all day long but as long as the local power brokers want highways built in cow pastures, it will continue to happen and new development will follow.

There is a lot of lip service given to controlling sprawl but anybody with power and influence is pretty much working actively in the other direction.

^^^Short term cash, long term crash

Every city in the U.S. should institute urban growth boundaries. OKC would be a dramatically better city with them. Cities with natural geographic boundaries are evidence how well they work. Curbing sprawl is not only better for cities, it's an important nod towards addressing the ecological catastrophe the world is facing.
Preach!

Keep in mind, OKC's Chamber of Commerce and all its powerful allies openly advocated for the 2 new turnpikes being built in far west and far east OKC.

So, we can talk about this problem all day long but as long as the long power brokers want highways built in cow pastures, it will continue to happen and new development will follow.

There is a lot of lip service given to controlling sprawl but anybody with power and influence is pretty much working actively in the other direction.
Helps to have had a cheap homebuilder running the turnpike authority.

Every city in the U.S. should institute urban growth boundaries. OKC would be a dramatically better city with them. Cities with natural geographic boundaries are evidence how well they work. Curbing sprawl is not only better for cities, it's an important nod towards addressing the ecological catastrophe the world is facing.
Except it’s made Portland one of the most expensive cities to live in and arguably causing a lot of the homelessness. Urban growth boundaries are horrible and nothing more than makeshift solutions that don’t work.

^^^Short term cash, long term crash
Expansion of the city occurring and infrastructure needing to accommodate it and offer bypasses. EOC part of an eastern bypass for through traffic on the interstate system.

yeah, yeah, yeah .......... I hear all the .................. " its a long way off " and " too many problems " ...........but again, I don't think I'd make a multiple hundred million dollar bet against the technology


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnFvPCDj6UI

yep... still going with my statments that its a long way off with articles like this

https://www.fastcompany.com/90374083/for-years-automakers-wildly-overpromised-on-self-driving-cars-and-electric-vehicles-what-now?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=webfeeds

EDIT: sorry to bring back up something from May... but seemed relevant to continue as to why streetcar's won't be replaced with AV's anytime soon

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/streeetcar071019a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/streeetcar071019b.jpg

looks like Sundays arean't really doing too well.

They really should have a specific line referencing when the Devon Tower glass fiasco that happened. That dramatically affected those numbers.

yep... still going with my statments that its a long way off with articles like this

https://www.fastcompany.com/90374083/for-years-automakers-wildly-overpromised-on-self-driving-cars-and-electric-vehicles-what-now?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=webfeeds

EDIT: sorry to bring back up something from May... but seemed relevant to continue as to why streetcar's won't be replaced with AV's anytime soon

But you can't know , the unknowable ............. and no one knows what transportation will look like 10 yrs from now, much less 20 years. I think Mr Lutz sums that up well in the last paragraph of that story.

I think what we do know, is the transportation sector is in flux, its changing.

And I'm not gonna bet hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on something that fluid. Not wise.

They really should have a specific line referencing when the Devon Tower glass fiasco that happened. That dramatically affected those numbers.

And Devon should pay the city for the lost revenue.

But you can't know , the unknowable ............. and no one knows what transportation will look like 10 yrs from now, much less 20 years. I think Mr Lutz sums that up well in the last paragraph of that story.

I think what we do know, is the transportation sector is in flux, its changing.

And I'm not gonna bet hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on something that fluid. Not wise.

Are you willing to bet hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that freeways will still be necessary in 20 years? We may finally get that flying car by then.

You cant just use the argument on things you don't like.

Are you willing to bet hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that freeways will still be necessary in 20 years? We may finally get that flying car by then.

You cant just use the argument on things you don't like.

Whatever ................

So June is the most comparable month so far to the free-fare time period months. In which June had the Devon glass interruption. That shows a significant uptick in use, it is too bad the Devon glass thing tainted the data.

So June is the most comparable month so far to the free-fare time period months. In which June had the Devon glass interruption. That shows a significant uptick in use, it is too bad the Devon glass thing tainted the data.

also great that the times keep coming down .. they should be able to get close to 40 when all the signal priority upgrades are installed

It really is much faster and so much more convenient now than it was at launch.

Whatever ................

insightful response... but the point he is getting at is that you have to continue to build infrastructure. and yes, that infrastructure may eventually become outdated one day, but if i have my choice, i'd rather put my money into diversifying my transportation infrastructure into multiple modes of transit, so that you have the best chance of both keeping up with demand, as well as pushing things in a forward direction, because just the idea that we should spend money on it, because it will someday become obsolete can be applied to anything, and thus isn't a valid argument on any level.

also, what i was trying to get to back in may and also with the article, is that you are right that we don't know what the future will hold... and neither do the companies that are making these claims, because they have been making these type claims since the 1950's... and they are never based on anything actually measured and thought out, they are all just numbers they pull out of thin air... and we should not make financial decisions based upon those number.

It really is much faster and so much more convenient now than it was at launch.

i'm guessing i need to try it again. i rode it free, and then in the first week of it being pay. but haven't rode it since. perhaps i need to plan a group streetcar brewery and pub crawl with my friends. lol