Larry and HotRod - you are barking up the wrong tree about Union Station. The group that wanted to keep primarily wanted to use it as a freight processing facility. They thought 50 semi-trucks a night would be linning up there to pick-up/drop-off freight. That is why they wanted to keep the railyard. It was laughable then and it is laughable now. If you think it would have made a good passenger hub then you don't know what a passenger hub is.

The whole Union Station thing is more of a philosophical debate rather than a technical one. The idea that massive rail infrastructure would be removed to make room for a "super-highway" just drives rail advocates and urbanites bonkers.

But Betts is right, to use it as THE rail hub for commuters is laughable. Primary commuting traffic is simply on a N/S axis- Edmond to Norman. Even Adventure Line and probably Yukon is coming in on the Northern alignment. Union station is on a E/W. Midwest City is unlikely to come in from the East on the UP line. Bus Rapid Transit is called for in the Fixed Guideway Study to serve the Yukon area unless the demand models change.

Airport is proposed as bus, but support for a rail alternative is gaining momentum. Even that connection would likely be a rapid streetcar going across on the new Boulevard and up through Stockyards to the existing alignment or up the Meridian Hotel corridor.

It is not that Union Station isn't attractive, its just not in the best place. In fact, its arguable that it was never in the right place to begin with for personal rail travel.

"probably Yukon"... Meant Midwest City

Urban and Betts, i don't disagree was just saying that while some tracks remain, some were removed. How many times have we gotten rid of something only to find out it was a bad idea and later try to bring it back (at considerable expense). Think it definitely needs to be a stop on the Streetcar (which would incorporate the MAPS 3 park) Ideally, would love to just switch the location of the 2 buildings.

I note that a meeting of the Modern Streetcar Subcommittee will occur later today (2/8) at 3:30 at 420 West Main Street, 10th Floor Conference Room. It is a public meeting so anyone can attend that wants to.

Of further note, in the PDF file containing the agenda (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/cache/2/yh4q4uef2jx0dlrhh4cmix45/114082102082011011908293.PDF) that the minutes of the January 26 meeting are set forth, a part of which reads,



The subcommittee agreed and recommended an initial proposed alignment: Robinson from 13th Street to the new Boulevard, Broadway from 13th Street to Sheridan Avenue, 4th Street between Broadway and Walker Avenue, Walker from 4th Street to Sheridan Avenue, and Sheridan Avenue from Walker Avenue to E.K. Gaylord. Circulation will generally be clockwise on the north and counter-clockwise at the south end of the route.

Using the scale provided by Google maps and approximating as I have in the image below, and depending on whether a rail segment would exist on NW 13th between Robinson & Walker or not (one might presume that it would but the draft minutes do not so state), and unless I have made a major error in my counting, the roughly approximate lineal mileage of the tracks is:

If no NW 13th, Robinson to Broadway segment exists: 17,500 feet, which is 3.31 miles
If a segment exists on NW 13th between Robinson to Broadway, 17,900 feet, which is 3.39 miles


http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/maps/1_26_2011_streetcar_route.jpg

So, I presume that all or substantially all of the rail is double-tracked, although the minutes don't address that. The subcommittee has my complete confidence ... lots of good people on that subcomittee ... but I am disappointed that an extension into Bricktown is not present, such as on Sheridan from Gaylord to Walnut. That said, I'm sure that the subcommittee considered a Bricktown entry but for reasons that I'm not privy to decided against it.

The agenda itself isn't particularly specific:

I. Call to Order
II. Approve Minutes of the January 26, 2010 MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board Transit/Modern
Streetcar Subcommittee Special Meeting
III. Discussion/Action on Modern Streetcar Alignments and Transit Hub Locations
IV. Discussion/Action on Transit/Modern Streetcar Project
V. Comments by Subcommittee Members, Staff, and Citizens
VI. Adjournment

Interesting. Not bad for a starter track. I too hope that the 3.31 miles estimated will be doubled.

Thanks Doug.

I am not disappointed that Bricktown is left out of this initial plan, as I have always said that Bricktown does not need it.

That pink section is not double track - it is coupled track to create a transit mall. To quote Pete White, I think we will live to regret that.

^^ So if you take that all into consideration, how many miles of track is this initial plan?

I'll try to post a better map for you later that depicts circulation patterns and such.

Keep in mind that this is only the recommendations for the P180 area. That is why Bricktown, other parts of Midtown, and the larger system plan are not described in the minutes.

The recommendations from the last meeting are strictly the core system as it relates to P180 (although we did go ahead and approve the "transit mall" on Robinson Broadway above 6th as the central spine so that "it is out of the way").

More good stuff to come as further deliberation on details occur.

My simple opinion is that a Robinson line is not ideal. It just seems awkward to leave the main corridor to get on the streetcar. Especially with Robinson being so narrow, it just doesn't feel like a street car route - just a thought.

Initially, I felt exactly the way you do. Robinson was promoted by several people and I was biased against it on a personal level. It feels like a very sleepy street. But through this process, I have tried to detach myself from personal opinions and look at things dozens of times again, with fresh perspective. I know that most of appointed committee members have discipline and do the same. We all care to the extreme degree to make sure that this system will work from "day one".

Robinson has shown itself to be one of the few "axis" available that "cuts" all the way through and creates the "spine". The system really needs that axis. I say that from studying it from a operational point of view, turning radius at essential corners, and so on.

We felt that Broadway was so essential to be served as well that is counters as the "spine" going in the opposite direction. To make this "transit mall" work, we will have to build strong pedestrian connections between the two. They are so close together they will work as a single "unit."

Robinson has one of the busiest core destinations at Park/First National, and the most visited state destination, the Memorial at 5th. The "sleepy end" above 6th to 10th is already changing with Midtown Renaissance and there are plenty of empty lots ripe for development.

The "spine" continues easily all the way to Edgemere in later phases and South to Capitol Hill.

There are two principals constantly reinforced from my visits to other cities with modern streetcar systems. One is that '"couplets" are now the preferred mechanism to create development and spread walkability." 2nd, it doesn't matter where you put a streetcar (in terms of whether the existing street is "sleepy or not"), the streetcar almost magically changes and enlivens the environment around it. Robinson will be changed for our lifetime.

Regarding the size of the street- sometimes smaller more intimate streets are good experiences in a system. The streetcar goes with traffic, so it doesn't impede car travel as it shares the lane. The stops can be designed so that the tram leaves the travel lane. There actually is enough right-of-way there to do whatever we need.

I really really really hope we don't go with a transit mall using coupled track. A single spine of double track puts twice as much area with-in one block of bi-directional travel and uses the same amount of track.

To all, I see that the direct link to the Agenda PDF file doesn't work ... the address shown in the address bar when the file open must not be a constant. Anyway, go to this page (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/meet.aspx) and then find the meeting you're looking for.

Jeff, a few observations and questions from what you said:

1) As a suggestion, based on your comments above, the minutes do not appear to be complete since one cannot know what the description in the minutes mean, unless I'm missing something. As an example, I saw no mention that the track description was limited to Project 180 overlap but your comments explain that it was.

2) Is there any double track involved in what is shown in the map?

3) Is there a track segment on NW 13th between Robinson & Broadway?

Okclee, the track length depends on the amount, if any, double tracking is involved, and whether there is a segment on NW 13th between Robinson & Broadway, as I said before.

Kerry, I don't know about what you said about double tracking. It's not in the minutes. Jeff will tell us, I'm sure. But, as to what Pete said, his condemnation was much broader and included everything involved in the system, generally.

I look forward to hearing the progress made at today's meeting.

Reno will make a logical extension as Bricktown hotels develop, Deep Deuce, etc and of course Film Row. I am actually a little worried that Core to Shore is giving us a north-south perspective that is driving the discussion when the development appears to me to be more east-west. The core is fanning out and getting across it is going to be increasingly difficult. I am in Bricktown several times a week walking around and we often walk into downtown. Moving east to west as a pedestrian is difficult especially as you try to navigate around the Ford center or the rail tracks.

Regarding Bricktown in general- there are essentially three easy to identify candidates to "cross-over" from the core. Sheridan, Reno, New Boulevard. The reason we haven't gotten into that yet as we do not have "firm" cost estimates as to the reconstruction costs of Sheridan or Reno railroad underpass. That is one huge element that will weigh heavily on the design.

The second, we do not know the "technicalities" of how the streetcar might directly connect to the inter-modal hub as its final location out of the three identified has yet to have been determined. Even then, we will have to develop preliminary architectural and engineering models to determine exactly what the best "interface" options are.

There is one thing that is certain though, the new boulevard railroad underpass will be brand new and meet the height requirements that a streetcar needs to safely operate. We are going to have to "weigh" the cost of a Sheridan/Reno E/W connection against this "free" unassociated improvement that can be taken advantage of.

To all, I see that the direct link to the Agenda PDF file doesn't work ... the address shown in the address bar when the file open must not be a constant. Anyway, go to this page (http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/meet.aspx) and then find the meeting you're looking for.

Jeff, a few observations and questions from what you said:

1) As a suggestion, based on your comments above, the minutes do not appear to be complete since one cannot know what the description in the minutes mean, unless I'm missing something. As an example, I saw no mention that the track description was limited to Project 180 overlap but comments explain that it was.

City staff prepares the minutes. We usually make suggestions for clarity.

2) Is there any double track involved in what is shown in the map?

No "double track" in the P180 recommended as of yet.

3) Is there a track segment on NW 13th between Robinson & Broadway?

Yes, there will be some type of connection. We have not got into the discussion about Midtown in detail as of yet and will in future meetings. the P180 area was the big concern. Most of us felt as though we have time to discuss at length the best connection mechanism in Midtown.

Kerry, I don't know about what you said about double tracking. It's not in the minutes. Jeff will tell us, I'm sure. But, as to what Pete said, his condemnation was much broader and included everything involved in the system, generally.

I don't think Pete fully understood what a couplet does in terms of one street going one direction and another going opposite. That is totally understandable. We have not explained such intimate operational details to council as of yet.

Pete came to the meeting you have referenced and stated that he "was pleased with where we are going." He stayed the entire meeting and saw how much detail and thought is going into all of this and I think that helped.

What you said re Pete, I know already. I was just responding to Kerry's point as to what Pete said when he made his negative comments. Thanks for your answers to my questions.

What you said re Pete, I know already. I was just responding to Kerry's point as to what Pete said when he made his negative comments. Thanks for your answers to my questions.

With a transit mall you only have one block that has direct access to two way travel. As we know, the distance people will walk drops of quikly as you move away from the tracks. Most people will not walk more than 2 blocks and hardly anyone will walk 3.

Here are the areas that would be within 1 block and 2 blocks of bi-directional travel. They use essentially the same amount of track.

Couplet
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Couplet-track.jpg

Double Track
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Double-track.jpg

As you can see the double track provides better service to more people.

How about a meeting report, Jeff, Jill, anyone?

How about a meeting report, Jeff, Jill, anyone?


http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/maps/1_26_2011_streetcar_route.jpg

Lots of good discussion. At the end, we reiterated that our "partial preferred route" encompasses the route/s outlined in your drawing above, with the addition of Walker between Sheridan and 4th Sts and the yellow area in question on 13th between Robinson and Broadway. That endorsement was to be discussed in the AA meeting today (which I suspect was cancelled) and we were going to address any comments or issues from them at our next meeting. People on the committee wanted to make sure that the public understands that this is not what we hope will be the full route, nor do we know with certainty that there won't be engineering issues that might influence the ultimate route. We've chosen not to address Bricktown until we have more information about the railroad bridges at 4th and Sheridan. The bridge at the Boulevard will be engineered so that it can sustain streetcar travel in both directions. Extension to Midtown or other areas in the city such as the Capitol, Paseo or Plaza District will be discussed at a later date and, of course, will be subject to funds available. Our primary focus, at this point in time, is areas subject to Project 180, as we want to have as much information available to them as possible. It is our hope that we can decrease construction costs by coordinating with Project 180. All this, as well, will ultimately have to be approved by the General MAPS committee and the City Council.

That is what I took away from the meeting. Hopefully Jeff will add his impressions or additions.

Nothing really to add. Very well described Jill. I will create a map when I have the time that describes all of this in greater detail with captions at the "stub ends." Doug, with the exception of the missing piece between 4th and Sheridan on Walker, these are the coridoors that we would like to "protect" in the core area. When I say "protect", I mean make logical preparations in P180 to accept a streetcar system.

During the meeting, I challenged people to start thinking about logical stop locations that might also be "protected."

What locations do OKCTALK members think have to be absolutely served on these potential coridoors? Every 3 blocks is a general "rule of thumb."

I was able to attend the meeting, as an observer. I'm not on the subcommittee.
What I took away from the meeting is exactly what betts wrote above.

I'm sure many on this thread know who is on the committee. But if you are one who does not know allow me to comment on a few of the committee members.

Jill Adler- She is a class act. Very knowledgeable and when she speaks her words are well chosen and precise.
A real asset (excuse me for referring to a person as an asset, but you know what I mean)

Jeff Bedzeck (sp)- here's a guy with passion! He is well versed in all transit

There was a lot of talk about transparency and the proper wording of maps and drawings so the public doesn't get led astray by misunderstanding the language of the committee.

Hope this post helps somebody. You guys are all so knowledgeable you probably already know all of this.

Peace.....

What do the numbers on the map represent?

I assume track feet or distance in feet.

What do the numbers on the map represent?

I assume track feet or distance in feet.

the black lines are segmented, and the bars with 1000 are the same length as 1000 feet in the scale in the corner so safe bet.

thanks for the great description betts i was at the meeting at well as an observer and your description was spot on.

I will add that i think there is a lot of truth to what Blair Humphreys had to say about the walker swing ... it is a 21mil (est.) leg that doesn't provide much. compared to the extra half a mile north or northwest that we could extend the transit mall during the phase 1 build out.

I was able to attend the meeting, as an observer. I'm not on the subcommittee.
What I took away from the meeting is exactly what betts wrote above.

I'm sure many on this thread know who is on the committee. But if you are one who does not know allow me to comment on a few of the committee members.

Jill Adler- She is a class act. Very knowledgeable and when she speaks her words are well chosen and precise.
A real asset (excuse me for referring to a person as an asset, but you know what I mean)

Jeff Bedzeck (sp)- here's a guy with passion! He is well versed in all transit

There was a lot of talk about transparency and the proper wording of maps and drawings so the public doesn't get led astray by misunderstanding the language of the committee.

Hope this post helps somebody. You guys are all so knowledgeable you probably already know all of this.

Peace.....

Thanks! Jill is pretty incredible. She is a doctor and a great person to have on the committee who understands downtown.

I wish I had been able to meet you. I was kind of distracted from who was new in the room. Next time, stop by and say hi.

For context, I am going to put up two maps made public at the previous committee meeting for reference. I have never put a map out on OKCTALK before.

The core map is what was approved as being "protected."

Several conceptual master plans were shown at the last committee meeting. We were all challenged as a "homework assignment" to produce "master plans." This larger area map shows one example of how the approved core area "protected corridor" might fit into a larger system that extends outside of downtown.

Please keep in mind that that this is my personal idea of what a greater system "might" look like. But all in all, three other maps and several verbal descriptions by committee members were put out there. They all followed a almost identical perspectives as it relates to the "core" area. That is how we came to the majority conclusion about the "protected" corridors at the last meeting. They were "re-debated" and solidified yesterday.

The "stub ends" as part of the protected core areas (particularly the Bricktown Core 2 Shore connections) will be addressed as we have more information about the hub, convention center location, and bridge reconstruction costs.

766767

Jeff, thanks for the hard work. I am glad to see the transit mall idea being approved. Please excuse me for asking if this has already been asked, is the transit mall going to have a connection at the two stub ends on 13th? Or is it going to be two independent lines running parallel and ending at 13th. Also what exactly is the definition of "protected" in the sense you are using and how it relates to the streetcar/planning.

Thanks!

What do the numbers on the map represent?
I assume track feet or distance in feet.
Yes, that is so (using the scale on the Google map). Of course, this is just me eyeballing it so some error factor needs to be used, probably + 5-6 % or so since the 1000 feet segments don't often touch each other. But, without factoring an error factor in, here is my revised map as of 2/8/2011, based upon the excellent reports of Jill & Jeff, as corroborated by Meaculpa & Boulder Sooner (and assuming that none of the lineal measurement is double-tracked):

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/maps/2_8_2011_streetcar_route.jpg

I think this one is slightly more accurate than the earlier version.

Thanks for those maps, Jeff. I really like the concept map ... pleasantly surprised to see it extend further north than NW 23rd. Skywest, Jill said that the meeting added a connector between the stubs on NW 13th & Broadway & Robinson.

Another question: Were any city council members present at this meeting and, if so, did they make any comments, and, if so, what?

Jeff, thanks for the hard work. I am glad to see the transit mall idea being approved. Please excuse me for asking if this has already been asked, is the transit mall going to have a connection at the two stub ends on 13th? Or is it going to be two independent lines running parallel and ending at 13th.

How the Broadway Robinson couplet is tied together is yet undetermined as it will probably be connected as part of a greater Midtown service line or "neighborhood collector." We will be debating that connection in future meetings. It's not quite as simple as just making a right-hand turn on 13th off of Robinson and right going Southbound on Broadway. Because of Floral and Hardy being so close to the street, a sharp right-hand turn is difficult there. We went that far up because many people believe that a "setup" for expansion due north or westward through Midtown is essential to depict in our 1st set of recommendations. That is why the "transit mall" is depicted all the way to 13th. To preserve a strong corridor.

Also what exactly is the definition of "protected" in the sense you are using and how it relates to the streetcar/planning. Thanks!

"Protected" means that easy to move obstacles such as manholes and utility lines that may need future access for service are moved out of the lane the streetcar will presumably travel. That minimizes the cost of doing this later. It also minimizes tearing up new P180 infrastructure outside of the travel lane. Utility relocation is nearly always the most invasive and expensive step to installing rail in the ground. This is true no matter what the actual power source for the tram is.

Probably one of the items not mentioned that is almost as important as the actual streets that we are going to be on is the circulation patter as depicted in my map. The committee approved this preferred circulation pattern. That helps inform city staff as to what side of the street we are probably on. That allows for them to know they need to shift utility infrastructure to the opposite side of the street.

See arrows on map. 768

Jeff, now I'm confused again. Earlier, Jill said, "At the end, we reiterated that our "partial preferred route" encompasses the route/s outlined in your drawing above, with the addition of Walker between Sheridan and 4th Sts and the yellow area in question on 13th between Robinson and Broadway." But you are saying not, if I'm understanding you.

Since I added this only on edit to my last post, you may have missed it, so I'll repeat: Another question: Were any city council members present at this meeting and, if so, did they make any comments, and, if so, what?

Jeff, now I'm confused again. Earlier, Jill said, "At the end, we reiterated that our "partial preferred route" encompasses the route/s outlined in your drawing above, with the addition of Walker between Sheridan and 4th Sts and the yellow area in question on 13th between Robinson and Broadway." But you are saying not, if I'm understanding you.

Since I added this only on edit to my last post, you may have missed it, so I'll repeat:

I don't remember the "tiny little piece" on 13th being added to approved "partial preferred route." It is really tempting to draw that one block segment in the map, but the E/W connection in midtown was something that we all agreed to debate further later.

There were no City Council members present at yesterday's meeting. Tom McDaniel, Chair of the Maps Advisory Board, was present for most of the meeting.

Another question: Were any city council members present at this meeting and, if so, did they make any comments, and, if so, what?

I did not notice any council members present but I was fairly distracted. No council member publicly spoke. That's okay. We pretty much just re-debated the same conclusions that we came to in the previous meeting of which Pete White and Larry McAtee were present and did comment. They are supportive of the progress that we had made in that meeting. Pete White seemed specifically pleased of the thoroughness of which we are debating these issues and the fact that we are factoring a greater "master plan" with potential objectives outside of the downtown core that makes the connections to the other modes of transit. He seemed to understand that getting the core "out of the way" doesn't preclude us from "stretching" to other areas. The recent discussions have centered around the effective integration with P180.

Thanks, Jeff & Tier2City. I'll leave my revised map alone unless/until Jill or someone else present at the meeting has comments about the NW 13th segment being included or not.

Thanks, Jeff. I am so far pleased with where this is going.

Nothing really to add. Very well described Jill. I will create a map when I have the time that describes all of this in greater detail with captions at the "stub ends." Doug, with the exception of the missing piece between 4th and Sheridan on Walker, these are the coridoors that we would like to "protect" in the core area. When I say "protect", I mean make logical preparations in P180 to accept a streetcar system.

During the meeting, I challenged people to start thinking about logical stop locations that might also be "protected."

What locations do OKCTALK members think have to be absolutely served on these potential coridoors? Every 3 blocks is a general "rule of thumb."

Bricktown and Deep Deuce, for one. What happened to the collector loop branching off to those areas?

Bricktown and Deep Deuce, for one. What happened to the collector loop branching off to those areas?

Ah Spartan, you're as guilty as I am of not reading far enough back. We are awaiting information about the railroad bridges at 4th, Sheridan and Reno and haven't begun discussions about those areas until we have more data. How much will it cost to go under the bridge, will the railroad even let us and in what time frame are questions that need answering. The only thing we know for certain is that we could run the streetcar on the boulevard in either direction, since that bridge hasn't been built yet. And it will be built with that capability.

Thanks, Jeff & Tier2City. I'll leave my revised map alone unless/until Jill or someone else present at the meeting has comments about the NW 13th segment being included or not.

Sorry, Doug. I must have added that block in my mind since it seems logical. However, as Jeff as pointed out and as we will all become aware over time, sometimes what looks logical on a map is not in reality. There are buildings and impediments present that may well affect our route that we don't even know about yet.....or at least that I don't know about!

I am re-posting this as we started a new page for reference...

For context, I am going to put up two maps made public at the previous committee meeting for reference. I have never put a map out on OKCTALK before.

The core map is what was approved as being "protected."

Several conceptual master plans were shown at the last committee meeting. We were all challenged as a "homework assignment" to produce "master plans." This larger area map shows one example of how the approved core area "protected corridor" might fit into a larger system that extends outside of downtown.

Please keep in mind that that this is my personal idea of what a greater system "might" look like. But all in all, three other maps and several verbal descriptions by committee members were put out there. They all followed a almost identical perspectives as it relates to the "core" area. That is how we came to the majority conclusion about the "protected" corridors at the last meeting. They were "re-debated" and solidified yesterday.

The "stub ends" as part of the protected core areas (particularly the Bricktown Core 2 Shore connections) will be addressed as we have more information about the hub, convention center location, and bridge reconstruction costs.

769

770

Per Jill's confirmation, here's my map with the NW 13th segment removed.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/maps/2_8_2011_streetcar_route_2.jpg

I am little concerned about the idea that a bridge over the railroad tracks will be used on the new boulevard. That bridge is going to have to be pretty steep to not only reach the elevated track but then another 20 feet to clear the tracks. I am assuming the bridge can't start until Robinson and it will have to reach that height before the Shield Blvd ROW. How steep of a climb can a streetcar make and still be comfortable for passengers? If the bridge started right at Robinson it would require a 5% grade to make it. That is pretty steep.

Im pretty sure he was talking about the railroad bridge that would have to build for the new boulevard to go under but i could be wrong

According to some documents for i40 construction, the boulevard is on the ground around Stiles Ave, and continues so to the train track.

Im pretty sure he was talking about the railroad bridge that would have to build for the new boulevard to go under but i could be wrong

This is correct. The New Boulevard descends under the tracks. The railroad uses the bridge to go over the New Boulevard.

An idea.....
A few years ago, just before the State's Centennial, I wrote an email to The Chamber of Commerce with an idea.

Here it is.
The large energy companies (Sandridge, Devon, Chesapeake) could sponsor a section or spur of a the streetcar line. The section of the line could be named after the sponsor. 1/2 mile spur into the neighborhood for 10 million paid by Chesepeake and we have the Chesepeake spur into The Plaza. Or whatever you can imagine.

Or several energy companies split the cost and they call it The OKC Energy Line.

Peace.....

My understanding is that heading east into downtown from the I-40/235 junction, the boulevard will not only have come down from grade by the time it reaches Stiles or so but must then be slightly below grade by the time it goes under the railroad tracks. This is to ensure 16’ plus clearances since the railroad will most likely have to stay at the same level. That does mean there will be no issue with clearances both for the streetcar itself plus its pantograph and the catenary (if that is the proplusion method). This will not so easily be the case for the rest of the bridges throughout downtown that were built as part of the 1930’s WPA embankment.

Much as I personally would like to see a line going straight east along Sheridan into Bricktown, everything I’ve seen for myself and am continuing to hear regarding the technical issues is making this less and less likely.

While talking about the new (railroad) bridge (across the Boulevard) I was wondering if Hutch could let us know a little more about what it will look like? Will there be more than two tracks, i.e., new tracks in addition to handle commuter lines? If the new intermodal hub is in the immediate vicinity of the bridge (two of the three Tier 2 Hub sites will be) will it have to be even wider to handle platforms as well as both BNSF and commuter tracks?

One thing I’ve been thinking about that the subcommittee can’t fully deal with right now until the Convention Center study is completed is how the streetcar should interface with the CC. Should the interface be a simple track outside the building or something beneath such as at Dallas? I sure would like to hear what OKCtalkers’ experiences and preferences are.

Ok, so nothing is decided yet on final locations for the hub and CC – though they soon will be relatively quickly – but a very likely scenario is the Hub at the 3 & 5 & 6 sites in the Hub study (Santa Fe plus parking lots on east side of tracks to Reno) and the CC on the Lumber Yard site (immediately then to the south of the new Boulevard). What kind of connectivity would there be across the Boulevard? Could you add a walkway to the new railroad bridge at that is at the rail level between the two locations?

Following on from that a possible streetcar stop for the (Lumber Yard) CC and the southern end of the Hub is an island platform in the Boulevard median. It could be linked at its western end by an escalator and elevator to the CC/Hub “walkway” and then by at grade pedestrian crossings at its eastern end….

This is correct. The New Boulevard descends under the tracks. The railroad uses the bridge to go over the New Boulevard.

Thanks for the correction (UP, stdennis, and snowman). I was envisioning a huge hump in the middle of downtown. Glad that is not the case.

An idea.....
A few years ago, just before the State's Centennial, I wrote an email to The Chamber of Commerce with an idea.

Here it is.
The large energy companies (Sandridge, Devon, Chesapeake) could sponsor a section or spur of a the streetcar line. The section of the line could be named after the sponsor. 1/2 mile spur into the neighborhood for 10 million paid by Chesepeake and we have the Chesepeake spur into The Plaza. Or whatever you can imagine.

Or several energy companies split the cost and they call it The OKC Energy Line.

Peace.....

Which is funny because streetcar directly competes with mass consumption of energy, but it could be a really good PR move for them. I mean really good.

The biggest problem with Streetcar, Commuter Transportation and for that fact, High Speed Rail, is that it's Government Driven, not Consumer Driven.

The biggest problem with Streetcar, Commuter Transportation and for that fact, High Speed Rail, is that it's Government Driven, not Consumer Driven.

Some things government should drive. Military, fire service, police service, public transit are a few. The market wouldn't provide these services because there isn't a profit, it's too costly and it is dangerous.

However, the "consumers" voted to tax themselves and allow the municipal government to move forward on transit.

Peace....

Some things government should drive. Military, fire service, police service, public transit are a few. The market wouldn't provide these services because there isn't a profit, it's too costly and it is dangerous.

The streetcar will be dangerous, ahhhh.

http://visualrian.com/storage/PreviewWM/1823/62/182362.jpg?1202719961
http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/waggoner_muni_accident_090803.JPG

Sorry, I meant and/or

I got a question about the street car and snow. Do the street cars still run in the type of snow we have had or do they need to be cleared first?

That is a good question stdennis. My understanding is that streetcars are pretty much all-weather unless the power line goes down from ice build-up. I'm sure in places that get a lot of snow (Toronta and Oslo) they have away of clearing the tracks.

This isn't the best picture but you get the idea.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_AtoycNtbXKI/S1N4RpsCEII/AAAAAAAACWk/BD2dD9TP7sw/12-20-09_022010.jpg

http://torontoist.com/attachments/toronto_mathewkatz/2008_03_16winterstreetcar.jpg

I got a question about the street car and snow. Do the street cars still run in the type of snow we have had or do they need to be cleared first?

If nothing else, they make plows for streetcars, but that will depend on the model the city decides on.

edit: Ahh, too slow

Most of the snow we have will be fine. I'll be honest though, I told engineers to factor out the "big hill" on 2nd in Deep Deuce. I used to live there. It turns into an ice sheet with cars sliding down and piling up at the bottom.

K i didn't know. I figured plows on the cars would work or maybe a heated track would work too. I knew there would have to be a way just didn't know how simple thanks for the answer.

I am re-posting this as we started a new page for reference...

For context, I am going to put up two maps made public at the previous committee meeting for reference. I have never put a map out on OKCTALK before.

The core map is what was approved as being "protected."

Several conceptual master plans were shown at the last committee meeting. We were all challenged as a "homework assignment" to produce "master plans." This larger area map shows one example of how the approved core area "protected corridor" might fit into a larger system that extends outside of downtown.

Please keep in mind that that this is my personal idea of what a greater system "might" look like. But all in all, three other maps and several verbal descriptions by committee members were put out there. They all followed a almost identical perspectives as it relates to the "core" area. That is how we came to the majority conclusion about the "protected" corridors at the last meeting. They were "re-debated" and solidified yesterday.

The "stub ends" as part of the protected core areas (particularly the Bricktown Core 2 Shore connections) will be addressed as we have more information about the hub, convention center location, and bridge reconstruction costs.

769

I'm going to challege people online again. On the downtown route that we are recommending for protection, what locations deserve stops?

Some things government should drive. Military, fire service, police service, public transit are a few. The market wouldn't provide these services because there isn't a profit, it's too costly and it is dangerous.

Worth a laugh - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV2rdGX4JYc

Seriously, turn conflicts are an issue and "median" lines may be more of a risk. We can safely assume there will be some "learning experiences" but emphatic advice from multiple operators is to have good insurance policies, contingency plans and simply spare car capacity in place (may not be your own car) for when one of your streetcars is out of service because of a "crash."