I consider myself a railbuff but when it comes to commuter rail I have only one question...do the sets operate on BNSF or UP existing tracks or is a new roadbed, track, rails and ballast laid down in their ROW (right of way)?

In order to operate commuter rail within the metropolitan area, BNSF and UP will require double-tracking (two main lines in addition to existing sidings) within their right-of-way. That will involve widening beds and installing additional mainline tracks, not to mention widening of single track bridges. Obviously those will be the major costs involved in developing commuter rail.

Since there won't be any tunneling involved, rail overbridges will be the biggest civil engineering expense for developing the commuter rail system. So it's imperative to make sure we maximize any opportunities to make huge future savings when such bridges are being reconstructed now or in the near future. Anybody know of any upcoming examples?

Since there won't be any tunneling involved, rail overbridges will be the biggest civil engineering expense for developing the commuter rail system. So it's imperative to make sure we maximize any opportunities to make huge future savings when such bridges are being reconstructed now or in the near future. Anybody know of any upcoming examples?

Are you implying that anything in ODOT's I-235/I-44 redesign will preclude commuter rail?

I'll defer to Hutch on that one....

Are you implying that anything in ODOT's I-235/I-44 redesign will preclude commuter rail?

ODOT wil be replacing the BNSF bridge over I-235 near 50th street as part of the project. The bridge is currently a single-track design. A double-track bridge will be required at some point in the future for commuter rail service between Edmond and OKC. However ODOT has refused both BNSF's and OKC's request to provide a new double-track bridge at this time. Instead they will only replace the current bridge with a new single-track structure. Their position is that if and when a second track is needed, an additional bridge can be built at that time. The result is that it will cost us millions of dollars more and create major traffic inconveniences to build an additional bridge in the future compared to the cost to replace the current bridge with a double-track design now. At the very least, ODOT should be constructing the substructure portion of the new single-track bridge now so that it will accomodate the additional superstructure components for a future double-track bridge. And they need to ensure that the grade for the new highway allows for minimum clearance requirements when the bridge is widened in the future. Otherwise, millions of dollars more would be required to tear up the highway and drop the grade to allow for the necessary clearance. Unfortunately, I'm not aware that they are doing any of that.

On a related note, this is the same problem we're facing with ODOT's new boulevard construction that will go below grade under the elevated BNSF lines. The current elevated BNSF right-of-way at that location provides for 4 tracks. ODOT currently is planning to build a new railroad bridge over the boulevard at that location that also has 4 tracks. The problam is the Intermodal Hub Master Plan that was finalized last year requires an additional width of approximately 30 feet on the east side of the bridge in order to provide for a 5th track to serve Phase 3 expansion requirements of the hub facility. Again, millions of dollars could be saved and major traffic inconveniences avoided by incorporatiog the additional bridge width now as opposed to doing it in the future. At the very least, ODOT should be constructing the substructure portion of the new single-track bridge now so that it will accomodate the additional superstructure components for expanding the bridge in the future. And, they certainly need to ensure that the grade for the new boulevard allows for minimum clearance requirements when the bridge is widened to the east in the future. Otherwise, millions of dollars more would be required to tear up the boulevard and drop the grade to provide the necessary clearance. Unfortunately, I'm not sure they are planning for any of that.

If this sounds like a broken record, believe me it is. And somebody needs to fix it or we'll continue to be stuck in the 20th century of transportation.

However ODOT has refused both BNSF's and OKC's request to provide a new double-track bridge at this time.

Sigh...


If this sounds like a broken record, believe me it is. And somebody needs to fix it or we'll continue to be stuck in the 20th century of transportation.

If I said this it would be "he's too young to know tact." Hopefully with you, people will clearly see a transportation expert who is frustrated with inept leadership, bad project management, and a concerted effort from City Hall and ODOT to keep OKC in the 1990s.

Sounds like ODOT is more interested in ensuring future employment than they are in building an efficient and cost effective transit network. A single lane of track can carry the same capacity as 15 lanes of interstate, but 15 lanes of interstate keeps ODOT busier.

The only accusation I would defend City Hall against is corrupt. ODOT, however, is corrupt. I know it's pretty toxic to say you agree with Tom Elmore on anything, but he was right about a great deal, unfortunately. ODOT is destroying rail connections wherever they can.

Sounds like ODOT is more interested in ensuring future employment than they are in building an efficient and cost effective transit network.

sadly there is a lot of truth to that... and it's in all things... i remember on highway 412 of ODOT replacing some bridges between Mooreland and just north of Fairview as bridges for the two lane road at the time... and then were ripping them out just 2 years later to make way for larger bridges that were already planned to be done when the process of widening those roads took place. so they were ripping out 2 year old bridges to make way for larger ones instead of just planning ahead

It sounds like we need some attention from the states news media and from our political leaders on the way ODOT is managed.
Perhaps we should let our views be known on this issue to the right officials?

Sorry about the honest questioning/constructive criticism and asking that the same rational be used... I was hoping for the best with the streetcar, enjoyed the debate/exchange of ideas and it looked like we were headed that way and then this...sigh

It sounds like we need some attention from the states news media and from our political leaders on the way ODOT is managed.
Perhaps we should let our views be known on this issue to the right officials?

Shyea, good luck. This place is hopeless.

Sounds like ODOT is more interested in ensuring future employment than they are in building an efficient and cost effective transit network.

It's simpler than that. They are only interested in building highways and bridges that move cars and trucks from point A to point B. They have no interest in rail transit. If you've ever been to ODOT's headquarters west of the capitol, you know how big the building is. The entire "Rail Division" is located in a tiny office tucked away in one of the corners of the facility. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

It's simpler than that. They are only interested in building highways and bridges that move cars and trucks from point A to point B. They have no interest in rail transit. If you've ever been to ODOT's headquarters west of the capitol, you know how big the building is. The entire "Rail Division" is located in a tiny office tucked away in one of the corners of the facility. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

Not to mention that our entire state capitol complex exists in the middle of what is basically a highway interchange. Have I mentioned that we are so hopeless? :Smiley122

Not to mention that our entire state capitol complex exists in the middle of what is basically a highway interchange. Have I mentioned that we are so hopeless? :Smiley122

we are so far from "hopeless" ...... this is a great time in our cities history .. and a great time to live in OKC

It's simpler than that. They are only interested in building highways and bridges that move cars and trucks from point A to point B. They have no interest in rail transit. If you've ever been to ODOT's headquarters west of the capitol, you know how big the building is. The entire "Rail Division" is located in a tiny office tucked away in one of the corners of the facility. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

It may be a very long row to hoe but the more that you and other likeminded people talk and type about this the more likely we are to see a change in direction.

The Oklahoma Department of Transportation IMO should be about building the most cost effective, efficient forms of transportation that best improve our commerce, prosperity, and quality of life.

If the DOT is stone walling efforts to do this^ it’s time we advocate for a change in the departments direction even if it means getting rid of personnel who are not open minded to change. Our prosperity, and quality of life demands it.

we are so far from "hopeless" ...... this is a great time in our cities history .. and a great time to live in OKC I agree
We very much have a can do spirit and a spirit of self-determination.

But it appears we face an entrenched government agency resistant to change.
We must find ways to change current DOT thinking.

we are so far from "hopeless" ...... this is a great time in our cities history .. and a great time to live in OKC

Agree. Plus, if one considers OKC hopeless, it's time to give up complaining, because there's nothing fixable.

we are so far from "hopeless" ...... this is a great time in our cities history .. and a great time to live in OKC

I just hope nobody tries to take credit for high oil prices, Hurricane Katrina, and urban pioneers risking their lives in areas to improve them. The city has contributed nothing to this renaissance, and that's a point I'll challenge anybody on.

Norick was a visionary leader. Since then??

I just hope nobody tries to take credit for high oil prices, Hurricane Katrina, and urban pioneers risking their lives in areas to improve them. The city has contributed nothing to this renaissance, and that's a point I'll challenge anybody on.

Norick was a visionary leader. Since then??

yes getting passing the stadium renovation maps 3 ..getting the thunder the devon tower and p180 (which has been great for the CBD) .... more housing under plans and construction than their existed in down town ..

non of that is anything good

yes getting passing the stadium renovation maps 3 ..getting the thunder the devon tower and p180 (which has been great for the CBD) .... more housing under plans and construction than their existed in down town ..

non of that is anything good

So let me get this straight - we're crediting Mayor Mick with Katrina and OKC's eventual basketball rise, Devon's new tower made possible by high oil prices, and developers building up downtown made possible by Norick.

Instead of talking about the things that other people made happen during Cornett's tenure, let's talk about the things that Cornett has done or not done. That would be more accurate. And I'm more than happy to discredit him with P180, but similarly that might be a bit harsh. I think you can reasonably view him as culpable on the boulevard, name, design, everything - but I don't think he's responsible for P180's gigantic screwups other than continuously promoting and enabling the city engineers who have bungled this project and many others.

How on earth did he finish in 2nd place at the World of Mayors competition?

I think the city is getting off easy in this discussion. Yes, ODOT is very entrenched in its ways, but OKC leadership can and should be pushing for good solutions from them. I don't see that happening. I see closed meetings with people like Couch and Wenger making secretive decisions with ODOT and then "announcing" them to the Council. It's extremely important to hold ODOT accountable, but the city staff is where these ideas germinate and where the discussions of priorities are happening -- behind closed doors. People on this site and elsewhere need to get in their ear -- and get in touch with your city council representative -- to let your ideas be known. This city has been run like a banana republic for a long time.

This city has been run like a banana republic for a long time.

Made me laugh cause I saw a quick flash in my head of city guys slipping around on a banana slide with papers flying out of their briefcases ;-)

How on earth did he finish in 2nd place at the World of Mayors competition?

Well, every other city that isn't an economy based on energy prices is doing nothing but sliding downhill right now. I won't say Mick hasn't had his successes, he has and furthermore he's a nice guy when he's not being smarmy to citizens at City Council meetings. But attributing much of downtown to the guy is like attributing the city's weight loss to his official Taco Bell diet program. Give me a break..

I think the city is getting off easy in this discussion. Yes, ODOT is very entrenched in its ways, but OKC leadership can and should be pushing for good solutions from them. I don't see that happening. I see closed meetings with people like Couch and Wenger making secretive decisions with ODOT and then "announcing" them to the Council. It's extremely important to hold ODOT accountable, but the city staff is where these ideas germinate and where the discussions of priorities are happening -- behind closed doors. People on this site and elsewhere need to get in their ear -- and get in touch with your city council representative -- to let your ideas be known. This city has been run like a banana republic for a long time.

We the people need to make sure that OKC leaders know what their priorities should be.
A sustained grass roots effort is often the best way to influence change on tone deaf leaders.
This IMHO also goes for the major OKC suburbs.

Well, every other city that isn't an economy based on energy prices is doing nothing but sliding downhill right now. I won't say Mick hasn't had his successes, he has and furthermore he's a nice guy when he's not being smarmy to citizens at City Council meetings. But attributing much of downtown to the guy is like attributing the city's weight loss to his official Taco Bell diet program. Give me a break..

lol...that last line gave me a nice chuckle.

Spartan, regarding the Mayor, you don't know what your talking about.

Without Mick Cornett, the Thunder wouldn't be here today. Even if he did nothing else, and he's done far more, that would be enough to establish an admirable legacy. I don't always agree with him, but I certainly respect his passion and commitment.

How much of Norick's vision and efforts would have succeeded without Humphreys' 'finish MAPs right" push for the MAPs extension.
If no extension had passed, would the momentum have continued? Would there even have been an arena?

Anyone think the NBA would be here today if there wasn't an available arena parked just off DT when the Hornets needed a temp home?

Norick did great things. Absolutely. But it seems fair to say some of that greatness is because Humphreys pushed to avoid the vision from being diminished by the cost overruns. And then there was MAPs for Kids.

Without both Norick and Humphreys, the current mayor probably doesn't have any NBA connection at all. That would have likely left him a nice chap who presumably means well. He owes a lot to the other two, as does everyone.

I wasn't talking about the NBA. Put that aside. We've heard enough about that. These new urbanist philosophies, continued downtown renewal, investments in walkability, are a direct result of the Mayor's self education on such matters at the National Endowment of the Arts in Washington. That is where he met Speck. So impressed with him, he brought him here.

He brought Speck here and planted a great many seeds, in many key minds. Then he appointed good people, streetcar committee included, to see this stuff through.

Our mayor isn't an iron-fisted mayor. He is a moderator. He allows debate and discussion to occur. Many of the great things that are happening now are because he has tried to posture carefully, allow debate to occur, whilst not making enemies that would tear the process apart.

People forget what type of era we are living in compared to the past. That's all I will say on the matter.

Next MAPS 3 Transit Subcommittee meeting is this coming Wednesday, June 27th, 3:30 PM at 420 Main (10th Floor Conference Room). The agenda hasn't been posted, but expect formal resolutions regarding the new OKC Boulevard/Transit Integration and contract expansion for studying necessary prep for the NE line connection to Santa-Fe Station Hub.

I just returned from a quick vacation in Portland, OR. I spent five days and covered a large portion of that city without stepping foot in a car. The Light Rail/Bus system there was heavily used and, as a result, the roadways had very little traffic congestion.

The Portland system uses five rail lines, each looping through downtown and then running a different part of the outskirts of the city. All of the stops within about two miles of the center of downtown were free with progressively higher fairs for the furthest stops. From the rail line you can get to nearby areas via bus.

I would love to see Oklahoma's transportation system modeled after Portland's.

I good part, we are modeling these first steps after Portland. Infact, a key person now on the design team is the manger for the Portland streetcar system.

I good part, we are modeling these first steps after Portland. Infact, a key person now on the design team is the manger for the Portland streetcar system.

This sounds promising. I hope the city will quickly move to expand the streetcar system and seriously evaluate the cost of the north - south commuter rail line everyone on here advocates. I still wonder if light rail might be better than commuter rail despite the significantly higher initial cost.....it seems like it can handle more frequent stops and is more easily expandable by getting away from freight RR right of ways.

I think that Classen and NW Expressway are ripe for such a light-rail line if the connective sidewalks were installed to get to the stop. On the commuter corridor s such as to Edmond or Norman, a standard Diesel Electric or even Compressed Natural Gas type train probably would be sufficient as the distances are so great. But you are right about the areas that might have more frequent stops.

This sounds promising. I hope the city will quickly move to expand the streetcar system and seriously evaluate the cost of the north - south commuter rail line everyone on here advocates. I still wonder if light rail might be better than commuter rail despite the significantly higher initial cost.....it seems like it can handle more frequent stops and is more easily expandable by getting away from freight RR right of ways.I just posted on another thread that I was told yesterday that some in Norman would rather build a light rail system like DART’s light rail system than a commuter rail system.

I believe it. In way it is more urban and cool. The "take-off" is faster. I am sure many in Norman would probably help pay for it if they were given the opportunity.

Commuter rail is the easiest and least expensive one implement quickly also. I was thinking about this when I was in DC a couple weeks ago. It would only take leasing (initially) 4 - 6 trainsets similar to TRE, VRE, or RailRunner, a few passenger platforms, and probably a few surface parking lots to have a starter system suitable for evaluation.

I still think light rail might be better long term; even for the Edmond - Norman corridor, for equipment standardization and operational efficiency even though the infrastructure costs are higher. I would love to see light rail up NW Expressway and Classen; and Will Rogers Airport/Mustang, the adventure district, and Tinker AFB/MWC.

I would love to do a detailed cost analysis of both types to see how the operational, infrastructure, and construction costs compare. I should find a way to make this my next career after the military.....

I just posted on another thread that I was told yesterday that some in Norman would rather build a light rail system like DART’s light rail system than a commuter rail system.


I believe it. In way it is more urban and cool. The "take-off" is faster. I am sure many in Norman would probably help pay for it if they were given the opportunity.


If Edmond and Norman would sign on with OKC to form a regional transit authority I think it is feasible to have this north - south line operational within 3-4 years. I would probably wait until the mess on I-235/Broadway Extension around the I-44 interchange is complete just to avoid service interruptions caused by the need for a wider rail overpass near 50th.

A big advantage with a central Oklahoma light rail system is that we would get to build it in much closer proximity to the destinations at either end when compared to commuter rail......
This gives us a do over and it offers an opportunity for higher ridership numbers.
The problem is, how you pay for light rail or even commuter rail?

IMO....Even if its in small ways, the sooner we act on this the better.

I would like to know if any rail transit system if self sustaining. I doubt it, but then again neither are highways. This is the circular argument we have to get past with government officials before any real progress can occur.

MAPS was perfect for funding the modern streetcar system for OKC, but it would take at least two, probably 3, counties (OK and Cleveland - maybe include Canadian) to hold a referendum on establishing a central OK transit authority to build and operate this system. Can you imagine to nastiness that would occur prior to the vote? The MAPS3 fight would pale in comparison.....but DFW got past it with DART and it has proven to be very successful as has every other rail transit system I know of.

I would like to know if any rail transit system if self sustaining. I doubt it, but then again neither are highways. This is the circular argument we have to get past with government officials before any real progress can occur.

MAPS was perfect for funding the modern streetcar system for OKC, but it would take at least two, probably 3, counties (OK and Cleveland - maybe include Canadian) to hold a referendum on establishing a central OK transit authority to build and operate this system. Can you imagine to nastiness that would occur prior to the vote? The MAPS3 fight would pale in comparison.....but DFW got past it with DART and it has proven to be very successful as has every other rail transit system I know of.

it doesn't take a public vote to create a RTA it is just a vote by the governing bodies in each city/county ....

once created the RTA would create a RTD and then those in the RTD would vote to tax themselves ..

it doesn't take a public vote to create a RTA it is just a vote by the governing bodies in each city/county ....

once created the RTA would create a RTD and then those in the RTD would vote to tax themselves ..

True - but getting enough people to vote in favor of funding the RTA and operations will be the hard part. I equate establishing with funding simply because saying you have a RTA means nothing without the means to establish and operate a system.

I just posted on another thread that I was told yesterday that some in Norman would rather build a light rail system like DART’s light rail system than a commuter rail system.

The problem is that only Norman wants to do this to the max. The good news is that Edmond has been moderately supportive and Moore has recently gotten to that point (now that they have tax money to burn for amusement), but what they would help pay for is a cheaper HRT. I think these things will fall in the middle - perhaps Norman will take their zeal for rail to build a streetcar network of their own radiating out of their Amtrak station. The problem is that I think Norman is so much more interested in a rail connection to Downtown OKC because they so deeply underestimate their own urbanism, which imo is very promising.

If Edmond and Norman would sign on with OKC to form a regional transit authority I think it is feasible to have this north - south line operational within 3-4 years. I would probably wait until the mess on I-235/Broadway Extension around the I-44 interchange is complete just to avoid service interruptions caused by the need for a wider rail overpass near 50th.

Wouldn't the BNSF need a twin facility across the Deep Fork and I 44, too?

Wouldn't the BNSF need a twin facility across the Deep Fork and I 44, too?

Yes they would. I-44 is done. 50th street has not been done. Now is the time to rebuild it with 20' seperation. Haven't climbed through the woods lately to see what is going on with Deep Fork although their does seem to be a great deal of drainage activity underway.

Deep Fork & I-44 is the same railroad bridge (if that is the 'facility' you are referring to). It is a single line rail bridge...just as over 235 @ 50th & over Western between Wilshire & Britton.

Deep Fork & I-44 is the same railroad bridge (if that is the 'facility' you are referring to). It is a single line rail bridge...just as over 235 @ 50th & over Western between Wilshire & Britton.

I guess that's my point. Why all the hand wringing and teeth gnashing over a one track bridge over I-235? Until similar problems are addressed at existing BNSF structures over I-44 and the Deep Fork, Western Avenue; and to a smaller extent NW 63rd, and Britton Rd./ Western Avenue again, twin structures at I 235 are useless.

I guess that's my point. Why all the hand wringing and teeth gnashing over a one track bridge over I-235? Until similar problems are addressed at existing BNSF structures over I-44 and the Deep Fork, Western Avenue; and to a smaller extent NW 63rd, and Britton Rd./ Western Avenue again, twin structures at I 235 are useless.

This is why I wish we had the foresight (and more importantly the funding) to prepare these chokepoints for future rail transit now while the roads are disrupted and the rail bridges are going to be reconstructed. If we could somehow get the bridges built over 44 and 50th St now, it becomes much easier to get service started in the future.

I guess that's my point. Why all the hand wringing and teeth gnashing over a one track bridge over I-235? Until similar problems are addressed at existing BNSF structures over I-44 and the Deep Fork, Western Avenue; and to a smaller extent NW 63rd, and Britton Rd./ Western Avenue again, twin structures at I 235 are useless.

I don't mean to be rude, but that is an absurd way to look at it.

Every highway and every overpass that is logistically identified in the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study should have at a minimum the base infrastructure and abutments to support future super-structures.

I am so tired of ODOT completely ignoring everything else that is going on and forcing us in a position where absolutely every segment of a future system will have to be built at the most premium price, a direct burden to the taxpayer.

To "wring our hands" and say "forget it, we're too late", when there are at least two projects coming up that haven't been built yet, is absurd. I'm not going to do it nobody else should either.

The problem with even addressing twin structures is that BNSF's right-of-way is not very wide. Even if a second line was built, be it BNSF or sold r-o-w to build a line like DART, you're still looking at high costs due to creating new road bed. Or for that matter, building a new bridge over the line at NW 63rd St., because it's currently not wide enough to support two lines running underneath it.


This is why I wish we had the foresight (and more importantly the funding) to prepare these chokepoints for future rail transit now while the roads are disrupted and the rail bridges are going to be reconstructed. If we could somehow get the bridges built over 44 and 50th St now, it becomes much easier to get service started in the future.

What they need to do at 235 near NW 50th, is go ahead and build the support ends to lay a future bridge down so that they don't have to shut down the area when or if they decide to add commuter rail to the area. Problem is, you don't know which side BNSF is going to want their traffic to run on.

The problem with even addressing twin structures is that BNSF's right-of-way is not very wide. Even if a second line was built, be it BNSF or sold r-o-w to build a line like DART, you're still looking at high costs due to creating new road bed. Or for that matter, building a new bridge over the line at NW 63rd St., because it's currently not wide enough to support two lines running underneath it.



What they need to do at 235 near NW 50th, is go ahead and build the support ends to lay a future bridge down so that they don't have to shut down the area when or if they decide to add commuter rail to the area. Problem is, you don't know which side BNSF is going to want their traffic to run on.

They are already planning on double-tracking for BNSF. It is just that BNSF wants a physical 20' separation from commuter rail for liability purposes. So they could go ahead and build the abutment and substructure. ODOT simply doesn't want to do it and they are not providing a cost to the City of OKC as even an option to consider incorporating it in.

As a minimum the abutments and fill for a future rail transit line could / should be done while construction is occurring. It baffles me that NO ONE in ODOT seems to have any foresight beyond the end of their nose or the next highway exit. This is so simple and obvious I cannot believe it hasn't been incorporated into the planning for future infrastructure requirements.

What is even more amazing is that it is not part of overall environmental mitigation requirements, ie ozone.

They are already planning on double-tracking for BNSF. It is just that BNSF wants a physical 20' separation from commuter rail for liability purposes. So they could go ahead and build the abutment and substructure. ODOT simply doesn't want to do it and they are not providing a cost to the City of OKC as even an option to consider incorporating it in.

I'm a big railfan and I have not heard this. Not like the don't need to anyway, as they're looking out for their best future interests, just like ODOT should be (even if it involves something other than asphalt)! Do you happen to have a link to a story of them sharing a double tracking time line? Would be much appreciated ;-)

ODOT is going to have to at least accommodate BNSF even if it won't accommodate its citizens.

That's the irony isn't it. They could easily say, "Sure, we'd be glad to! But its going to cost $5 million more that we don't have." City of OKC, if you want it, pay for it." It would be an easy answer.

Instead, even that option is never, ever, given.

So you have the 50th street bridge coming up, an Intermodal Hub approach that they helped pay to study that they seem entirely unaware of, and that's just the beginning.

Would an (as yet unestablished) RTA have any more clout or closer relationship with ODOT than City of OKC?

Yes it would. Having collective power politically among multiple cities would result in collective power both at the municipal level and the State Representative level. And money in the bank to deal with these issues wouldn't hurt either.

But you would think that OKC itself would have enough clout alone to deal with the issues that exists with ODOT within it's own borders. The problem is education. If the council doesn't know exactly when to ask for something and what to ask for, it often passes by and is then too late.

As a minimum the abutments and fill for a future rail transit line could / should be done while construction is occurring. It baffles me that NO ONE in ODOT seems to have any foresight beyond the end of their nose or the next highway exit. This is so simple and obvious I cannot believe it hasn't been incorporated into the planning for future infrastructure requirements.

The City of Norman is in the process of completing a new grade separation between the BNSF rail lines (two tracks...one current mainline and one siding) and Robinson Street (4-lane arterial). Robinson is being completely re-constructed below-grade and beneath the BNSF right-of-way. When planning for the project began several years ago, the intention was to construct a double-track rail bridge to accomodate the current mainline and siding tracks. However, as the project moved forward, BNSF requested that the City of Norman build into the project the necessary grades and substructure to allow for easy future expansion of the bridge to accomodate an addtional mainline. Because of the importance to BNSF for their own future service, as well as the fact that the City of Norman understood a second mainline would be necessary for establishing commuter rail service from Norman to Oklaoma City, the City of Norman wisely modified the plans and spent the addtional money now to prepare for the future.

That's the kind of foresight, planning and investment we need from ODOT but which is so sorely lacking.