Is phase 2 funded within the MAPS 3 budget and what does that timeline look like?

Yes, phase II will be fully funded with MAPS 3 funds. Phase I is supposed to be completed by 2017 and Phase II by 2021, I believe. That's from memory - I don't have the timeline in front of me.

I heard we just recently got turned down for another tiger grant application. Is this true?

Not sure. We apply for them all the time. Due to the lack of a 6-year Federal Transportation Bill, it extremely, extremely tough to win these with the limited funds available.

So can you explain to me why we as a city are suing to take this private property by ED when the facility is not needed for the streetcar? We also don't currently have funding and doesn't look promising to get funding for the other modes of passenger rail. Amtrak is also on the bubble and they are talking about doing away with the tiger grants all together.

Sure. I'd be glad to.

1st, it should have never been sold to a private entity in the first place.

2nd, it is very possible that it might be needed for streetcar services. We don't know for sure yet.

3rd, AMTRAK will continue going to the station for the foreseeable future and that is where streetcar will interface with it. I suspect the facility will be modified with some sort of pedestrian corridor or other architectural feature to connect with stops proposed on Reno/Sheridan if it doesn't go directly in front on EK Gaylord. That is still a conversation that is ongoing.

Efforts are underway to even extend the Heartland Flyer to Newton Kansas. It is probably a line that will become even more relevant to our locality in accessing Chicago and California in the future. The station is bound to become busier and require more services such as taxis, rental cars, or other infrastructure the Brewer's may not provide.

4th, efforts to develop a regional authority are well underway and presumably, developing such a system isn't contingent on Federal Funds. They would help sure, but I suspect development is is already presumed to be locally funded.


Santa Fe Station is THE critical linkage to create a meaningful regional transit system. Council Members set aside money to obtain this facility for immediate use and as a conservatory for when it is needed in a more fuller form. Therefore, we are moving ahead.

Ok. I guess private property rights are based on what ifs, maybes, and wishes these days. I hope it works out. If it weren't for that sale in the first place we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now.

The Brewers made out quite well with that property. The sale of it was certainly an oversight. I don't speak for the city, but as a volunteer, this is an important conservation effort to make sure that we preserve the ability for future mass transportation for our citizens.

The Brewer's have done well with that facility during a time when there was no leadership on such matters. My sympathy is limited.

I do understand your argument though and appreciate it.

It's just that there aren't many places you can effectively put a major train station.

There was really no reason for leadership. Obviously you must be young and were not around at the time. I admire the passion for your agenda. I'm just trying to be rational and understand the politics at play. This process is troublesome. I hope you will be ok if this bubble happens to burst.

Which bubble? lol

I'm not sure what the "politics" are around this. Sam Bowman and Pete White led the way for adding monies to our streetcar program to buy and preserve the facility.

If there are politics, they are probably "in perception." I don't think that locking out those passengers from the station did them many favors long term. It might have helped them in their lease negotiations with the State for AMTRAK. But I'm pretty sure that many people (particularly council members) may not regard the Brewer's as being the most devout people in assisting with rail service.

Just say'in. The optics on the lock out and their exorbitant purchase price probably didn't help them.

Throwing fastballs. You must be nervous. Always 2 sides to every story. The Brewers want to sell and will be happy with whatever the price is as long as your dream comes to pass. I hope you and the transit advocates nothing but the best.

Lol. Nope. I wouldn't comment on something I was nervous about.

And as far as I am aware, this is nothing to be nervous about. Here's hoping that the process is fair an equitable for and to everyone.

Absolutely

All I have been reading here is how much and how quickly the areas abutting any rail line will grow. So who cares where it is, right? The rail leads, not follows, right? If it is within a block or two of current demand, they will walk over and take it. Just make it easy to find, easy to figure out where it is going, and make it reliable as to schedule and up time.

That has been the rhetoric and I took it at face value as being the case. It seems logical. However, some recent items in the Oklahoman have indicated that in other places where modern streetcars were built, the development happened only after heavy incentives from the city (on top of the streetcar incentive itself). So now I don't know what to believe on the ROI issue.

Right now it looks a lot like the Chamber's contention that convention business would somehow explode 300% if we build a new convention center and given the after-the-vote revelation from the Chamber that only 1/3 of convention business is from out of area, that would require a 900% increase (local events will remain relatively unchanged). Just ain't going to happen. Or that the only way the COnvention Center is going to be successful, is if a public subsidized C.C. hotel is built at the same time.

Previous MAPS projects were not planned or designed around economic development. They were projects designed to improve city amenities and to improve quality of life for residents. To justify the convention center, economic development was dragged in to the equation. But IMO, the streetcar, just like prior MAPS projects, is designed to improve quality of life for OKC residents. Through serendipity, our prior quality of life improvements generated economic development. I think the same thing is likely to happen with the streetcar - its location and the prior denudation of downtown OKC by urban renewal created many opportunities for adjacent and nearby development - but it shouldn't be considered the ultimate goal of the streetcar. We weren't voting for economic development with MAPS, we were voting to make our city a more enjoyable place in which to live.

Betts: but isn't that the ultimate goal of MAPS type projects? That by making it a nicer place to live, that you give folks reason to move here (thats why Mayor Norrick gave for MAPS, that we lost out on landing the AA maintenance facity because we didn't have the quality of life that that employer was looking for), thus leading to economic development which increases the tax base so you can keep up with the ever rising costs of providing the same level of services to the existing tax base (much less the increased cost of the increased tax base and the infrastructure etc required)??? I agree that with this round of MAPS, economic development was a main selling point/justification not only for the Convention Center & Streetcars but even the NBA/Arena improvements??? Its all tied into each other.

Although this "issue" is several years from now...it has my wondering mind, well, wondering:

https://www.facebook.com/cityofokc/posts/10151482803862312

Will the streetcar operate on holidays? Seems the city doesn't want the bus service to run on holidays (nothing new here), I hope the streetcar when finished won't be included in this nonsense.

Although this "issue" is several years from now...it has my wondering mind, well, wondering:

https://www.facebook.com/cityofokc/posts/10151482803862312

Will the streetcar operate on holidays? Seems the city doesn't want the bus service to run on holidays (nothing new here), I hope the streetcar when finished won't be included in this nonsense.

Planning in the Streetcar Alternatives Analysis was for Weekday, Saturday and Sunday service, which would be consistent with all other streetcar cities. Start of service may be later (say 9 or 10 am) on a Sunday or a holiday. I would hope end of service would not be too early (I've seen 7 and 8 pm in some other cities on these days).

Color me uninformed, but if the beginning streetcar route will be able to easily move folks from DT businesses and hotels into Bricktown and Midtown, why would the service shut down at 7 pm?

Color me uninformed, but if the beginning streetcar route will be able to easily move folks from DT businesses and hotels into Bricktown and Midtown, why would the service shut down at 7 pm?

Maybe on Sunday, but surely not any other day of the week. On Saturday night I would think you would want it running very late. On nights when there were Thunder games or events I would think it would need to run late enough to move everyone home or back to their cars.

The streetcar does have an economic component because it fundamentally changes the economics of the development around it - that being the parking is removed from the equation. The streetcar won't 'steal' development from other parts of the city; it will make developments that aren't viable anywhere become viable along the route. As for just placing it anywhere, transportation is the number one determinant of development patterns so we have to build the streetcar where we want that development to occur. A lot of talk centers around Transit Oriented Development (TOD) but that occurs after the rail is in place. We should be talking about Development Oriented Transit (DOT) at this point.

About a Route
Oklahoma Gazette News: MAPS 3 streetcar (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-18715-about-a-route.html)

About a Route
Oklahoma Gazette News: MAPS 3 streetcar (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-18715-about-a-route.html)

We must bow to the mighty Ed Shadid and Pete White: they obviously know so much more than the subcommittee and consultants about streetcar routes. Seriously, though, read the article and notice that they don't even agree with each other. Shadid is arguing that the streetcar should only service well-trod corridors; conversely, Pete White is arguing for only putting the streetcar in the middle of nowhere. Perhaps these professional agitators should compare their talking points before stepping all over each other in print.

Also, is Pete White high? His commentary is rambling and weird.

Seriously, though, read the article and notice that they don't even agree with each other.

Pete White didn't even agree with himself. He said we shouldn't put the streetcar in an area that has already reached its development pinnacle but then said it should connect Deep Deuce and HSC. However, I will agree with Ed that all 4 of these routes have serious issues and I don't support any of them.

This was the most interesting part of the article to me:

“I don’t think any of the four (routes) will have substantial ridership.” Shadid said.

I will say this: if it is inexpensive, convenient and consistant, it will be extremely successful. I would like to see articles from the mid-90's talking about how the river enhancements, canal, arena and ballpark won't be successful.

I really wish the route that Sid drew up on his blog was one of the options. My favorite out of all the routes I've seen.

I really wish the route that Sid drew up on his blog was one of the options. My favorite out of all the routes I've seen.

The reaction by some of the HH neighbors to 13th St. was intense enough that I think Walker or Robinson (sadly) routes through HH would create a battle royal.

The reaction by some of the HH neighbors to 13th St. was intense enough that I think Walker or Robinson (sadly) routes through HH would create a battle royal.

Oh I definitely believe that.

The reaction by some of the HH neighbors to 13th St. was intense enough that I think Walker or Robinson (sadly) routes through HH would create a battle royal.

No need to worry about that. Once they see how the streetcar will improve property values and improve the lives of those along the route they will be begging for it. Then we can ask them to help chip in and pay for the expansion.

No need to worry about that. Once they see how the streetcar will improve property values and improve the lives of those along the route they will be begging for it. Then we can ask them to help chip in and pay for the expansion.

Sadly not since you're talking about somewhere that's beyond The Edge of reason.

The reaction by some of the HH neighbors to 13th St. was intense enough that I think Walker or Robinson (sadly) routes through HH would create a battle royal.

Actually many of the HH board and HH residents have passed this idea of Sid's around and are very positive toward it. They view it as a big positive for 23rd street, Paseo and Jefferson Park.

I've spoken with several people from HH about my suggested route. Nothing but positives so far.

Sid, i love your route. I am just curious if this was the route for phase 1... what would be your phase 2/second added route? and how would it all run?

I'm a big fan of Sid's. I'd love to see it head up to 23rd and then a future expansion east and west to capitol and maybe over to May somewhere.

I'm a big fan of Sid's. I'd love to see it head up to 23rd and then a future expansion east and west to capitol and maybe over to May somewhere.

i was actually thinking this. An expansion that continues as a separate route (so a different set of cars), continuing up walker, all the way to 50th. Then a route that starts at Remimington Park, runs down Eastern to 50th, then west on 50th, past walker, and right onto Northwest Expressway (probably ending at Penn Square Mall) then that sets the groundwork for eventually running a route all the way out Northwest Expressway. I am thinking Walker is a great location for the North-South spine of an entire streetcar network. Sure it might involve changing a few cars here or there, but having Northwest Expressway, Remimington/Science Museum/Zoo, all the neighborhoods along Walker, and the rest of his proposed route all connected eventually.

No need to worry about that. Once they see how the streetcar will improve property values and improve the lives of those along the route they will be begging for it. Then we can ask them to help chip in and pay for the expansion.

Some on here should stop perpetuating a caricature stereotype of the HH group. First of all, it is their love of the historic neighborhood which gives them the passion. They invested there and want to protect the neighborhood...nothing wrong with that. The fact that a few who live there might be wacky shouldn't indict the whole area. Most who live there are staunch supporters of downtown and will support intelligent projects like a well designed streetcar system.

I think it is ironic that those who advocate inclusiveness and diversity try so hard to put those unlike them in a box and set up an us vs. them.

Some on here should stop perpetuating a caricature stereotype of the HH group. First of all, it is their love of the historic neighborhood which gives them the passion. They invested there and want to protect the neighborhood...nothing wrong with that. The fact that a few who live there might be wacky shouldn't indict the whole area. Most who live there are staunch supporters of downtown and will support intelligent projects like a well designed streetcar system.

I think it is ironic that those who advocate inclusiveness and diversity try so hard to put those unlike them in a box and set up an us vs. them.

Good point.

But I think another point needs to be made here. The streetcar project in MAPS was designed to be a downtown circulation system. Regardless of how anyone may feel about the various proposed routes, they all accomplish this mission to varying degrees.

Regarding Sid's route, it would be cool, sure, but it would actually be the least inclusive route option, and would certainly provide access primarily to very high income individuals -- and would fail to accomplish the goal of providing a downtown circulation system.

I think where's Sid's route is cool is as future expansion. Obviously, linking Classen, Plaza, the Asian District and OCU would also be great expansion targets, as would a route going south into Capitol Hill and over to Stockyards City perhaps.

So if I'm being at all foggy here, let me explain: Sid, cool idea! Let's keep it on the table for a possible expansion route.

As to the issue before us today, let's not forget the stated purpose of the streetcar -- a downtown circulation system or "last mile" approach. While we can all imagine cool expansion routes, we don't have the money to do them right now. But let's of course continue the conversation and continue to imagine how all modes of transit can be expanded and improved for our city.

100% false. In fact, my suggestion is the only one thus far that reaches low income people. Paseo, Jefferson Park and then all of the 23rd Street Corridor -- the highest ridership route in the whole city and I don't think it is all rich people riding the bus on 23rd.

In fact, I specifically enjoyed the fact that these demographics will have access to many downtown amenities much easier now.

I've yet to see where the objective of the streetcar was to be a downtown circulator. Please show me where that was a defined objective given to the Subcommittee or any consultants.

I'm sorry Sid. i have to leave town for a meeting, so I cannot find the link you request. It has always been discussed as a downtown streetcar. In every mention I've ever seen or heard of it. I'm not trying to argue with you, because I like your concept. As for the demographics, it would be nice to link Jeff Park and Paseo into it; that is something I've personally dreamed of for a long time. Again, not trying to criticize. Just pointing out that the streetcar has always been advertised as a downtown streetcar, and as far as I know, has always been designed to move people throughout downtown.

Regarding your suggestion being the "only one" that reaches poor people, I disagree. One, there are several pockets of lower income housing throughout the downtown area. And two, more importantly, the streetcar as designed as a downtown circulation system can and will be used by all citizens, not just residents and hotel guests in the area. Downtown's population swells well beyond that of its residential population, a point I'm sure you would concede.

I'm sure others can provide supportive data to that effect. Best regards.

the highest ridership route in the whole city and I don't think it is all rich people riding the bus on 23rd.

In fact, I specifically enjoyed the fact that these demographics will have access to many downtown amenities much easier now.

I've yet to see where the objective of the streetcar was to be a downtown circulator. Please show me where that was a defined objective given to the Subcommittee or any consultants.

I was about to say that.

I've liked so many of Sid's posts on this topic, I feel like such a fan boy.

All that's left is for you to stop me on the sidewalk in Bricktown and tell me that you read OKCTalk. I think I need to find a different hat... ;)

Seems like the far more likely place to find you now is Skinny Slim's.

Some on here should stop perpetuating a caricature stereotype of the HH group. First of all, it is their love of the historic neighborhood which gives them the passion. They invested there and want to protect the neighborhood...nothing wrong with that. The fact that a few who live there might be wacky shouldn't indict the whole area. Most who live there are staunch supporters of downtown and will support intelligent projects like a well designed streetcar system.

I think it is ironic that those who advocate inclusiveness and diversity try so hard to put those unlike them in a box and set up an us vs. them.

I'm not trying to put anyone in a box. Nor do I have any problem with what HH residents have done for their neighborhood - it's been great. I have some friends who live in HH who would be thrilled to have the streetcar go past their house. But, there have been very vocal residents who have expressed extreme dislike even at the prospect of the streetcar on 13th, including some who could be described as very influential. The battle royal i suggested would likely be between residents of HH. But, my personal experience with city politics and citizens is that the nays, if alerted, tend to have louder voices. And loud voices get attention.

Sounds good. I welcome the discussion. The 100% false statement came off as harsh in black and white.

I think we are actually lukcy that we have a really logical corridor for transit. Over time, it will be one of our biggest assets if we start to view it that way and build accordingly. All citizens of OKC will benefit. I get excited just thinking about it.

I share your excitement, passion, and enthusiasm (redundant?). I also appreciate your vision. Sometimes I fantasize about becoming a multi-trillionaire and then just building a massive transportation system linking everything in OKC!

People should feel free to suggest whatever they want. This is a discussion board and 99% of the discussions here are very civil. I didn't interpret your post as harsh, just passionate.

Reading this makes me very unjealous of the people on the subcommittee and the consultants. Projects with this kind of scope and transformational effect incite a lot of passions, and as we can see, many differing views of what should be built. Those of us here are free to dream but we don't have to adhere to scope requirements, budgets, political realities, and we have simply not spent the time others have examining everything from ridership potential, to TOD possibilities, engineering obstacles, etc.

In the end, I think we're going to be very happy we built the streetcar, and we're going to want more routes and expansions, even if it doesn't conform exactly to what we think is best.

? how much of the route should be about ridership how much should be about economic development

? how much of the route should be about ridership how much should be about economic development

I would think that the focus should be on ridership. Assuming that strong ridership would lead to more and better development along the route.

As far as weighing percentages though, I don't know.

Sid, where's your streetcar route map?

When we first started the campaign for this project, the primary goal was develop the streetcar "circulator" that was promoted as part of an overall system plan in the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study.

With that in mind, the system was promoted as the "last mile" solution for a future commuter rail system. It was also thought that the streetcar system promoted as part of MAPS 3 could sustain itself until that larger system came online by connecting key points throughout downtown that people already regularly traverse inefficiently by car or long walks.

Since that time, many things have happened. Downtown and the "Greater Downtown" has changed and new areas have emerged. In my mind the 23rd street and Plaza District revitalization stands out as developed jewels we couldn't fully appreciate at the time of the initial campaign. The core of downtown is broadening. An additional tower on the Stage Center site is certainly anticipated to affect the modeling.

One of the other things that has also changed is that people's expectations and overall education about public transit issues have become more fully developed.

Now it feels like a debate over the only "real" money available. A relatively small pot of money proportionately at that. If I do the math right, we need about $1.6 Billion to do transit the way it really should be done metro wide. Streetcar is just a start.

Then the other thing that has happened, is that there are attempts underway to turn both MAPS 3 and the streetcar project into a mayoral political football.


With all that stated, these decisions have become so much more tougher than I think most of us ever realized. The criteria and expectations set forth on this project are incredible. There seems to be a real fight going on with the math between serving immediate ridership and using the streetcar for economic development purposes.

Great things are happening. People are engaged, they have opinions, and they are expressing their desire for a better transit system overall. At the last meeting, the Subcommittee was very careful to ask tons of questions and refrain from too much input as we solicit even more broader public input.

We have just celebrated our 80th public meeting about these issues. I am thrilled at the level of interest in not only the streetcar, but transit overall as a result of this project and the other projects/studies underway.

We are the only Subcommittee that audio records our meetings. We feel that it is important to have an authoritative record of what is going on for maximum transparency. This past meeting it has taken far bit more time to master, and at considerable personal expense, this one was videotaped for those who couldn't attend.

This has been quite honestly a grueling and tough process. But I think once it is over, we may have a technological marvel on our hands that propels the broader interest and public support for a much bigger investment.

Sorry if that post seems a little out of context. I started writing it 10 posts ago. lol

Sidewalk Sid: My Streetcar Route Suggestion for Oklahoma City (http://www.sidburgess.com/2013/06/my-streetcar-route-suggestion-for.html?m=1)

I'm not sure Walker make much sense as a corridor much farther north than 23rd. Perhaps 30th. Pull up a map and you'll see that I-235 really starts to shift west through there. By the time you reach 50th, you've got less than a block of residential to the east. Additionally, ending at 50th & Walker just doesn't give you access to anything. I do think that the ends of the route need to be pretty major draws/attractions. That's going to help feed the system. I've been on routes that just wimp out into nothingness at the end and I just don't see it as efficient.

That's why I think future (probably far future) extensions should either be up Western, or even Classen. Both of those are flanked by plenty of amenities and residential. Walker is more intimate which I think suits the modern streetcar better. The closer the buildings are to it, the better. It makes the transit/pedestrian space be functionally more conjoined. Other than that, Classen would be an interesting discussion.

For expansion much farther than 23rd, I'd really like to see a BID put in place. Especially if it is proposed for Classen. I think it needs funding and most importantly, commitment. Also, there just needs to be some pretty significant walkability/transit improvements made over the length of a few miles. Whether it goes on Western or Classen, I think the goal should be to get it to as far north as Whole Foods. Stopping short at 50th I think diminishes what's available to riders (end point) but also again, limits access to better amenities for those who normally can't access it. In that context, Classen probably makes more sense for the Mall/Wal-Mart connection on the north side looping down Bell Isle Blvd back to Classen.

Again, just thinking out loud.

Sid, you are killing my dream here... i want to be able to have a few beers at McNellies, ride the street car to the Zoo, walk around and enjoy it, then ride street cars all the way back to bricktown and have a beer with you at skinny slims. Meh, as long as i'm able to do that, i don't care what routes it takes. Make it Happen! lol

This is about 6 miles of total track. With some minor adjustment the length could be reduced.

3 lines serving a single spine which will produces short headways in the urban core - even after the system eventually expanded.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/All_zps3eab136c.jpg (http://s1178.photobucket.com/user/KerryinJax/media/All_zps3eab136c.jpg.html)

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Yellow_zps727b2035.jpg (http://s1178.photobucket.com/user/KerryinJax/media/Yellow_zps727b2035.jpg.html)

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Red_zps1a82e1c1.jpg (http://s1178.photobucket.com/user/KerryinJax/media/Red_zps1a82e1c1.jpg.html)

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/Black_zpsd5a3d369.jpg (http://s1178.photobucket.com/user/KerryinJax/media/Black_zpsd5a3d369.jpg.html)

Urban: thanks for answering Sid's "downtown circulator" question. What you described is what I remembered as well. IIRC, there was also a push by some on the Council to extend it out of the DTC model. While understandable that politics happen, it is an example of voters being told one thing and then getting another...which can lead to other "manipulations".

The map I just did:

https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=W+Reno+Ave&daddr=35.464628,-97.5091561+to:N+Walnut+Ave+to:N+E+K+Gaylord+Blvd+t o:N+Broadway+Ave+to:NW+13th+St+to:Unknown+road+to: NW+10th+St+to:N+Hudson+Ave+to:NW+4th+St+to:N+Robin son+Ave+to:W+Sheridan+Ave+to:S+Hudson+Ave+to:W+Ren o+Ave+to:S+E+K+Gaylord+Blvd&hl=en&ll=35.472414,-97.51349&spn=0.025933,0.060296&sll=35.467538,-97.506044&sspn=0.012967,0.030148&geocode=FUEkHQIdfREw-g%3BFbQlHQId3CAw-in_cQJGJxeyhzFbSfPEYteEIg%3BFew4HQIdfyEw-g%3BFao5HQIdVxMw-g%3BFQRrHQIdFg4w-g%3BFRFrHQIdO_Iv-g%3BFVldHQIdSPIv-g%3BFetaHQIdo_kv-g%3BFThDHQId3Pgv-g%3BFS9CHQIdhgQw-g%3BFbIsHQIdcwQw-g%3BFbgsHQIdX_gv-g%3BFUEkHQIdoPgv-g%3BFTYkHQIdzAQw-g%3BFQspHQIdtBEw-g&t=h&mra=dme&mrsp=2&sz=16&via=1&z=15

The total length on this is 4.3 miles. It covers DT in multiple areas, through BT, 2nd street in DD, AA, up to 13th Street and through midtown, bus station, memorial, down Robinson, in front of Devon, around the Myriad Gardens and back to the Santa Fe train station.

Now, I admit, I am a novice in urban planning, so explain to me why something like this is completely out of the rhelm of possibilities. Too many turns? Not a definite expansion route? Teach me.

It is my opinion that they aren't mutually exclusive. My suggestion is to find a balance. You need people on it from day one, on every single trip, or it will struggle to be successful at attracting development.

exactly. economic development only occurs if there is a steady flow of riders using the system. So it must go through areas that will make it feasible for people to ride it regularly (residential), and also go through areas where economic development can occur

Lol, I'm not sure I ever even heard the "dowtown circulator" phrases until after the vote. In fact, if you recall the old route "Y" that was suggested it showed much more than just a Downtown (or CBD) circulator.

The proposal I've tossed out there certainly is in keeping with at least that. In fact, I quite assumed it would need to go out of the CBD for ridership reasons. That's specifically why I've been so soured at proposals sort of since the beginning. They didn't do that.

Here's that original conceptual for reference:

http://www.lightrailnow.org/images02/okc-lrt-src-map-proposed-2009_mtp.jpg

what route didn't go out of the CBD?

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x378/KerryinJax/All_zps3eab136c.jpg (http://s1178.photobucket.com/user/KerryinJax/media/All_zps3eab136c.jpg.html)


Why not just run it straight down Robinson instead of shifting it over to Broadway?

Warren, Let me preface this by saying, I too am no urban planner. However, I have spent a decent amount of time using trains in major cities in the US and abroad. What seems to be the primary problem with a circular line system, similar to what you’re created is, from a rider’s perspective, is what happens when you are at stop “C” and you destination is stop “A”? In order you reach your destination via the street car, you would first have to go to stop “D” then “E” then “F” and so on until you reach stop “A”. Resulting in what would likely be a 20+ minute ride. If my options were that or walk 5 blocks (in 5 minutes and for free), unless it’s snowing or storming, I and presume a majority of potential able bodied users would walk. Therefore the system is not appropriate serving the citizens it is intended to serve. It creates problems when the system does not go both directions.

Whereas a system like Mr. Burgess has suggested, would allow a rider to go either direction.
Now if the circular design would have streetcars going in both directions that would be a different story. I hope this helps. Perhaps someone else can expand further.

Lol, I'm not sure I ever even heard the "dowtown circulator" phrases until after the vote. In fact, if you recall the old route "Y" that was suggested it showed much more than just a Downtown (or CBD) circulator.

The proposal I've tossed out there certainly is in keeping with at least that. In fact, I quite assumed it would need to go out of the CBD for ridership reasons. That's specifically why I've been so soured at proposals sort of since the beginning. They didn't do that.

Here's that original conceptual for reference:

http://www.lightrailnow.org/images02/okc-lrt-src-map-proposed-2009_mtp.jpg


For a little bit of context, this route concept was the very earliest rendition for when we (volunteers) were "shooting" for whatever we could get. That is volunteers petitioning the City Council at the time.

The 2005 Fixed Guideway Study rendition is an even earlier map and the study in which the premise for which the streetcar system is based on. It defines the streetcar as a "circulator" and ultimately that is what the City Council based their $120 million budget on. 4 - 6 miles of a downtown, rail-based, streetcar system.

Great discussion over the last couple of days. I thought most people were looking at the MAPS3 streetcar phase as being the downtown circulator called for in the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study. Evidently my assumption that most people were aware of the FGS was incorrect (I am the kind of nerd that reads that stuff!)

I view Phase 1 & 2 of the MAPS Streetcar project as Phase 1 of a much larger system. I definitely want to see Sid's 23rd Street spine, HSC/Lincoln Ave, Adventure District, Capitol Hill, Farmer's Market, and Stockyards eventually become part of an extensive streetcar system. This, combined with commuter rail as described in the FGS (Edmond - Norman and Tinker/MWC - WRWA/Mustang) and an improved modern bus system, is the ultimate goal. However, we must remember the MAPS3 phase is the foundation.

I still favor the Zeta proposal, with the extension to Union Station and the Midtown loop Jacobs has offered - it is an effective circulator for downtown and connects several important districts. It is also a solid foundation upon which to build.

(I still want to know if we might get more distance from our initial phase by eliminating the wireless "requirement". Is it possible to build a conventional wired system over the designated routes? If so, how much does the cost for the vehicles decrease? I bet maintenance costs will drop too. I know the BNSF overpass presents a possible clearance issue, but otherwise it seems like there is no good reason to add the expense of wireless capability other than a few people don't want wires outside their building.)

I really wish the route that Sid drew up on his blog was one of the options. My favorite out of all the routes I've seen.

I don't understand how serving so much of Heritage Hills makes this a legitimate system for regular people but serving Deep Deuce is a politically toxic idea.

Am I just mis/underestimating the density along Walker north of 13th? If you're looking for density.. downtown A, definitely now has it, and B, is a very, very safe bet for more density at the rate it is developing. Sid's argument against making ridership dependent on more development is tenuous because NOBODY is doubting whether downtown will continue to develop and evolve.

This process needs vision. That's the problem. I'm still not commenting on all the new routes proposed until I fully get it all, but I just wanted to address Sid's first because I respect his ideas and his proposal (just one route) was easier for me to research and consider. My thoughts on the newly proposed routes will follow soon...