(Hope I'm putting this in the right section.)

So I moved back to OKC this January after being gone 15 years. The original MAPS was just getting started then, and so much has changed since then! It feels like a completely different city from the one I grew up in.

But OKC still has a pretty bad inferiority complex. When telling people I moved back, they get real confused. It's as though they can't believe anyone would choose to move here. And they're doubly confused that anyone one choose to move back.

And then they ask, with all the doubt and hesitation they can muster, "How do you like it here?" They seem to think I'm just being nice when I tell them I'm glad to be back.

I also hear people say that OKC is still two or three years behind the rest of the country (it's not, not that I can tell). And behind every positive thing they say abou OKC, there's an unspoken parenthesis. "Yeah, downtown has improved a lot (well, by Oklahoma standards.)."

What's it going to take for OKC to get over this inferiority complex? The city is hardly touched by the recession (compared to where I used to live), the Thunder almost made it to the final round, and we're building one of the best downtowns in the country, especially if we can get that streetcar built. What's to be ashamed of? What's it going to take for people to be proud of OKC, without apology?

I agree that there is a lot to be proud of right now, but understand for locals who have been pushing this progress for the last 15 years, it's very hard still. You can't just go speak your mind and say something that OKC needs to do better on, urban-wise, and get a standing ovation. You still upset a lot of people when you suggest things like green building, historic preservation, usable public transit, economic development, quality of life initiatives and other things that sort of "seek to turn OKC into Austin or Denver." There is a strong progressive movement, but it's not without a struggle still. And then anti-progressive movement is also getting emboldened, especially when we have a system thanks to MAPS3 that gives state fairgrounds interests as much if not more influence than streetcar interests. And lord knows MAPS3 has become all about a convention center that nobody wants. Historic preservation is fleeting as well, and with the marching drum of "progress," a lot of great things have been lost as well. You can't just be for everything or against everything. Progressives are for and against a mix of things, anti-progressives are against and for a mix of things. Things are not nearly as black and white as someone might have envisioned they could be 20 years ago.

We're at the point that nobody can deny that we have a downtown that provides a really cool environment, perhaps one of the coolest in the nation for cities our size, and attracts a lot of investment, again, perhaps one of the most-invested-in downtowns for cities our size. So we have coolness and investment. How do we make that translate into livability and quality of life? We still lack in terms of urban living options, almost all of our peer cities are ahead of us there. Not that a "race" matters, but the point that DOES matter is that we could do A LOT better on urban living and quality of life. For many, and most leaders it seems, quality of life still means being able to get to Edmond or NW OKC easily. For the objective progressives, obviously that isn't going to cut it.

And we still live in a state that is woefully terrible on health, openness, quality of life, education, incomes, and so on. OKC is an oasis for coolness and investment. However even in OKC we are still having the same problems that the rest of the state is having when it comes to openness, educational attainment, and healthy living. We have entered into a new class of cities, no doubt, however we have carried many of our old problems with us which just makes us look really odd standing next to cities like Denver and Kansas City. So again, it's complicated. But it's awesome that you came back to Oklahoma. Right now as far as "where we are" it's about getting over that hump. We need OKC's coolness and investment benefits to translate into quality of life and benefit the other areas that we have still yet to improve much on.

But there is no doubt that we've made improvements across the board. Perhaps we didn't realize in what bad shape OKC was back in the 1990s. One thing that can definitely NOT be said about OKC is that it's a slum--we used to hear visitors say that a lot, and now that's rarely the impression that people get. Also keep in mind that I've made this post pretty objective. Of course I'm a lot more passionate and emotional because I'm personally identified with the urban progressive side of issues. Things are a lot more contentious behind the scenes than I have perhaps illustrated with my descriptions of where the city is as a whole. Very often I and others are incredibly frustrated with things, but occasionally, things can exceed my wildest hopes and I am literally stunned at how well something turns out. Case in point: the Thunder, Devon Tower, and the Myriad Gardens.

But as for an inferiority-complex, I think some who are just hapless bystanders to all of this might be that way, but the more involved people definitely don't have an inferiority complex. I can be very critical and when I feel like I need to bash something, I will mince no words, and spare no feelings. Some say I'm overly pessimistic in this regard. Well, I take for granted I suppose that we're all appreciative of what OKC has become on the whole. Am I appreciative of the specific fact that most people here still don't know what a sidewalk is?? Give me a break. But in the 1990s, to be kvetching about sidewalks would have been ridiculous considering the much huger problems we had. Also, having lived in Canada and Europe, I sometimes forget to frame things within the realm of what is acceptable to advocate to my fellow Okies. I do feel like people who hate my pessimism have an inferiority complex. It shouldn't bother people that I can unequivocally separate a specific issue and talk about many examples of places that are doing way better than us on that specific issue. But for them it's as if I'm criticizing our very existence of being.

We walked our dogs in the Myriad Gardens today and while it's a bit fussy for my taste, I think it's going to impress a lot of people. Looking over at the Devon Complex is pretty impressive as well. We'll have the new Ford Center entrance later this year, at least a third of the streets will be scaped, Automobile Alley has things happening, as does Midtown and the Triangle. Good things are happening.

I would like to see something done with that great series of buildings on the South side of Main St. in Bricktown. I walked by there today on my way home from the Myriad Gardens and all I could think of was what a great retail strip that would be. The city needs to do something to promote retail in downtown and that would be a great place to start, because the spaces are relatively small and you've got the Bricktown foot traffic, as well as more people living in Deep Deuce and the Triangle now.

OKC has blossomed during a time when a lot of the country has withered on the vine. All this constant criticism of Oklahoma/Oklahoma City by some is much like a mother who contantly tells her son, in public, that he is a loser "because she loves him and only wants to help." Yeah, right.

The kindest way to regard these types of comments would be to assume these people are just clueless about the City's history and how amazing its progess has been in the past 10 - 15 years. Honestly, I think they must have no idea how OKC stacks up to other, similarly sized cities. Bitching about sidewalks in the face of its amazing transformation is eyebrow raising, to say the least.

What's it going to take for people to be proud of OKC, without apology?

Dishonesty? Things can always improve.

Well no one who ever talked to me about OKC got the impression we felt inferior. I've always talked proudly about OKC, saying it got a bad rap until people actually came here and experienced it for themselves.

I don't think perfection needs to be the standard. Getting people to do the right thing is always a struggle, but it is possible to do enough, or to do enough for now.

I also think we do ourselves a disfavor when we make things like the streetcar and green buildings primarily about doing the right thing, or about making people be less conservative. In places where I've seen them happen, especially green buildings, it's been as much about showing off as it's been about doing the right thing.

And I think that's fine. For all the opposition to the streetcar, people just need to sit back and think about what a great impression it will make on visitors. I think about a trip to Portland a couple of years ago. For all of that streetcar's environmental qualities, my main impression was, "Wow, look at what these people can do!" I had the same impression in Salt Lake City. It shows a strong commitment to being good at being a city, to achievement.

OKC just has to keeping making more good decisions than poor or mediocre ones, with the choices it has on the table right now. We have a great track record with that these last few years, in spite of some opposition, so I'm not too worried about it yet.

OKC has blossomed during a time when a lot of the country has withered on the vine. All this constant criticism of Oklahoma/Oklahoma City by some is much like a mother who contantly tells her son, in public, that he is a loser "because she loves him and only wants to help." Yeah, right.

The kindest way to regard these types of comments would be to assume these people are just clueless about the City's history and how amazing its progess has been in the past 10 - 15 years. Honestly, I think they must have no idea how OKC stacks up to other, similarly sized cities. Bitching about sidewalks in the face of its amazing transformation is eyebrow raising, to say the least.

Unfortunately we still have our fair share of people like this who insist on defining the parameters of the debate on progress that they have opposed at every way. And I think people should explain why they are against sidewalks in the first place, instead of trying to go around the issue by again bragging about the other progress that they always opposed before the fact. You can't have a real debate with these types of people unfortunately.

Before I listen to someone try and obfuscate the issue with the mention of "progress" I'd like to see their report card on the aforementioned progress from the last 15 years.

Well no one who ever talked to me about OKC got the impression we felt inferior. I've always talked proudly about OKC, saying it got a bad rap until people actually came here and experienced it for themselves.

I tend to agree with this. I actually had a flight delayed last month and struck up some small talk with the lady next to me. She was from Chicago and went on and on about how much she liked it here. The people around here, all natives I assumed, seemed stunned that someone wasn't slamming OKC. It was a bit surreal.

The inferiority complex comes more from Oklahoma than specifically OKC. In fact, I'm starting to hear the following statement more and more:"I really like OKC but I don't like Oklahoma." Lets face it, this state as a whole has some serious problems, such that OKC may eventually hit a ceiling per say as far as development is concerned. But for now I think people are pretty happy to live here. Look how high our city scores with QOL surveys. Also, remember that OKC was one of the few cities to notch a large of a population gain for cities with 500K or more.

I really don't hear a lot of disparaging comments about OKC, moreso than I hear pointed complaints about specific areas like, "this road is in really bad shape" or "this neighborhood really needs to be revitalized." If anything, I consider this a good thing because, while yes this city has made remarkable progress we still do have a ways to go and people are not satisfied with just okay. MAPS and associated development succeeded in getting this city to a level comparable to other majors cities in metros with 1-1.5 million people. We are now transitioning to a level in which we are competing with the Kansas Citys and San Antonios of the world. Unfortunately we have nothing like Country Club Plaza or the Riverwalk or things those caliber of cities have, but the pieces are in place, the money is surprisingly there, it just needs good execution and leadership to happen.

Unfortunately we still have our fair share of people like this who insist on defining the parameters of the debate on progress that they have opposed at every way. And I think people should explain why they are against sidewalks in the first place, instead of trying to go around the issue by again bragging about the other progress that they always opposed before the fact. You can't have a real debate with these types of people unfortunately.

Before I listen to someone try and obfuscate the issue with the mention of "progress" I'd like to see their report card on the aforementioned progress from the last 15 years.

No one is saying they are against sidewalks. Don't twist my words. What I said was that some people are so caught up in the need to bitch about every piddling thing that they miss the forest for the trees and do this city and state a disservice. If nothing else, who the heck wants to live in a place where people are so quick to complain about their own city and the people who are proud of it?

I tend to agree with this. I actually had a flight delayed last month and struck up some small talk with the lady next to me. She was from Chicago and went on and on about how much she liked it here. The people around here, all natives I assumed, seemed stunned that someone wasn't slamming OKC. It was a bit surreal.

The inferiority complex comes more from Oklahoma than specifically OKC. In fact, I'm starting to hear the following statement more and more:"I really like OKC but I don't like Oklahoma." Lets face it, this state as a whole has some serious problems, such that OKC may eventually hit a ceiling per say as far as development is concerned. But for now I think people are pretty happy to live here. Look how high our city scores with QOL surveys. Also, remember that OKC was one of the few cities to notch a large of a population gain for cities with 500K or more.

I really don't hear a lot of disparaging comments about OKC, moreso than I hear pointed complaints about specific areas like, "this road is in really bad shape" or "this neighborhood really needs to be revitalized." If anything, I consider this a good thing because, while yes this city has made remarkable progress we still do have a ways to go and people are not satisfied with just okay. MAPS and associated development succeeded in getting this city to a level comparable to other majors cities in metros with 1-1.5 million people. We are now transitioning to a level in which we are competing with the Kansas Citys and San Antonios of the world. Unfortunately we have nothing like Country Club Plaza or the Riverwalk or things those caliber of cities have, but the pieces are in place, the money is surprisingly there, it just needs good execution and leadership to happen.

This is a good post in that it is even handed and I appreciate the fact that you recognize that the whole world doesn't think Oklahoma is just awful. They don't. That is self inflicted by people who think they have something to prove - either to people who don't live here or to the people who - horrors - love it here and are proud as hell of its continuing progress.

This is something I have never understood. Why do Oklahoman's have this inferiority complex? Then they project the self loathing onto others. I don't know if it was the Grapes of Wrath or what. A study the state chamber did prior to the Centennial, showed that most people didn't have ANY opinion of Oklahoma (positive or negative). We have a blank slate and can make that opinion anything we want it to be.

I am a native born Oklahoman (live across the street from where I was born). Was raised and traveled all over the U.S. and have never been ashamed or embarrassed to say where I was from. But the image I get from most of my fellow Okies is something akin to Sally Field and her infamous "You like me, you really like me!" Oscar acceptance speech. Or SNL's Stuart Smalley, doing his daily affirmations, saying to themselves as they gaze into the mirror, "I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!:" Hoping that if they repeat it enough times, they will convince themselves and the outside world that it is true. Not realizing that most don't see us the way we see ourselves.

No one is saying they are against sidewalks. Don't twist my words. What I said was that some people are so caught up in the need to bitch about every piddling thing that they miss the forest for the trees and do this city and state a disservice. If nothing else, who the heck wants to live in a place where people are so quick to complain about their own city and the people who are proud of it?

Oh, so you think advocating for sidewalks does this city a disservice? That's funny, I think not arguing for more improvements does this city a disservice, but to each their own I guess.

(What's to be ashamed of? What's it going to take for people to be proud of OKC, without apology?

My answer is:it will take time.

Living in OKC sucked for a loooooonnnnnggg time and people tend to think in terms of how things have been not how they currently are or where they are heading.

Or maybe it's humility. Lots of people here have been churched to be humble. That could be a good thing. Anybody can go around tellling everybody how great they are, true or not. This way maybe we get the best people to move here that pick up on the best kept secret...that this is a diamond in the rough.

I've said many times that when I come back to OKC to visit, I can see a big shift in the attitudes of people that live there in terms of civic pride -- a huge change from when I moved away in 1990.

But I think the recent past is still burned into the brains of many, especially the massive economic collapse of the 80's and incredibly mis-guided urban renewal attempts of the 60's and 70's. So, while there are plenty of positive things to point to, OKC was really at a disadvantage for quite a while so in many ways we are still digging ourselves out of a deep hole.

I also think many fear that we are just inches away from slipping back down the slope. That the legislature and local leaders are all morons and manipulated by a handful of good-ole-boys and that too much of the local population fights against any type of real progress. And/or that the oil & gas industry is going to go bust again and we'll have a repeat of 30 years ago.

You can see these attitudes/concerns all over this forum, and those that post here are certainly among the more enlightened members of the community.

I think most can see real progress and are even proud of it, yet at the same time fear we are going to lose the momentum. As more years pass and more and more successes pile up, people will start to let go of the failures of the past... But that is going to take time.

I also think many fear that we are just inches away from slipping back down the slope. That the legislature and local leaders are all morons and manipulated by a handful of good-ole-boys and that too much of the local population fights against any type of real progress. And/or that the oil & gas industry is going to go bust again and we'll have a repeat of 30 years ago.

When you're entrenched and you're in it for the long haul, it's hard to get past these issues which are still very real. If oil sank to $20/barrel...(nervous laugh) that would not be good for OKC. Does anyone really want to say they have total faith in the State Legislature? Yikes. And it is still very amazing how many people still fight progress, even on little issues, such as sidewalks.

Oil prices will always be somewhat volatile but there has been a big fundamental change that is likely to be permanent: the U.S. is no longer willing to sell out to the Middle East just to get cheap oil. 9/11 changed all that forever and therefore domestic production is always going to be a high priority. I'm sure at some point the industry and OKC will feel a hit when prices start to come down, but I just don't see anything like the 80's on the horizon.

The state legislature is frequently an embarrassment but there are plenty of thriving, progressive communities that overcome / work around similar limitations.

And although there are some that are very fearful of change, the mere fact that an incredibly conservative population has now voted three times to raise taxes to better their own community -- including street cars and sidewalks -- is hard evidence of a real shift that is only gaining momentum.


All these changes are not happening as deeply or quickly as many of us would like, but there is no doubting the general direction -- even when it's two steps forward and one step back.

Oklahoma doesn't have a corner on the market when it comes to legislative idiocy, that seems to be rampant in all 50 states and really at all levels of government.

Before I respond to this, I want to make clear that I'm not disagreeing with anything. Yeah, there are a lot of positives--I said it earlier myself that sometimes even I am shocked looking back at some of the progress. So these responses are mostly taking for granted that we're all pretty happy for the most part.


Oil prices will always be somewhat volatile but there has been a big fundamental change that is likely to be permanent: the U.S. is no longer willing to sell out to the Middle East just to get cheap oil. 9/11 changed all that forever and therefore domestic production is always going to be a high priority. I'm sure at some point the industry and OKC will feel a hit when prices start to come down, but I just don't see anything like the 80's on the horizon.

The odd thing about this though is that OKC is almost in a lose-lose predicament either way when it comes to the price of gas, because of stubborn leadership that slowly pushes for total changes. If we could cut down the auto-dependence, $5 gas could be an awesome thing for OKC. It puts money in our economy, grows our corporations, powers research in our industries, and locally, we can use that as an incentive to build a more sustainable community, because nobody wants to pay for $5 gas even if it pays their salary directly or indirectly. However we don't do that. We are still as car-dependent as we've always been, no signs of changing yet (although we are talking about 50-100 year transit plans, which I consider a cop-out), and how high is gas back home now? $4 yet or almost? And people just pay it and go on with their lives. We still brag about our highways. So, I still think as far as mentalities go, our leaders leave us ill-equipped to fully take advantage of what could be a good thing for OKC. However, if gas prices plummet, then our highways and low congestion become awesome things again, but that economic driver dissipates. So it's a strange scenario that OKC doesn't seem to have a plan for either way.


The state legislature is frequently an embarrassment but there are plenty of thriving, progressive communities that overcome / work around similar limitations.

Agreed, but none could be more embarrassing than the OK Legislature. That is a scary group if there were ever one. What's scary is that many of its leaders, and its most vocal embarrassments, come from OKC city limits (where they have been reelected many times, ala Sally Kern). The OKC City Council is legitimately a liberal group...I think now we can officially say that. But that is one layer of government which favors progressives, and beyond that, schiza... one advantage on the local level that the progressives have is that when issues such as transit and urban planning come up, the other side doesn't have any ideas, solutions, critiques, suggestions of where to go, or any background in any way. So I personally think it's been a great advantage that when a lot of progressives start talking about a streetcar all at once, there isn't really a counter group that is fully capable of joining the debate on the same level as the advocates. They are mostly too backwards to even know what a streetcar is, honestly.


And although there are some that are very fearful of change, the mere fact that an incredibly conservative population has now voted three times to raise taxes to better their own community -- including street cars and sidewalks -- is hard evidence of a real shift that is only gaining momentum.

This is a golden fact. Interestingly, it's one that the mayor loves to emphasize. However we all know that MAPS3 is flawed. It's also especially awesome that the streetcar and smaller budget items carried the ballot against the convention center. Yet why do we still have to defend the streetcar project from other interests which would like to attack it? Tough question there.



All these changes are not happening as deeply or quickly as many of us would like, but there is no doubting the general direction -- even when it's two steps forward and one step back.

I agree 110% with this. I just dislike oversimplifications of the struggle for progress, and I especially dislike backwards people claiming credit for any of the progress.

Oh, so you think advocating for sidewalks does this city a disservice? That's funny, I think not arguing for more improvements does this city a disservice, but to each their own I guess.

You can't read, can you.

I don't understand why anyone would consider OKC inferior. Inferior to what? To Dallas? No thank you, I tried living there 6 months and was very happy to land a job here.

Several things about OKC metro I've always bragged about: no pollution, easy commute, low cost of living, great people, the zoo, cowboy hall of fame, plenty of outdoor activities, OU football, four seasons, not much racism, the arts, professional sports...am sure there are a few others. I've always thought OKC was very livable compared to other places.

Awesome posts Spartan. This forum needs a like button.

It's also especially awesome that the streetcar and smaller budget items carried the ballot against the convention center. Yet why do we still have to defend the streetcar project from other interests which would like to attack it? Tough question there.

I assume some people perceive that public urban transporatation is associated with undesirables, like low income people, and street cars won't take it above that. That don't see that urban public transportation can be attractive for every one.

Awesome posts Spartan. This forum needs a like button.
But he lost me with "We still brag about our highways." When did we ever start doing that unless it was to venture out of state and discover highways worth bragging about?

I'm just sorry that the public transit advocates aren't using it all that much, now. I am always happy to see riders on our buses, and not just the ones who are too poor to afford a car. IMO, the best advocate for public trans would be the ones out using what we already have and taking their friends along - and not just on a lark but for real. Move near a line, take it to work consistently. We have bus lines - use them.

The problem with the buses is that the routes aren't logical and the waits are too long. The other day I saw someone sitting at the bus stop when I went in to the supermarket. When I got out, after doing a full shop, he was still sitting there. We don't have covered bus stops, and we have no signs giving routes or times of buses. We need to completely reform the bus system to make it attractive to people who want to ride not because they have no choice, but because they'd rather not drive.

The problem with the buses is that the routes aren't logical and the waits are too long. The other day I saw someone sitting at the bus stop when I went in to the supermarket. When I got out, after doing a full shop, he was still sitting there. We don't have covered bus stops, and we have no signs giving routes or times of buses. We need to completely reform the bus system to make it attractive to people who want to ride not because they have no choice, but because they'd rather not drive.

If a bus doesn't have a good route to work, I certainly understand not taking it. What I am talking about are people who are advocates for public transportation skipping the busses when the route is relatively reasonable. For example, if you are going downtown, by all means, take the frickin' bus. It may not be as convenient as a car - it never is unless you are in a situation where there is no parking - but that isn't the point. And if you have to end up walking 4 - 10 blocks, what is the big deal? That is normal even in NYC. And good for you. Anyone using public transportation to go to places beyond major intersections or tourist attractions is used to that. It is how any public transportation system works and one of the biggest selling points that it is healthier for people. How many times have we heard comments about fat Oklahomans who drive everywhere? Using the system in place to demonstrate that it is viable is the way to lead a movement. If people wait around until there is a door to door commute before they start using it - and using it consistently - it will never happen.

I think more people hope the rest of the country does not learn how great is here than any other attitude. You will always have your negatives and haters in any community...

The problem with the buses is that the routes aren't logical and the waits are too long. The other day I saw someone sitting at the bus stop when I went in to the supermarket. When I got out, after doing a full shop, he was still sitting there. We don't have covered bus stops, and we have no signs giving routes or times of buses. We need to completely reform the bus system to make it attractive to people who want to ride not because they have no choice, but because they'd rather not drive.

Agree completey. In this neck of the woods, buses=poor and everything that comes with it (crime, decay, etc.) and therefore not worth the investment. Which is a travesty considering how many people even here in car loving OKC don't have decent transportation on their own.

Of course trains=cool. I guess they make you feel like your a big time executive living in NYC. Even when I was living in Dallas I would notice how the buses even at rush hour were 60-70% empty while you couldn't get a parking spot at the DART Rail Station. Trains are neat but buses will always be more practical for most people. They are worthy of the investment.

I've lived in L.A. for 21 years and have never taken a bus, yet have driven to a Metro (subway) or MetroLink (commuter line) train station hundreds of times.

Trains/subways/trams/streetcars attract tons of people that would never step foot on a bus.

Agree completey. In this neck of the woods, buses=poor and everything that comes with it (crime, decay, etc.) and therefore not worth the investment. Which is a travesty considering how many people even here in car loving OKC don't have decent transportation on their own.

Of course trains=cool. I guess they make you feel like your a big time executive living in NYC. Even when I was living in Dallas I would notice how the buses even at rush hour were 60-70% empty while you couldn't get a parking spot at the DART Rail Station. Trains are neat but buses will always be more practical for most people. They are worthy of the investment.

There was an interesting comment on one of the streetcar sites. Apparently in Portland people will let a bus go by to take the streetcar to the same destination, even if they have to wait.

I have no problem with walking. I walk every day and I drive very little. But, I do require some information about when buses will arrive. Something as simple as a sign with the route and times of operation on it would go a long ways towards increasing bus traffic.

Awesome posts Spartan. This forum needs a like button.

Grazi!


I'm just sorry that the public transit advocates aren't using it all that much, now. I am always happy to see riders on our buses, and not just the ones who are too poor to afford a car. IMO, the best advocate for public trans would be the ones out using what we already have and taking their friends along - and not just on a lark but for real. Move near a line, take it to work consistently. We have bus lines - use them.

I'm going to take your interest in the bus system at face-value (hopefully that's not a mistake), but I have a feeling that you don't really know that much about the bus system, based on what you are saying here. Most streetcar advocates are also advocates for bus system reform, and if this is something you feel strongly about, I would encourage you to do some research and get involved to try and raise interest in bus system reform as well.

You probably weren't aware, but the Modern Transit Project group, the grass roots advocates of the downtown streetcar system (I am not a member, but have met with them a few times and ran into them around town) actually had a multi-part transit overhaul plan, the streetcar being only one component of that. They also wanted to make bus reform and other transit reform a priority, and have still been "looking out" for commute rail prospects. The point is that OKC needs multiple transit modes to come together in order to efficiently serve such a sprawling city with a high degree of density diversity, differing situations for different parts of town.

This isn't a dig so much as just a joke, but you said you're always happy to see riders on our buses--well I hope that doesn't mean you're never happy Lol. There are some serious problems with OKC city buses. The obvious problems are that the buses are always 15-20 minutes late, and don't post route information anywhere--the reason is because the routes are too unreliable. Secondly, we don't have bus lines. We have bus routes. The difference is that they mostly connect odd ends of town to the bus hub on Hudson.

In order to reform the buses, we will need to clean up the actual bus fleet, get buses to miraculously run on time, switch to a grid system (buses stay on one street and go up and down across town on say, just Penn, or just May), probably embrace bicycles, and we desperately need to focus on a maximum service area and anything beyond this core area should not be guaranteed decent bus service. It also needs more operational funding. The problem here is that operational funding is very expensive for bus systems, whereas it's virtually negligible for streetcar systems. MAPS can fund a capital expense, it can not come up with operational funding, so the funding mechanism is perfect for funding a streetcar system. Bus funding will however have to come out of the city budget or a dedicated transit tax or something like that.

Hopefully I didn't mistake your interest in the bus system as genuine and not just a ploy to detract from the streetcar. But I do firmly believe that different modes of transportation must interact and compliment each other. Of course a good solution isn't to go from totally relying on a car to totally relying on a streetcar, although that's probably not even possible. The most exciting thing about the streetcar though is that you can build a city around it. It will build up the part of town within 3-4 blocks of the streetcar line. In this regard, while still being a revolutionary transit component, it will do much more for city planning in OKC than it could possibly do for transit, which is still great.

I agree with the comment that there is a perception here that buses = poor people. Actually that is a perception issue everywhere. I also wish that our bus system was improved and that we would jump-start passenger rail service. The thing that strikes me odd about this city is that the government on occasions makes it very clear that they would like for people to retire here and that they want to be friendly towards older folks. There are so many elderly in our city, especially near the core downtown, who are too old to drive anymore who are dependent on relatives or friends shuttling them around. We could improve the quality of life for them so much if we had sufficient mass transit; they would not have to rely on others/services/programs/etc. if there was a setup like that. I know for a fact that many of them won't ride the bus not because a stop is far away, but because they are too old to wait outside in an open stop area in 100 degree heat for 30 minutes. Because they have trouble walking up steep bus steps and are too proud to ask the driver for help or embarrassed to take any wheelchair-accessible entrys. Trains offer an advantage in that I can't think of one that I have ever ridden in other states where the train entrain wasn't level with the floor when you get on. That has a lot of advantages to the elderly. Yes older cities that have el trains pose a problem, but modern cities such as Los Angeles have elevators and escalators to such train depots.

The sad fact about our city is that it is not well designed for either the young and adventurous or the old and infirm. It's really just set up for those middle years when you have a family. That to me does not seem like a sustainable strategy for us.

I actually like it here a lot. To take it back to the original poster's comment, for me I get frustrated when I see things which seem like such simple problems, or such common sense "well yeah that's the problem right there" issues that we as a city just sort of ignore and pass by year after year. I also know that a lot of people who don't like it here are coming from Texas, and I think that is really just a commentary on how well Texas does certain things with common-sense approaches to so many government managed things. I think it also has a lot to do with the amount of people and money they have as compared to us... basically unless you're from New York, California, or Illinois you are not coming from a state that is better off from a people/government standpoint than Texas. I also think that is why a lot of times some out of town-ers don't understand the frustration... I think a lot of our country is exactly like Oklahoma. I also think that is why so many Oklahomans don't understand why newcomers are not as frustrated as them with a lot of the things that go on here... they go on everywhere.

Like I said, it would be nice to see people use the public transportation that is already available. I get that street cars are cool. Especially in nice weather. But the reasons for a city wide public transportation system is to give people a cost effective, more green option besides driving a car or taking a cab. That it is less cool than a train or a streetcar is recognized, but this is about a lot more than that, seems to me. And actually USING the system instead of just dismissing it is far more likely to change both the reality and the negative stereotypes.

Buses are often late but so are subways. That is just the way city buses are, anywhere. It is just as difficult to wait at a streetcar stop as it is to wait at a bus stop. I don't expect people to take a couple of extra hours to get to work because that isn't a system that works. But as I said, for trips downtown, the mall, routes that are reasonably close to your job, or whenever you can, if someone is actually in strong favor of public transportation - and not just because it is cool but for all the other reasons we read about - I wish more people would take advantage of it. I mean, if someone cares enough to say it is important, they should be willing and interested in showing public transportation is a viable option.

As far as buses just going in crime ridden neighborhoods, that just isn't so. Buses, everywhere, are a pain, but they'll work. You can take them to the mall. Our main arteries are covered. You can take them downtown. You can take them to city public events. You can make a transfer with no more effort here than anywhere else, including a streetcar. I've used the bus here, and I've used the crosstown bus in Manhattan as recently at in March. I didn't see that much difference, if any. If they are willing to use them in the Big Apple, the king of mass transit, I can't imagine why so many advocates aren't willing to put up with some inconvenience to use them here.

By a show of hands, who among us has even looked at the Metro bus schedule? I hope people will check it out.

http://gometro.publishpath.com/schedules

Until those passionate about mass transit are willing to lead with their feet instead of just their voices, people on the fence will continue to avoid buses because only poor people allegedly ride them. So ride them, already. It would be nice to get trains and streetcars, but selling the value of public transportation needs to come before, not after. Any of those improvements are years away and a lot of people are skeptical of the whole notion of public transportation in OKC. Showing that we have a population that is willing to give up their cars and accept the inconveniences of mass transit would go a long way towards reassuring people that they aren't just throwing their money away on a boondoggle.

I've lived in L.A. for 21 years and have never taken a bus, yet have driven to a Metro (subway) or MetroLink (commuter line) train station hundreds of times.

Trains/subways/trams/streetcars attract tons of people that would never step foot on a bus.

My brother has lived in L.A. for about 30 years. He sold his car a few years ago and uses a bus exclusively for going any distance. They have a fantastic system though. All buses are equipped with a GPS system. He can either check on the website or use a phone app which shows where any bus is at any time and when it will be a particular stop. He never has to wait long at a bus stop.

My brother has lived in L.A. for about 30 years. He sold his car a few years ago and uses a bus exclusively for going any distance. They have a fantastic system though. All buses are equipped with a GPS system. He can either check on the website or use a phone app which shows where any bus is at any time and when it will be a particular stop. He never has to wait long at a bus stop.

That's how my kiddo keeps up with buses in Chicago.

Oh my god. It keeps going on...
Buses are often late but so are subways.[/quote]

Wrong.


It is just as difficult to wait at a streetcar stop as it is to wait at a bus stop.

Wrong.


By a show of hands, who among us has even looked at the Metro bus schedule? I hope people will check it out.

Give me a break.


Until those passionate about mass transit are willing to lead with their feet instead of just their voices,.........would go a long way towards reassuring people that they aren't just throwing their money away on a boondoggle.

Wrong on all counts.

Oh my god. It keeps going on...
Buses are often late but so are subways.

Wrong.


Give me a break.



Wrong on all counts.[/QUOTE]

You're absolutely right, Spartan. There is no reason to settle for mediocre. As I mentioned when talking about the L.A. system, some cities can do it right and there is no reason that OKC can't.

Well, then. So bus system in OKC is deemed crappy, which is why the mass trans advocates feel justified in simply ignoring it and advertising its bad reputation, justified or otherwise (and I am still unconvinced that most people even bother to use the system once they get that idea in their head). I am reading that buses are inconvenient, uncool and no one likes them. And I am reading that our bus system is different than bus systems elsewhere. And that appears to be accepted as a justification for not using it. Is that pretty much what you are saying? Because it sounds like you are saying that buses work in other places - just not here because we have a crappy system. Did I misunderstand the position?

But our streetcars and light rail - yeah, buddy. That will be different.

And why is that, again? Why will streetcars and light rail work well but buses don't? If buses work in other cities but not here, why would street cars and the like work here? And if buses are useful in other towns, why in the world aren't the mass transit folks trying to revamp our metro bus system to bring it up to par? It sounds to me like they have written it off and are doing nothing but offering the same sorts of excuses that drivers, everywhere, use to avoid public transportation. Someone please explain to me if I am simply not understanding the argument that buses (while working elsewhere) are crappy in OKC so we should just shun the system, but street cars and light rail will be cool and run well.

One other related issue is sidewalks. There are none between my work or home and the nearest bus stop, which is several blocks away from both. Big mistake OKC let that happen, IMO. However, there is a steady stream of people slogging through the weeds, snow, mud, wet grass and whatever to get up and down the street, including to the bus stop. AFAIK most or all of the suburban stops do not have anywhere nearby to lock up a bike either, nor are they enclosed for some weather protection.

So how many people who can do otherwise want to slog though whatever and stand around in the mud, rain, whatever and wait for a bus? As I said, my kid in Chicago usually watches the GPS app on his phone and times his walk to get to the stop just in time to catch one.

Chicago:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rlhZCdZl2is/S7jBwnPdXeI/AAAAAAAAMvI/pb84XmiJrkI/s1600/Chicago+bus+stop+llilies+flowers+Easter.jpg

My nearest stop...outdated and inferior.

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5551/busstop.jpg

My nearest stop...outdated and inferior.

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5551/busstop.jpg

Nice neighborhood. I'd be more concerned about the Boulder-Dam-type array of power lines overhead that might make passengers hair stand on end whilst awaiting a ride...

Nice neighborhood. I'd be more concerned about the Boulder-Dam-type array of power lines overhead that might make passengers hair stand on end whilst awaiting a ride...

NW 10th just east of Council Road. AFAIK that is the farthest west stop for this area. Within a mile radius of it there is a bit a diversity that could feed into it. East and SE is sh!tty apartments, shuttered apartments and cheap houses. SW is condos and a next tier of single family dwellings. NE is a step up with fairly nice homes, maybe $100 to 175K, or more for the ones on acreages. NW is nicer homes, many on acreages, say maybe $150k to 350K. No one has sidewalks to get from home to the bus stop and much of the walking is along commercial property frontage.

NW 10th just east of Council Road. AFAIK that is the farthest west stop for this area. Within a mile radius of it there is a bit a diversity that could feed into it. East and SE is sh!tty apartments, shuttered apartments and cheap houses. SW is condos and a next tier of single family dwellings. NE is a step up with fairly nice homes, maybe $100 to 175K, or more for the ones on acreages. NW is nicer homes, many on acreages, say maybe $150k to 350K. No one has sidewalks to get from home to the bus stop and much of the walking is along commercial property frontage.

Oh, I lived just up near 16th and Rockwell for over twenty years so am very familiar with that area. It was dodgy twenty years ago but has gotten awful in the past ten. Quite blighted and that's a shame because there used to be some lovely areas nearby. Would you expect that the streetcars would ever come out that far or are buses the only thing in that area's future? Because street cars need sidewalks and decent stops, too.

Yes, 10th street to Melrose, Council to Rockwell is dodgy. North of 10th from the lake to Council isn't. North of tenth, Council to Rockwell is a good neighborhood too for the most part.


I can't speak for the whole system, I haven't looked at it nor taken an OKC bus since I was 10 when I rode it to the downtown Y fairly regularly, but stops I have noticed look just like that one. Little access, no shelter, uneven and usually unpaved ground coming, going and waiting. It isn't that way in other places that seem to work where walking and masstrans are the norm.

The last time I looked at a schedule for the one in this neighborhood there was nothing that would fit my needs either.

And why is that, again? Why will streetcars and light rail work well but buses don't? If buses work in other cities but not here, why would street cars and the like work here? And if buses are useful in other towns, why in the world aren't the mass transit folks trying to revamp our metro bus system to bring it up to par? It sounds to me like they have written it off and are doing nothing but offering the same sorts of excuses that drivers, everywhere, use to avoid public transportation. Someone please explain to me if I am simply not understanding the argument that buses (while working elsewhere) are crappy in OKC so we should just shun the system, but street cars and light rail will be cool and run well.

PQ, I don't think anyone is proposing that the bus system be shunned or abandoned. If there are things that could be improved it should certainly be pointed out though. A viable bus system is very important to mass transit in OKC in conjunction with other systems being planned or hoped for. When our bus system was planned it was never subjected to the same scrutiny as the street car system. It developed (if that is the word for it) over many years with many different plans for the most effecient or cost effective operation. Obviously it is not a perfect system and attention for improvements is merited.

But he lost me with "We still brag about our highways." When did we ever start doing that unless it was to venture out of state and discover highways worth bragging about?

Bunty, Bunty...

Lake Hefner Parkway
Broadway Extension
I-35 from SW. 15th to Moore
And soon... The new Crosstown Expressway

What is it going to take to give credit where credit is due? My goodness gracious.

My nearest stop...outdated and inferior.

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5551/busstop.jpg

I've seen those in Houston on 43rd and Bingle.

I'm just sorry that the public transit advocates aren't using it all that much, now. I am always happy to see riders on our buses, and not just the ones who are too poor to afford a car. IMO, the best advocate for public trans would be the ones out using what we already have and taking their friends along - and not just on a lark but for real. Move near a line, take it to work consistently. We have bus lines - use them.
I understand what you are saying PennyQuilts. Someone had posted an experience they encountered with the Mayor a few years ago. He was on some sort of promo photo-op type of thing with a City bus (trying to encourage ridership). The bus broke down and the Mayor was whisked away in an SUV or something to that effect. If City leaders (Mayor, Council, City Manager on down the line) want a fundamental change in the citizens, leading by example might go along way.

Think along the lines of Chesapeake. They want people to make the switch to CNG, so they are leading by example and are making/have made the switch to their company cars.

Jumping into this conversation late but I just wanted to say here here! I have been taking the bus to work now every day and I live at 50th & Lincoln and am working downtown. I can honestly say, I am very close to selling my car and going car-free. For all the flaws our transit system has ( and I could list many), it does work and it works pretty well.

In the times I used the system to/from Norman and inside OKC, I've had no complaints other than no availability in the evening hours. If you went car-free, what do you do about after 6? Cab and friends?

PQ, I don't think anyone is proposing that the bus system be shunned or abandoned. If there are things that could be improved it should certainly be pointed out though. A viable bus system is very important to mass transit in OKC in conjunction with other systems being planned or hoped for. When our bus system was planned it was never subjected to the same scrutiny as the street car system. It developed (if that is the word for it) over many years with many different plans for the most effecient or cost effective operation. Obviously it is not a perfect system and attention for improvements is merited.

Glad to read that but my questions include why isn't this a popular cause; whether the poor bus system justifies not using it when they can; and why we could expect a different system would be run better? And the elephant in the room is wondering if the new systems are no better run, would the advocates avoid them, as well? Because if advocates of public trans are no more willing to endure the inconvenience than that, how could we possible expect someone who would rather take his car, anyway, to be convinced there are benefits? At this point, history suggests a new system would be just as ignored. And history would also suggest that OKC doesn't know how to run a public trans system that attracts riders. And history suggests that if we end up with a cruddy system, even the advocates will shun it. Other cities can do it but that isn't our history - it is theirs.

Jumping into this conversation late but I just wanted to say here here! I have been taking the bus to work now every day and I live at 50th & Lincoln and am working downtown. I can honestly say, I am very close to selling my car and going car-free. For all the flaws our transit system has ( and I could list many), it does work and it works pretty well. For me, it just took learning the routes and the schedules. I am even getting good at timing transfers so I can still hit my favorite restaurants or coffee shops. Again, not perfect, but worth a try for those who want to see it improved.

For what it's worth, I am going to start blogging about ideas I have about our system as they come to me so I welcome yours and hopefully we can kick off a meaningful discussion that can lead to changes.

I think that is terrific. See, this is what struck me. Seems to me the bus system isn't nearly as crappy as so many paint it to be. I used to could go from far west OKC to downtown, the classen area, OCU, up north (but I am not sure how far because I didn't use it to got to far, then). The buses, frankly, weren't all that bad. They were darn near empty and certainly as clean as anything else at the time. When I lived near Western they ran regularly in that area. I don't recall any crime reports in the news of bad behavior on buses. I am perplexed that people don't use them and don't advocate for using them.

In the times I used the system to/from Norman and inside OKC, I've had no complaints other than no availability in the evening hours. If you went car-free, what do you do about after 6? Cab and friends?

Like I said, it if doesn't have routes that work, that isn't an option. I was only discussing those times when it is an option. I get the feeling that many people who are in favor of mass trans have completely written off the bus system to the point where it isn't even on their radar as an option.

I don't know that the "advocates" are not riding the buses. I just know my experience with them hasn't been negative. It has certainly been a net positive.

As has mine. They are never going to be as convenient as a personal car (so long as parking is available) but there are many, many benefits that go with mass trans whether it is a bus, a street car or light rail. Reading the paper or a book is a big one. My kids live in NYC and they've adopted what you are planning in that they rent a car for road trips. They take a cab to bring home groceries (or walk for smaller trips). They tend to take cabs more than I would expect, given the mass transit system but the walking between stops is good for them and they take the bus for crosstown, depending on where they need to be and how fast they need to get there.

It is wise to break out into a dead run when you hear anyone use the hopeless and meaningless phase--INFERIORITY COMPLEX. At best--it is a relic of the 50's...

Glad to read that but my questions include why isn't this a popular cause; whether the poor bus system justifies not using it when they can; and why we could expect a different system would be run better? And the elephant in the room is wondering if the new systems are no better run, would the advocates avoid them, as well? Because if advocates of public trans are no more willing to endure the inconvenience than that, how could we possible expect someone who would rather take his car, anyway, to be convinced there are benefits? At this point, history suggests a new system would be just as ignored. And history would also suggest that OKC doesn't know how to run a public trans system that attracts riders. And history suggests that if we end up with a cruddy system, even the advocates will shun it. Other cities can do it but that isn't our history - it is theirs.

PQ, there are many things that were done poorly in our history (urban renewal anyone?). I'm thinking that is was good thing that we didn't say because all of those bad things happened there was no way our city could do better and just forget about it.

PQ, there are many things that were done poorly in our history (urban renewal anyone?). I'm thinking that is was good thing that we didn't say because all of those bad things happened there was no way our city could do better and just forget about it.

Yes, but we could do something about our bus service, now, if it were a priority. The ones who want something more interesting and cool don't seem to show much interest in improving what we have. We are choosing to perpetuate a history of having a poorly run system even as some clamor for a system that will no doubt be just as useless in the outskirts of the city. If it were really about public trans that was useful, as opposed to cool, they'd beef up and use the one we have in place. Seems to me. What it looks like to me is that the bus system is being ignored because it is perceived to be for filthy, poor people. Money and energy is not being poured into that system because, frankly, the ones who are interested aren't worried about them. Most of the ones pushing for a streetcar system aren't about to use the bus system if what I see on this board is any indication. But a new system that won't help poor folks but WILL be attractive to some (hopefully), has lots of advocates. Where I am coming from is that public transportation that is publically funded should be for everyone. The dirty bus system is written off while attention is given to a new, shiny, expensive system that will only be useful in certain trendy areas or to serve certain trendy areas. We saw a photo, above, that showed how crappy the bus system is in parts of the city. Adding in streetcars won't help them and for some reason, this doesn't seem to bother anyone. Smells of the spoils of elitism and power, to me. But what else is new?

Yes, but we could do something about our bus service, now, if it were a priority. The ones who want something more interesting and cool don't seem to show much interest in improving what we have. We are choosing to perpetuate a history of having a poorly run system even as some clamor for a system that will no doubt be just as useless in the outskirts of the city. If it were really about public trans that was useful, as opposed to cool, they'd beef up and use the one we have in place. Seems to me. What it looks like to me is that the bus system is being ignored because it is perceived to be for filthy, poor people. Money and energy is not being poured into that system because, frankly, the ones who are interested aren't worried about them. Most of the ones pushing for a streetcar system aren't about to use the bus system if what I see on this board is any indication. But a new system that won't help poor folks but WILL be attractive to some (hopefully), has lots of advocates. Where I am coming from is that public transportation that is publically funded should be for everyone. The dirty bus system is written off while attention is given to a new, shiny, expensive system that will only be useful in certain trendy areas or to serve certain trendy areas. We saw a photo, above, that showed how crappy the bus system is in parts of the city. Adding in streetcars won't help them and for some reason, this doesn't seem to bother anyone. Smells of the spoils of elitism and power, to me. But what else is new?

PQ, of course improvements could be made to the bus system. That's what posters here are suggesting. But to think that it should happen at the expense of the "elite" streetcar system is not reasonable. We should be able to have both and eventually a light rail system that would all be compatible. It really doesn't appear on the surface at least that improving the bus system should require huge amounts of money, it just needs a little better planning in some aspects.

This is a quote from Urban Pioneer (Jeff) about the streetcar system. A few of these ideas could be incorporated into the bus system.

"When I said World Class, I meant it. I am sure that the Mayor meant it too. For clarity as to what I meant by it, I meant and said often that World Class means for me that we will take everything that has been learned by the three other cities that have put these system in the US, and build upon their experiences.

I proposed, and continue to propose the most technologically advanced and fully intuitive American system design ever constructed. Lets take the experiences of other cities, investigate new technologies that have come about since those systems were installed, mesh all of that with an intuitive design for the ultimate pleasurable experience for a first time or regular user of the system.

Here's just 10 examples:

1. Complete traffic signal prioritization for the streetcar
2. Telephone GPS applications for identifying car locations
3. LED (Light Emitting Diode) color coding of approaching cars
4. Intuitive and coordinated streetcar system signage, stops, and branding
5. Vandal resistant, real-time flat television panel system maps at stops
6. Wireless power capability (Electromagnetic, Lithium Ion Battery, CNG) exploration
7. Electronic payment methods
8. Monthly or Yearly Transit Cards for Prioritized Regular Users
9. OKC Ambassadors onboard to help visitors
10. Minimal sharp turns to maintain, speed, efficiency, and comfort."

I just don't think penny understands transit issues and I don't care to have a transit discussion in a thread about an inferiority complex with someone who has an inferiority complex, or at best, is more interested in rationalizing failure than in embracing ways to eliminate failures and continue the incredible progress OKC has been making civically. We have a local brand of civic improvements and that usually involves, for the people who are actually a part of the process, embracing innovative solutions. What penny says about streetcar won't change anything, just because one person who insists on being in the dark doesn't understand streetcar, doesn't mean that's a consensus for depriving OKC of this urban amenity that voters resoundingly supported already. End of story.

I think that, essentially, writing off the bus system as indicative of a failed system that is reflection of OKC's inadequate policies is a very good example of Oklahoma's inferiority complex. It is as if its past (and present) is inferior and embarassing and some want to wipe the slate clean.

The personal insults by Spartan (who left town, BTW for bigger and better things), notwithstanding, I speak as someone with legitimate concerns. I fail to see where my opinion and observations on the subject are either uninformed or illustrative of a lack of understanding of public transportation or civic issues. Having lived many years using the metro system in Washington, DC, and currently making regular trips to NYC and using their public transportation, I am quite familiar with public transportation, probably more so than the majority of Oklahoma City residents. Spartan's basic premise is that because I believe we should use, improve and encourage use of our current system, that I am uninformed or stupid. I am merely pointing out that our bus system should be utilized by the ones who are pro public transit to the extent it is reasonably convenient. I also point out that it would be in the best interests of our city (Spartan's former city), to encourage people to use public transportation even if it is just the dirty old buses used by the poor. Spartan clearly fancies himself an academic and enlightened individual and if that is so, I can't imagine why he would find fault with what I am saying.