View Full Version : Hughes For Mayor??



catch22
01-22-2014, 09:42 AM
6268

WTF??

www.hughessynergies.com


Sounds like he has some solutions to our mass transit problems...

LakeEffect
01-22-2014, 09:55 AM
Phil! Nuttier than Elmore!

Urban Pioneer
01-22-2014, 10:28 AM
Lolz

Midtowner
01-22-2014, 07:34 PM
Elmore isn't a nut. In fact, in the grand scheme of things, I think we'll really regret not using the train station as a multimodal hub and moving I-40 a few hundred yards to the South.

CaptDave
01-22-2014, 10:41 PM
How did Mr Elmore get that reputation? I know he strongly advocated for the preservation of the Union Station complex but I don't see how that makes him a nut. I know several people who tried to stop ODOT from destroying it and none of them are nuts or unreasonable.

I think you are right Mid, people will eventually come to realize what a big mistake that was.

This other guy though.... I won't say nut, but do NOT let him corner you with his "plan(s)".

Urban Pioneer
01-23-2014, 12:41 AM
People advocating for the reuse of Union Station as a multi-modal hub have no idea what they're talking/writing about. Union Station would have required a "stub end" transfer. A completely stupid idea for regional commuter trains.

Elmore and Co's campaign was more or less propagated by pure nostalgia rather than technical functionality for the end user. Would Union Station been ok for Amtrak or High Speed Rail? Sure. Was there more room there versus Santa Fe Station? Undoubtedly.

But for the trains coming in the near future Edmond to Norman, Midwest City to Downtown- Union Station is a completely inefficient and STUPID idea.

Santa Fe Station is big enough for 65 years (or more) of rail growth. It offers a "pull through" movement that does not require back in maneuvers and track switching. Its at the same elevation all the way across and does not require declinated ramps.

As a transit advocate, the removal of Union Station's rail yard for I-40 pains my heart... But only symbolically. Santa Fe Station is geographically in a better location for commuters, pedestrians, and has the technical advantage with time efficiency.

Anybody who tells you otherwise doesn't know or probably refuses to assess the technical differences between the two.

Sorry for the rant, but I am SO tired of arguments posed over something that is physically gone by folks who refuse to appreciate the positive path that we are currently on.

CaptDave
01-23-2014, 11:14 AM
That makes perfect sense as far as the near future of transit and passenger rail U. It would not have been reasonable to expect people to traverse the desert between the CBD and Union Station when that debate was happening - and for the next few years as well. From a regional and interstate perspective though, it would have been nice to preserve that infrastructure. But water under the bridge and time to make the best possible system of the infrastructure we have.

soonerguru
01-23-2014, 08:00 PM
What a terrible location Union Station would have been for rail. I would have been cool with literally picking up the building and moving it, but it's about a mile south of the CBD. Not a good location for much of anything rail related.

The reason people call Elmore a nut is because he is a fanatic. I've observed his behavior at public meetings and it is bizarre; it's certainly not persuasive. He also pushed the envelope quite a bit on how to behave toward sitting US Congressmen (even those with whom I vehemently disagree).

CaptDave
01-23-2014, 08:14 PM
Ah - I see. I was not in the country when that fight was on, so I missed that spectacle.

Spartan
01-26-2014, 07:51 PM
Elmore isn't a nut, he just acts like one. It stinks when someone who believes and knows the right things can't act the right way.

Urban Pioneer
01-29-2014, 06:44 PM
Found out today, it is official. Hughes has registered. Joe Sarge Nelson may register tomorrow.

Midtowner
01-29-2014, 08:19 PM
What a terrible location Union Station would have been for rail. I would have been cool with literally picking up the building and moving it, but it's about a mile south of the CBD. Not a good location for much of anything rail related.

The reason people call Elmore a nut is because he is a fanatic. I've observed his behavior at public meetings and it is bizarre; it's certainly not persuasive. He also pushed the envelope quite a bit on how to behave toward sitting US Congressmen (even those with whom I vehemently disagree).

For a multimodal hub? It's about 6 blocks from the CBD, not a mile (more like half a mile) and when you figure in the rapid infill which would have occurred had that and the MAPS III projects all happened, you'd see we missed a great opportunity. There are many rights of way sitting unused right now, already acquired, which hooked right up to that building.

CaptDave
01-29-2014, 08:27 PM
For a multimodal hub? It's about 6 blocks from the CBD, not a mile (more like half a mile) and when you figure in the rapid infill which would have occurred had that and the MAPS III projects all happened, you'd see we missed a great opportunity. There are many rights of way sitting unused right now, already acquired, which hooked right up to that building.

I was just thinking Dallas Union Station is farther away from their CBD than ours. I wonder if we might have been able to expand our streetcar system and start commuter rail faster had it been preserved. But all water under the bridge and we will never know. I think SF Station will be alright but it would be hard to envision it having the capacity of Union Station. Oh well. Time to make sure we elect people that will give us the best chance to maximize the infrastructure we still have.

OKCisOK4me
01-29-2014, 08:39 PM
For a multimodal hub? It's about 6 blocks from the CBD, not a mile (more like half a mile) and when you figure in the rapid infill which would have occurred had that and the MAPS III projects all happened, you'd see we missed a great opportunity. There are many rights of way sitting unused right now, already acquired, which hooked right up to that building.

Your screenname isn't Core2Shore. Union Station would have made sense if the area around it already had the density envisioned in MAPS3. In all reality C2S is a long term project where Midtown infill and development is NOW. The Santa Fe Station works as our intermodal hub due to its proximity to the CBD in the short term. Not to mention, it's location is more strategic. Had history played out differently and Union Pacific still had a cross country route from Memphis to Tucumcari, then I could see Union Station providing an argument but that is not the case.

Sorry, that was off topic...

Go Mayor Mick!

CaptDave
01-29-2014, 08:42 PM
^ True - and Mayor Mick has been working on getting regional transit established in Central OK. None of the other three (?) candidates can truthfully make that claim AFAIK.

Tier2City
01-29-2014, 09:01 PM
I think SF Station will be alright but it would be hard to envision it having the capacity of Union Station.

The biggest limitation to the capacity of a central city train station is whether through movements can occur, i.e., trains do not need to stop and reverse direction. Through trains simply stop to briefly unload and load passengers. If all trains have to terminate and reverse, then yes, you need far more platforms. Union Station would have forced every Edmond to Norman train to pointlessly detour away from the mainline and then reverse direction after the driver changed ends. Santa Fe Station serves just as many of the existing and disused railroad rights of way - only it serves the most important one (the BNSF mainline) directly and in a location (it's the original Oklahoma Station that OKC was platted from) that was, is and will always be the very core of the city. As a central station location Union Station has no technical merit compared to Santa Fe Station.

CaptDave
01-29-2014, 09:05 PM
That makes sense especially since most through movements will be north - south. Had it been E - W Union Station may have been better. Doesn't matter too much to me, because even though I think Union was a neat facility, I am excited to see what we do to SF Station to prep us for future transportation improvements. My primary concern is that we are able to restore the wye from the viaduct into Bricktown and up to the Adventure District and MWC.

catch22
02-04-2014, 08:48 AM
That makes sense especially since most through movements will be north - south. Had it been E - W Union Station may have been better. Doesn't matter too much to me, because even though I think Union was a neat facility, I am excited to see what we do to SF Station to prep us for future transportation improvements. My primary concern is that we are able to restore the wye from the viaduct into Bricktown and up to the Adventure District and MWC.

And Tulsa.