Thoughts on Robinson Ave--streetcar-appropriate?

[Urban Pioneer]

Quote Originally Posted by Spartan View Post
But Jeff, I know you aren't ready to endorse a failed concept like BRT...

It seems like the failed systems were the ones that called themselves BRT, but weren't really. If BRT has dedicated lanes, boarding platforms, less frequent stops, and essentially looks and operates like light rail, it has been successful. BRT in Cleveland and LA has been pretty successful. And since you give the BRT its own lanes, it can eventually provide right of way to replace the line with rail based transportation. I think Classen and NW Ex are set up really well to receive BRT that could eventually evolve into rail.

Look, I'm not going to get into whether I like BRT or not. But Shane's perspective is right on from what I've actually personally ridden on or researched.

But bringing it up in any context for debate is not the point. The point is that it is depicted in the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study. Experts claim it should be part of the master plan. Our subcommittee has been tasked by several vocal council members to depict how the streetcar makes immediate connections to existing transit, and future proposed transit.

That is why I bring up BRT.

Beyond the immediate tasks at hand, we really don't have time to debate something else that is unfunded. So I won't.

[Spartan]

But you're including it in your planning it seems... so we don't debate BRT, but it's taken for granted that it will be there, so the streetcar needs to go there?

Sorry if these are pointed questions, I'm just kind of confused at this point I guess. Just trying to understand where this is now.

[shane453]

Well Spartan- whether it is BRT, LRT, or future streetcar, don't you agree that Classen would be a good street for future fixed route transit? So either way, it's important to consider how our streetcar will interface with Classen in the future, right? Could easily take out a lane in each direction, or part of the median, and do BRT, LRT, or dedicated lane streetcar.

As for BRT the argument is that TOD can be generated by BRT as long as it is made clear that it is a permanent route. The buses travel in lanes that are separated by striping (at a minimum) and sometimes have their own curbs or barriers to separate traffic, stations have a permanent appearance and are easy to see. I prefer rail but I think BRT could be a good precursor to rail, especially when you get past I44. Plus it's about 1/4 the price to build, and would set up infrastructure (right of way, stations) for rail in the future.

[Urban Pioneer]

But you're including it in your planning it seems... so we don't debate BRT, but it's taken for granted that it will be there, so the streetcar needs to go there?

Sorry if these are pointed questions, I'm just kind of confused at this point I guess. Just trying to understand where this is now.

I really don't understand your point. It's not part of our planning. Its part of the 2005 FGS. Who's taking what for granted? The streetcar doesn't need to go there because of BRT.

But it will be where BRT might be if a future council or Regional Transit Authority decides to install it where the FGS recommended it.

And Shane is right about dedicated lanes often starting out as BRT and then becoming rail. I just don't know why we are debating anything about BRT when the committee is simply demonstrating that it might be there sometime later. It is a courtesy to those who are concerned that we have taken future connection opportunities into consideration.

[Spartan]

Jeff, this is just what me confused (two contradicting points you've made):

It's not part of our planning. Its part of the 2005 FGS.

....that we have taken future connection opportunities into consideration.

I can't tell if you guys drew the route out, and then said, "Oh yeah, here's another bonus we didn't even think of," or if it was part of the process that was pitted against other potential lines. Of course, I understand that it is important that you link the subcommittee's work to the established process before now, and not just what you think is a good idea. I know it's easy to blow the FGS off because it's already expired in my view, but I understand there's a lot more responsibility in your position.

I agree wholeheartedly with you that Classen is a great place to tie the streetcar system into other modes of transit. I also agree that 23rd and Classen is a vital intersection. I suppose my only real disagreement is how get from downtown to 23rd/Classen. It goes without saying, either you go along Classen and go through a ton of blight, or you go through well-restored neighborhoods and then go along 23rd.

I guess Classen offers more TOD potential, but I think Robinson-to-23rd just does a better job of "going through somewhere" and connecting things that actually exist in current form, along with that presence at the important intersection, and even if you don't see Uptown 23rd as an emerging urban district like I do, surely it's a stronger candidate than Classen south of 23rd.

[okclee]

I believe if streetcar goes north on Robinson to 23rd you cut through the most walkable neighborhood in all of Okc. Heritage Hills / Mesta Park would in itself fill the streetcar on a daily basis at all times of the day and night. Going Classen to 23rd, I don't think would have the same outcome.

[Larry OKC]

This is all part of the delicate balancing act (which is difficult at best when you only have the 5 to 6 miles to play with) but do you build the routes where there is already density (work/attractions/residential) or do you build it in/through a blighted area hoping that the expected development happens? One of the stressed points about Streetcars was the economic impact/development that will naturally happen along the routes. And I know leadership wants to avoid the perception that it is just a tourist ride (but the tourists need to be taken into account as they are mostly new money coming into the economy). The easier you make it for the Convention goers/tourists to easily connect to Bricktown and other points of interest, is going to be a plus. Also critical that you connect as many of the MAPS 3 projects as you can ... Park, C.C., River, Fairgrounds, and a Senior Aquatics Center (if a DT location happens). This round of MAPS projects are symbiotic to an extent (as the success of one helps the others succeed too).

[Snowman]

I believe if streetcar goes north on Robinson to 23rd you cut through the most walkable neighborhood in all of Okc. Heritage Hills / Mesta Park would in itself fill the streetcar on a daily basis at all times of the day and night. Going Classen to 23rd, I don't think would have the same outcome.

I thing most things we have been seeing it goes up to 13th on Robinson and then has yet to be determined, Classen not only has more space to accommodated mass transit it also has much more future potential along the route than Robinson north of 13th if we are putting money into the project as i235 limits growth on the east side, granted it will take a lot of work to get it their.

[Spartan]

That is a valid point about the limited TOD potential east of Robinson, but there is a LOT of land along Broadway from 13th (well, 10th really) up to 23rd that is ripe for large-scale infill. (In the event that the transit mall couplet could just be extended all the way to 23rd.)

[Urban Pioneer]

Yes, all of you are right. Our committee needs professional ridership projections for various scenios in the Classen versus Capitol / Plaza versus Paseo scenerios.

The main thing to keep in mind is that "the set up" is there for either, which allows for great flexibility.

1a Midtown/St. Anthony's to hub area
1b Connections to Bricktown/Convention Center/Park
1c Extension

2 Federal Funded connections to Health Sciences

[Spartan]

Keep up the good work Jeff. I hope you weren't discouraged or annoyed by some of the questions I was asking, that's just what I do I guess. You and the entire MTP group (I'm not sure about the entire subcommittee) have the full support of anyone who wants to see an urban OKC..23rd/Classen or no 23rd/Classen.

[Snowman]

While originally I did not care much either way, the more I thing about it, the more I am for it going both ways on Robinson and not on Broadway. To face facts OKC is not a highly density population and a significant portion would rather not live in an urban development and even if the motivation was their it would take decades for a real shift. The plan has to accommodated cars and trucks to get in/out to really begin the transition in the first place. By promoting Broadway/Gaylord as the car route and Robinson as trolley/pedestrian route it make it safer and gives a core to build out from between the two. Some simple building restrictions like parking garages/lots must open onto Broadway or other non Robinson streets gives a clear path through the city for both the trolley and pedestrians. Also any transportation system is a network as such increases in value as it reaches more points, so connections need to be made efficiently. Having the rails split makes interconnections more complex and transfer points even less convenient for users. Having auto, trolley and pedestrian so intermixed can slow down all users and increase frustration with the system and area.

[Urban Pioneer]

Good points. One of the reasons that the N/S on on the interior subsequently attempting to create a safe pedestrian environment between the block.

It all depends on the intuitiveness of the design.

One thing that has come up lately is the possible need for such development overlays. I think that will become even more relevant as the impacts need to be "positively channeled."

[Urban Pioneer]

One other thing, the couplet design also reduces our utility relocation costs allowing for more track overall. At least that's what we think "pre-engineering."

[Spartan]

Snowman: How can the rail NOT go down Broadway? That is the absolute best urban fabric this city has.

You suggest that should be the auto-centric entrance to downtown?? Why do Robinson and Broadway have to serve two totally opposite purposes? That also makes no sense to me. You enforce the same development standards and goals on every street in downtown. Ideally.

[Snowman]

I am not calming to be an expert but that was just my thoughts.

As the core of a trolley system it should have the most ridership and branches off it, along with the most frequent traffic of trolleys, delays their will affect the entire system so I think it would need higher standards than any other place in the city. Outside of a loop being made with the use of Classen it may be the only major north/south connector in the city core. Between Broadway and Robinson seems to be some of the most likely places that we can get any high rise building in the near future that might even consider a street level retail, high rise living/office space and parking garages. I have concerns the mall concept will at best create a island of much smaller commercial/retail developments, who's scale will lead them to try more suburban designs and reduce the chances of ever developing anything more dense than bricktown.

[Spartan]

Wait, so why does the couplet work wonders in Portland, but will actually do the opposite here in OKC? Another question, if traffic disruption is a concern--then it would seem to be more of a benefit with Broadway which has virtually nowhere near the traffic that its capacity is designed to handle, and if traffic does some day become an issue on Broadway, there is much much more room in that right of way than in Robinson. So Broadway could have a dedicated streetcar lane. It will get restriped soon anyway, taking away a lane to replace the parallel parking with back-in angled parking. Which is another benefit because it will give Broadway a much expanded parking capacity, so A-Alley could become a good place to park and ride. Whereas there is ZERO parking capacity along Robinson because the right of way is so narrow.

I am not saying that detracts from Robinson, I am just using it as a supporting reason that I think the two streets compliment each other really, really well...and a couplet could work very nicely. Also, I wasn't attacking your credibility or anything like that, and I know you've never called yourself an expert. An expert is so subjective, and I don't think it's relevant because there aren't BAD decisions here. I'm really just asking questions and such, so if it seems like I'm coming across terse and direct, it's mostly just because I've been around Swedes for over a month now who are both of those things..to the max.