Widgets Magazine
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 199

Thread: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

  1. #76

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Let's cross our fingers guys...this could be the jumpstart that forces mass transit to start here soon rather than "maybe in 2030".

  2. #77

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    You said it right "FORCES", which means--take/accept something that we don't need.

  3. #78

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Stimulus Watch has a listing of projects and Midwest City has requested $4,000,000 for construction of light rail- first phase of system.

    This is just a drop in the bucket of what would actually be needed to create a light rail line.

  4. #79

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Last edited by southernskye; 02-12-2009 at 12:57 PM. Reason: ooopss double post

  5. #80

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by blangtang View Post
    yep, mostly funded by the Uni, since the late 80's, with a little bit thrown in by City of Norman-sad state of affairs. Although the City of Norman funded a recent study, which gave an upgrade/blueprint on how to carry on in the future-all depending on a city funding source.

    CART(cleveland area rapid transit--"rapid" ha ha), yeah its mainly an OU based and funded service that interfaces with the OKC COTPA b.s.

    the routes in Norman are decent, but mainly geared toward OU students (since its mainly funded by OU student fees). The City of Norman piggybacks.

    the service drops off when classes are out-summer, xmas break, holidays, etc.

    the thing that chides my hide, is how CART can get me up to OKC on a Fri afternoon, but I can't get back to Norman till Monday morning on the current schedule.

    For example: i catch the last bus from Norman leaving around 5 pm up to downtown OKC for the Friday night NBA Thunder game. All is good and well, i get dumped downtown. Well i'm stuck in OKC till monday morning around 7 a.m. to catch a bus back to the OU campus in Norman.

    COTPA + Cart=Major Suck!

    I have nothing postive to say, the whole thing needs to be scrapped. COTPA is more focused on wasting money on river cruises and parking garages.

    Long live the individual automobile!
    The lack of bus service from Norman to OKC and back keeps away a lot of OU students that would go into downtown. The gripe is always "I've had a few drinks and can't drive back and a cab ride is too expensive." They really need to get a better link between Norman and downtown OKC, whether it be rail or rapid bus...

    It makes no sense the state's largest city and 3rd largest city, only 20 miles apart, are not better connected.

  6. #81

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
    The lack of bus service from Norman to OKC and back keeps away a lot of OU students that would go into downtown. The gripe is always "I've had a few drinks and can't drive back and a cab ride is too expensive." They really need to get a better link between Norman and downtown OKC, whether it be rail or rapid bus...

    It makes no sense the state's largest city and 3rd largest city, only 20 miles apart, are not better connected.

    It makes no sense to spend millions on rail or rapid transit to haul a bunch of drunk college students to OKC and back

    And it takes 15--20 minutes to drive from Norman to Moore to OKC, how much more connected can you get.

    Even if they build light rail or improve rapid bus, they still would not be used.

  7. #82

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    You said it right "FORCES", which means--take/accept something that we don't need.
    For years, politicians here have creatively "FORCED" this issue to stay shelved, regardless of what the people vote for. This may force them to give into what the people, as a whole, want. Not what certain people want (or lobby for).

    You said "take/accept something that we don't need." That is your opinion, just as my opinion is that we don't need a future full of 20-lane double-stacked highway or gas-guzzling/polluting automobiles just to move around. So, it's a matter of opinion. If a majority of the folks are of the opinion that it is needed, then it should and will happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    It makes no sense to spend millions on rail or rapid transit to haul a bunch of drunk college students to OKC and back

    And it takes 15--20 minutes to drive from Norman to Moore to OKC, how much more connected can you get.

    Even if they build light rail or improve rapid bus, they still would not be used.
    Are you aware that a clear majority of the folks here in the area have expressed a solid interest in furthering mass transit? You are certainly entitled to your opinion/vote the same as I or anyone else for that matter, but if more folks want to see mass transit, then it does make sense to fulfill that will of the people. You must understand that on this specific project in midwest city, we have 2 choices: 1) take the money; or 2) give the money to another state. Either way, we are gonna pay our portion for it. Agree or disagree with it, it doesn't matter, because this is where we are now. Take it or leave it.

    As far as your second statement, making a generalization that we are spending millions on rail or rapid transit just to "haul a bunch of drunk college students to OKC and back" is simply not fact. How would you know that the $$$ spent on the rail line would solely, or mostly for that matter, be used to haul drunk college students back and forth?

  8. #83

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by sgray View Post
    For years, politicians here have creatively "FORCED" this issue to stay shelved, regardless of what the people vote for. This may force them to give into what the people, as a whole, want. Not what certain people want (or lobby for).

    You said "take/accept something that we don't need." That is your opinion, just as my opinion is that we don't need a future full of 20-lane double-stacked highway or gas-guzzling/polluting automobiles just to move around. So, it's a matter of opinion. If a majority of the folks are of the opinion that it is needed, then it should and will happen.



    Are you aware that a clear majority of the folks here in the area have expressed a solid interest in furthering mass transit? You are certainly entitled to your opinion/vote the same as I or anyone else for that matter, but if more folks want to see mass transit, then it does make sense to fulfill that will of the people. You must understand that on this specific project in midwest city, we have 2 choices: 1) take the money; or 2) give the money to another state. Either way, we are gonna pay our portion for it. Agree or disagree with it, it doesn't matter, because this is where we are now. Take it or leave it.

    As far as your second statement, making a generalization that we are spending millions on rail or rapid transit just to "haul a bunch of drunk college students to OKC and back" is simply not fact. How would you know that the $$$ spent on the rail line would solely, or mostly for that matter, be used to haul drunk college students back and forth?
    My comment on the college kids was in reference to a post by someone on this thread about how more college kids would ride mass transit from Norman to OKC, so that they could drink without having to worry about a DUI or pay cab fare.

    The City already has a bus system, and according to a recent study, the average, daily ridership per bus was 13 (on a 40 passenger bus), I don't see that improving just because we have new buses or light rail.

  9. Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Maybe if you actually lived in Oklahoma, and specifically the metro Daniel, you would understand the issues with the commute. I'm not sure how long it has been since you picked up and moved to sunny Florida, but pretty much the commute isn't fun and has got worse. I remember when I could get from my Norman home to the airport in 20 minutes. Now? 40-50 minutes depending on traffic.

    13 people per bus? IT IS A FREAKING BUS. To most people there is absolutely no time savings in taking a bus than just driving themselves. Train? There will likely be a time savings especially during rush hour and especially while I-35 is going to be torn up for the next few-several years.

    Common sense.

  10. #85

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    My comment on the college kids was in reference to a post by someone on this thread about how more college kids would ride mass transit from Norman to OKC, so that they could drink without having to worry about a DUI or pay cab fare.
    I know, but you tied that comment to the millions being spent on the rail and there is much much more to the picture. Also, you don't think they'd have to pay bus or rail fare?

    What venture79 said about the Norman route...I take that regularly and it has really gone to hell as far as the traffic load...equally so with edmond...and it doesn't have to be full-on rush hour either. Without getting into another whole debate, the city (and state) has become quite fond of gas-powered vehicles, dysfunctional interchanges, excessive yield signs, and left-hand on/off-ramps.

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    The City already has a bus system, and according to a recent study, the average, daily ridership per bus was 13 (on a 40 passenger bus), I don't see that improving just because we have new buses or light rail.
    When was the last time you rode the bus (in OKC, of course)? In most cities, the bus 'works'. Here, it really only does (for sure) if you can leave a day early. I feel for the folks who have no other choice.

    The city doesn't have a "bus system". The city has a collection of buses and a neat, artsy-looking "thing" they call a bus terminal, put in a great location for a sandwich shop. You don't see people eager to lead Metro Transit with the "C-clamp" they've got around them financially. If they try to do more to make it efficient, more of the little funding they already have will be pulled to push it back into the red.

    Not even enough money has been allocated to make a little bus system work (some might say on purpose). I hope nobody paid for said study because anyone that lives and moves around within the city already knows the situation well.

    It doesn't take a transit scientist to understand what the deal is with OKC's bus system. I can appreciate the standpoint of watching the spending, but we need a "crowbar" that can rip the transit issue off the shelf and force the city and metro leaders to address this...now! And I think that the MWC system might just be that "crowbar".

    I also wanted to touch more on your comment about "forcing". What do you suppose has been done to us with roads and cars since they forcefully removed the rail systems we had way back when? You don't see that as forcing one method onto the people? And when gas prices skyrocket, they talk about it like they're planning something, then when the prices go down, it get's quieter and quieter.

  11. #86

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    The real issue is that there is no commuting problem in Oklahoma City, despite what you may think - and that comes from someone who has lived and commuted in the OKC area all his adult life. Go to a city like Dallas, Los Angeles, Atlanta, or other city with real congestion issues and you'll realize we here in Oklahoma City are spoiled rotten when it comes to the availability and convenience of our metro highways. No offense, folks, but if someone from those areas heard those of us in OKC complain about a 40-minute commute from WRWA to Norman, they'd laugh their heads off.

    Just because "someone else will get it" doesn't mean that its a reasonable, intelligent expenditure of funds. That's part of the idiotic, governmental, bureaucratic mentality that is the very essence of wasted taxpayer dollars.

    The economies of scale for light rail in central Oklahoma are laughable given our population densities. It is a populist, politically popular notion in our green-hysteria religious frenzy we're in right now, but in real-world, practical terms it makes absolutely no sense to connect OKC to Norman via light rail. Then again, it makes absolutely no sense to continue to subsidize the Heartland Flyer, as it loses money every time it moves, but its cool, nostalgic, and sophomoric, so who cares how much it costs, right?

    According to information at wikipedia, light rail construction projects range from $15 million per mile to as high as $179 million per mile (Seattle). That means that a 20-mile (est) run from Norman to OKC would, optimistically, run somewhere in the ballpark of $300 million. And that's on the cheap end. Amazing how quickly that $465 million disappears, eh?

    The point is we can't get worked up into a lather just because someone says "light rail." It is just as ludicrous to superimpose light rail in the OKC area as it would be to superimpose more vehicle traffic in the northeast US.

    Just because a sizeable number of folks have expressed an interest in furthering or expanding mass transit doesn't mean they immediately support a half-billion-dollar boondoggle into light rail. While I tend to agree that there is similarly little benefit in the OKC area bus service, I must offer the opinion that you could modernize, expand, and improve that existing service, and correspondingly increase ridership, for drastically less money per additional rider-mile than light rail.

    Per cost data drawn from here, CNG buses cost about $275K each, while a slo-fill CNG fueling station runs around $300K. That means that for an allocation of $10 million, you could (theoretically) install 10 CNG fueling stations and purchase something on the order of 28 CNG buses that could serve the entire city. This isn't to say a CNG-based bus alternative is the be-all, end-all; it's merely another perfectly viable option that, compared to light rail, would probably be much more effective for OKC commute issues.

    Of course it makes sense to explore mass transit alternatives. We simply cannot allow ourselves to be drawn into the notion that there is one "absolute" solution merely because the government is throwing money at it.

    -SoonerDave

  12. #87

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    SoonerDave,

    Would you mind providing the expense figures on our highway costs (complete build-out and maintenance per mile) and then also factor in the cost of the vehicles that run on it, fuel consumption, etc... These figures should also include the next 20/30-year forecast because the highways will have to be widened again and again.

    That way you are being thorough and not just biased towards one mode. Interestingly, with all the figures on rail costs in your message, there are no figures at all on interstates (and expansion) for the reader to come to an informed conclusion on the subject. In fact there are no costs at all on road-transit related expenses. And we know highways are very expensive to build and maintain, not to mention the larger land requirements as opposed to rail.

    Perhaps it is possible that with the figures sitting side-by-side, that the reader may come to the conclusion that an average-width highway with rapid transit as a load-balancing solution might offer the best cost-benefit. In addition, the headaches of "rush hour" might persuade folks to take mass transit (at least during that time frame) and further aid the load-balance concept, thereby resulting in no need for a 20-lane highway. Who knows...

  13. #88

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    It makes no sense to spend millions on rail or rapid transit to haul a bunch of drunk college students to OKC and back

    And it takes 15--20 minutes to drive from Norman to Moore to OKC, how much more connected can you get.

    Even if they build light rail or improve rapid bus, they still would not be used.
    Can you name any cities that put in light rail and now they wish to God they hadn't?

    Maybe a lot of people like you were bitterly opposed to raising taxes to support the various MAPS projects over the years. But can anyone find someone who thinks doing that was a wrong and stupid way to spend precious taxpayer money?

  14. Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunty View Post
    Can you name any cities that put in light rail and now they wish to God they hadn't?
    Maybe they wish they did it another way but when i was in Las Vegas they dropped over 600 million on that POS monorail system them have. Many of the locals think it was built wrong without much planning. If you have been there you know what I am talking about, because its so much easier to cab it because the stations are strangly placed and not close to anything.

  15. #90

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by worthy cook View Post
    Maybe they wish they did it another way but when i was in Las Vegas they dropped over 600 million on that POS monorail system them have. Many of the locals think it was built wrong without much planning. If you have been there you know what I am talking about, because its so much easier to cab it because the stations are strangly placed and not close to anything.
    The plan that Las Vegas (read: casinos) put in place is a POS. The equipment is not POS, but the layout and station locations are stupid with one exception--the convention center. Business folk pile into that thing like the world is coming to an end. Trying to use that system while on your vacation there is pointless, simply because you have to walk to egypt to get to it. Definitely bad planning, but not bad equipment, just overpriced equipment.

    I think if they'd have put it over the center of the strip, it would have been easy easy to get to (they have those street crossing things with the escalators on them that would have made good, cheap stops that were actually in the line of traffic, you know?

    They should have also been more open-minded to other bidders besides Bombardier. Similar situation in the airline industry--that's why you see so many Embraer jets now...cheaper, yet functionally the same. I think Las Vegas could have easily chopped that number in half if they were smart.

  16. #91

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by venture79 View Post
    Maybe if you actually lived in Oklahoma, and specifically the metro Daniel, you would understand the issues with the commute. I'm not sure how long it has been since you picked up and moved to sunny Florida, but pretty much the commute isn't fun and has got worse. I remember when I could get from my Norman home to the airport in 20 minutes. Now? 40-50 minutes depending on traffic.

    13 people per bus? IT IS A FREAKING BUS. To most people there is absolutely no time savings in taking a bus than just driving themselves. Train? There will likely be a time savings especially during rush hour and especially while I-35 is going to be torn up for the next few-several years.

    Common sense.
    Venture79, pardon my French, but what in the hell are talking about, I don't live in Florida, never have, never will, I have lived in the Norman the past 17 years. I can leave my house in Brookhaven and be downtown in no more than 25 minutes (during rush hour).


    If you would think about it, a bus ride would be faster:

    If you think the bus is slow, how's this for the train, if you live in the East side of Norman you have to drive to the station on Main, 10--15 minutes, park and walk to station, 5 minutes, stand in line to buy ticket, 5--10 minutes, board train and find seat, 5 minutes, stop in Moore to load/off-load passengers, 15--30 minutes, ride from Moore to OKC, 15--20 minutes, arrive at station in OKC, then you have to walk, catch a bus or cab to your final destination. With that said, a 20--30 minute car ride turned into a 1--1 1/2 hour nightmare.

  17. #92

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunty View Post
    Can you name any cities that put in light rail and now they wish to God they hadn't?

    Maybe a lot of people like you were bitterly opposed to raising taxes to support the various MAPS projects over the years. But can anyone find someone who thinks doing that was a wrong and stupid way to spend precious taxpayer money?

    Bunty, you shouldn't speak when you have no clue, I was not opposed to the MAPS projects, if I had lived in the OKC limits, I definately would have voted "YES".
    Nothing approved/ funded and completed with MAPS money was a waste like rail transit would be, we do not have the population numbers to justify the millions, if not billons, a light rail system would cost.

    Again, before you go blowing smoke, have you facts straight.

  18. #93

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    I can leave my house in Brookhaven and be downtown in no more than 25 minutes (during rush hour).
    I want to follow you through one of these "rush hour" 25-minute runs from Norman to Downtown and see how you're bypassing the gridlock. During off-peak (non rush hour) times with lower traffic loads and no stopping, going the speed limit of 70, it takes me 30 minutes to get up to norman. Could prolly do less than 30 mins during off-peak if going 90 MPH. Are you speeding? Sure enough, looked up the distance and it comes out to about half an hour at minimum 70mph (Not rush hour gridlock).


    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    If you think the bus is slow, how's this for the train, if you live in the East side of Norman you have to drive to the station on Main, 10--15 minutes, park and walk to station, 5 minutes, stand in line to buy ticket, 5--10 minutes, board train and find seat, 5 minutes, stop in Moore to load/off-load passengers, 15--30 minutes, ride from Moore to OKC, 15--20 minutes, arrive at station in OKC, then you have to walk, catch a bus or cab to your final destination. With that said, a 20--30 minute car ride turned into a 1--1 1/2 hour nightmare.
    If you studied mass transit design, you would know that each area served by rail should have, at minimum, a skeleton grid bus system with pretty decent frequency on your major arteries...park-n-rides are a nice add-on too. This system not only gets you to the rail stop quick, but also is useful for most of your in-town runs (full coverage, which is the idea). Concerning tickets, I NEVER stand in line to buy fare when I'm using other cities mass transit. For example, I have a Breezecard for Marta in Atlanta...swipe and hop on! Finally, on the stop-times...rapid transit rail systems are like 30 secs or less. Very little wait at each stop. Most of the light rail I've used is similar.

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    we do not have the population numbers to justify the millions, if not billons, a light rail system would cost.
    If our population was not an issue, then we wouldn't be in an endless loop of expanding and widening our highways, you know? Again, you need to study other areas like ours. Go look at other systems in similarly-populated areas. We have a very unique issue in that we are a very spread-out city, where walking is simply not an option for most people. And there are a lot of people that either can not afford or choose not to have a car.


    As I wrote in my previous post, the real truth lies in the huge amount of dollars we are spending on big, wide, paved highways! In addition, we keep widening, and widening, and widening. It's an addiction that is wasteful, and when you pull the numbers on what we spend on highway work alone, the rail numbers won't seem so huge anymore. Also, think about this in terms of waste. Non-commercial traffic dominates the highways. On average, how many persons are in a given automobile on the highway? Now look at how much space that automobile takes up on the road, compared to even a lightly-loaded rail car or bus. Then you look at the fuel use/burn just for that one/two person(s) to have all that car space. Now figure up the cost of the highway, on average, for every car.

    Look closely and you'll see why a well-designed transit system (coupled with an average highway size) very well could be the best cost-benefit to us as opposed to an ever-expanding mega-highway, whose big, elevated interchanges would grow with as well.

    FYI-Look at how much $$$ we are forking over just for that short section of crosstown interstate. What is it, TEN lanes now???



    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    Again, before you go blowing smoke, have you facts straight.

  19. #94

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by sgray View Post
    I want to follow you through one of these "rush hour" 25-minute runs from Norman to Downtown and see how you're bypassing the gridlock. During off-peak (non rush hour) times with lower traffic loads and no stopping, going the speed limit of 70, it takes me 30 minutes to get up to norman. Could prolly do less than 30 mins during off-peak if going 90 MPH. Are you speeding? Sure enough, looked up the distance and it comes out to about half an hour at minimum 70mph (Not rush hour gridlock).




    If you studied mass transit design, you would know that each area served by rail should have, at minimum, a skeleton grid bus system with pretty decent frequency on your major arteries...park-n-rides are a nice add-on too. This system not only gets you to the rail stop quick, but also is useful for most of your in-town runs (full coverage, which is the idea). Concerning tickets, I NEVER stand in line to buy fare when I'm using other cities mass transit. For example, I have a Breezecard for Marta in Atlanta...swipe and hop on! Finally, on the stop-times...rapid transit rail systems are like 30 secs or less. Very little wait at each stop. Most of the light rail I've used is similar.



    If our population was not an issue, then we wouldn't be in an endless loop of expanding and widening our highways, you know? Again, you need to study other areas like ours. Go look at other systems in similarly-populated areas. We have a very unique issue in that we are a very spread-out city, where walking is simply not an option for most people. And there are a lot of people that either can not afford or choose not to have a car.


    As I wrote in my previous post, the real truth lies in the huge amount of dollars we are spending on big, wide, paved highways! In addition, we keep widening, and widening, and widening. It's an addiction that is wasteful, and when you pull the numbers on what we spend on highway work alone, the rail numbers won't seem so huge anymore. Also, think about this in terms of waste. Non-commercial traffic dominates the highways. On average, how many persons are in a given automobile on the highway? Now look at how much space that automobile takes up on the road, compared to even a lightly-loaded rail car or bus. Then you look at the fuel use/burn just for that one/two person(s) to have all that car space. Now figure up the cost of the highway, on average, for every car.

    Look closely and you'll see why a well-designed transit system (coupled with an average highway size) very well could be the best cost-benefit to us as opposed to an ever-expanding mega-highway, whose big, elevated interchanges would grow with as well.

    FYI-Look at how much $$$ we are forking over just for that short section of crosstown interstate. What is it, TEN lanes now???


    Tell me when your ready to follow me and I'll give you my address, I live in the new section of Brookhaven, off of 48th, just S. of Robinson. I take 48th N. to Tecumseh, Tecumseh to I-35, and guarentee you I'll make to to downtown OKC in less than 30 minutes. (and I drive the speed limit)

    Again, as for the light rail, it will never work in this area, I hope and pray that we don't waste our money.

    Just wandering, since you are so opposed to highways/car travel, how often do you use the present bus system in either Norman or OKC.

  20. #95

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    Tell me when your ready to follow me and I'll give you my address, I live in the new section of Brookhaven, off of 48th, just S. of Robinson. I take 48th N. to Tecumseh, Tecumseh to I-35, and guarentee you I'll make to to downtown OKC in less than 30 minutes. (and I drive the speed limit)
    Don't forget, you said you were going to do this in the middle of rush hour, when the highway is at an almost standstill for a great portion of the i-35 stretch. And you said 25 minutes home-to-downtown, not to be picky or anything...just sayin.


    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    Again, as for the light rail, it will never work in this area, I hope and pray that we don't waste our money.
    How do you know it will not work? It has not been done on any scale here in recent years. The old rail back in the day was a great success. How can you be so sure, when there are places less and more populated than us, packed in tighter as a city (obviously easier to walk) and rail/bus has been a great success.

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    Just wandering, since you are so opposed to highways/car travel, how often do you use the present bus system in either Norman or OKC.
    If you read my previous posts within the last couple of days, you'd see where I commented on the insanely non-existent budgets for Metro Transit (as well as CART). I have tried to use the bus here, but they are trying to do too much with too little (and I don't fault the operations themselves for that). You can't do bus alone on a city with our huge spread and have so few buses to add to that. Do you realize that we do not even have a bus that goes to the airport??? The truth of the matter is that Metro Transit has a huge c-clamp around it financially and, IMO, that was done on purpose.

    Now, let's talk about CART in your city. The city of Norman doesn't even fund the bus system there at all! OU has had to step up and do what the city wont do. What's up with that? Understand this is a city whose own city council sent a resolution to Governor Henry asking him to save precious rail assets in Oklahoma City and stressing the important of mass transit to our future, and they won't even fund their own little city bus system???

    The writing's on the wall around here with regard to the local bus operations. You cannot do something with nothing.

  21. Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    SGRAY:

    You are right. POS was not the word of choice as the system was very nice and top notch. But the fact that it was shoved to the side and nowhere near the strip was ridiculous. You are right, if they had an elevated monorail right down the strip it would be more economical.

    And rail would work here if you don't over saturate it. Yukon, OKC, MWC (Tinker) as one line. With a spur from meridian corridor going to Will ROgers. Then Edmond, OKC, Moore, Norman.

    I frequent norman quite often, and as much as I love driving, sometimes I wouldn't mind parking and riding, even if it takes longer. Hell folks in Los Angeles were very opposed to thier system and now they can't live without it.

  22. #97

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by danielf1935 View Post
    Bunty, you shouldn't speak when you have no clue, I was not opposed to the MAPS projects, if I had lived in the OKC limits, I definately would have voted "YES".
    Nothing approved/ funded and completed with MAPS money was a waste like rail transit would be, we do not have the population numbers to justify the millions, if not billons, a light rail system would cost.

    Again, before you go blowing smoke, have you facts straight.
    There are two thought processes when developing a fixed-guideway system for any city. 1) Corridor alignment in areas with sufficient densities 2) Corridor alignment in areas with significant infill opportunities like TOD.

    What most cities do, especially in the West, where true ubiquitous densities do not exist, is a combination of the two. Corridor placement is situated along some of the higher densities and through areas of infill opportunity. Same could be done here. We have ample infill space along all the suggested corridors and enough commuting citizens for a system to have an immediate impact.

    To say we do not have the population numbers is a misconception of the long-range implications of a functioning, well designed transit system. It's the same mentality of people who are complacent with the status-quo and do just enough to appear busy. Current population is only part of the picture. This region is growing, and highway capacity is shrinking. We need to be proactive and stay ahead of that curve, by providing alternatives in transportation and lifestyle.

    It may only take you 25 minutes to get downtown, but do you really believe that will be constant. With the rate of growth in Norman and Moore, in 10 years that commute could increase substantially and your quality of life could suffer.


    There is an opportunity here to really change the perception, lifestyles, and status-quo of this city and region. Just because it is, doesn't mean it has to be. Cities around the country have citizens and officials that always say something can't be done. Cities also have leaders - men and women willing to take the risk and successfully prove them wrong.

  23. #98

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by sgray View Post
    SoonerDave,

    Would you mind providing the expense figures on our highway costs (complete build-out and maintenance per mile) and then also factor in the cost of the vehicles that run on it, fuel consumption, etc... These figures should also include the next 20/30-year forecast because the highways will have to be widened again and again.

    That way you are being thorough and not just biased towards one mode. Interestingly, with all the figures on rail costs in your message, there are no figures at all on interstates (and expansion) for the reader to come to an informed conclusion on the subject. In fact there are no costs at all on road-transit related expenses. And we know highways are very expensive to build and maintain, not to mention the larger land requirements as opposed to rail.

    Perhaps it is possible that with the figures sitting side-by-side, that the reader may come to the conclusion that an average-width highway with rapid transit as a load-balancing solution might offer the best cost-benefit. In addition, the headaches of "rush hour" might persuade folks to take mass transit (at least during that time frame) and further aid the load-balance concept, thereby resulting in no need for a 20-lane highway. Who knows...
    What biases? I will admit to a bias against government throwing money at something merely for the sake of throwing money at it. I was trying to offer the opinion that there are substantially more efficient alternatives than light rail, and tried to offer some base of data on which to support that opinion.

    In an effort to meet your request, the closest I could find to a similar piece of information for highway construction was here, wherein the approximate cost for the addition of a single lanes to an existing highway ranged from $2.4 million to $6.9 million per lane-mile. The same document indicates that new highway construction through urban areas ranges from $4.9 milion per lane-mile to $19.5 million. The worst-case figure of $19.5 million is still something on the order of 1/8 the cost of the Seattle $197 million/mile light rail fiasco, with the low-end something on the order of 1/3 the low-end of the light rail new construction range.

    Understand, too, that the original discussion centered around a $465 earmark for light rail. I was trying to add some informed analysis on the relative cost of a light rail system versus another, cheaper alternative, in the midst of this frenzy about light rail. I was trying to point out that for a fraction more than 2% of that $465 million "light rail subsidy" package, you could lay a theoretical groundwork for a mass transit alternative that would serve a much greater subset of OKC population leveraging existing infrastructure and tapping a natural resource that is abundant in Oklahoma. And I also specifically stated that I made no pretense that it was a be-all, end-all solution.

    The point is we need coherent, cogent research into alternatives for mass transit, not merely to throw money at it because a foolhardy government wants to spend its way out of a fiscal disaster largely of its own creation.

    -SoonerDave

  24. #99

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by sgray View Post
    Don't forget, you said you were going to do this in the middle of rush hour, when the highway is at an almost standstill for a great portion of the i-35 stretch. And you said 25 minutes home-to-downtown, not to be picky or anything...just sayin.

    Just say when, I'm retired, and other than my afternoon nap, I'm ready.



    How do you know it will not work? It has not been done on any scale here in recent years. The old rail back in the day was a great success. How can you be so sure, when there are places less and more populated than us, packed in tighter as a city (obviously easier to walk) and rail/bus has been a great success.

    It won't work because were to dependant on cars, and that won't change. I just don't think we need to spend millons/billons, on something that's so questionable.


    If you read my previous posts within the last couple of days, you'd see where I commented on the insanely non-existent budgets for Metro Transit (as well as CART). I have tried to use the bus here, but they are trying to do too much with too little (and I don't fault the operations themselves for that). You can't do bus alone on a city with our huge spread and have so few buses to add to that. Do you realize that we do not even have a bus that goes to the airport??? The truth of the matter is that Metro Transit has a huge c-clamp around it financially and, IMO, that was done on purpose.

    Now, let's talk about CART in your city. The city of Norman doesn't even fund the bus system there at all! OU has had to step up and do what the city wont do. What's up with that? Understand this is a city whose own city council sent a resolution to Governor Henry asking him to save precious rail assets in Oklahoma City and stressing the important of mass transit to our future, and they won't even fund their own little city bus system???

    The writing's on the wall around here with regard to the local bus operations. You cannot do something with nothing.
    The City of Norman is a great place to live, however, they are not real agressive in areas, they like the idea of bus/light rail passenger service, just at someone else's expense.

  25. #100

    Default Re: $465 million in aid to Oklahoma includes lightrail!!!

    SoonerDave,

    Using Seattle as a cost comparison is irresponsible. We all know that Seattle has a very unique topography and the engineering feats needed for that system to work are unlike anything we would encounter here (i.e. floating bridges, tunnels, etc). A better estimate of LRT cost is $15 to $60 million per mile. Oklahoma City would be toward the bottom of that range.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why Vote No - Video
    By DavidGlover in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 02-28-2008, 05:12 PM
  2. Its Almost Fair Time
    By OklaCity_75 in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 08-11-2006, 06:24 PM
  3. State tourism ads being shown in other markets
    By Patrick in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 01:45 AM
  4. Oklahoma: An Emerging Player in Space?
    By floater in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-22-2004, 09:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO