OKC mass transit announcement!!

[Urban Pioneer]

Jeff, what is the estimate of cost for just the first leg of the streetcar, do you know?

I am sorry if my replies aren't quicker. I-phone is great for reading things but not so much on typing responses on active.

Basically, you looking at 28 million per mile at 2009 pricing (including service building). From Deep Deuce to Union Station up to St. Anthony's is about 3.4 miles or around 100 million.

I think the State should chip in to extend the connection to the Capitol and connect all of their buildings together. The law community would greatly benefit from commuting from downtown to the capitol without dealing with parking.

[Urban Pioneer]

And to add another question to that...

I don't know if there has been planning that has gone this far but my question goes like this. Is there going to be just one set of rails? Or overlapping sets running between each other where every once in a while there will be strips in the streets where car sets running opposing directions will pass each other? My only reasoning for this is because as short as the overall route is--well--it's still long. One set of cars going back and forth all day would be more useless than our current rubber tired trolley system...which like you said, sucks, lol.

Also, I'm behind your plan & I'd like to donate because unlike a lot of the naysayers, I'm forward thinking and wish the best for this city! But, like those naysayers a smidge of me asks 'what if it doesn't go through?'. So my question is, if I donate...and it fails...do I get my money back? Or does it go into some other project??

Thanks for any answers Jeff.

Sure. We (City) is going into the Alternatives Analysis phase. This phase examines the Fixed Guideway Study proposal of the streetcar in detail and essentially determines exactly where the stops are going to be and where and how much double tracking is needed. The Portland streetcar normally operates on a 7 minute rotation. I think that waiting 7 minutes "if they just missed it is much better than the erratic "20 minute bus trolley" service.

[Superhyper]

Fully agreed Shane, i'll be graduating from OU in the next year and a half and frankly i'd like to live in a real "Big League City". OKC has shown that it has the vision for long-term planning, but if we miss this opportunity we could really end up regretting it. I don't really want to have to pay $4+ a gallon to get around again, once was more than enough. I love the OKC metro, but frankly I will not live in a city that doesn't give me any options other than "drive".

There is a major framing error that is going on in the minds of many posters here. From my perspective, reasons for installing such a streetcar system may include traffic, high population density, and other things that OKC doesn't have much of- reasons that dissenters are using to show that we don't need streetcar.

However, there is also the fact that the act of building the streetcar is an economic incentive for future development. We can use the streetcar to stimulate the types of urban development that require streetcars - dense, walkable development that would be congested without public transit.

It is an economic strategy to have this form of transit- not merely a way to relieve traffic. It doesn't matter what percentage of residents will use it. The fact is, future success and growth will require it. I really want to live in this city when I graduate from college, but I really want to live in a city where I can have streetcars and light rail systems and a walkable neighborhood, and I represent many people in my generation. It's important in many ways other than moving people around.

[Urban Pioneer]

And to add another question to that...

I don't know if there has been planning that has gone this far but my question goes like this. Is there going to be just one set of rails? Or overlapping sets running between each other where every once in a while there will be strips in the streets where car sets running opposing directions will pass each other? My only reasoning for this is because as short as the overall route is--well--it's still long. One set of cars going back and forth all day would be more useless than our current rubber tired trolley system...which like you said, sucks, lol.

Also, I'm behind your plan & I'd like to donate because unlike a lot of the naysayers, I'm forward thinking and wish the best for this city! But, like those naysayers a smidge of me asks 'what if it doesn't go through?'. So my question is, if I donate...and it fails...do I get my money back? Or does it go into some other project??

Thanks for any answers Jeff.

I missed the donate question. It is a campaign. You would be contributing "donating" to an object instead of a person. The funds will go to pay for a full-fledged marketing campaign to get the ballot initiative passed. If there is money leftover after the ballot issue vote and the campaign is discontinued, by law the funds would have to be donated to charity.

I would definitely think of this as you would an individual. If you believe in them and you want to give them a boost so they'll win, you donate.

[BoulderSooner]

There is a major framing error that is going on in the minds of many posters here. From my perspective, reasons for installing such a streetcar system may include traffic, high population density, and other things that OKC doesn't have much of- reasons that dissenters are using to show that we don't need streetcar.

However, there is also the fact that the act of building the streetcar is an economic incentive for future development. We can use the streetcar to stimulate the types of urban development that require streetcars - dense, walkable development that would be congested without public transit.

It is an economic strategy to have this form of transit- not merely a way to relieve traffic. It doesn't matter what percentage of residents will use it. The fact is, future success and growth will require it. I really want to live in this city when I graduate from college, but I really want to live in a city where I can have streetcars and light rail systems and a walkable neighborhood, and I represent many people in my generation. It's important in many ways other than moving people around.

best post of the why do this by far .. i am still not sure that this is the best use of money ... but it is a great argument

[BoulderSooner]

I don't think that a dependable bus-only system exists...at least I've never seen one. At least rail systems are most likely on-time.

it does see VAIL Colorado .. i know that our current trolley system is broken .. i think it is fixable ... if we had better stops a fixed down down circle route gps real time arrival and dept info at every stop and if the system was free it would be used and would be a great upgrade for downtown transit.

[Urban Pioneer]

And to add another question to that...

I don't know if there has been planning that has gone this far but my question goes like this. Is there going to be just one set of rails? Or overlapping sets running between each other where every once in a while there will be strips in the streets where car sets running opposing directions will pass each other? My only reasoning for this is because as short as the overall route is--well--it's still long. One set of cars going back and forth all day would be more useless than our current rubber tired trolley system...which like you said, sucks, lol.

Also, I'm behind your plan & I'd like to donate because unlike a lot of the naysayers, I'm forward thinking and wish the best for this city! But, like those naysayers a smidge of me asks 'what if it doesn't go through?'. So my question is, if I donate...and it fails...do I get my money back? Or does it go into some other project??

Thanks for any answers Jeff.

I missed this question for me earlier.

Its like any other political campaign. If you believe in the person, you donate. The money is spent mostly on marketing. If we lose, whatever is left over would have to go to charity or be spent on an extension of the campaign if something else transit related were coming up. However, the polls look good and strong messaging is key to keep it that way.

[Pete]

Regarding reliable bus service, just about the only name on the NBA cities without light rail is Milwaukee and this debate has been raging there for decades.

However, that city is very different than OKC. The bus system has been well-established for decades and Milwaukee never had mass exodus from their central core for lots of reasons that I've detailed in other posts. Therefore, there has been a continuity of service and culture there that is quite different than any other bigger city.

Simply put, their ridership is very strong and always has been, so they are having a hard time justifying a rail system.

But the simple truth is that just about anywhere else, people are much, much more likely to ride a rail/streetcar system than a bus. Buses are used generally by necessity, and very few people in OKC fall into this category. Rail is much more attractive to people that don't HAVE to use it, but merely CHOOSE to. We could write a novel as to the reasons why, but that's fundamentally the way all systems in the U.S. work.

[jstanthrnme]

This is a great thing, and I fully support it.

Although, I can see how people will look at the limited area the streetcar will cover, and vote it down because they won't be able to see how it benefits them. The new bus proposals will be sorely overlooked, and that, I think will be major blow to the efforts to get this thing done too.

I feel like this initial phase should be marketed to the citizens of OKC as a benefit to tourists who visit here, which could tie back into the new convention center in Maps 3. Thats how I feel its gonna pass on that Tuesday that we vote.

[OKCisOK4me]

This is the way I look at this whole situation. Agree with me if you will.

This city used to have street cars, we know. Also, the interurban, which ran all main compass points. All of it was popular and all population centers rose in accordance because of them. Then the automobile. Tracks are pulled or paved over and life spreads and stays in these areas yet builds elsewhere because our city is a late bloomer compared to other cities and therefore the automobile created the vastness of our city.

How do we get people back to the core? By starting all over again. Start with the center and work the modes of transportation outward. Our gas goes up and people are going to be looking for the shortest route possible. If we want our downtown to be vibrant then this starter line needs to be built. Obviously the city has a long way to go to offer what is needed for downtown living. But it'll be a lot easier to get there if we start now and not 40 years from now.

Again, agree, or disagree.

[jstanthrnme]

I agree that you have to start building the bottom before you can build the top, but I don't see a 4 mile long streetcar line doing a lot to encourage the residents of the other 600 square miles of land here in OKC to pack up and move. Right now, we shouldn't look at it as a direct benefit to us the citizens, but to the tourists who might visit, and bring their wallets here.

[Pete]

Actually, I think such a system will go a long way to providing the one thing OKC has been lacking: a true urban lifestyle.

Living in the central part of town won't be for everyone but as of right now, the people interested in that sort of thing have very few options. We need things like this to jump-start the type of development that will provide this lifestyle, otherwise we'll be just another soulless sprawl town on the plains.

We have a lot of the bigger pieces in place and this would provide the final catalyst IMO.

[shane453]

I agree that you have to start building the bottom before you can build the top, but I don't see a 4 mile long streetcar line doing a lot to encourage the residents of the other 600 square miles of land here in OKC to pack up and move. Right now, we shouldn't look at it as a direct benefit to us the citizens, but to the tourists who might visit, and bring their wallets here.

The starter line proposed by MTP OKC would likely be a direct daily benefit to at least 70-80,000 workers, 20-30,000 residents, and 4,000 students in central OKC. A few thousand tourists might use it every month to go from the Capitol to Bricktown to the Memorial. Tourism should definitely be a secondary consideration with the streetcars.

[jstanthrnme]

The starter line proposed by MTP OKC would likely be a direct daily benefit to at least 70-80,000 workers, 20-30,000 residents, and 4,000 students in central OKC. A few thousand tourists might use it every month to go from the Capitol to Bricktown to the Memorial. Tourism should definitely be a secondary consideration with the streetcars.

workers - maybe for their lunch break, or jaunt from capital to courthouse...but for a commute?

residents - I'm one of them who would probably use it. agreed here.

students - will it run extended weekend hours for OCU students spending a couple hours in bricktown? just kidding here, but really, could it?

When you market this idea to the population of the city who will vote on it, the tourism aspect shouldn't take a backseat to our own benefits, especially when it will probably be on the same ballot as a brand new convention center.

[shane453]

workers - maybe for their lunch break, or jaunt from capital to courthouse...but for a commute?

residents - I'm one of them who would probably use it. agreed here.

students - will it run extended weekend hours for OCU students spending a couple hours in bricktown? just kidding here, but really, could it?

When you market this idea to the population of the city who will vote on it, the tourism aspect shouldn't take a backseat to our own benefits, especially when it will probably be on the same ballot as a brand new convention center.

I see your point. It should be tied into the convention center. But I think it's more important to stress the present benefits directly to citizens and future benefits in attracting new economic development and residents over tourism.

And I was referring to OU Health Science students, but OCU could potentially use it too.

[OKCisOK4me]

I agree that you have to start building the bottom before you can build the top, but I don't see a 4 mile long streetcar line doing a lot to encourage the residents of the other 600 square miles of land here in OKC to pack up and move. Right now, we shouldn't look at it as a direct benefit to us the citizens, but to the tourists who might visit, and bring their wallets here.

Okay, I know Little Rock isn't 600 square miles, but how many miles of their city do you think this affects?

http://www.cat.org/rrail/routes/maps/river_rail_5.jpg

[sgray]

Well written! And I happen to agree with you. Why live in the core if I still have to have a car to get around? The core needs to have a solid means to move about the area before linking the outlying areas inward.

Again, good post.

This is the way I look at this whole situation. Agree with me if you will.

This city used to have street cars, we know. Also, the interurban, which ran all main compass points. All of it was popular and all population centers rose in accordance because of them. Then the automobile. Tracks are pulled or paved over and life spreads and stays in these areas yet builds elsewhere because our city is a late bloomer compared to other cities and therefore the automobile created the vastness of our city.

How do we get people back to the core? By starting all over again. Start with the center and work the modes of transportation outward. Our gas goes up and people are going to be looking for the shortest route possible. If we want our downtown to be vibrant then this starter line needs to be built. Obviously the city has a long way to go to offer what is needed for downtown living. But it'll be a lot easier to get there if we start now and not 40 years from now.

Again, agree, or disagree.

[HOT ROD]

Shane hit it on the nail. What the new Streetcar will do is create a critical mass for downtown by providing a ready transit alternative to shuttle people around downtown. This creates momentum for projects downtown, which eventually turns into a domino effect. See Portland Streetcar for what it did to their downtown and Pearl district.

I see a lot of people don't know or realize what is going on here. A streetcar is not meant to relieve metro congestion nor move people from the suburbs into downtown or work. Streetcars don't have that much capacity to do so and there would be WAY too many stops.

So, I laid this out before - but here we go again:

- Streetcar: light rail vehicles that ride in city streets with multiple stops. These are useful for building critical mass in a central area with lots of attractions, like downtown or University campus or major attraction campus. This likely is the starting step for OKC to expand on it's downtown model, to connect all of the districts - a very good economic generator the streetcar will be.

[key note: the downtown streetcar could be expanded to OCU and other inner areas, but you wouldn't want to go much further because it would take way too long to ride to downtown once you hit 2 miles, given the stops and that it is not dedicated ROW]

- Light Rail: light rail vehicles that generally travel in dedicated ROW, with less stops than Streetcar. LRT is typically used to transit people from one end of a city to downtown. LRT is not a circular and has much higher capacity than a Streetcar. OKC will see LRT once there are "community/town centers" which will serve as TOD spots throughout the city. (otherwise, the density of transit passengers isn't there since OKC is so spread out).

- Subway/Metro: light or heavy rail vehicles with complete dedicated ROW and Mass capacity. Metro systems are typically underground or overhead and carry multiple times more capacity than LRT due to the dedicated ROW and minimal stations. OKC may never see a metro system, the city is not planned for that kind of density.

- Commuter Rail: Heavy Rail vehicles with either mixed or loaned ROW with very few stations. CRT funnels passengers typically from suburbs or large event locations to a main transit hub. (See Metra Rail in Chicago). I see an immediate need for CRT in the Edmond-downtown-Norman corridor; but as mentioned - it requires funding from multiple cities/the state/the feds. But CRT can be quickly implemented and I think OKC should at least have a rush hour CRT line immediately (actually two: Edmond-63rd/Chesapeake-downtown and Norman-Crossroads-downtown).


Again, as others have said - there is a plan for a comprehensive rail network for Oklahoma City EVENTUALLY; but NOW we are only talking about the Streetcar component for downtown and some of the core inner city.

Streetcars create critical mass by tying in a local area full of attractions or employment or residents. Here in Seattle, we have a streetcar (that was known as the SLUT). It was built to create critical mass for employment locations in the south lake union area and funnel them into downtown (Westlake). At Westlake, passengers could transfer to the bus (soon LRT) tunnel and go to more remote places in the city. Passengers could also go to the CRT during rush hours to get to suburbs or Tacoma.

A good metropolitan city will have a variety of transit, and I think it is a great idea for OKC to start with the Streetcar in the central area and maybe have CRT (or bus rapid/commuter transit) from downtown to the suburbs. LRT can be implemented in the inner and outer OKC once demand shows it (ie, more people ride busses in the city). Until then, the bus network should improved to bring people in the city to downtown and other destinations.

fuzzytoad, sorry to single you out; but - It is LRT, subway, and CRT that alieviates (sp?) congestion in traffic, because IT gets people out of their cars. Streetcars are not designed for that - they simply get people around ONCE THEY GET TO THE DENSITY AREA!!!

You should really check out Portland OR, they utilize the LRT and Streetcar transit model very effective - however, I see OKC doing it more as a Commuter Rail and Streetcar model given OKC's lack of density and inner city TOD's.

[betts]

I agree that you have to start building the bottom before you can build the top, but I don't see a 4 mile long streetcar line doing a lot to encourage the residents of the other 600 square miles of land here in OKC to pack up and move. Right now, we shouldn't look at it as a direct benefit to us the citizens, but to the tourists who might visit, and bring their wallets here.

I don't think a streetcar in and of itself will encourage people to pack up and move, but it's a piece of the puzzle. The more activity, the more people out on the streets, the more businesses open downtown, the more it looks like a fun place to live, and people start thinking about moving there. I must say, though, almost everyone who has expressed any interest in moving downtown to me has mentioned needing a grocery store before anything else. But, it's almost like a Catch-22. You have to build some of the things necessary for downtown to be a vital area in which people want to live before they're needed, because some of the others (especially retail which is numbers driven) are going to wait until you've got the population density to open their businesses.

[Tier2City]

Steve Lackmeyer's MAPS 3 transit poll at OKC Central brings up the downtown rail streetcar that was approved in MAPS 1. I understand that Tom Elmore was somehow involved in this project. Yet somehow we ended up with the bus trolleys. What happened?

[warreng88]

One question for anyone that knows. If they are going to do a four mile streetcar line from BT to CBD, do you think they will do away with the parking on the street to make a better lane for the streetcars? I could see this happening because people could then park a little further away and ride it to their destination.

[BG918]

Okay, I know Little Rock isn't 600 square miles, but how many miles of their city do you think this affects?

http://www.cat.org/rrail/routes/maps/river_rail_5.jpg

I was just in Little Rock and saw their trollies. Cool system, and I like the historic look. But the problem is that their trollies run on the same lanes as cars on narrow 2 lane streets with parallel parking. When there's a traffic jam the trolley is stuck too which can make it late to its next stop. I think if OKC decides to do a streetcar it should have its own right of way either in a center median or at the side of the street for sidewalk access to the streetcar.

[BG918]

FWIW, my basic proposal for a streetcar system in downtown/inner OKC with the 'starter line' in red. Right now it has the streetcars going north and south on Broadway/E.K. Gaylord (and east-west on the new boulevard) but could be modified to have tracks going north on Broadway and south down Robinson, or west on the boulevard and east on Reno, etc. I do think it's important to link the OUHSC to downtown via Broadway/Robinson, which is then centrally located to the Ford Center, hotels, office buildings, convention center, and Bricktown.

[Urban Pioneer]

This plan is a very good plan. However, there are some technical issues that make a key part of it prohibitive (from a cost and "right-of-way" perspective). The flaw is 10th street. I consulted engineers in our project and crossing the BNSF tracks on 10th or 13th could only be done in the air. You cannot "cut" the freight tracks to get over to the Health Sciences. Plus, the erratic schedule of freight trains would directly impede a regular synchronized 7 minute service. Good ideas but would require a prohibitively expensive bridge- still not enough rooms for ramps.

You cannot go under "tunnel" because of depressed highway and private property issues. Your only option is 6th and/or 4th. 6th is a very difficult corridor. 4th has lesser conflicts.

[soonerguru]

This plan is a very good plan. However, there are some technical issues that make a key part of it prohibitive (from a cost and "right-of-way" perspective). The flaw is 10th street. I consulted engineers in our project and crossing the BNSF tracks on 10th or 13th could only be done in the air. You cannot "cut" the freight tracks to get over to the Health Sciences. Plus, the erratic schedule of freight trains would directly impede a regular synchronized 7 minute service. Good ideas but would require a prohibitively expensive bridge- still not enough rooms for ramps.

You cannot go under "tunnel" because of depressed highway and private property issues. Your only option is 6th and/or 4th. 6th is a very difficult corridor. 4th has lesser conflicts.

Could it go north from Bricktown? That would take it under the tracks, right?