OKC Regional Transit System

[HOT ROD]

As much as I do not want it to be the case I feel like commuter rail will never pass after the failure that is the OKC streetcar. The route is garbage, the service times are garbage, and I say this as someone that lived downtown and attempted to utilize the system for three years before saying **** it. I hope the city and like minded people prove me wrong, but I do not have high hopes for commuter rail passing in the next decade.

who said the streetcar was a failure?? I'ts been a huge development success and is the first (or second) piece of a transit system for OKC; once the political will returns to expand it and build the other transit nodes (commuter bus, commuter rail, light rail, more express bus), streetcar itself will be a huge transit success. To me, the ONLY failure of the streetcar (besides the lack of N-S and E-W dual track spines) is the fact that it is not free. This IMO was self inflicted by EMBARK as they placated to the bus mafia who feel that a free streetcar downtown would somehow harm the bus system and therefore poor people. Huh? Seems like it'd be the other way around from a logic standpoint.

- ----

I proposed a downtown Oklahoma City free transit zone for both streetcar (obviously) and bus, like we used to have in Seattle: all streetcar stations, and outbound bus stops are free in downtown but pay when you get off, inbound bus is charged when you get on (unless you're downtown). Seattle did this to 1) encourage support of downtown attractions and retail, and 2) to help alleviate traffic. This would be HUGE for OKC 1) to help build transit ridership culture!!! 2) to therefore justify transit expansion 3) to help downtown attractions and bring back significant retail. The downtown OKC ride free zone should be in place until the streetcar is expanded or downtown retail truly takes back off.

[Dob Hooligan]

who said the streetcar was a failure?? I'ts been a huge development success and is the first (or second) piece of a transit system for OKC; once the political will returns to expand it and build the other transit nodes (commuter bus, commuter rail, light rail, more express bus), streetcar itself will be a huge transit success. To me, the ONLY failure of the streetcar (besides the lack of N-S and E-W dual track spines) is the fact that it is not free. This IMO was self inflicted by EMBARK as they placated to the bus mafia who feel that a free streetcar downtown would somehow harm the bus system and therefore poor people. Huh? Seems like it'd be the other way around from a logic standpoint.

- ----

I proposed a downtown Oklahoma City free transit zone for both streetcar (obviously) and bus, like we used to have in Seattle: all streetcar stations, and outbound bus stops are free in downtown but pay when you get off, inbound bus is charged when you get on (unless you're downtown). Seattle did this to 1) encourage support of downtown attractions and retail, and 2) to help alleviate traffic. This would be HUGE for OKC 1) to help build transit ridership culture!!! 2) to therefore justify transit expansion 3) to help downtown attractions and bring back significant retail. The downtown OKC ride free zone should be in place until the streetcar is expanded or downtown retail truly takes back off.

I live in Oklahoma City and I think the streetcar is a failure.

I think it is a nice and expensive toy for the Chamber of Commerce types, and I am okay with that. I don't think it will ever be cost effective to operate. But it is built and it is here.

I think we should do all we can to maximize the utility and access of it.

The only thing worse than an overpriced toy is a useless toy.

[CaptDave]

Public transit is a public service. It is not a profit center and no reasonable person thinks any public transit system is directly profitable or breaks even. I can't provide an exact number, but the vast majority are subsidized for the economic benefits that result from having a comprehensive functional transit service.

If I recall correctly, the data shows every $1 in transit investment results in an average of $5 in economic activity. Of course that is dependent on having a system and not a few disparate pieces of a system.

[PhiAlpha]

who said the streetcar was a failure?? I'ts been a huge development success and is the first (or second) piece of a transit system for OKC; once the political will returns to expand it and build the other transit nodes (commuter bus, commuter rail, light rail, more express bus), streetcar itself will be a huge transit success. To me, the ONLY failure of the streetcar (besides the lack of N-S and E-W dual track spines) is the fact that it is not free. This IMO was self inflicted by EMBARK as they placated to the bus mafia who feel that a free streetcar downtown would somehow harm the bus system and therefore poor people. Huh? Seems like it'd be the other way around from a logic standpoint.

- ----

I proposed a downtown Oklahoma City free transit zone for both streetcar (obviously) and bus, like we used to have in Seattle: all streetcar stations, and outbound bus stops are free in downtown but pay when you get off, inbound bus is charged when you get on (unless you're downtown). Seattle did this to 1) encourage support of downtown attractions and retail, and 2) to help alleviate traffic. This would be HUGE for OKC 1) to help build transit ridership culture!!! 2) to therefore justify transit expansion 3) to help downtown attractions and bring back significant retail. The downtown OKC ride free zone should be in place until the streetcar is expanded or downtown retail truly takes back off.

have you ever lived or worked downtown here and tried to use it consistently? What are you basing the comment that it’s been “a huge development success” on?

it’s slow, limited because it’s not bidirectional, and it’s generally easier to Uber, take a scooter, walk or drive than it is to use the street car. Bad advice, poor design, and cheaping out on the route have hurt it. Probably should’ve been part of its own project or built to be more expandable than include as a small part of maps 3. The street cars themselves are nice but it needs to run in both directions and hit more of downtown if people in mass are ever going to use it as more than a novelty.

[Thunderbolt]

The Streetcar loop was/is a terrible idea. It was designed to spur development along the route (which does have a purpose), not to serve as a daily form of transportation. I'd imagine it would be much more utilized if it was a straight shot down Robinson from Capitol Hill to Midtown, then perhaps spurring to Classen to the Plaza. Maybe a second line that went from Myriad Gardens > Bricktown > Convergence. Oh well...

RAPID, on the other hand, seems to be off to a strong start. Fast and can actually get you places...

[jedicurt]

forget the price. heck even when it was free, i rarely used it, because it doesn't actually do a good job at moving me anywhere. i can usually walk faster than the time it takes to move me from one area to another. the streetcar is a complete failure, because they didn't actually create it as a people mover

[LocoAko]

RAPID, on the other hand, seems to be off to a strong start. Fast and can actually get you places...

This. I live along the route and always make a point to glance at the buses as they pass by. More often than not there are multiple people riding each bus. And all for about one-fifth of what the streetcar cost. I know they serve different purposes (e.g., it is unlikely that tourists/convention center attendees will frequently ride RAPID), but there seems to be a big utility gap between it and the streetcar...

[LakeEffect]

This. I live along the route and always make a point to glance at the buses as they pass by. More often than not there are multiple people riding each bus. And all for about one-fifth of what the streetcar cost. I know they serve different purposes (e.g., it is unlikely that tourists/convention center attendees will frequently ride RAPID), but there seems to be a big utility gap between it and the streetcar...

Partly because the streetcar's track layout was planned with economic development versus ridership as a focus...

[HOT ROD]

have you ever lived or worked downtown here and tried to use it consistently? What are you basing the comment that it’s been “a huge development success” on?

it’s slow, limited because it’s not bidirectional, and it’s generally easier to Uber, take a scooter, walk or drive than it is to use the street car. Bad advice, poor design, and cheaping out on the route have hurt it. Probably should’ve been part of its own project or built to be more expandable than include as a small part of maps 3. The street cars themselves are nice but it needs to run in both directions and hit more of downtown if people in mass are ever going to use it as more than a novelty.

the initial implementation of streetcar was not intended to be a mass transit solution but instead was to be a first step in a transit network providing final mile of a larger commuter system AND the streetcar was intended to spur economic development along its route. Are you arguing that there hasn't been significant economic development along along the route since the streetcar was announced?

Should I refresh your memory of what has been developed along the route? Even since last year, let alone since the entire run of streetcar returning to OKC.

Again, it was not intended to be a transit solution - initially. It can not compare to BRT which runs through the biggest retail corridor in the state and connects to some of the largest residential tracts connecting them to the largest downtown of the state. I agree, streetcar should be expanded to be successful and/or commuter rail and true hub/spoke bus transit needs to be implemented then streetcar can truly be the final mile downtown connector solution. But to sit here and say streetcar is a failure because nobody rides it is short-sighted to the original and future intent, and may be biased to encourage a certain narrative - based on my analysis.

Streetcar is part of OKC's overall image, if nothing else it adds to the OKC experience regardless if residents use it or not (which OKC is not a transit friendly city to begin with). Do you think Tulsa or Wichita would turn down having a similar loop style streetcar in their downtowns?

[Rover]

the initial implementation of streetcar was not intended to be a mass transit solution but instead was to be a first step in a transit network providing final mile of a larger commuter system AND the streetcar was intended to spur economic development along its route. Are you arguing that there hasn't been significant economic development along along the route since the streetcar was announced?

Should I refresh your memory of what has been developed along the route? Even since last year, let alone since the entire run of streetcar returning to OKC.

Again, it was not intended to be a transit solution - initially. It can not compare to BRT which runs through the biggest retail corridor in the state and connects to some of the largest residential tracts connecting them to the largest downtown of the state. I agree, streetcar should be expanded to be successful and/or commuter rail and true hub/spoke bus transit needs to be implemented then streetcar can truly be the final mile downtown connector solution. But to sit here and say streetcar is a failure because nobody rides it is short-sighted to the original and future intent, and may be biased to encourage a certain narrative - based on my analysis.

Streetcar is part of OKC's overall image, if nothing else it adds to the OKC experience regardless if residents use it or not (which OKC is not a transit friendly city to begin with). Do you think Tulsa or Wichita would turn down having a similar loop style streetcar in their downtowns?

I am huge in favor of mass transit options. Having spent a huge amount of time in cities all over the world where there are high function systems, I am a big proponent. Unfortunately, it seems that our OKC system fails on many levels.

IF it was intended as a pretty toy to increase our image, it mostly works for that on pictures and short video snippets. It does look cool if not in context. It doesn't look cool when it is rarely seen loading and unloading people, or circulating with 2 or three people in it at any one time.

IF it was to be an economic development generator, I would challenge someone to show where it specifically induced development that wouldn't organically grow otherwise. I would have to be shown where the developers financial plans included the increased valuation based on being on or near the line and how their tenants were willing to pay more for it.

It is NOT a time saver or viable commuting option. I have tried, but cannot rely on its timeliness and have had to add additional time to any appointment just to allow for it. It is not a rational way to travel around downtown. It seems that ridership is at best stagnant and few people outside of this forum even talk about it. It is simple a non factor.

If it was to be used to induce further streetcar development, it would do so if people actually could use it the way intended and find real value in it. People want value shown and failure doesn't show value. They will not vote to throw good money after bad ideas or poor execution.

Face it, OKC tripped on their own shoelaces on this. It is probably (IMHO) the worst executed of any of the MAPS projects to date.

[BoulderSooner]

the initial implementation of streetcar was not intended to be a mass transit solution but instead was to be a first step in a transit network providing final mile of a larger commuter system AND the streetcar was intended to spur economic development along its route. Are you arguing that there hasn't been significant economic development along along the route since the streetcar was announced?

Should I refresh your memory of what has been developed along the route? Even since last year, let alone since the entire run of streetcar returning to OKC.

Again, it was not intended to be a transit solution - initially. It can not compare to BRT which runs through the biggest retail corridor in the state and connects to some of the largest residential tracts connecting them to the largest downtown of the state. I agree, streetcar should be expanded to be successful and/or commuter rail and true hub/spoke bus transit needs to be implemented then streetcar can truly be the final mile downtown connector solution. But to sit here and say streetcar is a failure because nobody rides it is short-sighted to the original and future intent, and may be biased to encourage a certain narrative - based on my analysis.

Streetcar is part of OKC's overall image, if nothing else it adds to the OKC experience regardless if residents use it or not (which OKC is not a transit friendly city to begin with). Do you think Tulsa or Wichita would turn down having a similar loop style streetcar in their downtowns?

well said and all correct ..

[HOT ROD]

Rover, I think your arguments are fair and you're likely correct that Streetcar was not purposefully indicated for most OKC development. Therefore, I'll rephrase my wording to say the Streetcar is a catalyst that likely ensured projects were built. Heartland building, Phillips Murrah, Citizen, numerous restaurant and shoppes all cite Streetcar as a feature/amenity of their location. I'd argue that none of them would have been built without the streetcar, notice areas NOT on the streetcar route for comparison (dev along streetcar is much more built-up/urban). ...

Again, I can't provide exact examples that cite streetcar for their existence but one can conclude the streetcar has been a development success by comparing projects built along the route vs areas that aren't on the streetcar. Boardwalk at Bricktown cites the streetcar (as an amenity); however, is streetcar a necessity for Boardwalk to be built? Likely not. ...

Portland's streetcar started out similar to OKC's yet was expanded and integrated with MAX Light Rail once it was built. MAX doesn't go into the neighborhoods that Streetcar does, I think this is the benefit of Streetcar that so far haven't been proven in OKC - it allows final mile, tight fit into urban neighborhoods that light rail and larger metro trains can't. You can certainly conclude that the Pearl District would NOT be the relative success it is without the streetcar that's for sure, it was an industrial wasteland prior. Ditto that for waterfront.

[PhiAlpha]

the initial implementation of streetcar was not intended to be a mass transit solution but instead was to be a first step in a transit network providing final mile of a larger commuter system AND the streetcar was intended to spur economic development along its route. Are you arguing that there hasn't been significant economic development along along the route since the streetcar was announced?

Should I refresh your memory of what has been developed along the route? Even since last year, let alone since the entire run of streetcar returning to OKC.

Again, it was not intended to be a transit solution - initially. It can not compare to BRT which runs through the biggest retail corridor in the state and connects to some of the largest residential tracts connecting them to the largest downtown of the state. I agree, streetcar should be expanded to be successful and/or commuter rail and true hub/spoke bus transit needs to be implemented then streetcar can truly be the final mile downtown connector solution. But to sit here and say streetcar is a failure because nobody rides it is short-sighted to the original and future intent, and may be biased to encourage a certain narrative - based on my analysis.

Streetcar is part of OKC's overall image, if nothing else it adds to the OKC experience regardless if residents use it or not (which OKC is not a transit friendly city to begin with). Do you think Tulsa or Wichita would turn down having a similar loop style streetcar in their downtowns?

What on earth are you talking about? Yes it was supposed to be a mass transit solution FOR DOWNTOWN. It was supposed to be the downtown circulator portion of a larger mass transit network. It was not built to spur development...that was promoted as a side benefit. I'm arguing that it sucks at serving the purpose it was built for...and the ridership numbers show that...few people use it for anything other than a novelty because of the way it was set up.

You don't need to refresh my memory on anything. There is nothing that was built on the route that wouldn't have been built anyway. Developers might have promoted that as a perk of why they chose a location for a development over another...but I would bet my life savings that no one looked at the street car line and said..."well if they didn't put this here...we would be out on building this in OKC or redeveloping this building...but the street car!!! That changed everything for us!"

Yes the street car can be compared to the BRT...which is serving the purpose it was built for and doing it well...the street car was built to be a downtown circulator and it isn't good at it. How is saying that no one rides it and that its often faster to walk to your destination not an indication of failure? It was supposed to help people move around downtown AFTER THEY GET DOWNTOWN...commuter rail isn't going to fundamentally change how many people head downtown and at some point need to walk somewhere...there are plenty of people parking in lots all over downtown or ubering now that aren't using the streetcar to get to their destination. Hell it doesn't even go through Deep Deuce which is the most concentrated residential area downtown.

Sure it looks great on promotional material that we have a street car system but it's useless outside of that.

Yes... Tulsa would turn down a Streetcar system that was built like this one...they would look down the turnpike and say..."why would we spend $200 Million to build a poorly designed streetcar system that we have proof that no one will use?"

Your analysis sounds like that of someone who lives 2000 miles away, hasn't spent much time in downtown OKC since the streetcar was completed and hasn't spent time trying to use it on a day to day basis.

[PhiAlpha]

well said and all correct ..

Just completely disagree with everything except that it looks nice for OKC's image.

[PhiAlpha]

Rover, I think your arguments are fair and you're likely correct that Streetcar was not purposefully indicated for most OKC development. Therefore, I'll rephrase my wording to say the Streetcar is a catalyst that likely ensured projects were built. Heartland building, Phillips Murrah, Citizen, numerous restaurant and shoppes all cite Streetcar as a feature/amenity of their location. I'd argue that none of them would have been built without the streetcar, notice areas NOT on the streetcar route for comparison (dev along streetcar is much more built-up/urban). ...

Again, I can't provide exact examples that cite streetcar for their existence but one can conclude the streetcar has been a development success by comparing projects built along the route vs areas that aren't on the streetcar. Boardwalk at Bricktown cites the streetcar (as an amenity); however, is streetcar a necessity for Boardwalk to be built? Likely not. ...

Portland's streetcar started out similar to OKC's yet was expanded and integrated with MAX Light Rail once it was built. MAX doesn't go into the neighborhoods that Streetcar does, I think this is the benefit of Streetcar that so far haven't been proven in OKC - it allows final mile, tight fit into urban neighborhoods that light rail and larger metro trains can't. You can certainly conclude that the Pearl District would NOT be the relative success it is without the streetcar that's for sure, it was an industrial wasteland prior. Ditto that for waterfront.

These were all built on primary commercial corridors in OKC that are heavily trafficked and were already heavily growing before the streetcar was completed or even approved. There is absolutely no way the streetcar was the deciding factor or even ensured that these developments were built.

I thought the streetcar was a great idea when it was proposed as part of MAPS III but as soon as the layout and single track design was chosen...I was extremely skeptical that it would ever be used as intended and so far it has played out that way and will continue to unless something is done to greatly improve the efficiency of the system.

[Mississippi Blues]

I am huge in favor of mass transit options. Having spent a huge amount of time in cities all over the world where there are high function systems, I am a big proponent. Unfortunately, it seems that our OKC system fails on many levels.

IF it was intended as a pretty toy to increase our image, it mostly works for that on pictures and short video snippets. It does look cool if not in context. It doesn't look cool when it is rarely seen loading and unloading people, or circulating with 2 or three people in it at any one time.

IF it was to be an economic development generator, I would challenge someone to show where it specifically induced development that wouldn't organically grow otherwise. I would have to be shown where the developers financial plans included the increased valuation based on being on or near the line and how their tenants were willing to pay more for it.

It is NOT a time saver or viable commuting option. I have tried, but cannot rely on its timeliness and have had to add additional time to any appointment just to allow for it. It is not a rational way to travel around downtown. It seems that ridership is at best stagnant and few people outside of this forum even talk about it. It is simple a non factor.

If it was to be used to induce further streetcar development, it would do so if people actually could use it the way intended and find real value in it. People want value shown and failure doesn't show value. They will not vote to throw good money after bad ideas or poor execution.

Face it, OKC tripped on their own shoelaces on this. It is probably (IMHO) the worst executed of any of the MAPS projects to date.

Well said, all of it.

[Teo9969]

A more interesting study would be the ratio of downtown residential/workforce/recreational density to ridership compared to other cities.

At the pace we're growing/developing, downtown is probably 3 decades away from being a 24/7 vibrant urban community. There are obviously a lot of cool things downtown, and a crowd can be brought in by any one of those things, and when you stack 5 or 6 things on top of each other, downtown looks like an incredible place to be. But for at least 70% of the time, downtown is still pretty vacant. Hard to have ridership without people especially when you're serving a sprawled urban landscape.

Public transit in OKC needs at least 100k and probably closer to 200k additional residents within the Grand Loop to have any sort of quality ridership. Downtown needs at least another 30k people and probably closer to 50k.

[Teo9969]

15 minute lead times for any public transit system is a joke. Even Rapid gets 12 minute leads during weekdays.

The lead times for the street car ought to be 8-10 minutes during peak times. That creates a more reliable system. However, even if that brought back 150% of potential regular riders, it would still leave largely vacant vehicles, because we'd need 300+ hourly riders for it to seem successful. There are nowhere near 300+ people/hour that would have a legitimate need to take any sort of public transportation downtown on a regular basis.

[Sonicthunder]

What I think the rta should do
Northeast, northwest, southeast, southwest and downtown OKC should all have transit centers each of those transit centers should connect to each other via BRT or light rail..

Each transit center should have its own bus system with routes that serve that side of town

Each route should have multiple connections to the BRT/light rail

[Rover]

Rover, I think your arguments are fair and you're likely correct that Streetcar was not purposefully indicated for most OKC development. Therefore, I'll rephrase my wording to say the Streetcar is a catalyst that likely ensured projects were built. Heartland building, Phillips Murrah, Citizen, numerous restaurant and shoppes all cite Streetcar as a feature/amenity of their location. I'd argue that none of them would have been built without the streetcar, notice areas NOT on the streetcar route for comparison (dev along streetcar is much more built-up/urban). ...

Again, I can't provide exact examples that cite streetcar for their existence but one can conclude the streetcar has been a development success by comparing projects built along the route vs areas that aren't on the streetcar. Boardwalk at Bricktown cites the streetcar (as an amenity); however, is streetcar a necessity for Boardwalk to be built? Likely not. ...

Portland's streetcar started out similar to OKC's yet was expanded and integrated with MAX Light Rail once it was built. MAX doesn't go into the neighborhoods that Streetcar does, I think this is the benefit of Streetcar that so far haven't been proven in OKC - it allows final mile, tight fit into urban neighborhoods that light rail and larger metro trains can't. You can certainly conclude that the Pearl District would NOT be the relative success it is without the streetcar that's for sure, it was an industrial wasteland prior. Ditto that for waterfront.

Love to see a map of development scatter before and after the streetcar, as well as a study showing ridership frequency from tenants, clients, employees, etc of those developments. If built with the streetcar as an amenity, is it actually being used that way, or for cheaper park and ride option for events? There should be real analytics that show effectivity and not promoted curated and anecdotal evidence. This isn’t rocket science.

[HOT ROD]

very good points Rover, I too would like to see it.

would be a very nice project for OU or OCU Civil Engineering departments. ..