Ideas 4 MAPS

[Midtowner]

I sorta worry about investing in the zoo too much over the long term. I could see zoo’s going away one day if the political winds keep going the way they are. Already seeing it with sea world and the circus. I don’t think we should pull all funding and stop, but maybe not double down on it either.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...806-story.html

I'm not sure SeaWorld is in much danger. They hit a rough patch, but I can attest that when we went in July, it was a great experience and it was PACKED.

While anti-zoo activists are loud, I don't think many people care very much about what they have to say. Right now, the OKC Zoo seems very disjointed and either there is not a great master plan in place or there is a master plan which isn't all that well-executed. The new exhibits are decent. The new elephant area is a world class facility. It has a great deal of potential.

Pete, the picnic areas were just renovated. They also added a large indoor dining area in the Asia exhibit. I can't recommend the kimchi pizza though.

[HangryHippo]

Right now, the OKC Zoo seems very disjointed and either there is not a great master plan in place or there is a master plan which isn't all that well-executed.

What makes you say this? I haven’t been to the zoo recently and am curious.

[Midtowner]

What makes you say this? I haven’t been to the zoo recently and am curious.

The zoo is made up of four types of areas. Those which are abandoned and not being currently redeveloped, like the NE area of the zoo, including the former aquariums (shut down) and all of the former displays there, which appear to be in the process of being abandoned, those which appear to soon be abandoned, like the reptiles, islands exhibits, then the new(ish) areas like the cat exhibits and the great escape, and then the state of the art areas like the Oklahoma Trails, the elephant exhibit and Asia, the later of which was kind of disappointing in terms of the number of exhibits vs. concession space (it seems the lion's share [get it?] of the redevelopment went to a new concessions/banquet facility).

I think the Zoo Trust knows what it's doing for sure and does a good job with what it has, but with a massive cash infusion allowing them to basically redo everything up to current standards all at once, we could have a real treasure on our hands.

[hoya]

The 2005 Fixed Guideway study is the master plan being worked against currently and that should not vary with MAPS.

The streetcar plans have already changed from what is shown in the 2005 study. If we're talking about additional streetcar lines, it will change further. But we need to make sure that any additions are well planned for future expansions.

For instance, if we're going to expand to the OUHSC, it's probably easiest to just connect to the downtown system and then loop back. Cross at NE 4th, or maybe go across on Harrison to 8th, do a loop around the hospital complex and then go back. It's probably easiest, but I don't think that's the best Phase 2 path as it relates to a Phase 3 extension. We would want to provide access to the Health Science Center, while also serving as a branching off point for future service to the northeast side of town. It may be a better idea to have a double track line that runs all the way up and down Lincoln Blvd instead.

I think we need a revised "streetcar master plan" that takes into account real barriers and real opportunities, factors for risk, and presents a staged plan for growth that serves the needs of the city.

The Wheeler District has an enormous amount of potential, but right now it's an empty field. I'm sure streetcar access would be highly desirable (both for the people who will live there, and for the city in general), once everything is underway. But that's still some time in the future. How much should a line down to Capitol Hill take into account that the Wheeler District might be really cool one day? Do we focus on serving Capitol Hill the best we can, or do we make a more general "southside loop" that runs down Robinson and then goes up Western? That's a tough question and I don't have the answer to it. I don't think we should wait until Wheeler is humming along before we get around to serving the south side.

The most important thing is that we need to know what we're doing from the beginning, so we have a system that functions and makes sense, both as we expand, and when it's completed.

[shawnw]

My understanding is the very first thing that will happen once the RTA is stood up is a revised study will be done.

[hoya]

That's fine. I just think each step of the streetcar needs to make sense on its own, in case future expansions don't pass. But it also has to work with future expansions, in case they do. We want it to connect to destinations, but also to serve existing populations.

[shawnw]

https://newsok.com/article/5611669/o...ay-oct-15-2018

Could MAPS 4 include arena?

Mayor David Holt kicked off MAPS 4 on Thursday, emphasizing the "transformational" nature of MAPS projects and their contribution to Oklahoma City's renaissance, exemplified most clearly by the "big-league city" status conferred by the arrival of the NBA's Thunder. As it happened, Roy Williams of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber had reported two days earlier on September's fact-finding visit to Sacramento, California. He said Sacramento's new NBA arena, the Golden 1 Center, and a planned soccer stadium were "breathing a lot of new life into their downtown." Williams said the Chamber leads the annual visits by business and civic leaders to explore best practices, tour new developments and "to hear very candid discussions about peer city successes and failures."

[Ross MacLochness]

Perhaps something we should look at for MAPS 4 is installing shared autonomous vehicle infrastructure (sensors, computers, perhaps even cars) in the urban core so that we would be ahead of the game in terms of SAV transit. Ideally, SAVs would be "smart" and talk to all other modes of transit you might need to use: streetcar, uber, Amtrak, bus, etc so that you would never have to wait to hop on and would be a great "last mile" optio as it would take you right to the door of where you needed to go. These vehicles would be shared of course, but would be smart enough to only pick people up who are going to areas near you, or who are going somewhere that would be efficiently on the way. I heard Dan Dixon from Stantec talk about SAVs last year and he really sold me on the potential of these things to revolutionize transit and planning for the better if used correctly. SAVs would, according to Dixon, encourage more people to live within range of SAV use and would in turn only help our efforts building a walkable, less car dependent area of the city.

[gopokes88]

Has the thunder even asked for help to build a new arena? I’m not necessarily opposed to it, but there won’t be any added economic benefit. The benefit comes when the team first moves to town (remember 15 multi millionaires plus a massive organization moved in) not when you replace an arena with another.

[gopokes88]

Perhaps something we should look at for MAPS 4 is installing shared autonomous vehicle infrastructure (sensors, computers, perhaps even cars) in the urban core so that we would be ahead of the game in terms of SAV transit. Ideally, SAVs would be "smart" and talk to all other modes of transit you might need to use: streetcar, uber, Amtrak, bus, etc so that you would never have to wait to hop on and would be a great "last mile" optio as it would take you right to the door of where you needed to go. These vehicles would be shared of course, but would be smart enough to only pick people up who are going to areas near you, or who are going somewhere that would be efficiently on the way. I heard Dan Dixon from Stantec talk about SAVs last year and he really sold me on the potential of these things to revolutionize transit and planning for the better if used correctly. SAVs would, according to Dixon, encourage more people to live within range of SAV use and would in turn only help our efforts building a walkable, less car dependent area of the city.

It’s not a bad idea but it could very very easily wind up being a colossal waste of money. That technology is going to change and evolve at an insane pace.

It’d be like investing heavily in AOL so everyone could have internet access.

[Ross MacLochness]

It’s not a bad idea but it could very very easily wind up being a colossal waste of money. That technology is going to change and evolve at an insane pace.

It’d be like investing heavily in AOL so everyone could have internet access.

Perhaps, but did you wait on gigabit internet before you logged on for the first time? I think this form of transit could be a g-word (gamechager) for our city due to it's lack of density. It would be an answer to so many folks who need a reliable and cheap last mile option for transit. If we get ahead of the game favoring SAVs over private AVs (which is no different than our current path) we could be a model for how to do transit in cities like ours and really serve a greater range of the population very efficiently.

[gopokes88]

Perhaps, but did you wait on gigabit internet before you logged on for the first time? I think this form of transit could be a g-word (gamechager) for our city due to it's lack of density. It would be an answer to so many folks who need a reliable and cheap last mile option for transit. If we get ahead of the game favoring SAVs over private AVs (which is no different than our current path) we could be a model for how to do transit in cities like ours and really serve a greater range of the population very efficiently.

No, but I also didn't spend 10s of millions of dollars on a technology that was outdated in 5 years.

My point is simply there's a huge risk in spending at least a $100 million on a technology that might be outdated by the time it gets built and up and running. Same reason Google Fiber pulled out.

It's a good idea, but the risk the technology winds change is going to prevent it from ever being a reality.

[Ross MacLochness]

It's a good idea, but the risk the technology winds change is going to prevent it from ever being a reality.

I'd like to know more as to why you think that this will never be a reality due to changing technology. Is this just speculation or do you have a source to support your claims? As far as ageing tech goes, we just built a streetcar, which were invented over 100 years ago and we continue to build huge highways which could become obsolete in 100 years (not saying they will, but who knows, they could..) At any rate, I think this idea should be looked at rather than just dismissed because "the winds of tech are changing". Maybe we could account for that while planning?

[jedicurt]

I'd like to know more as to why you think that this will never be a reality due to changing technology. Is this just speculation or do you have a source to support your claims? As far as ageing tech goes, we just built a streetcar, which were invented over 100 years ago and we continue to build huge highways which could become obsolete in 100 years (not saying they will, but who knows, they could..) At any rate, I think this idea should be looked at rather than just dismissed because "the winds of tech are changing". Maybe we could account for that while planning?

the tech behind autonomous vehicles that are not run on tracks with specific parameters and interact in an environment where they deal with pedestrians and other non-autonomous vehicles is still at least a decade off if not more... Uber wasn't even doing their testing for a year before the realized some design flaws and had to scale back significantly on testing... this idea is a long way off, and we would be investing into tech that is unproven and will change rather than proven tech such as a streetcar

[gopokes88]

I'd like to know more as to why you think that this will never be a reality due to changing technology. Is this just speculation or do you have a source to support your claims? As far as ageing tech goes, we just built a streetcar, which were invented over 100 years ago and we continue to build huge highways which could become obsolete in 100 years (not saying they will, but who knows, they could..) At any rate, I think this idea should be looked at rather than just dismissed because "the winds of tech are changing". Maybe we could account for that while planning?

Lol. No one can account for changing technology, that's the entire point.

Google is one of the smartest tech companies in the world, they spent billions building out a fiber network then less than a decade later they've halted all plans because of the possibility of city wide wifi.

OKC could spend 100s of millions building out a SAV infrastructure, and then a $50 device comes along and does the same thing faster.

It would be wiser to let someone else prove out which technology works, let it mature, and then follow their lead. Or we can lead the charge like we did with the Pei Plan. ( OKC doesn't have the amount of tech talent we'd need to even have a prayer of being successful.)

It's not that it's not a reality, it's that it's too early in the life cycle of SAVs to commit to something specific. Let it play out. There's a million ways to skin that SAV cat. There's a risk we back AOL and Yahoo instead of Google and Apple.

[Ross MacLochness]

Thanks ^^ I appreciate the input.

[Plutonic Panda]

It would be wiser to let someone else prove out which technology works, let it mature, and then follow their lead. Or we can lead the charge like we did with the Pei Plan. ( OKC doesn't have the amount of tech talent we'd need to even have a prayer of being successful.) .

The Pei Plan was never fully implemented and it's debatable that it would have been successful if it was.

I agree with your main point, but this wasn't a very good comparison.

[Ross MacLochness]

The Pei Plan was never fully implemented and it's debatable that it would have been successful if it was.

I agree with your main point, but this wasn't a very good comparison.

True. And it's not like you'd have to tear anything down to implement SAVs. I see the point in waiting to see how the tech changes but I still think it wouldn't hurt to take a look at including SAVs in an overall transit master plan. What if SAVs do become the future and we end up spending millions on something else that eventually becomes obsolete instead of looking towards the future? It's entirely possible that private companies may want to build in the infrastructure as well to run their own private services - which would be fine, but we as a city would need to be proactive enough to force those companies to work through a centralized network that connects to all forms of publicly available transit, public and private to reap the efficiency benefits of having a fully connected transit system.

[gopokes88]

The Pei Plan was never fully implemented and it's debatable that it would have been successful if it was.

I agree with your main point, but this wasn't a very good comparison.

Fair enough, it was mostly just to illustrate sometimes jumping on the "next huge thing" can be very stupid in retrospect. Whereas patience would have been better.

(Not that SAVs are stupid that's not what I'm saying)

[baralheia]

Why not like Kansas City, and put a property tax dedicated to the streetcar, along the streetcar right of way. Those properties a getting the value of being on the street car route, they could have a tax like KC’s to operate and maintain the streetcar

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't believe Oklahoma state law would allow for that. I believe only sales taxes can be used to fund City things like this. I know for a fact when the RTA starts up, they are limited to sales taxes as a funding source as well.

[Jersey Boss]

What is the Mayors position on greater self governance and taxation powers for large cities, say over 100k in popularion?

[TheTravellers]

What is the Mayors position on greater self governance and taxation powers for large cities, say over 100k in popularion?

Might not matter if whatever a city wants runs afoul of what the state legislature wants, since they can (and have in the past) overrule it (whatever "it" is) if they want (Dillon's Rule state).

[Richard at Remax]

Oh boy..

“If soccer is not included in MAPS 4 at all, I think people ought to know… The Energy won’t be here forever,” says Mayor David Holt.

[jedicurt]

Oh boy..

“If soccer is not included in MAPS 4 at all, I think people ought to know… The Energy won’t be here forever,” says Mayor David Holt.

absolutely they won't be here forever... prodigal will find a way to mess it up... hence why i'm not in favor of massive public investment for them.

sincerely,
Former member of the OKC Barons SSH Advisory Board

[Jersey Boss]

Might not matter if whatever a city wants runs afoul of what the state legislature wants, since they can (and have in the past) overrule it (whatever "it" is) if they want (Dillon's Rule state).

I realize what the status quo is. So as a Norman resident I feel that the mayors of OKC, Tulsa, and Norman should be lobbying the legislature or backing a citizen change to the constitution to effect this change. I don't vote for those who accept the status quo for fear of taking a stand.