OKC Commuter Rail

[CuatrodeMayo]

Don't be surprised if the next two iterations of MAPS are made up in large part by transit initiatives with votes occurring simultaneously in other suburban cities to enable these efforts to come to fruition.

This is incredibly exciting.

[shawnw]

And it all, when finished, could make MAPS 1-3 look like child's play in terms of how it impacts the metro economically and growth wise.

[Urban Pioneer]

SW Aviator and I have worked on the two bills for several years. We are thrilled that it finally made it through. We had UN Agenda 21 people coming after us thinking that it was some sort of world conspiracy.

The initial bill gave us the ability to form an RTA, but it wasn't sophisticated enough to tailor the district boundaries to the constituents that would most likely need the service and consequently vote for it.

This is all an extension of Bob's efforts to install commuter rail and our successes with MAPS 3 streetcar. Mayor Cornett is the leader who helped organize and lead the initial discussions with the other cities into fruition. We now have support by Edmond, Moore, Norman, Midwest City and Del City. Now Yukon wants to be actively involved.

Don't be surprised if the next two iterations of MAPS are made up in large part by transit initiatives with votes occuring simultaneously in other suburban cities to enable these efforts to come to fruition.

Regarding the comments regarding congestion and attractiveness. I agree with most, if not all of those comments. But we are not building this system for the city of today, we are building this for the city of the future. A very bright future.

I should also point out that regular OKC Talk poster "Hutch" is also on the Steering Committee for RTD. He represents Norman in large part with Mayor Cindy Rosenthal. Nobody has worked harder to sell the idea and vision for a Regional Transit Authority more than Hutch. He is an authority on these matters. There are a few more anonymous posters on here actively involved in these issues as well.

One of the exciting things about that ACOG email is that it seems that the new transportation division planner is excited about this. That was a very positive email and the guy seems excited. We haven't had many "paid" people involved in these processes other than consultants and politicians that actively advocate or display some passion.

[PhiAlpha]

I read about this yesterday and was highly disappointed. Even at 60mph IMO it is a waste of time, it won't be used. I'd rather have the flexibility of a car. Now get that train going from downtown to downtown at least 100mph, and now we have something worth a damn.

I go to Tulsa for work at least 3 or 4 sometimes 10 times a month and would definitely use this and rent a car for the day/trip. I also have a bunch of friends that I routinely visit up there that could pick me up at the station if all else fails. I can't be the only person in either city in this situation.

Also, the drive gets very repetitive and creates 4 hours of productivity that I lose per trip. Even if it takes a little longer, being able to work on the train and not deal with driving would present enough of an advantage for me to use it. It does definitely need to go from downtown to downtown though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hoya]

If you factor in not putting miles on your vehicle, not having to find a parking space, and being able to read a book/play games on your phone without running people off the road, the trip taking an extra 20 min or so isn't that bad.

[Just the facts]

Awesome!

I wished so badly to have the Tinker portion when I worked at Tinker for so many years.

While I like the idea of a streetcar extension going up Classen, I would almost rather incentivize CPK to move downtown and save those capital costs... pipe dream I know.

Spreading expensive capitol costs all over low-density sprawl is what gave us a freeway system we can't afford to maintain. Some lessons are never learned.

[Teo9969]

Spreading expensive capitol costs all over low-density sprawl is what gave us a freeway system we can't afford to maintain. Some lessons are never learned.

What are you saying here?

[Rover]

For the 18,000,000 th time he is letting us know he hates sprawl. Now we know how he feels. LOL

[Plutonic Panda]

For the 18,000,000 th time he is letting us know he hates sprawl. Now we know how he feels. LOL

I'm still not sure though.... Part of me wants to see he likes large freeways and part of me doesn't. I just can't seem to figure it out.

It's almost like how a ton of people on this board question whether I like big highways or not. It's a just a tough call to make.

[Teo9969]

Bump so JTF can see this…I'm still really curious what exactly he was trying to say.

[OKCisOK4me]

Spreading expensive capitol costs all over low-density sprawl is what gave us a freeway system we can't afford to maintain. Some lessons are never learned.

Kerry, why do you command this again?

[Just the facts]

Infrastructure has a cost per distance. The fewer people there are along that infrastructure the more it cost per person to operate and maintain it. In many cases, that cost is more than the individual is able to afford so the funding short fall has to be made up from other sources. In the case of the interstate freeway system, users only pay half the direct cost and the other half comes out of the general fund. In the case of a well planned rail system, development along mass transit lines generate enough tax revenue to fund the operation and maintenance of the rail system, but when you start spreading that rail system across low density sprawl you reproduce the same situation the highway systems is failing at. Is there going to be enough density on the way to Classen Curve to cover the capitol cost of providing service to Classen Curve? If not, then why the hell do it?

Here is what I find ironic, the usual OKCTalk suspects who decried mass transit as requiring a subsidy and would thus be a waste of money ARE THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE who are happy expanding rail into low density areas which insures the funding short fall. Go figure.

[Teo9969]

Here is what I find ironic, the usual OKCTalk suspects who decried mass transit as requiring a subsidy and would thus be a waste of money ARE THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE who are happy expanding rail into low density areas which insures the funding short fall. Go figure.

Care to point out who some of those people are? It seems to me those who are and have always been a fan of the street-car downtown are also a fan of the street car out to these particular areas.

Infrastructure has a cost per distance. The fewer people there are along that infrastructure the more it cost per person to operate and maintain it. In many cases, that cost is more than the individual is able to afford so the funding short fall has to be made up from other sources. In the case of the interstate freeway system, users only pay half the direct cost and the other half comes out of the general fund. In the case of a well planned rail system, development along mass transit lines generate enough tax revenue to fund the operation and maintenance of the rail system, but when you start spreading that rail system across low density sprawl you reproduce the same situation the highway systems is failing at. Is there going to be enough density on the way to Classen Curve to cover the capitol cost of providing service to Classen Curve? If not, then why the hell do it?

So is your thought to wait for the high density development to come about and THEN bring the mass transit?

This is apples to oranges…the interstates were built to/through absolutely nothing. The street car being expanded in the core is actually going to other established locations. Yes they may currently be low density, but just how are you going to entice people to get away from the car and move toward high-density development if you show no commitment to making it feasible to live without a car?

Do you think TOD is not going to happen along this route?

This is such a confusing thing for me to hear you say because it sounds as if you're advocating that we do nothing to further public transit in this city seeing as the downtown area is barely dense enough to warrant such a thing, let alone anything outside of those borders.

[Just the facts]

So is your thought to wait for the high density development to come about and THEN bring the mass transit?

This is apples to oranges…the interstates were built to/through absolutely nothing. The street car being expanded in the core is actually going to other established locations. Yes they may currently be low density, but just how are you going to entice people to get away from the car and move toward high-density development if you show no commitment to making it feasible to live without a car?

Do you think TOD is not going to happen along this route?

This is such a confusing thing for me to hear you say because it sounds as if you're advocating that we do nothing to further public transit in this city seeing as the downtown area is barely dense enough to warrant such a thing, let alone anything outside of those borders.

Don't get me wrong, empirical evidence proves that with rail it almost is a 'build it and they will come' situation, but if it gets built to Classen Curve is CHK all of a sudden going to build a thousand residential units around their station? I don't think so. However, if the line is extended to into Capitol Hill I do think it will spur residential development? I think it will because rail based development doesn't just 'steal' development from the suburban fringe, it makes development possible that wouldn't be viable anywhere else for the simple reason that parking is not required.

[Just the facts]

Let me add - 1.8 miles from downtown Capitol Hill and 5.5 miles to Classen Curve. That means to recover the capitol costs development along Classen would have to run 3X more than to Capitol Hill. Does anyone seriously see that happening?

Finally, the OKCTalk usual suspects know who they are. If you have to wonder if you are a member of the 'usual suspects' you aren't .

[hoya]

Going to Classen Curve did strike me as a very big step. Honestly I don't care so much about connecting Chesapeake and Classen Curve. I know those are big areas right now, but I don't know that a lone streetcar line connecting it to downtown will be that beneficial. It does connect to Penn Square Mall, though, giving downtown residents access to a huge amount of retail that they wouldn't have otherwise.

[Teo9969]

Maybe, maybe not. But you're looking at this as a one-sum game rather than a multi-sum game.

You're taking the position that the only destination for urban centers is the absolutely most dense area. In reality 63rd and Western will and should always be a destination, even it's not preeminent. Realize that a lot of people will continue to work at CHK/Mid-First, and people that otherwise drive there right now, will be able to live downtown and support that culture while maintaing or applying for a job at 2 of OKC's very most important companies. There is plenty of potential for fantastic urban development on this route. Classen Blvd alone has the potential to be among the best streets in all of the state with the right vision…having the street-car truck down this line will likely promote quite a bit of demolition of bad development in favor of multi-story mixed-use, which would greatly enhance the walkability of a wide-swath of single family homes in and around this part of town.

[Just the facts]

If access to an employer base was the driving factor a company in lay-off mode would be at the bottom of the list and OUHSC and Capitol Complex would be way at the top. The thing is though that unless CHK, OUHSC, and the Capitol want to rethink their position on urban design they shouldn't even be considered. Every mass transit rider starts and ends their trip as a pedestrian.

[okclee]

In my opinion.... It's not so much as connecting to Classen Curve or CHK, as it is the areas that are along this route to get there. Going up Classen even 1.7 miles would make a bigger impact than going to Capitol Hill in 1.7 miles.

[Teo9969]

If access to an employer base was the driving factor a company in lay-off mode would be at the bottom of the list and OUHSC and Capitol Complex would be way at the top. The thing is though that unless CHK, OUHSC, and the Capitol want to rethink their position on urban design they shouldn't even be considered. Every mass transit rider starts and ends their trip as a pedestrian.

CHK hasn't been in lay-off mode for a good minute, and MidFirst is in expansion mode. And those are hardly the only two employers along the route. It's one of the most important areas of commerce in OKC.

Considering how poorly downtown scores in urban design on a regular basis, would you just as soon us not build the thing at all and wait until we have all of our ducks in a row?

Are you going to ignore the potential of Western Ave completely? Are you going to dismiss the reality that there are several major schools/churches in this general direction. And will you also continue to ignore the reality that many people living downtown currently drive up to this area of town for a host of reasons including food, work, play, and shopping, and that this area, due to its proximity to some of OKC's richest neighborhoods and biggest business, will always maintain a level of high-quality retail/restaurants.

And no…plenty of mass transit riders start and end their trips as automobile drivers or even more prevalently then that, bicycle riders.

[hoya]

The Classen streetcar line was estimated to cost between $270 and $370 million. That's a good chunk of change. As you said, the development potential along Classen is incredible. I do wonder if running one line way out by itself is the best way to create that development, though.

[Geographer]

I'm a big fan of Western Ave. But this isn't Western Ave. Classen has almost ZERO urban fabric. It's completely auto-dominated. Who exactly is ignoring reality here?

who exactly is "planning" the streetcar route?

[Teo9969]

I'm a big fan of Western Ave. But this isn't Western Ave. Classen has almost ZERO urban fabric. It's completely auto-dominated. Who exactly is ignoring reality here?

Where did I say Classen has urban fabric?

[CuatrodeMayo]

If you took the same amount of streetcar track and placed it along 23rd between MLK and Shepard Mall, it would be nothing short of transformational for that corridor. I'm struggling to see how a route to CHK would give us more bang for the buck.

[Hutch]

The proposed streetcar line from downtown to 63rd is part of ACOG's Commuter Corridors Study. URS Corporation analyzed several different transit modes and corridors for providing commuter transit service between downtown, north Oklahoma City and Edmond, including Commuter Rail, Streetcar, Light Rail and BRT. Based on a number of factors, including ridership, cost and feasibility, the Steering Committee decided that Commuter Rail was the best solution. However, the modeling showed that there was significant ridership demand along an alternative corridor from downtown north along Classen to 63rd that would not be served by the Commuter rail option alone. So, the Steering Committee decided to include the streetcar line extension from downtown to 63rd along with the Commuter Rail option as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the North Corridor. In combination, the two rail transit modes will provide the most effective commuter transit solution, regardless of the fact that there are areas of lower density development along both of the corridors. The decision involved whether or not to include a streetcar line along that specific corridor as part of the LPA or not as part of a future commuter rail transit system.

Regional transit systems are typically developed by a regional transit authority created to represent specific local municipalities. The RTA operates within a specifically created regional transit district using funding derived through a dedicated local revenue source (typically sales tax) from within the RTD. So, the cities being served by the system are all funding its development and operation through local tax revenues collected from within the RTD, and the transit services being provided operate only within the RTD from where the revenues are generated. Ideally, the boundaries of the RTD and its transit service lines are created in order to serve all of the major population and employment centers throughout the region, as well as to maximize the capture of sales tax revenues for funding the system. The fact that there are pockets of low density development within the boundary of the RTD is not the single determining factor for developing transit service lines, especially rail transit.

From a ridership and farebox perspective, it might make sense to only develop and operate rail transit systems within and along areas of the highest population densities. However, cost and feasibility restraints do not always allow for development of a "perfect" corridor and there will almost always be areas of lower density within the system, especially as it initially develops. But that can be a good thing, as it allows for greater opportunities for transit oriented development, which in turn creates more future sales tax potential for increased funding for the system. Remember, it's the dedicated local revenue source that is primarily responsible for funding the system and not farebox receipts. As long as there is significant ridership demand at critical points along and at each end of a transit service line, it may very well be a viable component of the transit system whether or not it passes through areas of lower density.

If you exclude rail transit service to certain areas of Oklahoma City, and to Norman, Edmond, Moore, Midwest City and Del City simply because the service lines pass through some areas of low density, then you might as well just forget the idea of an RTA, RTD and a regional transit system and simply allow COTPA to continue to operate a very limited and ineffective local transit system within the core areas of Oklahoma City using non-dedicated money from the City's general fund. And we all know just how successful that has been.