Light rail is overkill for OKC. Denver’s 16th Street shuttle system is great… Hop on – Hop off. Simple, free, fast, & convenient.

Why not use Denver’s example to connect Auto Ally, the eastern side of downtown (i.e. arenas) and Bricktown. Just one rout could hit them all. Broadway is wide enough for a street car as well as Reno.

As for core-to-shore. In my humble opinion, focussing on multiple areas (downtown, auto ally, bricktown) and now C2S will just stretch out what little resources are currently available. Bricktown still has much to be desired with plenty of opportunities. Auto Ally is basically in it’s infancy but has huge possibilities. Why spend the resources on C2S right now when there is still so much work to be done?

Since OKC use to have a streetcar system, why not revive it? We could at least put some money into significant upgrades to the downtown trolley line (more abundant and reliable vehicles, gps linked signage announcing stops and times).

I’m afraid if we postpone a vote on MAPS 3, it will be much more difficult to reinstate it later. It’s a lot easier to ask people to continue an existing tax than to add one after it’s been taken away.

Streetcars require fixed rails. Fixed rails cost more than bus routes, wreck havoc on bikes & scooters, and they’re fixed! Buss routes can grow & flex better, be established faster, and easily connect with future light rail nodes.

Downtown MUST keep the ball rolling with C2S momentum included in MAPS-next.

I like the proposed streetcar system. Let’s just go with the plan and become a Tier 2 city..and stop resisting that. Maps 3 is supposed to be a comprehensive package of improvements for downtown just as Maps 1 was.

I for one won’t be caught dead riding on a bus, but I used light rail frequently where I go to college.

Streetcars are so 20th century… Nick, I think you’re suffering from an outdated bus paradigm.

I agree with you folks, the time is now for a public transit makeover. With the current Metro Transit system, you cannot get from the Shepherd Mall area to I-40/Meridian without connecting Downtown. This is highly inefficient. Why not put more trolley-sized buses into the city, and “grid” the routes in such a way that connections don’t always involve Downtown. As far as rail, we can use existing tracks for commuter lines between Guthrie and Purcell. Money? It could be a combination of current COTPA funds, MAPS, and Federal dollars (stimulus?).

Amen.

Steve, a chance we could see the amount of votes on this poll thus far?

121 so far. If you click on the comment link on the poll, you can see the number of people who have voted and a map of where the votes are being cast. Something that’s always interesting to me; we typically see votes from across the country on these questions. I know there are some readers who live in other states. I just wonder how many …

Dennis..I don’t think fixed rail is 20th Century. I believe it’s a proven method of shaping an urban environment. Proven in the 20th Century AND in the 21st Century whenever there was a back-to-the-city movement.

The early 1900s they didn’t argue the benefits of it because it was the best transportation, people were enamored with how high-tech it seemed, and cities were dense back then. It made sense.

Now that everybody owns a car there are more challenges with transportation. We think the infrastructure has to take someone anywhere they want to go. The problem with that is that we’ve seen what it does to our cities in terms of sprawl. With fixed transit infrastructure as opposed to nomadic transit that goes wherever, you’re better able to organize which areas you want to see built-up.

It has worked wonders in cities that have adopted streetcars and light rail..even in the most sprawled cities such as Phoenix which has seen incredible amounts of dense development for the first time in their history along a newly completed LRT line.

Thanks, Steve. With that map, there is no hiding which one Blair voted for. My vote can stay behind the green curtain.

Casey, my father-in-law lives in Boston. Maybe he really, really wants to see a street car or light rail in OKC – or maybe he sees Core to Shore as a threat to Boston’s oceanfront development.

Nick,
In the early 1900’s they didn’t argue the benefits of rail because there were no options other than horse & buggy. Rail (light or heavy) is good for getting from multiple point A’s to multiple point B’s that exist along a line… spokes to a hub. In this topic I think we’re discussing a small-scale circulation system for downtown. We need localized circles and ziz-zags. If the wheel and track technologies are the main difference between trains & busses, what’s the big hickey on busses?

What would benefit downtown is a simple, fast, & free way to get from where you are to where you want to be… Go visit 16th Street in Denver to see such a thing in action.

For me it’s less about planning for the status quo and more about trying to shape the future with planning.

Steve, this Captcha system is bad. Sometimes I have to renew it like 5 times in order to just find one that I can actually read.

And yeah Denver is cool, but arguably, 16th Street isn’t there because of its bus system. There are parts of Denver that do exist however solely because of the LRT.

There are more wonderful examples in favor of streetcars and especially LRT than there are bus systems. We already have a bus system and it blows. We need something radically different than the massive failure that is the Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys.

I dont think you all truly appreciate how horrendously expensive public transportation is. In order to make public transportation worthwhile you have to have enough people that will use it. We dont need an entire grid for NBA basketball games and a few thousand people that work in the area.

There has to be a 24/7 pull to the area. A transit system is worthless without the core to shore. Not to mention we need to have a renewable injection of capital to the city to fund it without running a deficit. That injection will come from the tourists and the tens of thousands of people that will stop on their way across 1-35 or 1-40.

a dedicated very efficient downtown bus system would be a better first step. With great routes visible stops with real time GPS arrivial and dept information. This would be much cheaper and would fill the needs of downtown okc.

we should also make said bus system free … see Vail, CO one of the best public transit cities in the US .. all by bus..

Nick,
Why are trains better than busses for downtowns?
Why does Denver have LRT in some places and VERY efficient busses in others? Why doesn’t LRT run on 16th Street?

Name one city that doesn’t have a thriving bus system in their downtown core… Contrary to your preset image, busses can be just as romantic and “cool” as trains.

You say the OKC bus system blows. Does that mean it can’t be improved?

I agree with AJ’s comments, all the downtown area needs is to revamp the Oklahoma Spirit trolleys; more of them, make them reliable including GPS tracking and make them free in the downtown area.

After that then you put the real money in to light rail along I35 and I40 for the people in the suburbs to commute in to the city.

To answer you’re question Dennis, I’m against buses because I’d rather not settle for something other than what I’d like to see. I understand that we can’t have streetcar all over the entire city, but I believe it would be a great idea for us to start with an inexpensive streetcar system and watch how it improves areas along the line.

We will see new development explode along a fixed transit line simply for the psychological benefit that people can see the line. That is the biggest benefit to me. You don’t get any real benefit added locally from a bus route, which goes completely against the MAPS concept. Buses are okay for providing bare bones transportation for people who don’t have any other transportation, but fixed transit routes go way beyond that and actually shape the way a district develops.

Take Portland, Oregon for example, where they pioneered streetcar lines as a more cost efficient alternative to subway systems and light rail. They did this so that they would SEE more development, not because they HAD more development. It’s a debate where you’re asking the proverbial question, which comes first, chicken or the egg? I can not answer that, but I can tell you this: there is no telling if OKC will ever be dense enough for people to say we NEED streetcar and light rail BUT I can guarantee that if we go ahead with streetcar, it will turn OKC into the kind of city that actually does need streetcar and light rail.

It’s similar to the cell phone debate. Old folks that hold out say they’ll never get a cell phone because they don’t need one, and they’re absolutely right–we don’t need cell phones. BUT I can say that now that I’ve gotten used to my really cool phone with a camera, email, Internet, games, and all my songs on it — I can’t go anywhere without that it. And what’s more is that I believe it adds value to my life because I can check sports scores, stay connected with friends and professors, and enjoy my music without having to carry another device on me. But I definitely didn’t get one out of “need”.

To answer your* question (ugh, I hate when there’s a typo in the first line! lol)

Feel free to call me whatever horrible names you want, but I simply would not ride busses. I ride the trolleys sometimes (but only when I don’t have to wait 30 minutes for them to come by). When I am downtown now, and going from one end to the other (say Civic Center to Bricktown), I typically drive, even though I hate to. But if there was a downtown RAIL circular, I would ride that in a heartbeat. If there was a bus circular, I would still drive.

Just being honest….

Nick & Brian,
A number of wheeled vehicles traverse a fixed downtown route with such frequency that you never have to wait more than 2-3 minutes to hop on one at any street corner. The vehicle is comfortable, fast, FREE, and reliable… It transports you to your destination rapidly (say Civic Center to Bricktown). This is the vehicle’s sole purpose. It does not transport people into & out of downtown, just around downtown. What difference does it make if the wheels are made of steel or rubber?! Seriously… what is it that makes busses so bad? I guess if you’ve never been on a nice bus, at your invitation I’d have to call you uninformed.

I’m willing to hate busses too, if I only knew why!

It just has to do with the fact that it’s not what I want to see, Dennis.

I’d like to see something in OKC that is similar to what you can find in..Houston, Dallas, Little Rock, Austin, New Orleans, Fort Worth, Memphis, Nashville, Charlotte, Miami, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Philadelphia, DC, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New York, Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago, Indianapolis, Saint Louis, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Albuquerque, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Portland, Seattle, Salt Lake City, and that’s just off the top of my head.

The main reason I dislike bus is because I know it’s what we’re going to end up with instead of a much better idea. It’s the same as I hate the proposal to build an $80 mil expo center at the Fairgrounds because I feel like it is going to compete with the better idea to invest in a real convention center downtown.

As for why I don’t like buses in general..what IS to like about them? The people inside are smelly. They are ugly. They don’t take you straight where you want to go. The routes change periodically. They are unreliable. They aren’t clean. And especially those Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys..if I stepped “all aboard” one of those things I had might as well have clown shoes and a polka dot suit on.

The difference between streetcars and buses is similar to McDonald’s vs. sit-down burger joint. Yeah, McDonald’s serves food that is somewhat edible and it’s cheap cheap cheap. Does that mean you want it though?

Oh and I forgot Denver and Atlanta on my list. Kind of obvious ones when whining about how everyone else but us is doing it (rail)..

It would be nice to have electrified Light Rail, but what Cornett doesn’t tell you is that it takes waaaay more money than Commuter Rail.
See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Costs_of_light_rail_construction_and_operation
“A survey of North American light rail projects[22] shows that costs of most LRT systems range from $15 million per mile to over $100 million per mile.”
Commuter Rail is $4-5 million per mile! It can also be up and running in about a year from the airport to Union Station whereas a LR system will take about 10 yrs. You have to dig up the street and reinforce it before laying track because of the weight. And of course, electrify it. Lots of disrupted roads and detours for 10 years? Whereas Commuter Rail runs on existing train tracks, not in the street.
Actually, there is a British hybrid system of Light Rail which is much lighter, cheaper, and doesn’t require reinforcing the streets – just gouge out a shallow strip for the track. It runs on CNG & a flywheel. Check it out at: http://www.ParryPeopleMovers.com

$15-100 million per mile is a pretty wide range.

Downtown won’t have light rail, it will have electric streetcars. Light rail are more for rapid city-wide transit, when stops are spaced out at least a mile. Streetcar is much cheaper and is what usually gets used for systems that just serve the downtown area.

Bringing up the cost of light rail is kind of a red herring in a way. It’s not really relevant, but it sure makes for a passionate diversion.

Maybe we can use the excess electricity from Rand’s building to power all the streetcars!

I’m pretty much in agree with Nick on this one. Nick, your last three posts were spot on.

Dennis, regarding your post calling me uninformed, you are absolutely wrong. I have ridden city busses in numerous cities around the world including Seattle, Washington DC, London, and Rome. I stand by my statement that I would not ride busses here. I would ride any kind of rail in a heartbeat. It’s just different. With a rail system you always know what you are going to get, it has a fixed route and schedule, and is attractive and green.

Now we’re getting somewhere regarding WHY you prefer rail over bus: 1) you know what you are going to get, 2) fixed route and schedule, and 3) attractive and green. Would an electric bus do the trick? I bet not…

I really don’t care which mode wins out. I’m just trying to highlight the hypocrisy of wanting rail only because of a sexy urban image, rather than logic & reason.

For what it’s worth, I can’t begin to express how proud I am to have all of you as regular readers of this site. I learn as much from you as you do from me, and this conversation is an A+ in my book. This thread (involving 11 people of all ages with very different backgrounds) is a perfect demonstration on how to disagree intelligently and with respect for one another. Have no doubt, whatever success I have with this blog isn’t possible without you. I’m humbled to know you’re all visiting and taking valuable time to participate in these discussions. You keep me going.

I haven’t had a chance to read all of the comments yet, but I must say that I’m not convinced public transportation within downtown is an issue. There is certainly a huge need for public transportation improvements throughout the city. But as a downtown worker and resident, I do not see why we need a ride from one side of downtown to the other. I’ll admit that sometimes the weather makes a 15-minute walk less than pleasant, but it really is not that far.

Nick, maybe you are the one who is smelly and ugly.

i believe rapid transit is a good thing for any city. not only is it convenient, but it also = cleaner air!!! i believe it would be a great thing for oklahoma city once core 2 shore has happened and the city has expanded. i don’t think there is necessarily a need for it just yet. i live and work downtown and a nice walk or bike ride is great. although they may need some work, buses are available. i do not think a bus ride should be luxurious, just functional and some of us just need to deal.

Dennis, I probably have 10 reasons or so why I prefer rail over rubber tire buses and trolleys..but I make no qualms about admitting that my main reason is purely psychological. A textbook on a planning course will tell you to just meet basic needs before you do anything else..but anyone that actually lives and breathes in a city, including professors providing more depth to a subject, can bring to life the essence of a city..most of which is psychological.

It’s not debatable that rail is more beneficial for the basic transit needs of a community, BUT stronger points can be made for the psychological benefits that go far beyond that in my opinion. Having streetcar downtown REALLY does get people thinking green, urban, and clean..

It’s so important when OKC has made such strives recently to renew the inner city. That synergy has collected over time and is finally flowing right NOW. Will it be that way in 5 years? No telling, but that’s why we have to take advantage of this era for our city. The potential AND the risks if we don’t take advantage of that potential NOW. As we’re becoming one of the larger metro areas, we can be a sprawling smoggy mess of urban blight, or we can be a shining city on a hill when it comes to urbanism. Right now we are the largest city in the US that is in compliance with the EPA’s clean air regulations, but we are in danger of going over. We can remain a city with clean air AND free of EPA fines (in terms of the millions) if we start investing in green, urban initiatives before we really have to have them.

And besides that, what is wrong with wanting something because of a sexy urban image? I think when it comes to stuff like that–Bricktown, Devon Tower, Core to Shore..all of that has and will do wonders for our city. That’s the kind of stuff that makes the transformation from an average Tier 3 city (Wichita, Amarillo, Little Rock, etc) to a Big League City (Portland, Denver, Pittsburgh, etc). Which of those two types of cities are people going to enjoy living in, and which do companies and artists move to?

Nick, I agree that there are some cool-looking streetcars and that they’d look very cool in OKC. I’m aware of the psychological aspects of our environment… believe me. Also believe me when I say I’m aware of the physical aspects of our environment. You sound like Al Gore when you say “it’s not debatable” that rail is more beneficial for the basic transit needs of a community (no offense). I have nothing against green, urban, and clean. However, the rail vs. rubber debate IS glaringly debatable. The good news is you and I are not going to decide this issue.

The main things I want in a downtown shuttle system are high frequency and speed. I really don’t care what the box & wheels look like. If I can depart my point-A without waiting more than 3-4 minutes, and arrive at my point-B as efficiently as possible, I’m happy. Isn’t that really what public transit is about?

It is not up for dispute that streetcar is better than buses. It is an inconvenient truth.

Just kidding..but seriously, do you want to try and prove that buses are actually better? It’s like..could someone really argue that McD’s is better than Applebee’s?

It’s safe to say we’ll be seeing arguments between professionals that know a heck of a lot more about the subject than we do.

And YES, McDonald’s is better than Appplebee’s when you’re in a hurry, short of money, and have a car full of kids. There are some applications better suited for busses, some better suited for rail. Why would a rational society choose wrong solutions? (There I go again: criticizing Gore…)

Steve, help! Hurry up and pull the plug on this thing!

“Steve, help! Hurry up and pull the plug on this thing!”
Why in the world would I do that? I’m following every bit of this. I doubt you guys are going to have a meeting of minds on this one. But I remain very proud of the level of discussion going on here.

Dennis, when does a rational society choose right solutions?

Nick… touche!

I’m wondering why everyone is thinking that this is an either/or discussion? An effective transportation system is a comprehensive regional issue that addresses the next 50 years, not just the next convention or NBA season. We are having this discussion now because previously it was an either/or discussion and the car won.

Light rail is going to work most effectively when it’s bringing in commuters from the bedroom neighborhoods outside of the core and visitors from the airport to the hotels and convention centers. Trams, electric street cars or electric-hybrid buses are more effective in downtown where stops are more frequent. All that has been said, but that’s not the issue.

I think that Nick Roberts made the most important comment that may or may not have been noticed: “We can remain a city with clean air AND free of EPA fines (in terms of the millions) if we start investing in green, urban initiatives before we really have to have them.” Do a calculation of the downtown population during the day, and during the night. Until the city can effectively reduce the environmental impact that the population shift illustrates, than bus or electric trolley doesn’t matter. I doubt that Oklahoma City is going to experience a serious population shift or realignment of density within the next few generations…so to solve the bigger issues, you need more efficient roads, light rail transportation connections that negate the need to drive, and even hybrid buses.

Everyone is on point about the benefits, perceptions, etc of the different mass transit options. But until the community takes a comprehensive look at what is needed, and demands it of their elected officials, than we will get the same transportation package we got with the original MAPS.

we need good trolleys around downtown, streetcars radiating from downtown to areas like the farmer’s market/stockyards/ airport, up classen then northwest highway, to the hospitals and state capitol, 23rd street, capitol hill, etc, and finally commuter rail connecting to other cities in the region, to be cost-shared with them. ou to uco would be very cool, but guthrie to purcell would be even better. while we’re at it, we need to connect okc with tulsa. all are necessary and justifiable. from a practical political reality standpoint, okc should try to start with a perfected trolly system AND a streetcar to the airport. that will create demand for an expansion to the system, because now people could fly into will rogers, ride the streetcar downtown to their hotel, go to their convention and party in bricktown and tour downtown. it shouldn’t be hard to get the northside to push for expansion to the shopping districts once it is successful. by the way, commuter rail is THE ticket for the regional transit!

i forgot to mention, make the rubber-tired trolleys run on CNG and you’ll get the political backing for it.

[...] measures in a suburban city, imagine what a precedent it would set. Most of the recent urban issue related commentary that I’ve been reading about NYC and OKC is in regards to transit and transportation. It [...]

There is at least 40 yrs worth of building to be done
on the Oklahoma River. “Core to Shore” will take out the
dilapidated buildings. This will make the river projects go.
The citizens of OKC want light rail. They want to be able to
go from Norman to Guthrie. And Midwest City to El Reno.
One day it will be OKC to Tulsa. The waiting is over. Put
out your pennies again, everyone shut up! And lets start
building!!