We are a state that leads in transportation

--According to Bobby Stern, the executive director of the Oklahoma Association of General Contractors. I kid you not, read his op-ed column published by the Oklahoman. Apparently Fallin, Inhofe, Langford, and Cole are leading our state in transportation similar to the 1992 USA Olympic team. I need to get in contact with him regarding whatever he is smoking.

FACT: Oklahoma has the 2nd-most miles of bad roads in the nation.
FACT: OKC has the worst public transit of any major U.S. city.
FACT: Oklahoma leads the nation in diverting transit funds to other places.
FACT: Oklahoma doesn't invest jack squat into public infrastructure.

Breaking MAPS3 news

Jeff Bezdek is reporting on OKC Talk that the MAPS 3 Citizens Oversight Committee approved the "Option 1" timeline. I know that this puts SOME OF the streetcar project within expected timeline delivery, but not sure about other projects, since the streetcar is obviously my main concern at this point. I think Option 1 might be the original timeline proposed earlier by ADG, the local consultant for MAPS3. This original proposal put the park first, the streetcar second, and the convention center last.

Will edit this as more details become available.

edit: Evidently "Option 1" is different from the original timeline. Option 1 moves the convention center up 21 months in the timeline. It moves the Lower Park, Phase 4 river improvements (the "cosmetic improvements") , and Phase 2 of the streetcar project to the end of the timeline (anything beyond a 4-mile starter loop).

Well there you have it. Done deal.

My streetcar proposal

I just wanted to once again draw people's attention to what I'd propose for a starter streetcar system:


How would I expand this and turn this into a city-wide system, you ask?

(The wide lines represent double tracks, although also keep in mind several single tracks are spaced just a block apart, effectively forming a double track/transit mall.)

Like this. Mostly, something divided into a northside system with 23rd Street as the main drag, and a southside system with Robinson Ave as the main feeder, and all of it coming together downtown. It would be a system with 3 separate hubs, a main hub downtown for the downtown-area streetcar lines and for cross-town transfers, and a north and south side hub to separately run those systems as efficiently as possible.

That is how I'd turn OKC into a big streetcar city once again. The lines look funny. The system is pretty big and overbearing. But it is quite simple when you break it down into southside and northside, with downtown being the point of emphasis between the two.

The starter system alignments matter. The future expansion alignments don't matter that much. As long as certain districts get served, it is not worth debating as much as the starter lines. The reason for the difference is that how a Phase 2 or 3 district gets served doesn't effect how other districts get served in the same way that how Mid-town is served will have MAJOR effects for how Plaza and Paseo get served, and so on.

I also want to say one thing intended directly for the subcommittee: You can't focus too much on development potential, because all of OKC has that, even North Broadway. Don't let someone tell you that Broadway is difficult to develop or already mostly developed, because that's insanity, and you're not a development task force, you're an infrastructure task force. You guys are experts on infrastructure and have studied streetcar systems, not development, and I assure you there are experts on OKC development in their own right, and they all have differing opinions of their own. You guys need to worry about initial ridership numbers and making sure that the starter system is successful. That means it needs to go somewhere and appeal to existing districts. You guys need to focus on the Bricktown, Mid-town, Arts District, CBD, Deep Deuce, Automobile Alley, and other districts. You need to connect those districts to be successful, and that involves actually touching them, not throwing bones. Be pragmatic about where people go downtown right NOW, not where they could go 20 years from now, which unfortunately won't come soon enough for the starter system.

Somebody hurry up and fix the buses..

..before Pete White kills the streetcar. For those who saw the news tonight (a day late), streetcar is once again coming under fire after voters already approved the measure. The veteran City Councilor, known for his sharp criticisms of certain things, absolutely hates the streetcar project and has made no bones about it. He's not anti-transit, he's coming from the viewpoint that city buses are more important and that he wants the money to go to bus service.

I've been relatively quiet on this since it happened yesterday, waiting for other people to go first. I didn't want to be first because I spoke at the meeting yesterday and was in the room when Pete was being slightly disrespectful to Jeff Bezdek, a key figure behind the scenes for streetcar. I actually think Pete has the right idea, he's just going about it the wrong way. Very few people who support the streetcar don't support bus service, and the two are not at odds with eachother..they both have vital functions in any possible plan to revamp transit all over the city. It's just that he's playing a no-sum game. I'd like to opine in response to him, and I have just a few main points.

Facts that Pete White is ignoring
And when I say this I don't mean "Councilor White is the enemy." I just think he doesn't get the streetcar, or the realities of what the MAPS funding can do. I don't disagree with anything he actually says, because I can acknowledge that bus and streetcar are separate things. The idea is that you've got to divide and conquer, and come at transit from many different angles. We can't serve such a huge area as OKC without using a variety of different modes. I do agree with Mayor Mick's position that Mr. White and Mr. Bezdek are both right.

1. He's ignoring the entire idea of bus v. streetcar. He doesn't seem to understand how multiple modes of transit can work together and are needed to complete each other. He also doesn't understand WHY streetcar is better for downtown.

2. He's shown that he's out of touch with downtown. He doesn't regard it as a viable, important place--he regards it as city hall and Bricktown and that's it. He wants to talk about "normal people" who are waiting at the unsheltered bus stops at 74th and Santa Fe. To this I say: In 5 years there is no question that downtown will have more density and vibrancy than anywhere else in OKC, and it will not even be close, so there is no question where this streetcar has to go...downtown. There are even quite a few "normal people" living downtown who would use transit if they could.

3. He is not actually being proactive in presenting a solution for buses, he just wants to attack something that doesn't address buses because it doesn't address buses. I don't understand why he is playing this no-sum game.

4. He has not thought through the long-term costs of maintaining a MAPS transit system. Over 10 years you'll probably spend the same on a bus route that you will on a streetcar route, the difference being that one has enormous capital expenses and the other comes with enormous operating expenses. MAPS is a temporary tax and can not be a viable funding source for long-term transit operation, and furthermore, it is supposed to be spent on capital improvements and not operating. That at the very least IS in the MAPS 3 resolution, so they are at least legally bound there, I believe (or hope, admittedly).

5. Voters didn't approve a bus system. They approved what they voted for, which was downtown streetcar, nothing more, and nothing less. Furthermore, streetcar was the only big-ticket item that voters actually liked a lot. So to that extent, you could said the issue carried the ballot, because obviously sidewalks or senior centers that make up 10% of the overall money did not carry the measure unless voters are really really stupid.

6. He also doesn't understand what will happen as a consequence of streetcar. In fact the idea is so foreign to him that he blows it off and thinks a bus route would have the same effect.

What do we do now?
This does sort of change things. At this point, you have to start counting votes if you want to see transit actually happen. Unless you can find a compromise, it's very possible that Pete White could end up being a vital swing vote on the council, and we know what would happen then. Skip Kelly isn't going to be a reliable vote unless he feels his whole district is being served, despite that Deep Deuce and Bricktown are part of his district. Sam Bowman is going to want to see the system be bigger-picture than just downtown. Could he be placated with seeing a 10-year plan that includes expansion, or will he want to see the bigger picture represented in the first phase, and is that even possible? I understand other councilors have certain concerns and conditions of support, but I don't want to speculate on anything that hasn't been made public.

We have to evaluate how badly we want to stick to downtown, and what close-in options there are that be easily worked into a route. A downtown-only streetcar system right now (including "downtown" surrounding neighborhoods) is fool-proof in my opinion because of the geographic size of downtown (a narrow definition still gives you 2 square miles) and you can at least focus really good service on a small 2-sq mi region. It would be successful if the routes make sense. The risk with including some of downtown and some of the inner city is that you're trying to combine two incomplete systems into a complete system and hope that there is strong interaction between activity nodes. That's harder to rely on. Virtually every route I've seen that goes further out from downtown with only 6 track miles looks like a very fragmented beginning to an overall system. It's vital that the first phase be able to function as a complete system on its own because it's success will have an integral role in securing additional funding to expand the system and to do just what Pete White wants to see: offer comprehensive transit for the entire city.

Here are two examples of where we could be headed if political forces insist on the first phase going further than downtown. The top one is an example of a good downtown circulator that could be a phase all on its own, with the expansion routes already determined and just including phase 2 in the system preliminarily. So essentially, just emphasizing the future expansion of the system. The bottom example is if the first phase has to cover more ground, which is the only thing I see Pete White remotely accepting. That whole system is about 7.5 miles, so you could build all of it at once if OKC is able to secure more federal funding, or build all of except just go as far on the Plaza District line until you run out of funds.




I actually like the bottom route. I don't think it is possible to go to the south or northeast sides of the city no matter the political pressure on the streetcar process simply because of the black holes in the city that stand in between downtown and south and northeast parts of the city. You could have an urban vacuum in the middle of your 6-mile route, there has to be interest along the entire way, so that's where it's going to difficult to make a small starter system cover more ground than just downtown, which is still a larger area than we realize.

Step 1: Fix! Step 2: It!


If Pete White wants to play this no-sum game, then good lord, somebody hurry up and fix the damn bus system so we can move on! In order to do so, here's my suggestion: Actually talk about ideas for fixing the bus service. Some good ideas might include:

1. Funding. You have to make a long-term commitment to bus operating costs. There is no way to get around the fact that we simply need to increase the percentage of our annual city budget that goes toward bus service, currently it's not enough. However, it's a LOT more than what Mr. White infers. I have no idea what he's talking about when he goes off on a tangent about "scrounging around" to find $40,000 for bus service. That might be the salary of one bus driver, but I don't even know where he's coming up with that figure. OKC spends millions and millions on crappy bus service, and COTPA it still incredibly underfunded. What OKC needs to do is spend millions and millions more on bus service, and oh by the way, you can't even legally procure that from a temporary sales tax that was passed for capital expenses unless you want to spend $120 million on nothing but new buses and sheltered bus stops. That might be enough to put one out by 134th and Henney.

2. Focus more on the inner city. Ignore areas north of Nichols Hills and south of 240. There is no doubt that it will be politically difficult because there are people with transit needs all over the city, but OKC is not dense enough to justify it. All transit is subsidized, we just have to make sure revamped transit service is the most effective it can be. If it's effective and meaningful, who cares what it costs? There is no question that you have to provide public transit, and just to be clear, I certainly recognize Pete White as one of the prime proponents of that thinking. We just have too large and too sprawled a city to even come close to our goals if we don't narrow down the region that we will provide A+ bus service.


3. We have to re-do the routes. We have to get rid of the spiraling maze of confusion that is OKC's current bus route map and replace it with a grid system. Just have one or more buses follow ONE arterial for its entire length through the A+ service area. That way to get across town, from say N 36th and Walker to S 44th and Penn, just take the Walker bus down to 44th Street, and then take the 44th Street bus over to Penn. Easy.

4. Make the buses cleaner. I definitely don't want to get on a bus when my only experience with the OKC buses is being covered in fumes every time one passes me when I'm on a downtown sidewalk. They also need to introduce the blue florescent on-board lights that cities are switching to, because they prevent your fellow-riders from being able to find their vein.

Please, no "180" monkey wrench for streetcars

My latest concern about the stewardship of the voter-approved MAPS sales tax is the lack of urgency from COTPA and Alternatives Analysis in coming out with the streetcar route. The streetcar will probably end up being the second MAPS 3 project after the park, and if I had my druthers the streetcar would be first but I'm nobody. I will say that not putting the streetcar project first in succession will hurt the streetcar project more than it would hurt any other project, and we're talking about the issue that carried ballot and had the highest voter favorability. The streetcar needs to be the priority of MAPS 3 because voters simply did not respond as positively to the Core2Shore stuff, particularly the convention center. If they were separately voted on, streetcar might have been the only high-dollar initiative that passed, and as much as City Hall wants to pretend this was not the case, it should translate into leverage for streetcar backers. That alone is concerning.

What is most concerning however is that there seems to be no effort to publicly cooperate with the Project 180 construction, which could lead to the biggest fear of anyone looking for transparency, private cooperation. Let me rank in order the best outcomes for cooperation between MAPS streetcars and Project 180:

1. Public cooperation between the two
2. No cooperation at all between the two
3. Private cooperation between the two

Let me explain: I am afraid that COTPA's "Let's Talk Transit" and all their alleged due-diligence could be a complete farce if they don't come out with something soon. There will be major cost savings if they can figure out where the streetcar is going to go, and that's just obvious. What's less obvious is who's to say they don't know that? I would not be surprised if they don't decide to just let the city engineers behind Project 180 make the route decisions and then circle the wagon later by saying, "Well, we just didn't plan around it soon enough, because this is how the roads got built. Shucks, now we gotta put the route through here." Or however COTPA/MAPS 3 would come out and say that (probably by saying something to maintain more public confidence than "shucks" would).

There are private citizens backing this who are confident they will get the best route, and they're confident that they will be able to find common ground with COTPA and City Hall in getting a comprehensive streetcar system that pleases everyone, all the stakeholders involved. But one way COTPA can usurp the give and take process is if they use Project 180 to tie their own hands. For example: Most everyone wants Sheridan to be a transit corridor but it is impossible to lay tracks going one direction (I think west bound) down Sheridan because of the utilities underneath that side of the road. So that will not be in the route, whereas going the other way down Sheridan will work, so far as we know now. I don't think COTPA is manipulative so much as they're just a typical dumb government agency, but it is plain to see how this could throw a wrench in the planning phase. With its effect on the streetcar route, the people in charge of deciding where utilities will be buried NEED to have a talk with the streetcar route planners.

COTPA has had MORE than enough time to plan this route. They got a ton of feedback and surely it doesn't take them this long to figure out how to go against all of it. I also realize that ACOG is still doing the transit hub study. That was began at the beginning of this year, and I think COTPA is capable of talking to ACOG. I mean, they office in the exact same building (I think).

I would honestly rather there be no planning coincide between the two if it's not completely public, and have a transparent process where we get the best streetcar route even if a mistake is made and it ends up costing a few more million dollars. I'm not saying that this is what I think is happening or someone has told me something that has me jumping to a conclusion, because that has not happened. What has happened is everything you see in the news since the measure passed at the ballot box by a good margin. I just haven't seen a whole lot since then that has bolstered my confidence in this process, and over my lifespan COTPA hasn't exactly earned a great deal of good will either, and my pessimism and relentless over this is, in my opinion, entirely warranted until MAPS 3 gives more hope for transparency and COTPA gives more hope for competence.

As bad as COTPA has been throughout the last 10 years, let's face it. They're a helluva lot better than the city engineers behind Project 180..the people who refuse to let go of E.K. Gaylord (despite the Chamber's offer to "fix it" for us) and the NE 2nd Street "Sidewalkgate." I have absolutely no confidence in the ability of them to get it right, and at least COTPA is using consultants who vaguely know what this urbanism thingy is about.

Huh?

What is this Transport Politic article about? Gotta love it when outsiders bungle articles.. and in the comment section, talk about hijacked by Tom Elmore (LOL)..

Traffic circles, streetcars, pedestrian malls, oh my!

I just want to congratulate anyone and everyone who participated in one of the Let's Talk Transit public forums and took their beliefs public. It's often so easy to sit behind a computer screen and type and keep typing until you've written a how-to essay on what you want to happen in OKC, but it's harder to make the time to meet people in person and go before a group of strangers including city leaders and state your case. Those who participated did just that and left COTPA with the impression that the community is interested and is watching. I want to thank COTPA as well for giving us the chance to do this through the public forums, for paying attention to everything we said, and also for giving me the opportunity to be the guest blogger. Without much further ado I'll go into more detail on a few key points:

Routes: We're being told that any routes we may see mapped out are only preliminary. I want streetcar planners to realize that we know these maps will be the starting point for their system planning, so we ARE going to analyze the routes. Just because they are "preliminary" doesn't mean they're only preliminary. On the Let's Talk Transit website, Walter Jenny made the following comment on a previous blog entry of mine:

- Identify the purpose of the streetcar. It's not to move people from Edmond to downtown, for example. It's to move people around downtown once they're there.

This got me thinking. I myself, and others as well, have said a LOT about the importance of connecting the Oklahoma Health Center to downtown but since stressing that importance I've been waffling on the issue. Blair Humphreys made his case in an OKC Central guest post that given the track miles we have to work with, it is not worth connecting the Health Center to downtown for the purpose of the lunch rush. Given the frequency of having streetcars run every 15 minutes and carrying less than 100 people in each run, he has a good point. Is the lunch rush the purpose for connecting both sides of I-235? Of course not, but the point remains.

One of the things I'm hearing a lot about is the lack of simplicity in any of COTPA's preliminary routes. A lot of people have suggested that the routes indicate not listening to the people who have clearly expressed a desire to see Sheridan, Walker, and Broadway. I contend however that the routes show COTPA is listening to everybody and not just the majority and the experts and FAILING to commit to ONE alignment through an area, and the complex web of streetcar they've drawn up does seem to touch virtually every street for at least one-two blocks. Someone needs to tell them it doesn't work that way. For example, you can't describe to an out-of-towner where they can catch the streetcar and where it goes without turning blue in the face. You also do need to COMMIT to a corridor and stick to those corridors instead of interweaving in order to please every proponent of every corridor. While I'm not certain of this route and while I realize it misses key areas such as Deep Deuce (although some Deep Deuce residents have told me they are used to walking), here is my proposal for SIMPLICITY:



That would be within the 7 miles we have to work with and within the physical constraints that each corridor seems to have. For instance, Sheridan can't have a double track going in both directions due to the heavy underground utilities that exist underneath the south half of the street (eastbound lanes). Other constraints involve the traffic circles, and others also involve the underpasses underneath the elevated BNSF railroad (they lack the clearance for streetcar cables). Sheridan however is by far the most popular corridor thus it NEEDS a streetcar line and more than the 3-4 blocks COTPA has proposed.

Not that the COTPA routes are all that bad. I think that the red route could be really awesome if slightly tailored, as such:

All I changed about the red route was instead of southbound cutting west to Robinson on 4th, I kept the streetcar going down Hudson until Park where it turns west to Robinson. By touching Hudson/Park you've got Arts District coverage that the streetcar didn't before. I like the idea of CBD coverage as well--most people's routes seem to touch all of the periphery neighborhoods that make up downtown but NOT the downtown skyscraper core. Just because an area doesn't currently have mixed-uses doesn't mean it lacks potential for streetcar vibrancy.

Traffic circles: In the $835 million 2007 General Obligation Bond that the citizens passed by almost 90%, apparently there was funding for several more traffic circles. Traffic circles have been making their entry to the downtown area over the last few years, most notably in the Midtown area on both sides of St Anthony's--10th and Walker has a traffic circle and 10th and Dewey also has a traffic circle. I love these traffic circles and not only do they make the intersections very efficient but they also go a long way toward creating defined space and anchoring an area with an interesting street form and well-maintained streetscapes (intensive planting in the middle of the traffic circle). These traffic circles are GOOD things. They are also helping to extend Classen Drive which cuts diagonally (NW/SE) between Midtown and Heritage Hills. In the Classen Drive extension there are new traffic circles proposed to go in at 9th and Hudson, 8th and Harvey, and I think stopping at 7th and Robinson. You can view the 2007 GO Bond projects here at okc.gov. Getting to the point: These traffic circles are going to affect the route and we need to figure out what the deal is with these traffic circles SOON and before going any further.

There are surely some solutions to cutting through a traffic circle as well. The OKC traffic circles have too sharp of a turning radius for a streetcar to actually navigate the curve normally but perhaps a traffic signaling system similar to crosswalk lights (embedded street lights in the pavement that flash, stopping traffic when a pedestrian pushes a button) could be used and the streetcar route could just cut through the center pavers inside the traffic circle. Granted, you would still not be able to have a streetcar curve or intersection in the middle of a traffic circle, you just might be able to transect it evenly. Maybe.

Funding: A lot has been said about the funding ever since I brought up my concern that system expansion is not feasibly going to happen any time soon due to the funding mechanism, and especially considering COTPA has yet to identify a maintenance funding mechanism for this current starter system. The belief (or illusion) shared by many behind the streetcar initiative is that future expansions will be funded by the feds who have already begun issuing streetcar grants to cities. Let me just say this: Any city that is counting on the feds for any streetcar-related capital investment is deluding itself and needs to get off its arse and fund the damn thing itself. I don't want my taxes paying for streetcar in every city when we here in Oklahoma will likely NEVER see a dime for fixed guideway transit of our own. The reality is that the feds are very strict when they evaluate transit proposals and go for bang for the buck as well as FEASIBILITY. And they have strict determining factors for feasibility which take into account density, not the potential for density.

Also consider the people we send to Washington. These guys do everything they can to thwart transit funding and they're not going to go out of their way to secure transit funding for OKC, believe me. Remember in the 1990s when OKC was about to get a LIGHT RAIL grant from the feds to go with the original MAPS projects and disgraced Congressman Ernest "I-Took" Istook put the breaks on that? Let me state it again. Consider the people we send to Washington, these guys aren't on board with transit and will never go out of their way to secure funding so that their own community can have as decent transit as everyone else. These guys are obstructionist, self-defeatist, they do not believe in the greater good for the community and thus do not believe in the future of OKC and they're going to bring us down with 'em if we decide to rely on them for future expansions of this system. /end rant

Pedestrian malls: Another really cool idea that I think we ought to consider is integrating a streetcar corridor with a pedestrian mall. The result would be a street that incorporates numerous transit types, virtually everything except cars. It would have a bicycle lane, street vendors, a pedestrian mall, and a streetcar corridor connecting to other areas of downtown. Since Robinson is already such a screwed up one-way then two-way then one-way corridor why don't we just use Robinson for this? Between Park and Sheridan (adjacent to the Myriad Gardens) is where we could do this. An alternative is using Broadway between Sheridan and 4th, PROVIDED that SandRidge keep their buildings and builds up a Broadway streetwall.

Think about it:

We Talked Transit..apparently

Sorry I am just now getting around to writing up my recap for the Let's Talk Transit meeting waaaaay back on May 11. I've just been bogged down with work and of course, fighting SandRidge and now anti-preservation moron lawmakers--the topics that have very clearly preoccupied this blog lately.

But YES, there WAS a Let's Talk Transit streetcar public forum meeting on May 11..it was held at the usual time, 6 pm in the Hall of Mirrors, Civic Center 2nd floor.

Several points from other people first, and then I'll just finish with my own thoughts that I feel are relatively important to the subject. The format of this meeting was just open mic and attendants were encouraged to take the mic and voice their concerns for the streetcar system. In order to get us fired up, Mike McAnelly shared several potential streetcar alignments which I'm not even going to mention here because I think (hope) those were just to get us talking, and not something seriously being considered.

Jeff Bezdek: Jeff conveyed several great ideas, as usual, when he took the mic so I am going to start with him. The most important idea that he conveyed, as far as streetcar route alignment goes, is that there is a strong need to find a balance here and pick up people in destination areas in order for the streetcar to serve as an incubator for somewhere else. Put more simply, a streetcar with nobody riding on it does very little to actually invoke infill interest--it's the people that streetcar brings, not the streetcar itself. Jeff also publicly alluded to (for the first time I'm aware of) something that he privately mentioned to me at a previous meeting, so I'm going to assume it's okay to break the news: We may very possibly end up with more than $120 million for streetcar..and I don't think he is just talking about a fed contribution. I'm sure more details on this will be forthcoming when it's appropriate.

Dean Schirf: Dean, one of my co-transit bloggers, was quite possibly one of the foremost experts on rail in the room during the meeting. This, despite that he never officially headed up the campaign for streetcar nor is he the one getting paid by COTPA for consulting on streetcar. So it's with great respect and admiration when I preface this by saying that I actually have a disagreement with Dean when he said that it is important to start small and grow the system based on what we know works. He suggested that the wise thing to do would be to cautiously expand into 6 miles, in order to avoid any risks of going with a bad route. He also spoke up on the issue of the boulevard, which we can ALL agree with: The mythical boulevard still has not yet been funded, not by the city, not by the state, not by ODOT's 8-year plan, and not by the feds--and it is showing absolutely no signs of getting funded any time soon, either. So then why, on earth, is COTPA even suggesting that an E/W alignment share a route with the proposed boulevard? Yeah, it would be cool. Imagine it: A Paris-like street in the middle of OKC, lined with cafes and coffee shops and destination retail such as Nordstrom's, packed with pedestrians, super wide, with a streetcar going down it even. And then snap back to reality....

There was also a dude who showed up to argue for a $5 billion metro-wide light rail plan. He gave me a card, I lost it, forgot his name, forgot the name of his plan--but apparently he is serious about this. Personally I think he mislead a lot of people in the room into thinking that his private citizen initiative is a real deal like this streetcar project IS, but it was interesting nonetheless.

My own opinions: First, as for the "start small" concept, to me it's not a matter of the wisdom in the idea or being impatient to affect change. The bottom line is that if we do not have a system that is comprehensive and gets people everywhere they want to go, it will fail. So to that end, how does it help us to just gradually open a line that takes people up and down Sheridan and just Sheridan? When the ridership lags behind our hopeful wishes do we get to say, "Well, it's only the starter line, doesn't take people anywhere besides along Sheridan.." or is "Told ya so!" more appropriate?

I was speaking and Jennifer Eve, who was moderating, asked me to continue about how I feel about expansion..so I took a deep breath and this is what came out: The reality of this situation is really do or die for Oklahoma City. Here you have an infrastructure improvement that is so long overdue that it's easy to say just build the damn thing, whatever it is is we'll be happy with it. However, then it gets complicated. How much streetcar can $120 million buy us? That in my opinion is the MAIN QUESTION they should be asking, and NOT where can we stick 6 miles of streetcar? Because of the funding mechanism we are using for this project, any talk of expansion at the present is spurious--MAPS 4 will not even be a prospect until 2018 and a streetcar expansion can not be realized until 2025. We are committed to the overall MAPS 3 sales tax for the next 7-almost-8 years, and after that, we know the drill..voter approval, and then revenues must be collected BEFORE improvements begin. So yeah, don't even talk about expansion. What you have to do is design a system with the understanding that your hands are so tied by the funding mechanism that an expansion is not possible until 2025, or basically, a really long time.

Also my concern is with the project conception. Taking it like a scientific question, I think it asks the wrong question and has the control and variables inadvertently misplaced. The way COTPA has approached the question, the cost per mile is a constant and the route is the variable, the question being "How much can $120 million get us?" Instead I think that the route should be constant, the cost per mile should be the variable, and the question should be, "OK this is the route, now how much to spend per mile on it?"

See what I'm saying? There are certain things that make it more or less expensive per mile, and face it, the estimated $12-25 million per mile for modern streetcar systems is a HUGE range. If we come in closer to $12 million per mile, which would make me incredibly happy, then we could get 10 miles out of this system--and sure, we might not have some of the features that the $20 million/mile alternative would come with. But consider this: Which is going to attract more riders, a streetcar with bike racks and leather seats or a streetcar that connects Bricktown and Deep Deuce to the Oklahoma Health Center? We need to spend so much more focus on doing whatever we can to get slightly more than 6 miles. 8 miles would be great, and make a huge difference because in the current 6 mile system models I've seen, it is virtually impossible to do a good job connecting downtown districts and the medical district. I think that connecting the medical district is necessary due to the huge number of high-income jobs over there and the urban development growth that area is currently experiencing. But if you can't put a station in the middle of the medical district, don't even bother--there is no point in stopping at Lincoln and 8th because nobody is going to walk from 12th or 16th (OMRF) to get on the streetcar south of the medical district, basically.

Okay...so that's a LOT of issues, and a lot of debate, and a lot of respectful discourse. TOMORROW (Thursday) will mark the FINAL meeting of the Let's Talk Transit forum and it will basically consist of COTPA recounting back to us what we told them. It's a chance for us to see if they got our order right, basically. 11:30 am (lunchtime) and 6:30 pm, CITY HALL (not Civic Center).

Route evolution

Let's get straight to the issue surrounding COTPA's Let's Talk Transit forums. What people want to know is the route of the proposed streetcar system, when it's going to be built, and issues like that.

If you're still back on Page 1 and wondering what kind of rail we're doing and questions like that, just research "streetcar." Throw out everything you know about heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, etc--those types of mass transit are not designed to work effectively and safely within pedestrian spaces, do not make quick stops, travel too fast, and are cost prohibitive for a condensed (LOL at that one) downtown area. Streetcar is a cost-effective option that is also clearly the best-adapted to what we hope may at some point in the future be a good pedestrian area.

Now moving on. The route. That is the real issue, and probably one of the most complex issues that remain unresolved with MAPS 3 (besides how a powerless advisory board can possibly be relevant in anyway). It involves many complex issues, and possibly politics although I hope it doesn't come down to that.

Because of streetcar's incredible ability to stimulate infill development within 4 blocks of a streetcar line, you have to look at the potential of certain key nodes of activity in downtown, and not just what is presently there. With that said, you also want a good mix of current hotspots such as Bricktown, the Devon Tower site, Ford Center/Cox Center, etc. In my opinion the goal should be to maximize the best mix of potential infill stretches that link current hotspots. One example is the area between the CBD and the Walker Circle in MidTown, another example is the area between Bricktown and the OUHSC/Oklahoma Health Center area.

I would also encourage anyone looking at a route to heavily consider the potential to expand the system. For instance, if you go with a certain route, consider how an expansion to further-out important activity areas (such as perhaps the State Capitol, OCU, etc) would tie-in with what you're creating.

Then there are technical ramifications. Consideration of locating a hub for the system. What type of route configuration, are we going to go with a loop system, or a hub-and-spoke? I tend to prefer the loop because it's simple and incredibly easy to expand, difficult to mess up from a planning perspective--and with planning being what it is in the Heartland you definitely want to minimize the risk in that area. The mayor seems to prefer the hub-and-spoke system based off of what has been in the media, and I'm not one to question the planning expertise of Mayor Cornett. Actually though, the hub-and-spoke does offer a few advantages, the most important being that it seems you can cover more of downtown using the same 5-6 mile distance of track. That is a clear advantage that could make hub-and-spoke the best option for OKC if it chose to go in that direction with the streetcar project.

Like I mentioned, a loop route would be almost too easy. A hub-and-spoke system would require heavy coordination of tying in the different streetcar lines, a schedule that is a work of art, and of course it would require that every line be a double track.

Here's an interesting hub-and-spoke route that I put together. There are three overall lines: the Blue Line is just a strip down Sheridan Ave, the Red Line is just a loop that goes through MidTown and ties into..the Orange Line, which connects downtown and Bricktown to the OUHSC area and closely resembles the abstract route proposed by the Modern Transit Project led by Jeff Bezdek.

This is a good route in my opinion because it does a good job of tying sites that currently have high importance with areas that could see a lot of infill. The infill is important because that is almost the only area in which OKC stands to get an economic benefit out of streetcar, and the economic impact of downtown development shouldn't be underestimated. The areas in this system that would see a ton of infill are along Sheridan in the Film Row area, the "Medical Business District" along 10th Street, the area along Walker before you get to the Walker Circle, and also the area along Lincoln would stand to be built up.

The system also ties in a good array of important sites, starting with the hub which would be placed at Santa Fe Station. In the past I've talked about the opportunity to expand the Santa Fe Depot and build a true transit hub that ties into the east side of the Cox Center (which is currently an embarrassing blank wall), but it's the same general area. Realistically with streetcar, you don't need a hub, but it can be a valuable bonus to tie the streetcar into Amtrak, potential light rail/commuter rail to other parts of the city, bus services, among other modes of transportation. Other important sites that are linked by this system are Bricktown (from end to end), the OUHSC, Devon Tower, the Cox Center/Ford Center, Myriad Gardens, and OCU Law School along the Blue Line and the OUHSC leg of the Orange Line. The Red Line connects the Arts District, City Hall, Civic Center Music Hall, OKC Museum of Art, Walker Circle (restaurants), and so on. The Orange Line goes all the way down North Broadway and feeds off of the Automobile Alley area--imagine how awesome streetcar will look gliding along its rails with the historic storefronts of A-Alley behind it and the CBD skyline off in the distance.

And then, as for tie-in to potential expansion, here's what I've got in mind:

You can see where the goal here is mainly to connect the one remaining big activity area (the State Capitol) to the rest of the system and for the rest of the expansions, I think the best idea is to follow historic precedent. There are certain historic areas of our city that were originally built around streetcar expansions in the first place and these areas today still offer the best chance for success. For the most part, these are also the denser, cooler strips that could use a real hand in redevelopment--such as the Plaza District or Uptown. Future streetcar expansions should connect hot spots such as OCU, 23rd Street, the Asian District, Uptown, Plaza District, perhaps Western Avenue, Paseo, etc. Imagine the diversity that someone from out of town would come in contact with simply by riding the streetcar of OKC.

Critical thoughts on COTPA's leadership of the Maps III transit initiative

Vs.







Everywhere I turn on the web, from Steve's blog, Blair Humphrey's blog, OkMet, OKC Talk, and everywhere else, I can't help but notice the consensus that a downtown transit system has been replaced by anything and everything else. For the last two years the mayor has been campaigning for light rail, using the issue as the centerpiece of his civic initiative to make OKC more pedestrian-friendly, even lamenting the issue of streets built for cars, not people. I always thought he was spot on, and many of us had thought he had been turned into a rail advocate.

Undoubtedly I think we were wrong.. it seems that Mayor Mick is a pragmatic politician after all. When the public current seemed to favor light rail above any other potential initiative, we saw the mayor talk about how badly OKC needs something different for its transit system. Now that the business community has gotten serious about the convention center and the river, there's a lot of suspicion that transit has been relegated to the bottom of the food chain.

In many ways, it has been. Mayor Mick and the Chamber folks didn't necessarily put together a list that pushed transit towards the bottom of priorities. Instead what they did, whether as an intentional slight or not, was put COTPA in charge of the initiative. This means that the same people who have been running every transit proposal into the ground for the last two decades are now inflicting their usual incompetence on another great idea.

Two decades ago when city leaders embarked to put together Maps I, Ron Norrick initially wanted the proposition to include a downtown fixed transit system (I'm not sure if it was streetcar or light rail, but I think light rail, if I remember right). I was probably in 1st grade in Galveston, TX back when Maps I was passed, but from what I've heard and read, it was a combination of bad project management and former Congressman Ernest Istook's hidden agenda that killed the idea of light rail in OKC during the 1990s. Just think..if someone had been a better project manager, or had Ernest Istook not been taking money from the Oklahoma highway lobby..OKC would have had light rail before many of the cities that are now light years ahead of us. Like Dallas. They've ran the city bus system into the ground. If you disagree, try to make sense of their website for routes and schedules, etc. They've wreaked havoc on the downtown streetscape with their unsightly public garages that have ruined the look and feel of much of downtown. Essentially, where there is failure in downtown OKC, COTPA has usually been right behind it.

Many other blogs have been reporting that COTPA's transit initiative has been underwhelming city leaders, at best. This at the same time as fabulous presentations on Mike Knopp's proposal for more Oklahoma River investment, the business community wholly behind the convention center proposal, the Bricktown community behind an extension of the canal, and the bio community behind the idea of a new bio research facility in the medical district. Everyone has proved without a doubt that their project is worthy of Maps III funding except COTPA. They've officially ran out of ideas, ran out of steam, ran the downtown streetcar intitiative into the ground, and now they need to be ran out of town.

COTPA needs to be replaced with something else. A temporary solution is for the City to recognize Jeff Bezdek's Modern Transit Project group as the leadership behind the transit issue. It seems like a no-brainer. This group has passion, is personally invested in the issue (as downtown residents), they have new blood and new ideas, and they have done an excellent job of marketing what they are all about. Nobody can say they have no idea what they're proposing. They've clearly defined their project as STREETCAR, not LIGHT RAIL. They've done research and proposed a cost, they've proposed a route, and they've also done a brilliant job of integrating the streetcar project with other sustainability goals, by proposing that locally-harvested wind power be used to power the system. They've defined environmental benefits, sustainable benefits, health benefits, transit benefits, and urban benefits. They've also defined benefits from a regional competition standpoint, by comparing OKC to every other NBA city. Almost all of which have fixed rail systems.

If this private group were given the chance to make presentations alongside Knopp and the convention center boosters, they would knock the socks off of attendees, and we would see a downtown streetcar system be a virtual guarantee as a part of Maps III. If we continue to let the "know-how" at COTPA dictate the transit initiative, we will end up with no fixed transit system, and merely some token bus upgrades. It is better in the short-term, and the long-term, if slowly COTPA's responsibilities get moved over to other more captivating entities and COTPA is phased out.