Evolution to a sprawling metropolitan area comes with its headaches, not the least of which is public transit. And while many metro areas choose to address the issue of getting people from point A to point B only when it has become a problem, Oklahoma City and the surrounding municipalities are looking to get a handle on it long before then.

That was the thinking behind the formation of a steering committee that will advocate, guide and direct a regional transit dialogue to examine alternative modes of surface transportation systems for the Central Oklahoma region.

The questions the committee will be asked to answer are numerous: How much will it cost? Where will the money come from? How should the system be laid out? What modes of transportation should be implemented?

The answers to these questions will likely be decided by a regional transit authority, yet to be established.

While Edmond, Oklahoma City, Moore and Norman have all conducted their own traffic-pattern studies in the past, the committee – launched by the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments – is expected to lead to the formation of this new authority that will ultimately decide what the real answers will be.

In order to tap into federal funds, metropolitan planning organizations are required to do both short- and long-term transportation studies. ACOG is the agency charged to do just that.

According to ACOG’s most recent data, the average number of vehicle miles driven each day to work in the Central Oklahoma area is 16.86 miles, with an average drive time of 21.7 minutes.

STEERING COMMITTEE
Steve Kreidler makes that drive. He is the executive director of the University of Central Oklahoma. In his spare time, he’s a member of the transportation steering committee.

With an enrollment of more than 15,900 students, 1,800 employees and a budget in excess of $110 million, UCO now ranks among the top five universities in the country in size. Its location on the north side of the metro and the fact that, statistically, one out of every 100 metro residents attends UCO, Kreidler says the university needs to have a say in any regional transit dialogue.

“We’re very, very interested in how people are able to move back and forth,” he says. “Almost all of our students work, and we need to make sure our students can get back and forth to this campus and to their jobs and their homes in such a way now and in the future that traffic doesn’t become the thing that prohibits them.”

One thing Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett has always pointed out is that the city was built around the automobile. He says it’s time that line of thinking yields to greener, more cost-efficient alternatives.

“I think it reflects the evolving issue of this region and thinking more of a region, as opposed to just thinking of individual municipalities in our own worlds,” Cornett says. “Transit seems to be a good place for us to start the regional concept, especially if we start looking at rail entities and a more regionalized bus system. The purpose of the committee is to examine some other best practices that are existing, and see what’s pertinent to us and what’s not. There are a lot of models out there for us.”

DARTS
Denver and Dallas are two that will be studied extensively.

The Dallas Area Rapid Transit system moves more than 220,000 passengers per day through Dallas and 12 surrounding cities across a 700-square-mile service area. DART began in 1983 when 58% of voters in 14 cities and in Dallas County voted to back it.

Colorado’s Regional Transit District dates back to 1969. Today, it serves more than 40 municipalities in six counties with a service area of 2,337 square miles. More than 1,000 buses and 117 light-rail units shuttle some 313,000 people around each day.

At 621.2 square miles, Oklahoma City is among the top five cities in the country in terms of geographic area. At last count, Metro Transit had 56 buses.

“If we are going to create density in Oklahoma City, we’re going to have to have a better public transit system and create neighborhoods where people don’t feel they have to own a car,” Cornett says. “We know we’re an aging population, and we also have to assume gasoline prices are going to go higher rather than lower, so all of those are reasons to be planning for public transit.”

Kreidler says the alternative really isn’t an alternative.

“I really think that if we don’t get a unified approach – and an agreed-upon authorization for a unified approach – we’ll be doing this again in 20 years, and I don’t think we’ll be serving the citizens well,” he says. “I really think it’s a terrific approach if it leads to action. Planning is one thing, but it needs to lead to action. In some cases, this group has players at the table that can make some action happen relative to city expenditures.

“And in some cases, it will have bully pulpit opportunities to make a strong case for why investment in corrected, reasonable forms of transit makes good sense.”