plus agenda item 18 a new master plan for the LNC

ISSUE: LLOYD NOBLE CENTER MASTER PLAN – NC
ACTION PROPOSED:
President Boren recommends the Board of Regents:
I. Rank in the order presented below architectural firms under consideration to
provide professional services required for a master plan for the Lloyd Noble
Center and for improvements at the facility;
II. Authorize the University administration to negotiate the terms of an agreement
and a fee for these professional services, starting with the highest-ranked firm;
and
III. Authorize the President or his designee to execute the consultant contract.
BACKGROUND AND/OR RATIONALE:
The Lloyd Noble Center was constructed in 1975 with a major building addition
constructed in 2002. Current building area totals approximately 264,000 gross square feet. The
need has been identified for a comprehensive master plan for facility-wide improvements. The
master planning effort will require the services of an architectural consultant to provide
programming and to assist in the development of a comprehensive program. As funding is
available and improvements projects are approved and implemented, the selected consultant will
be requested to provide professional services for project design, construction documents and
construction administration
Looks like I'll be working on this project...

Looks like I'll be working on this project...

So, are we talking lipstick on pig type scope... or more like raise the roof, gut, and build straight up type scope?

I think 2002 was a re-freshening of the LNC and now they will be looking at major changes to the arena itself.

Not sure about raising the roof but I bet they'll reconfigure the bowl so that seating is more like a gym and less like a concert venue.

Looks like I'll be working on this project...

great ... from the peanut gallery suggestions include

a. some box/suites like the ones at the Mabee Center at either the top of the lower level or the bottom of the upper level

b. remove the Wall on the student end (at the minimum)

c. "square" the seating like they did at the erwin center (ut basketball)

I would have rather had a new arena but this is likely a much cheaper option.
I suppose what OU does will depend on how much money is available / donated.
I hope OU doesn’t drag out the construction for several years like they have with the baseball stadium.

Good point about the suites... You can bet that will be included because they are massive money-makers.

I would have rather had a new arena but this is likely a much cheaper option.
I suppose what OU does will depend on how much money is available / donated.
I hope OU doesn’t drag out the construction for several years like they have with the baseball stadium.

I know this would be more expensive, but I'd rather see them raise more money and put the arena on the south side of the football stadium where the football practice fields are located. Those fields could be put north of the football practice facility if a parking garage is built to replace that massive parking lot. That's my master plan that's not happening...

I know this would be more expensive, but I'd rather see them raise more money and put the arena on the south side of the football stadium where the football practice fields are located. Those fields could be put north of the football practice facility if a parking garage is built to replace that massive parking lot. That's my master plan that's not happening...

In the next few years if OU built a new arena I would favor a location north east of the football stadium in the area where OU has already been gradually buying up property’s.

This would be very close to the planed OU commuter rail and bus station. It would be within reasonable walking distance for most students.
Any parking improvements would be able to be used nearly every day and would help fans who attend football games and other events.
Obviously OU doesn’t have a large donor for this type of project and is going with a cheaper option.
Eventually OU will need part of the practice field land to enclose the south end zone.

Wasn't there a lot of talk about renovating the Field House north of the stadium into an arena?

Wasn't there a lot of talk about renovating the Field House north of the stadium into an arena?

No, they decided to put a bunch of money in it (which they've already done) and have it be for wrestling and volleyball.

In the next few years if OU built a new arena I would favor a location north east of the football stadium in the area where OU has already been gradually buying up property’s.

This would be very close to the planed OU commuter rail and bus station. It would be within reasonable walking distance for most students.
Any parking improvements would be able to be used nearly every day and would help fans who attend football games and other events.
Obviously OU doesn’t have a large donor for this type of project and is going with a cheaper option.
Eventually OU will need part of the practice field land to enclose the south end zone.

This is the best plan I've heard. I don't think it will happen anytime in the short term but could be part of a bigger athletics project involving the expansion of the stadium 5-10 years down the road.

I think student housing will be the next big short term project for OU. Once Headington Hall opens there will likely be a push to add more similar projects along Lindsey between Jenkins and Asp, and eventually replace Cate Center with a similar project in the future. Building up the research campus will also be a priority with more office buildings constructed, especially if the GE Energy research center is built there.

I can definitely assure you at OU will not be replacing Lloyd Noble anytime soon, its an unfortunate truth.

I don't believe replacing Cate will happen anytime soon either since they have been in the process of gutting and renovating the interiors of each cate building the last couple of years.

Not surprised that LNC is getting overhauled; don't there would have been the 2002-era rehab had their been any plans to build an entirely new facility.

Just in my little knothole, I'm still wanting to see OU redo the press box at Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. Its a nearly 40-year-old facility that was state of the art in its day, but from everything I've read, its in serious need of overhaul. One plan I heard was to raze the existing structure, then rebuild a new facility that would run the width of the west deck, including a combination of media facilities and high-roller suites. This was on tap just before the recession, haven't heard any new notions of subsequent plans...

Not surprised that LNC is getting overhauled; don't there would have been the 2002-era rehab had their been any plans to build an entirely new facility.

Just in my little knothole, I'm still wanting to see OU redo the press box at Oklahoma Memorial Stadium. Its a nearly 40-year-old facility that was state of the art in its day, but from everything I've read, its in serious need of overhaul. One plan I heard was to raze the existing structure, then rebuild a new facility that would run the width of the west deck, including a combination of media facilities and high-roller suites. This was on tap just before the recession, haven't heard any new notions of subsequent plans...


There are plans to renovate the press box, but not completely tear down and rebuild the structure.

There are plans to renovate the press box, but not completely tear down and rebuild the structure.

Could you expand on that? If you've got some good source material or links, that'd be awesome. Must say I'm not thrilled with a facelift, however. I guess they scrapped plans for the full rebuild?

Could you expand on that? If you've got some good source material or links, that'd be awesome. Must say I'm not thrilled with a facelift, however. I guess they scrapped plans for the full rebuild?

i have heard that the full rebuild is still on the table .. it will all depend on how much money they can raise

i have heard that the full rebuild is still on the table .. it will all depend on how much money they can raise

That's sure closer to what I have heard, Boulder. I guess a facelift is possible, but man it seems like a curious expenditure of money on an older structure.

I remember the press box issue being part of the stadium Master Plan from several years ago, if I'm not mistaken, and they were planning on rolling ahead when the economy went in the toilet and the monies dried up. I recall Joe C saying something to the effect of saying they'll go back to the project "when it makes financial sense" or words to that effect. The biggest issue I recall in planning were the additional expense associated with the complicated logistics of getting cranes and other heavy construction equipment into the stadium area given the presence of the parking garage. Oh, well, guess it will get done whenever it gets done. Seems like that's the last big piece to the puzzle for OMS for a while to come, as I really don't see them "bowling the corners" as many have commented any time soon.

That's sure closer to what I have heard, Boulder. I guess a facelift is possible, but man it seems like a curious expenditure of money on an older structure.

I remember the press box issue being part of the stadium Master Plan from several years ago, if I'm not mistaken, and they were planning on rolling ahead when the economy went in the toilet and the monies dried up. I recall Joe C saying something to the effect of saying they'll go back to the project "when it makes financial sense" or words to that effect. The biggest issue I recall in planning were the additional expense associated with the complicated logistics of getting cranes and other heavy construction equipment into the stadium area given the presence of the parking garage. Oh, well, guess it will get done whenever it gets done. Seems like that's the last big piece to the puzzle for OMS for a while to come, as I really don't see them "bowling the corners" as many have commented any time soon.

the numbers were around at one time ... the full redo of the west deck .. moving the press box to the top suites row .... and adding a club level would add 100-200 seats to the stadium .. but would generate lots of new revenue because of the new club level seats and extra suites

the numbers were around at one time ... the full redo of the west deck .. moving the press box to the top suites row .... and adding a club level would add 100-200 seats to the stadium .. but would generate lots of new revenue because of the new club level seats and extra suites

Exactly. I wish someone in the broader sports media could ask Joe C about this project in particular, if for no other reason than to satisfy my curiosity. I mean, isn't that good enough reason? :)

All kidding aside, I'd like to hear the status of that project (dead, delayed, or otherwise) from Joe C. I heard Stoops make overtures in this direction a few months back (commenting about the state of the press box at OMS), and thought surely that was the first volley in a campaign to get that project going - but it never went anywhere.

Surely there are some reporter types that lurk on this board and might come across this question, and could solicit a response from Joe C on it...I mean, its not like it would be some double-secret thing :) If the economy is picking up, surely the folks in the AD's office have a pretty good feel for the "temperature of the water" as it were for a project like this.

They might as well wait until they have adequate funding to do the west side right, and remove the entire existing press box and suites and then rebuild a new structure along the entire length of the west upper deck that has suites and a press level, probably 3 stories tall with glass to match the suites on the east side and a new brick facade over the entire west side. When you look at what schools like Nebraska and A&M are doing this would be considered a small project compared to major projects they have either under construction or planned.

And the upgrades to Cate Center were because they turned part of the complex into offices, and the window upgrades were 40 years past due. I wouldn't doubt that if they can configure that site to hold more students in higher rent units then OU will readily bulldoze those buildings, especially if they can also make it a mixed-use project with retail along Lindsey (similar to what they're doing with Headington Hall but more extensive). I do think they would infill the parking lot between Jenkins and Asp first.

i think they are talking about removing the entire west deck .. (not just the press box) .. and rebuilding it to match the east side

i think they are talking about removing the entire west deck .. (not just the press box) .. and rebuilding it to match the east side

Wow...Now I had *not* heard that one, Boulder. That's a monumental project that almost certainly couldn't be done in one off-season - heck, the demo on the existing structure would take up half that much time by itself. There'd be a ton of displaced season ticket holders for at least one season, to say nothing of the very high additional cost, combined with the fact that a true match with the east side would almost certainly result in a reduction in total seating capacity. I know the construction on the east side took one entire season to finish (during 2002), so it almost makes me suspect it might take two full football seasons to demo the existing deck, build a new twin-deck like the east side, and have a new pressbox atop it all. Wow.

See, that's why we need Joe C to come out and tell us what his "vision" is. Certainly he knows what he wants to do :)

The press box wouldn't be on top it would be part of the top club level. Ie below the top deck. And with the right schedule it could be done I believe in one off season.

Not saying that is what will happen. But I know it has been talked about

The press box wouldn't be on top it would be part of the top club level. Ie below the top deck. And with the right schedule it could be done I believe in one off season.

Not saying that is what will happen. But I know it has been talked about

Ahhh, okay, I gotcha. It would be incredibly tight, but they might be able to pull it off. The time to demo the existing structure would be the 800 lb gorilla to me.

Ahhh, okay, I gotcha. It would be incredibly tight, but they might be able to pull it off. The time to demo the existing structure would be the 800 lb gorilla to me.

no doubt .. it would be interesting to see if they could use/reuse some of the substructure .. or if they would have to demo to the ground ..

Pretty sure, but not positive, K-State just demolished and is re-building an entire side of their stadium in one off season.

Pretty sure, but not positive, K-State just demolished and is re-building an entire side of their stadium in one off season.

Nebraska is doing the same thing, among other schools. It can be done, but it does cost more $$$.

K-State needs a new stadium.

Michigan just totally renovated theirs.

K-State needs a new stadium.

Michigan just totally renovated theirs.

Think some wealthy benefactor threw a whole pile of money at KSU to rebuild one portion of their stadium a few years back, so I doubt a new facility is on the horizon right now..in fact, the structure of their renovation was very much a template for the way OU built the new east stands a few years ago.

Think some wealthy benefactor threw a whole pile of money at KSU to rebuild one portion of their stadium a few years back, so I doubt a new facility is on the horizon right now..in fact, the structure of their renovation was very much a template for the way OU built the new east stands a few years ago.

and kstate is in the middle of another multi phase renovation

Visited family that live next to Texas A&M. Last time I visited was 3 years ago - massive change. Talking to my uncle who use to teach there - and keeps up with what's going on - and he said they are undergoing a massive build up. The engr. schools are expecting to add 25,000 students in the next 5 years, growing the school from 50,000 - to 75,000. What I want to know is how all these schools are growing so much when tuition is getting to the point where people are seriously thinking about alternatives to college?

Visited family that live next to Texas A&M. Last time I visited was 3 years ago - massive change. Talking to my uncle who use to teach there - and keeps up with what's going on - and he said they are undergoing a massive build up. The engr. schools are expecting to add 25,000 students in the next 5 years, growing the school from 50,000 - to 75,000. What I want to know is how all these schools are growing so much when tuition is getting to the point where people are seriously thinking about alternatives to college?

The only way to fix tuition is for the Fed to come in and cut back on what the max loans they will hand out are. The problem is all the school administrators look at the stafford loans as free money so they hike tuitions to get as much of it as possible. The cost for education in this country is just messed up. At some point it'll snap back and administrators will get a wake up call of "what do you mean we are only going to take in half what we did last year."

From today:

4069

Headington Hall looks great. Huge presence on that corner.

The only way to fix tuition is for the Fed to come in and cut back on what the max loans they will hand out are. The problem is all the school administrators look at the stafford loans as free money so they hike tuitions to get as much of it as possible. The cost for education in this country is just messed up. At some point it'll snap back and administrators will get a wake up call of "what do you mean we are only going to take in half what we did last year."

well that and tuition doesn't cover the cost of school at most places

well that and tuition doesn't cover the cost of school at most places

Then they need to start operating like most businesses and get their costs in line. If their costs are so out of control that the main source of their income can't cover the costs, they should be like any other business and forced to reorganize or go out of business.

i think they are talking about removing the entire west deck .. (not just the press box) .. and rebuilding it to match the east side

I had only heard any desire of matching the seating to the other side from fans, specifically ones that were prone to knowing nothing of any details that school officials were considering.

Then they need to start operating like most businesses and get their costs in line. If their costs are so out of control that the main source of their income can't cover the costs, they should be like any other business and forced to reorganize or go out of business.

well there is a pretty solid thought that higher education is in the public's interest .. thus it is subsidized .. pretty much every college in America public and private is outside of just a few ..

Then they need to start operating like most businesses and get their costs in line. If their costs are so out of control that the main source of their income can't cover the costs, they should be like any other business and forced to reorganize or go out of business.

So, we should dumb down the schooling? Increase class size? Hire less effective and cheaper professors? Reduce academic and other support? Quit building new classrooms? No more new dorms? Quit taking care of the facilities? Don't offer counseling? Quit buying computers? Don't provide space and labs for research? Quit recruiting efforts? etc., etc., etc.

What costs do you think are out of line? Just curious.

So, we should dumb down the schooling? Increase class size? Hire less effective and cheaper professors? Reduce academic and other support? Quit building new classrooms? No more new dorms? Quit taking care of the facilities? Don't offer counseling? Quit buying computers? Don't provide space and labs for research? Quit recruiting efforts? etc., etc., etc.

What costs do you think are out of line? Just curious.

I'd be content with a much more straightforward tuition and fee scheme. IIRC, OU is toying with that very idea that would standardize the cost to a student from semester to semester and encourage a quicker completion. I have always been appalled by the Anschluss of fees you can find on your Bursar's statement -- hidden costs that only the experienced student knows to expect. Weren't you just recently stating how you wanted to see the football ticket price reduced to avoid another add-on fee? Are you not satisfied with the entertainment value as currently priced?
Irrespective of the fee issue, venture79's argument is a very well documented point that shows how a good business will raise prices based on fund availability (supply and demand) and funds have never been more government-subsidized than in the last couple of decades.

venture79's argument is a very well documented point that shows how a good business will raise prices based on fund availability (supply and demand) and funds have never been more government-subsidized than in the last couple of decades.

I'll drink to that. :banghead:

So, we should dumb down the schooling? Increase class size? Hire less effective and cheaper professors? Reduce academic and other support? Quit building new classrooms? No more new dorms? Quit taking care of the facilities? Don't offer counseling? Quit buying computers? Don't provide space and labs for research? Quit recruiting efforts? etc., etc., etc.

What costs do you think are out of line? Just curious.

Who said anything about dumbing it down? The rise in tuition costs for students is pretty well noted across the board. That has also happened thanks to the government now giving students somewhere around $67,000 for their first degree and another large sum for their masters. Schools see that as easy money to go after and they do.

The OU campus is starting to look really good...

The OU campus is starting to look really good...

nice transition haha. My only complaint is that I wish the other Tower dorms looked like Headington Hall..it's unfortunate that the Towers were built when they were (a la Cabrini Green/Pruitt Igo) haha.

Who said anything about dumbing it down? The rise in tuition costs for students is pretty well noted across the board. That has also happened thanks to the government now given students somewhere around $67,000 for their first degree and another large sum for their masters. Schools see that as easy money to go after and they do.

So, I am asking you, how do the "go after it"....by trying to educate as many students as possible? You want them to educate fewer or in a worse way? You said their costs were out of control, so I am asking you to justify the statement. HOW are they out of control? People love to make these great generalizations without regard to fact or logic. Which is it - costs are out of control or they are recruiting too many kids?

nice transition haha. My only complaint is that I wish the other Tower dorms looked like Headington Hall..it's unfortunate that the Towers were built when they were (a la Cabrini Green/Pruitt Igo) haha.

I'd really like to see a master plan for the land between Elm Ave. and Jenkins Ave. from Lindsey St. south to Timberdell Rd. There are many buildings in this area, but I find most of them ugly outside of the Henderson Cultural Center and the new power plant that was just built. It's not an attractive building, but it isn't going anywhere.

Obviously this is just my personal preference, but the buildings I'd like to see replaced are the Sooner Suites, the old Cross Center dorms/offices, and the dorm towers along with the Cate Center dorms/offices and the Honors College. These are ugly buildings that do little to maximize the potential of the real estate they sit on.

I also would like to see a serious revamp of the student housing at OU to replace the towers with something like Headington Hall. I know they just "renovated" the towers, but honestly, it was a typical Oklahoma renovation/disappointment. New paint and supposedly it's all better. It was a massive waste of money. I think it would be cool if they could have the South Oval extended through this part of campus in between the dorms. They could then build around that. I just really don't care for the buildings that are there now.

I'd really like to see a master plan for the land between Elm Ave. and Jenkins Ave. from Lindsey St. south to Timberdell Rd. There are many buildings in this area, but I find most of them ugly outside of the Henderson Cultural Center and the new power plant that was just built. It's not an attractive building, but it isn't going anywhere.

Obviously this is just my personal preference, but the buildings I'd like to see replaced are the Sooner Suites, the old Cross Center dorms/offices, and the dorm towers along with the Cate Center dorms/offices and the Honors College. These are ugly buildings that do little to maximize the potential of the real estate they sit on.

I also would like to see a serious revamp of the student housing at OU to replace the towers with something like Headington Hall. I know they just "renovated" the towers, but honestly, it was a typical Oklahoma renovation/disappointment. New paint and supposedly it's all better. It was a massive waste of money. I think it would be cool if they could have the South Oval extended through this part of campus in between the dorms. They could then build around that. I just really don't care for the buildings that are there now.

I think this will happen in time. Infill that entire area along Lindsey in between Jenkins and Elm with new student housing similar in style to Headington Hall. Even have some streetfront retail and restaurant space along Lindsey. And yes extend the south oval southward as a common green space between the new dorms. The highrise towers will probably be around for awhile but I could see Cate and Cross replaced within 10 years. There have been recent renovations in both but mainly to create additional office space and bring the buildings up to bare minimum for code-compliance. If OU were to build an office building elsewhere on campus that would free up the space in Cate/Cross..

Anyone know the current status of renovating the Huffman Center and adding the aquatic center expansion? That was a project that was put on hold a few years ago and hadn't heard anything new about it. That would be another reason to build up student housing in that area since the Huffman would be literally next door with new indoor pools and a big outdoor pool area on the south side of the building (adjacent to the new utility plant).

The reason universities are struggling is because state's are cutting funding like never before. Public education should not be operated like a business because the objectives are vastly different. Bringing the business model into education has resulted in failure many times over. Our society benefits from great institutions of learning. If Oklahoma wants to be taken seriously then it should be investing in its universities, not raising tuition and making it financially unwise for students to attend college.

The reason universities are struggling is because state's are cutting funding like never before. Public education should not be operated like a business because the objectives are vastly different. Bringing the business model into education has resulted in failure many times over. Our society benefits from great institutions of learning. If Oklahoma wants to be taken seriously then it should be investing in its universities, not raising tuition and making it financially unwise for students to attend college.

So would you then say that public universities should be free to anyone that wants a public education? Granted anyone could go to community college and essentially have that with the current level of Pell Grants.

nice transition haha. My only complaint is that I wish the other Tower dorms looked like Headington Hall..it's unfortunate that the Towers were built when they were (a la Cabrini Green/Pruitt Igo) haha.

Yeah, OSU tore down or is tearing theirs down. Texas sure has 'em though. TCU also tore theirs down for a fabulous new res life green.

Yeah, OSU tore down or is tearing theirs down. Texas sure has 'em though. TCU also tore theirs down for a fabulous new res life green.

TCU's new facilities are great. Most big universities still have them, but they're hideous and need to be torn down.

Most big universities still have them, but they're hideous and need to be torn down.

Let's line Lindsey with a few Headington Hall-type student housing buildings first, and then tackle the Towers. :)

More for the other thread, but hopefully eventually private developers will begin building their own high density student-focused housing projects north of OU in and around Campus Corner, and also east of campus closer to the tracks. Surround the campus on three sides with high density residential and keep the academic and office functions in the core area in between.

hopefully eventually private developers will begin building their own high density student-focused housing projects north of OU in and around Campus Corner, and also east of campus closer to the tracks. Surround the campus on three sides with high density residential and keep the academic and office functions in the core area in between.

I'm really surprised we haven't seen more of this, especially with the large growth in enrollment and Norman growing in general.

Apart from CC there is very, very little private development near the campus.

Isn't Norman still blocking high density development in its core? Developers have a great plan on the table and the city council has effectively put them on hold over and over. Maybe I'm missing something.

Isn't Norman still blocking high density development in its core? Developers have a great plan on the table and the city council has effectively put them on hold over and over. Maybe I'm missing something.

You could say the city council is doing it, but technically the developer is asking for delays until the city gets the codes worked out.

I'm really surprised we haven't seen more of this, especially with the large growth in enrollment and Norman growing in general.

Apart from CC there is very, very little private development near the campus.

The biggest problem with new privet development near OU's campus is the lack of vacant land.

In most cases older homes and buildings would need to be torn down to make the land available and past members of the city council have spoken against doing this.
Lots in this area are often very small and not everyone is willing to sell even at great prices. In many cases a developer would likely need to be willing to wait many, many years to buy enough land in one area to build anything major.

Increasing the value of the land is about the only way higher density will occur on any scale.
The value of the land would be increased by decongesting the area via building several streets with more capacity and with commuter rail.
This would make the area a more realistic place to live for more people who have higher incomes.

Increasing the value of the land is about the only way higher density will occur on any scale.
The value of the land would be increased by decongesting the area via building several streets with more capacity and with commuter rail.
This would make the area a more realistic place to live for more people who have higher incomes.

There are definitely more ways to raise value of land than by "decongesting" (and I don't believe this area is congested at all) areas and commuter rail.

I will definitely say that the streets surrounding campus can hold enough capacity...capacity isn't an issue. Those roads function fine (they'd function better and more efficiently by replacing stoplights with roundabouts, but that's another story). Redoing some major street-scapes along lindsey, boyd, university, asp (north of campus corner) would definitely help land values though. However, Land Value in that area is already high because of the proximity to the university...and there's already a lot of money living around campus...just look at some of the houses just west of campus, some streets northwest of campus, little neighborhood off to the east of campus (east of classen and south of boyd). There's money living around campus, that's not a problem.

I'll agree that acquiring enough property is an issue for a medium-rise mixed use-type development.

There are definitely more ways to raise value of land than by "decongesting" areas and commuter rail.

I will definitely say that the streets surrounding campus can hold enough capacity...capacity isn't an issue. Those roads function fine (they'd function better and more efficiently by replacing stoplights with roundabouts, but that's another story). Redoing some major street-scapes along lindsey, boyd, university, asp (north of campus corner) would definitely help land values though. However, Land Value in that area is already high because of the proximity to the university...and there's already a lot of money living around campus...just look at some of the houses just west of campus, some streets northwest of campus, little neighborhood off to the east of campus (east of classen and south of boyd). There's money living around campus, that's not a problem.

I'll agree that acquiring enough property is an issue for a medium-rise mixed use-type development.

Trey I agree with you. I cannot fathom the reasoning why we would even entertain adding more streets and such to an area that would be ripe for higher density developments. Adding more streets and such is only gong to serve the commuter/suburbia crowd that has no intention of living in a higher density area. Norman has plenty of areas where suburbanites can go and live with out destroying the quality of life that some of these older neighborhoods provide. If we can couple all of this with a commute rail station, completely with more high density development like what Kerry has proposed in the past, on Boyd or Lindsey then it is even better.

More streets is not going to be an answer. There are plenty of them.

Trey I agree with you. I cannot fathom the reasoning why we would even entertain adding more streets and such to an area that would be ripe for higher density developments. Adding more streets and such is only gong to serve the commuter/suburbia crowd that has no intention of living in a higher density area. Norman has plenty of areas where suburbanites can go and live with out destroying the quality of life that some of these older neighborhoods provide. If we can couple all of this with a commute rail station, completely with more high density development like what Kerry has proposed in the past, on Boyd or Lindsey then it is even better.

More streets is not going to be an answer. There are plenty of them.

The street connectivity west of campus (to berry) and north of campus (all the up to main and beyond) is fantastic! There's never any traffic on those streets because there are multiple streets with smaller blocks and they all connect and don't dead end. What a novel idea eh? Make streets connect and you don't have congestion of people forced to take one or two roads to get somewhere. This is the problem you see on Lindsey west of berry. Many of the neighborhood streets leading from campus over towards berry dead end before they get to berry...thus people are forced to get onto Lindsey, creating traffic. Too bad they don't connect to berry and beyond.

Back to what we were talking about.....the street connectivity around campus is fantastic and definitely provides the bones for future mid-level development around campus (similar in form to headington hall).

There are definitely more ways to raise value of land than by "decongesting" (and I don't believe this area is congested at all) areas and commuter rail.

I will definitely say that the streets surrounding campus can hold enough capacity...capacity isn't an issue. Those roads function fine (they'd function better and more efficiently by replacing stoplights with roundabouts, but that's another story). Redoing some major street-scapes along lindsey, boyd, university, asp (north of campus corner) would definitely help land values though. However, Land Value in that area is already high because of the proximity to the university...and there's already a lot of money living around campus...just look at some of the houses just west of campus, some streets northwest of campus, little neighborhood off to the east of campus (east of classen and south of boyd). There's money living around campus, that's not a problem.

I'll agree that acquiring enough property is an issue for a medium-rise mixed use-type development.

When it very often takes 20 to 30 minutes to drive to the major shopping areas on the west side or to the interstate from the neighborhoods around campus its a major deterrent to many who would love to live near campus. Wasting this amount of time just isn't a option for more than a few folks who have more than enough money to live any place they would like. Eliminating this area as a option to live in for many professionals holds prices down and slows redevelopment.

Most of the city streets near campus are of antiquated design, have very poor drainage and are in various states of crumbling condition and by any reasonable assessment they do not come even remotely close to meting the needed capacity. If they haven't already they will be hindering the growth and development of OU and nearby areas. I know many people who avoid the campus areas just based on the congestion, so it is impacting area business sales to some extent.

When compared to other major university’s OU has scored poor marks for its access.

When it very often takes 20 to 30 minutes to drive to the major shopping areas on the west side or to the interstate from the neighborhoods around campus its a major deterrent to many who would love to live near campus. Wasting this amount of time just isn't a option for more than a few folks who have more than enough money to live any place they would like. Eliminating this area as a option to live in for many professionals holds prices down and slows redevelopment.

Most of the city streets near campus are of antiquated design, have very poor drainage and are in various states of crumbling condition and by any reasonable assessment they do not come even remotely close to meting the needed capacity. If they haven't already they will be hindering the growth and development of OU and nearby areas. I know many people who avoid the campus areas just based on the congestion, so it is impacting area business sales to some extent.

When compared to other major university’s OU has scored poor marks for its access.

So you're saying that no professionals that live near campus? I'll disagree with that, since there are many large homes with large values surrounding many areas of campus.

The only issue you have brought up is connectivity of neighborhood streets to the rest of Norman. That's a problem rooted in the suburban street pattern found in Norman, IE west of berry (if we're talking strictly in the campus area). Like I said in a previous post, the issue is STREET CONNECTIVITY, not the "antiquity of streets" or the size of streets. If you connect your streets better, people have MULTIPLE options of getting around instead of 1 major road, lindsey. That's the root of the problem, street connectivity. The street is plenty big, there's just not enough connected through streets. Connected Streets combined with Lindsey's street lights are the problem...the latter can be fixed with roundabouts at major intersections, the former will be harder to solve.

But let's be sure and understand the root problem, it isn't capacity......it's connectivity.

Look at the picture I've attached, you can see that there are only two streets that connect ALL the way through, consistently, from 24th SW to campus. Street connectivity is Norman's biggest problem, linking western shopping/interstate to campus. 4135