Man, that's some amazing traffic counts! So crazy that EK gets 15,000 vehicles per day but a yet to be designed boulevard is going to have 94,000?! Get tha f outta here ODOT!

Do you remember when ODOT came out that they were going to cut off the exit at Lindsey? This reminds me of it. ODOT's management uses diversion tactics to push through things. They spend hundredes of thousands of dollars on designing projects they know will never happen. WASTING OUR MONEY!

I met a guy that works for ODOT and he said the Lindsey exit was never going to get terminated. He said they did that because they wanted the public distracted when they moved HWY 77 from Porter to 12 Avenue. He said they wasted a about $80,000 on the designs they all knew weren't going to happen.

This sounds exactly the same. Why would they build a Boulevard with bridges and exit ramps that will cost 30 times more than an at grade boulevard? They are trying to push something else! What it is I don't know. They may be trying to get the city to take control and pay for everything or there may be a highway project on the northside of the city that they are trying to make changes to, that they don't want people to notice.

I am 90% sure this is what they are doing. I am not friends with the guy at ODOT anymore so I can't ask him, but this is what I feel in my gut!

ODOT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED FOR WASTING TAX PAYER DOLLARS! If not for this project, definitely for the I35 HWY 77 misdirection tactics!

Do you remember when ODOT came out that they were going to cut off the exit at Lindsey? This reminds me of it. ODOT's management uses diversion tactics to push through things. They spend hundredes of thousands of dollars on designing projects they know will never happen. WASTING OUR MONEY!

I met a guy that works for ODOT and he said the Lindsey exit was never going to get terminated. He said they did that because they wanted the public distracted when they moved HWY 77 from Porter to 12 Avenue. He said they wasted a about $80,000 on the designs they all knew weren't going to happen.

This sounds exactly the same. Why would they build a Boulevard with bridges and exit ramps that will cost 30 times more than an at grade boulevard? They are trying to push something else! What it is I don't know. They may be trying to get the city to take control and pay for everything or there may be a highway project on the northside of the city that they are trying to make changes to, that they don't want people to notice.

I am 90% sure this is what they are doing. I am not friends with the guy at ODOT anymore so I can't ask him, but this is what I feel in my gut!

ODOT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED FOR WASTING TAX PAYER DOLLARS! If not for this project, definitely for the I35 HWY 77 misdirection tactics!

What else would they want besides an elevated bridge? I think your general idea is correct, but I think the ODOT's "Super Circle" is the misdirection.

I truly think ODOT thought no one would notice or care before they started seeing bridge piers going up. People started putting two and two together when they saw what the area would look like without an elevated bridge.

ODOT will probably note this for future projects and immediately start construction right after demolition.

Man, that's some amazing traffic counts! So crazy that EK gets 15,000 vehicles per day but a yet to be designed boulevard is going to have 94,000?! Get tha f outta here ODOT!

Yeah, its amazing how the city is still operating with no boulevard at this time. Lol

Yeah, its amazing how the city is still operating with no boulevard at this time. Lol

Laughter aside, do you really think there's going to be a displacement of 80,000 vehicles between Gaylord and the new boulevard? Come on now...

“It makes no difference to us, the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, whether the road is built as was our promise to citizens in 1998 or we build a roundabout,” Evans said.

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-group-questions-highway-engineers-roundabout-design/article/3696173#ixzz21w2Zl9J4

Unfortunately, I don't remember hearing about that promise in 1998. But then again, I was only fourteen. I just don't understand how this issue has been swept under the rug for so long.

Why would they build a Boulevard with bridges and exit ramps that will cost 30 times more than an at grade boulevard? They are trying to push something else! What it is I don't know. They may be trying to get the city to take control and pay for everything or there may be a highway project on the northside of the city that they are trying to make changes to, that they don't want people to notice.


There is some deception involved, but probably more on the part of what the consulting groups like to call "interested stakeholders". The types of people Cornett has been courting to get them to move downtown. All people have to do is take the Shields exit, it is closer to the CBD anyway. But they want to keep taking Western and clogging up traffic. If Nichols and Hamm wanted an above grade expressway, do you think they would publicly support it or just have a talk with Cornett??

Some important context from Steve about what downtown OKC looked like in 1998 when "promises" were made:

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2012/07/27/context-1998/

Laughter aside, do you really think there's going to be a displacement of 80,000 vehicles between Gaylord and the new boulevard? Come on now...

I would say no, but with that being said westbound boulevard traffic on the East end would be significantly higher than Shields/Gaylord since traffic from three different directions is funneling into it and there is also no Shields off-ramp.

What is ODOT saying about the traffic count for Western? Im sure that is overstated.

Edit: Now that I think about it. E..K. Gaylord North of the boulevard will see an increase in traffic when the new boulevard configuration on the east end is put in place.

Whoever has the authority to set the speed limit for the boulevard will end up determining the actual traffic count. If they make it 35 like most existing streets, or lower, there will be less motorist demand I would think. If ODOT is determined to crank it up to 45 mph, they certainly have the power to eventually fulfill their predition of 90,000+. There isn't anything at all wrong with 10th street or 4th street. 4th is awesome and underutilized. It would begin to siphon off traffic from the boulevard if traffic came anywhere near 90k.

How many people work downtown or visit downtown during a general business day ? Traffic counts need to be subjected to time frames. How many cars going in what direction from 7:30 am to 8:30 am at any given location, or 4:30 pm to 5:30 pm at a specific location. If you divide 90,000 by 24 hours the average is 3,750 cars per hour. We all know it doesn't work that way, but truly ODOT is manipulating the numbers to their advantage. Just because of how they represented with the 10 point traffic circle, they are over due for a public grilling.

Man, that's some amazing traffic counts! So crazy that EK gets 15,000 vehicles per day but a yet to be designed boulevard is going to have 94,000?! Get tha f outta here ODOT!

x10.

I wish I had a job where I could just make stuff up. ODOnT has collectively lost their minds. Showing a traffic circle to ODOnT is like showing a cross to Dracula or fire to Frankenstien

m-hthLLrHA0

That was some good solid reporting in Saturday's Oklahoman. Thank god for Steve.

Are There Other Options?

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2012/07/28/are-there-other-options/

Flashback: Route Chosen for New Interstate 40

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2012/07/29/flashback-route-chosen-for-new-interstate-40/

Well worth a read - there's lots to digest here....

Very helpful to understanding where this came from. Notice the similarities between this debate and the one back then? Numbers were being tweaked to justify the outcome. Also note that the city had their own independent consultants that did not agree and they were still "overun" by ODOT. A few specific engineers run this town my friends.

I found McCaleb's quote at the end of the story very revealing. It seems to typify the attitude of ODOT and too many other officials. We are up against quite a bit of long standing political inertia but I remain hopeful......

Very helpful to understanding where this came from. Notice the similarities between this debate and the one back then? Numbers were being tweaked to justify the outcome. Also note that the city had their own independent consultants that did not agree and they were still "overun" by ODOT. A few specific engineers run this town my friends.

Overrun by.ODOT and the FHA.


But federal highway administration representatives attending the meeting said the railroad tracks already divide the neighborhood. North-south streets passing under the tracks can be rebuilt to cross over the completed highway, they said.

If this is still their attitude then I don't expect any support from the FHA.

I found McCaleb's quote at the end of the story very revealing. It seems to typify the attitude of ODOT and too many other officials. We are up against quite a bit of long standing political inertia but I remain hopeful......

You mean the bit about how "the citizens advisory board has been working for us in this process for three years” before plans became regrettably public?

My email to the mayor was forward down to Eric Wegner.


(Catch22) -



I received your email from the Mayor's office, and very much appreciate your interest in the Oklahoma City Boulevard project. The Oklahoma Department of Transportation is managing the project, and as you know, the planning and design is underway. They have been working closely with the City of Oklahoma City, and many ideas about the overall design have been discussed. Mayor Cornett has been involved, and the design team includes engineers, planners, a walkability expert and other consultants to help ensure the design provides the best project possible. There are many options being considered for the various components of the new roadway, including how to best address traffic flow but also to consider important elements such as future development and walkability. At this time, no decisions regarding a final design have been made. But based on progress to date, I am confident the new Boulevard will provide many new ground level opportunities, especially through the downtown core and into the Bricktown areas.



Your concern about the Boulevard being elevated is shared by many, but I believe it is due to lack of drawings and renderings that are not yet available. Although the Boulevard includes elevated sections to provide access and connections to I-44, and also to I-35/I-235, there is a significant portion of ground level roadway that is being designed to ensure opportunities for downtown access and future development. The current design ground level portion begins just east of Western Avenue and extends to the east side of Oklahoma Avenue, near the Harkins Theater. This nearly 10 block section will create several new intersections at Walker, Hudson, Harvey, Robinson, Broadway, Gaylord, and Oklahoma that don't exist today. In addition, since the new roadway will be narrower than the former highway, many areas of the existing highway right-of-way adjacent to the new boulevard will be available to further enhance development and pedestrian opportunities.



The City's goal is to develop a new boulevard that will significantly enhance the downtown Oklahoma City area. In order to provide better information, City staff is working with ODOT to make a presentation to the City Council on July 31st, which will be during their regular meeting. This meeting will be aired on Cox Channel 20 and will also be available on the City's website at www.okc.gov. ODOT has also tentatively planned a public meeting on August 21st, and we are awaiting confirmation of the time and location. I'm certain notices will be sent by ODOT as this public meeting is important to the design process.



Thanks again for your interest, and I hope you will take the opportunity to follow the update to Council and also participate in the upcoming public meeting.



Eric



Eric J. Wenger, P.E.

Director Public Works/

City Engineer

(405) 297-3486

eric.wenger@okc.gov

If this is still their attitude then I don't expect any support from the FHA.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't expect any support from the FHA, either, but they did insure my first mortgage, which is nice.

I've been giving that statement a great deal of thought. I think things are different. The FHWA and lawmakers aren't beholden to Ernest Istook. I was in some of those meetings after the decisions had been made via the Chamber. That was a different time.

Your concern about the Boulevard being elevated is shared by many, but I believe it is due to lack of drawings and renderings that are not yet available. Although the Boulevard includes elevated sections to provide access and connections to I-44, and also to I-35/I-235, there is a significant portion of ground level roadway that is being designed to ensure opportunities for downtown access and future development. The current design ground level portion begins just east of Western Avenue and extends to the east side of Oklahoma Avenue, near the Harkins Theater. This nearly 10 block section will create several new intersections at Walker, Hudson, Harvey, Robinson, Broadway, Gaylord, and Oklahoma that don't exist today. In addition, since the new roadway will be narrower than the former highway, many areas of the existing highway right-of-way adjacent to the new boulevard will be available to further enhance development and pedestrian opportunities.


Is he really this ignorant, has a different definition of "ground level" or just lying through his teeth?

I wouldn't expect any support from the FHA, either, but they did insure my first mortgage, which is nice.

That is the subject of a whole other debate about development patterns since WWII. I would strongly argue against the "which is nice" part.

For those that are confused: FHA - Federal Housing Authority. FHWA - Federal Highway Adminstration. Both agencies work everyday to make American just a little worse than it was the day before.

Is he really this ignorant, has a different definition of "ground level" or just lying through his teeth?


Can someone please give me the context of the "the current design ground level portion begins just east of Western Avenue" ? Was this a letter from Wenger? Can someone send me a copy of it?

Can someone please give me the context of the "the current design ground level portion begins just east of Western Avenue" ? Was this a letter from Wenger? Can someone send me a copy of it?

It was sent to catch22 from Wenger apparently.

That entirely depends on the magnitude of what is considered "just east".

That entirely depends on the magnitude of what is considered "just east".

True, Western is very close to Walker in astronautical units.

It was sent to catch22 from Wenger apparently.

Catch22, can you send me a full copy of that email or letter so that I can post it on the OKC Central blog?

just
near
close
accessible

basically weasel/wiggle/say-nada type words

as I read it, one could possibly sum it up as
- hey, about that road. well, it's ground level at the arena and the cc, and even a little bit more than that. that'll do for the folks who actually get a say. As for the rest, well, thanks for playing.

yeah, I'm a cynic today. doesn't make me wrong though.

Is he really this ignorant, has a different definition of "ground level" or just lying through his teeth?

He is technically telling the truth due to his use of approximation vis a vis Western Avenue, however it is a masterful act of deflection. I really think these guys are expecting us to go away and let them get back to being public engineers.

I just emailed Greenwell, my councilman.

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2012/07/29/the-one-where-i-ask-if-the-county-jail-is-just-west-of-devon-energy-center/

I know that it is just a matter of "semantics" . . . but, technically, how can a "Boulevard" not be on grade, without elevated sections? How can anyone be considering a strange rebuild of the Crosstown Expressway--except with a lower speed limit and less holes in the pavement (for awhile)?

Since "roundabouts" or "traffic circles" seem to be anathema to some folks, how about real underpasses (short tunnels) where the N/S streets intersect the E/W Boulevard? They have at least one major tunnel in another major league city (Minneapolis). They could build-in New Orleans Style Pumps (an homage to another major league city) for when the tunnels try to flood.

If they do end up building an elevated Crosstown Expressway 2--which they almost certainly will--they should name it The SkyDunce Bridge.

:lol2: I may not agree with everything in this, but the "Skydunce Bridge" is hilarious!!

Is he really this ignorant, has a different definition of "ground level" or just lying through his teeth?

Eric was hired by Jim Couch fresh out of college in 1994. He began his work for OKC managing MAPS projects and later became MAPS Director before recently being appointed Public Works Director. So, while he does have an engineering degree and I'm sure understands standard engineering principles quite well, his experience is that of a manager and not a design engineer. The same goes for Jim Couch. They rely on private engineering firms for design and construction of major projects.

What we're witnessing is the fact that Eric's job also includes essentially serving as Jim Couch's public and council informational officer, which unfortunately appears to often be that of a political press secretary who has been instructed to spin the story and the facts to support the party line.

Okay . . . Make that The SkyDunceS' Bridge.
(reversing the last "S" would be acceptable for the signage and bronze plaques)

All I know is, the more I hear and read, the less it bothers me they want to name this mess the Oklahoma City Blvd. It now seems such an appropriate name for a road that has a bit of real nice to it and the rest, well it could be oh so much more than some appear determined to permit.

I understand what you are saying kevin - I hate to think the city is going to once again settle for barely adequate when great is possible. We can do better and as citizens we should demand it from out city's leadership.

I know that it is just a matter of "semantics" . . . but, technically, how can a "Boulevard" not be on grade, without elevated sections? How can anyone be considering a strange rebuild of the Crosstown Expressway--except with a lower speed limit and less holes in the pavement (for awhile)?
.

If they build it with elevated bridges I would only consider the stretch from Walker to Gaylord "the Boulevard" with everthing else being really long interstate on and off ramps. It would make more sense to call the currently planned at-grade portion "Central Park Avenue" rather than Oklahoma City Boulevard.

From Catch22 reply from Mr. Wenger:

Your concern about the Boulevard being elevated is shared by many, but I believe it is due to lack of drawings and renderings that are not yet available. Although the Boulevard includes elevated sections to provide access and connections to I-44, and also to I-35/I-235, there is a significant portion of ground level roadway that is being designed to ensure opportunities for downtown access and future development. The current design ground level portion begins just east of Western Avenue and extends to the east side of Oklahoma Avenue, near the Harkins Theater. This nearly 10 block section will create several new intersections at Walker, Hudson, Harvey, Robinson, Broadway, Gaylord, and Oklahoma that don't exist today. In addition, since the new roadway will be narrower than the former highway, many areas of the existing highway right-of-way adjacent to the new boulevard will be available to further enhance development and pedestrian opportunities.
As I remember the media reporting over the years, the Boulevard was consistently described as being "at grade" and following the then current Crosstown footprint. How did it go from being approx 6 miles in length (Google maps doesn't have the old alignment, so used the shorter Reno path) to just 10 blocks (according to Google), right about 1 mile????

I can't be at tomorrows Council meeting, but if someone that is going can ask them that question, I would love to hear the answer! I am sure they will say that they can't comment about an unattributed article or that the media reported it incorrectly all of these years or some other nonsense...

Also, Mr. Wenger stated in that reply that you can watch the meeting on Cox Channel 20...it was removed from that channel number for about a year now???. I know I don't get it any more...nothing but a blue screen on 20 now.

From Catch22 reply from Mr. Wenger:
As I remember the media reporting over the years, the Boulevard was consistently described as being "at grade" and following the then current Crosstown footprint. How did it go from being approx 6 miles in length (Google maps doesn't have the old alignment, so used the shorter Reno path) to just 10 blocks (according to Google), right about 1 mile????

I can't be at tomorrows Council meeting, but if someone that is going can ask them that question, I would love to hear the answer! I am sure they will say that they can't comment about an unattributed article or that the media reported it incorrectly all of these years or some other nonsense...

Also, Mr. Wenger stated in that reply that you can watch the meeting on Cox Channel 20...it was removed from that channel number for about a year now???. I know I don't get it any more...nothing but a blue screen on 20 now.

If somebody asks them that question and specifically uses your "6 mile" figure, they will be laughed at and dismissed.

You are right, I redid it and it came out to just under 5 miles. Along Reno (a straight path it measures 4.8 miles). Given that the old Crosstown did not travel in a straight path, it should be right at or over 5 miles?

But you are missing the point...how did it go from being almost 5 miles to a few blocks????

Why, that is the distance from where Reno crosses with I-244 and I-235??? Along Reno (a straight path it measures 5.8 miles). Given that the old Crosstown did not travel in a straight path, it should be right at or over 6 miles?

I-244 is in Tulsa.

With Oklahoma being laid out in Township, Range, and sections, it's easy to estimate distances.

Portland to May is one mile, May to Penn is one mile, etc.

6 miles on Reno would take you from Portland to Eastern (MLK to the north of Reno). Hardly the length of the "Blvd."

I-244 is in Tulsa.

With Oklahoma being laid out in Township, Range, and sections, it's easy to estimate distances.

Portland to May is one mile, May to Penn is one mile, etc.

6 miles on Reno would take you from Portland to Eastern (MLK to the north of Reno). Hardly the length of the "Blvd."

Why are you playing semantic games on here?

I-244 is in Tulsa.

With Oklahoma being laid out in Township, Range, and sections, it's easy to estimate distances.

Portland to May is one mile, May to Penn is one mile, etc.

6 miles on Reno would take you from Portland to Eastern (MLK to the north of Reno). Hardly the length of the "Blvd."

What is the number designation of the highway from Tulsa that intersects with I-40? Isn't that called I-244 at that part?

And again you are missing the point, the media repeatedly reported that the Boulevard would be "at grade" and follow the old crosstown which extended from the area you described to MLK. Somewhere around of 5 to 6 miles. Now, according to Mr. Wenger the at grade portion is only going to be 10 BLOCKS or 1 mile, mol. There is a HUGE change from 5 or 6 miles to 1 mile.

ON EDIT, Google maps has that entire stretch of highway as being plain ol' I-44 (I was thinking that section where it ran N/S was 244...like I-40 & 1-240)

There are a couple prominent semantic hair splitters that hang around for the sole purpose of finding a minor inaccuracy or something they do not agree with, and then spend days focusing on minutia while ignoring the primary point.


But who is going to the City Council tomorrow morning? ODOT is on the agenda to present their boulevard design. This is probably the best opportunity for citizens to impact the council's decision on permitting OKC Public Works and ODOT to continue down the path of building another elevated freeway through the center of downtown.... Or slowing down and conducting a serious exploration of alternatives including the type of street Mayor Cornett has described numerous times.

There are a couple prominent semantic hair splitters that hang around for the sole purpose of finding a minor inaccuracy or something they do not agree with, and then spend days focusing on minutia while ignoring the primary point. They seem to believe every statement made on a message board is required to withstand the same scrutiny scientific data or legal decisions are required to. Gets tiresome when all most people want to do is discuss broad topics and ideas with the understanding that to implement those ideas additional, more detailed research and study would be necessary.

Sounds like a couple of 4 year olds yelling "I know you are, but what am I?" over and over.

Semantic games like, "just west of Walker"?

All I'm saying is you better be more realistic about its length or you will be doing this effort a huge disservice.

I can understand that - so i tempered my remark a bit. I would say "just west of Walker" is a major inaccuracy though and not semantics.

To clear things up, here are the numbers: (via Google Earth's measuring tool) This is total distance along the path, not straight line.

Entire length of old I-40 (Agnew to Lincoln)
3.19 miles

Western to Oklahoma
1.14 miles

Walker to Oklahoma
0.58 miles

Western to Walker
0.55 miles

I also cannot go tomorrow, but I wish I could

What I hope is that someone points out is that the old crosstown killed all positive developent south to the river. And yes, I know that it has been pointed out time and time again. But I see a massive amount of potential for the are around the Farmer' Market. I believe that this area COULD possibly be the next big thing. Maybe it's a generation or so down the line, but whatever, the point is that it has the potential and if this "boulevard" is elevated it will remove all hopes of that area being redeveloped into something positive for our childern or our children's children. No doubt the park will create positive development from Robinson to Gaylord/Shields, but to the east, that development will end at Walker (if we are lucky enough for it to go that far). Take a look at Google Maps and see ALL the wasted potential in the area.

Now, with that said, I wish that I could hit these people with a clue dart, because here it is: the biggest conradiction in this whole mess... THEY want to say it's all about "promises." We were promised this and that about the "boulevard" and timetables and... whatever. Have they forgotten about the promises made regarding Core2Shore? What about the "Western Gateway?" have all these things been forgotten and/or thrown out the window because these people can't figure out how to make this road at grade? We were promised redevelopment from the old I-40 to the river (hence the name Core2Shore), and if this street is elevated for a good portion of that area we will not have those promises fulfilled.

If this street is truely to belong to the City, then the City's promises to it's people MUST be taken into account. Otherwise we are not just screwing ourselves, but also our children and future generations.

To clear things up, here are the numbers: (via Google Earth's measuring tool) This is total distance along the path, not straight line.

Entire length of old I-40 (Agnew to Lincoln)
3.19 miles


Maybe of potentially flat boulevard, but there is a flyover built from I-44 to the boulevard. I-44 falls between May and Portland. So that's nearly a mile of potential "boulevard" you're not counting, right by the heavily renovated fairgrounds.

3.42 miles counting the future on ramp.

Splitting hairs....

http://gyazo.com/413183ca8d72ddaeb5f3f9571c6ba9c6.png?1343677714

Western to Oklahoma
http://gyazo.com/1586e6109df394929cb904f303b94478.png?1343678019

Walker to Oklahoma

http://gyazo.com/ccb5794cba05d5e688319bc6eee18d01.png?1343678058

Oops I thought the boulevard would be directly accessible from I-44, not just 40. But I guess with the cost of flyovers, that wouldn't be feasible. Good photos though. If the city released their renderings, we wouldn't have to do so much guesswork.

Red: Elevated superstructure
Yellow: Semi Elevated (above ground level on raised dirt)
Blue: Ground Level

http://gyazo.com/36f791c886f206360328930ecf79bb30.png?1343679019

Is that correct?

WOW that really shows the absurdity of what they're doing.. no wonder they haven't released it. That stretch in yellow is what Tweedle Dee & Dum (Couch & Wenger) want to get built ASAP. Literally just enough to look good for the HD cameras at Thunder games.

I think that is the current ODOT / OKC Public Works design proposal.

Red: Elevated superstructure
Yellow: Semi Elevated (above ground level on raised dirt)
Blue: Ground Level

http://gyazo.com/36f791c886f206360328930ecf79bb30.png?1343679019

Is that correct?

Also below grade (up to 8 feet) from somewhere east of Robinson to Compress or Oklahoma.

This is an idea that just occurred to me looking at that map. What about merging the boulevard with Reno just east of Classen (?) and connecting Reno with I-40 at Penn. Then restore the street grid in the old I-40 right of way directly north of this merged section and sell that land off for redevelopment.

This would do several things:
1) reduce the costs significantly
2) completely eliminate the raised road debate
3) provide the city with some revenue from the sale of the land
4) provide the traffic counts the Market district needs to develop, and
5) leave enough funding to really make the boulevard section fit the ideal we were all promised.

Thoughts??