True, but can't the streetcar routes be expanded later?

Beyond 2021? I don't see why not.

If that's the case, then leave it wide enough for foot traffic and a single dedicated line to go west on the boulevard. Of course, if the damned thing ends up being built on a viaduct west of Lee, then the dreams of a street car going to the Farmer's Market area off of a traffic circle will be a whole other adventure.

The reason why I thought it was going from 6 lanes to 4, was to make more room for the convention center.

It was already being reduced from 6 to 4 when most thought the convention center was going on the east side of the park or the cotton seed mill site, later since it is not taking up all the land the old i40 did they requested near the CC it be on the south most side and make the remaining land for the CC.



To some of your points earlier, coming from the eastbound i40, south from i235 and north from i35 will probably will end up being a major entry into OKC but the west side only hits a relatively small part of downtown you are not better off taking a different exit.

Plus only on the east side do you have more than one ramp from the interstate onto the boulevard from the interstate, so coming from the west it will rarely be at it's full capacity till more cars turn onto it. Then in both directions it merges down to one lane before entering on to an interstate, so two lanes is much less prone to jamming than if a third lane was present.

All joking asside, Ben Franklin Parkway is an amazing and beautiful street, and I don't see why we cant have something like that (or at least something similar) instead of what is being proposed by ODOT

It is great for cars but sucks for walking. I wish we had the power to take a group field trip to Philly to see what a real urban pedestrian city is really like and what works and what doesn't work. Trust me, you would spend all of 5 minutes on BFP as a pedestrian but you would have to be dragged kicking and screaming if someone tried to remove you from Ave of Arts or Chestnut St. The area around Rittenhouse Sq is one of my favorite places on the planet.

Now having said that, Classen and Lincoln could both be upgraded to Ben Franklin Parkway status - especially Lincoln with the Capitol Building forming a terminal view from the north and south.

Now having said that, Classen and Lincoln could both be upgraded to Ben Franklin Parkway status - especially Lincoln with the Capitol Building forming a terminal view from the north and south.

Lincoln north of the capitol is nothing but state office buildings and supporting businesses. It does have a good amount of sidewalks but no one uses them because its basically an elongated office park. Btw, I was thinking of names for the boulevard.. Will Rogers Avenue, because you will need a sense of humor just to drive it in the beginning. Or Jim Thorpe Boulevard.. maybe Olympics is just on my brain.

I've had a day to think about it and here are my observations:


The boulevard design as presented was nothing surprising. It was generally what I and others who have been watching this project expected. I was encouraged to hear that right-of-way will be acquired to connect Oklahoma Ave. to the boulevard instead of the infernal Compress street mess. The central section (convention center and central park) ask shown could be nice, not spectacular, but nice. One thing I was pleasantly surprised by was the suggestion that the convention center have street-level retail and public amenities. This will make significant strides towards mitigating the less-than-ideal convention center location. The Walker-to-Western section was the part that was discussed the most and I’ll speak to that a bit later. The Penn-to-Western section will basically be the rehabilitation of the existing highway grade and bridges. Given the industrial nature of the area, this is not too big a deal. The council did suggest that the portion of the boulevard east of Douglas Ave. be included in the study area that includes the Western-Classen-Reno area. This would allow Klein Ave. to meet the boulevard at grade and create additional development opportunities. The remaining balance of this post deals with the portion from Walker-to-Western.

First of all, in the design industry (my profession), it is not unusual when presenting options to clients, to dress-up the option most preferred by the design team. This is intended to subconsciously direct the client away from the other options and to the option the designer wants them to choose. While the City/ODOT did present other options, the extra effort devoted to lipsticking the pig on the elevated design made it obvious which option they found most favorable.

Ed Shadid was great, as usual. All of his statements were spot-on. Councilman Shadid is a great advocate for good urban design and planning This city is fortunate to have a councilperson of his caliber. His presentation was well thought-out and addressed many of the statements that had been made by ODOT in recent weeks. (On a side note, when the live video feed of the roundabout in Nova Scotia was displayed, I was praying for no accidents)

I’d like to give some kudos to my councilperson, Meg Salyer. She quickly replied to the email I sent and assured me of her support for an alternate boulevard design. She was also very clear in her comments during the meeting regarding her opposition to the elevated design. It was her recommendation that an independent consultant be hired to study the different options. I do respectfully disagree with her assessment of the NW 10th & Walker roundabout being pedestrian unfriendly. My office is located directly on the roundabout and I walk around it regularly. I find it quite easy to navigate compared to a tradition intersection with crosswalks.

I’ll admit I have been frustrated with Eric Wenger in recent weeks; however, after sitting through the council meeting and observing his handling of the boulevard concerns, I have a new appreciation for the difficult position he is in. I believe his is doing the best he can given the circumstances. Actually, as I was typing this, I received a pleasant email from Mr. Wenger.


I had hoped Planning Director Russell Claus would come out in strong opposition to the elevated boulevard, however he downplayed the possibility of any future development in the next 30 years on the west end of downtown regardless of which boulevard option was chosen. Mr. Claus seemed extremely hesitant to speak in opposition to the current design. He finally agreed that an at-grade option was a better solution (if time and costs were equal) when pressed by Councilman Shadid.


At the end of the meeting, some council members took an opportunity to defend themselves against the claims that the council was “blindsided” by the elevated boulevard design. Councilman Kelly along with Councilman Ryan took it a step further and took issue with those who have been criticizing city staff and ODOT (the media and citizens) over the design of the boulevard. Whether the criticism was warranted or not, it seemed somewhat inappropriate for a councilperson to scold citizens in a public manner for merely expressing their (obviously valid) concerns.

Overall it was a positive meeting. I think the council is nearly unanimous in their aversion to an elevated boulevard. However, they are not willing to direct city staff or ODOT without fairly considering all options. That being said, the independent consultant could either be a blessing or a curse, depending on who is selected. The best-case scenario is an independent consultant that specializes in urban street design that will evaluate the project based on multiple factors other than traffic flow only. The worst-case is a local traffic engineer who regularly contracts with ODOT to design transportation projects. I think the best thing we can do right now is (politely) encourage our council and city leaders to hire a best-case type of consultant, not another transportation engineer.

Oh, God! No! Not the roundabouts!!! Oh! The carnage! The chaos! All who see this, pray... I beg of you, pray for the poor people of Philadelphia. How do they make it through the pain and the tragedy? Day after day, the horror and evil of the roundabout is there, mocking the good citizens in the cradle of democracy. And what of the children?

THIS cracked me up! :D

Granted one side of it's elevated roadway "Berlin Wall" sits along a shoreline, but Seattle has an elevated expressway through downtown that didn't restrict any development ;)

I've talked to a few public works contractors in town...they think this current ODOT idea is bad as well.

It is great for cars but sucks for walking.

Yeah, I've not been to Philadelphia, so I have no idea how pedestrian friendly it is. I was more thinking on the "something similar" side of it. Kinda like how the park is supposed to be "modeled" like or "inspired" by Discovery Green. In no way should the boulevard be a carbon copy of the BFP, but something like it. If ODOT has its way it will be modeled after the I-40 Crosstown bridge... wait a second, aren't they demolishing that? I think we could have saved the taxpayers a ton of money by simply building the new highway and instead of tearing down ALL of the Crosstown, only tear down the part between Walker and Lincoln... take what was left between Walker and Penn, throw some synthetic turf in the middle, close the left hand lanes and line them with planters large enough to hold small trees... Here's a link (http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbx51/h_d2/Navigation?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051) for you, ODOT... surely there is something in there that would have helped.

Seriously, why did we remove that highway just to rebuild it with trees in the middle?

I’d like to give some kudos to my councilperson, Meg Salyer. She quickly replied to the email I sent and assured me of her support for an alternate boulevard design. She was also very clear in her comments during the meeting regarding her opposition to the elevated design.

What do you think of ol' Meg? What exactly does she advocate? I've watched a lot of council meetings where she just falls in line.

JTF - I wondered about the BFP. It looks very nice from the satellite photos but I fully understand what you are saying. One thing I noted was the large elongated roundabout on the NW end of it and what appeared to be several more in the city. I am fairly certain Philadelphia has much higher traffic counts than anything OKC will need to plan for anytime soon, so capacity is not the limiting factor with roundabouts.

After driving around the proposed route of the boulevard in the vicinity of Walker, Reno, Classen, etc. I think merging the blvd with Reno and then connecting to I40 might be a very good alternative. There is a reason we had to "cross the berm" to get into Iraq - it is a barrier, obstacle, divider or whatever you want to call it. If we extend that barrier even farther eastward whether it is a wall, piers, or grass slope; it is still an inhibitor to the revitalization of the Market District.

One of the benefits of this idea is the ability to restore the street grid where the berm lies now, and permit the city to sell that land or use it to entice redevelopment in that area. Someone calculated there are 64 acres of develop-able land if the berm is bulldozed. Reno has several industrial facilities in that area, but most wouldn't be very difficult to relocate to an area more suitable for industrial use - such as the area around the old Bridgestone - Firestone (Dayton) plant out on Council. (That is where the Co-op is supposed to eventually move.) The W&W Steel Mill would be the hardest one to relocate and probably would remain in place for the foreseeable future. The main problem I see with using Reno to connect with I40 is there has been a significant amount of work done on bridge piers in that area already; and the possibility the grade from the Penn flyover will be too steep. The would likely take longer than the end of 2014 to be complete, but I think most people would approve of a delay to get the very best western gateway to downtown OKC we can.

I will attempt to draw a few lines on a satellite photo to illustrate what I think may be possible. I may be completely wrong about the feasibility of this idea, but it is another option to think about.

I just picture Chevy Chase driving for hours on a roundabout...... :)

That's not bad - certainly an improvement over any elevated design. I still think it is too wide to be easy to cross at a leisurely pace and a road that wide will encourage excessive speed in my opinion. If you took the two innermost lanes and made them part of the median - maybe allowing for turn lanes at some but not all intersections - then you are much closer to what I personally think the blvd should look like. I like the inclusion of bike lanes, the sidewalk "furniture", and the landscaping in the median. I would like more of a good thing though.

A glaring problem with that street is no parking.

:iagree:

Just thought of this...if the future holds true of the site of the cotton mill, where are the exits going to be...The one at SW3rd and the one as a Compress thru Street? If there is to be an arena there or private development or anything, those two street exits alone are not going to be enough to handle all the traffic that may be exiting that future site development.

They have decided to use Oklahoma to access Bricktown (a very good thing), so going south on Oklahoma will be one way to get to that site. There are two streets that presently pass through the BNSF viaduct from the west - 4th and 7th. It will depend on what is actually built there some day that will decide if three streets are sufficient. I personally hope for the combined MLS outdoor / AHL indoor arena concept that I saw in another thread but that is a long way off.

I think that 7th is blocked off by Shields though...I could research it right now, but I'm not in the mood.

I think that 7th is blocked off by Shields though...I could research it right now, but I'm not in the mood.

An investment in railroad bridge(s) may need to be made. 4th St has a narrow two lane opening and 7th St goes underneath Reno. If you want to call it a street, its more of a gravel access road.

That connection to the boulevard will be a tough one depending on the projected traffic volume. It may require some expansion of the openings in the viaduct because I don't think there will be any way to connect farther east than Oklahoma.

JTF - I wondered about the BFP. It looks very nice from the satellite photos but I fully understand what you are saying. One thing I noted was the large elongated roundabout on the NW end of it and what appeared to be several more in the city. I am fairly certain Philadelphia has much higher traffic counts than anything OKC will need to plan for anytime soon, so capacity is not the limiting factor with roundabouts.

After driving around the proposed route of the boulevard in the vicinity of Walker, Reno, Classen, etc. I think merging the blvd with Reno and then connecting to I40 might be a very good alternative. There is a reason we had to "cross the berm" to get into Iraq - it is a barrier, obstacle, divider or whatever you want to call it. If we extend that barrier even farther eastward whether it is a wall, piers, or grass slope; it is still an inhibitor to the revitalization of the Market District.

One of the benefits of this idea is the ability to restore the street grid where the berm lies now, and permit the city to sell that land or use it to entice redevelopment in that area. Someone calculated there are 64 acres of develop-able land if the berm is bulldozed. Reno has several industrial facilities in that area, but most wouldn't be very difficult to relocate to an area more suitable for industrial use - such as the area around the old Bridgestone - Firestone (Dayton) plant out on Council. (That is where the Co-op is supposed to eventually move.) The W&W Steel Mill would be the hardest one to relocate and probably would remain in place for the foreseeable future. The main problem I see with using Reno to connect with I40 is there has been a significant amount of work done on bridge piers in that area already; and the possibility the grade from the Penn flyover will be too steep. The would likely take longer than the end of 2014 to be complete, but I think most people would approve of a delay to get the very best western gateway to downtown OKC we can.

I will attempt to draw a few lines on a satellite photo to illustrate what I think may be possible. I may be completely wrong about the feasibility of this idea, but it is another option to think about.

I just don't see the city going with a Reno option at this stage of the game. The idea would be that ODOT spent millions of dollars for flyovers that in all reality goes to the same place that the Penn exit goes to. Im not completely sure, but I believe a Penn westbound on ramp would have been possible if the flyover bridges weren't constructed.

That connection to the boulevard will be a tough one depending on the projected traffic volume. It may require some expansion of the openings in the viaduct because I don't think there will be any way to connect farther east than Oklahoma.

One of the Progress charts indicated that it would have transitioned to the ground early enough that at Joe Carter Ave may be possible without a grade change, granted to connect to that street would need a bridge over the canal and acquisition of parking lots of the hotel and some restaurants. Even if they just had an entry for that parking lot, there are some existing bridges to get from there to the far east side of bricktown without going through Oklahoma.

I just don't see the city going with a Reno option at this stage of the game. The idea would be that ODOT spent millions of dollars for flyovers that in all reality goes to the same place that the Penn exit goes to. Im not completely sure, but I believe a Penn westbound on ramp would have been possible if the flyover bridges weren't constructed.

I think it is likely you are correct, but it may be worth evaluating the cost of changing the exit connection vs. revenue from the land that would be available for development.

I think it is likely you are correct, but it may be worth evaluating the cost of changing the exit connection vs. revenue from the land that would be available for development.

Sadly from the tone of the Planing Commissioner's response to council the value would probably not be enough for several decades, ironically he estimated about the time it would be for the bridges to need major rehabilitation or replaced with something else for the bridge section to have developed, so might be a good time to make the next section an boulevard from an elevated expressway.

If light rail is to.go to the airport, it will go via the rail line bordering the park south of the Oklahoma River.

We had a discussion similar to that at dinner Sid. Whatever this street looks like in the end, we decided we will end up with a "better boulevard"; and that is the primary goal. I don't think anyone has THE answer yet - especially for this western section of the blvd. Hopefully there will be a lot of open discussion once the city retains the services of an independent expert to provide and analyze alternatives to raising the roadway.

As I would assume, but if I recall from talks with Jeff in the past, passenger rail on that line might be problematic? Or I could be entirely imagining that.

Suffice it to say, I am fishing for a win here. :)

As far as rail traffic goes, it's nothing compared to BNSF or even the UP line going to El Reno. Its Stillwater Central and they only run on the line that was previously state owned from Tulsa to Lawton. I highly doubt that freight on this line is as hectic as what it would be for, say, Amtrak on BNSF's line, so I think it would be a clear case scenario.

The only thing they would have to do is build a branch off of the line down to the airport and it would be a done deal. Now granted, if it were light rail then you'd be looking for ROW acquirement and you'd have to replace the bridge over I-44 because of that.

I am fairly certain Philadelphia has much higher traffic counts than anything OKC will need to plan for anytime soon, so capacity is not the limiting factor with roundabouts.

You would be surprised how little traffic Center City Philadelphia has. Cars simply are not needed there. I worked on the 20th floor of Comcast Center so I had a pretty good view of the city and by far the worst traffic was on the interstate as people who worked in one part of suburban Philly tried to get home to another part of suburban Philly. The vast majorty of people who work dowtown either live in Center City or take mass transit. In the 2 months I lived there I never once sat in a car (not even a taxi), but had full access to the entire city thanks to their rail system.

Philly is one of the greatest cities in America. It is too bad it has such a negative perception. If anyone is ever looking to take a weekend trip I highly recommend Philadelphia.

The reason why I thought it was going from 6 lanes to 4, was to make more room for the convention center.

Have always heard the reason for it going from 6 lanes to 4 was the walkability/pedestrian friendly etc aspects. What was mentioned was diverting the path of the Boulevard South where it eats into the Nortern edge of the Park to give the Convention Center a smidge more room.

Have always heard the reason for it going from 6 lanes to 4 was the walkability/pedestrian friendly etc aspects. What was mentioned was diverting the path of the Boulevard South where it eats into the Nortern edge of the Park to give the Convention Center a smidge more room.

That is what I recalled being requested by the CC Committee. I am still hopeful their selected site will cost too much and that land will be available for private development. (Yes, tilting at windmills I know....)

The rumored Howard development "plan" would have been a great jump start for development along the boulevard - it was also closer to the Core to Shore plan/vision for that site. I am a huge fan of the idealized C2S plan and hopes most of it comes to fruition. This is one of the reasons I feel so strongly this boulevard needs to stay at grade and avoid becoming another line of division in the city even beyond the C2S "boundaries".

Councilman Kelly along with Councilman Ryan took it a step further and took issue with those who have been criticizing city staff and ODOT (the media and citizens) over the design of the boulevard. Whether the criticism was warranted or not, it seemed somewhat inappropriate for a councilperson to scold citizens in a public manner for merely expressing their (obviously valid) concerns.

I am still trying to decide if it is worth addressing this with my councilman and how to best approach him about it. I agree it is inappropriate for a councilperson to scold citizens for caring about what their city government is doing.

I have heard the Mayor and others repeatedly state the desire for people with advanced education to remain in or relocate to OKC. They may not have considered that type of person is also much more likely to pay attention to what their city government is doing; and are willing to question that government when appropriate. I think some of them (not Mayor Cornett IMO) meant they wanted those people's salaries and tax dollars, but not necessarily have them engaged in civic matters.

I don't think anyone has been disrespectful toward the city staff or ODOT - a few snarky jokes aside. But I think thick skin is a prerequisite to be in a position of responsibility in government because someone is always going to make comments like that. They are usually trying to be funny and not demeaning even if it is a little uncomfortable for the person or department on the hot seat. Everyone I have talked to involved in this "Better Boulevard" movement only wants the best for our city. I also don't think anyone at ODOT or the city staff is trying to do a half-a$$ed job. There are simply a few ideas and issues related to the new boulevard that weren't recently discussed or evaluated in light of the dramatic changes in Oklahoma City since that initial elevated road concept was conceived.

True, but can't the streetcar routes be expanded later?

yes but i doubt it ever runs down the blvd anywhere past classen



One value of the boulevard concept as presented by ODOT is that it would make for a logical platform for light rail running west toward the airport one day.

Similar to the elevated SkyLink in Vancouver, some kind of express east-west line could go far to mitigate the disruptive nature of the elevated road. If traffic counts prove to be even less than estimated, perhaps in the short term some kind of BRT?

I'd like to defer to the experts on the board more to the subject but if it looks like it will be hard to win this fight, would it be possible to make this a win for transit somehow?

going to the airport more than likely will be by heavy rail


If light rail is to.go to the airport, it will go via the rail line bordering the park south of the Oklahoma River.

the heavy rail to the airport would be on the line south of the river

I've had a day to think about it and here are my observations:


The boulevard design as presented was nothing surprising. It was generally what I and others who have been watching this project expected. I was encouraged to hear that right-of-way will be acquired to connect Oklahoma Ave. to the boulevard instead of the infernal Compress street mess. The central section (convention center and central park) ask shown could be nice, not spectacular, but nice. One thing I was pleasantly surprised by was the suggestion that the convention center have street-level retail and public amenities. This will make significant strides towards mitigating the less-than-ideal convention center location. The Walker-to-Western section was the part that was discussed the most and I’ll speak to that a bit later. The Penn-to-Western section will basically be the rehabilitation of the existing highway grade and bridges. Given the industrial nature of the area, this is not too big a deal. The council did suggest that the portion of the boulevard east of Douglas Ave. be included in the study area that includes the Western-Classen-Reno area. This would allow Klein Ave. to meet the boulevard at grade and create additional development opportunities. The remaining balance of this post deals with the portion from Walker-to-Western.

First of all, in the design industry (my profession), it is not unusual when presenting options to clients, to dress-up the option most preferred by the design team. This is intended to subconsciously direct the client away from the other options and to the option the designer wants them to choose. While the City/ODOT did present other options, the extra effort devoted to lipsticking the pig on the elevated design made it obvious which option they found most favorable.

Ed Shadid was great, as usual. All of his statements were spot-on. Councilman Shadid is a great advocate for good urban design and planning This city is fortunate to have a councilperson of his caliber. His presentation was well thought-out and addressed many of the statements that had been made by ODOT in recent weeks. (On a side note, when the live video feed of the roundabout in Nova Scotia was displayed, I was praying for no accidents)

I’d like to give some kudos to my councilperson, Meg Salyer. She quickly replied to the email I sent and assured me of her support for an alternate boulevard design. She was also very clear in her comments during the meeting regarding her opposition to the elevated design. It was her recommendation that an independent consultant be hired to study the different options. I do respectfully disagree with her assessment of the NW 10th & Walker roundabout being pedestrian unfriendly. My office is located directly on the roundabout and I walk around it regularly. I find it quite easy to navigate compared to a tradition intersection with crosswalks.

I’ll admit I have been frustrated with Eric Wenger in recent weeks; however, after sitting through the council meeting and observing his handling of the boulevard concerns, I have a new appreciation for the difficult position he is in. I believe his is doing the best he can given the circumstances. Actually, as I was typing this, I received a pleasant email from Mr. Wenger.


I had hoped Planning Director Russell Claus would come out in strong opposition to the elevated boulevard, however he downplayed the possibility of any future development in the next 30 years on the west end of downtown regardless of which boulevard option was chosen. Mr. Claus seemed extremely hesitant to speak in opposition to the current design. He finally agreed that an at-grade option was a better solution (if time and costs were equal) when pressed by Councilman Shadid.


At the end of the meeting, some council members took an opportunity to defend themselves against the claims that the council was “blindsided” by the elevated boulevard design. Councilman Kelly along with Councilman Ryan took it a step further and took issue with those who have been criticizing city staff and ODOT (the media and citizens) over the design of the boulevard. Whether the criticism was warranted or not, it seemed somewhat inappropriate for a councilperson to scold citizens in a public manner for merely expressing their (obviously valid) concerns.

Overall it was a positive meeting. I think the council is nearly unanimous in their aversion to an elevated boulevard. However, they are not willing to direct city staff or ODOT without fairly considering all options. That being said, the independent consultant could either be a blessing or a curse, depending on who is selected. The best-case scenario is an independent consultant that specializes in urban street design that will evaluate the project based on multiple factors other than traffic flow only. The worst-case is a local traffic engineer who regularly contracts with ODOT to design transportation projects. I think the best thing we can do right now is (politely) encourage our council and city leaders to hire a best-case type of consultant, not another transportation engineer.

Thanks so much for sharing this and for your commitment to this project in general. OKC needs more people like you.


As with any large group and especially one where a good number of the people have been together for an extended time, you get a lot of group-think. I think this is why Shadid is so often standing alone or nearly alone on so many issues and the group tends to side against him more often than not.

I'm glad Eric Wenger has been accommodating. I've been a harsh critic of several things he's done in the past but he is clearly a sharp guy with a really tough job. However, I will also say he and Couch are very adept at diplomacy and making people fell like everything is fine, and then too often make bad decisions anyway.

Thanks so much for sharing this and for your commitment to this project in general. OKC needs more people like you.


As with any large group and especially one where a good number of the people have been together for an extended time, you get a lot of group-think. I think this is why Shadid is so often standing alone or nearly alone on so many issues and the group tends to side against him more often than not.

I'm glad Eric Wenger has been accommodating. I've been a harsh critic of several things he's done in the past but he is clearly a sharp guy with a really tough job. However, I will also say he and Couch are very adept at diplomacy and making people fell like everything is fine, and then too often make bad decisions anyway.

Can you imagine what things would look like today if Shadid had not been elected, and Charlie Swinton was in that seat? Scary thought. We would have to lean on Meg to the be "progressive." Wouldn't be pretty. Other than Pete White (who occasionally goes off the rails), we would have no one who listens to urbanists concerns with the political courage to buck the establishment. Shadid's political courage is remarkable -- and a breath of fresh air for OKC.

As I would assume, but if I recall from talks with Jeff in the past, passenger rail on that line might be problematic? Or I could be entirely imagining that.

Suffice it to say, I am fishing for a win here. :)

There are (3) seemingly different ways to accomplish connections to the airport that have been regularly discussed. #2 could in theory involve the Boulevard.

1. The easiest, most cost effective route is to use the existing "Packing Town Lead" that has just been refurbished as part of the I-40 relocation just to the South running through the northern portion of the Capitol Hill neighborhood. The line would connect into the existing freight alignment that is rarely used but gets you within eyesight of the airport. That line would have to be extended to the terminal. The advantage of the line is the cost effectiveness, direct connectivity via the lead to the elevated BNSF to the Santa-Fe station, and then capable of continuing easily on to Tinker (assuming that line is upgraded) to serve as a connector to the base.

2. Involves the Boulevard. This is to extend the streetcar to the Farmers Market along the Boulevard (an elevated bridge would make this more difficult of course for the full length along the Boulevard to Western), then head SW on Exchange, over the new I-40, through the Stockyards, then connect to the old freight line onward to the airport. Converting the alignment from heavy freight to "rapid streetcar" or streetcar service at 40 - 60 mph speeds on to the terminal. Of course, any of the rare occassions freight service occurs would have to stop or a second set of tracks would have to be created. But it is entirely doable. Cost is intermediate between 1 and 3.

3. Involves complete streetcar service all the way parallel to Reno and North on Meridan to airport serving both hotels and the west side. Such a service could also facillitate special event service to the Fairgrounds. Undoubtedly the cost would be astronomical for such a project although if teh new Boulevard were to provide extra space for tracks (even in the "elevated condition") it could impact cost effectiveness by eliminating street reconstruction all the way to Penn.

I have to think about these things. It is what I am appointed to do. Particullarly now that Greenwell keeps bringing up the airport.

There are (3) seemingly different ways to accomplish connections to the airport that have been regularly discussed. #2 could in theory involve the Boulevard.

1. The easiest, most cost effective route is to use the existing "Packing Town Lead" that has just been refurbished as part of the I-40 relocation just to the South running through the northern portion of the Capitol Hill neighborhood. The line would connect into the existing freight alignment that is rarely used but gets you within eyesight of the airport. That line would have to be extended to the terminal. The advantage of the line is the cost effectiveness, direct connectivity via the lead to the elevated BNSF to the Santa-Fe station, and then capable of continuing easily on to Tinker (assuming that line is upgraded) to serve as a connector to the base.

2. Involves the Boulevard. This is to extend the streetcar to the Farmers Market along the Boulevard (an elevated bridge would make this more difficult of course for the full length along the Boulevard to Western), then head SW on Exchange, over the new I-40, through the Stockyards, then connect to the old freight line onward to the airport. Converting the alignment from heavy freight to "rapid streetcar" or streetcar service at 40 - 60 mph speeds on to the terminal. Of course, any of the rare occassions freight service occurs would have to stop or a second set of tracks would have to be created. But it is entirely doable. Cost is intermediate between 1 and 3.

3. Involves complete streetcar service all the way parallel to Reno and North on Meridan to airport serving both hotels and the west side. Such a service could also facillitate special event service to the Fairgrounds. Undoubtedly the cost would be astronomical for such a project although if teh new Boulevard were to provide extra space for tracks (even in the "elevated condition") it could impact cost effectiveness by eliminating street reconstruction all the way to Penn.

I have to think about these things. It is what I am appointed to do. Particullarly now that Greenwell keeps bringing up the airport.

I would not be sure streetcar to the airport would be good. Too many stops and too slow of transportation. You need a quick mode of transportation to get downtown with maybe 2 or 3 stops between the airport and downtown. Light rail of some sort would be the best.

Not to throw the thread off, but bringing up transit integration to the west I think is a prudent discussion. Even discussing the relevance of the Fixed Guideway Study that calls for Bus Rapid Transit service to Yukon and El Reno is a reasonable thing to discuss as the new Boulevard will connect virtually directly to the new Santa-Fe hub.

I've tried to "stay away" from the Boulevard debate publicly do to the political ramifications and have only tried to emphasize thoughts about transit integration. But I find the whole situation frustrating as we are not "planning ahead" beyond the MAPS 3 streetcar and hub issues, and even that has been a battle to get traffic engineers to comprehend.

Can you imagine what things would look like today if Shadid had not been elected, and Charlie Swinton was in that seat? Scary thought. We would have to lean on Meg to the be "progressive." Wouldn't be pretty. Other than Pete White (who occasionally goes off the rails), we would have no one who listens to urbanists concerns with the political courage to buck the establishment. Shadid's political courage is remarkable -- and a breath of fresh air for OKC.

I generally agree but unfortunately in politics it's all about your ability to influence others, as you can accomplish little on your own.

I just hope he doesn't alienate too many people and picks his battles wisely, otherwise he'll become nothing more than a man with good ideas that don't go anywhere.

I would not be sure streetcar to the airport would be good. Too many stops and too slow of transportation. You need a quick mode of transportation to get downtown with maybe 2 or 3 stops between the airport and downtown. Light rail of some sort would be the best.

I was talking "rapid streetcar" ie light rail "light" 40 - 60 mph with the first stop being stockyards, second being Farmers Market, third being probably Film Row, fourth being new Convention Center/Chesapeake Arena/Central Park stop, five being Santa-Fe hub. So essentially two thirds of the distance is at relative high speed.

At least half of the streetcar vehicles are actually truly real light rail vehicle just shorter in length and thus called streetcar. But they are the same models, just shorter.

This is obviously the #2 scenerio that I am talking about that could be partialy enabled via Boulevard integration.

I was talking "rapid streetcar" ie light rail "light" 40 - 60 mph with the first stop being stockyards, second being Farmers Market, third being probably Film Row, fourth being new Convention Center/Chesapeake Arena/Central Park stop, five being Santa-Fe hub. So essentially two thirds of the distance is at relative high speed.

At least half of the streetcar vehicles are actually truly real light rail vehicle just shorter in length and thus called streetcar. But they are the same models, just shorter.

This is obviously the #2 scenerio that I am talking about that could be partialy enabled via Boulevard integration.

Gotcha, thanks for your response Jeff.

I generally agree but unfortunately in politics it's all about your ability to influence others, as you can accomplish little on your own.

I just hope he doesn't alienate too many people and picks his battles wisely, otherwise he'll become nothing more than a man with good ideas that don't go anywhere.

You are correct on all points. I would argue, though, that he's already accomplished a great deal. Simply giving citizens a voice and pushing for public input may frustrate others on Council, but they can't really shut it down. His signature achievement so far is the nondiscrimination policy in city hiring, IMO.

There are (3) seemingly different ways to accomplish connections to the airport that have been regularly discussed. #2 could in theory involve the Boulevard.

1. The easiest, most cost effective route is to use the existing "Packing Town Lead" that has just been refurbished as part of the I-40 relocation just to the South running through the northern portion of the Capitol Hill neighborhood. The line would connect into the existing freight alignment that is rarely used but gets you within eyesight of the airport. That line would have to be extended to the terminal. The advantage of the line is the cost effectiveness, direct connectivity via the lead to the elevated BNSF to the Santa-Fe station, and then capable of continuing easily on to Tinker (assuming that line is upgraded) to serve as a connector to the base.




just a note but we would not have to connect it all the way to the terminal .... with the new car rental hub going in at 54th ... and it having constant service to the terminal .. it might make sense to have the train end at the pick up point there

just a note but we would not have to connect it all the way to the terminal .... with the new car rental hub going in at 54th ... and it having constant service to the terminal .. it might make sense to have the train end at the pick up point there

Starting to go off topic. But perhaps as a short term solution, but long term I think it is imperative to connect to the main terminal building. People don't want to put their bags on a bus, then 5 minutes later get off the bus and put them on the train.

By experts on the board I obviously meant Jeff. :)

Thanks for that roundup. I think it is fair to bring in transit, especially if the elevated concept appears to be "winning". I'd rather get a win out of the deal too and if we can perhaps negotiate a transit design commitment on the Boulevard, it would at least reduce the negative impact of the boulevard.

Do you think a central transit median should be conceptualized? How could we best propose a "solution" that fits their fundamental vision of the elevation of the boulevard?

Well thank ya'. The reality is that whatever "base design" "wins out", they need to bring in experts. I think that it has become too obvious that the local traffic engineers are too narrow minded in their own expertise to fully understand/comprehend the ramifications to everything else. It simply isn't a factor in their way of thinking.

If they go with the Berlin Wall design, then they need to hire multiple experts. Get the "High Line" people from New York, get some BRT experts, expand our streetcar consultants scope to encompass it, have Russell Claus and his people in planning conduct a thorough assessment on how to make whatever positive assets can be derived from it into a parallel neighborhood impact-integration plan. I'm actually probably going too far in making those statements, but even the most divisive design can be "softened" for the benefit of the community that it runs through. Even elevated, it could be an awesome jogging/walking connector with a great view of downtown.

I guess the frustrating thing is that their making long-term investments with short-term vision using the public's money that doesn't seem to extend past the automobile. And their not experts on these new urbanist designs.

I think as long as citizens and open minded city leadership continue to fight the good fight until its conclusion, there is no doubt we will end up with a better boulevard than what nearly happened. It is probably prudent to prepare for every possible outcome and what to try to achieve in the absence of an ideal outcome. You might say UP is snatching a small victory from the jaws of defeat, but it is far better than a stark concrete or dirt mass dividing the city.

I wish I was not the cynic I am, but has anything really changed at this point?

City staff and ODOT have their lipstick on a pig preferred elevated proposal. There was no vote to ask ODOT to STOP (or did I miss that?) ODOT head dawg has noted, why would they STOP absent being told to do so.

I get there is now a plan to ask an outside expert for an opinion, but who actually puts together the rec list on any outside experts for council to engage? Isn't that going to be the same folks already lined up with the Miss Piggy's Red plan?

Elected officials scolding the public is nada new, but it doesn't bode well for expecting changes from them.

You would be surprised how little traffic Center City Philadelphia has. Cars simply are not needed there. I worked on the 20th floor of Comcast Center so I had a pretty good view of the city and by far the worst traffic was on the interstate as people who worked in one part of suburban Philly tried to get home to another part of suburban Philly. The vast majorty of people who work dowtown either live in Center City or take mass transit. In the 2 months I lived there I never once sat in a car (not even a taxi), but had full access to the entire city thanks to their rail system.

Philly is one of the greatest cities in America. It is too bad it has such a negative perception. If anyone is ever looking to take a weekend trip I highly recommend Philadelphia.

Same for Portland except we're perceived mostly as being weird.

Portland, Oregon, has an excellent( and extensive ) light rail system extending out to the limits of the metropolitan area in most directions. It also goes to the airport. It works well for someone like me who lives in a rural area just outside the metro area yet wants to go downtown without the parking issues.

It's drawbacks are that it is not particularly cheap nor is it the fastest. Construction costs can vary from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars per mile! Of course, Portland had to bore through a mountain for about a mile to put in one line.

For me it's more an issue of convienience to visit downtown as there are no light rail stops close to where I work to make it a viable commuting option. That can be an issue where you have a large suburban area like Oklahoma City where places of employment are so spread out that they're effectively isolated from mass transportation like light rail.

Might hit 80 today in Portland. I see that OKC is forecast for 114! Yipes!

I wish I was not the cynic I am, but has anything really changed at this point?

City staff and ODOT have their lipstick on a pig preferred elevated proposal. There was no vote to ask ODOT to STOP (or did I miss that?) ODOT head dawg has noted, why would they STOP absent being told to do so.

I get there is now a plan to ask an outside expert for an opinion, but who actually puts together the rec list on any outside experts for council to engage? Isn't that going to be the same folks already lined up with the Miss Piggy's Red plan?

Elected officials scolding the public is nada new, but it doesn't bode well for expecting changes from them.

There was an understanding that the only "phase" the city is concerned with is the Elevated portion between Western and Walker. It was assumed the rest of the project is pretty much good to go. So it was assumed ODOT should stop with the Western/Walker phase but be allowed to continue with the other phases. That was my take from the meeting.

Same here - I wish they would start work on the eastern I40 connection ASAP. Presently it is scheduled for Spring 2013 - I wonder if it is possible to move it up in the schedule?

I understand cynicism with government kevin. I've often asked myself WTH am I doing here over the course of a couple decades. But I choose to not give up and attempt to influence their decisions in some small way. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

the heavy rail to the airport would be on the line south of the river

One and the same line I was talking about ;-)

Stuff you all probably already know, but I can never be too sure:

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/2012/Adv_080212_public_meeting_set_on_Aug_21_for_okc_bo ulevard.pdf

But remember...this meeting is only to discuss width of the new boulevard, so don't go in there hootin & hollerin about a traffic circle...

yeah, the cynic in me envisions a post meeting report along the lines of

majority at public meeting were very favorable of going 4 lanes over 6 lanes.

In related news, hardly anyone mentioned a roundabout.

Conclusion, folks want tighter road space and roundabout was a passing fad, which won't fit in smaller roadbed space anyhow.

problem solved, with minimal lipstick to boot.



I'll go sit in the corner now.

But remember...this meeting is only to discuss width of the new boulevard, so don't go in there hootin & hollerin about a traffic circle...

Really? A meeting about the widith? And we all thought this Aug. 21 meeting was scheduled because of the debate over the elevated bridge. Also, look how their trying to change the argument into a traffic roundabout debate. Nice strawman ODOT!

Way off Kevin - it would be more like this.

Dateline OKC - ODOT unveiled its revised plan to reduce the proposed OKC Boulevard from 6 lanes to 4 lanes after initial public reaction, most notably from on-line blogs, opposed a road of that width. Four lanes are much more pedestrian friendly and providing vertical separation will allow traffic and pedestrians to move freely. The reduction in the number of lanes was welcomed by all. ODOT officials said they are happy to put this issue to rest.

Anyhow, on a serious note thanks for posting Buffalo Bill. I think 4 lanes of traffic, a 4' to 6' median, and on-street parking are adequate. I am not even sure bike lanes along this particular road are necessary so long as they use sharrows and the speed limit is reduced.

Way off Kevin - it would be more like this.

Dateline OKC - ODOT unveiled its revised plan to reduce the proposed OKC Boulevard from 6 lanes to 4 lanes after initial public reaction, most notably from on-line blogs, opposed a road of that width. Four lanes are much more pedestrian friendly and providing vertical separation will allow traffic and pedestrians to move freely. The reduction in the number of lanes was welcomed by all. ODOT officials said they are happy to put this issue to rest.

Anyhow, on a serious note thanks for posting Buffalo Bill. I think 4 lanes of traffic, a 4' to 6' median, and on-street parking are adequate. I am not even sure bike lanes along this particular road are necessary so long as they use sharrows and the speed limit is reduced.

That's funny! But probably closer to the truth than we want to think...

btw, I watched the doc you recommended....I haven't written you back as there's so much to say...but just WOW. I actually was going to see that at OKCMOA during urbanology but didn't realize it was the same film until I started watching it. I didn't get to catch that one at Urbanology, so I watched it on Netflix and THANKS for recommending!

I thought ODOT wanted to build only what the city wanted? I don't think anyone at any level of city government wants a six lane boulevard, and I thought that discussion was long over. I'm happy to tell ODOT precisely what I think about six lanes, right after I tell them what I think about elevating it.

And this is an evening meeting. If you live in OKC, are in town and not working nights, do more than "try" to go. If you can go and just don't get around to it, don't complain about the outcome.

I work evenings

I thought ODOT wanted to build only what the city wanted? I don't think anyone at any level of city government wants a six lane boulevard, and I thought that discussion was long over. I'm happy to tell ODOT precisely what I think about six lanes, right after I tell them what I think about elevating it.

Wait! And telling them you shouldn't even have to be telling them anything as this all seems so basic - at least to those who understand cities.

And this is an evening meeting. If you live in OKC, are in town and not working nights, do more than "try" to go. If you can go and just don't get around to it, don't complain about the outcome.

I'll be there...

Just as a heads up, I will be on Gwin Falconer-Lippert's radio show to talk about boulevard design and urban activism next weekend (not this weekend).