Meg Salyer on The Gwin Faulconer Lippert Show (1st Interview)

http://www.ktok.com/player/?station=KTOK-AM&program_name=podcast&program_id=GwinnFaulconerLippert.xml&mid=22323268

Owner of the Farmer's Market on The Gwin Faulconer Lippert Show (2nd Interview)

http://www.ktok.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?podcast=GwinnFaulconerLippert&selected_podcast=Gwin_08-05-12_Hour_1_Seg_2_1344259148_10234.mp3

Why do people think that for the next 50 years the average person is going to take the Boulevard in and out of Downtown from I-40? The average person looks at the skyline and gets within a mile of it and takes the closest exit (and the online map programs will do the same).

Nobody is going to know about this boulevard when it's entrance on and off I-40 is all the way out by Penn. Most people are going to assume (that's the long way)...It's the nature of Interstates...closest exit to your destination...not exit that puts you on the straightest path to your destination at the highest speed to your destination (unless that happens to be another interstate)

Why do people think that for the next 50 years the average person is going to take the Boulevard in and out of Downtown from I-40? The average person looks at the skyline and gets within a mile of it and takes the closest exit (and the online map programs will do the same).

Nobody is going to know about this boulevard when it's entrance on and off I-40 is all the way out by Penn. Most people are going to assume (that's the long way)...It's the nature of Interstates...closest exit to your destination...not exit that puts you on the straightest path to your destination at the highest speed to your destination (unless that happens to be another interstate)

If I understand you correctly, I am pretty sure I agree with your basic premise. This is why I said the 94000 vehicles per day figure thrown out by ODOT is likely very inaccurate.

http://www.cnu.org/cnu-salons/2012/08/highway-boulevard-reclaiming-and-revitalizing-our-city

Their outside comment on it is pretty hilarious "Strange Highway to Boulevard to Highway Plans". lol

Information for the coming meetings:



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevardnew1.jpg





http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevardnew2.jpg

Meg Salyer on The Gwin Faulconer Lippert Show (1st Interview)

http://www.ktok.com/player/?station=KTOK-AM&program_name=podcast&program_id=GwinnFaulconerLippert.xml&mid=22323268

Owner of the Farmer's Market on The Gwin Faulconer Lippert Show (2nd Interview)

http://www.ktok.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?podcast=GwinnFaulconerLippert&selected_podcast=Gwin_08-05-12_Hour_1_Seg_2_1344259148_10234.mp3


Thanks for posting this and tremendous credit to Meg Salyer for being one of the leading forces in taking a hard and educated look at the various options.

Shadid is heavily involved as well but I think Meg does not get enough credit for her contributions in general. She has a much quieter and more diplomatic way of approaching things, and in many circumstances that may be more effective than the more confrontational style of Shadid.

Or perhaps a better way to say it is that in their own respective ways, each are great proponents for responsible urban planning.

Why do people think that for the next 50 years the average person is going to take the Boulevard in and out of Downtown from I-40? The average person looks at the skyline and gets within a mile of it and takes the closest exit (and the online map programs will do the same).

Nobody is going to know about this boulevard when it's entrance on and off I-40 is all the way out by Penn. Most people are going to assume (that's the long way)...It's the nature of Interstates...closest exit to your destination...not exit that puts you on the straightest path to your destination at the highest speed to your destination (unless that happens to be another interstate)
I have been saying this for several years now...the only folks taking the Boulevard as the Downtown access will be from the East (westbound) which will be the closest route...and depending on how it is configured may over shoot their destination and they have to back track to get where they are going...if they are coming from the West (eastbound) they are most likely going to stay on I-40 and then exit Western or Shields

Yes, the idea this boulevard will be needed as a big traffic mover is pretty silly.

There is very little between the exit and downtown and I don't see that changing any time soon. It's now so easy to get on/off on Western or Shields I can't imagine who is going to be taking this route. I know I wouldn't.

Yes, the idea this boulevard will be needed as a big traffic mover is pretty silly.

There is very little between the exit and downtown and I don't see that changing any time soon. It's now so easy to get on/off on Western or Shields I can't imagine who is going to be taking this route. I know I wouldn't.

What's funny is that people WILL take this route in 50 years (particularly if they have out-of-towners/tourists with them) if we do it right and put in a Boulevard that will encourage development of the area. And it really needs to be at grade until at least Blackwelder.

I have been saying this for several years now...the only folks taking the Boulevard as the Downtown access will be from the East (westbound) which will be the closest route...and depending on how it is configured may over shoot their destination and they have to back track to get where they are going...if they are coming from the West (eastbound) they are most likely going to stay on I-40 and then exit Western or Shields

There will be signage directing people to Downtown from I-40, so, yes, people will use it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhHzly_6lWM

And it really needs to be at grade until at least Blackwelder.

Agreed!

I understand why it cannot be at grade by Penn... I get that. And I don't know if it could be brought down before Virginia (which I would perfer, just not sure it's possible), but I see bringing it down somewhere between Virginia and Indiana (perhaps around Kentucky) as something that is VERY possible. Please, correct me if I am wrong.

Agreed!

I understand why it cannot be at grade by Penn... I get that. And I don't know if it could be brought down before Virginia (which I would perfer, just not sure it's possible), but I see bringing it down somewhere between Virginia and Indiana (perhaps around Kentucky) as something that is VERY possible. Please, correct me if I am wrong.

Of course its possible. I see this section more of a cost issue more than an engineering issue. Its recycling a large portion of I-40.
Removing the berm, bridges, and putting in new storm drainage, intersections, lights, etc costs more than removing the concrete medium and basically repaving everything.

I say they should do very little to this section as possible and lower everything when more money is made available.

Agreed!

I understand why it cannot be at grade by Penn... I get that. And I don't know if it could be brought down before Virginia (which I would perfer, just not sure it's possible), but I see bringing it down somewhere between Virginia and Indiana (perhaps around Kentucky) as something that is VERY possible. Please, correct me if I am wrong.

I agree with you and it is 100% possible, manageable and doable.


Of course its possible. I see this section more of a cost issue more than an engineering issue. Its recycling a large portion of I-40.
Removing the berm, removing the bridges, putting in storm drainage, intersections, lights, etc costs more than removing the concrete medium and basically repaving everything.

I say they should do very little to this section as possible and lower everything when more money is made available.

Surely there will be some kind of cost offset though by not constructing the new elevated portion that if done like in the rendering will also have greenspace and trees on it.

I agree with you and it is 100% possible, manageable and doable.



Surely there will be some kind of cost offset though by not constructing the new elevated portion that if done like in the rendering will also have greenspace and trees on it.

Depends on whatever the alternative would be. Its a 1 mile long berm and the elevated path in question is about a half mile. That why I think they shouldn't put any more money into it because it makes them less likely to what to remove it in the future.

I wonder how much it costs to move that much dirt? Took forever to remove the approach on the east end.

Spartan: Here are a few ideas I did awhile back that might relate to your post:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/15393885/Market%20Circle%20-%20Scheme%20C.jpg


I like this a lot, except I would relocate the Greek restaurant at Western/Exchange (which would get much more business in a building that is not a converted Burger King location) and extend 3rd to Exchange, and do the Market Circle there instead of 4th. I would want to give heightened streetscape treatment to 3rd because it has more potential for redevelopment than 4th, vis a vis C2S.

edit: I looked at that map again, and thought it was odd showing 3rd crossing the Crosstown. Then I realized I think you labeled the streets 1-block off. So yes, I'd say keep the roundabout placement exactly like THAT. ;)

I agree with you and it is 100% possible, manageable and doable.



Surely there will be some kind of cost offset though by not constructing the new elevated portion that if done like in the rendering will also have greenspace and trees on it.


the state is not putting in any of the landscaping the city is ...

edit: I looked at that map again, and thought it was odd showing 3rd crossing the crosstown. Then i realized i think you labeled the streets 1-block off. So yes, i'd say keep the roundabout placement exactly like that. ;)

doh!!!

the state is not putting in any of the landscaping the city is ...

Well good. That just means more money for dirt removal.

Some have suggested that the boulevard isn’t even necessary and that the east and west ends of the boulevard should be connected into the existing downtown street grid. This scheme represents one potential concept for doing just that.

In this scheme, the boulevard would consist of two discontinuous sections.

The eastern section of the boulevard would align with SW 3rd Street. It would be a wide, tree-lined boulevard in the vicinity of the convention center and central park. To the west of the park, the boulevard transition into SW 3rd Street, an urban street and terminate at a roundabout at Exchange. This roundabout could be designed to complement the architecture of the adjacent Farmer’s Market and spur development in this area.

The western section of the boulevard would be at-grade and follow the alignment of the old I-40 until Western. Beyond Western the boulevard would intersect with Classen in a grand roundabout. Beyond this roundabout, the boulevard would transition into California, an urban street that would terminate at a roundabout at Walker. This area has significant development potential with the addition of the downtown elementary school and the possible redevelopment of the Stage Center site and surrounding properties.

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg

Some have suggested that the boulevard isn’t even necessary and that the east and west ends of the boulevard should be connected into the existing downtown street grid. This scheme represents one potential concept for doing just that.

In this scheme, the boulevard would consist of two discontinuous sections.

The eastern section of the boulevard would align with SW 3rd Street. It would be a wide, tree-lined boulevard in the vicinity of the convention center and central park. To the west of the park, the boulevard transition into SW 3rd Street, an urban street and terminate at a roundabout at Exchange. This roundabout could be designed to complement the architecture of the adjacent Farmer’s Market and spur development in this area.

The western section of the boulevard would be at-grade and follow the alignment of the old I-40 until Western. Beyond Western the boulevard would intersect with Classen in a grand roundabout. Beyond this roundabout, the boulevard would transition into California, an urban street that would terminate at a roundabout at Walker. This area has significant development potential with the addition of the downtown elementary school and the possible redevelopment of the Stage Center site and surrounding properties.

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg

I LOVE this idea!

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg

I think a roundabout at Classen and 3rd st would also be nice. Also, those two or three properties directly north of 3rd st should be acquired so the boulevard can be the same width as it is east of Walker. It wouldn't really be two separate sections after that since everything would 'flow' together with the two roundabouts.

And I would just make a traditional intersection at Western and Reno. that way those scared of roundabouts will not have to go through it on their way to the interstate. lol

Some have suggested that the boulevard isn’t even necessary and that the east and west ends of the boulevard should be connected into the existing downtown street grid. This scheme represents one potential concept for doing just that.

In this scheme, the boulevard would consist of two discontinuous sections.

The eastern section of the boulevard would align with SW 3rd Street. It would be a wide, tree-lined boulevard in the vicinity of the convention center and central park. To the west of the park, the boulevard transition into SW 3rd Street, an urban street and terminate at a roundabout at Exchange. This roundabout could be designed to complement the architecture of the adjacent Farmer’s Market and spur development in this area.

The western section of the boulevard would be at-grade and follow the alignment of the old I-40 until Western. Beyond Western the boulevard would intersect with Classen in a grand roundabout. Beyond this roundabout, the boulevard would transition into California, an urban street that would terminate at a roundabout at Walker. This area has significant development potential with the addition of the downtown elementary school and the possible redevelopment of the Stage Center site and surrounding properties.

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg



This is by far the best idea, but do we even need the roundabouts. The natural routes are California and 3rd street. It will bring people to the grid and open up the old crosstown route for new development.

I think a roundabout at Classen and 3rd st would also be nice. Also, those two or three properties directly north of 3rd st should be acquired so the boulevard can be the same width as it is east of Walker. It wouldn't really be two separate sections after that since everything would 'flow' together with the two roundabouts.

And I would just make a traditional intersection at Western and Reno. that way those scared of roundabouts will not have to go through it on their way to the interstate. lol

Exchange...

Exchange...

Ok, not quite traditional.

Some have suggested that the boulevard isn’t even necessary and that the east and west ends of the boulevard should be connected into the existing downtown street grid. This scheme represents one potential concept for doing just that.

In this scheme, the boulevard would consist of two discontinuous sections.

The eastern section of the boulevard would align with SW 3rd Street. It would be a wide, tree-lined boulevard in the vicinity of the convention center and central park. To the west of the park, the boulevard transition into SW 3rd Street, an urban street and terminate at a roundabout at Exchange. This roundabout could be designed to complement the architecture of the adjacent Farmer’s Market and spur development in this area.

The western section of the boulevard would be at-grade and follow the alignment of the old I-40 until Western. Beyond Western the boulevard would intersect with Classen in a grand roundabout. Beyond this roundabout, the boulevard would transition into California, an urban street that would terminate at a roundabout at Walker. This area has significant development potential with the addition of the downtown elementary school and the possible redevelopment of the Stage Center site and surrounding properties.

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg

This, minus the roundabouts, has been the direction I would have liked to have seen it go for at least the last year or two. If it's main purpose was to help access to downtown, then this will be more useful for at least the next twenty or thirty years to get to/from existing major structures on the west side of downtown to/from the west side of the metro.

Shifting the mainline to Sheridan is also a plausibility since that would allow traffic to go without turns on city streets all the way through the core, plus we have the right of way to do it and that would not dent the mile grid like shifting to Reno would.

Some have suggested that the boulevard isn’t even necessary and that the east and west ends of the boulevard should be connected into the existing downtown street grid. This scheme represents one potential concept for doing just that.

In this scheme, the boulevard would consist of two discontinuous sections.

The eastern section of the boulevard would align with SW 3rd Street. It would be a wide, tree-lined boulevard in the vicinity of the convention center and central park. To the west of the park, the boulevard transition into SW 3rd Street, an urban street and terminate at a roundabout at Exchange. This roundabout could be designed to complement the architecture of the adjacent Farmer’s Market and spur development in this area.

The western section of the boulevard would be at-grade and follow the alignment of the old I-40 until Western. Beyond Western the boulevard would intersect with Classen in a grand roundabout. Beyond this roundabout, the boulevard would transition into California, an urban street that would terminate at a roundabout at Walker. This area has significant development potential with the addition of the downtown elementary school and the possible redevelopment of the Stage Center site and surrounding properties.

The areas highlighted in red represent former interstate right-of-way that would be available for development.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/market circle/MarketCircle-SchemeE.jpg

Probably the best idea so far...though if you are actually going to release this idea to a broader public, I recommend taking out all the stop lights...At least half those intersections east of Classen wouldn't need stoplights for at least 10 - 20 years.

This is by far the best idea, but do we even need the roundabouts. The natural routes are California and 3rd street. It will bring people to the grid and open up the old crosstown route for new development.

I don't think either of these are "natural" boulevards, but I agree that it makes more sense to use an existing ROW than to create a new one we may or may not need. Perhaps the consultant should also evaluate whether we need to create a new ROW.

I would say not to underestimate the value of a diagonal route to expedite with NW>SE circulation. I would also say that the traffic circles aren't just about breaking up areas with too many intersections too close, but also about creating landmarks and sense of place where they are needed. In that regard, also don't underestimate the practical value of the roundabouts beyond just traffic circulation.

I think the idea that we need to replace what was a major throughway through downtown with another major throughway through downtown is just silly. The idea is that the boulevard feeds downtown with convenient access, not that it provides a way to go through downtown. That's why I favor the disconnected plan the most. let's get people into town and on the street grid - spurring more development and easy access to the park, the convention center and the other attractions without cutting downtown in half (again) with a major throughway.

Just my $.02.

If the option of conceding existing right of way is on the table, they should consider selling all of it north of SW 3rd and using the proceeds to connect Western to Walker along 3rd. Anything west of Western is sort of no man's land at this point and irrelevant to current traffic flow.

I have been suggesting similar for several years, but isn't there some way to avoid breaking the Boulevard up/disjointed/jogging those 3 blocks...like put it on Reno? On the west end where they already have the flyover halfway built, it seems like it could easily connect with Reno since it is already right there...what about the other end? Does Reno (or any of our East/West streets go all the way though).

Absolutely, return the existing ROW back to private ownership and development...get that land back on the property tax rolls and developed to get the income that results. Make whatever Street the iconic Boulevard and have your Development there too.

I have been suggesting similar for several years, but isn't there some way to avoid breaking the Boulevard up/disjointed/jogging those 3 blocks...like put it on Reno? On the west end where they already have the flyover halfway built, it seems like it could easily connect with Reno since it is already right there...what about the other end? Does Reno (or any of our East/West streets go all the way though).

Absolutely, return the existing ROW back to private ownership and development...get that land back on the property tax rolls and developed to get the income that results. Make whatever Street the iconic Boulevard and have your Development there too.

It would have to be a T-Intersection at Penn. Which people would find silly because they could have just as easily taken the Penn off ramp to get to Reno.

Edit: I guess it could cross over Penn and Virgina and than have a T-intersection between Virgina and Indiana.

Which is why they should have put the connection all the way back at the I-44/I-40 interchange instead of shortening the Boulevard by that length...another thing that goes against ODOT's line about not putting exits so close together (they have Agnew/Boulevard/Penn in very close proximity)

I presume folks that will be taking the Boulevard exit will be merging onto whatever roadway it ends up on and not have to deal with signals, turns and over passes...similar to the Kirkpatrick(sp) flyover ramp from Hefner Parkway. Folks can take the Memorial exit, stop at the intersection, turn right and then get on the Turnpike there...But you bring up a good point, are folks that are taking the Penn exit going to have to deal with that intersection, the overpass, Reno and the Boulevard...if elevated I guess they will be passing underneath it...?????

Just received email from OK div. of FHWA informing me of the meeting on Aug 21.

Great to get this email, without me asking for information. Sounds like they want the people who have shown interest in this project to be involved. Unlike ODOT.

I presume folks that will be taking the Boulevard exit will be merging onto whatever roadway it ends up on and not have to deal with signals, turns and over passes...similar to the Kirkpatrick(sp) flyover ramp from Hefner Parkway. Folks can take the Memorial exit, stop at the intersection, turn right and then get on the Turnpike there...But you bring up a good point, are folks that are taking the Penn exit going to have to deal with that intersection, the overpass, Reno and the Boulevard...if elevated I guess they will be passing underneath it...?????

Huh?

Which is why they should have put the connection all the way back at the I-44/I-40 interchange instead of shortening the Boulevard by that length...another thing that goes against ODOT's line about not putting exits so close together (they have Agnew/Boulevard/Penn in very close proximity)

I presume folks that will be taking the Boulevard exit will be merging onto whatever roadway it ends up on and not have to deal with signals, turns and over passes...similar to the Kirkpatrick(sp) flyover ramp from Hefner Parkway. Folks can take the Memorial exit, stop at the intersection, turn right and then get on the Turnpike there...But you bring up a good point, are folks that are taking the Penn exit going to have to deal with that intersection, the overpass, Reno and the Boulevard...if elevated I guess they will be passing underneath it...?????

Kilpatrick... Kirkpatrick is the Science Museum (sorry, I can be snarky at times... not intentional). Exiting onto Penn and going north will not lead to an intersection with the Boulevard, because the boulevard is going to be elevated there. Nothing anyone can do to stop that. So no matter what happens they will go underneath.

More alternatives needed for final boulevard design

Letter in today's Oklahoman:

http://newsok.com/more-alternatives-needed-for-final-boulevard-design/article/3699808

Just caught the last few minutes Spartan. Very good from what I heard though, looking forward to the meeting tomorrow night.

Just a reminder on the big event today!


Information for the coming meetings:



http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevardnew1.jpg





http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevardnew2.jpg

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevardnew2.jpg

I will not get off work in time for this... will someone be able post a video on Youtube?

Huh?
What is the question?


Kilpatrick... Kirkpatrick is the Science Museum (sorry, I can be snarky at times... not intentional). Exiting onto Penn and going north will not lead to an intersection with the Boulevard, because the boulevard is going to be elevated there. Nothing anyone can do to stop that. So no matter what happens they will go underneath.
Sory about the spelling (that is why I had (sp) beside it...i was responding to jn1780's post that originally said there would be a T-connection with the Boulevard there, and why do that since they could just exit on Penn. They could bring it down to at grade there couldn't they? Or they could have before they went ahead and built the flyover in the wrong place. If that portion is going to be elevated no matter what at this point, will folks on Penn have direct access to the Boulevard or will they have to drive out of their way (like they do now to get westbound I-40 access...currently have to take Reno all the way down to Portland or go back to Western...over 2 miles round trip out of the way)?

What is the question?


Sory about the spelling (that is why I had (sp) beside it...i was responding to jn1780's post that originally said there would be a T-connection with the Boulevard there, and why do that since they could just exit on Penn. They could bring it down to at grade there couldn't they? Or they could have before they went ahead and built the flyover in the wrong place. If that portion is going to be elevated no matter what at this point, will folks on Penn have direct access to the Boulevard or will they have to drive out of their way (like they do now to get westbound I-40 access...currently have to take Reno all the way down to Portland or go back to Western...over 2 miles round trip out of the way)?

If your on Penn, you would have to use the new Agnew exit that is set to open in a few months.

The city and ODOT currently have no plans to bring this section to grade and there isn't much serious talk to do so.

Sory about the spelling (that is why I had (sp) beside it...i was responding to jn1780's post that originally said there would be a T-connection with the Boulevard there, and why do that since they could just exit on Penn. They could bring it down to at grade there couldn't they? Or they could have before they went ahead and built the flyover in the wrong place. If that portion is going to be elevated no matter what at this point, will folks on Penn have direct access to the Boulevard or will they have to drive out of their way (like they do now to get westbound I-40 access...currently have to take Reno all the way down to Portland or go back to Western...over 2 miles round trip out of the way)?

I think what jn was trying to say was the IF there was a connection to Penn from the boulevard it would have to be a T, at least that's what I got out of it, I could be wrong... but it is my understanding that there would be no connection to Penn because of the flyover, and the earliest it could be brought down was Virgina, although that is a streatch and the more likely scenario would see it brought down around Kentucky (Though I perfer Virgina).

I think what jn was trying to say was the IF there was a connection to Penn from the boulevard it would have to be a T, at least that's what I got out of it, I could be wrong... but it is my understanding that there would be no connection to Penn because of the flyover, and the earliest it could be brought down was Virgina, although that is a streatch and the more likely scenario would see it brought down around Kentucky (Though I perfer Virgina).

Actually it was in regards to what Larry suggested in connecting the boulevard on-ramp directly to Reno. No room to connect it directly south of Reno with what they have built right now. So it would have to flyover Reno and curve back around and connect to Reno coming from the north.

Sort of irrelevant though how it would be done since the city will never choose to route it to Reno. Best case scenario would be an at-grade street along the current route sometime in the way distant future.


If were lucky it will be brought down by Klein. Ed Shadid talked about an intersection at Douglas at the council meeting, but it was like "yeah, will have ODOT look into it". So it doesn't really sound like the plans from Penn to Western are changing.

What is the question?

I was 100% sober when I read that, yet I could not articulate it. Please explain what you were talking about with more clarity? Thanks.

Actually it was in regards to what Larry suggested in connecting the boulevard on-ramp directly to Reno.

Ah... my mistake

So it doesn't really sound like the plans from Penn to Western are changing.

I know... which just irritates the hell out of me. They need to be looking further west. I don't remember which councilman said it, but at the meeting one of them said something about bringing it to grade as quickly as possible in Lower Bricktown. Why isn't anyone talking about bringing it to grade as soon as possible to the west. The quicker it is broght down, the more we can develop... and yes, I realize development in the area will take many, many years, probably not even in my lifetime, but this shouldn't be about us, it should be about the future. When I talk about the boulevard, I'm not talking about how I can get home as fast as possible after a Thunder game. I'm talking about imporving our quality of life. I'm talking about what my son will see and do when he's my age, and what his children will see and do after that. I'm talking about the potential for things that will make us proud long after we are gone. We have made such great strides in this city, and if we block all that potential development just so a few will have the option to get home faster on a road that most of them won't take anyway... Well... all our efforts will come up short

Just caught the last few minutes Spartan. Very good from what I heard though, looking forward to the meeting tomorrow night.

Thanks! I'm finishing up some emails, and I'm about to head down there myself right afterward - look forward to seeing everyone there, and I especially look forward to the speakers we have lined up!

I just got back from dropping off some boards. The set-up is very nice. This is going to a great event.

Pics and/or video would be greatly appreciated by any of you going. Working til 8 tonight. Thanks!

Pics and/or video would be greatly appreciated by any of you going. Working til 8 tonight. Thanks!

I second this... I too am working late... must have video!!!

I second this... I too am working late... must have video!!!

I am as well. It would be awesome if someone could take the time to record the event. I'm very excited by citizen's reaction to the boulevard dilemma and would never have imagined that a difference could be made. Well, I guess that's what ODOT wants us to think anyways.

I was 100% sober when I read that, yet I could not articulate it. Please explain what you were talking about with more clarity? Thanks.
Hope this helps...if not feel free to PM me

jn1780 posted:

It would have to be a T-Intersection at Penn. Which people would find silly because they could have just as easily taken the Penn off ramp to get to Reno.

I was basically saying IF there will be Boulevard access from Penn, that the Penn exit and fly-over Boulevard exit is a similar situation with the Turnpike access from Hefner Parkway (north bound).

1) One can take the fly-over exit ramp and get directly on the Turnpike.

or

2) One can take the Memorial exit ramp. Potentially wait at the intersection. Turn right, then cross over a couple of lanes to get onto the Turnpike.

Some might say that it seems rather silly to have 2 different ways to get onto the Turnpike within such close proximity to each other (solely from the Hefner Parkway perspective).

Vail, CO

http://gyazo.com/b0c9059d4f174ece2bd5fecfa54dcda4.png?1344903654
http://gyazo.com/42ab2f0f062a11d78df41a57cd5b4b8e.png?1344904212

Avon, CO

http://gyazo.com/9572e77b49ffe46b09136a736c152efb.png?1344904348
http://gyazo.com/f9f4b3e34688ef4d91a1301f1b9ebd5a.png?1344904406

Clearly the people in Colorado are smarter than ODOT thinks the people of Oklahoma City are.

INOeZnfUuIY

Were those satellite photos taken during a weekend? I'm sure someone is going to point out that Vail or Avon doesn't seem that busy.

Of course, downtown OKC often looks like that at certain times during the week.

Hope this helps...if not feel free to PM me

jn1780 posted:


I was basically saying IF there will be Boulevard access from Penn, that the Penn exit and fly-over Boulevard exit is a similar situation with the Turnpike access from Hefner Parkway (north bound).

1) One can take the fly-over exit ramp and get directly on the Turnpike.

or

2) One can take the Memorial exit ramp. Potentially wait at the intersection. Turn right, then cross over a couple of lanes to get onto the Turnpike.

Some might say that it seems rather silly to have 2 different ways to get onto the Turnpike within such close proximity to each other (solely from the Hefner Parkway perspective).

If OTA couldn't plan for the future, I don't see how ODOT can.

Were those satellite photos taken during a weekend? I'm sure someone is going to point out that Vail or Avon doesn't seem that busy.

Of course, downtown OKC often looks like that at certain times during the week.

Both Friday Sept 23 2011.

Hope this helps...if not feel free to PM me

jn1780 posted:


I was basically saying IF there will be Boulevard access from Penn, that the Penn exit and fly-over Boulevard exit is a similar situation with the Turnpike access from Hefner Parkway (north bound).

1) One can take the fly-over exit ramp and get directly on the Turnpike.

or

2) One can take the Memorial exit ramp. Potentially wait at the intersection. Turn right, then cross over a couple of lanes to get onto the Turnpike.

Some might say that it seems rather silly to have 2 different ways to get onto the Turnpike within such close proximity to each other (solely from the Hefner Parkway perspective).

You can't really compare a turnpike to a street. Of course, a highway is going to be directly connected to another highway and Memorial would have its own ramp to the turnpike.

Both Friday Sept 23 2011.

which would be the down season for Vail and Avon ....