Yes, by all means let's encourage bringing all the 18-wheelers down off the interstate into downtown.

Yeahhhhh, cause 18-wheeler through traffic from west coast to east coast & vice versa loves to take the business routes through all small towns. There are no truck stops in downtown OKC so why assume that to be true?

this is not close to the truth

What part did I get wrong?

1) I-40 was an elevated psychological barrier
2) (the grid still existed under it)
3) that devastated this part of downtown
4) for 50 years.
5) The boulevard is an actual physical barrier
6) on the ground
7) and the grid will be broken.
8) The boulevard actually makes things worse.

Yeahhhhh, cause 18-wheeler through traffic from west coast to east coast & vice versa loves to take the business routes through all small towns. There are no truck stops in downtown OKC so why assume that to be true?

I was simply repeating what Councilman Marrs said....that the main purpose for the boulevard should be for traffic egress should I40 be "shut down." (Which of course I happen to completely disagree with)

Well according to Gary Marrs, the only reason the blvd should exist is to provide egress from I40 for interstate traffic. Yes, by all means let's encourage bringing all the 18-wheelers down off the interstate into downtown.

Then (and I'm not arguing with you, s00nr1, I'm arguing with Gary Marrs), why doe the two new entrances have to connect. I don't think ANYBODY is opposed to the two new entrances.

Then (and I'm not arguing with you, s00nr1, I'm arguing with Gary Marrs), why doe the two new entrances have to connect. I don't think ANYBODY is opposed to the two new entrances.

With the 'two boulevards on the grid' option the two entrances would be connected by 7 different roads, just in case the alternate route needs an alternate route. If his excuse was a real concern his choice is the worst solution.

I was talking with some old-timers recently, discussing how Patience Latting shook up the cronyism and old boy system that prevailed downtown before her arrival. They all agreed that it has returned, and needs to be changed.

The election filing period will open later this month for Wards 1 (Marrs), 3 (McAtee), 4 (White) and 7 (Kelly).

White has performed really well on the boulevard. This morning he spoke against Alternative A, noting that attaching the boulevard to the grid system would have the exact same ingress/egress capabilities but with more north/south connectivity. He voted "no" on Alternative A, adding an explanation: "I am casting this vote because I think we can do better."

White did a perfect job attempting to steer the conversation toward performing analysis on the grid concept, but the council was already decided. Hopefully FBB can gather political support for White if he seeks reelection in Ward 4 (southeast OKC).

How much electoral power can be generated by supporters of better urban design? Will supporters of better urban design help favorable council members get reelected? It's the only way to make sure council gives more consideration in the future.

I wanted so bad to have a copy of the Emergency Response Guide and ask former Fire Chief Marrs what he would propose to do if the event necessitating diverting traffic onto city streets fell within the stand off distances. The most likely places for an accident of that magnitude would place Core to Shore within evacuation distances and preclude using the blvd as an emergency bypass. Sorry Gary, there are people in FBB that have some HAZMAT certifications you didn't count on.

CaptDave - the whole 'alternate emergency route' is a gimmick. Marrs has no interest in the truth on this subject. FHWA already said there was no such requirement so we know he is making it up it up to fit his own desires. If it really was an issue I-240, I-35, I-44, I-235, and Kilpatrick Turnpike already provide alternate routes.

I know but it would have been fun to flip the ERG open at the podium and look up the required evacuation radius.

I know but it would have been fun to flip the ERG open at the podium and look up the required evacuation radius.

You don't even need the HAZMAT manual; you just need a highway map. Hell, forget the map, even a rudimentary knowledge of OKC would suffice.

Yeah but watching his jaw drop when the little orange book was pulled out could have been a classic! ;-)

This could go in several different threads but this one is as good as any.

HeLgjogTVF4

I was talking with some old-timers recently, discussing how Patience Latting shook up the cronyism and old boy system that prevailed downtown before her arrival. They all agreed that it has returned, and needs to be changed.

The election filing period will open later this month for Wards 1 (Marrs), 3 (McAtee), 4 (White) and 7 (Kelly).

Someone needs to run against McAtee. N.W. 23rd Street between I-44 to MacArthur is an absolute disaster. It's worse than a dirt road. He has done nothing to help.

Someone needs to run against McAtee. N.W. 23rd Street between I-44 to MacArthur is an absolute disaster. It's worse than a dirt road. He has done nothing to help.

If only the State had $80 million to fix the roads that already exist. Now where can we find $80 million?

If only the State had $80 million to fix the roads that already exist. Now where can we find $80 million?

Not that it really matters, but NW 23rd is not the State's road, at least between I-44 and MacArthur.

Someone needs to run against McAtee. N.W. 23rd Street between I-44 to MacArthur is an absolute disaster. It's worse than a dirt road. He has done nothing to help.

Just FYI, this corridor is to be the recipient of a beautification project, like how 23rd is between Centennial Expressway and Classen. It will eventually have a center median landscaping and the hopes are to have it done with concrete, but we'll see. The business I work at is just north of 23rd on Meridian and our district manager is part of the 23rd St. Business District group that has been having regular meetings on how we're going to keep our businesses alive when it comes to this project. Wish I had info for you on a start date, but just know that it is in the works...

If only the State had $80 million to fix the roads that already exist. Now where can we find $80 million?It's simple. We just create a coin. ;)

This could go in several different threads but this one is as good as any.

HeLgjogTVF4

Love the video! Reminds me of Sean "Local Hero" Cummings recent work . . . =)
(btw: was glad to see that no "distracted driving" was involved in the production of that film.)

Just FYI, this corridor is to be the recipient of a beautification project, like how 23rd is between Centennial Expressway and Classen. It will eventually have a center median landscaping and the hopes are to have it done with concrete, but we'll see. The business I work at is just north of 23rd on Meridian and our district manager is part of the 23rd St. Business District group that has been having regular meetings on how we're going to keep our businesses alive when it comes to this project. Wish I had info for you on a start date, but just know that it is in the works...

That's great news. I live in the neighborhood and we need some help.

Mods: Sorry for getting in the weeds.

I was talking with some old-timers recently, discussing how Patience Latting shook up the cronyism and old boy system that prevailed downtown before her arrival. They all agreed that it has returned, and needs to be changed.

The election filing period will open later this month for Wards 1 (Marrs), 3 (McAtee), 4 (White) and 7 (Kelly).

None of those wards have (substantive) domain in the Urban Core. In all of those wards it is going to be a hard campaign to sell which is built around the principles of urbanization. As much as I want to see a shake-up, it seems likely to me that these council members are genuinely representing the desires of their constituents.

I'd be willing to bet that the average person living on Council and Hefner would prefer that the Boulevard be an easy access point to downtown (see the following thread on Betts basketball forum: New boulevard and Thunder games (http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/showthread.php?10055-New-boulevard-and-Thunder-games)).

If there are going to be members campaigning in those Wards that would be allies of FBB and other urban minded peoples, then coming up with a convincing campaign to help suburbanites see the advantages for them of a thriving downtown is going to be of the utmost importance.

I decided not to write a rebuttal on the basketball forum in the interests of being a good neighbor, but I don't think the boulevard is going to be a solution. First of all, a significant number of the people leaving Thunder games are heading north or south so the boulevard will have absolutely no effect on their driving times. The boulevard will have at least one stop light and a 25 mph speed limit as you are exiting the Chesapeake Arena, not to mention people attending Thunder games will utilize the boulevard parking lanes and you will have people trying to get into the lanes of traffic from their parking spaces. That will slow east-west traffic on the boulevard considerably. If people's inclination is to ignore the 25 mph speed limit, it will make the boulevard a very profitable place to put speed traps.

I'm continually perplexed about people's complaints about traffic after a Thunder game regardless. First of all, unless the game has a point differential of about 2 or less, 10 to 25% of the tepid "fans" attending a Thunder game leave at the 5 minute mark in the 4th quarter so they don't have to deal with traffic. There are less than 20,000 people at the game, which is only 20% of the people at a Sooner football game in Norman, which really does only have people going north and south to get out of Norman. I walk home now, but when the Hornets were here I drove home, and the traffic was an extremely minor annoyance, with my drive time being about 5 to maybe 10 minutes longer than usual. Even if you have season tickets, we're only talking about 41 nights out of an entire year. I didn't think I had much to complain about when I was driving.

I doubt there will be parking lanes on the westbound portion of the boulevard considering that that will most likely be where the streetcar tracks will go. Also, you have to think about future development. Obviously, caddy corner to the arena will be the central park. To the immediate south? Hopefully a new development with a hidden public parking structure. To the west will be the convention center and street lined parking will be at a minimum.

When my mom was in town and we went to the game (ironically the New Orleans game, lol) we waited until after traffic in the arena thinned out. We took turns going to the restroom then we went into the Thundershop and looked around and I bought a few items. By the time we got back to my car in the Main Street parking garage, it was a cinch to get outta downtown.

I don't think the boulevard is going to congest the area, I just think that people have to get used to the idea of how it's going to be by the time it's all available and in place for us.

So Pete White and Ed Shadid voted no? Anybody else? Obviously Skip, Meg, Mick and Marrs voted for option A. So what about McAtee, Greenwell, and Ryan?

No one else. Councilmen Shadid and White made a very strong case for rejecting Option 'A' but unfortunately it fell upon deaf ears and blind eyes. Mr White summed it up best in his final statement, "We can do better". The other 7 are willing to settle for mediocrity or worse.

A short video offering of some of the comments made today at the meeting.

Compromise plan for downtown OKC boulevard approved | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/compromise-plan-for-downtown-okc-boulevard-approved/article/3744177)

I doubt there will be parking lanes on the westbound portion of the boulevard considering that that will most likely be where the streetcar tracks will go. Also, you have to think about future development. Obviously, caddy corner to the arena will be the central park. To the immediate south? Hopefully a new development with a hidden public parking structure. To the west will be the convention center and street lined parking will be at a minimum.

When my mom was in town and we went to the game (ironically the New Orleans game, lol) we waited until after traffic in the arena thinned out. We took turns going to the restroom then we went into the Thundershop and looked around and I bought a few items. By the time we got back to my car in the Main Street parking garage, it was a cinch to get outta downtown.

I don't think the boulevard is going to congest the area, I just think that people have to get used to the idea of how it's going to be by the time it's all available and in place for us.

i would bet that parking will be on both sides of the street on the BLVD

Looking at the wide median of the Blvd, kind of reminds me of San Jose, California where they have a boulevard near the airport with the tracks running down the middle of the median. I think this could be part of the BART system.

I also saw the same scenerio in Barcelona, where they have an above ground system that ran through the large median of a rambles. It even had mechanical arm crossguards for pedestrians in the medians at major walkways.

Looking at the wide median of the Blvd, kind of reminds me of San Jose, California where they have a boulevard near the airport with the tracks running down the middle of the median. I think this could be part of the BART system.


That is part of the Valley Transit Authority (VTA).

BoulderSooner,

Do you think they'll set up this portion of the streetcar route in the right lane of traffic and save curbside for parking? Yep, this will be accidentville lol.

You are asking a lot from ODOT. Last year they said they didn't know anything about a streetcar system in OKC. However, they were vaguely familiar with a rubber tire trolley route but nothing that involved steel wheels.

Yeah...its too bad us average citizens don't have the oil tycoon money to lace their pockets with...

Another meeting this month.

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/2013/ADV_050813_citizens_urged_to_attend_public_meeting _on_okc_boulevard.pdf

Betts; we can agree to agree!

ON EDIT: just noticed your post was from January...LOL...but I still agree

Tonight's meeting canceled per ODOT.

Oklahoma City Boulevard meeting rescheduled to June 18 » Local News » The Edmond Sun (http://www.edmondsun.com/local/x1543059184/Oklahoma-City-Boulevard-meeting-rescheduled-to-June-18)

Meeting on track for the 18th. ODOT, City of OKC Schedule Oklahoma City Boulevard Public Meeting for June 18th | The ACOG Blog (http://acogblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/odot-okc-boulevard-public-meeting/)

From Ed Shadid's Facebook page
Today 5:30pm in Bricktown. ODOT, City of OKC Schedule Oklahoma City Boulevard Public Meeting for June 18th | The ACOG Blog (http://acogblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/odot-okc-boulevard-public-meeting/)


The meeting will provide information about the state’s ongoing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Assessment of the Oklahoma City Boulevard in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration and present alternatives being considered. Citizens are encouraged to attend and formally submit their comments about these elements of the Environmental Assessment. Additionally, information will be provided about upcoming improvement projects to address operational issues at the east and west ends of the OKC Boulevard and the I-40 Crosstown corridor.

A presentation is planned followed by a question and answer period and the opportunity for the public to visit one-on-one with engineers and planners and provide comment on the OKC Boulevard.

Hope someone will be able to take lots of pictures and post a nice recap on here.

They published the handouts on ODOT's website.
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2013/130618/handout_e.pdf

So basically east interchange and Penn to Western has been finalized and will be awarded next month.
For the central section, they are presenting 4 alternatives or should I say two alternatives with the first two being the reason for the redesign in the first place.
A: Original concept(6 lanes)
B: Modified original concept with 4 lanes.
C: Bridge going over Western only with an intersection at Reno.
D: Grid option

Please D

A and B have such a little benefit since it is faster to just get off on Western than use slow freeway they create, C's main benefit seems to be it routes traffic to Classen but it's variation on the boulevard section is pretty much just an at grade barrier instead of an elevated one. I would even take connecting old i40 and to Classen & Sheridan before A, B or C.

It is a significant accomplishment for the FBB group that Option 'D' is now getting serious consideration. It will be analyzed to the same extent the other options finally. For many people, the choice is obvious.

I'm sorry, I can't salute old school grid. I like option C.

I'm sorry, I can't salute old school grid. I like option C.

Out of curiosity, why not the grid? If what you want is a grand streetscape, that can still be accomplished on an existing grid street.

Any idea where the cost savings will default to if Option D is selected?

Any idea where the cost savings will default to if Option D is selected?

Roughly $30million if the bridge section between Klein and Francis. But also consider the amount of land that becomes available for development if the entire diagonal section is eliminated!

Options A and B, with retaining walls and bridges from Western to Lee, would be an awful idea. That would only continue to hamper the redevelopment of the Farmers Market area and stifle any new development south of the blvd.

I'm sorry, I can't salute old school grid. I like option C.I agree, I really like "curvy" streets and think that they are cool. Just a personal preference though. I don't dislike the grid, I just think it gets boring after awhile. I would love option c if they took the bridge and made it an at-grade round-a-bout.

Roughly $30million if the bridge section between Klein and Francis. But also consider the amount of land that becomes available for development if the entire diagonal section is eliminated!



Thanks. I was more alluding to asking where the remaining funds (whatever is left when it doesn't cost the budgeted $85M) would go with Option D? Considering how much cheaper it will be as it eliminates a huge portion of new boulevard construction.

I think it simply goes away, unfortunately.

Thanks. I was more alluding to asking where the remaining funds (whatever is left when it doesn't cost the budgeted $85M) would go with Option D? Considering how much cheaper it will be as it eliminates a huge portion of new boulevard construction.

One thing to remember is the boulevard - at least the basic construction - will be built using federal funds. The "amenities" may or may not be included in that; I think the city is responsible for that regardless of the final design. But I think it is reasonable to expect two "nicer" boulevards, possibly meeting Project 180 standards on California and 3rd Street - if basic construction costs are saved by eliminating the most expensive section.

It would be nice to be able to redirect any savings to another federally funded local project (I235/I44 interchange for example??) but it doesn't work that way unfortunately.

If you weren't able to make it last night (like me), here is a link to the presentation, handouts, etc.

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2013/130618/index.htm

I haven't read through them all yet, but I am working on it.

Wasn't able to attend the meeting, but just looking at the presentation materials, I would have to go with D and then C with an absolutely NO to A and B. The retaining walls/bridges found in A and B inhibit development right up against the boulevard, C would be "acceptable" because it minimizes the bridge, but D would be optimal.

I think it simply goes away, unfortunately.

Then, I think we need to consider an option that returns to the grid BUT somehow requires a move of the substation for the convention center. (sadly,) LOL.

I asked if there was a "use it or lose it" clause on these funds. They expressly said no. In fact, afterwards I met with the PIO who was there and he said that the Deferred Action plan (not doing anything with the middle portion) is in fact getting traction. It doesn't mean that we can't have a boulevard or anything else there in the future. The argument I made and I think others are making too is what's the rush? If we can build it in 2 years, and if connecting the ends fixes the traffic issues, then let's just do that and then wait to see what C2S actually looks like in 10-20 years.

That is good news. The ability to re-allocate saved funds to other projects should be a huge selling point for Option D.

Option D is serving as the "Do Nothing" alternative which is required in all NEPA assessments. However, I'm curious, did they present is as actually doing nothing (leave it as it sits as of the end of new I-40 construction) or road construction to restore the grid. If it's the former, Option D is a guaranteed looser.

Option D is serving as the "Do Nothing" alternative which is required in all NEPA assessments. However, I'm curious, did they present is as actually doing nothing (leave it as it sits as of the end of new I-40 construction) or road construction to restore the grid. If it's the former, Option D is a guaranteed looser.

That is what OKCPW and ODOT will likely try. It is clear they are still trying to prejudice opinion against anything other than their basic original plan.

Stand by, more to come on Option 'D'...

Option D is serving as the "Do Nothing" alternative which is required in all NEPA assessments. However, I'm curious, did they present is as actually doing nothing (leave it as it sits as of the end of new I-40 construction) or road construction to restore the grid. If it's the former, Option D is a guaranteed looser.

We are only talking about the middle segment - not to 'do' or 'not do' the boulevard. The boulevard is being built, the question is will it be one long continuous boulevard bisecting the grid, or will it follow the grid.

That is what OKCPW and ODOT will likely try. It is clear they are still trying to prejudice opinion against anything other than their basic original plan.

Stand by, more to some on Option 'D'...
It sounds like FBB is getting ready to re-mobilize.

That is good news. The ability to re-allocate saved funds to other projects should be a huge selling point for Option D.

Time for a twitter campaign of #WeWantTheD


.....idk....

It sounds like FBB is getting ready to re-mobilize.

Yep!