Gotta check out the Friends for a Better Boulevard Facebook page.... http://www.facebook.com/groups/483683684978845/

Absolutely amazingly detailed concepts. Some real effort put forth.

(Catch22) -



Thank you for your email and sharing your thoughts about the new Oklahoma City Boulevard. Please let me assure you that the City, and the Oklahoma Department of Transportation who is the lead designer for the project, will take your concerns into consideration as the design of the new roadway continues to be developed. The traffic circle concepts that have been developed by the community for the Western/Classen/Reno/Exchange area have been communicated to ODOT, and the option is being considered by traffic and design engineers to determine the feasibility of such a solution. No decisions have yet been made, and we should know more in the coming weeks.



In response to the Boulevard design, much of the new roadway spanning Downtown Oklahoma City will be at grade and will encourage much needed economic development in the area. Currently plans anticipate reaching grade at approximately Lee Avenue on the west and Oklahoma Avenue on the east. However, portions of the new Boulevard must be elevated so connections can be made to the existing I-44 and I-35 interchanges. Much planning has already taken place, and there will be tremendous opportunities to integrate the new MAPS 3 Convention Center with the new Boulevard, MAPS 3 Park and Streetcar System. Pedestrian access is a key part of the overall design, and consultants have been recently selected for each of these projects, providing a unique opportunity to have them work closely together and create something very special for the City.



I appreciate your interest, and thanks again for sharing your ideas.



Eric



Eric J. Wenger, P.E.

Director Public Works/

City Engineer

(405) 297-3486

eric.wenger@okc.gov

Speedy reply.

Gotta check out the Friends for a Better Boulevard Facebook page.... http://www.facebook.com/groups/483683684978845/

Absolutely amazingly detailed concepts. Some real effort put forth.

Those are some good concepts. I think anything that requires more right of way to be purchased so roads can be moved around will be rejected, unfortantly. The city engineers don't want to delay and redesign everthing.

This is based on the roundabout idea I sketched out a couple of years ago. At the time, I was just speculating about the look and feel of the new boulevard. Once the issue of the boulvard design is started to heat up, I decided I needed to take the time to further explore the idea. It is by no means perfect or complete, but this series of images represents a conceptual idea of what our boulevard could (and I believe should) be like.
Enjoy!
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-1.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-2.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-3.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-4.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-5.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-6.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-7.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-8.jpg
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-9.jpg

The full PDF (27 MB) can be downloaded here:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/15393885/Final Presentation.pdf

I repeat my previous comments. Traffic circles can look pretty and lend themselves to fountains and statues. That's all they're good for.

I repeat my previous comments. Traffic circles can look pretty and lend themselves to fountains and statues. That's all they're good for.

First of all, I think you're discounting the value of beautification. The fact is that this proposal creates a feasible opportunity for landmark beautification that nothing else creates. You could build a Space Needle replica like Las Vegas and still not get the authentic urbanism value of this traffic circle.

Furthermore, other things that you're completely over-looking: (1) Safer, more efficient traffic management; (2) Heightened sense of place; (3) Impetus for major infill development; (4) Connectivity to the existing street grid; (5) Better downtown gateway from essentially ALL I-40 traffic; (6) An opportunity to actually create the boulevard we were sold; (7) Integrating the Farmer's Public Market with downtown rather than further separating it and preventing its revitalization; (8) A really cool way to pay homage to Oklahoma's veterans (we have nothing in the way of veteran memorials that so many other peer cities have, like KC).

I was just excited to have a rendering to try and sell the officials on, I was actually not expecting the masterpiece that this ended up being, I am stunned. Even though I was in a bad mood from the Thunder game, that did not last long after seeing this.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-6.jpg
Can you guys imagine this with a backdrop of our city's already-spectacular skyline from the west, rising above the Market Circle?

First of all, I think you're discounting the value of beautification. The fact is that this proposal creates a feasible opportunity for landmark beautification that nothing else creates. You could build a Space Needle replica like Las Vegas and still not get the authentic urbanism value of this traffic circle.

Furthermore, other things that you're completely over-looking: (1) Safer, more efficient traffic management; (2) Heightened sense of place; (3) Impetus for major infill development; (4) Connectivity to the existing street grid; (5) Better downtown gateway from essentially ALL I-40 traffic; (6) An opportunity to actually create the boulevard we were sold; (7) Integrating the Farmer's Public Market with downtown rather than further separating it and preventing its revitalization; (8) A really cool way to pay homage to Oklahoma's veterans (we have nothing in the way of veteran memorials that so many other peer cities have, like KC).

Spartan, a few of your points are valid. But, as I've said over and over, I've experienced personally countless traffic circles both as a pedestrian and a driver and never found them to feel safer (especially as a pedestrian) or more efficient. I think the other things you desire can be accomplished without a traffic circle.

Well, right now, one is either for the earthen ramp or for the traffic circle. Ljbab, you're welcome to start a third competing movement with an alternative proposal for this site, but Friends for a Better Boulevard has been successful in turning this into a 2-option debate, rather than the default acceptance of ODOT's proposal.

Obviously the movement is still young, a lot of work is left in order to persevere and save the western side of downtown, and I think Bob Kemper will have some plans for how to take it to the streets that I am anxious to see. I personally think he ought to follow MTP's model. I see no reason why there shouldn't be a traffic circle committee, a la the streetcar committee.

I was just excited to have a rendering to try and sell the officials on, I was actually not expecting the masterpiece that this ended up being, I am stunned. Even though I was in a bad mood from the Thunder game, that did not last long after seeing this.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-6.jpg
Can you guys imagine this with a backdrop of our city's already-spectacular skyline from the west, rising above the Market Circle?

Having seen this on the Facebook group...yes, it could be a shock to ODOT. We need to find a way to get Andrew, or at least his presentation to the round table (pun intended)!

Well, right now, one is either for the earthen ramp or for the traffic circle. Ljbab, you're welcome to start a third competing movement with an alternative proposal for this site, but Friends for a Better Boulevard has been successful in turning this into a 2-option debate, rather than the default acceptance of ODOT's proposal.

Obviously the movement is still young, a lot of work is left in order to persevere and save the western side of downtown, and I think Bob Kemper will have some plans for how to take it to the streets that I am anxious to see. I personally think he ought to follow MTP's model. I see no reason why there shouldn't be a traffic circle committee, a la the streetcar committee.


I see absolutely no reason why it should be a ramp or a traffic circle. That just makes no sense. I'm all for efforts to change the plans as currently drawn but a traffic circle is not necessary to do that. Count me in as a volunteer for the no traffic circle committee. I would even favor a square over a circle.

Boo you LJ

Boo you LJ


I call it as I see it and I am a big supporter of changing the current plans. You may not have had the personal experience with traffic circles that I've had. People tend to get blown away by beautiful renderings with thinking about the realities of the plan.

Sorry...I haven't been neglected by a traffic circle. Did you get in a wreck looking at the Scissor Tail Flaycatcher mating ritual bridge on I-40? My bad...

LJ, the non traffic circle option is the earthen ramp. That is the other choice. But if you are really convinced that the hard work put in by the Friends for a Better Boulevard movement is not the right course of action for the community, then you really should draw up an alternate proposal of a crazy 5-way intersection or what have you. Currently, the option you seek does not exist and will not unless you force it into the public discourse.

As it is, any opposition to this will be seen as support for the earthen ramp, and I'm not sure you want your opposition to traffic circles misconstrued as support for the earthen ramp. I count myself firmly as a friend of the Better Boulevard.

Earthen ramp = Miami Heat. No one wants that crap to win...

I would more accurately compare the desirability of the earthen ramp to the Muslim Brotherhood.

I still like the idea of just getting it back to the grid. From the west bring it back to grade at Fred Jones or Shartel and flow into California (western is out since it would be redundant possibly worse option for people to use than i40 interchange with it), from the east have it flow into 3rd/old i40. It is not like anyone will drive the entire distance anyway, the exits/entrances on the other side make more sense if you are coming/going from/to the interstate.

I was just excited to have a rendering to try and sell the officials on, I was actually not expecting the masterpiece that this ended up being, I am stunned. Even though I was in a bad mood from the Thunder game, that did not last long after seeing this.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s225/CuatrodeMayo/FinalPresentation-6.jpg
Can you guys imagine this with a backdrop of our city's already-spectacular skyline from the west, rising above the Market Circle?

This is absolutely fabulous. Stunning. This is what happens when standards are raised. Wow.

Agreed...great vision and work.

Does this plan include making the I40 off ramps go to Reno instead of an elevated road?

I personally think it would make sense to merge Reno and Exchange in the approach to the Market Circle, but do it without demolishing a single historic building on Klein, and then have Reno enter the circle in the west Boulevard's place. That frees up room on the radius for Western to enter the Market Circle, which I can't underscore the importance of, because Western does carry all of the traffic between downtown and I-40.

It's traffic counts have risen exponentially since I-40 opened. Western will probably carry most of the traffic counts that actually justify this kind of infill development around the circle. That street is also the link to the south side.

Currently plans anticipate reaching grade at approximately Lee Avenue on the west and Oklahoma Avenue on the east. However, portions of the new Boulevard must be elevated so connections can be made to the existing I-44 and I-35 interchanges.
looks like that is a distance of only 8 to 10 blocks and falls outside the elaborate Traffic Circle plan???

Even though I dislike traffic circles with a passion and will avoid them whenever possible, am not trying to put the idea down as it looks nice, but what would the cost of that design be? We had impressive renderings of Project 180 and the things that were going to be included, then budget realities hit and even parts that weren't scrapped, were severely cut back. What is the probability that even if this was approved by ODOT that it would come anywhere close to looking like this when they were done with it??

I really like the circles. Seen my share in Europe, Barcelona is full of them, even some of the city residential 2 lane streets have them. As far as pedestrian navigation, they had street lights that allowed the people safe crossing through the traffic, so there is really no saftey issues if done right.

I believe it would be cost effective without the complete traffic signalization that a regular intersection would have, both on initial installation and maintenance.

What does the typical traffic signal cost? I would think that any part of that rendering (sculpture, fountain, landscaping etc) would be about the same as the traffic signals. For safety reasons, aren't pedestrians going to need some type of signals in those crosswalks? It looks rather massive (much larger than the ones along 10th street...wouldn't that require more land? Would it require the elimination of existing businesses/buildings already there? I just think there are a lot of unanswered questions with this is all.

Again, don't get me wrong, it looks very nice and I have seen some attractive ones elsewhere too. I guess the question here, at this location, is there a high concentration of pedestrians utilizing this park/plaza in the middle of the street(s)?

I agree with other posters here, it is not a matter of what ODOT is going full steam ahead with and just this proposal. There are other options that need to be explored, like eliminating the need for the traffic circle by returning the intersection to the street GRID.

Apparently this has already made it to David Streb at ODOT and some of the Council. So they are aware that the concepts are out there. I just had lunch with Bob. I didn't know that this was Cuatro's modern interpretation of Bob's idea for Layton's proposed Lincoln Boulevard "Arch de Triumph". Pretty cool interpretation for the modern day.

Bob is thinking comprehensive War Memorial for all US wars including Iraq and Afghanistan. If the circle is "doable" within the City-ODOT engineering sphere, that's a pretty great concept in my opinion to gain public support.

What does the typical traffic signal cost? I would think that any part of that rendering (sculpture, fountain, landscaping etc) would be about the same as the traffic signals. For safety reasons, aren't pedestrians going to need some type of signals in those crosswalks?

I'm sure a big fountain or sculpture would cost more than a traffic signal...but some type of feature would be asthetically pleasant to visit. A simple overhead pedestian walkway could eliminate signals altogether. One of those circles in Barcelona was 10 lanes of traffic.....and it works.

the traffic circle would replace a new bridge .. so i would bet the money would not be that far off

One of the other benefits to the design is that it re-invigorates Exchange and Classen as the boulevards they once were. Also, nice solution to drop Reno a block and solve its integration with the roundabout.

Do you realize how many "simple overhead pedestrian walkways" you are talking about. That is going to add to the cost, much less take away from the attractive design they have going there. Would have to see the numbers on all of it to see if it is feasible not only to build as rendered but to maintain

Do you realize how many "simple overhead pedestrian walkways" you are talking about. That is going to add to the cost, much less take away from the attractive design they have going there. Would have to see the numbers on all of it to see if it is feasible not only to build as rendered but to maintain

Ever seen those in Vegas ? Not much to them, and you'd just need a couple, one on 2 sides of your choice. You could go underground for that matter, then they wouldn't be unsightly and practically maintenance free. Just a simple tunnel.

Do you realize how many "simple overhead pedestrian walkways" you are talking about. That is going to add to the cost, much less take away from the attractive design they have going there. Would have to see the numbers on all of it to see if it is feasible not only to build as rendered but to maintain

They are not talking about pedestrian overpasses and there are none in the rendering that I can see.

I am only aware of a few traffic circles this size that have people in the middle of them, and they get there via an underground walkway.

I am only aware of a few traffic circles this size that have people in the middle of them, and they get there via an underground walkway.

Dupont Circle in Washington, DC is a good example of a heavily traveled traffic circle with significant pedestrian traffic.

There are no underground walkways for pedestrians, but there is an underground road and subway that goes through it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupont_Circle
1856

Dupont Circle Google Earth Image

1857

Dupont Circle in Washington, DC is a good example of a heavily traveled traffic circle with significant pedestrian traffic.

There are no underground walkways for pedestrians, but there is an underground road and subway that goes through it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupont_Circle
1856

Nice one and a pretty good example. Thanks.

Dupont Circle in Washington, DC is a good example of a heavily traveled traffic circle with significant pedestrian traffic.

There are no underground walkways for pedestrians, but there is an underground road and subway that goes through it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupont_Circle
1856

Exactly. Dupont Circle was actually the main inspiration for Market Circle.

They are not talking about pedestrian overpasses and there are none in the rendering that I can see.

Yeah, I don't know where that came from.

LJ, the non traffic circle option is the earthen ramp. That is the other choice. But if you are really convinced that the hard work put in by the Friends for a Better Boulevard movement is not the right course of action for the community, then you really should draw up an alternate proposal of a crazy 5-way intersection or what have you. Currently, the option you seek does not exist and will not unless you force it into the public discourse.

As it is, any opposition to this will be seen as support for the earthen ramp, and I'm not sure you want your opposition to traffic circles misconstrued as support for the earthen ramp. I count myself firmly as a friend of the Better Boulevard.

Spartan, it sounds like you have just designated yourself to be the arbitor of the choices. My opposition to both stands. I don't have the capabilites to draw up elaborate plans that some have posted but you can't convince me that an alternative isn't possible. As I've said before, I would even favor some kind of traffic square over a circle.

I'm not arbitrating, I'm just trying to bring this back down to reality, which I would argue the traffic circle has miraculously become a part of.

What is a traffic square? I'm not familiar with this concept. What about a traffic trapezoid? Has a nice ring to it. (I kid, I kid)

I'm not arbitrating, I'm just trying to bring this back down to reality, which I would argue the traffic circle has miraculously become a part of.

What is a traffic square? I'm not familiar with this concept. What about a traffic trapezoid? Has a nice ring to it. (I kid, I kid)

When you tell me there are only two options, the one you favor and the one you oppose, that is being a little heavy handed. I still contend that people have become enamored by a beautiful depiction without considering all of the ramifications just as ODOT is enamored with their plans without considering all of the ramifications.

When you tell me there are only two options, the one you favor and the one you oppose,

Because those are the two options. I'm not being heavy handed ljbab, I'm leveling with you - you've done nothing to illicit heavy-handedness.

You have to find a creative way to handle the convergence of all these streets. The only other feasible alternative that I can see is to not do the boulevard at all. However, I'd encourage people to look at downtown in 2012, and to stop looking at downtown in 2000 (C2S) and especially throw out plans based on the 1990 outlook (ODOT's basis here). That 2012 reality, that so few people have keyed in on, is that I really think the best development opportunity is the west side of downtown - it has traffic counts that don't exist anywhere else (bumper-to-bumper traffic on Western), and it has cheap real estate fronting Western - classic rent gap situation. I'm not saying to abandon C2S, I'm just saying that C2S needs to evolve to reflect the changes that have occurred in the last 10 years in order to be as successful as we all want.

Then the bottom line, for me, becomes this - if you're wanting to put downtown's west side to the highest possible use to take advantage of this golden opportunity, you gotta do this traffic circle. It's such a natural way to build the world-class environment we're looking for.

As for advocated of "returning to the street grid," I think you create and take advantage of new opportunities between Classen and Shields, however, west of the Market Circle, I think then you absolutely "return to the street grid" with Reno. That is a slight deviation from the plans drafted by Andrew but the engineering is workable, albeit complicated because you have to merge Reno and Exchange in the approach to ingress, preferably without demolishing a single building along Klein which is an incredibly urban street that frames the Farmer's Market amazingly well. That's a fantastic district waiting to emerge.

Because those are the two options. I'm not being heavy handed ljbab, I'm leveling with you - you've done nothing to illicit heavy-handedness.

You have to find a creative way to handle the convergence of all these streets. The only other feasible alternative that I can see is to not do the boulevard at all. However, I'd encourage people to look at downtown in 2012, and to stop looking at downtown in 2000 (C2S) and especially throw out plans based on the 1990 outlook (ODOT's basis here). That 2012 reality, that so few people have keyed in on, is that I really think the best development opportunity is the west side of downtown - it has traffic counts that don't exist anywhere else (bumper-to-bumper traffic on Western), and it has cheap real estate fronting Western - classic rent gap situation. I'm not saying to abandon C2S, I'm just saying that C2S needs to evolve to reflect the changes that have occurred in the last 10 years in order to be as successful as we all want.

Then the bottom line, for me, becomes this - if you're wanting to put downtown's west side to the highest possible use to take advantage of this golden opportunity, you gotta do this traffic circle. It's such a natural way to build the world-class environment we're looking for.

As for advocated of "returning to the street grid," I think you create and take advantage of new opportunities between Classen and Shields, however, west of the Market Circle, I think then you absolutely "return to the street grid" with Reno. That is a slight deviation from the plans drafted by Andrew but the engineering is workable, albeit complicated because you have to merge Reno and Exchange in the approach to ingress, preferably without demolishing a single building along Klein which is an incredibly urban street that frames the Farmer's Market amazingly well. That's a fantastic district waiting to emerge.

I still agree with your points except the traffic circle. There ARE NOT just two options just because you think that's true. You could put a square or even somewhat rectangular configuration in the area where you propose the traffic circle. That would be safer for both drivers and pedestrians and just as efficient, if not more so.

Can you take us beyond "I just don't like traffic circles?" Why are you so vehemently opposed to circles? Just curious..

Can you take us beyond "I just don't like traffic circles?" Why are you so vehemently opposed to circles? Just curious..

Too many personal experiences, Spartan, both here and in Europe. I always feel I'm taking my life in my hands. A traffic circle isn't the end of the world and my life doesn't revolve around opposing them but I've had my say.

can you show any of us an example of a "traffic square" or "traffic rectangle" any where??

and west of this area the BLVD is going to be on the old I40 alignment ..and that is pretty much written in stone

can you show any of us an example of a "traffic square" or "traffic rectangle" any where??

and west of this area the BLVD is going to be on the old I40 alignment ..and that is pretty much written in stone

Here are just a few off the top of my head:

Lebanon, TN - downtown
Washington D.C. - two are just east of the Captiol building.
Savannah, GA - everywhere (more than you can shake a stick at)

Here are just a few off the top of my head:

Bowling Green, KY - downtown
Lebanon, TN - downtown
Washington D.C. - two are just east of the Captiol building.
Savannah, GA - everywhere (more than you can shake a stick at)

ok how about 1 of the size to replace this traffic circle ..

I'm not sure why this guy is so vehemently against circles. No offense ljbab, but it sounds like a phobia. Lol. "Circlephobia". I just imagine some video of a guy losing his mind as he sees other cars circling ahead culminating into some sort of 3 Stooges style crash over an embankment.

Personally, I think it's awesome Andrew put the effort forth. There's more inspiration and quite frankly detail, than we have seen attached to nearly anything else out there regarding anything else. Lol. Where are ODOT's renderings for their overpasses? Lol

ok how about 1 of the size to replace this traffic circle ..

Trafalger Sq - Westminster/London

nm - not a good example.

I guess both of the ones in DC would be the best examples. Both are larger than Du Pont Ciricle but they are residnetial in nature and not commercial. Not sure if that is just the historic makeup of the areas or if the square/circle impacted the development pattern (i.e. do circles promote commercial development while square promote residential development, or is there no impact)

Now that I think about it, maybe this why I can never spur retail/commerical development on my traffic squares in Sim City 3. And this whole time I though it was because SimCity 3 was still based on segregated zoning.

can you show any of us an example of a "traffic square" or "traffic rectangle" any where??

The common courthouse square similar to those in Cordell or Boise City, OK. Check them out on Google Maps.

The common courthouse square similar to those in Cordell or Boise City, OK. Check them out on Google Maps.

Creek Council House [square] in Okmulgee, too.

Let's compromise and do an octagon...everybody wins =)

Let's compromise and do an octagon...everybody wins =)

I say we base the decision on the role of an 8 side die. For the record, I prefer the circle - I was just answering the question that was asked.

Let's compromise and do an octagon...everybody wins =)


Or...or...or:

http://www.gogeometry.com/problem/p413_cyclic_quadrilateral.gif

(everybody wins)

However, I'd encourage people to look at downtown in 2012, and to stop looking at downtown in 2000 (C2S) and especially throw out plans based on the 1990 outlook (ODOT's basis here). That 2012 reality, that so few people have keyed in on, is that I really think the best development opportunity is the west side of downtown - it has traffic counts that don't exist anywhere else (bumper-to-bumper traffic on Western), and it has cheap real estate fronting Western - classic rent gap situation. I'm not saying to abandon C2S, I'm just saying that C2S needs to evolve to reflect the changes that have occurred in the last 10 years in order to be as successful as we all want.

Then the bottom line, for me, becomes this - if you're wanting to put downtown's west side to the highest possible use to take advantage of this golden opportunity, you gotta do this traffic circle. It's such a natural way to build the world-class environment we're looking for.

In reality there are always more than two options, but the Market Circle (Octagon? Tetradecagon?) idea is a lot like OKC's past of doubling down on the bet (stealing from Steve Lackmeyer). Go big or go home ... and do nothing.

Certainly returning to the grid and doing nothing is lots better than doing nothing and letting ODOT run OKC.

In reality there are always more than two options, but the Market Circle (Octagon? Tetradecagon?) idea is a lot like OKC's past of doubling down on the bet (stealing from Steve Lackmeyer). Go big or go home ... and do nothing.

Certainly returning to the grid and doing nothing is lots better than doing nothing and letting ODOT run OKC.

odot is not running okc .. they are building a road on property that they already own ..

odot is not running okc .. they are building a road on property that they already own ..

Yeah, I get it, but why? Why does ODOT want to own that anyway? Forgive me if I'm late to the discussion, but what value does that land/road mean to ODOT or the State of Oklahoma?

This land/road is something that ODOT is legally bound to by virtue of the EIS and the NEPA process that took place for the new crosstown.

Where is the boulevard EIS and documentation about the NEPA process?