The Vancouver city planner speaking in the Mayor's Devrlopment Roundtable today said it is absolutely critical that it not be a highway. He said it needs to be a means of connection, not division, and it should be more like the 19th century concept of a boulevard.

Which goes nicely with what Jeff Speck said like five to ten years ago. I hope they just connect it to California, redo the California/Classen intersection and then focus on making the 3rd an actual Boulevard.

I'm not sure "no build" is an option any longer since the west portion is built and the east portion is well underway...

I've been tweeting, I posted on nextdoor.com and I posted on the urbanneighbors.org. I plan on tweeting again here in a bit.

I'm not sure "no build" is an option any longer since the west portion is built and the east portion is well underway...

I've been tweeting, I posted on nextdoor.com and I posted on the urbanneighbors.org. I plan on tweeting again here in a bit.

Sure it is. Just connect the west end to California and have the east end connect to 3rd street.

I get that it's technically possible. I just meant so much as been spent on those ends that it's kind of a lot for "roads to nowhere" vs not having done anything at all and calling it good. Someone at ODOT may not be willing to let "nothing" happen because they may be accountable to the feds now that they've spent so much money.

I get that it's technically possible. I just meant so much as been spent on those ends that it's kind of a lot for "roads to nowhere" vs not having done anything at all and calling it good. Someone at ODOT may not be willing to let "nothing" happen because they may be accountable to the feds now that they've spent so much money.

As long as both sides connect to the downtown grid who outside of OKC is going to make a big deal, it went somewhere. In a lot of ways building it as a quasi-highway is worse than a road to nowhere; it costs more both to build and maintain, is generally slower than just getting on i40 even if just going an exit or two, plus it can pretty much knock billions off what could be built downtown.

ODOT, do it right. Don't make me come down there an "splain it" to you.

ODOT, do it right. Don't make me come down there an "splain it" to you.Dude, if you go to ODOT and explain your view to them, you have to take a video or tell and I will drive down there to watch it man!!!!! ;)

You are free to leave your comments here if you can't make it to the meeting:

Open House: 7th of May, 2014 (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/index.htm)

Urban Pioneer asked me to post this:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard050714.jpg

What is the lighter blue section crossing Penn, Virginia, etc. on the left?

The current constructed west end.

Is this an ODOT-generated drawing?

After looking at all the renderings, it feels like we either get a six lane divided expressway with a smaller opening for the Classen/Western southern pass thru or a four lane street with an enormous elevated portion of of the Classen/Western pass-thru. I would much rather prefer the option D, restoring the streetgrid but they are going to say it is not thinking forward enough for the traffic count and that will be knocked out. Whatever happened to the roundabout?

After looking at all the renderings, it feels like we either get a six lane divided expressway with a smaller opening for the Classen/Western southern pass thru or a four lane street with an enormous elevated portion of of the Classen/Western pass-thru. I would much rather prefer the option D, restoring the streetgrid but they are going to say it is not thinking forward enough for the traffic count and that will be knocked out. Whatever happened to the roundabout?

That's what I was looking for too. Did the roundabout ever get put-in? ...or was it kicked out?

Urban Pioneer asked me to post this:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard050714.jpg

... thank you Pete & Urban Pioneer.

You are free to leave your comments here if you can't make it to the meeting:

Open House: 7th of May, 2014 (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/index.htm)

There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin...

I'm sorry, but I just don't like the grid option much. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a curved BLVD. that adds character and changes things up a bit for the city. Makes it more interesting, imo.

I agree, I don't care for the grid option either but the effort it seems they put into it is extremely lacking. Just continue California on and and then run S 3rd into the east end. No imagination or planning to it. I think it is clear the people want something different than what they are willing to deliver or even look at planning. When I think of what this Blvd should mean to the city I want to see our own version of Chicago's Michigan Blvd. With roundabouts and biking lanes and a road that people take not as the fastest route in a out of downtown but instead a road that highlights our city and shows planning that works for all. I drove by the area where the curve in the Blvd would be just last week and the possibilities are endless for how great this area can be. The curve to me helps take it from being a divider in the road but instead connects the arts areas of western and classen and goes right into the core to shore park. Its a perfect transition. I love the rendering that I think panda did of the 4 lanes with bike lanes and room for the trolleys, something like that is what needs to be attempted, not another high speed NW expressway. IMO the only plan that comes close is option C and it still has HUGE problems that haven't been addressed.

It could just be my computer but has anyone gotten the online comment form working?

We are trying to build a high-density walkable city and ODOT is still trying to build a low-density automobile city

Not defending ODOT, but they aren't in the business of city planning.

Well that was awful. Another evening when ODOT pretends they care. Another time I look at a developers "scoring" system that magically gives them the answer they wanted. When will people become more important than cars in OKC?

Well that was awful. Another evening when ODOT pretends they care. Another time I look at a developers "scoring" system that magically gives them the answer they wanted. When will people become more important than cars in OKC?

betts, no offense because I value what you post, but to answer your question, never, and honestly, the shouldn't as a whole (although in some areas pedestrians should take priority). The only portion of this road to me that matters is between the elevated portion everyone is up in arms about, and where it connects to I-40 on the east. I don't think that some magical roundabout is going to spur development in that blighted area near Western. Maybe I'm wrong. I probably am. I am actually for all the things you guys want with the boulevard (and I don't even live in the core), I guess I just don't see the point of the huge uproar (unless the section from California through Bricktown is not friendly for pedestrians).

I was just a the open house with plenty of discussion going on. I will be submitting my comments and potential concepts that create a hybrid of Alternatives "C" & "D". It would be a big mistake to choose either "A" or "B".

Pahdz, because we've already seen OKC grow quicker than we thought it would (part of why the current design from the early 2000s is no longer adequate) and we are expanding investment downtown further than we expected by this point. In 5 - 10 years, it's not unreasonable to thinl people might begin to consider investing in the development of this area...But we're installing things that are already at least partly dated...you want infrastructure to be built for where you're going, not where you re at and certainly not where you were.

Enviado desde mi SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 usando Tapatalk 2

The section that concerns you could still be six lanes. That has not been decided. Reportedly the park designers fear a big wide green median will interfere with closing the street for festivals. The speed limit is 25 for a very small portion of the road. How many people will actually follow the listed speed limit when it is previously 45? I don't understand why we can't do the least expensive thing and restore the grid. I've long since given up on the roundabout but would like a pretty, green boulevard that is as few lanes as possible, is safe and easy to cross, that makes people want to live or build businesses along it.

The section that concerns you could still be six lanes. That has not been decided. Reportedly the park designers fear a big wide green median will interfere with closing the street for festivals. The speed limit is 25 for a very small portion of the road. How many people will actually follow the listed speed limit when it is previously 45? I don't understand why we can't do the least expensive thing and restore the grid. I've long since given up on the roundabout but would like a pretty, green boulevard that is as few lanes as possible, is safe and easy to cross, that makes people want to live or build businesses along it.

Not gonna happen. This is one area in which I believe Mayor Cornett could have exerted more leadership. I know he has to choose his battles wisely, but he's a sharp guy and I think he totally gets what we want. He is, after all, the person who painted the vision of a grand boulevard.

I'm not hung up on the grid option. I just want the area between Western and the eastern terminus to be pedestrian-friendly and desirable for development.

I would be willing to wager we are getting what Jim Couch wants (and probably many influential members of the business community).

As far as development along the boulevard, I would just as soon we continue to densify to the North, East, and West as opposed to the South. I'm really not much of a Core to Shore guy.

Pahdz, because we've already seen OKC grow quicker than we thought it would (part of why the current design from the early 2000s is no longer adequate) and we are expanding investment downtown further than we expected by this point. In 5 - 10 years, it's not unreasonable to thinl people might begin to consider investing in the development of this area...But we're installing things that are already at least partly dated...you want infrastructure to be built for where you're going, not where you re at and certainly not where you were.

Enviado desde mi SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 usando Tapatalk 2

Thank you!

I used to know a couple of "card tricks" that some of you probably do too. They are very effective and seem nearly magical. They are based on the concept of "You Pick, I Choose." This all sounds a bit like the same sort of deal.

Pahdz, because we've already seen OKC grow quicker than we thought it would (part of why the current design from the early 2000s is no longer adequate) and we are expanding investment downtown further than we expected by this point. In 5 - 10 years, it's not unreasonable to thinl people might begin to consider investing in the development of this area...But we're installing things that are already at least partly dated...you want infrastructure to be built for where you're going, not where you re at and certainly not where you were.

Enviado desde mi SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 usando Tapatalk 2

I guess I'd just ask where are we going? I know where the urbanist majority of this board wants to go, but that's not really the whole city is it? I'd love to see something that fits both groups. I would like better access in my car when I come to work and play downtown. I don't need another mid-speed thoroughfare across town, that's a waste. As far as the Western area, does anyone know what the business owners currently in that area want, or do you only care that their precious property could be high density housing or retail some day?

I'm admittedly not as invested as some of you in this, so forgive my ignorance if some of these questions have already been answered.

If ODOT follows their "Concept Matrix" then it seems clear their going to go with option C.

Not defending ODOT, but they aren't in the business of city planning.

If you ask them they are.

If you ask them they are.

Last time I did speak with their head I was told their focus is building and repairing bridges

(and probably many influential members of the business community).

One of ODOT's project managers talked about the need to get employees of a prominent company out of town more than any other design aspect of the options presented. So it is pretty clear to me where this is going to end up - it has been decided and everything else is a charade. Pretty disappointed by tonight's displays because it is clear a lot of effort over the last couple of years to get city leaders and ODOT to listen has been for naught.

But I might guess half of those employees wouldn't even take the boulevard, they're probably heading north

But I might guess half of those employees wouldn't even take the boulevard, they're probably heading north

I made that exact point. Deer in headlights.....

Pahdz, because we've already seen OKC grow quicker than we thought it would (part of why the current design from the early 2000s is no longer adequate) and we are expanding investment downtown further than we expected by this point. In 5 - 10 years, it's not unreasonable to thinl people might begin to consider investing in the development of this area...But we're installing things that are already at least partly dated...you want infrastructure to be built for where you're going, not where you re at and certainly not where you were.

Enviado desde mi SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 usando Tapatalk 2

Steve Lackmeyer makes a strong case by bringing together the development already happening. He also states there is $60M in development waiting to be announced that we don't know about.

This development is several times over the price tag for this measly expressway ODOT wants to build. One should dictate the other.

Not defending ODOT, but they aren't in the business of city planning.

So how does city planning get to influence what we are doing here to the city?

ODOT's efforts to culdesac WESTERN AVENUE in the middle of downtown evokes irreparable damage a la urban renewal in the 60s and 70s.

So how does city planning get to influence what we are doing here to the city?

Grow a pair? I don't know, you tell me

Steve is asking a lot of really good questions about things he doesn't get.

More Questions than Answers on the Downtown Boulevard | News OK (http://newsok.com/more-questions-than-answers-on-the-downtown-boulevard/article/4747385)


I spent more than an hour tonight trying to understand the four downtown boulevard design options presented by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation at an Open House held in the Cox Convention Center.
I thought about doing this as a story for the paper. But I seriously don’t know what I would write. Well, yes, I do. I’d start it with “I don’t get it.”
And when I say “I don’t get it,” I mean there’s a lot I don’t get.

I guess I'd just ask where are we going? I know where the urbanist majority of this board wants to go, but that's not really the whole city is it? I'd love to see something that fits both groups. I would like better access in my car when I come to work and play downtown. I don't need another mid-speed thoroughfare across town, that's a waste. As far as the Western area, does anyone know what the business owners currently in that area want, or do you only care that their precious property could be high density housing or retail some day?

I'm admittedly not as invested as some of you in this, so forgive my ignorance if some of these questions have already been answered.

Where we're going is a city of diverse types of development. I don't think anybody on this forum is calling for NW Expressway to be turned into a haven of Angled parking, 30MPH speed limit, 30-foot setback ordinances.

But this is a road going through downtown. And the problem with the direction they are going is, regardless of their intentions, it's inflicting massive damage on the fabric of the area as a neighborhood. It is being constructed for the exact purpose of traffic dispersement (though the debate is still out if the non-grid options are going to do even THAT better than the restore to grid…in fact, that's half of what's maddening about this whole thing anyway…the reasons for selecting the options they are selecting are potentially the reasons why they OUGHT to select the grid…but I digress). The problem is, traffic dispersement cannot be the primary factor in deciding how to handle a road in an urban environment. It's *A* factor but definitely not THE factor.

Spartan's highlighting of "WESTERN AVENUE" is exactly correct. You're talking about a street that has major urban development as far north as 63rd street and ODOT's plan is to cut that street off? There are no words for how asinine that is. The whole point of the Roundabout was because it would give OKC a chance to build a special place. As they plan on doing it right now, it *might* attract a couple more fast food chains…it had a chance to be whatever the future developers and citizens of that neighborhood wanted.

The worst part far and away of this whole process has been the refusal to realize how important it is for things to be At-grade. Contrary to what some have said here, FBB did at least get a partial win by getting them to bring it down to grade well before Walker…but why not Western? Why are they so damn afraid of a little bit of congestion on a major artery in OKC? There exist no great cities in the world that are free of congestion. You have plenty of other options as a downtown worker…if you can't be bothered to be in traffic for an hour when you live on 122nd/Council, then either move closer, or find another job. But don't insist that the people who actually LIVE downtown have a part of their neighborhood hindered by a desire to move traffic (debatably) just a little bit more efficiently. Because at the end of the day, no matter what they do with this boulevard, you're still not getting to 122/Cou in 30 minutes from downtown during rush hour. They can ease the congestion a bit and cut off 10 minutes of travel for those living in the burbs.

10 minutes of travel at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars of economic activity in the long run…it's repulsive.

Option A (Six Lanes and Western turns into a f*cking Culd-de-sac)

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t31.0-8/10338541_10202850992108376_7222132365440585335_o.j pg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t31.0-8/10256674_10202851024069175_7310696791763884876_o.j pg

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/t31.0-8/10344181_10202851023789168_9041028739401532335_o.j pg

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t31.0-8/10272643_10202851023349157_9047222760406231676_o.j pg
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20A.pdf

I mean seriously????? A CULDESAC?????????? On one of the busiest streets in OKC? What in the world are these people smoking??

Option B

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t31.0-8/10285594_10202850992228379_4705867154906538491_o.j pg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t31.0-8/10339297_10202851031309356_8214607313194141045_o.j pg
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20B.pdf

Option C

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t31.0-8/1498843_10202850992148377_4784261563442364756_o.jp g

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t31.0-8/1491489_10202851042309631_5186918887504609149_o.jp g
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20C.pdf

Option D

https://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t31.0-8/10317652_10202850992588388_8775726296543230559_o.j pg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t31.0-8/10272475_10202851034029424_9152878483561667124_o.j pg
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20D.pdf

A Cul-de-sac, they want to put a Cul-de-sac into Western.... Do we get mad about that? Should we laugh because ODOT might not be serious about it.... Did I have a stroke and this is what I am seeing? Was I out for a leisurely stroll on my unicycle getting milk and eggs for my grandmother when I pulled out my umbrella because of the rain and was struck by lighting which caused to fall over and get hit by a truck full of chicken feathers and I am dead but haven't crossed over the other side and I'm actually just imagining this?

A Cul-de-sac, they want to put a Cul-de-sac into Western.... Do we get mad about that? Should we laugh because ODOT might not be serious about it.... Did I have a stroke and this is what I am seeing? Was I out for a leisurely stroll on my unicycle getting milk and eggs for my grandmother when I pulled out my umbrella because of the rain and was struck by lighting which caused to fall over and get hit by a truck full of chicken feathers and I am dead but haven't crossed over the other side and I'm actually just imagining this?

Would you be happier if it was Classen that dead end? Just an honest question. One of the the two streets have to be closed if it is insisted that the Bouelvard is actually one continues curved road. I think the idea is to make Classen the "busy" road North of the bouelvard.

Grid is growing on me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is so much wrong with this I don't know where to begin...

CM, what would be your primary concerns?

This is not "Wowing" me. Where are the Roundabouts ?

So, what do we do if ODOT ultimately decides to go full speed ahead with a design that nobody other than ODOT wants? Could the City Council put their collective foot down and stop the construction?

My main concern is the vast amount of usable/developable/and taxable land this road is eating up - and the accompanying amount of unbuildable lots that will be left over on each side of the road. It will be an expensive road to build with no tax revenue generated to help maintain it going forward.

CM, your ideas are hands down THE BEST. The best for today and tomorrow. ... let's just go w/ yours.

The Better Boulevard ? Part II, Thunder Circle | Andrew Stewart (http://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/thunder-circle/)

Mr. Cornett, please take this idea and Make It Happen. This is what we expect for our city today. ..the people.

A Cul-de-sac, they want to put a Cul-de-sac into Western....

This cul de sac idea reminds me a bit of when the South Park kids saw Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Grow a pair? I don't know, you tell me

How does this constitute a response?

Would you be happier if it was Classen that dead end? Just an honest question. One of the the two streets have to be closed if it is insisted that the Bouelvard is actually one continues curved road. I think the idea is to make Classen the "busy" road North of the bouelvard.

On what basis do you know that they have to be closed?

I argued with the consultant Steve talked to (once Steve was done) until about 20 after 8, when they had long closed up shop, about the grid option. He wouldn't stop making the "future traffic requirements" argument from a "traffic engineer" perspective no matter how much I tried to get him to think like a downtown resident. I kept making the point that he was planning for a future that didn't exist. Once there is regional rail and 3-4 phases of the streetcar and 1000-3000 (or many more) additional residential units downtown, the traffic should go down and not up, as people pull more into the core. Also, someone else who's name I didn't get made the point that their study didn't factor in the stress relief on the rest of the grid once the two ends were reconnected to the grid (their study shows a lot of stress on the grid in 2040). Lastly, I tried to make the point that we've been stuck with the old I-40 ROW as a barrier for 50+years and that not restoring us to the grid keeps us stuck with it another 50 years because we'll never get them to take it out once it's there again. He said once its turned over to the city they can do what they want and tear it out in 20 years if it's a problem, but I don't see the city engineers doing that. I asked why they couldn't do it the other way around and restore the grid and if it becomes a problem look at putting in the connection between the ends, and it kept going back to the federal dollars no one wants to give back.

CM, your ideas are hands down THE BEST. The best for today and tomorrow. ... let's just go w/ yours.

The Better Boulevard ? Part II, Thunder Circle | Andrew Stewart (http://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/thunder-circle/)

Mr. Cornett, please take this idea and Make It Happen. This is what we expect for our city today. ..the people.

Mr. Cornett, I know you know this, but I want the others to hear it too.... We need this ( Thuder Circle / Blvd ) to surpass the expectations of the Brand ( Thunder & OKC ). This is the view that the world will see every home game of the Thunder. ...so what opinion will they make from the conference room in NY / LA / London when they want to expand or move their operations to a more central location? We must blow their minds in where we are. We can't have average.

But I might guess half of those employees wouldn't even take the boulevard, they're probably heading north

They dropped the "we need to get Thunder fans home quickly" argument, perhaps because it was pointed out that the majority of them are driving north or south as well.

The problem isn't even that this is a road and not a street, a throughway and not a boulevard. The problem is its location. It is a divider. And, while I understand that not everyone thinks Core to Shore is important, yesterday in the Mayor's Roundtable, the head of planning for Vancouver talked about the importance of luring families downtown. We have a school very close to a lot of undeveloped land that happens to be adjacent to what will be a huge park. Anyone think that might be the kind of area that would lure families to live downtown? Then, think about your child crossing the boulevard to get to school. That's a terrifying thought. So, what would end up happening is that in a part of the city where we want to encourage walkability, everyone is driving their kids a few blocks to school. To me, that defies what we're trying to create in our downtown.

I told them last night they'd better think about building a huge underground, so that people can walk beneath the boulevard. I was smirked at, but at this point in time, I think that's the only solution. But if you care about any of this, please write and tell them you don't want this to be a six lane road. People can say that's not happening. But, two of the most influential people at that meeting last night asked me to please write and request that the road not be 6 lanes. That tells me 4 lanes isn't even a sure thing.

How does this constitute a response?

it was a joke, and an admittance that I don't know :)

More Questions than Answers on the Downtown Boulevard | News OK (http://newsok.com/more-questions-than-answers-on-the-downtown-boulevard/article/4747385)

They dropped the "we need to get Thunder fans home quickly" argument, perhaps because it was pointed out that the majority of them are driving north or south as well.

The problem isn't even that this is a road and not a street, a throughway and not a boulevard. The problem is its location. It is a divider. And, while I understand that not everyone thinks Core to Shore is important, yesterday in the Mayor's Roundtable, the head of planning for Vancouver talked about the importance of luring families downtown. We have a school very close to a lot of undeveloped land that happens to be adjacent to what will be a huge park. Anyone think that might be the kind of area that would lure families to live downtown? Then, think about your child crossing the boulevard to get to school. That's a terrifying thought. So, what would end up happening is that in a part of the city where we want to encourage walkability, everyone is driving their kids a few blocks to school. To me, that defies what we're trying to create in our downtown.

I told them last night they'd better think about building a huge underground, so that people can walk beneath the boulevard. I was smirked at, but at this point in time, I think that's the only solution. But if you care about any of this, please write and tell them you don't want this to be a six lane road. People can say that's not happening. But, two of the most influential people at that meeting last night asked me to please write and request that the road not be 6 lanes. That tells me 4 lanes isn't even a sure thing.

Let me help the ODOT Engineers that are caught-up in ( CYA ) of volume & projections for the next 50 years. OKC will never be NY / LA / Chicago / or Dallas. So, we don't have to look to "that type" of numbers to manage and you won't be "on-the-hook" for the responsiblity of it. We need to manage a new growth area that will be Community First.

This MUST have the Project 180 ( Principles ) to be THE City that is designed for LIVE WORK PLAY.

ODOT, don't give me excuses for average. Don't give me another 70 mph exit w/ a 20 mph ramp ( as they are scattered all over our city & state) w/ zero room to decelerate.... ?!@!@???? Give us something to be proud of. Something you can be proud of. ...and let's get started now.

Hypothetical question, if things don't turn out well and we get a 6-lane highway with wide lanes, etc, can city council take a lane out on either side, resripe and do angled parking?

This is all but signed and stamped, another NW Expressway.

What was the point of moving I-40 if we are going to rebuild the same thing in its place with some at-grade sections?

We need more meetings.

FBB will be strategizing today. We do need more meetings. FBB does not advocate for one design over another but rather that citizen input make the Boulevard "better". Obviously, there is quite a bit left to be desired.

The City ( Mr. Cornett ) needs to provide ODOT the Required Specs ( Project 180 Principles ). The State ( Ms. Fallin ) needs to inform ODOT that this will be the direction that department will take on this project.

This is dirtwork / steel / concrete / signage / trees / lighting. That's it.

People from all over the State of Okahoma will be using this new corridor and it must respresent tomorrow, not the past.