Jane Jenkins ‏@JaneJenkins 3h
@UrbanNeighbors Please endorse or condemn any of the options. Important to comment. City Council voted to endorse Option C.

City Council voted (7-2) for something similar to Option C on January 8, 2013. But that was from a different set of choices that did not include a Return to the Grid option, which thanks to public pressure, is now an option in what ODOT is proposing. And there are two different people on Council now.

Why is she acting like this is a settled issue with Council???? Confused.

"Someone behind the scenes" is some very powerful downtown interests, if what I've heard is correct. This boulevard is being built for someone. It would be interested if the someones who are getting what they want would identify themselves.

Hopefully the meeting Monday is well attended.

Does one of those someones have a concrete business? Because only the grid promotes development in that area.

Who is the PR person for Downtown OKC? Why would they say that on Twitter? The Council has not endorsed version C. Why is Downtown OKC misleading the public by saying the Council has endorsed option C? This has not happened. Someone may want to let the PR flack know.

Also, who is on the board of directors for Downtown OKC? That could be very enlightening.

Here you go:

Jim Tolbert, Chairman of the Board
Larry Nichols, Immediate Past Chair
Mark Beffort, Vice Chair
Jane Jenkins, President
Chip Fudge, Treasurer
A.J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary
Avis Scaramucci
Bob Howard
Carl Edwards
Chuck Wiggin
Claudia San Pedro
Clay Bennett
David Rainbolt
Dean Gandy
Fred Hall
Jim Couch
Mayor Mick Cornett
Roy Williams
Sean Trauschke
Steve Mason

There's some interesting conversations going on on Twitter about this. It very much feels to me like someone behind the scenes overplayed their hand hard.

Can anyone share some of these Twitter interactions, out of curiosity?

Steve's twitter (https://twitter.com/stevelackmeyer) is a pretty good starting place for the retweets mentioned. Downtown OKC Inc. (https://twitter.com/DowntownOKCInc) is another, as is the Urban Neighbors (https://twitter.com/UrbanNeighbors) account.

Downtown OKC Inc. ‏@DowntownOKCInc 4h
The letter we sent asking for support for option C on the Blvd went only to our boards. Not asking community to support it, only to comment.

Judy Burns ‏@JudyBurns 57m
@DowntownOKCInc Why are you supporting option C? What boards are you referring to? That sounds very backdoor to me.

Downtown OKC Inc. ‏@DowntownOKCInc 32m
@JudyBurns We were referencing our boards of directors, to whom the letter was addressed.

Steve's OKC Central ‏@stevelackmeyer 28m
@DowntownOKCInc This is all very odd....

Downtown OKC Inc. ‏@DowntownOKCInc 20m
@stevelackmeyer Agreed. It's really not that complicated, tho. Jane wrote a letter to our boards of directors, and UN sent it to members...

Steve's OKC Central ‏@stevelackmeyer 4m
@DowntownOKCInc I'm confused on one detail here: has Downtown OKC's board of directors endorsed Option C for the boulevard?

Downtown OKC Inc. ‏@DowntownOKCInc 3m
@stevelackmeyer No.

Nice to know that:
(a) Downtown OKC just thinks of Urban Neighbors as one of its boards
(b) that Jane Jenkins decides what Downtown OKC "believes" is the best alternative, not the DOKC board

Here's that Suburban Neighbors email again:

The Oklahoma Department of Transportation recently conducted an open house to review conceptual designs for the new Oklahoma City Boulevard. Reconnecting the downtown core to the new Interstate 40 through this new roadway is a top priority for Downtown OKC - and your input on the new design is needed. The comment period is open through May 21.

We need you to weigh in and provide a comment. The voice of the residential and business community must be heard on this issue - the comments provided will have an impact on which alternative is selected. Of the alternatives presented, Downtown OKC Inc. believes alternative C best balances urban planning issues and traffic movement. The concentration of workers in downtown Oklahoma City is growing - and an alternative that invites congestion is not in the best interests of continued growth.

Steve's twitter (https://twitter.com/stevelackmeyer) is a pretty good starting place for the retweets mentioned. Downtown OKC Inc. (https://twitter.com/DowntownOKCInc) is another, as is the Urban Neighbors (https://twitter.com/UrbanNeighbors) account.

Thank you! And also Tier2City. :)

Jane Jenkins is speaking for all these people? Without a meeting? And why is she saying this issue is settled with the City Council? They have not voted on this yet.

Jane Jenkins is speaking for all these people? Without a meeting? And why is she saying this issue is settled with the City Council? They have not voted on this yet.

Yeah, that's the bit that's making me squint at this suspiciously. Certain elements including her keep insisting that option C is the city council choice, and even if that were true why should that even matter? The people she represents are expecting an advocate for their best interests, not a parrot for the council.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Yea it makes no sense. But pushing option C through a DowntownOKCInc (twitter with 18 thousand+ followers in OKC) is a clear move for what a group/someone wants.

Keep in mind, this is the exact opposite of what this group has been advocating for years. Especially on social media, they are big pushers of walking and biking in DT OKC. Option C systematically goes against what their obvious and original stance has always been.

I wrote that. There is not a conspiracy. I am the board member responsible for communicating civic activities, so I post to the website (which then goes out via the newsletter) about public engagement opportunities. When I wrote the above I was trying to give equal consideration to all modes as to not have UN expressing a particular endorsement, as we are not a political organization.

The board did not gather to discuss what went out today but have since communicated via email and a clarification will be sent out.

Please explain why you wouldn't endorse a particular option. How do you represent residents concerns that may be different from Edmond residents?

I am just blindsided by the decision by Urban Neighbors, the Chamber, and DOKC to either not support Friends for a Better Blvd or blatantly support ODOT. I don't understand how these organizations can be responsive and care about downtown as a community and support the way that ODOT has handled this, strong atm tactics, Thunder game open houses, return of six lanes, refusal to listen, and all.

The Chamber and DOKC may especially be in need of reform if they can support turning prime boulevard frontage properties into residual acreage with no access. They are prioritizing interests of the suburban elite over the downtown elite.

Is there elevations of option C? Im curious how much will be a true at grade and not bermed up slightly higher than adjacent properties..?

FBB would appreciate it if this meeting notice was also sent out to members. Betts spoke to Shelly and notice of this meeting was supposed to happen. Its our neighborhood. The UN should be partnering with FBB to gather input specifically about this issue.

Good point, I will post a notice on the site this weekend. I will also post it to nextdoor.com.

Please explain why you wouldn't endorse a particular option. How do you represent residents concerns that may be different from Edmond residents?

I am just blindsided by the decision by Urban Neighbors, the Chamber, and DOKC to either not support Friends for a Better Blvd or blatantly support ODOT. I don't understand how these organizations can be responsive and care about downtown as a community and support the way that ODOT has handled this, strong atm tactics, Thunder game open houses, return of six lanes, refusal to listen, and all.

The Chamber and DOKC may especially be in need of reform if they can support turning prime boulevard frontage properties into residual acreage with no access. They are prioritizing interests of the suburban elite over the downtown elite.

Our organization has chosen to remain politically neutral. UN, in its present form, is more of a downtown social/awareness community than anything else, and that's fine. To become a political activist organization, in my opinion, would be just as problematic as remaining neutral, only it would have consequences for our membership numbers and business sponsors. Plus, there are plenty of politically oriented organizations around, do we really need another?

I helped found the UN and was once President of the association. The UN was always intended to be a neighborhood association. The UN morphed into a primarily social organization to meet other neighbors and business owners. It shed its advocacy skin long ago and is a big reason that I left the board and didn't run again.

I guess it depends on your definition of "politics" but NA's historically get involved and advocate for or against things on their own turf. At a minimum, enable public input after educating members what the ramifications are to the NA.

I like the UN. I put hundreds of hours in the first few years, but I am disappointed that it isn't a substantive voice with fighting for the best solutions for the neighborhood. With that stated, Heritage Hills NIMBYISM makes me want to vomit, so I am not suggestion the UN swing over to the other end of the spectrum either.

Our organization has chosen to remain politically neutral. UN, in its present form, is more of a downtown social/awareness community than anything else, and that's fine. To become a political activist organization, in my opinion, would be just as problematic as remaining neutral, only it would have consequences for our membership numbers and business sponsors. Plus, there are plenty of politically oriented organizations around, do we really need another?

Wow. This is really weak. My own fledgling neighborhood association has more grit.

Our organization has chosen to remain politically neutral.

You can't be neutral on a moving train.

Has anyone looked at starting a petition?


Our organization has chosen to remain politically neutral. UN, in its present form, is more of a downtown social/awareness community than anything else, and that's fine. To become a political activist organization, in my opinion, would be just as problematic as remaining neutral, only it would have consequences for our membership numbers and business sponsors. Plus, there are plenty of politically oriented organizations around, do we really need another?

This isn't political.

I understand what it was intended to be, but that's not what it was when I got here. Just explaining what it is now.

A petition is overdue and a great idea.

The problem with just saying A, B, C, or D is that it doesn't allow for folks to make their comments as to how they would make the individual proposals "better". FBB is advocating that people choose their preferred alternative, but to be sure to explain how "C" could be made more urban since that is ODOT's preference that they are pushing forward.

It's difficult to make C more urban because of the number of weird, irregular, too small, or too large parcels it creates.

At the meeting on Monday, we were going to go over what the various opportunities are to make the "Option C" more urban. Irregular shaped lots can make for very interesting buildings and developments. And If you really study the scale, these lots that are being created are actually quite substantial individual lots.

But also, where are the bike lanes, the sidewalks, the transit stops, the landscaping plans? The argument is that those items will come out after an alignment is selected- IE after the Feds are out of the picture. FBB argues that these attributes are part of the environmental mitigation. They should be preliminarily depicted or at least promised in writing that they will exist before the Feds sign off on this environmental mitigation proposal.

We want a grand, beautiful, functional street. ODOT is trying to get the public to only make comments on which of the four options they prefer and transfer the scrutiny and feedback to only the alignment issue.

Its much more than that. The public comments should reflect these other concerns.

It's difficult to make C more urban because of the number of weird, irregular, too small, or too large parcels it creates.

And beyond that, it will just be residual land if there is a separation of grade between Reno and Klein. Like land in the middle of a freeway interchange, basically useless.

At the meeting on Monday, we were going to go over what the various opportunities are to make the "Option C" more urban. Irregular shaped lots can make for very interesting buildings and developments. And If you really study the scale, these lots that are being created are actually quite substantial individual lots.

But also, where are the bike lanes, the sidewalks, the transit stops, the landscaping plans? The argument is that those items will come out after an alignment is selected- IE after the Feds are out of the picture. FBB argues that these attributes are part of the environmental mitigation. They should be preliminarily depicted or at least promised in writing that they will exist before the Feds sign off on this environmental mitigation proposal.

We want a grand, beautiful, functional street. ODOT is trying to get the public to only make comments on which of the four options they prefer and transfer the scrutiny and feedback to only the alignment issue.

Its much more than that. The public comments should reflect these other concerns.

This. I am sure most of the people on this forum have voiced their opinion via comment form that addresses EVERYTHING about the Boulevard, not just the traffic in and out.

I cringe at the thought of how many comment forms they're getting from suburbanites talking about how they need more entrances and exits to get in and out of downtown faster.

What is to be expected when ODOT's twitter is phrasing questions as "Ever have a problem leaving or entering downtown? Voice your opinion!"... It wasn't until people (probably from this forum) started calling them out on the obvious leading questions, that they started posting stuff about walkability and biking.

We need more meetings, I don't understand why we cannot easily have more... If they've made their minds up and don't want public input, quit throwing this false curtain out about how there is still a decision to be made.

Also why does ODOT keep saying submit your comments by 05/21? I thought we had longer on this whole deal?

We want a grand, beautiful, functional street.

Evidently some people are convinced the boulevard as described by Mayor Cornett is only needed for one block; or so it appears in Option C. The rest of it is fine as another NW Expressway if it moves a high volume of mythical cars.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/optiona1.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/optiona2.jpg






Just a quick reminder of what Alternative C looks like on the far west side. We really don't have any renderings of any part of the rest of it. And I think the City of OKC created these. Unless I missed it at the public meetings, three dimensional drawings are not being provided to the public as part of this environmental assessment.

Oh, and I would assume that the trees and landscaping are just fictional since none seem to exist on the already finished portion to the west of this rendering.

What, no ODOT buffalo on the retaining walls? They really help improve the aesthetic.

So what I never noticed, is that the Boulevard no longer has landscaping, or a median in the new presentations between the Convention center and the Central Park. Where have this gone?

I'm all for the grid, but it's very important to make sure we are getting what we desire out of Option C. What was originally promised is no longer included.

Make sure to make it clear in your letters that you want The road in front of Convention enter and Central Park to be urban, walkable, and properly landscaped. If we don't ask for it, they will not give it to us.

It's difficult to make C more urban because of the number of weird, irregular, too small, or too large parcels it creates.

Difficult? Maybe. Impossible? No. The reality facing all of us who have ideals of what this boulevard should be is that we will not get exactly what we want. The political, grass-roots will simply does not exist to counteract and overturn the juggernaut of suburbanism and vehicle-oriented engineering behind ODOT and other "powers that be." That doesn't mean however, that there is not the will to produce meaningful "adjustments" to Option C. After all, the successes of the initial FBB effort were incremental but important and substantive changes in the original plan. If all of those who want to make a difference here could coalesce around 3 or 4 meaningful adjustments to Option C, package them in an easily presentable and marketable format, and push for these adjustments as a "compromise," we can still end up with a boulevard that is dramatically more grand, walkable, and urban than was originally proposed. Accomplishing that in the current planning climate would be a victory worth celebrating - and no small victory, at that.

KFOR's story on this today.

OKC bikers oppose new four lane road through the heart of downtown | KFOR.com (http://kfor.com/2014/05/16/okc-bikers-oppose-new-four-lane-road-through-the-heart-of-downtown/)

"bikers"???

CYCLISTS.

"bikers"?

CYCLISTS.
I'm a biker. Some call me a 1%er.

And the average person is going to complain about traffic and say yes. ODOT will then use that as justification to build a "Second Interstate".

Like Urbanized said, if getting in and out of downtown is the problem why is ODOTs soution a high- capacity thru road connecting I-40 on both ends. The grid plan is the best solution to get people in and out of downtown.

Like Urbanized said, if getting in and out of downtown is the problem why is ODOTs soution a high- capacity thru road connecting I-40 on both ends. The grid plan is the best solution to get people in and out of downtown.

ODOT pretty much only build either interstates or highways, so for them this is the lower capacity version.

Friends for a Better Boulevard Open House MONDAY 5 - 8


Meet with Bob Kemper and other FBB volunteers to study ODOT's preferred "Option C" proposal to develop and submit comments on how to improve the design. FBB believes that the new Boulevard should be grand with sidewalks, landscaping, trees, bike lanes, transit integration, urban-sized traffic lanes, meaningful intersections, and restoration of urban fabric wherever possible. The new boulevard should be iconic and welcoming to our downtown Oklahoma City.


Some of the leadership group of the FBB group believe that other alternatives such as the grid type proposal in "Option D" may be preferable to the "Option C" bypass-type design. However, ALL of us also believe that ODOT's preference for Option C is likely to win out through the local process.


Therefore, we are encourage comments to ODOT and the Federal Highway Administration that support YOUR preference for whichever "Option" YOU prefer but also strongly encourage comments on how Option C can be directly improved.


Our group of volunteers have already identified several simple but meaningful changes that would dramatically improve the urbanity of the proposed "C" option while maintaining the traffic flow that traffic engineers are advocating for. These changes to enhance urbanity and pedestrian friendliness will likely only be incorporated through meaningful and clear public feedback.


Let's make Oklahoma City an even BETTER city

MONDAY, May 19th
5:00 PM - 8:00 PM
The Sieber Apartments
1305 N. Hudson (Main Lobby Area)

RSVP here- https://www.facebook.com/events/465676230230750/?context=create&source=49

Bumping this. Please RSVP so we can plan chairs and possibly refreshments.

Bumping this. Please RSVP so we can plan chairs and possibly refreshments.

How can I RSVP without Facebook?

Some good comments from Cafeboeuf:

Paul Ryckbost, AICP @cafeboeuf · 24h
Thing is, have they? Was that information, if studied, included in the updated Alternatives that have been provided?

Paul Ryckbost, AICP @cafeboeuf · 24h
By not building the BLVD yet, ODOT & OKC should have had time to study the current traffic patterns & rush (1/2) hour congestion.

Paul Ryckbost, AICP @cafeboeuf · May 16
Did @OKDOT publicly provide any of the projected traffic counts for the 4 BLVD options this time around?

How can I RSVP without Facebook?

Email- friendsforabetterboulevard@gmail.com

I don't know where else to post these.

Looking west of Bass Pro from the canal parking lot.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/18/e2y7yju5.jpg
Looking directly south of Bass Pro from the same location.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/18/3u3uga8u.jpg

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

I hope everyone who is free can come to the Sieber Hotel tomorrow for the FBB meeting. I believe we need to send a message to ODOT that a safe, attractive, bikeable, walkable boulevard is of paramount importance. If you don't speak up, don't complain!


Tomorrowat 5:00pm - 8:00pm

Sieber Apartment Hotel
1305 N Hudson Ave, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73103
Apartment & Condo Building
(405) 605-4206
Get Directions
Friends for a Better Boulevard Open House

Meet with Bob Kemper and other FBB volunteers to study ODOT's preferred "Option C" proposal to develop and submit comments on how to improve the design. FBB believes that the new Boulevard should be grand with sidewalks, landscaping, trees, bike lanes, transit integration, urb... See More

I can't make the meeting, but I would like my thoughts on the BLVD to be this:

1. Use Option C w/ this additional modification(s).
A. Use the "Thunder Circle" for Robinson & Blvd. This will be the most visible marketing of OKC for the next 30 years! It creates an iconic point for OKC. This will be televised on national tv / the world every year w/ the Thunder. Lot's of Eye Candy !
The Better Boulevard ? Part II, Thunder Circle | Andrew Stewart (http://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/thunder-circle/)
B. Place a roundabout in the Reno & Blvd w/ an iconic fountain w/ a large artistic structure.

2. This must be in the Principles of Project 180. Period. This a required for a Blvd. that is centered between Convention Center / The Peake / Hotel / Central Park / C2S. The walkability is critical to the success of this High Volume pedestrian traffic. Thus, Thunder Circle makes this achievable through allowing "Ease of Access" for all new convention goers & local residents in the C2S.

The OKC Boulevard: Why we choose Alternative D. | Better Block OKC (http://www.betterblockokc.com/the-okc-boulevard-why-we-choose-alternative-d/)

The OKC Boulevard: Why we choose Alternative D. | Better Block OKC (http://www.betterblockokc.com/the-okc-boulevard-why-we-choose-alternative-d/)

Have these comments been submitted to ODOT, Mayor & Council and FHWA? Are you issuing a press release?

The OKC Boulevard: Why we choose Alternative D. | Better Block OKC (http://www.betterblockokc.com/the-okc-boulevard-why-we-choose-alternative-d/)

Could not have said it better myself. However for some reason, the city(?) and ODOT seem dead set on building another highway in the middle of a city because "business interests" (ODOT's words at the open house) want their employees to save 2 minutes in their escape to the suburbs. If they get their way, OKC will be stuck with another development limiting albatross for decades. I hope Mayor Cornett and at least 4 other members of the City Council will reconsider the path this appears to be headed.

The OKC Boulevard: Why we choose Alternative D. | Better Block OKC (http://www.betterblockokc.com/the-okc-boulevard-why-we-choose-alternative-d/)

Shared on Facebook and I definitely plan on sending my feedback tomorrow since tonight's schedule is somewhat congested.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5

I can't make the meeting, but I would like my thoughts on the BLVD to be this:

1. Use Option C w/ this additional modification(s).
A. Use the "Thunder Circle" for Robinson & Blvd. This will be the most visible marketing of OKC for the next 30 years! It creates an iconic point for OKC. This will be televised on national tv / the world every year w/ the Thunder. Lot's of Eye Candy !
The Better Boulevard ? Part II, Thunder Circle | Andrew Stewart (http://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/thunder-circle/)
B. Place a roundabout in the Reno & Blvd w/ an iconic fountain w/ a large artistic structure.

2. This must be in the Principles of Project 180. Period. This a required for a Blvd. that is centered between Convention Center / The Peake / Hotel / Central Park / C2S. The walkability is critical to the success of this High Volume pedestrian traffic. Thus, Thunder Circle makes this achievable through allowing "Ease of Access" for all new convention goers & local residents in the C2S.

For the sake of 5-10 years being lost, I'm for taking this ODOT contract ( today ) and Re-designing their highway into MY BLVD. If we use the "C" layout and incorporate our designs ( Project 180 principles ), then we can have the BLVD that is what we desire.

If we use "D" and then wait for this to be completed... 2018 ish", then the city does it's RE-DO and get that completed by 2025 ish ? We can't afford to waste that much Economic Time.

Also, if we use the Thunder Circle now, then we can do this in today's ( Cost Structure ) and utilize the ODOT $$$ to make it happen!

I hope everyone who is free can come to the Sieber Hotel tomorrow for the FBB meeting. I believe we need to send a message to ODOT that a safe, attractive, bikeable, walkable boulevard is of paramount importance. If you don't speak up, don't complain!


Tomorrowat 5:00pm - 8:00pm

Sieber Apartment Hotel
1305 N Hudson Ave, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73103
Apartment & Condo Building
(405) 605-4206
Get Directions
Friends for a Better Boulevard Open House

Meet with Bob Kemper and other FBB volunteers to study ODOT's preferred "Option C" proposal to develop and submit comments on how to improve the design. FBB believes that the new Boulevard should be grand with sidewalks, landscaping, trees, bike lanes, transit integration, urb... See More

As being an "Open House" event, is the meeting a "come and go" schedule? Or is there a presentation happening at a specific time?

For the sake of 5-10 years being lost, I'm for taking this ODOT contract ( today ) and Re-designing their highway into MY BLVD. If we use the "C" layout and incorporate our designs ( Project 180 principles ), then we can have the BLVD that is what we desire.

If we use "D" and then wait for this to be completed... 2018 ish", then the city does it's RE-DO and get that completed by 2025 ish ? We can't afford to waste that much Economic Time.

Also, if we use the Thunder Circle now, then we can do this in today's ( Cost Structure ) and utilize the ODOT $$$ to make it happen!

... who does not love the Thunder Circle ?

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

^^^ I have mentioned it and linked it in all of my emails. Andrew did a great job and I hope the city looks at it! I think its quite clear that the overall majority are not happy with any of the designs, in fact I have not found one person who even likes one of the options as they have been presented. I just hope the council and mayor listen to the people of OKC and make this something we can be proud of.

The way I see it is this, .... If I have to put up w/ their Highway, then they have to put in the Thunder Circle ! ( and the round-about at Reno & Blvd ).

This is absolutely stunning:

http://www.betterblockokc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/BroadwayGif.gif

I don't mind it at all really. Would be nicer to have it underground.

It's part of a growing city and new transportation methods. Highways have their place and this one has its place. This highway has served millions of people and has made it much easier to navigate the city then it would've been had it not have been built. I am glad it is there.

From Urban Pioneer for tonight's meeting at the Sieber:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/fbb1.jpg

5 - 8 PM tonight at the Sieber. We have maps, salmon, fruit, beer, gin, vodka, and water. Should be an interesting public meeting.

5 - 8 PM tonight at the Sieber. We have maps, salmon, fruit, beer, gin, vodka, and water. Should be an interesting public meeting.

Hey Urban Pioneer, Go get'em. ...we just don't want average. Let's get this done quickly, w/ the highest design, and on the ODOT dime. Thunder Circle is a must!

I don't think the Thunder Circle is even being by ODOT, but I would love to have it.

I don't think the Thunder Circle is even being by ODOT, but I would love to have it.

At this point in this project, the modifications of Layout C or D are still in design. So, adding the Thunder Circle is just that simple. The rest is concrete / steel / signage, etc. It is not that complex. It is just a city street.

I am embarrassed I didn't think of this before today. If the obvious property issues could be resolved this could be the compromise that would satisfy everyone. It maintains the "through movement" and traffic moving by using two roundabouts on the Dewey spine. Traffic light timing will be critical of course.

Probably WAY too late to even be considered. Traffic movement and maximum development potential and walkability.

Fire away.....

7897