I believe the city of OKC is neglecting Reno Ave for this new boulevard, this street is screaming for a new surface, and I don't even live in Oklahoma City but every time I drive on it, I get very disappointed. I wonder how much would it cost to resurface the area from Morgan Rd to Western

I think Reno needs to be reconstructed in cement and widened to 6 lanes with that storm creek buried and have a nice landscaped median with dual left turn lanes, illuminated street signs(which I wish OKC would start doing), dedicated right turns, 6ft. sidewalks and bike lanes all the way from downtown past the new outlet mall. Who thinks that will happen? lol

I would prefer that it remain 4 lanes with a nice street car running down the middle.

Ahhh, I'd still vote for six with Street car... I think there room to do it

Nope, we don't need a six lane road there. Haven't you been reading about all of the effort to get the new boulevard changed from 6 to 4 lanes? Just because there is room isn't a good reason to do it.

I'm in favor of the Boulevard being 4 lanes but not Reno except for downtown.

I'm in favor of the Boulevard being 4 lanes but not Reno except for downtown.

Outside of downtown (and this is especially true on the west side) we have I-40 running parallel to Reno Ave (separated by a block in most cases). It has a ton of capacity. 4 traffic lanes is more than enough for the entire Reno Ave. stretch. We need to encourage smaller streets all over the city; urban principles need to start being applied to more than just downtown.

Hey I know I'm in the minority on this but I'm sticking with it.

Hey I know I'm in the minority on this but I'm sticking with it.

That's fine. Just showing the opposing point of view for our readers and lurkers.

That's fine. Just showing the opposing point of view for our readers and lurkers.Yeah, but either way, something needs to be done Reno.. lol :)

I believe the city of OKC is neglecting Reno Ave for this new boulevard, this street is screaming for a new surface, and I don't even live in Oklahoma City but every time I drive on it, I get very disappointed. I wonder how much would it cost to resurface the area from Morgan Rd to Western

It seems like for a while there they were marching along doing one mile then continuing to the next one. A lot of the surface between Yukon/Mustang to Council-ish has been resurfaced in the last few years. Also from Western to MLK was recently done. The 2007 estimates for other segments of Reno was just over 3 million per mile.

I doubt capacity is a problem on Reno, even at rush hour in the busiest parts of the west side, the only time I have been on it and it be overwhelmed is due to construction, bad weather or a wreak on i40. Though I also would not like to see a streetcar line there any time soon if ever, since near term it seems like we would just be repeating our over extending a reasonable service area we did with the bus system, long term even the destinations along Reno that could draw enough traffic have their entrances at least 500ft from the street.

Yeah, but either way, something needs to be done Reno.. lol :)

Reno has had some streetscape work done as part of Project 180. You can see it on the south side of the Myriad Garden. Many people who favor the "Two Boulevards on the Grid" plan want a portion of the $30 million saved by NOT building an unnecessary bridge to go toward extending the streetscape improvements on Reno out to Klein. There is absolutely no need whatsoever to widen Reno though. The last thing downtown OKC needs is NW Expressway running through it - that is one of the primary reasons behind the effort to change the Boulevard design. We are fortunate to have excess capacity in our street network now. All it takes is to stop creating induced demand on a small number of streets by making them appear to move more vehicles quicker. If you think about it, would you rather have one, six lane street; or 3-4 four lanes avenues running east-west in downtown?

Many people who favor the "Two Boulevards on the Grid" plan want a portion of the $30 million saved by NOT building an unnecessary bridge to go toward extending the streetscape improvements on Reno out to Klein.

Unfortunately, that is not the way it works. ODOT is obligated to build the boulevard. Any money saved by not building a bridge or even the boulevard itself will not be passed along to OKC.

ODOT is obligated to build the boulevard. Any money saved by not building a bridge or even the boulevard itself will not be passed along to OKC.

That is a well known fact -what is wide open is the form and shape of that boulevard. It absolutely is NOT required to be a through movement despite the misinformation being put out by the city. The Federal Highway Administration has directly refuted the city public works' and ODOT's claims. Even ODOT was forced to concede this truth during the December 3 public meeting.

The money saved would be used to "mitigate" the social and economic affects the Interstate 40 relocation had on downtown OKC - and that can include improving the existing street network and by making the simple, smart connections to the relocated interstate.

Reno has had some streetscape work done as part of Project 180. You can see it on the south side of the Myriad Garden. Many people who favor the "Two Boulevards on the Grid" plan want a portion of the $30 million saved by NOT building an unnecessary bridge to go toward extending the streetscape improvements on Reno out to Klein. There is absolutely no need whatsoever to widen Reno though. The last thing downtown OKC needs is NW Expressway running through it - that is one of the primary reasons behind the effort to change the Boulevard design. We are fortunate to have excess capacity in our street network now. All it takes is to stop creating induced demand on a small number of streets by making them appear to move more vehicles quicker. If you think about it, would you rather have one, six lane street; or 3-4 four lanes avenues running east-west in downtown?I understand Reno should be 4 lanes through downtown but after Classen I think it should be 6 with all the amenities I described earlier. I don't think it needs to be an expressway. Dallas metro is filled with 6 lane streets and they work just fine. Reno is just one of multiple streets in OKC I think could use 6 lanes. Mainly for planning ahead and I think they are more impressive to. I don't think the Boulevard should be 6 lanes and there are a bunch of streets I think should stay 4 lanes. Like I said earlier I just think there are multiple streets in OKC that use six lanes(maybe not now but for the future) and I believe Reno is one of them(outside of downtown, of course).

That is a well known fact -what is wide open is the form and shape of that boulevard. It absolutely is NOT required to be a through movement despite the misinformation being put out by the city. The Federal Highway Administration has directly refuted the city public works' and ODOT's claims. Even ODOT was forced to concede this truth during the December 3 public meeting.

The money saved would be used to "mitigate" the social and economic affects the Interstate 40 relocation had on downtown OKC - and that can include improving the existing street network and by making the simple, smart connections to the relocated interstate.

Capt.Dave, no offense meant here, but you seem to be becoming more and more like Spartan and JTF in creating your own facts to justify whatever position you want to support. Please provide a real example of where ODOT has used disinformation on this subject. I watched the video of the public meeting and ODOT was not forced to do anything. They answered each question in a straight forward, and to my knowledge, truthful way. Please provide information as to where the money will be saved on the project that will allow it to be used for the mitigation of social and economic affects you referenced. I am a disinterested party as to the outcome of what happens to the boulevard, therefore I feel I can give an unbiased opinion that I have heard more distortion of facts from the public than I have from the City or ODOT.

I understand Reno should be 4 lanes through downtown but after Classen I think it should be 6 with all the amenities I described earlier. I don't think it needs to be an expressway. Dallas metro is filled with 6 lane streets and they work just fine. Reno is just one of multiple streets in OKC I think could use 6 lanes. Mainly for planning ahead and I think they are more impressive to. I don't think the Boulevard should be 6 lanes and there are a bunch of streets I think should stay 4 lanes. Like I said earlier I just think there are multiple streets in OKC that use six lanes(maybe not now but for the future) and I believe Reno is one of them(outside of downtown, of course).

The only streets in OKC that are 6 lanes for a long, multi-mile stretch are Classen Blvd and Northwest Expressway, and both are way busier than Reno.

I would be careful in comparing the transportation needs of a metro with 1.3 million with one approaching 7 million.

Nothing wrong with planning for the future, but in these days of limited budgets I can think of about 20 projects that need to be completed before we even think of widening Reno. With a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of surface streets handle traffic just fine in OKC.

Shields...

I would be careful in comparing the transportation needs of a metro with 1.3 million with one approaching 7 million.
Believe I understand, I use that comparison lightly and that is why I say there is a "few" streets that should be widened, not all of them.

Nothing wrong with planning for the future, but in these days of limited budgets I can think of about 20 projects that need to be completed before we even think of widening Reno. With a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of surface streets handle traffic just fine in OKC.I really don't know how I feel about this. I know we have to set our priorities and be smart about it. I feel that Reno esp. near the fair and the new outlet mall should have a high priority but understand there are more important projects needed. There are just so many places in OKC that need to be redone.

I really don't know how I feel about this. I know we have to set our priorities and be smart about it. I feel that Reno esp. near the fair and the new outlet mall should have a high priority but understand there are more important projects needed. There are just so many places in OKC that need to be redone.

You can thank all of the other unnecessary 4 lane roads sprawling into the country side for the poor road condition of most of our streets. It chokes are budget maintaining all of the lanes we have, we shouldn't be adding more to that. We need to go on a diet of our streets.

Capt.Dave, no offense meant here, but you seem to be becoming more and more like Spartan and JTF in creating your own facts to justify whatever position you want to support. Please provide a real example of where ODOT has used disinformation on this subject. I watched the video of the public meeting and ODOT was not forced to do anything. They answered each question in a straight forward, and to my knowledge, truthful way. Please provide information as to where the money will be saved on the project that will allow it to be used for the mitigation of social and economic affects you referenced. I am a disinterested party as to the outcome of what happens to the boulevard, therefore I feel I can give an unbiased opinion that I have heard more distortion of facts from the public than I have from the City or ODOT.

None taken Popsy, I have pretty thick skin. I see where I may have been unclear though.

The city Public Works Director has stated on several occasions the boulevard is required to be used as a bypass by the federal government. This is 100% untrue - the Federal Highway Administration has directly and unquestionably rejected that notion. There is no federal requirement whatsoever for the boulevard to be an uninterrupted through movement for the purposes of emergency use as a bypass. That was written in an agreement between the city and ODOT. By all appearances, it seems like that was an attempt to give the public a plausible reason for the necessity of the city's current preferred design; and to shift the responsibility for any future dissatisfaction with the city's preferred design to the federal government.

Mr. Streb of ODOT admitted in the public meeting the design can be changed. In fact it is already being changed by reducing the number of lanes from 6 to 4. But he only did so after some pressure from a well informed member of the public. He also revealed ODOT is being required to perform an Environment Assessment of the boulevard design and will not be permitted to treat it as a mere mitigation for the I40 relocation. The NEPA requirements for EA's and alternatives analysis are very clear - I have read them extensively and it is nonsensical to treat a $100 million project that runs through the middle of downtown as no more significant than a concrete sound wall along the highway. In a nutshell, that is the problem with the entire process. There was no consideration given to the effect of the boulevard on the surrounding areas.

Until a few months ago no one thought to ask any questions but the more research is done, the more fatally flawed the entire process appears. If the city and ODOT could demonstrate that equal consideration for alternatives other than their 1998 design was given, and they would provide the data that justifies their decision, then the "controversy" surrounding the street would be resolved.

I felt that the public works director was grasping for straws when he made that statement and it is probable that he felt he was correct when in fact he did not know. I do not think he was making a cognitive effort to deceive. He has a lot of oars in the water and he hasn't been on the job that long. To me, it is rare that someone will make a public statement that is being recorded that they do not believe to be true. I do not think it was made to deceive in a conspirititorial way. Have you ever been guilty of thinking something and been wrong?

As to Mr. Streb's "admission", ODOT was very clear months ago that anything could be changed, provided the FEDS approved the change and all changes would have to be presented to the FEDS.

As to the fatally flawed process you mention, the city hired a very highly respected company to make their recommendation and to my knowledge the City did not give them any direction or preference. They gave their recomendations at the last meeting and provided their answers. They also stated they would be available after the meeting for further explanation and discussions if any wanted to meet with them. Were you at the meeting and did you avail yourself the opportunity to discuss your questions further? You seem to be flailing away at the City and ODOT for the answers given by the consultant. Why?

Capt Dave.......Please provide information as to where the money will be saved on the project that will allow it to be used for the mitigation of social and economic affects you referenced.

Yes. That's what I'd be interested to learn since I've been told that that's not the way the agreement works between ODOT and the city.

Popsy - yes I was there (and every other public meeting) and spoke with several people. I have also stated numerous times I like Mr Wenger and do not envy his position. I am certainly not flailing at anything - if you had read the National Environmental Policy Act and other FHWA requirements you would know that.

As far as redirecting the funds from the project, they can be shifted to other purposes within the scope of the project. It is a $100 million project - $15 million from OKC and the remainder from the federal government. For example, utilize funds saved from not building a bridge for extending the proposed SW 3rd Street boulevard to Exchange; fund mitigation measures in the Farmers Market area to facilitate redevelopment; better connect California to the western off ramp from I40; make some improvements on Reno is the affected area, especially near the Farmers Market; maybe even better connect Sheridan into the solution using some of the existing on ramps. The mere fact that ODOT has been directed to submit a new Environmental Assessment is a sign of issues related to the project.

I think reno could use wider lanes closer to down town but no additional lanes except maybe between agnew and Portland so traffic flows better when they finally widen the bridges over 44 that would also accomidate fair traffic as well

Let the new boulevard follow Reno on the far west end. Follow Reno up until just east of the gas station but before the shelter, where the old I-40 turns southeast. No sense in letting the new boulevard follow the old I-40 path where it is just behind Horn Trader music building. If that were to happen there could be a stoplight on Western at Sheridan, at the new boulevard, at Reno and at SW 3rd. I know there wouldn't be that many stoplights in a row. I know there would be a workaround but I fear the workaround would have to be an overpass at the old I-40 location.

The only care that ODOT has is that it doesn't want to spend millions on new environmental assessments, etc., on new designs. Every new design change requires another federal environmental assessment, thus more money and more delay. I'm under the impression that ODOT is ready to build it and move on to the state's other road issues.