Preach!!

The primary problem with the boulevard, IMHO, isn't really near the park...it's west of the park and how the boulevard comes into downtown as a freeway and then cuts across and disrupts what could have been a re-stitching of the street grid. That has been and will always be the boulevard's worst and most egregious flaw.

The primary problem with the boulevard, IMHO, isn't really near the park...it's west of the park and how the boulevard comes into downtown as a freeway and then cuts across and disrupts what could have been a re-stitching of the street grid. That has been and will always be the boulevard's worst and most egregious flaw.
Agree wholeheartedly. The highway portion coming into the Farmer's Market area sucks.

The primary problem with the boulevard, IMHO, isn't really near the park...it's west of the park and how the boulevard comes into downtown as a freeway and then cuts across and disrupts what could have been a re-stitching of the street grid. That has been and will always be the boulevard's worst and most egregious flaw.

Yep. That's why many people argued for a form of ODOT's Alternate D, that essentially blended the east and west approaches into the existing street network.

I think it is important to keep in context that what was originally planned was far, far worse. There are substantial changes in reductions of what was planned to aerial and what is now at-grade.

With that stated, it is important to ensure that it is retrofitted by the city once the keys are turned over to be closer to what it should be. It needs bike lanes, strategic sidewalks, transit stops, landscaping, working lighting, etc. “D” was interpreted by ODOT as a “no build” option. It was never politically viable.

We could have ended up with a better “C”, but the “gridders” ignored the political futility of the situation. In the end, we saved taxpayers over $80 million dollars and helped subdue even worse negative impacts. This Boulevard can be fixed with parts of it even removed.

Was at an event tonight where Eric Wenger gave a talk and I asked him (not for the first time but after quite a bit of time had passed since I last asked) again about pedestrian connectivity between West downtown and Farmers market. He seemed to have backed off the last thing he told me a bit and went with the more conservative, "there will be pedestrian features but we'll upgrade them over time as needed". Not saying this is a negative response but considering the last time we talked about this none of the things happening in West downtown were happening yet, and just how much more rapidly things will progress once what's being built is done (e.g. there will suddenly be hundreds of residents that won't want to only go east), I think he's underestimating how quickly they'll need to upgrade and thus why not do them up front.

Well first, thanks for asking! That is disappointing, Their were wide promises made in public meetings to make major investments in the The Farmer's Market District by the city to offset the negative, divisive impacts of the Boulevard's Western Avenue bridge and related berms. Basically a promise to implement The Planning Department's Master Plan for the area to some degree.

the city really needs to make klein and blvd a 4 way street light intersection ASAP

I told him I was going to keep asking him when I see him to make sure he remembers. Maybe he'll see the light as west village comes online. I may also email him. We've had exchanges before.

Maybe the answer to my question lies deep within this thread, but perhaps someone could quickly explain so I don't have to dig. What was the political motivation for building this thing? Why was ODOT so resistant to change? Why was option D or returning to grid not remotely politically viable? It just doesn't make sense to me.

People don't like to give up rights of way. And people think traffic is worse than it is and that there aren't enough big streets for people to get out of downtown within seconds. Nevermind the fact that we've gotten along FINE without this road for YEARS.

Maybe the answer to my question lies deep within this thread, but perhaps someone could quickly explain so I don't have to dig. What was the political motivation for building this thing? Why was ODOT so resistant to change? Why was option D or returning to grid not remotely politically viable? It just doesn't make sense to me.

the powers that be city and state view easy access to the downtown core as an important thing for continued business growth .... (for better the east side blvd or for worse the west side blvd) and they view it as a posssible by pass of I40 should that be a need. (seems unlikely)

Maybe the answer to my question lies deep within this thread, but perhaps someone could quickly explain so I don't have to dig. What was the political motivation for building this thing? Why was ODOT so resistant to change? Why was option D or returning to grid not remotely politically viable? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Mostly because ODOT already had the east and west connections built and it was hard not to connect two ends together at that point. It was assured that the boulevard was going to happen way back in the mid to late-90's when the route for the new I-40 and plan boulevard was first selected even though the city is significantly different from then. If ODOT was never given the task of building the boulevard originally and federal funds given to them it would have never happened.

If ODOT was never given the task of building the boulevard originally and federal funds given to them it would have never happened.

You mean the I-40 re-alignment never would have happened?

You mean the I-40 re-alignment never would have happened?

I mean back when replacing I-40 with a boulevard became part of the plan. They were both packaged together and federal funds were provided for both. ODOT became the main driver at that point.

I mean back when replacing I-40 with a boulevard became part of the plan. They were both packaged together and federal funds were provided for both. ODOT became the main driver at that point.

Edit: There were people complaining about I-40 being "too far away" back in 98. https://newsok.com/article/3838658/flashback-route-chosen-for-new-interstate-40

Makes sense. Thanks. I'd rather have a less than stellar mostly at grade boulevard than an elevated interstate in that spot any day.

Edit: There were people complaining about I-40 being "too far away" back in 98. https://newsok.com/article/3838658/flashback-route-chosen-for-new-interstate-40

“My point is this,” Humphreys said. “The interstate now makes it easy for people coming from the west and north to get downtown in a hurry when they need to.

“But when you move the interstate south by the river, that easy access goes away because then people will have to travel down blocks and blocks of city streets to get where they are going.”



Wow... We've come a long way folks.

"blocks and blocks"

by car even. for shame.

Pains my heart. However, we did a pretty awesome job f**king up ODOT's grand plans for I.M. Pei elevated skyways Version #2 and saving taxpayers millions of dollars. At least the city can fix their mess now that it is on the ground.

Those were good days. I hope the city will start ripping out the ODOT mess nearly as soon as it is complete. I still say connecting the thing was unnecessary.

The primary problem with the boulevard, IMHO, isn't really near the park...it's west of the park and how the boulevard comes into downtown as a freeway and then cuts across and disrupts what could have been a re-stitching of the street grid. That has been and will always be the boulevard's worst and most egregious flaw.

^^^^ This x1000

I think it is important to keep in context that what was originally planned was far, far worse. There are substantial changes in reductions of what was planned to aerial and what is now at-grade.

With that stated, it is important to ensure that it is retrofitted by the city once the keys are turned over to be closer to what it should be. It needs bike lanes, strategic sidewalks, transit stops, landscaping, working lighting, etc. “D” was interpreted by ODOT as a “no build” option. It was never politically viable.

We could have ended up with a better “C”, but the “gridders” ignored the political futility of the situation. In the end, we saved taxpayers over $80 million dollars and helped subdue even worse negative impacts. This Boulevard can be fixed with parts of it even removed.

As a gridder, I thought it was worth the fight but understood all the other considerations. I hold out hope the city will undertake restoring the street grid soon if for no other reason than the tax revenue that can be recovered from that real estate taken up by the diagonal section of the blvd.

Those were good days. I hope the city will start ripping out the ODOT mess nearly as soon as it is complete. I still say connecting the thing was unnecessary.

This would be so much fun to watch because odot would be so mad

I can't see what purpose the blvd will serve between shields & where it crosses Reno. I don't see why anybody would take it from those 2 points. They should've just fed the blvd in to Reno.

I can't see what purpose the blvd will serve between shields & where it crosses Reno. I don't see why anybody would take it from those 2 points. They should've just fed the blvd in to Reno.

the blvd from shields to walker is the grid ...

I can't see what purpose the blvd will serve between shields & where it crosses Reno. I don't see why anybody would take it from those 2 points. They should've just fed the blvd in to Reno.

That use to be third street. With the park, convention center, omni hotel, etc. There are a lot of reasons to go through there. It's going from walker to Reno and beyond that becomes questionable

My big complaint is that it's not designed for its posted speed limits. It's built like a 45 MPH road (at least), but posted (at least for now) at 25mp, between 235 and shields. So you either go the speed limit and have people swinging around you at high speeds, or you speed yourself. If they wanted a lower speed crosstown, it should have been two narrower lanes, and a bike lane in either direction.

My big complaint is that it's not designed for its posted speed limits. It's built like a 45 MPH road (at least), but posted (at least for now) at 25mp, between 235 and shields. So you either go the speed limit and have people swinging around you at high speeds, or you speed yourself. If they wanted a lower speed crosstown, it should have been two narrower lanes, and a bike lane in either direction.

past shields it will be narrower ... east of oklahoma it is an on/off ramp

past shields it will be narrower ... east of oklahoma it is an on/off ramp

The problem is the speed drops from 55 to 25 in a very short distance. It would be better if it was narrower there as well.

The problem is the speed drops from 55 to 25 in a very short distance. It would be better if it was narrower there as well.

also helps that there is a light at oklahoama and a light at shields

Yeah although I've noticed people getting to Oklahoma going 20 miles over the speed limit most days. This would be a speed trap gold mine.

Yeah although I've noticed people getting to Oklahoma going 20 miles over the speed limit most days. This would be a speed trap gold mine.

i agree

hopefully when the cotton seed site and the lumber yard site get developed it will create a better sense of place and cause traffic to slow down

Going underneath the railroad viaduct also helps to slow things down just before shields. I think they could have merged the onramps together sooner before reaching Oklahoma.

Looks like they could pave the eastern two blocks almost any time now.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072118.jpg

I'm wondering with all the upcoming construction in that two block area, how likely is it the road might get damaged from large trucks and and machinery?

^

Perhaps but it's going to be needed because a lot of the roads in that area east of the park are already closed.

I suspect they will completely redo Robinson as they did Hudson, just wait until the convention center and Omni are near finished.

That photo just reinforces (IMO) what a waste this is/will be. With Reno running from Yukon to Midwest City, why do we need this highway spur?

^^^^^^^
I don’t disagree, but will point out that a number of City officials have openly stated that once OKC Boulevard takes on significant E/W traffic through downtown that they will be willing to explore traffic calming measures and even things like a road diet and on-street parking on Reno. Once the boulevard opens my hope is that we can hold them to these considerations.

^^^^^^^
I don’t disagree, but will point out that a number of City officials have openly stated that once OKC Boulevard takes on significant E/W traffic through downtown that they will be willing to explore traffic calming measures and even things like a road diet and on-street parking on Reno. Once the boulevard opens my hope is that we can hold them to these considerations.
I hope so too. But there have been other streets that are perfect candidates for road diets (4th, 5th, 6th, I'm sure others), but we see no movement on those, so I'm not inclined to be optimistic about this one.

That photo just reinforces (IMO) what a waste this is/will be. With Reno running from Yukon to Midwest City, why do we need this highway spur?
Gives people something to complain about.

Gives people something to complain about.

Oh, they'll find something, have no worries there.

We just spent a bundle on Project 180 for Reno, the longest stretch that got the full makeover.

In fact, 4 of the 6 blocks between Shields and where the new boulevard will cross were completely re-done.

We just spent a bundle on Project 180 for Reno, the longest stretch that got the full makeover.

In fact, 4 of the 6 blocks between Shields and where the new boulevard will cross were completely re-done.
The discussions have centered around the stretch in Bricktown.

They have started to pave the far eastern section:


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072918a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072918e.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072918b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072918c.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard072918d.jpg

Oh cool! Yet another unnecessary slab of concrete cutting right through the heart of the city. How pretty.

Yes, it’s outrageous to think a city could put concrete down for streets and such. How backwards.

I zoomed in on the latest rendering for this area and it looks like the area that is unpaved in the first photo will be a landscaped median.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard080518a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard080518aa.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard080518b.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/boulevard080518c.jpg

In the last photo it looks like they have blocked access to the diagonal street by the gas station, will this street no longer intersect here once the Blvd and Classen are completed?

In the last photo it looks like they have blocked access to the diagonal street by the gas station, will this street no longer intersect here once the Blvd and Classen are completed?

No, it will according to plans.

They just are re-working that section of Reno as a part of this project.

Eric Wenger said, when I talked to him a few weeks ago, that Exchange would be closed at that intersection, but we'll see what happens. I don't that in writing or anything.

"landscaped" median, yep with nothing on it. .. way to go OKC.

In the city's provisional defense, it's still technically an ODOT job. The city hasn't gotten to take their crack at it yet.

Are they going to landscape the median and the sidewalks like Project 180? I know it's my pet peeve, but this is quite barren in the plans!

"landscaped" median, yep with nothing on it. .. way to go OKC.

There are lots of landscaped medians all over OKC.

I'm aware of this. I personally do not call a median landscaped unless there's something on it more than or in addition to grass.

for such a location as this, I'd expect there to be some sort of statue or fountain or public art or properly landscaped median (with trees/bushes). OKC/ODOT set the bar low - way to go.

Best looking medians I see in OKC are ones adopted by companies or some organized group. Maybe Omni and the new apt. building will adopt these.

Best looking medians I see in OKC are ones adopted by companies or some organized group. Maybe Omni and the new apt. building will adopt these.
The ones taken care of (?) by OKC Beautiful by Penn Square Mall look really good.

OKC Beautiful _does_ have a contract with the parks department to maintain some medians.

Up by Chesapeake are nice too because they are adopted spaces. Lots of nice Crepe Myrtles, all trimmed and healthy.

The first block of the current boulevard project is open:

https://www.ok.gov/triton/modules/newsroom/newsroom_article.php?id=277&article_id=44250