I noticed that there appears to be some angled parking on the east side of Classen just north of 13th street. IIRC there was a building demolished at that corner not too terribly long ago.

Parallel parking. It was a TV and VCR repair store.

Photo of the new sidewalks going in on the east side of Classen and between 13th and 18th.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/classen061218.jpg

Great progress. Now let's cut it to two lanes and add a protected bike lane...

I mean, we've been doing fine with just the two lanes for weeks now....

I mean, we've been doing fine with just the two lanes for weeks now....

agreed. the first time I went down it... I was like "O man, this is going to be a nightmare"... but it really hasn't been... I would be completely okay with them just permanently making it two lanes and add a bike lane

Classen is significantly busier north of 23rd, but I definitely would be good with 2 lanes on the south as long as it makes sense with a future streetcar extension.

Classen is significantly busier north of 23rd, but I definitely would be good with 2 lanes on the south as long as it makes sense with a future streetcar extension.

But even north of 23rd, the huge majority of time the traffic isn't that bad. I drive it several times a week.

The entire boulevard could easily be reduced to 4 lanes, especially given the center turn median.

But even north of 23rd, the huge majority of time the traffic isn't that bad. I drive it several times a week.

The entire boulevard could easily be reduced to 4 lanes, especially given the center turn median.

You could make left turns potentially safer too - give more space for queuing, etc.

https://ggwash.org/images/posts/201412-040940.jpg

Cycletrack protected bike lanes

A busy avenue like Classen will require some kind of protected bike lanes. Talked with a few bikers who are familiar with the bike trails in OKC. Many of the street bike lanes are unprotected; therefore it's the drivers who need to be more aware of their existence. One in particular is NW 39th Street between Youngs Blvd., & Penn Avenue.

My brother & his wife frequent the Oklahoma River bike trails on weekends; they do not trust the streets. I use to jog those river trails, now the weekend bike traffic has become so intense that my activities are restricted to the downtown YMCA upper track over the gym, pool & the weight rooms.

It will take time for bikers to feel the trust needed to use bike lanes on busy avenues especially the unprotected ones: https://www.google.com/maps/place/NW+39th+St+%26+N+Pennsylvania+Ave,+Oklahoma+City,+ OK+73112/@35.5114509,-97.5491417,48m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b21a734846b14f:0x3e3f3 7001ff67033!8m2!3d35.5113883!4d-97.547068

Pedestrian & Bicycle Information Center: The cost of a five-foot bicycle lane can range from approximately $5,000 to $535,000 per mile, with an average cost around $130,000. The costs can vary greatly due to differences in project specifications and the scale and length of the treatment. http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/planning/facilities_bike_bikelanes.cfm

You could make left turns potentially safer too - give more space for queuing, etc.

This really needs to be done. I drive Classen all the time and see so many accidents and close calls from people trying to make left turns onto the side streets while people on the side streets try to turn left onto Classen. There's no reason for the median to break at literally every side street. I really believe that closing off the median and having dedicated left turn/u-turn areas every quarter mile or so would (a) be much safer and (b) result in improved traffic flow.

But even north of 23rd, the huge majority of time the traffic isn't that bad. I drive it several times a week.

The entire boulevard could easily be reduced to 4 lanes, especially given the center turn median.

You could reduce it to 4 lanes, a center turn lane, bike lanes and it would flow just as well.

But the invisible anti center lane lobby is so strong and powerful. We have an easier time getting marijuana legislation passed than getting a turn lane built.

Serious question because Denver has done a similar project on a similar through street, S Broadway, out of downtown. S. Broadway was 4 lanes in each direction with one being dedicated to buses. They took one additional lane and made dedicated bike lanes and street parking. Denver has a pretty significant bike riding population but casual observations when I am downtown show virtually no users. I'm sure there are some users especially during rush hour but even if 150 bikes use the path, I don't see the justification of taking a lane of one of the busiest streets carrying 32,000 cars a day.

I doubt Classen is as busy but I ask the same question. If daily bike use is, say, 100 bikes a day, how do you justify taking a full lane? Many bikers in Denver still use a 2 lane street to the east of Broadway because they feel it is far safer and far more serene (their verbage). Why not have dedicated bike streets for bikers only except for local car traffic rather than trying to force bikes and cars together on extremely busy streets?

It is difficult to gauge a designated bike lane on a busy avenue like Classen based on our current bike usage. Just based on the increased usage of the bikes on the river trails, you could see a serge in riders if protected lanes were in place; riders need to feel safe.

A nice route could begin in Scissortail Park west to Classen or Western Avenues combination north to Memorial Park @N.W. 36th Street.

So, my point being, why use Classen? Why not use side streets that are in the regular grid, designate them "bikes only except for local traffic," and keep cars and bikes apart? Some daily bikers may not care about mixing it up with cars but if the desire is to attract new bikers, they may want a more secure and calm route.

I just can't imagine enough people in OKC becoming long distance bikers to justify the loss of traffic lanes and bike lane construction for 50 or so users a day. If my user number is low, please correct me. I just base it on what I see in Denver which is a relatively high bike riding city.

I went riding all around downtown from the river, through Bricktown, Film Row/Arts District, and Midtown a couple of weekends ago. I was the ONLY rider I could see along my entire route the entire time. It baffles me that we need more bike routes when the ones we have are rarely used. Where is the demand? I know it is cool to have bike lanes all over, but we need to use what we have and show that there actually are users out there. If we do the same thing with the streetcars and don’t prove demand, it will be really hard to justify expansion.

Rover, I think the problem is that commuters must first ride on unprotected suburban streets in order to reach the downtown bikes lanes & paths, and many don’t want to take that chance. Two personal observations: 1) I ride all of the areas you mention at least three times every week with groups, going to/from the River Trails, then west all the way to Overholser (we frequently come back on 16th Street). We love the protected bike lanes & paths. And 2) I’m returning now from Washington, and although they have few protected bike lanes, there are a lot of bicycle commuters, plus tourists on the DC Bikeshare bikes, rental scooters and a variety of other mechanized forms of transportation. It’s a chaotic mash-up of users!

Actually, I encounter as many riders when I’m riding my area around 63 & Penn on those dreaded suburban streets. Lol. We should be seeing everyday riders where we have lanes, and more overall. And not just for amusement riding. Until we promote biking for real everyday transportation we are just hoping some show up.

I went riding all around downtown from the river, through Bricktown, Film Row/Arts District, and Midtown a couple of weekends ago. I was the ONLY rider I could see along my entire route the entire time. It baffles me that we need more bike routes when the ones we have are rarely used. Where is the demand? I know it is cool to have bike lanes all over, but we need to use what we have and show that there actually are users out there. If we do the same thing with the streetcars and don’t prove demand, it will be really hard to justify expansion.

You need to have enough to hit a critical mass. Similar to sidewalks. If one house in the neighborhood has a sidewalk, it’s barely going to get used, if they all do they’ll get used.

We have way too many excuses as to why people don’t do things. How about we demonstrate demand at the same time we create the opportunities. I bike all over my area without dedicated lanes....it can be done. But I find it odd I see more riders and walkers/runners in Nichols Hillls than I do in other younger more urban areas.

I’m not an expert, but hasn’t been shown over and over that bike ridership increases with investment in bike infrastructure? OKC has really poor bike infrastructure so low ridership should be expected, right?

I’m not an expert, but hasn’t been shown over and over that bike ridership increases with investment in bike infrastructure? OKC has really poor bike infrastructure so low ridership should be expected, right?

Of course it will increase it, but we have a woeful commitment to biking and walking in this city regardless of infrastructure. All I am saying is we need to commit ourselves to these forms of transit. Showing more demand goes a long way to showing support for polititions trying to justify the investment.

If we try and justify whether or not a project will pay for itself, we'll never get anything built. Try to look at this from a holistic quality-of-life approach, you need balance, some projects will get a modest return--others will not. Projects that enhance a city's quality-of-life will change the perception & trajectory of our city.

Of course it will increase it, but we have a woeful commitment to biking and walking in this city regardless of infrastructure. All I am saying is we need to commit ourselves to these forms of transit. Showing more demand goes a long way to showing support for polititions trying to justify the investment.
If showing demand involves taking your life into your own hands by riding where there's no appropriate infrastructure, then I'll hold off on showing more demand.

I went riding all around downtown from the river, through Bricktown, Film Row/Arts District, and Midtown a couple of weekends ago. I was the ONLY rider I could see along my entire route the entire time. It baffles me that we need more bike routes when the ones we have are rarely used. Where is the demand? I know it is cool to have bike lanes all over, but we need to use what we have and show that there actually are users out there. If we do the same thing with the streetcars and don’t prove demand, it will be really hard to justify expansion.

I’ve used those bike lanes and I’m not even an avid cyclist. Those bike lanes felt tremendously unsafe.

Actually, I encounter as many riders when I’m riding my area around 63 & Penn on those dreaded suburban streets. Lol. We should be seeing everyday riders where we have lanes, and more overall. And not just for amusement riding. Until we promote biking for real everyday transportation we are just hoping some show up.

Lol.

I think Classen might work better if we turned the median into a dedicated streetcar lane. On one side we could have a protected bicycle path. I don't think that would require eliminating a lane north of 23rd. South of 23rd the traffic isn't really that bad.

If showing demand involves taking your life into your own hands by riding where there's no appropriate infrastructure, then I'll hold off on showing more demand.

Lol. I ride all over the north of the city and don’t feel like I’m taking my life in my hands. Do I wish for more protected and dedicated lanes, of course. If I can do it at 65, where are all these 20-30 something’s out biking? They sure don’t seem to be in OKC. I’m certainly for more and better biking conditions, but not just to be cool. It would be great to know are actually going to use them.

If we try and justify whether or not a project will pay for itself, we'll never get anything built. Try to look at this from a holistic quality-of-life approach, you need balance, some projects will get a modest return--others will not. Projects that enhance a city's quality-of-life will change the perception & trajectory of our city.
So, again, designate some lesser or little-used side streets as "bike and alternative wheeled only except for local traffic" (busses, too, maybe) and not mess with major traffic arteries? Re: Classen, if you're going to sacrifice a lane of traffic in each way, I'd rather see it done for a light rail line.

Rover, I think the problem is that commuters must first ride on unprotected suburban streets in order to reach the downtown bikes lanes & paths, and many don’t want to take that chance. Two personal observations: 1) I ride all of the areas you mention at least three times every week with groups, going to/from the River Trails, then west all the way to Overholser (we frequently come back on 16th Street). We love the protected bike lanes & paths. And 2) I’m returning now from Washington, and although they have few protected bike lanes, there are a lot of bicycle commuters, plus tourists on the DC Bikeshare bikes, rental scooters and a variety of other mechanized forms of transportation. It’s a chaotic mash-up of users!

You just made my point...DC has lots of commuters on bikes, as do many other cities, even though it is “a chaotic mash-up of users”. Weekend riders on scenic trails is great...use them myself... but everyday use/demand would be useful to get more infrastructure. And, someone indicated earlier that it shouldn’t be about profit and loss, which I totally agree with. However it IS about VALUE. We need to demonstrate value and the pressure it creates from a more active and influential constituency. I’ve been in other cities where communities of bikers are actually political activists using all kinds of meathods to influence. Activism can be cool too.

I’ll share some links later today if I get some time, but there is well-documented and compelling evidence that the only way to increase bicycle participation - including commuting but also among women, families and the non-spandex crowd - is to invest in infrastructure. It’s been proven in cities as disparate as Copenhagen and Minneapolis.

Go search for an image of Copenhagen in the sixties and you’ll see the same types of traffic snarls, dangerous roadways, plazas given over to surface parking and the like that we see in the U.S. today. Read up on Minneapolis and you’ll find that people there bicycle commute even in winter, and in snow, with plowed and even heated bike paths. In both cases the culture changes and adoption of cycling were caused by thoughtful planning and infrastructure changes, not the other way around.

There is also excellent evidence that thoughtful bicycle and sidewalk infrastructure investment actually improves the experience and safety of not only the protected modes of transit but for drivers of automobiles, as the presence of cyclists and pedestrians in an intuitive environment improves sight lines and has a traffic calming effect (fewer speeders, gambles and aggressive moves in traffic). At the same time there is ALSO evidence that it can increase efficiency and even make commutes faster for automobiles. An example is that overall commute times for automobiles actually DECREASED in Manhattan with the addition of bike lanes and the pedestrianization of Broadway, which totally flew in the face of accepted logic.

I went riding all around downtown from the river, through Bricktown, Film Row/Arts District, and Midtown a couple of weekends ago. I was the ONLY rider I could see along my entire route the entire time. It baffles me that we need more bike routes when the ones we have are rarely used. Where is the demand? I know it is cool to have bike lanes all over, but we need to use what we have and show that there actually are users out there. If we do the same thing with the streetcars and don’t prove demand, it will be really hard to justify expansion.

Go at 7 a.m. on Saturdays before the heat sets in an you'll see a different picture. I saw over 50 cyclists on the river trails this past weekend in an hour of biking.

I have walked almost the entire trail system at one point and can attest that the trails are very well used on Saturday mornings before the heat of the day. I usually count hundreds of bikers. (I literally am counting something in my head at most times btw)

I was in Amsterdam and Copenhagen a few weeks back and can confirm both are biking paradise. I don't remember seeing a street anywhere in either city that didn't have dedicated bike lanes, and so we never felt unsafe biking all over both cities (and Copenhagen had a fair amount of car traffic as well).

https://i.imgur.com/q4OWIEz.jpg

+1 for Amsterdam biking

Very quick video of the new sidewalk/retaining walls on the east side of Classen just south of 16th.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/dER2UKEAEMec292c9

I'm all for improving biking infrastructure in the long run, but it seems an exercise in poor prioritization until we show a serious commitment to increased density outside of downtown.

From May/63rd down to Capitol Hill up to the Health Science Center to the Capitol and back over to Belle Isle --- there need to be laws put into place that demand new construction in these areas increase the density of residents, and then we need to actually see that increase before we start talking about adding bike-lanes to thoroughfares.

I'm all for improving biking infrastructure in the long run, but it seems an exercise in poor prioritization until we show a serious commitment to increased density outside of downtown.

From May/63rd down to Capitol Hill up to the Health Science Center to the Capitol and back over to Belle Isle --- there need to be laws put into place that demand new construction in these areas increase the density of residents, and then we need to actually see that increase before we start talking about adding bike-lanes to thoroughfares.

i think completely opposite of you... i think once the infrastructure is in place... then it's time to start increasing density... to increase density now, without great public transit (or even good public transit) and being completely pedestrian unfriendly, is a terrible idea. forcing the demand to then hopefully get to the infrastructure to support that demand down the line, leads to bad design in infrastructure. whereas building the infrastructure now with great design and an overall plan would do a lot to encourage an increase in density, all on it's own without the need for laws requiring it.

I tend to agree with the "build it and they will come" methodology. Once you set the infrastructure areas that are typically considered less attractive become more plausible for developers. This also provides some continuity throughout the neighborhoods. Sidewalks, bus stops, proper lighting goes a long way in improving a desolate area. Obviously this is something that should be strategically done and with future development in mind.

i think completely opposite of you... i think once the infrastructure is in place... then it's time to start increasing density... to increase density now, without great public transit (or even good public transit) and being completely pedestrian unfriendly, is a terrible idea. forcing the demand to then hopefully get to the infrastructure to support that demand down the line, leads to bad design in infrastructure. whereas building the infrastructure now with great design and an overall plan would do a lot to encourage an increase in density, all on it's own without the need for laws requiring it.
I'm with you on this one.

The good news is OKC has tons of roads that are just too wide for the amount of traffic.

All around downtown and perhaps Classen and the city just narrowed Western between NW 18th & 23rd.

The stretch of 39th between Penn and Classen is also absurd. 4 full lanes, all residential, no sidewalks. Often, you see delivery vans and yardwork vehicles just parked in the right lane even though there is no shoulder. Traffic, of course, just goes around and people walk trails into grass.

NW 10th between Western and Penn is also silly (another 4-lane, 30 MPH road).

There are a bunch of them which should make it much easier to start adding dedicated bike lanes and pedestrian paths / sidewalks.

Say what you will about our 4-lane roads, but I see this as actually a good thing. Definitely not the original intent of the city planners, but look how we have the groundwork in place for bike lanes and BRT lanes. Practically every street is a 4-lane road, I feel that traffic would move smoother if most roads were 2-lane. Up in PA for instance, very seldom do you see roads larger than 2-lanes except for interstates, toll roads, and one-way urban city streets. Most state highways and roads through the suburbs are 2-lane with sizable shoulders. With most towns more densely populated they seem to not have as much traffic issues as we see. Granted this could be the difference of having an endless grid versus free flowing roads that don't have lights every 1/4-mile or so...

^^^not a bad thought. Paint and vertical delineators are cheap compared to having to build dedicated paths

^

23rd between Broadway and Classen is another great candidate for a road diet.

Broadway between 10th and 23rd... It's a long, long list.

i think completely opposite of you... i think once the infrastructure is in place... then it's time to start increasing density... to increase density now, without great public transit (or even good public transit) and being completely pedestrian unfriendly, is a terrible idea. forcing the demand to then hopefully get to the infrastructure to support that demand down the line, leads to bad design in infrastructure. whereas building the infrastructure now with great design and an overall plan would do a lot to encourage an increase in density, all on it's own without the need for laws requiring it.


I tend to agree with the "build it and they will come" methodology. Once you set the infrastructure areas that are typically considered less attractive become more plausible for developers. This also provides some continuity throughout the neighborhoods. Sidewalks, bus stops, proper lighting goes a long way in improving a desolate area. Obviously this is something that should be strategically done and with future development in mind.


I'm with you on this one.
It's a well-documented phenomenon at this point that well-built bicycle infrastructure creates use and demand. It actually makes a lot of sense as the bicycle version of induced demand, except that increasing bicycle use in lieu of some car travel has multiple societal benefits; it demonstrably increases retail sales in stores which front bike lanes, it encourages increased density in affected areas, it increases transit use, it provides proven health benefits to participants, and it even has been shown to improve the experience and transit time for the drivers of automobiles (seriously) as it tends to organize traffic and cause drivers to take fewer chances (which can result in auto/auto collisions, tie-ups, etc).

Here are some links for anyone interested in reading about this:

https://bicycletimesmag.com/if-you-build-it-they-will-ride-pop-up-bike-lanes-prove-that-demand-exists/

https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/nyc-and-dc-protected-lane-pioneers-just-doubled-biking-rates-in-4-years/

https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/how-high-can-they-go-dc-bike-counts-show-continuing-surge-in-protected-lane-use/

https://bicyclecoalition.org/our-campaigns/biking-in-philly/spruce-and-pine-street/#sthash.NpoPegjp.dpbs

https://www.redmond.gov/Transportation/GettingAroundRedmond/Bicycling/21GoodReasonsToMarkBikeLanes/

http://bike.lacity.org/if-you-build-it-they-will-come/

https://www.nctr.usf.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/jpt16.4_Cervero.pdf

https://www.treehugger.com/bikes/if-you-build-it-they-will-come-new-study-shows-bike-lanes-increase-ridership.html

https://grist.org/cities/if-you-build-bike-paths-cyclists-will-come/

http://spacestoplaces.blogs.realtor.org/2017/01/11/bike-lanes-build-them-and-they-will-come/

It's a well-documented phenomenon at this point that well-built bicycle infrastructure creates use and demand. It actually makes a lot of sense as the bicycle version of induced demand, except that increasing bicycle use in lieu of some car travel has multiple societal benefits; it demonstrably increases retail sales in stores which front bike lanes, it encourages increased density in affected areas, it increases transit use, it provides proven health benefits to participants, and it even has been shown to improve the experience and transit time for the drivers of automobiles (seriously) as it tends to organize traffic and cause drivers to take fewer chances (which can result in auto/auto collisions, tie-ups, etc).

Here are some links for anyone interested in reading about this:

https://bicycletimesmag.com/if-you-build-it-they-will-ride-pop-up-bike-lanes-prove-that-demand-exists/

https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/nyc-and-dc-protected-lane-pioneers-just-doubled-biking-rates-in-4-years/

https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/how-high-can-they-go-dc-bike-counts-show-continuing-surge-in-protected-lane-use/

https://bicyclecoalition.org/our-campaigns/biking-in-philly/spruce-and-pine-street/#sthash.NpoPegjp.dpbs

https://www.redmond.gov/Transportation/GettingAroundRedmond/Bicycling/21GoodReasonsToMarkBikeLanes/

http://bike.lacity.org/if-you-build-it-they-will-come/

https://www.nctr.usf.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/jpt16.4_Cervero.pdf

https://www.treehugger.com/bikes/if-you-build-it-they-will-come-new-study-shows-bike-lanes-increase-ridership.html

https://grist.org/cities/if-you-build-bike-paths-cyclists-will-come/

http://spacestoplaces.blogs.realtor.org/2017/01/11/bike-lanes-build-them-and-they-will-come/

as always sir... you provide us with a plethora of knowledge to digest! :)

The good news is OKC has tons of roads that are just too wide for the amount of traffic.

The stretch of 39th between Penn and Classen is also absurd. 4 full lanes, all residential, no sidewalks. Often, you see delivery vans and yardwork vehicles just parked in the right lane even though there is no shoulder. Traffic, of course, just goes around and people walk trails into grass.


I know it is tangential to your point, but the reason 39th is that wide is it once was US66. 66 ran west from the Capital to Classen, then north on Classen to 39th, where it turned west to Warr Acres and Bethany. In the early 50's along with the completion of the Turner Turnpike, US66 was routed south along the NE Expressway (now I44) to the Classen traffic circle, then west to a new connecting expressway in front of Penn Square Mall (roughly the path of I44 today)

I know it is tangential to your point, but the reason 39th is that wide is it once was US66. 66 ran west from the Capital to Classen, then north on Classen to 39th, where it turned west to Warr Acres and Bethany. In the early 50's along with the completion of the Turner Turnpike, US66 was routed south along the NE Expressway (now I44) to the Classen traffic circle, then west to a new connecting expressway in front of Penn Square Mall (roughly the path of I44 today)

Have they gone back to the original route now? I saw a couple of weeks ago the city had put up more Rt66 signs and there was a tweet of the Gold Dome building being on Rt66. I cannot for the life of me figure out the route between Edmond and Portland Ave...

I suspect the signs were "Historic Rt 66" which would not be the same as current Rt 66, right?

Some news regarding bike infrastructure in the Classen Blvd corridor: The city has recently made some progress on the conversion of N Western Ave between W Sheridan Ave and NW 18. This is one of the Priority 4 routes in the original bikewalkokc plan where it was listed as partially funded. The general idea is to convert Western from 4 traffic lanes to 2, with Tier 1 protected bike lanes on either side of the road.

In the last month, they've been rebuilding at least portions of the sidewalks on both sides of Western from NW 4 to about NW 9. There's also now a sort of pocket park in the triangle formed by the two legs of Linwood Blvd and Western, just across from the OKCPS HQ. In preparation for bike lanes and the elimination of some traffic lanes, the Traffic and Transportation Committee approved the removal of the no left turn restriction when traveling northbound on Western at W Main St. They were also supposed to consider converting Western between NW 16 and NW 18 to "two-way" traffic to allow for protected bike lanes on both sides of the road. (Under the current traffic code, you can only have bike lanes that allow for travel in the same direction as vehicles, and since Western is northbound-only there the one-way designation needs to be changed. After the project is completed, the northbound slip lane will be bicycle-only and Western will have just one northbound vehicle lane with protected bike lanes on either side of the road.) However, consideration of this second part was pushed to their September meeting.

You forgot the part about how the TTC went a bit off the rails regarding the contraflow bike lane south of 18th and had to defer the decision a month to get input from a community that should have no purview over this road since they have closed themselves off to said road (e.g. at 17th, 16th).

^ Thanks for the info! I was just going off the minutes which of course don't record the interesting stuff - lol. The minutes just reflect the continuance but I wondered what the deal was since TTC approved the Main/Western part of the project and not the NW 16-18/Western part.

^ Thanks for the info! I was just going off the minutes which of course don't record the interesting stuff - lol. The minutes just reflect the continuance but I wondered what the deal was since TTC approved the Main/Western part of the project and not the NW 16-18/Western part.

The meeting was loooong and boring. The contractor thought that getting the approval through was a no-brainer and arrived with no real sales pitch wahtsoever nor prepared in any way to discuss the matter. Unfortunately the motion was written in such a confusing way that the entire traffic commission thought that they were approving changing the two blocks of Western between 16th and 18th to two way vehicular traffic and after kicking that around for ten minutes (and being very favorable to the notion) someone let them know that no, in fact, the motion is to make it two way for bicycles only and remove one lane of vehicular traffic.

Several years ago the Mesta/Heritage folks made an unsolicited proposal to the city to change a great deal of things both within and surrounding the neighborhood in order to reduce traffic passing through their neighborhood. Part of this proposal was to make that stretch of Western two way, presumably in an attempt to reduce folks who come southbound on Western from making the turn onto 18th and proceeding south on Shartel. Since they were many of them familiar with this old proposal the traffic commission seemed to think that this was what they were voting on. As I said, the contractor(s) bringing forward the proposal did nobody any favors by being vague and passive on the issue.

After the true thrust of the thing became clear the meeting really went off the rails with the commissioners making bad faith arguments about bike lanes and traffic counts etc. The mood turned quickly against the motion and it was deferred for one month to the September 20 meeting. My read of the room is that the motion is likely to fail.

I will be in attendance to speak in favor of the motion from a pedestrian safety perspective and I am on the hunt for a bicycle advocate to speak in favor of it from that angle. Please contact Stuart Chai stuart.chai@okc.gov and your City Council member if you are in favor of this motion. And also if you are available to speak in-person at the September 20 Traffic Commission meeting at 1:30 PM please send me a message so we can coordinate.

I really don’t like large buffers between cycle lanes and car lanes that are asphalt with delineators. I wish they’d be actual raised medians with landscaping. LA is horrible about wasted pavement space and only increases the urban heat island effect.

Drove up Classen this morning and was impressed with how manicured and nice the green medians looked, especially through the Asian district. But the whole stretch from NW Exp to downtown seemed well groomed.

If TTC denies their approval for the proposed change, do you know if can it be appealed to Council? Or can Council "pull" it out of TTC and vote on it directly? Seems weird or wrong that TTC could put the kibosh on it when the original project was already approved (I think) by Council in late 2020 and when the funding is already in place.

City of OKC just tweeted out that bike lanes will be coming to Classen from NW 10th to NW 16th. Beginning Mid-May, contractors will stripe Classen to include bike lanes designated by green paint, bike symbols and delineators.

City of OKC just tweeted out that bike lanes will be coming to Classen from NW 10th to NW 16th. Beginning Mid-May, contractors will stripe Classen to include bike lanes designated by green paint, bike symbols and delineators.

Hope the delineators are actually the stand-up poles, otherwise it's just paint on a street and not a real bike lane.

Yeah I’m not a fan of this at all. Just cheap and lazy urban planning. If they’re going to remove a lane on Classen why the hell didn’t they do it for the BRT project and make it a bus only lane? There’s more than enough room to add a two way protected cycleway along the entire length of Classen.

This is yet another example of OKC not understanding how real mass/alternative transit works in actual big cities. It would have taken complex engineering and planning as it would’ve taken some parking away which would need to be substituted and some mature trees would have to go but it in the future we’ll be glad we did it.

So now we’re just going to create bottlenecks and quasi bike lanes. Amateur hour.

Yeah I’m not a fan of this at all. Just cheap and lazy urban planning. If they’re going to remove a lane on Classen why the hell didn’t they do it for the BRT project and make it a bus only lane? There’s more than enough room to add a two way protected cycleway along the entire length of Classen.

This is yet another example of OKC not understanding how real mass/alternative transit works in actual big cities. It would have taken complex engineering and planning as it would’ve taken some parking away which would need to be substituted and some mature trees would have to go but it in the future we’ll be glad we did it.

So now we’re just going to create bottlenecks and quasi bike lanes. Amateur hour.

I'm so glad we're going to shut down car lanes used by hundreds of cars per day, maybe thousands, and instead have bike lanes for the 16 bikes per day. Solid effort.