View Full Version : Innovation Link
HangryHippo 04-04-2018, 08:27 AM Patient care is and should be their first priority.
Unfortunately, this is not the case far too often or there would be a lot more changes. But then the Trust wouldn't be able to pad their pockets as much, so...
Rover 04-04-2018, 03:11 PM Unfortunately, this is not the case far too often or there would be a lot more changes. But then the Trust wouldn't be able to pad their pockets as much, so...
Who is this that is padding their pockets? They are anti urban because they have been paid off or are profiting by there being poor walkability and no coffee shops? What a conspiracy of corruption! This is quite an accusation to throw out there. Facts or opinion?
Plutonic Panda 04-09-2018, 12:09 AM In Steve's chat the bossman at Chamber OKC said this development is being actively considered which is good to hear. I initially thought it was just an idea drawn up by OU students to see if it would gain any serious traction but it appears this could really happen. I hope they consider a full cap over a partial one, but anything will help! Even if they just widen the bridges to allow for buildings to be built on each side.
There is not so much a MAPS focus as there is a discussion of significant issues the city is facing, such as criminal justice facilities we may need, more transportation infrastructure like regional transit, expansion potential of some of the MAPS 3 projects like the streetcar, discussion about the innovation district including a potential capping of I-235, potential expansion of the Bricktown Canal and more dams along the Oklahoma River. But they are not so much in the context of MAPS 4.
- http://newsok.com/okc-central-chat-transcript-april-6-2018-with-special-guest-roy-williams/article/5589859
Urbanized 04-09-2018, 09:06 AM Again, I think a complete capping is such an extreme and expensive measure. You could achieve great walkability simply by lining a bridge with buildings, a la Pulteney Bridge (Bath, England), or even the park-like walled treatment given to the Long Street Bridge in Columbus, OH.
Personally I’d rather see a less expensive but equally effective approach considered, with the funds that might have been used for a full cap used instead for streetcar expansion to the health center or elsewhere. Much more effective and impactful use of money, IMO.
Plutonic Panda 04-09-2018, 02:12 PM Yeah I also think if they're going to spend this much money might as well just do a longer stretch from north of I-40 and south of 50th st. and do a cut and cover tunnel and place an urban BLVD. at top down the line, that is, when we start to run out of space to develop in the core which isn't anytime soon. In the mean time, I think place buildings on each side of the bridges would work well and I think removing the ramps to I-235 in Deep Deuce and turning that area into a park with a new bridge going over I-235 for the streetcar and peds only would be cool.
gopokes88 04-09-2018, 02:15 PM I would bet big money a bridge cap is in Maps 4
HOT ROD 04-09-2018, 02:52 PM I personally would rather they develop the existing OHC as it's own neighborhood and build several pedestrian bridges + trails over I-235 to connect to the downtown neighbourhoods. This idea solves the REAL problem of the lack of density at the pedestrian level in the neighborhood and also likely is the cheapest. Capping I-235 to me is a band aide that doesn't solve the real problem.
Rover 04-09-2018, 02:56 PM Are we going to underwrite the private development to go on this cap? Do any of you think a privately funded building project can make money at the cost of construction required to build over the expressway? Does the city (or is this ODOT's) charge for the air space rights? Anybody care to work out the practical economics?
I know this is a modern urbanist googly eyes dream to do this cap, but it sure seems we can invest our money in way more efficient ways to create good urban development.
Plutonic Panda 04-09-2018, 03:02 PM Are we going to underwrite the private development to go on this cap? Do any of you think a privately funded building project can make money at the cost of construction required to build over the expressway? Does the city (or is this ODOT's) charge for the air space rights? Anybody care to work out the practical economics?
I know this is a modern urbanist googly eyes dream to do this cap, but it sure seems we can invest our money in way more efficient ways to create good urban development.
City projects aren't a business to make money. It's to make the quality of life better. You have to pay money for that. Anything built as a result is just a plus that offsets part a loss that was already expected. Classic example is Seattle's SR-99 Tunnel. Though tolled, it still won't make money necessary to cover it's multi-billion dollar cost and unfortunately for me and my love of tunnels, I think it will be the last freeway tunnel for awhile in the U.S. Even though other countries are building them like crazy, the U.S. is being left behind. If you want to see some incredible new freeways being built with an extensive tunnel network, look no further than Japan, Turkey, Sri Lanka, or China. If you really want to be wowed, have a gander at Rogfast Tunnel that will be 17 miles long and only costs a mere few billion dollars. Through extreme ignorance and flat out arrogance, the 710 tunnel gap is dormant and likely dead in L.A. Unfortunately new freeway progress seems to be in trouble in Los Angeles.
I am sure the residents of Seattle will apreciate the increased walkability and connection to the bay though it was a costly and lengthy road to get there. Ask any Bostonian and I'm sure most will tell you the big dig was worth it even though they still have to pay over 7 million a year to pump water back up that leaks in.
GaryOKC6 04-09-2018, 03:23 PM The plan is to not have an interstate carving the innovation district in half. It is supposed to include the research park as well. The chamber along with 80+ business leaders did an inter-city visit to Columbus last fall to visit with them about their interstate cap among other projects. This innovation district is already well under way although you don't see the visible signs of it yet.
Are we going to underwrite the private development to go on this cap? Do any of you think a privately funded building project can make money at the cost of construction required to build over the expressway? Does the city (or is this ODOT's) charge for the air space rights? Anybody care to work out the practical economics?
I know this is a modern urbanist googly eyes dream to do this cap, but it sure seems we can invest our money in way more efficient ways to create good urban development.
Capping the freeway seems like a good way to spend tons of money for not much impact. I think there's still a metric buttload of low hanging fruit for OKC's development, and we don't need to engage in something of this size and scale in order to move the city forward. Certainly not yet anyway.
Now, I feel like I'm channeling the ghost of Just The Facts/Kerry, but I think a far better investment would be for us to rip out I-235. That's not something that's going to be politically feasible for at least 30+ years, but I think it's going to take that long for us to use up all the available land that we've got downtown right now. I don't think we're ever going to hit a point where a freeway cap is either needed or makes economic sense. Put some pedestrian bridges over 235, run the streetcar over to the medical complex? Sure. But we don't need to cap the land. There's tons of land right on the other side that is currently nearly vacant. Let's use that up first.
Once the Innovation District is a real thing, and we're running out of room, by that point it'll be time to look at replacing 235 anyway. By that point we should have a regional mass transit system. By that point our downtown should have a sizable resident population. By that time we can look at just eliminating the interstate. But that's a long way off from today.
Plutonic Panda 04-09-2018, 08:40 PM Capping the freeway seems like a good way to spend tons of money for not much impact. I think there's still a metric buttload of low hanging fruit for OKC's development, and we don't need to engage in something of this size and scale in order to move the city forward. Certainly not yet anyway.
Now, I feel like I'm channeling the ghost of Just The Facts/Kerry, but I think a far better investment would be for us to rip out I-235. That's not something that's going to be politically feasible for at least 30+ years, but I think it's going to take that long for us to use up all the available land that we've got downtown right now. I don't think we're ever going to hit a point where a freeway cap is either needed or makes economic sense. Put some pedestrian bridges over 235, run the streetcar over to the medical complex? Sure. But we don't need to cap the land. There's tons of land right on the other side that is currently nearly vacant. Let's use that up first.
Once the Innovation District is a real thing, and we're running out of room, by that point it'll be time to look at replacing 235 anyway. By that point we should have a regional mass transit system. By that point our downtown should have a sizable resident population. By that time we can look at just eliminating the interstate. But that's a long way off from today.Ripping out 235 is never going to happen until flying cars make freeways obsolete. Even then, 30 years is a long to just bank on that freeway being removed and there is plenty of good reasoning to build a freeway cap.
Rover 04-09-2018, 11:29 PM So, the consensus on this board is that this is the most efficient use of our money to create an urban environment.
Plutonic Panda 04-10-2018, 02:19 AM So, the consensus on this board is that this is the most efficient use of our money to create an urban environment.
Everyone will always have a better idea of how to spend someone else's money. I get you don't like this idea. That is fine. It will be up to the city or the people if it is brought to a vote to build it or not. Lots of major cities have been doing this with great results. St. Louis is poised to see a lot of new development and Dallas certainly already has around their caps. I-70 in Denver will be capped and already have new announcements adjacent to the cap, IIRC.
At the very least, other alternatives have been presented like this one:
https://daks2k3a4ib2z.cloudfront.net/581110f944272e4a11871c01/59cd107d01fe980001f9504c_High-Street-Cap-660x439.jpg
https://www.columbusunderground.com/wp-content/themes/patterns/timthumb.php?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.columbusundergr ound.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2Fodot-7071-high-street-rendering-01.jpg&q=90&w=650&zc=1&
As Urbanized said, Columbus, OH has done it with great success.
https://www.pps.org/article/bridges-and-placemaking
https://www.quora.com/What-bridges-have-buildings-built-on-them%E2%80%94like-the-old-London-Bridge
Rover 04-10-2018, 05:06 PM I am not arguing if this is a nice thing to do, just that we have so many areas where we can improve our urban environment and enable and encourage private investments, I just question the cost/benefit vs doing other things like extending the streetcar and public transportation capabilities, infilling existing areas, etc. We have lots of areas for improvement. Is this the best bang for our limited bucks? Where we are talking about is very, very different than in Columbus and certainly than Florence or Prague.
Rover 04-10-2018, 05:18 PM I am not arguing if this is a nice thing to do, just that we have so many areas where we can improve our urban environment and enable and encourage private investments, I just question the cost/benefit vs doing other things like extending the streetcar and public transportation capabilities, infilling existing areas, etc. We have lots of areas for improvement. Is this the best bang for our limited bucks?
I believe Columbus was done by a private developer with them receiving "air rights" over the highway. The state kicked in around $1 million. If we can get the same kind of commitment and agreements, I say bravo. Let's see an OKC developer step up. The Columbus development was pretty much a commercial development and didn't include bike trails, walking trails, green belts, etc. Here, we might be able to do something like it IF ODOT agrees to give the air rights and support with some platform construction like Ohio did.
Urbanized 04-10-2018, 05:48 PM ^^^^^^^^
I don't necessarily disagree with you that there are better ways to spend money than on the cap, and completely concur that infill and urbanization of the existing district is much more important than a cap.
All I am saying is that the cap I'm seeing floated is so incredibly ambitious - and by extension expensive - that if they are really looking to knit together the two areas over 235 they don't need to create a blocks-long park; they could do it much more inexpensively by using those Columbus models. And in the case of the bridge with buildings they could actually derive ongoing revenue in the form of rent. Besides, doing what was done in Columbus is INFINITELY more walkable than the park-like thing I've seen in drawings.
I really suspect that the cap happens at some point because it now has too much inertia behind it. Witness Gary's post. And I think it is telling that he talked about it also needing to connect to the research park. What this tells me is that to sell it as a district they have latched on to the west of 235 portion so much that to some extent the research park - which is the actual point of the whole thing - is secondary in the sales pitch. So if it's happening anyway, let's do the more walkable (and by coincidence more affordable) version.
dwellsokc 04-11-2018, 05:46 AM The original Link design was a concept test, based on capping as much as possible without interfering with I-235 traffic paths (present and future). The curving geometry is a result of that concept. However, because the purpose is to improve connectivity and walkability, not provide “park” space, the design is being modified to reduce the Cap area (and cost) to a minimum but keeping the swooping geometry.
It's important to understand that 9th Street, not 10th Street, is the true connector between both sides of the barrier… that’s why you see it pulled through onto the Cap, creating a “target” for the proposed pedestrian paths.
Why should the space over I-235 be considered any less of a missing tooth than other infill opportunities? Extruding the city fabric across the barrier is urbanization of the existing district…
HangryHippo 04-11-2018, 07:10 AM It's important to understand that 9th Street, not 10th Street, is the true connector between both sides of the barrier… that’s why you see it pulled through onto the Cap, creating a “target” for the proposed pedestrian paths.
I'm not sure I follow - can you expound on this? How is 9th St the true connector?
extruding the city fabric across the barrier is urbanization of the existing district…
Well said.
dwellsokc 04-11-2018, 07:20 AM I'm not sure I follow - can you expound on this? How is 9th St the true connector?
10th Street is probably destined to remain a major vehicle path... very pedestrian-unfriendly and biker-unfriendly. 9th Street is already pedestrian-friendly and contains many destinations for neighboring walkers. It's a natural connector to Automobile Alley.
Urbanized 04-11-2018, 07:21 AM ...Why should the space over I-235 be considered any less of a missing tooth than other infill opportunities? Extruding the city fabric across the barrier is urbanization of the existing district…
Because of the geometric budget expansion it would create in the name of a more satisfying rendering, and because achieving walkability only need involve the touching the street, the sidewalk and building frontage. In the photo below, the tan building in the middle is suspended over the freeway, creates a thoroughly walkable connection, and totally obscures the highway visually, from street level. Who cares what’s behind it?
Walkability and quality urbanization has absolutely zero to do with attractive aerial renderings and everything to do with actual street-level interaction.
https://daks2k3a4ib2z.cloudfront.net/581110f944272e4a11871c01/59cd107d01fe980001f9504c_High-Street-Cap-660x439.jpg
catch22 04-11-2018, 08:35 AM That is amazing ^^^^
If you hadn't mentioned that I would have had no idea that was a bridge.
dwellsokc 04-11-2018, 09:18 AM Who cares what’s behind it?
Context matters. The I-670 Cap in Columbus is an extremely successful model, and they didn’t care what was behind it because there was nothing behind it. In our case, 9th Street is behind it… and 9th Street is more important to pedestrianism than is 10th Street.
The Innovation Link radically improves the 10th Street pedestrian experience while reconnecting to the real pedestrian corridor… 9th Street. I challenge everyone to spend some time walking and biking the area, then downplay the importance of 9th Street.
Concept renderings are needed to make a vision easier to understand. And as with all projects, the final product won’t exactly match the first rendering. (But I must agree that it is an attractive aerial rendering!)
Urbanized 04-11-2018, 09:55 AM Context matters. The I-670 Cap in Columbus is an extremely successful model, and they didn’t care what was behind it because there was nothing behind it. In our case, 9th Street is behind it… and 9th Street is more important to pedestrianism than is 10th Street.
The Innovation Link radically improves the 10th Street pedestrian experience while reconnecting to the real pedestrian corridor… 9th Street. I challenge everyone to spend some time walking and biking the area, then downplay the importance of 9th Street.
Concept renderings are needed to make a vision easier to understand. And as with all projects, the final product won’t exactly match the first rendering. (But I must agree that it is an attractive aerial rendering!)
Both streets could get the same treatment and it would STILL be cheaper than capping both streets AND the area between them.
dwellsokc 04-11-2018, 10:45 AM Both streets could get the same treatment and it would STILL be cheaper than capping both streets AND the area between them.
I absolutely agree!
And street-level sidewalks are cheaper than a canal… And a collegiate-quality arena is cheaper than an NBA-quality arena… And busses are cheaper than streetcars… And a dry creek bed is cheaper than a rowing river…And doing nothing is cheaper still…
The mission is to improve connectivity and walkability across the I-235 barrier. Is cost the prime driver?
catch22 04-11-2018, 10:46 AM Why does 9th street even need to cross? 9th goes right across into the GE Parking Garage. It's not like there's some interactive street across the highway from 9th?
I'm with Urbanized here. The cap would be pretty, but really all we need is a more interactive 10th street crossing.
benjico 04-11-2018, 10:58 AM I think ideally you want to connect 9th street on the west side of 35 with both 10th street and 8th street on the east side of 35.
Rover 04-11-2018, 11:13 AM I absolutely agree!
And street-level sidewalks are cheaper than a canal… And a collegiate-quality arena is cheaper than an NBA-quality arena… And busses are cheaper than streetcars… And a dry creek bed is cheaper than a rowing river…And doing nothing is cheaper still…
The mission is to improve connectivity and walkability across the I-235 barrier. Is cost the prime driver?
OKC has a long history of expanding areas instead of improving areas. Personally, I would much rather focus on infilling efforts and walkability/bikeability/public transportation/code enforcement, etc. from I40 to 23rd, from Classen to I235, than from continuing to stretch out and make downtown bigger. When the innovation district itself makes itself worthy of connection, then this connection becomes important. It is not urban and does not seem to be moving towards urban. Connecting AA to it does not make it urban and even worth walking or biking to. Right now, what are we talking about connecting to? Let's connect areas where developers are already doing things to make their area urban. Let us knit the best together before we keep adding area. We keep promoting this notion of quantity vs. quality.
dwellsokc 04-11-2018, 11:18 AM 9th Street doesn’t cross. The cap is designed to steer westbound 10th Street pedestrian traffic to 9th Street because 10th Street (west of I-235) is pedestrian-UNfriendly. 10th Street is for cars… 9th Street is for people. Functionality, not esthetics, is the design driver.
Yeah, 9th street on the west side of the interstate may be all walkable and great. But 9th street on the east side of the interstate is the GE building's wall.
catch22 04-11-2018, 11:28 AM OKC has a long history of expanding areas instead of improving areas. Personally, I would much rather focus on infilling efforts and walkability/bikeability/public transportation/code enforcement, etc. from I40 to 23rd, from Classen to I235, than from continuing to stretch out and make downtown bigger. When the innovation district itself makes itself worthy of connection, then this connection becomes important. It is not urban and does not seem to be moving towards urban. Connecting AA to it does not make it urban and even worth walking or biking to. Right now, what are we talking about connecting to? Let's connect areas where developers are already doing things to make their area urban. Let us knit the best together before we keep adding area. We keep promoting this notion of quantity vs. quality.
Spot on. Let the areas push up against their boundaries before forcing them to bridge.
Plutonic Panda 04-11-2018, 03:09 PM Eh, count me in as someone who support a full cap. The are buildings along the freeways and a park cap would allow for even more connectivity by allowing people to walk over to the other side anywhere almost, unless the partial cap happens. I would support the partial cap just for more green space.
aDark 02-05-2019, 04:04 PM Thanks to PlutonicPanda for his development map I was reminded of this possible project. I know it is something people are interested in for Maps4
Does anyone have insight into the likelihood of this being a formal party of Maps4? Anyone wanna give odds on this making the cut? I'm interested in literally any thoughts whatsoever
I believe the Chamber of Commerce is pushing hard for this to be a part of MAPS 4.
It may be a less ambitious version, however.
We should know more in a few months when these ideas start to solidify.
dankrutka 02-06-2019, 03:57 AM I am a huge MAPS supporter in general, but this would be the worst item added to any MAPS in my opinion. I don't even understand the concept. There is nothing really to connect together. The "innovation district," which is not a district in any meaningful way, is built for cars. What would be the benefit of capping the highway? This would be a complete waste of taxpayer money.
As I said in another thread, I could actually squint hard enough to see a benefit in capping I-40 to connect the north and south sides of the park, but there's just no good reason to cap I-235.
Southsider2 02-06-2019, 08:49 AM I am a huge MAPS supporter in general, but this would be the worst item added to any MAPS in my opinion. I don't even understand the concept. There is nothing really to connect together. The "innovation district," which is not a district in any meaningful way, is built for cars. What would be the benefit of capping the highway? This would be a complete waste of taxpayer money.
As I said in another thread, I could actually squint hard enough to see a benefit in capping I-40 to connect the north and south sides of the park, but there's just no good reason to cap I-235.
Completely agree
aDark 02-06-2019, 09:10 AM ...I could actually squint hard enough to see a benefit in capping I-40 to connect the north and south sides of the park, but there's just no good reason to cap I-235.
I am also a huge Maps supporter and will almost certainly vote in favor of Maps 4. I agree that a cap connecting the two parks over I-40 would be better than a cap of I-235. That said, I am supportive of any cap which helps OKC grow out of the 235/40 boundary that currently exists.
If they do propose a plan to cap I-235 I sure hope it includes a ton of sidewalks, bike lanes, etc. Let's start making the Innovation District a more walk-able area. The idea is solid in concept but would be a huge waste without investment around OSSM, GE, etc.
Do you think the cap over I-235 is an effort to lessen the historically racist efforts to divide the city in half? I believe those pushing for the cap are lagrely OU and GE folks. But, if the I-235 cap happened in tandem with a new Streetcar spoke out to and around NE 23rd st (or at least OUHSC) I do think we'd see a lot of investment and benefit to a part of town which has historically been shafted.
Maybe I'm too optimistic.
jedicurt 02-06-2019, 09:12 AM I am also a huge Maps supporter and will almost certainly vote in favor of Maps 4. I agree that a cap connecting the two parks over I-40 would be better than a cap of I-235. That said, I am supportive of any cap which helps OKC grow out of the 235/40 boundary that currently exists.
this is how i feel as well... I-40 makes way more since for a cap. but i'm supportive of any cap to get out of the current boundaries
Timshel 02-06-2019, 09:14 AM I am a huge MAPS supporter in general, but this would be the worst item added to any MAPS in my opinion. I don't even understand the concept. There is nothing really to connect together. The "innovation district," which is not a district in any meaningful way, is built for cars. What would be the benefit of capping the highway? This would be a complete waste of taxpayer money.
As I said in another thread, I could actually squint hard enough to see a benefit in capping I-40 to connect the north and south sides of the park, but there's just no good reason to cap I-235.
This. I'm trying to get creative and think of a way where a cap to the "Innovation Link" could possibly be worth the expense and I can't get there. Extending the streetcar through that part of town, making it easier for Innovation District workers to get to a walkable, urban, environment without a car, seems to be better than capping the highway to provide access to what is essentially a suburban office park on the edge of downtown. I just can't see the Innovation District being developed to be more of a mixed-use area at any time in the future to make it worth it (although I would welcome such development if it weren't at the expense of developing other areas).
On the other hand, especially after seeing how great the cap/tunnel at the Gathering Place looks, I love the idea of capping I-40 to connect the park (recognizing that I'm sure there's a huge cost difference in capping Riverside in Tulsa and I-40). Seems like such an obvious way to ensure connectivity between both sides of the park that I'm somewhat surprised it wasn't in the park's long term plans to begin with.
Plutonic Panda 02-06-2019, 01:11 PM I am a huge MAPS supporter in general, but this would be the worst item added to any MAPS in my opinion. I don't even understand the concept. There is nothing really to connect together. The "innovation district," which is not a district in any meaningful way, is built for cars. What would be the benefit of capping the highway? This would be a complete waste of taxpayer money.
As I said in another thread, I could actually squint hard enough to see a benefit in capping I-40 to connect the north and south sides of the park, but there's just no good reason to cap I-235.
Is I-40 even a depressed freeway? If not, it would be a unique cap.
I support this cap, but hearing that the proposal might not be as ambitious bums me out as I didn't think the current proposed cap is all that ambitious, but it would still be nice.
Johnb911 02-06-2019, 02:41 PM How about a decent pedestrian bridge over 235? Something that echoes Scissortail thematically and gives a better option crossing than 10th or Harrison
OKC Guy 02-06-2019, 02:59 PM How about a decent pedestrian bridge over 235? Something that echoes Scissortail thematically and gives a better option crossing than 10th or Harrison
I don’t ynderstand the desire to do one for 235? What good is ped bridge when a majority of east 235 is workers? No one from Bricktown/east town is wanting to walk east over 235 since there is nothing there to do other than work. And likewise workers are not walking west over 235 due to time limits at work. For the cost it would be a waste becuase its not connecting 2 vibrant areas. One is work and other is mixed use.
Now, had they put the SC over it that makes more sense if it was fast and efficient to get workers to lunch faster.
I like the 40 idea much much better, more bang for bucks.
Ross MacLochness 02-06-2019, 04:58 PM I don’t ynderstand the desire to do one for 235? What good is ped bridge when a majority of east 235 is workers? No one from Bricktown/east town is wanting to walk east over 235 since there is nothing there to do other than work. And likewise workers are not walking west over 235 due to time limits at work. For the cost it would be a waste becuase its not connecting 2 vibrant areas. One is work and other is mixed use.
Now, had they put the SC over it that makes more sense if it was fast and efficient to get workers to lunch faster.
I like the 40 idea much much better, more bang for bucks.
That's not true at all. Lots of people walk or ride bikes across i235. I used to before I moved. Lucky for me I'm a young able-bodied male because it's a terrible and dangerous walk. Due to a lack of state maintenance on the overpasses, vegetation blocks the way, requiring people to walk in the street. I used to see families and people with disabilities cross the bridges most times I'd cross the highway (before/after work). I'm not sure an expensive cap is the answer but certainly, this connection needs an improvement, not only for the sake of the "innovation district" but also for the many people who live over there and who choose or are forced to walk or ride a bike.
OKC Guy 02-06-2019, 05:17 PM That's not true at all. Lots of people walk or ride bikes across i235. I used to before I moved. Lucky for me I'm a young able-bodied male because it's a terrible and dangerous walk. Due to a lack of state maintenance on the overpasses, vegetation blocks the way, requiring people to walk in the street. I used to see families and people with disabilities cross the bridges most times I'd cross the highway (before/after work). I'm not sure an expensive cap is the answer but certainly, this connection needs an improvement, not only for the sake of the "innovation district" but also for the many people who live over there and who choose or are forced to walk or ride a bike.
OKC has a population of over 600,000 and this is not enough need fo spend millions to build a special overpass for pedestrians when an crossing always exists. The 10th st bridge has pedestrian walkways and is not overgrown with grass nor obstructed.
We can’t have everything we want in just one section of the city. We missed the opportunity to have a SC shuttle going back and forth too, that ship sailed.
Very few use it in relation to our population. Now, the 40 proposal would get way more use as it connects our new park and convention center activity areas. But at what cost? Not to sound snide but it seems downtown wants to spend all the money for the entire city taxpayers. We have to be picky on what we spend our money on.
If you live downtown would you embrace none of your tax dollars spent downtown and all of them spent on the far NW part of OKC? No you would not. Yes, we need to spend money downtown to attrack and keep business but there is a limit too.
I’d much rather build an aquarium than a cap over 235. Better use of tax dollars. As is we are looking at higher taxes to support regional transit models. Not to count other projects like fairgrounds.
All I’m saying is we can’t solely look at donwtown pet projects we need to look at the whole city.
citywokchinesefood 02-06-2019, 07:40 PM OKC has a population of over 600,000 and this is not enough need fo spend millions to build a special overpass for pedestrians when an crossing always exists. The 10th st bridge has pedestrian walkways and is not overgrown with grass nor obstructed.
We can’t have everything we want in just one section of the city. We missed the opportunity to have a SC shuttle going back and forth too, that ship sailed.
Very few use it in relation to our population. Now, the 40 proposal would get way more use as it connects our new park and convention center activity areas. But at what cost? Not to sound snide but it seems downtown wants to spend all the money for the entire city taxpayers. We have to be picky on what we spend our money on.
If you live downtown would you embrace none of your tax dollars spent downtown and all of them spent on the far NW part of OKC? No you would not. Yes, we need to spend money downtown to attrack and keep business but there is a limit too.
I’d much rather build an aquarium than a cap over 235. Better use of tax dollars. As is we are looking at higher taxes to support regional transit models. Not to count other projects like fairgrounds.
All I’m saying is we can’t solely look at donwtown pet projects we need to look at the whole city.
I would also rather see MAPS funds go to an aquarium over the proposed cap over 235. The 235 cap lacks any sort of real inspiration beyond being a pet project. Dallas and Denver are doing highway caps in a much bigger and more awe inspiring fashion. I think a highway cap is something that should be tied into MAPS 5 or through the aid of some federal funding. This proposed cap is in my opinion half assed and the biggest stinker of any of the proposed projects.
Buffalo Bill 02-06-2019, 07:48 PM Due to a lack of state maintenance on the overpasses, vegetation blocks the way, requiring people to walk in the street.
Maintenance of the sidewalks adjacent to and across the bridge is the responsibility of the city. Need to contact Action Center.
Ross MacLochness 02-07-2019, 02:27 PM Maintenance of the sidewalks adjacent to and across the bridge is the responsibility of the city. Need to contact Action Center.
I did, they said it was a state job. hmm.
Ross MacLochness 02-07-2019, 02:28 PM OKC has a population of over 600,000 and this is not enough need fo spend millions to build a special overpass for pedestrians when an crossing always exists. The 10th st bridge has pedestrian walkways and is not overgrown with grass nor obstructed.
.
You haven't walked it then. Like I said in my post, I don't think a multi million dollar cap is the right Idea, but certainly improving pedestrian and bike connectivity is necessary and absolutely worth spending some money on.
OKC Guy 02-07-2019, 02:52 PM You haven't walked it then. Like I said in my post, I don't think a multi million dollar cap is the right Idea, but certainly improving pedestrian and bike connectivity is necessary and absolutely worth spending some money on.
I beg to differ. There is a raised sidewalk that goes from west of 235 all the way over 235 and east into medical district (east of Lincoln). It is clear of weeds and pretty new (they put in when built new GE Building).
Its never obstructed, but you do have hustlers working the 235/10 N/S off ramps but they don’t do east/west 10th so no blockage or hassle. I would encourage you to relook because I know what I’m talking about. The sidewalk is the south (GE) side all the way over and many blocks to east/west of it. I see walkers/bikers often enough too.
OKC Guy 02-07-2019, 02:59 PM Maintenance of the sidewalks adjacent to and across the bridge is the responsibility of the city. Need to contact Action Center.
Speaking of OKC Connect, in my usage they went from best in country to bottom 5 in the past 3 years. We need to find out why they are not fixing basic potholes submitted or signing off work as done when its not. This would make for a good story if we actually had a newspaper or TV who would investigate and report “what the heck is going on” with our services at OKC. Maybe need a MAPS to fix this?
king183 02-07-2019, 03:05 PM Speaking of OKC Connect, in my usage they went from best in country to bottom 5 in the past 3 years. We need to find out why they are not fixing basic potholes submitted or signing off work as done when its not. This would make for a good story if we actually had a newspaper or TV who would investigate and report “what the heck is going on” with our services at OKC. Maybe need a MAPS to fix this?
I had the same experience and quit using it. They would constantly mark things as done without addressing it. It seemed like they just wanted to get it off their queue.
When it first came out, they were very responsive and did a great job. I'd be interested in learning why it deteriorated so suddenly.
TheTravellers 02-07-2019, 03:11 PM I did, they said it was a state job. hmm.
Find out who the councilperson is for that Ward and contact them about the discrepancy (not sure how responsive other Wards are for this kind of thing, but Ward 2 is pretty decent).
SEMIweather 02-07-2019, 09:50 PM Is I-40 even a depressed freeway? If not, it would be a unique cap.
I support this cap, but hearing that the proposal might not be as ambitious bums me out as I didn't think the current proposed cap is all that ambitious, but it would still be nice.
I-40 through the park is about 5 feet below ground level. IIRC, they originally wanted to depress it much more, something like 20 feet below ground level, but ran into issues due to the water table.
jonny d 08-01-2019, 07:44 AM https://oklahoman.com/article/5637571/plan-looks-to-innovation-district-as-economic-engine-for-okcs-future
Article from The Oklahoman regarding this.
aDark 08-01-2019, 09:13 AM The Oklahoman article mentions additionally building a parking structure for the State Capitol. Anyone have insight on this aspect of the proposal? Surely they're not suggesting building a parking garage at NE 10th for the use of State Capitol visitors/employees?
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119a.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119b.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119c.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119d.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119e.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119f.jpg
I made this map so it is not official, but these are the general areas they seem to be focusing on:
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/innovation080119g.jpg
HangryHippo 08-01-2019, 10:16 AM I made this map so it is not official, but these are the general areas they seem to be focusing on:
That’s still too far from the OUHSC campus and not at all convenient for employees or visitors to the hospitals.
The whole area is very spread out and of course separated from downtown by the interstate.
But by concentrating on this area it would be easy to tie into the street car system.
jonny d 08-01-2019, 10:24 AM That’s still too far from the OUHSC campus and not at all convenient for employees or visitors to the hospitals.
So where would you have them focus development on?
|
|