When it comes to pedestrian connections, the boulevard is a dead end.

[Rover]

All I can say is go to Google Earth Streetview and look again. All of Central Park is surrounded by a 4 foot stone wall and Boston Common has a 4 foot wrought fence on every side except one. Once you see them you will say, "I never noticed that before" which is a testament to how well they were done and fit in with the environment.

I stand corrected on Central Park. The walls are set back and inside the sidewalks. Implication on previous thread was walls were needed to protect pedestrians. Clearly not the purpose of these walls around park, not boulevard.

As for. BC, guess I aways walk on one side without. Lol

[Kerry]

I stand corrected on Central Park. The walls are set back and inside the sidewalks. Implication on previous thread was walls were needed to protect pedestrians. Clearly not the purpose of these walls around park, not boulevard.

As for. BC, guess I aways walk on one side without. Lol

If you limit access points to the park then that in turn will keep people from trying to cross the street where there is not a place to enter the park. As for the boulevard, no one is saying don't make a grand iconic boulevard. All we are saying is to use Robinson and Walker instead and return the I-40 route to the original street grid.

[betts]

People need to have just a little vision and quit being so absolutely negative. There are great boulevards. all over the world. If designed properly this can be a positive asset.

Of course. The key word here is "properly". We've had very little beyond silence from the powers that be on this subject. When the only thing you've heard includes words like three lanes, highway and pedestrian bridge one doesn't feel terribly reassured. If we would hear terms like grand pedestrian concourse, if we would be assured that it will not only be easy and safe to cross anywhere at street level, were told that speed limits will be low and that there is no reason to need a pedestrian bridge I can assure you much of the negativity would cease.

[bdhumphreys]

People need to have just a little vision and quit being so absolutely negative. There are great boulevards. all over the world. If designed properly this can be a positive asset.

Lets not mistake wishful thinking for vision. This thread contains a significant number of issues with the boulevard that are cause for concern, important questions that have not yet been answered, as well as an alternate vision that seemingly provides an improved outcome.

It is a mistake to equate the proposal of visions differing from what is generally accepted to demonstrate an "absolutely negative" view of anything. On the contrary, the process of reformulating and refining the vision for the boulevard is only possible given an optimistic view and sincere hope of improving the overall outcome. "Absolute negativity" would offer nothing more than complaints and disparaging remarks about our leadership.

Or, to reassess our relative positions more specifically. You say that, "If designed properly this can be a positive asset." I quite agree; I simply believe that a "proper" design would be limited to no more than one lane in each direction between Hudson and Robinson.

[okclee]

Hasn't it been speculated that the future streetcar route will include the new boulevard? If so we would need extra width to accommodate such.

[bdhumphreys]

Hasn't it been speculated that the future streetcar route will include the new boulevard? If so we would need extra width to accommodate such.

Some people have proposed streetcar on the boulevard, but thus far they have not been able to make an adequate case to convince the relevant committees. At the end of the day, projections on ridership, economic development value, and overall distance from existing activity make streetcar on the Boulevard a tough sale. I think it is a safe bet that it will not happen.

[Kerry]

Hasn't it been speculated that the future streetcar route will include the new boulevard? If so we would need extra width to accommodate such.

The streetcar will travel in the same lane as a regular car. If there is room for a car, there is room for a streetcar (for the most part).

[Larry OKC]

Haha, don't take anything personally here. ... I don't see what is horrid about it but I certainly understand the argument to keep it as a road too. I walk downtown a lot with my family and I can see a long park traversing across an urban city as being absolutely delightful.

Its all good...Glad that you didn't take it personally. My objection to it was the solid mass of concrete with no green space. That would be absolutely brutal in the summer months. Understand it was a former street but it looks like a former street with people balancing on these concrete balls in the middle of the street. Doesn't look inviting or comfortable in the least and was reminded of the pics others had posted of the barren plazas back in the SandRidge threads. At least your pic showed a few people.

[Larry OKC]

Not against the long park idea per se, but we already have that with the MAPS 3 park going in, so may be redundant. I'd go along with the outdoor market concept (connecting the parks). And then again, I think what you are suggesting is supposed to be incorporated in the MAPS 3 Park.

[Kerry]

Keep this in mind - from Western to Shields the underlying grid network is still in place. If the elevated I-40 is turned into at-grade boulevard you are going to create a lot of traffic issues and you would have to close a lot of streets. It would essentially create a really long super block and we already see the problems we have with those. Couple that with Prominade Park and we really cause connectivity issues around Core to Shore.

[Snowman]

Keep this in mind - from Western to Shields the underlying grid network is still in place. If the elevated I-40 is turned into at-grade boulevard you are going to create a lot of traffic issues and you would have to close a lot of streets. It would essentially create a really long super block and we already see the problems we have with those. Couple that with Prominade Park and we really cause connectivity issues around Core to Shore.

Shields does not even connect to anything on between the new i40 and the river and the only connection before the new boulevard is very narrow streets. Without something following the proposed boulevard getting to bricktown and the boathouse district is a big pain coming eastbound on i40 or returning. Most of the places it is block the city grid are the places they are leaving existing structure, which is not in an area they are likely to spend the money to tear down. Coming from westbound i40 or either direction from i235/i35 is removes a load of traffic into bricktown and downtown from hitting streets that would need upgraded to handle traffic they are not equipped to. Most of i235 south of 13th just should have been done better. Like it or not downtown needs to be highly accessible from the interstate. From the project specks by the time i40 work is complete the interconnect will go from i40 to the santa fe train tracks and will have completed the westbond flyways, leaving only about 30% of the road for the city to even make any decisions with at this point. The current plan may impend walking but significantly improves access to downtown from the greater metropolitan area, and diverts a lot of traffic from constantly being around the park.

[Kerry]

Reno would be the dominant east/west route into downtown. It connects to I-40 on both sides of downtown. I don't think people realize how many roads would have to be closed if an at-grade boulevard followed the existing I-40 path. If they wanted to extend SW3rd under the railroad, pass by the lumberyard site, and connect to the new I-40 that would be OK as well.

[Snowman]

Reno could connect but the only connection it has ever had was an on ramp to i35 southbound in that area (which has been close and possibly already in some stage of demolition). At this point though it is unrealistic to imagine they will change the i40 plans. The only realistic alternative to the current plan would be Reno is the major access route from the west, 3rd would be the major access from the east. That leaves major access problems for people coming from the west, and as i235 will be having major construction for the next decade the northwest will have access problems as well.