BOK Park Plaza

[Plutonic Panda]

I don't want to derail the thread, but I don't agree with this.

FBB made a huge difference on many levels. We reduced the hideous overhead bridge by 3,200 linear feet and forced broad changes that will save taxpayers somewhere between $28.5 and $35 million dollars. We successfully delayed the project by nearly 3 years. A project that was said to not be possible of being delayed. That has allowed citizen input to actually occur. More intersections are being introduced to mitigate the "barrier affect" and subsequently slow traffic with more stops. A greater concern for crosswalks, bike lanes, and how the Boulevard interacts with the areas it bifurcates has occurred. Parallel parking has been introduced and the quantity of lanes and width of lanes diminished. The broader conversation regarding impacts has caused a political commitment to invest in rehabilitation and greater walkability investment to the streets leading up to the Boulevard.

Is it perfect? Hell no. Is it "better"? Hell yes.

We could have probably accomplished more if everyone was towing the same rope. There seemed to be a lack of recognition by urbanists that a "grid" option was never a politically viable option on all sorts of levels.

Some of your other commentary is fairly spot on. I am just a bit tired of the narrative that FBB failed somehow. We worked our a** off and forced a great many arrogant people to have to modify the design of their project. And they hate us for it.

I guess that is where the rub exists. This community is in transition with generational thinking. Suburban perogatives versus urbanity. The only way that positive change can occur is to get involved, get elected, or somehow else get a seat at the table.

Well, I simply disagree that you guys made anything better. Like I said, I think you made it worse. It would have been more pedestrian friendly if left more of a bridge because you could go under it without having to worry about traffic. If done right and built a little higher than the old I-40 and more attention to artwork and detail, it would have been no barrier what so ever. There are plenty of elevated highway in cities that have booming neighborhoods on BOTH sides of the highway and it's very easy and comfortable to walk under them.

Ps, I still respect that we had people who actually cared about this city and fought for what they believed in putting their time and effort into this. I am glad to see that.

PPS, perhaps I would change my wording not to say you failed, but didn't achieve what you seeking out to achieve. Believe it or not, I would've loved to have seen CuatrodeMayo's vision of a low-speed, 4 lane with narrow lane, huge traffic circle, bike lanes, and everything else he had on it with the Thunder Circle way more than I would like to see an old I40 rebuilt.

The thing here is though, we're not getting either. We're getting a half ass, half BLVD half highway, I'm not even sure what to call it at this point.

It's a road that is designed to be a highway but is being declared as a pedestrian friendly roadway. It sucks. Either have one or the other because no matter, unless you do it right, it will still be a detriment to the Super walkable environment we want to see built around here, am I wrong?

Again, I do appreciate what you guys did and am not trying to bash you.

[Urban Pioneer]

I see. You consider the bridge design less of a barrier. I mean, we could have essentially replicated the former Crosstown I-40. Point taken. Most of us preferred the idea of a great Boulevard however and disliked the visual barrier that the former bridge presented.

I would argue however that the bridges section that we reduced would not have impacted pedestrian connectivity one way or another as there are now intersections in that zone that were not planned.

[Plutonic Panda]

I see. You consider the bridge design less of a barrier. I mean, we could have essentially replicated the former Crosstown I-40. Point taken. Most of us preferred the idea of a great Boulevard however and disliked the visual barrier that the former bridge presented.

I would argue however that the bridges section that we reduced would not have impacted pedestrian connectivity one way or another as there are now intersections in that zone that were not planned.

I updated my other post.

I will say I think if the BLVD would've been built like CuatrodeMayo's design it would have been amazing. It would have been iconic.

Now we're just stuck with a bland Boulevard that I don't even think will encourage any walkability.

The only thing is once it's turned over to the city, we could include a MAPS initiative or something that would essentially tear down the whole road and build it from scratch making it a true pedestrian oriented road, but how likely is that?

[Urban Pioneer]

I think that can happen in the near term. I think that there is a willingness to do something grand once ODOT hands over the keys. The problem all along has always been highway engineers and city engineers. Once we are past that and have possession of it, making it the way we hoped it would be is entirely possible.

Regarding 499 and preservation; basically we have to have younger people or urbanists on these boards. They have to be meaningfully organized enough to educate and influence City Council.

and sometimes... God forbid... we have to be willing to compromise.

[adaniel]

Well, I simply disagree that you guys made anything better. Like I said, I think you made it worse. It would have been more pedestrian friendly if left more of a bridge because you could go under it without having to worry about traffic. If done right and built a little higher than the old I-40 and more attention to artwork and detail, it would have been no barrier what so ever. There are plenty of elevated highway in cities that have booming neighborhoods on BOTH sides of the highway and it's very easy and comfortable to walk under them.

Really? Name one. Elevated highways in most urban centers (the old 40 included) are dark, piss-scented bum hangouts and NOT comfortable at all to walk under. There's a reason a lot trying to get rid of them.

I applaud the work of FBB; No the Blvd is not perfect but their work forced some badly needed change with ODOT. Up until recently, I'd been in OK for some time and I can't remember them being challenged like that, which is way overdue IMO. We'll see if they learned, of course.

You are entitled to your opinion but I think you are going to find yourself in a tiny minority.

[Plutonic Panda]

I think that can happen in the near term. I think that there is a willingness to do something grand once ODOT hands over the keys. The problem all along has always been highway engineers and city engineers. Once we are past that and have possession of it, making it the way we hoped it would be is entirely possible.

Regarding 499 and preservation; basically we have to have younger people or urbanists on these boards. They have to be meaningfully organized enough to educate and influence City Council.

and sometimes... God forbid... we have to be willing to compromise.

I hope you are right. I would love to see a new major pedestrian oriented BLVD like what they have in major cities.

[Plutonic Panda]

Really? Name one. Elevated highways in most urban centers (the old 40 included) are dark, piss-scented bum hangouts and NOT comfortable at all to walk under. There's a reason a lot trying to get rid of them.

I applaud the work of FBB; No the Blvd is not perfect but their work forced some badly needed change with ODOT. We'll see if they learned, of course.

You are entitled to your opinion but I think you are going to find yourself in a tiny minority.

Alright. I spend a lot of time Street viewing cities and have found a ton of elevated highway with both sides being full with development and having Street life. When I get home, I'll post screen shots, name of the highway & city.

[David]

There was some non-agenda discussion of this at today's city council meeting. Here's the YouTube video time keyed to it if anyone is interested.

[BDP]

Re-read his post, that's not what he said.

Ok. Makes sense now. Thanks.

He says some pretty off the wall stuff, but that seemed a little too crazy. My bad.

[BDP]

Alright. I spend a lot of time Street viewing cities and have found a ton of elevated highway with both sides being full with development and having Street life. When I get home, I'll post screen shots, name of the highway & city.

That'd be interesting to see.

I remember that when I lived in San Francisco, everyone told me how bad the embarcadero was before the 89 earthquake because of the elevated freeway. They had to tear it down after loma prieta and now the embarcadero is a serious asset to the city. And when I lived there they tore down the part of the freeway that went over Hayes Valley to Oak and Fell streets. Within a year of that Hayes Valley went from a junk neighborhood to trendy and hip with nice restaurants and shops. Tearing down freeways was the best thing they ever did in that city (or the worst if you're someone who had to pay double the rent after they did it).

[BDP]

I did video in this area of Denver that is posted on the Denver thread and I specifically went up to Broadway and 20th St just to see the Holy Ghost Catholic Church.

StreetView

1999 Broadway is a skyscraper that they built to curve around this very old church. It's literally on the front doorstep and is really cool. We all know how this would have played out in Oklahoma City for this historic structure.

That is a cool building. Denver is interesting to me, because it's got a lot of cool architecture, but most of the high rises are very bland. There is a lot of cool stuff to check out in downtown, but you wouldn't know it from the interstate. Their successful districts are also a great mix of old and new and there a tone of examples around CBD that show why the design of 499 Sheridan is so weak when implemented.

[Stickman]

yeah, lived in Mountain View, going into SF noticed some parts kinda of blighted. They were usually around the elevated freeway.

[Bellaboo]

StreetView

Looking down California to the South you see a canyon wall of parking garages, you look back to the North and you see a very large garage plus surface parking. So OKC isn't the first place to get a cluster of garages.

Notice California is a one way street also.

[Just the facts]

StreetView

Looking down California to the South you see a canyon wall of parking garages, you look back to the North and you see a very large garage plus surface parking. So OKC isn't the first place to get a cluster of garages.

Notice California is a one way street also.

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?

[mugofbeer]

Denver also has a far bigger downtown, a far older downtown and far more hitorical structures of all kinds than does OKC. Denver also has sort-of two downtowns. One being at the traditional 1st and Broadway historical buildings and then the main one where the Union Station was built. Commerce moved to this area immediately after.

[Buffalo Bill]

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?

Cars parked in the metered spaces?

[bchris02]

Denver also has a far bigger downtown, a far older downtown and far more hitorical structures of all kinds than does OKC. Denver also has sort-of two downtowns. One being at the traditional 1st and Broadway historical buildings and then the main one where the Union Station was built. Commerce moved to this area immediately after.

I agree. I don't think Denver and OKC are really comparable. Denver's downtown has so much more historical building stock and is so much larger it really is beyond comparison.

One city I would say is comparable to downtown OKC is Charlotte. Both cities have very little historic building stock left after suffering massive urban renewal failures. Both downtowns are consisting of mostly stock built within the past few decades. Charlotte is simply 25 years or so ahead of OKC in the revitalization process. It started with the Bank of America tower, which at the time was much taller than anything else there, and then they saw a massive building boom throughout the following two decades resulting in the very impressive, vibrant downtown that exists there today.

Charlotte - 1985 - This is comparable to OKC ca. 2010.

[Just the facts]

Do you notice anything missing in that streetview?

Cars parked in the metered spaces?

No pedestrians (despite a large residential building 1 block away and lightrail tracks).

[Village]

No pedestrians (despite a large residential building 1 block away and lightrail tracks).

Google Maps isn't a great indicator of traffic or livelihood of neighborhoods, Usually they go out early or at times when there isn't very much traffic.

[BDP]

I agree. I don't think Denver and OKC are really comparable. [/IMG]

It's not a comparison, but a lesson. Denver's downtown has good contrast in development styles where you can easily compare the impact of good and bad urban development.

[Pete]

Shadid submits appeal resolution on bus station demolition | Red Dirt Report

OKLAHOMA CITY - Oklahoma City Ward 2 Councilman Ed Shadid revealed a plan to appeal the decision of the Downtown Redevelopment Review Committee (DDRC) to demolish the Union Bus Station, Red Dirt Report learned Thursday. - See more at: Shadid submits appeal resolution on bus station demolition | Red Dirt Report

[Stickman]

Good, surely they can save just one building?

[Just the facts]

I like the bus station, but really - of all the structures on that block it is the one with the most support? It is maybe #3 on my list. Is it receiving the most attention because it is being replaced by a parking garage? Half of Hotel Black is being replaced with a corporate plaza.

[krisb]

I have said this before, Shadid is the only member of the council who speaks the language of urbanism.

[PhiAlpha]

I have said this before, Shadid is the only member of the council who speaks the language of urbanism.

Which is why it's disappointing that he's such a jackass.

The DDRC made the decision on this, has the City Council even had a say in it yet?