Walker Building

[Tundra]

I see. Since you don't notice much foot traffic in the daytime during the few seconds it takes you to drive through there, it's not needed. I'm very glad to know that and now everyone else can relax about it. And anyone who happens to be in a wheelchair that you don't see should know they shouldn't be there.

80% of Oklahoma City doesn't have sidewalks, just not sure why people go crazy because someone is trying to improve an area and may have created a short term inconvenience for someone that could just take a different route, it's done with cars via detour signs, are walkers not able to do the same?

[LocoAko]

80% of Oklahoma City doesn't have sidewalks, just not sure why people go crazy because someone is trying to improve an area and may have created a short term inconvenience for someone that could just take a different route, it's done with cars via detour signs, are walkers not able to do the same?

Have you ever considered what any of this might be like if one wasn't 100% ablebodied?

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
Pushing a stroller? Sprained ankle? Vision impaired? Simply have broken glasses and headed to Midtown Optical? Elderly? Lots of senior housing in Midtown. Luggage? There is a hotel a block from here. An already-existing business dependent on pedestrian traffic? These aren't imaginary conditions.

Obviously, even though he didn't bother to answer my question, he indirectly did; he's being deliberately obtuse. New development and the preservation of the pedestrian environment through temporary means are hardly mutually exclusive; they both somehow happen in pretty much every other major city in America.

And the whole "temporary" argument is also pure BS. It's everybody's hope and expectation that as these projects wrap other ones closeby will come online. Construction and renovation is a permanent condition in successful cities.

I'm hardly suggesting an exotic solution. In fact, it's one that is probably REQUIRED by federal law. The fact that we DON'T require it possibly leaves OKC voters subject to exposure. I'm also not suggesting it be done on projects on Memorial Road or similar locations. It only need happen where there is EXISTING ADA access that will be interrupted by construction.

If our litmus test for the pedestrian environment is that "80% of the city doesn't have sidewalks" or that a random dude on the Internet drives through on the regular and never notices people walking or in wheelchairs, that's a pretty embarrassing standard.

[Tundra]

^^^^^^^
Pushing a stroller? Sprained ankle? Vision impaired? Simply have broken glasses and headed to Midtown Optical? Elderly? Lots of senior housing in Midtown. Luggage? There is a hotel a block from here. An already-existing business dependent on pedestrian traffic? These aren't imaginary conditions.

Obviously, even though he didn't bother to answer my question, he indirectly did; he's being deliberately obtuse. New development and the preservation of the pedestrian environment through temporary means are hardly mutually exclusive; they both somehow happen in pretty much every other major city in America.

And the whole "temporary" argument is also pure BS. It's everybody's hope and expectation that as these projects wrap other ones closeby will come online. Construction and renovation is a permanent condition in successful cities.

I'm hardly suggesting an exotic solution. In fact, it's one that is probably REQUIRED by federal law. The fact that we DON'T require it possibly leaves OKC voters subject to exposure. I'm also not suggesting it be done on projects on Memorial Road or similar locations. It only need happen where there is EXISTING ADA access that will be interrupted by construction.

If our litmus test for the pedestrian environment is that "80% of the city doesn't have sidewalks" or that a random dude on the Internet drives through on the regular and never notices people walking or in wheelchairs, that's a pretty embarrassing standard.

Drive a car down Hefnerarkway towards rose creek any day of the week...., Construction is a pain for drivers yet ,either you take a different route or you take you time and life in your own hands... But we know at some point when it's done everyone will benefit.

[Urbanized]

Hefner Parkway is your analogue? Wow.

[ljbab728]

Hefner Parkway is your analogue? Wow.

Evidently it is when he is struggling to justify what he said. LOL

[catch22]

A much better analogy would be if a business closed down all of its handicapped parking spots, forcing drivers with disabilities to park across the street or completely avoid the business all together. But that doesn't fit his argument.

It should absolutely be a requirement that if existing sidewalks exist before construction, they should be required to provide reasonable access along or adjacent to the closed route.

[dankrutka]

From Saturday.




And, by the way, I saw a guy walking in the street where the sidewalks end almost get hit by a car on Saturday morning. Unreal that the city let's this happen.

[HOT ROD]

maybe the city of OKC will learn the hard way.

BTW - we/Seattle also learned (with several pedestrian/vehicle impacts). That is the reason why we go a little above the cuff with regard to pedestrian egress in construction zones. Lawsuits and Loss of Life/Limb is surely more expensive than providing access in the way Urbanized has shown and that I have also advocated in the past.

OKC can learn the hard way OR Oklahoma City can use other major cities as benchmark. I prefer the latter.


Also, nobody is suggesting we bring this level of pedestrian egress to Hefner Parkway - an obvious automobile corridor. We're talking about the inner core of Metropolitan Oklahoma City, you know - the 2-3 mile circle from OKC city hall that is supposed to be urban and pedestrian. In other major cities, this zone is preserved regardless of construction; it is mitigated during construction cycles which (as Urbanized so eloquently stated) are continuous in successful cities and NOT temporary. Projects themselves are temporary but the city should expect construction to be continuous even once the city runs out of develop-able land - see Vancouver, Canada (which has even more strict pedestrian egress standards than Seattle).

This does matter becasue there are people in the core of OKC now, so this must be addressed (AND IT WILL BE) either once somebody is hurt/killed and sues the city and state for not requiring pedestrian accommodations in construction zones OR OKC steps up and defines the central core (IMO Asian District to Capital Hill) as requiring full pedestrian egress and separation from vehicle corridors for all medium construction sites (larger than a single family house) and larger. Please somebody at City Hall read this post and this thread - and let's get ahead of this quickly.

[_Cramer_]

They have something similar to this on Robert S Kerr near Harvey where P180 is happening.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
That's because P180 is a public project and the city can't/won't do a project of this type without giving consideration to interrupted access. The problem is PRIVATE development, and that the City does not enforce the same basic standard when issuing permits.

You use Robert S. Kerr as an example, so I'll show you a private project only one block away, where pedestrians are forced to walk around the barricades unprotected, in the traffic lane, and those with mobility challenges have no alternative except to backtrack, cross the street, and then cross the street again. The solution of course would be to provide a simple temporary barricade/ramp like the one shown above, and tin this case probably also some overhead protection. These are not exotic solutions; they happen every day - automatically and without difficulty or hardship on the developer - in cities all over this country.

Instead, here in OKC we get this shameful setup:

[Timshel]

I noticed there is a real estate broker's sign in front of the site. Did the previously discussed deal fall through, or was the deal for only a portion of the space?

[Urbanized]

^^^^^
Thanks for fixing my image upthread, Pete. For some reason I have an unreasonably difficult time posting personal images on this site, at least from my iPad. The impact of the image is now probably lost on people who read the post, didn't see an image, and now probably won't scroll back up to see it. Anyway, same song different verse.

[TheTravellers]

So, I ask again (not regarding this instance, but in general), is there anybody we can report this pathetically inadequate (and possibly illegal WRT ADA) setup to? And if so, are there any teeth for enforcement or would they just send a sternly worded letter?

[Urbanized]

I don't think there are any (local) rules being broken; that's the problem. It should simply be a matter of permitting. If a permit is filed that requires sidewalk closure in a prescribed area (you would define areas that qualify as urban in nature), it would trigger a requirement for an access plan. Public works already requires all sorts of site plans before issuance of construction permits; this would be a very simple requirement. The problem is that I don't believe that it exists, at all.

[TheTravellers]

Thanks for the clarification, still sucks that it happens. Guess that since OKC has never really cared much about pedestrians (given the complete lack of sidewalks and access in huge parts of the city, as well as the poor repair that dozens of miles of sidewalks are in), they've never even thought about blocking sidewalk access, they just do it, because who walks in OKC anyway, whereas cities that have cared/thought about pedestrians (or have been made to care/think about them) created ordinances/requirements to create alternative access instead of just taking it away completely during a construction project.

[Pete]

Little hard to see but they have already started work on the foundation:

[dankrutka]

A little bit of progress.

[dankrutka]

Going vertical.

[shawnw]

I saw those verticals yesterday and couldn't make sense of how they fit in with the renderings we have. Unless those are the balcony supports?

[Pete]

I saw those verticals yesterday and couldn't make sense of how they fit in with the renderings we have. Unless those are the balcony supports?

You may have missed the newer renderings up-thread that now show a 3rd level.

[shawnw]

Oh that's right. I just went to the first post thinking that would have the latest info.

[Harbinger]

Starting to take shape

[UnFrSaKn]

Always loved the design of this building. Wish more projects went in this direction. One more empty lot vanquished.

[Pete]