OKC Boulevard

[dankrutka]

But depending on you define vibrant, there are master planned communities around frisco Sam Rayburn Tollway, IIRC, that are somewhat vibrant.

If I do it in time, I’ll edit this post when I get back home and give some specific examples. I know of a few freeways being built and I’m thinking there are some high activity neighborhoods around them.

Thanks. And, yeah, I probably wouldn't consider anything in Frisco very vibrant, but again, I'm happy to be proved wrong. I really am curious if it is possible to have vibrant neighborhoods near "freeways" (and similar developments).

One of the most incredible examples of the destructiveness of freeways is the area between downtown Dallas and Deep Ellum. These are two areas of absolutely explosive growth and there's 4 blocks of deadness between them because of the freeway. It's almost stunning the ways in which freeways kill neighborhoods, which is why highways were used to destroy the neighborhoods of people of color for years. The black community of Tulsa actually rebuilt Greenwood after the Tulsa Race Massacre, but guess what destroyed that neighborhood: 244.

[dankrutka]

See, the thing is, some people are never going to change their minds. You can provide the proof they ask for, they will discount it.

You want one example? Easy. Mustang Road and SW 15th. Damn turnpike isn't even built yet and yet there are at least two different threads on this very forum talking about the development there. "That doesn't count, it hasn't been built yet". OK, fine, you want another example? Highway 4 south of 152 has businesses and neighborhoods that didn't exist until that road was built. Or head east on the 'new' 152 and count all the businesses and neighborhoods that weren't there. What, Mustang isn't a good enough example for you? Drive the 'new' Portland east of the airport, and if you don't see the development there, turn in your license, blind people shouldn't be driving.

Your "some people" comment is kind of weird when directed at someone honestly asking for alternative perspectives and examples. Yeah, I'm skeptical that vibrant, urban neighborhoods can thrive with freeways, but I'm honestly interested in examples of any exceptions.

And, yeah, I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I think you're mistaking subruban car-centric development for urban, walkable neighborhoods, which was what I was at least attempting to ask about. The Farmer's Market is an urban neighborhood that is not built around cars and parking with a hope of increased density, mixed uses, and an active street life.

To that point, is there a lot of walkable, bikeable street activity next to these freeways you mentioned or are we talking about car-centric, suburban developments? Obviously, car-centric freeways and car-centric suburban developments go hand-in-hand, but under what conditions can car-centric freeways and walkable developments succeed next to each other? If you go walk around a freeway in most urban environments (including OKC), you will (almost?) always find that the freeway creates some kind of deadzone. But I am sure in really dense cities there are at least some exceptions, right?

[jn1780]

What was planned before the organized FBB protests were even worse.

Agreed. The city could lower the BLVD. between Klein and Virgina in the future it wanted to and then there would only be just the one western bridge.

[stile99]

Your "some people" comment is kind of weird when directed at someone honestly asking for alternative perspectives and examples.

The "some people" was clearly a general statement and not a directed one, but since you bring it up I'll note that in your reply right before this one you were presented with an example and then discounted it.

[dankrutka]

The "some people" was clearly a general statement and not a directed one, but since you bring it up I'll note that in your reply right before this one you were presented with an example and then discounted it.

There's a big difference between "discounting" an example and questioning whether it applies. I provided a specific explanations in the last couple posts for why I wasn't sure those examples are relevant and then asked for further explanation. I, in fact, didn't dismiss these examples, but instead took them seriously and engaged in a conversation about it. In the case of Frisco, the example wasn't specific, but PluPan did say he would come back and provide specifics. Knowing Frisco a little bit, I couldn't think of anything comparable to the Farmer's Marker or urban development near a highway. But, as I stated in a couple places, I'm looking forward to learning more or being proved wrong about Frisco/Mustang Road & SW 15th. On the latter, I'd love to know more. I checked out the area on Google maps and there does not seem to be a highway there. It seems to be a block away and that may be the source of misunderstanding. I am pointing out that highways kill the areas right near them. They are built for suburban, car-centric areas so that's really not what I was talking about. This can be a big deal for developing urban areas. My bad if I communicated that poorly.

[stile99]

I'm looking forward to learning more or being proved wrong about Frisco/Mustang Road & SW 15th. On the latter, I'd love to know more.

Like I said, there are multiple threads.

This one might be interesting if you'd really love to know more, but then you'll just say it isn't urban.

[Pete]

The next small section of the boulevard is now open; between Hudson and Walker.

[dankrutka]

Like I said, there are multiple threads.

This one might be interesting if you'd really love to know more, but then you'll just say it isn't urban.

We're not talking about the same thing. I recognize that. I'll move on.

[Plutonic Panda]

Thanks. And, yeah, I probably wouldn't consider anything in Frisco very vibrant, but again, I'm happy to be proved wrong. I really am curious if it is possible to have vibrant neighborhoods near "freeways" (and similar developments).

One of the most incredible examples of the destructiveness of freeways is the area between downtown Dallas and Deep Ellum. These are two areas of absolutely explosive growth and there's 4 blocks of deadness between them because of the freeway. It's almost stunning the ways in which freeways kill neighborhoods, which is why highways were used to destroy the neighborhoods of people of color for years. The black community of Tulsa actually rebuilt Greenwood after the Tulsa Race Massacre, but guess what destroyed that neighborhood: 244.

Yeah I hear you. I’m going through the struggle atm but when I get a chance I’ll look through because I am aware of some recent freeway corridors built. Just need to get some links and see if any neighborhoods are around.

I completely get the point about the developments in frisco.

[rte66man]

Yeah I hear you. I’m going through the struggle atm but when I get a chance I’ll look through because I am aware of some recent freeway corridors built. Just need to get some links and see if any neighborhoods are around.

I completely get the point about the developments in frisco.

This might meet your criteria:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.0783.../data=!3m1!1e3

When I was there in October, there were tons of people walking around.

[PaddyShack]

Look at how this thing took shape, I think they should have plunged headfirst into debt to bury the blvd and have a tunnel for the S-curve(thingy)/

[Anonymous.]

Look at how this thing took shape, I think they should have plunged headfirst into debt to bury the blvd and have a tunnel for the S-curve(thingy)/

I am not sure if this post is serious. But in case it is, that would be insanely expensive and for sure massive public outrage would be had for unnecessarily tunneling through a water table to build a street that doesn't need to exist. I cannot wait for the general public to find out about the potential I-235 cap and who will be funding that. Popcorn ready.

[Plutonic Panda]

I am not sure if this post is serious. But in case it is, that would be insanely expensive and for sure massive public outrage would be had for unnecessarily tunneling through a water table to build a street that doesn't need to exist. I cannot wait for the general public to find out about the potential I-235 cap and who will be funding that. Popcorn ready.

Sad that bold ideas that solve traffic problems and fix the issues that freeways caused like division are met with “this idea can’t be serious.” Expensive? Yes. Good engineering and asset to the community? Yes. A tunnel would have been a great alternative to I-40 and would satisfy both parties. Have two portals and a mid way access point, the grid could be restored, the feds would be satisfied, and this tunnel would have served the community for decades to come.

It’s a great time in OKC where traffic isn’t an issue at the moment. Shall we wait until we get into Austin’s position and have some of the worst in the US? Plan ahead and be smart. There’s always a better way to spend money.

[PaddyShack]

I guess I was being both, I am a bit serious because a tunnel would have satisfied everyone with the exception of the cost of the project. I understand that it would never have happened completely based on the economics, but I do believe it to be the best solution to this particular problem. I.e, OkDOT and the powers that be wanted easy access in and out of DT, the majority of urbanites wanted the grid restored, and those that don't care either way wouldn't have had to sit and hear all the bickering from both parties... Haha.

[jn1780]

Just two parties? The "this is insane and expensive" party would get a whole lot more support than the we need the BLVD or just return to grid groups.

I don't think what we have no is bad, if some of the big dirt mound to the west of western is removed. They only left that there to save money.

[OKCbyTRANSFER]

Part of the I-95 rebuild in Philadelphia (a 40 year plan!) Is to complete the cap through the water front area, the original design capped part of the new freeway back in the 70's when they completed that section. That allowed the city to reconfigure some of the city grid for access as the riverfront was redeveloped. I saw this today in the local newspaper.

[Plutonic Panda]

Just two parties? The "this is insane and expensive" party would get a whole lot more support than the we need the BLVD or just return to grid groups.

I don't think what we have no is bad, if some of the big dirt mound to the west of western is removed. They only left that there to save money.

My only gripe about the BLVD is 4 things at this point:.

1) Classen disconnect. I wish the bridge structure was larger so Classen and western could stay connected.

2) Lack of bike lanes

3) lack of landscaping

4) I wish it were six lanes instead of four.

Most of that can easily be fixed if desired and landscaping is already in the plans.

[jedicurt]

My only gripe about the BLVD is 4 things at this point:.

1) Classen disconnect. I wish the bridge structure was larger so Classen and western could stay connected.

2) Lack of bike lanes

3) lack of landscaping

4) I wish it were six lanes instead of four.

Most of that can easily be fixed if desired and landscaping is already in the plans.

i agree with 1-3... but 4 intrigues me... what is your reasons for wanting 6 lanes?

[Anonymous.]

i agree with 1-3... but 4 intrigues me... what is your reasons for wanting 6 lanes?

You must not read Plu Pan's posts very often

[Plutonic Panda]

LOL! In all honesty, 6 lanes is the least of my concern and I’ll be happy with 4. I’m just thinking realistically now what can be done to enhance what we have.

Once it’s all said and done it won’t really be worth the expense and disruption to widen it to six lanes. Same thing with connecting Classen under a larger bridge superstructure.

Landscaping is in the plans that will be funded by OKC per Pete’s post.

But there doesn’t seem to be any bike lanes. The best solution will be to possibly convert a couple intersections to roundabouts. Narrow the lanes and add more mid block pedestrian HAWK crossings. Consider raised intersections or at least raised crosswalks parallel to the boulevard. And then with the extra room from narrower lanes, construct fully protected bike lanes and have a special signal for cyclists.

They are placing these in LA and would be a good measure to make cyclists more confortable using the BLVD and would make motorists more aware of a cyclists corridor. http://bike.lacity.org/anatomy-of-a-...cycle-signals/

[Plutonic Panda]

PS, I know I have posted it before, but if the city really wants to go all out, build this and be done with it!

https://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com...levard-part-i/

[Pete]

Western is now closed just south of Reno while they improve that intersection.

They have essentially re-built the north half of reno for about .5 mile and are in the process of completing the south half.

Open images in a new tab to see 1500px versions.

[SEMIweather]

Tell me they're at least going to have good lighting, beautification, and wide sidewalks under this overpass?

[mugofbeer]

They won't even have lights, someone will steal the copper wiring.

[soonerguru]

Tell me they're at least going to have good lighting, beautification, and wide sidewalks under this overpass?

Expecting reliable lighting of any kind is too much for our big league city.