OKC Boulevard

[hfry]

Pete who owns that parking lot on the east side of the railroad tracks there that they plan to go through? Also is it just me or does it show a westbound only turn out onto the boulevard from the new Oklahoma Avenue ?

[Pete]

The boulevard intersection will be move regardless; that is already in motion.

The Centennial HOA absolutely does not want the north half of Oklahoma to be moved, and the city is saying they won't do anything without consensus, so that will probably be the end of this.

I would still like to know why the city instructed ODOT to place the intersection at the current location when they had not procured the Uhaul property. As it turned out, the two parties were miles apart on price and it very much looked like the court was inclined to the Uhaul valuation, which is why the city dropped the whole matter.

The Lumberyard and Coop will be adversely affected, as the only real way in and out of these massive properties is at the far west end. And it also places the only 2 lights on the boulevard between I-235 and Shields very close together.

[Pete]

Pete who owns that parking lot on the east side of the railroad tracks there that they plan to go through? Also is it just me or does it show a westbound only turn out onto the boulevard from the new Oklahoma Avenue ?

Randy Hogan.

And the idea of putting another intersection on Reno makes no sense to me, especially given the proximity to Oklahoma Ave. northbound, the streetcar stop on the north side of Reno and then yet another light at EKG/Shields.

[RedDollar]

Mo money .....................its not real money .................its just mo money for downtown. City will get it back in taxes.

Bwaaaa

[jn1780]

Randy Hogan.

And the idea of putting another intersection on Reno makes no sense to me, especially given the proximity to Oklahoma Ave. northbound, the streetcar stop on the north side of Reno and then yet another light at EKG/Shields.

Negotiation tactics? What the city will probably end up doing is having Oklahoma curve back into the current Reno/Oklahoma intersection similar to the Western/Classen configuration. They made this crazy proposal to make that idea sound better. I'm sure they will do this one regardless of what anything thinks. The city is not going to be happy with two 90 degree turns, otherwise it wouldn't bother moving intersection.

Truthfully, the Centennial HOA is going to be strongly opposed to any proposal because ultimately means more traffic on Oklahoma, but that's going to happen regardless.

[HangryHippo]

It would require a ton of modifcation and be cost-prohibitive, but a nice solution (IMO) would be a move of Harkins Bricktown and connect Mickey Mantle through Lower Bricktown to the boulevard and to Walnut in the Co-Op/Lumberyard. You could move the theatre and it might prompt some redevelopment of lower Bricktown to not be so lame.

[jn1780]

It would require a ton of modifcation and be cost-prohibitive, but a nice solution (IMO) would be a move of Harkins Bricktown and connect Mickey Mantle through Lower Bricktown to the boulevard and to Walnut in the Co-Op/Lumberyard. You could move the theatre and it might prompt some redevelopment of lower Bricktown to not be so lame.

Just another case of poor planning by the city.

[HangryHippo]

Just another case of poor planning by the city.

I agree.

[BoulderSooner]

Just another case of poor planning by the city.

i wonder what the history of the city vacating the oklahoma street row is?

[HangryHippo]

The irony is that they are also improving Reno (center of 2nd photo above) with a landscaped median.

This right here! And we wouldn't be dealing with this bs intersection issue near the U-Haul if we had just transformed Reno all across the city (in which case it would have truly become the OKC Boulevard).

[Pete]

Took this last evening.

All the paving looks like it's finished and it's just down to striping and installing traffic lights.

At the bottom right, it's looking more and more like Exchange will no longer connect with the Reno/Western intersection.

In the middle right, Lively Brewery has painted its large building a bright purple.

[jedicurt]

In the middle right, Lively Brewery has painted its large building a bright purple.

i'd call that more violet than purple...

thanks for the pic Pete... hopefully this will be open soon, and we can see if it truly was needed or not.

[Lazio85]

No Exchange connection ...

[Pete]

No Exchange connection ...

I don't understand this.

Exchange directly connects downtown to the Stockyards.

The former 3-way intersection was not problematic in any way I ever saw.

[Ross MacLochness]

Maybe the city will reconnect when they take this over?

[David]

Go all the way, level the stupid overpass and put in the circles that should have been the solution all along.

[baralheia]

Oh what could have been... https://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/tag/market-circle/

Click to embiggen

[HangryHippo]

Oh what could have been... https://andrewkstewart.wordpress.com/tag/market-circle/

Yep. Huge missed opportunity.

[BDP]

Maybe the city will reconnect when they take this over?

That's what I had seen / been told. I think there are some plans floating around city hall for some sort of traffic circle there and maybe on Klein. Not as grand as the plan above, but something to connect the area, create place in the Farmer's market, and manage the flow of traffic that meets there, all while preserving a connection to Exchange and on into the Stockyards. But I have no idea how far any of that is, or if it's even still being considered by anyone. To me, it looks ODOT isn't going to touch that little section of exchange at all, which I assume the city still controls. I have no idea when or how something will happen here, but I imagine it's another case where one interest will complete the work and then another will tear it up again to fix the problem that could have been avoided all along...

[shawnw]

I want it, but I'll believe it when I see it. Every time I've heard Eric Wenger talk on the matter he doesn't think it works in this area. Not saying I agree with him here, but I haven't seen anything to convince me he has changed his mind. Wanting to be wrong of course.

[jn1780]

I know adding Exchange back into the interchange can probably be done relatively cheaply. A traffic circle would require ROW which will increase cost, but probably nothing too astronomical.

[betts]

Go all the way, level the stupid overpass and put in the circles that should have been the solution all along.

A couple of the people in charge blithely told me that could be done if we don’t like it the way it is. I’ve never seen people so happy to waste taxpayer money by redoing expensive concrete.

[jn1780]

A couple of the people in charge blithely told me that could be done if we don’t like it the way it is. I’ve never seen people so happy to waste taxpayer money by redoing expensive concrete.

I seriously doubt that would gain any real traction, at least not until 20 to 30 years from now. I do think boulevard should be lowered between the Western bridge between Penn though. Eventually the three re-purposed I-40 bridges will need to be rebuilt and it would make more sense to lower boulevard at this point. That may take away some of the pain of the having the bridge over Western.

[onthestrip]

So much road in such a small area.

[Pete]

Boulevard crossroads
An Oklahoma City Boulevard intersection is being moved, and city officials are seeking the most efficient way to reconfigure streets.
BY MIGUEL RIOS



The current Oklahoma City Boulevard intersection in Bricktown is being moved to the west of U-Haul.
The Oklahoma City Boulevard intersection in lower Bricktown is being moved. City officials are also weighing various options to make it more efficient for drivers, which could include relocating Oklahoma Avenue. Both reconfigurations would cost the city up to $1.4 million.

Originally, officials planned to extend Oklahoma Avenue straight through the U-Haul Moving & Storage of Bricktown parking lot to connect with the original boulevard intersection. The city was to acquire the parking lot property but did not do so before the intersection was constructed. Currently, drivers must detour around the U-Haul facility, 100 SE Second St., to reach Oklahoma Avenue.

“When [Oklahoma Department of Transportation] was in plan development, they moved that intersection to there. They had to construct it; they couldn’t wait on it to get the right-of-way,” said Debbie Miller, assistant Public Works director. “It was on their schedule. We wanted to extend Oklahoma from the boulevard all the way up to Reno, and a portion of Oklahoma Avenue is constructed there at Second Street, which is north of U-Haul. We had gone through negotiations to purchase their parking lot, and things fell through. So since it fell through, we’re trying to find a different route that will still work.”

U-Haul representatives previously told media they were negotiating with the city for two years but hit a roadblock when it came to discussing money.

“Construction costs for what the city is asking of our store will approach $5 million,” wrote a U-Haul representative in a 2017 letter to Public Works. “In response, the city offered us just over $1 million. Essentially asking a business to spend its own money — let alone almost $4 million — to accommodate a city-requested project that would hurt business and inconvenience U-Haul customers is mindboggling. And wrong.”

The city then filed eminent domain proceedings but withdrew them before fair market value was determined.

New plans
Now, the city plans to move the Oklahoma City Boulevard intersection west of the U-Haul facility and find a way to connect it to Reno Avenue. Miller said one of the options is to rebuild Oklahoma Avenue directly north to a new intersection on Reno Avenue.

“We have two or three different options, and there have been no decisions made on that,” she said. “[Another option] is we can connect it to Second Street and take out a couple of the turns — but you’d still have to turn on Second — and leave Oklahoma Avenue where it’s at. ... The other is possibly extending Oklahoma [Avenue] all the way up and leaving that portion of Oklahoma [Avenue] in place for the condo owners. There are a lot of options; we just don’t have anything definite yet.”

The city signed a contract in May with engineering firm Smith Roberts Baldischwiler for planning and construction up to $1.4 million to move the intersection and relocate Oklahoma Avenue.



The current Oklahoma Avenue will be replaced by parking lots, and the new Oklahoma Avenue will connect Reno Avenue with the boulevard on the west side of U-Haul.

“Oklahoma Avenue south from Reno Avenue to Oklahoma City Boulevard is impaired by the location of private property,” reads the resolution passed by Oklahoma City Council in May. “This project will provide for the relocation of Oklahoma Avenue through the exchange of property and easements, closing and construction of public streets, and the relocation of drives and access to Reno Avenue and Oklahoma City Boulevard.”

Conceptual renderings by Smith Roberts Baldischwiler show the current Oklahoma Avenue replaced by parking lots. The new Oklahoma Avenue would connect Reno Avenue with the boulevard on the east side of U-Haul.

However, The Centennial Lofts Owners Association expressed opposition to the proposal and hired attorney Eric Groves to send a letter to the city with their concerns. The letter states the street reconfiguration would force residents to enter their property through Reno Avenue, which gets congested during events.

“The taking away of S. Oklahoma Avenue would be unsafe in their minds and inconvenient to say the least. They were never consulted about this by anybody,” Groves told Oklahoma Gazette. “The conceptual plan was done without consultation with the association or its representatives, so they’re not happy about that. … I’m retained to investigate the manner, make recommendations to the association, and we have that underway right now.”

At least one meeting with Centennial homeowners association members and Public Works officials has taken place since the city’s plans were released. Groves was not there but said the association “did not come away from that meeting with a totally comprehensive and clear understanding of what’s going on.” Miller also said they have been in conversations with them but have not made any concrete decisions.

“We haven’t really gotten to that point yet,” she said. “We have recently found out that they were involved in this, and so we’ve kind of put the brakes on until we get them pulled in and take care of their issues. … We really haven’t decided on which direction to go because we do like to work with all the property owners and take their concerns into account.”

Miller said they have no definite schedule on the project but want to focus on moving the intersection to finish the ongoing landscaping project in that area.

The project is funded by a 2007 general obligation bond for street reconstruction with an authorized amount of $2.5 million.

“We have to use 85 percent or use a portion of it and have the project declared complete,” Miller said. “We would use the amount that we could, and if the project is complete, we can declare it complete and the remaining money would be surplus.”

Surplus money would go to another bond project of the same type. Miller said they could technically consider the project complete once the intersection is moved, but they feel the need to put more work and make the connection to Reno Avenue more efficient.