Comments on: Not "if" on the Boulevard?

By: Dennis

Dennis — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:18:56 +0000

The western half of the proposed boulevard traverses a nasty industro-slum that will probably always be less than scenic… There’s really no need for a major new boulevard through that area (unless there are plans for redevelopment). A nice boulevard connecting Exchange Avenue to the I40/I35 Interchange area would be very nice though. Letting the western section of abandoned I-40 revert to industro-slum would save millions of dollars. Preserving a few dozen old bridge columns for an art project could also save a large chunk of money.

Kris & Ed bring up excellent points… Stakeholder-citizens should be encouraged to offer ideas for the best use of this found land.

By: Ed

Ed — Fri, 29 May 2009 03:35:04 +0000

Is there any way OKC could build a large park between downtown and I-40 with a winding road through the park which could be used 3 or 4 times a year as a Formula One race track?
Nearby roads to the park could be blocked off and used as part of the race track. This could bring tourists or race fans to downtown and help pay for the park. International tourists and race fans could come if the races were big enough. Maybe an Oklahoma Grand Prix

By: Michael H

Michael H — Wed, 27 May 2009 19:51:44 +0000

I read the statement twice. I could be missing something here, but there still seems to be some equivocation. Maybe that’s warranted since the funding isn’t locked in – but it would appear some of the key stakeholders are committed to seeing it through.

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Wed, 27 May 2009 17:19:47 +0000

Very good question and good ideas, Dennis. Especially in light of Jeff Speck’s call for walkability. My hunch is that city leaders are envisioning the next Rodeo Drive…while the “experts” are recommending a shift from Rodeo Drive to Greenwich Village.

There is definitely a greater need for collaborative discussion concerning the impetus for a new boulevard and the Core to Shore projects in general.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:04:46 +0000

It appears the boulevard will be real, but instead of asking ‘if,’ a better question might be: “Why?” What is the boulevard’s purpose?” Is it just something to fill dead space, or does it actually DO something? Why does it have to be a boulevard? Why can’t it just be a street, or open space, or future building sites, or creative combo of all of the above?

Should local artists be invited to explore how leftover columns might be incorporated into a signature work of art? OKC’s aqueduct ruins? Etc…