The Oklahoman mentioned that the Resolution of Intent is non-binding, and as such wouldn’t need a vote of the Council to change it. Any project (the Intent ones, or others) only require a majority vote of the Council to be approved. I agree that there would be an outcry if they changed it and it would be stupid for them to do so (but as OKC’s history has shown time and again, just such stupidity has happened before).

By one way or two-way maybe I wasn’t clear with the question. I understand your point about “going all the way around”, but what I meant was one lane/track going one direction and one going the other on the same street. If you have one track handling streetcars going both directions, there would have to be some sort of side rail where the east bound car would sit until the westbound car passed?

As “long as there is noise and stuff to alert cars to get out of the way”, made me laugh out loud (no offense intended). Have you seen the way some drivers respond when a emergency vehicle approaches? Some panic and just come to a dead stop in the middle of the road. Some ignore it completely. And the rest, do the right thing and pull over as safely as possible. Can definitely seeing that type of thing happening if they don’t have dedicated “lanes”

i agree with the comments about the boulevard, but with a twist. the boulevard could be fine if it’s done like st. charles street in new orleans (i.e. a WIDE median beautifully landscaped, connecting homes, downtown, zoo, two universities, dining, etc. with parking all along the sides). two lanes of traffic per side, MAX. one wide one would be even better, so pedestrians could easily cross. besides, you want to encourage use of the streetcar while not completely abolishing the automobile.

i also really liked the comment about us doing something unique. okc rocks is cool; what else could we have that emphasized what we have here? hmmm, sun, rocks, wind, sky…. bungee jumping? hang gliding? solar drag racing? wakeboarding? noodling? catapault competitions (who else does it? we have lots of boy scouts…)?

i’m also looking forward to tying dowtown together with the old (hopefully soon-to-be-reborn) farmer’s market and packingtown. it could go on to the airport. our stockyards is a very real tourist attraction. bring back the coliseum with wrestling, MMA, and boxing!

I think the streetcars would be/should be two-way. Or else we would be faced with the problem of, “Well I’m in Bricktown and I want to go to the Cox Center…well it looks like I have to go alllll the way around, ugh.” Either that or the streetcar would be of little use and wouldn’t be used very much. I think if you put the streetcar down the center of streets and have the streetcars go in the direction of traffic, as long as there is noise and stuff to alert cars to get out of the way, that it should be fine and traffic shouldn’t be affected too much. This isn’t light rail where it goes so fast it requires a dedicated right of way.

Originally the Boulevard was included in the relocation plans/budget but due to the ever increasing cost of the relocation, for all intents and purposes, the Boulevard was dropped and became a separate project. Reportedly, the State is still paying for the tearing down of the existing crosstown and the replacement Boulevard (but unless this has changed recently, it still is not funded nor on ODOT’s eight year plan…believe the Mayor’s goal is to have the Park and Boulevard opening together in 2014, which puts us well within the 8 years). An article dated 9/20/08 put that cost at $100M.

Am sure I read an article saying that the City would have some costs associated with it (like streetscaping). This is a prime example where the Council’s MAPS 3 Intent Resolution is meaningless. If for some reason State funding does not come thru, the City may decide to pay for it. Because the definition of “Capital Improvement” in the Ordinance is so broad, funding for the Boulevard could indeed come from MAPS 3. The Mayor has indicated the Boulevard is essential for the City.

From Steve’s blog “Before You Make Those 2012 Core to Shore Plans…” (4/17/09)

“Cornett admits Core to Shore, the development of mostly blighted area between the river and downtown, can’t be launched without the boulevard. ‘The city grinds to a halt if that boulevard isn’t constructed when I-40 is relocated.’”

Believe Steve had a response from ODOT about the “if” it is built/funded question, and they said because the design is still in flux (4 or 2 lanes etc), that discussions are ongoing with the City.

I am in favor of the streetcars but am curious… Jill mentioned “the fact that it will be located where I can conveniently use it!” indicates the routes have been announced and finalized? Also, unless they are “one-way”, presume the streetcars are going to require dedicated “lanes” (both directions) in order to operate. Which streets downtown are capable of incorporating a streetcar if this is true? Does that mean the effective elimination of the 5 to 6 miles of streets in the downtown area for regular traffic? If that is the case, won’t that compound downtown traffic issues instead of helping them? Anyone have info or thoughts?

I agree with your advice of breaking up the super block. The last super block in OKC to get finished was The Legacy at Arts Central and in my opinion it was a disaster (The Hill is probably next). Sure it is filling up and it has brought more people into downtown, but we have a suburban apartment complex in the center of OKC that is destined to become slums in 10-15 years…Maybe it suffered the fate of “Value Engineering”

As far as The Boulevard is concerned, I don’t have a preference one way or another, but I thought I read that it was to have two lanes with parking on either side? I don’t know. To me, that would be a nice boulevard, but I might have made all of that up. Somebody fill me in here.