Were it up to me, I’d make up for the banality of the “Oklahoma River” by calling it North Canadian Boulevard.

Really, though, this new thoroughfare – not a couple of redundant blocks of Robinson – ought to have Ron Norick’s name on it.

Yup! There should be a documented process and we need an open legislative ticker if you will so people can track legislative proposals. New ordinances take a pretty specific route. Document it like an organization chart and find a way to show where it is at along the way.

Then folks can talk to their elected officials as it goes along.

That is how you name a street.

I’m not one to typically raise much stink over such petty things as street names. However, this isn’t just any ole’ street. It plays an integral role in a very prominent/well-travelled part of town, which is at any given time inundated with out-of-towners. Surely we can come up with something more catchy, memorable, or at least note-worthy than Oklahoma City Boulevard.

Yes their should be a process. Cornett is the Mayor and not the City Dictator.

There needs to be public involvement in the process. None of the development would be happening without the public approving each iteration of MAPs.

“Murrah Parkway” or “Oklahoma City Memorial Parkway”

Decisions on street naming or what the biggest project for MAPS3 should be should stay behind closed doors decided on by just a few people. The public needs to be kept in the dark – right?

I say, let’s see this baby before we name it.

Ellison.

“Oklahoma City Boulevard” sounds really underwhelming. Surely something like this practically cries out for a “call for suggestions” and then some sort of rational culling process.

While I can’t get too excited about this name, we’re probably just going to call it The Boulevard. We already have a street named Oklahoma that could intersect with it, which is probably the best argument against the name. Does anyone seriously think we’ll call it “Oklahoma City” like we say Robinson and Broadway? No one is going to say, “Take a left on Oklahoma City Boulevard”. It’s too cumbersome. No one is going to say “Take a left on Oklahoma City”. So we’ll probably end up saying “Take a left on the Boulevard”. If we want a name that’s actually used, it’s going to have to be something different. But, let’s not call it “Ron Norick Boulevard” either. Try telling someone to take a left on Joe Carter. If we’re going to bother with a name, it should be a single one like most streets. Norick Boulevard, Ellison Boulevard. It needs to be simple to say.

I’ll throw out a conspiracy theory: The mayor wants a generic name now, so when he leaves office, it can be renamed in someone’s honor…say, in honor of a mayor who had really high approval ratings and has had a great impact on the city. Someone like…himself. Pushing it to be named after himself as a sitting mayor would look really, really bad, but promoting a bland, underwhelming name would make an easy sell on renaming it Cornett Boulevard in a few years. Just a thought….

That’s a really interesting theory, actually.

And I second Jill. Ellison Boulevard.

I think “The Boulevard” would be a pretty good name. Very unique and kind of hip. I don’t go out in “Oklahoma City”, I go out in “The City”.

Maybe Mick thinks that if the name is generic enough, The City will name it after him someday. I bet that has crossed his mind.

What was the process for naming the streets that have been named recently? Ron Norick Blvd, Wanda Jackson Way, Flaming Lips Alley, Joe Carter Ave, Mickey Mantle, Russell Perry, and others are recent street namings. Was there public input? Names for the new blvd have been proposed on OKC Talk for several months and it does not appear that any of the proposed have been received with overwhelming enthusiasm.

I have no problem naming either the blvd. or the park after Cornett. I see either happening someday in the future.

I have no problem with it being called Cornett Blvd., but just ‘boulevard’ is bland. If someone told me to turn left onto boulevard I would question if that was the name or style of the street.

Back to the main discussion, yes there should be a committee who chooses a handful of select names and let the public have an informal vote on it, say online?

Agree, Cornet is the Mayor of OKC, NOT the dictator.

Cornett has really become quite the ambiguous character in this thread.

Downtown street names are a pet peeve of mine! Having one street with more than one name is silly, and more importantly confusing. Whoever makes the decisions to give more than one name to a street (especially in close proximity) is really not thinking about the practical implications.

I once had to explain directions clarifying that the street they needed to turn on MAY say Russell Perry Ave, OR Joe Carter AVE, OR if they’re using Mapquest, may say Stiles St. That’s backwards!

The name “Oklahoma City Boulevard” is too long, too much of a mouthful (like Robert S. Kerr Ave. – why not just Kerr? Or even better, 2nd Street?). I forget if this is a totally new street from start to finish, or if it is an extension of an existing street. If an extension, the WHOLE street should be named its future name.

How is someone acting like a dictator for doing exactly what is spelled out in their job?

Streets are normally named by the council. If there is a public input process it often happens during a scheduled public meeting. But that isn’t required and certainly isn’t the norm in my experience.

Everyone has a voice in the matter. Pick up your phone and call your councilman. That it he way it needs to be done. If you show up to a council meeting to contest this name and you haven’t even given your councilman a call or sent and email, you have missed the whole point of a having a government structure. If I was on that horseshoe, I would want to hear from you before the meeting where I might be able to get more input and have a conversation.

I love our republican structures and lets use them. All that said, it should be much easier to see what decisions are proposed and citizens should be able to subscribe to some kind of alert process so that they know when to call or write.

Sid you can rest assurred that I am in REGULAR contact with my city councilman along with my state senator and representative.

I have made it quite clear what I am for and againist regularily. And where is it spelled out in his job description that he has the autority to name streets??? Heck where is his job description at all.

As for taking anything on OKCTALK seriously…

I do wonder, at times, whether there is confusion about the differences between a “strong mayor” form of government, as is in place in Tulsa, and the “city manager” form of government that is dictated by charter in Oklahoma City. Essentially, the city manager form of government gives the mayor very little power above and beyond the one vote cast out of nine at city council meetings.

boulevard is a street in edmond, which has multiple names, depending on whether you are in guthrie, edmond, north oklahoma city, south oklahoma city, etc. grand boulevard has already been taken, although never finished.

how about central parkway, or central boulevard? at least you would know where you were based on the street name.

steve, the captcha is getting so bad i had to refresh seven times before i could read it.

Steve you are quite correct. I would wager that the overwhelming majority of OKC residents are ignorant of the City Manager form of governemnt we have and not Mayorial.

Perhaps the naming of the boulevard could be a part of a public process where citizens also have an opportunity to provide input on the design of the boulevard…

Given the current design, the boulevard is destined to be a disappointment for those of us that hope to create a downtown for people.

Is there a current design available for me to see? Haven’t seen it in awhile, I hope Blair is wrong.

Matt – I too would like to see the design that is talked about so much…the “current design” people talk so much about being a failure. The only thing I’ve really ever seen is whatever was used in the Maps 3 campaigning, which was not developed by ODOT and yet was developed multiple years ago…

Yes, I agree with everyone when they state that the “current designs” look too wide/not pedestrian friendly and do feel that the design is a great topic of conversation, but I seem to be the only one that realizes that was by no means even close to a finalized design and do not see it “destined to be a disappointment” for urban dwellers.

the old style boulevards, such as st. charles boulevard in new orleans, or even 12th street in okc, are very pedestrian friendly. no more than two lanes of traffic, with a very wide (essentially a “park”) median.

i’m certain such a design would be banished by federal regulations, so i think okc should build it with their own money and make it a truly beautiful boulevard. anyone who has ever toured the garden district on the streetcar would not disagree. i think this is more important than the name, frankly.

David I agree. However that would take foresight that is beyond the capacity of the current or past OKC administration/mayors. They are both out for self agrandizment and nothing more.

Casey and Matt, I’ll see what I can do. The last designs I saw indicated the boulevard will be slighter wider than Northwest Expressway where it crosses MacArthur. On recent inquiries with ODOT I’ve heard nothing that indicates that width is changing.

Blair, I’m noticing the mayor and city manager increasingly leaning toward a process that allows for all the public policy debate and negotiation to go on behind closed doors and attempts to have a quick and easy vote in the public meeting.
Is this not evidenced by the mayor shutting down questions about the boulevard name and encouraging a council member to discuss it more at length after the meeting? Is this not evidenced by statements by the city manager that indicate The Alliance for Economic Development was discussed privately with each council member months before it was unveiled in public (upon which council members dissenting were not allowed the same courtesy of delaying a vote for a few weeks to get a better understanding). And is this not evidenced by the city manager having $30 million reserved for a power station in Core to Shore based on what he said were directions given by the mayor in private discussions?
This is a very different City Hall than the one I observed in the 1990s.

Slightly wider than Northwest Expressway where it crosses MacArthur? I’m behind on discussion, but that’s a ridiculous start to an area that’s supposed to be pedestrian-friendly. Looks like the technocrats won.

Combined with the possibility that the convention center could be located just west of the arena, you have the end of the boulevard-as-place dream.

Sorry for the tangent…at this point, I’m for anything besides of Oklahoma City Boulevard.

Agree Ernest. Though the location of the Boulevard (a short stretch between two highway off-ramps) and its path (tangential to the pedestrian spine) have always made the “boulevard-as-place dream” nothing more than wishful thinking.

Add to that the elevation issues created by the BNSF underpass and you have what amounts to an $80 million concrete and asphalt barrier.

It is worth pointing out that the “Core to Shore” committee did not dream up the boulevard, rather it was a offering by ODOT when the city had no intentions of expanding downtown south. It runs counter (literally) to the “Core to Shore” concept.

If they are really going to make it as wide as NW Expressway, and I am talking about the street easement, why not do something like David Ball said. I live on 12th in Miller, it’s a great street. I want to see it taken to another level though. Make it like the Panhandle in San Francisco. Actually put a park in the middle of the boulevard with winding sidewalks. When Boston put their highway underground, they replaced the existing highway with a park. Why replace a street with another street?

the width of northwest highway?!?!? goodbye, core to shore. i wonder if the mayor realizes that this could kill his dream project. based on his actions, i’m pretty certain that mayor cornett genuinely dreams of having this as his legacy for oklahoma city, a permanent monument to a grand vision. i’m being sincere here. at the same time, the boulevard as described will be as much of a barrier as the railroad wall to bricktown, or the river.

the boulevard as originally proposed was basically, “hey, we’ve got this right of way, let’s use it for something.” since the feds did not fund it, and given the flexibility of the new maps projects, NOW is the time to have a serious discussion about this. i’ve seen the mayor take some hits on this board, but we need to pull TOGETHER now more than ever.

i truly hope someone who has the mayor’s ear from around here might encourage some re-thinking on what could be his finest hour in pursuing his (alleged) grand dream.

David you are correct. His legacy could very well come down to how he decides to comport himself on this issue. Glory vs Gut Wagon. The ball is in his court.

gee, who gets all that park money once they decide the park is not practical. Will the scaled down to a shell of its of its original self Skydump Bridge become OKC’s very own Bridge2Nowhere?