so does this mean “they” are now proposing that the new boulevard extend no further east than walker avenue? did i read that correctly? and reno would presumably remain unchanged?

I would not trust Wegner to tell the truth as far as I could throw the Devon Tower. Time to slow down, reasses and move on. Those who want to plunder ahead are the idiots that are holding this city back.

Core to Shore was a debacle from the start and desperately needs to be reassessed and replanned. Our illustrious Mayor(NOT) is pushing a bad position.

Steve – as far as I can see there’s no difference between the above and what’s on NewsOK. What got cut?

Once again someone has the chronology skewed. Core to Shore was in direct response to the relocation of I-40. The new I-40, replacement Boulevard and even the Pedestrian (SkyDance) Bridge, along with the MAPS 3 “Central” Park were all incorporated in the Core to Shore report and didn’t just happen after that report came out.

But interesting to see that they are rethinking the Boulevard and having it merge into Reno. The question that brings up is how does that effect the already partially built off ramps of the relocated I-40? But they need to make up their minds soon as the Boulevard is still on track to be completed in about 18 months according to ODOT.

LOL Can’t help but think the Convention Center is going to be moved up even closer to the front of the line now???

Steve, you have private posts on here and I can’t see them? I feel so betrayed..

By the way, not a fan of this article. There is a lot of controversy that needs to be broached here. Just a few examples, and I only read the summary presentation and I’m just now going through the actual report, but here’s what I’ve noticed so far:

1. Recommendations to “bend” the boulevard to free up more space for the convention center, if needed. Are you kidding me? I’ll save the ensuing rant that this deserves, moving on..

2. Recommendations regarding the streetcar. They are questioning what it connects, what its demand is, and suggesting that it should be buried in another barrage of studies. Every single question here has already been answered in extraneous detail by the FGS and now more specifically by the AA process.

2a. I’ve even told streetcar subcommittee members to their face that they need to fight back against this. Also, these fights get no press coverage, yet there is a very concerted effort underway to strip the streetcar project. The subcommittee members think they’ve won. I think this is a story, too. I think they think they’re under pressure to “behave” and to be diplomatic, however, instead maybe they should be under pressure to fight harder. We’ve already seen one MAPS installment stripped of a proposed streetcar, why does nobody think it could happen again, when it’s clear that we’re gonna need to free up some more money for this jewel-encrusted, gold-plated convention palace that Larry Nichols wants adjacent to his new tower.

3. The city failed to get developers interested in C2S, despite waving millions of dollars in incentives at them, including some federal loans, and probably including the TIF deal as well. This is a story, especially in context of the city downing the Bomasada project and dragging its heels on the quiet zone.

4. Who are these “stakeholders”? To me, it sounds like it’s the Chamber board of directors and maybe a few other people for diversity and good measure. Since when did this become a legitimate target for an independent report? This is just ADG’s attempt to provide guidance for future project design phases, right? If anything, all this report does is prove who ADG is in bed with. That’s a story, as well.

Just a few suggestions, though I could come up with many more. This report stinks if you ask me, and it’s time (IMO) for a review of ADG’s services. Of course, this will never happen. They’ve undoubtedly been very smart and calculating in their approach to please the chamber junta and help them get what they want out of MAPS at the expense of everyone else.

I saw the mention of the streetcar comments, but it’s a separate issue from Core to Shore. I believe Michael Kimball will be delving into the streetcar issues soon enough.
As for the names of the stakeholders – good question. I’ll see what I can find out.

Those interviewed for the Core to Shore limited study are:
Mayor Mick Cornett, Councilwoman Meg Salyer, Councilman Gary Marrs, Devon Energy CEO and Convention Center Subcommittee member Larry Nichols, MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board Chair and Convention Center Subcommittee Chair Tom McDaniel, Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce President and Convention Center Subcommittee member Roy Williams, MAPS 3 Park Subcommittee member Anthony McDermott, MAPS 3 Park Subcommittee Chair Kim Lowe, MAPS 3 Park Subcommittee member Fred Hall, MAPS 3 Park Subcommittee member Bill Cameron, downtown property owner Bob Howard, Alliance for Economic Development President Cathy O’Connor, City Planning Director Russell Claus, former Mayor Kirk Humphries, Executive Director of the University of Oklahoma Institute for Quality Communities Blair Humphries, Oklahoma City Bombing Memorial and SkyDance Bridge designer Hans Butzer, Oklahoma Department of Transportation Project Manager Paul Green, and Myriad Gardens Foundation Chair Jim Tolbert.

I also understand that some questions were selectively asked of certain stakeholders, and not of others, based on what their presumed response would be. Or in other words, a number of very pro-streetcar stakeholders have expressed some confusion over the published findings, saying that they weren’t asked about streetcar.

Once ADG is severing their corporate masters. Its bad enough they have their fingers in MAPs for kids pie and woefully under estimated both the cost and needs of almost every okc school with a one size fits all program and a drive by assessment of current facilities. C2S was not designed to be an over night success-It is a long term strategic plan. It will take decades and true courage to reclaim those blighted neighborhoods not some chicken s*’$ myopic report by the biggest corporate tools in the city.

I agree with Nick and that’s unusual. It time for ADG to go away. They have zero experience with this level of urban planning. Its time to start a petition.

There’s not going to be a streetcar or boulevard. What’s wrong with you people? Nichols has spoken.

P.S.: These project funds will be diverted to the now unfunded convention center hotel.

Censorship is alive and well!

There will be no streetcar, no boulevard! These funds will diverted to the now unfunded Nichols Convention Center Hotel. What’s wrong with you people? “Stakeholders” have spoken.

You’re not being censored Rob. You got caught up in the spam filter.

Is there anything in the report that specifically mentions the convention center hotel unfunded mandate?

ADG is in over their head? Maybe. Their experience level is probably about 200 times more than just about everyone else on here though. It’s a lot easier to architect or plan from the sidelines with a fraction of the information available.

Nick, if you’re ADG who are you going to be in bed with? A design student with good ideas or a stakeholder with lots of cash and a desire to develop? These stakeholder’s (the people representing the city) hired ADG. All ADG did was provide them a report that I swear I have read before.

These stakeholders hired ADG?!?!

I thought MAPS was for like, you know, the people.

Surely you’re not that naive. I suspect you are being funny.