I’m Not An Engineer, Nor Do I Play One On TV
After almost two decades of covering City Hall, however, I can recognize when engineers are reluctant to consider other options when it comes to a road project. I saw it with the late Paul Brum, city engineer, when it came to his insistence that rebuilding the Walnut Avenue Bridge was a bad idea, that it would be bad engineering and create a dangerous traffic situation compared to the at-grade road he preferred (he lost and the bridge was built).
We’ve seen a debate between the engineers who say at-grade crossings aren’t possible due to too many street intersections in a compact area at the boulevard’s west connection to the new I-40. And we’ve seen the at-grade advocates argue for a traffic roundabout assuming the engineers are correct about the crossings.
The engineers, in turn, argue a roundabout will cost millions, delay the opening of the boulevard, and have all but openly said “heck no, this won’t go.”
But have the engineers really explored all options?
I drove the area again this afternoon. And quite frankly, the traffic along Classen pretty much gives out along Sheridan Avenue.
Why is that?
Well folks, Classen used to dead-end about a block south of the old I-40 (the future boulevard path) until about a decade ago when it was extended a few more blocks into what is now a sleepy warehouse area.
What if Classen were to dead-end again at Sheridan Avenue? Would it be the end of the world? We certainly know that traffic is almost non-existent along nearby California Avenue. So what if California Avenue and Classen were to dead-end and not intersect with the boulevard? My skills at photo manipulation are horrendous. But check out the aerial above… what if it IS possible to do regular intersections?
I’m running into a lot of concerned folks who are asking, what will it take for engineers to seriously look at how to build the boulevard without elevating it, instead of spending their effort to justify their current plans? What if an outside engineering firm were hired that would not be subject to current egos involved in the current design?
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
Seems to me that you shouldn’t have Classen and California each dead-end just before the Boulevard but rather have them run into each other just north of the Boulevard. Traffic can still flow and access those areas as well as go up to Sheridan and around to reach the at-grade Western/Boulevard intersection in whatever form that may be.
Here’s a question I have – What if, instead of an outside engineering firm, a SINGLE planner was allowed to give input on the process?
ODOT is a bunch of engineers… if someone tells them what to design, they’ll do it. They defaulted to the elevated design because they’re a bunch of engineers, and apparently no one told them about the design program. The City must simply tell them what to do!
The big question is: Why wasn’t the City (and knowledgeable citizens) working with them YEARS ago on this?! It seems inexcusable that they surprised us with this myopic design…
Millions in redevleopment will be spent on the area. millions will be taken in on taxes. TIF the area. We have bonds to talk about in the next few years.
Engineers always want to go with their first idea. They find it offensive if they are questioned, just like any professional would. They always say it will cost more or take longer when it doesn’t always. The fact is, they need to suck it up and go back to the drawing board and come up with a better solution.
Nick, what’s the difference? Outside firm, single planner?
Steve, those streets or areas might not be sleepy anymore if a better intersection is in place. Why go halfway when you can have the whole enchilada?
the idea that ODOT will just design whatever the city wants them to is laughable …and is not in concert with what has been happening
…it’s clearly not in concert with what’s been happening, but why is it laughable that ODOT intends to ignore their client?
So, a traffic circle will costs millions? A raised road will costs tens of millions, and cost millions to maintain! Aren’t we getting rid of the crosstown because it is raised and costs millions to maintain?
Is this just too obvious or is it just me?