This Week’s Downtown Boulevard Presentation
Kudos to the Oklahoma City public information office for posting a video of Tuesday’s city council discussion of the downtown boulevard on You Tube!
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
David,
I’m not sure what your point is. Are you ssying we should build a four lane boulevard because it might be expanded some day to six lanes? I’ve seen no evidence that the lanes being planned are overly wide. NW Expressway and 39th are not good comparisons. They have never had street parking that I’m aware of. And a six lane configuration for both WAS NOT accomplished by just restriping.
I’m sorry, I need to correct myself. There is street parking in the Bethany area of 39th but that doesn’t change my point.
i am indeed saying that the road should be built with only two lanes per side, with no shoulder. your memory of how 39th and nw hwy came to be six lanes wide is different than mine. i used to drive nw 39th to work each day. i remember seeing people get frustrated and drive on the paved shoulder and get ticketed when caught. due to overwhelming public non-conformance, they finally gave up and re-striped the road. the outside lane then fell apart because it wasn’t as thick, so they overlaid the pavement. on nw hwy, the authorities “saw the light” and yielded to demand and repeated the process. this was easy to do because the pavement was there. the only difference between a parking lane and a paved shoulder is whether or not you get a ticket for leaving your car there.
if we build the new roadway to encourage the swift movement of cars, that is exactly what we will get. we will only get pedestrians and new development if the road is accessible to both. i have driven on both nw hwy and st. charles boulevard in rush hour traffic, and i can tell you people drive in a calmer fashion when the roadway doesn’t beckon you to see what your machine is capable of.
i also wonder why i haven’t seen discussion about the appropriate speed limit. is there any reason why this road should be any faster than, say, classen? okc already has an urban expressway, the new I-40. the trick here is design priorities. we are looking at something that is totally new for us; building a great city with impressive public works. that is a worthy goal, and a better return on investment than a “no-frills, utilitarian” approach.
I don’t think we are in too much disagreement then. When you mentioned a parking lane I thought you were referring to angeled parking spaces instead of an emergency parking area.
i see. no, no angled parking there. my concern about “parking lanes” is that people will drive faster, regardless of the posted limit. i believe that the design of the road will have a significant influence on the behavior of those on the road.
When was this? I have been back in OKC since 1985 and I can’t recall 39th (except in Bethany) or NW Expressway ever being anything other than the current 6 lane design with no parking??




so it is admitted that the segment to western is essentially to be the same as what is being removed. which leads me to ask, why did we remove it? the statement that there would now be only two lanes per side “with a parking lane” reminds me of two famous local roadways: nw 39th expressway, and northwest highway. both were built in that exact description, but due to high traffic loads and people flagrantly ignoring the “parking” aspect of the outside line, the current six-lane setup was accomplished by a simply re-striping. (i have NOT watched the entire video due to time constraints)
i would suggest that the driving lanes NOT be built wide, but narrow. people will drive more slowly, and pedestrians will cross more easily. if they want to drive quickly, they can take the interstate. remember the mission: ODOT builds HIGHWAYS, they are not in the business of urban planning or building urban streets. it doesn’t make them bad (indeed, i have great fondness for the agency and what they do), it just means that they have a very different mission than what they are being called upon to do here.
incidentally, while i have slowly come to appreciate the roundabout idea (and am in favor of it), it seems like a slow sell here. i hope it isn’t written off before it’s too late, because they offer a nice way to have attractive public spaces that are sadly lacking in this anti-public-art environment. more importantly, i have personally seen that they DO work!