“Administrative Approval”?
Looks like my first reactions to the new agenda for the Downtown Design Review Committee match those being asked at OKC Talk. Exactly how is it that city staff can administratively approve replacing brick, as originally voted by the Downtown Design Review Committee, with EIFS Stucco? And what’s up with the windows?
6. DTCA-11-00092, at 250 N Robinson Ave (DBD), by Pierre Derenoncourt for Midland Center LP for revision to original Certificate of Approval to install EIFS in place of originally approved brick veneer on upper levels of the east elevation; and modify the proposed work to reflect only floors 13 to 18 at east elevation.
7. DTCA-11-00092, at 250 N Robinson Ave (DBD), by Pierre Derenoncourt for Midland Center LP, for second revision to original Certificate of Approval to delete previously approved window systems in upper levels of east elevation; install metal panel systems in lieu of windows in same configuration and location at rear elevation.
In other business, as expected by critics of the Civic Center park redesign, the Planning Department is now recommending approval…
“Misinformation”
Apparently there are some people being left with the impression that I somehow provided “misinformation” about the two-way conversion of Walker Avenue. Let’s be perfectly clear on this: I correctly quoted Public Works Director Eric Wenger in reporting that the city had money for traffic controllers, but not traffic lights, to complete the two-way conversion of Walker and Hudson Avenues. When I raised the question of the traffic lights removed from other streets as part of Project 180 and why they couldn’t be re-used, I was then told by Assistant City Manager Dennis Clowers that yes, this was possible. But a delay was again cited in the interest of doing studies to determine how how the conversion might proceed with existing property egress along the two streets. When I then noted that such studies were supposedly ordered by the city council in 1999, the message went out that the idea Walker Avenue was not scheduled to be converted to two-way traffice was “misinformation.” I’ve now seen evidence of this message going out from city staff on multiple occasions. When I contacted city staff to say I was standing by my reporting on this matter, I was told by Clowers they did not intend to state I had put out misinformation, that instead, they had accidentally misreported to me the availability of existing Project 180 funding that does exist to complete the two-way conversion of Walker Avenue as part of the current contract.
NOTE: City staff still also reports that Hudson will remain a two-way, one-way, two-way traffic corridor until more studies are completed on egress and money is identified for installation of the four remaining traffic lights and restriping.
Yet Another Update on the One Way Street Conversions
As noted by frequent OKC Central contributor Dennis Wells in a comment on yesterday’s blog post, the city has shifted its response on the street conversions. Assistant City Manager Dennis Clowers reports that the Project 180 contract will include money for complete conversion of Walker Avenue to two-way traffic after all – and that it will be done this year.
Clowers reports no change in plans, however, for Hudson Avenue. More studies and evaluations on funding, etc., are said to be needed before the section between Robert S. Kerr Avenue and NW 6 can be converted to two-way traffic. This means visitors are likely to encounter a two-way, one-way, two-way traffic pattern along the street from Interstate 40 to NW 6 until the city addresses this matter. I will remind readers, the city council instructed the public works department to begin conversions of one-way downtown streets to two-way traffic in 1999 – which was 13 years ago.
Confuse and Delay?
This photo was taken in 1999. Only one of these signs has been eliminated.
To fully understand how long the city has been dragging its feet (yes, I said it) on converting downtown’s one-way streets to two-way traffic, consider this 1999 story. Think about who’s names are on this story. Jack Money, my former writing partner, left the paper two years ago. Jay Swearingen hasn’t lived in Oklahoma in about a decade. Amy Brooks left the state as well. Ann Simank stepped down from the council a few years ago and now oversees the Public Inebriate Center. Paul Brum is dead. I am the only one left. This story, comments left at OKC Talk are jogging my memory. I remember how proponents of the one-way street conversions were skeptical of whether the city’s public works department REALLY wanted to make this happen. They had seen projects the department didn’t embrace get buried in study after study. Veteran City Hall observers like the late Councilman Mark Schwartz had schooled me on how city staff could, and did, “kill” projects through delays, studies, confusion, and funding “short-falls.” Schwartz called it “confuse and delay.” Read the story below and you’ll see hints of where the proponents saw the hiring of Cobb Engineering as yet another subterfuge toward stopping or slowing down yet another project.
A former, early employee of Downtown Oklahoma City Inc. jogged my memory of another discussion – a presentation done on street conversions by Brum – in 2000 that resulted in similar concerns. During the presentation he gave off every impression that he had no enthusiasm for implementing this project.
Thirteen years later, we’re being told once again more studies are needed. And that the funding, which was fully provided for in Project 180, was cut for completing the conversion of these streets. City staff instead gave priority to cosmetic projects like the much-maligned makeover of the Civic Center park, precedence over making Walker and Hudson Avenues two-way corridors. This detail was omitted from the Project 180 presentations to city council and the Devon Implementation Committee.
But this time, city staff is asking for faith that this time they’re serious. Gang, I’m still here, watching and reporting. And I’ve got no intention of going away. I won’t be confused. There will be no delay in my scrutiny.
Green Light Given To Traffic Study
By Jack Money, Steve Lackmeyer
Staff Writers
Monday, April 26, 1999
Edition: CITY, Section: COMMUNITY III, Page 01
Oklahoma City is finally moving forward with a traffic study that could address complaints from metropolitan area drivers and pedestrians about downtown’s confusing one-way streets.
But not everyone is convinced the study, due for completion in about four months, will change the traditional thinking that brought one-way streets to the downtown business district.
The downtown Oklahoma City streets were changed in the 1970s to provide quick, orderly movement of oil-boom workers and their automobiles to and from their offices.
While the study is applauded by most, some downtown leaders privately fear the selection of a local engineering firm to conduct the study will skew its results toward keeping the streets.
Jay Swearingen, director of the Automobile Alley Main Street Program, is one downtown leader who says the streets need to be changed.
He said they are unattractive to pedestrians and potential streetside business operators.
“We have far too many one-way streets in downtown Oklahoma City,” said Swearingen. “They can discourage people who don’t have much downtown driving experience.
“And the effect on pedestrians is just enormous. Any study of downtown traffic patterns should include pedestrian movements and how potential street changes impact them.”
He added the study should also look at how changes in street directions would impact mass transit services, bicycle lanes and other forms of transportation.
Two Oklahoma City council members agree.
Ward 2 representative Amy Brooks and Ann Simank, the Ward 6 council member who represents much of downtown, emphasized pedestrian needs before the council authorized negotiations to hire an engineering firm for the study.
Brooks and Simank actually took time recently to cross Hudson Avenue, one of the city’s busiest one-way streets.
The two council members waited for the light to turn green and crossed the street, having no trouble arriving on the other side before the lights turned against them.
However, they also discovered a 30-second or longer delay in starting across Hudson could easily leave them crossing against a red light.
“Downtown is becoming busier and busier… and it’s time to look at these one-way streets,” Simank said.
She added that her council office has received complaints about downtown streets from out-of-town visitors.
Brooks said she believed two-way streets would help slow Oklahoma City’s downtown traffic. She said pedestrians today often face a psychological challenge of crossing one-way streets.
“When you get in there, you feel like you have to get across real fast,” said Brooks. “It’s like trying to get around downtown Dallas – trying to get around there with the one-ways. If you only go there occasionally or if you’re a visitor, trying to get where you are going is very difficult.”
Oklahoma City’s current street directions create pairs of one-way streets to move motorists quickly in and out of the downtown district.
The city’s NW 5 and NW 6 street corridors were the city’s original east-west link to Interstate 235 and one-way northbound and southbound streets.
NW 6 continues to be one way westbound from its origin at I-235 to Classen Boulevard. NW 5, meanwhile, was broken into two segments by the closing of the street where it passed in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.
Today, a block of NW 5 between Harvey and Robinson is part of the Oklahoma City National Memorial.
Members of the Oklahoma City Traffic and Transportation Commission voted this month to make NW 5 a two-way street a block west and a block east of the memorial site.
Between Hudson and Classen, and between Broadway and Interstate 235, NW 5 continues to be a one-way eastbound street.
Oklahoma City has two major pairs of northbound and southbound one-way streets.
One pair is Robinson Avenue, a southbound street, and Harvey Avenue, which takes vehicles northbound. These two streets bracket the heart of the downtown office district.
The other pair is Hudson Avenue, southbound, and Walker Avenue, a northbound street.
These streets take motorists past Oklahoma County, City Hall and the Civic Center Music Hall, the seats of local government and the city’s cultural center.
Oklahoma City Public Works Director Paul Brum said he anticipates the study will recommend eliminating many of downtown’s one-way streets.
Brum said the engineering firm, Cobb Engineering, is using a consultant with decades of traffic engineering experience.
“The report is going to talk about one-way and two-way streets,” said Brum. “It also is going to talk about pedestrian issues and how the streets affect them.”
The public works director said the firm will evaluate pedestrian needs along with its traffic studies.
Brum downplayed the concerns privately expressed by several downtown interests that the selection of an engineering firm instead of a planning-oriented firm might skew the study’s recommendations to favor vehicles over pedestrians.
Brum said only local engineering firms applied for the job. No “planning” oriented firms responded to advertisements for the project.
“Where did these people want me to go to hire someone? New York City?” he asked.
As for the agreement, Brum said it will take his staff a few weeks to negotiate a price with Cobb Engineering.
Brum said Oklahoma City already has extensive studies examining many of downtown’s traffic issues.
“We have done some previous studies, looking at traffic counts, parking issues and access points into the downtown street system,” Brum said.
“We didn’t go as far as determining whether one-way or two-way streets were needed, then, though, because we were waiting for a decision from the state on where it would relocate Interstate 40 and on further implementation of the city’s Metropolitan Area Projects.
“Now that we are further along on those issues, we can look at whether or not these streets should be changed. And I expect many of them will be.”
Swearingen said he hopes Brum is right.
“A good traffic study should be concerned with how well it moves people – not how fast it moves cars,” he said.
Update on One-Way Street Conversions
Assistant City Manager Dennis Clowers just called me. They’re aware of this conversation. Clowers was the former public works director and that department is one of several that answer to him.
He said the city “has every intention” of finishing the conversion of Hudson and Walker to two-way traffic. But, he added, “it’s not just going to happen overnight.”
He repeated what was apparently told to Ed Shadid. I challenged him on the studies, noting studies began a dozen years ago. I asked, what is more urgent – a cosmetic makeover of the Civic Center park or the safety and function of Hudson and Walker Avenues?
At this point Dennis, who I do respect greatly, acknowledged this matter may not have been addressed with the diligence it deserves. He acknowledged the two-way, one-way, two-way pattern will be less safe for visitors than what we had before. He said city staff is going to get on top of this, and that this matter will be addressed with the same urgency being given to the park.
For downtown businesses, development of the urban core, consultants have determined street traffic patterns can make or break economic development.
A Question of Priorities
Walker Avenue now coverted to two-way traffic between Reno and Sheridan as part of Project 180. Opened this week.
Eight traffic lights.
That might not seem like a big investment for a city the size of Oklahoma City with a $919 million annual budget. But we’re told times are tight, and with shortfall on funding for Project 180, the apparent inability to pay for eight traffic lights means we’ve may have to wait years before we’ll see the long-promised conversion of downtown streets from one-way to two-way traffic.
To be blunt, the conversion, which we thought was a sure thing with Project 180, and was promised would take place by 2014, is not a sure thing at all anymore. It is now an unfunded project.
Once again, we’re slowly learning the true extent of the cuts to Project 180. And when the area around NW 5 and Walker was cut from Project 180 at the insistence of developer Rick Dowell, it not only saved Project 180 millions of dollars – but it also had the unintended consequence of leaving the sections of Hudson and Walker as one-way corridors between Robert S. Kerr Avenue and NW 6.
Going through an extensive project update with Public Works director Eric Wenger, I learned the city still has money for traffic controllers for these intersections, but no money for the actual traffic lights.
Wenger said a study not yet done will determine a new timeline and potential funding. Note that the city council instructed the public works department to begin a study to convert downtown’s one-way streets to two-way traffic back in 1999. History shows that at City Hall, a study can translate into a years-long delay (consider the progress to date on a quiet zone on the railway tracks parallel to Automobile Alley).
What this means is the plan now in place would result in Walker Avenue being two-way traffic south of Robert S. Kerr Avenue, one-way traffic between Robert S. Kerr Avenue and NW 6, and then two-way traffic again north of NW 6. Ditto for Hudson Avenue.
Got that?
These are corridors heavily traveled by visitors to our town. They are streets that lead up to our central business district, to the Myriad Gardens, to the Oklahoma City Art Museum, to the Oklahoma City National Memorial and to a small new office complex known as Devon Energy Center. They are streets that go straight to our City Hall, to the Civic Center Music Hall, and to the County Courthouse.
I’m curious how walkability consultant Jeff Speck might react to this set up.
I was going to delay this post until after my story, (I call it “All You Ever Wanted to Know About Downtown But Didn’t Know Who To Ask”), appears in the paper and on NewsOK. But then I realized – this isn’t a problem in the far-off future. It’s with us now. This week Walker Avenue between Sheridan Avenue and Reno Avenue was converted from one-way to two-way traffic. That two-way conversion will continue northward to Robert S. Kerr Avenue. And then it will stop. The road will be one-way again – for four blocks – until it hits NW 6 when it goes two-way again.
We can curse this situation. We can question the sanity, the planning and judgment of the city’s engineers. Or we can look for a light bulb. A well-used, but to my knowledge, a still perfectly functional and safe lightbulb.
This traffic light stood at Reno and Harvey before Project 180. It has since been removed and replaced. Is it in storage? Or did the city sell it for scrap? Why not use it to complete the two-way conversion of Hudson Avenue?
If the question is simply a matter of this city with an annual $919 million budget can’t afford to buy eight new stop lights for its downtown, then why not just re-use the traffic lights that were removed from streets that have undergone Project 180 reconstruction?
I realize, some of them weren’t very pretty. But when it comes to safety over visual appeal, what’s more important? And yes, I do see confused motorists driving the wrong way on one-way downtown streets on a weekly basis. And yes, we’ve had people killed crossing some of these extra wide one-way streets.
And actually, if one uses Google Earth to explore downtown streets (circa 2009), one will discover some newer traffic lights have been replaced as well – most notably ones at Main and Lee, on Reno in front of the Chesapeake Energy Arena, and at Main and Hudson.
This traffic light stood in front of the Chesapeake Energy Arena and was only in place for a few years before it was replaced by a newer Project 180 traffic light. It is nearly identical to lights already in place along the portion of Hudson Avenue now remaining as a one-way street for the indefinite future.
One must also wonder about the “priorities” set by city staff planning Project 180. I didn’t once hear them explain that they were proposing to council that a revamp of Bicentennial Park be a priority over completing the two-way conversion of these streets. I never heard them warn council members that by eliminating the area around NW 5 and Walker they were creating an ongoing hodge-podge of two-way, one-way, two-way traffic sequences on downtown’s busiest streets.
Here’s my promise: I will be keeping a close eye on accidents along these corridors. I will remind readers of this decision. One must wonder if any lawyers read this blog…
Vote: Move Forward with Civic Center Park Makeover or Redesign?
A Close Look at the Civic Center Spinner Tower
One of the features of the proposed makeover is a series of “spinner towers” that would be funded through private donations. It just so happens that one of these towers is on display outside of architect Rand Elliott’s offices at 6th and Harrison. I hope this photo helps.
I’ve also been asked to reprint Blair Humphreys’ full remarks concerning this project. I will also note that I’ve asked Elliott if he wants to comment on this matter – so far he has politely declined to do so.
Humphreys is no stranger to long-time readers of OKC Central. He is Executive Director of the Institute for Quality Communities and Asst Professor in the College of Architecture. He has a Masters in City Planning and Urban Design degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a BBA in Entrepreneurship from the University of Oklahoma. He is a founding member of ULI Oklahoma, currently serving as the Vice-Chair for Mission Advancement of the statewide organization.
Humphreys teaches graduate-level Urban Design Theory, and has previously taught in the Urban Design Studio. In 2011, Blair served as the faculty advisor of OU’s award winning Hines/ULI Urban Design Competition team. He also has acted as a consultant in development efforts along Automobile Alley and in MidTown.
Humphreys’ comments to Downtown Design Review Committee on the Civic Center Park redesign:
The new Myriad Gardens is special.
It is a captivating mix of spaces and attractions that seem to offer something for everyone on every day, all year long. It gets right everything that the old Myriad Gardens got wrong, while being careful to retain everything that the old Myriad Gardens got right.”In fact, the shift from rigid to flexible is something of a theme with a park now appropriately offering “myriad” attractions for a range of users. A restaurant will sit on the edge of a fun-natured plaza sure to host laughing children year-round. The plaza features a splash fountain during the summer that converts to a skating rink during the winter.
As famed urbanist William Whyte pointed, “What attracts people most, it would appear, is other people.” The new Myriad Gardens gets this: It is a public space for people. Hopefully, it is just the beginning of our transformation into a city for people — a city worth staying in.
Simply put, the new Myriad Gardens and all Project 180 improvements to date have made our city a better place for people. The new Bicentennial park design does not.
I expressed similar concerns to the project manager about the direction of this park at informational meeting about Project 180 over two years ago when I was told that this park would be focused on passive observation. I am not aware of a single successful public park created for passive observation. Citygarden in St. Louis, the best new sculpture garden in the world, is the opposite, encouraging interaction with the art and among the adults and children that flock to it.
I have been waiting these two years for a public forum in which to offer my input both as a passionate promoter of great public spaces and a native citizen of Oklahoma City. I am not aware of any public meeting I missed, but apologize that these criticisms have not been offered until today.
When compared to the existing Bicentennial park, the new design is:
less walkable
less flexible
less respectful of our city’s history
less safe
and far less appropriate for such an important civic site.What makes the Myriad Gardens special is that it was carefully crafted for the people of our city, whether workers downtown, residents from surrounding neighborhoods, or children enjoying a sunny Saturday afternoon. It may not win an architectural design award or be praised by the critics in New York and Chicago, but it is already cherished by the people of our city and will be for many decades to come.
In the case of the new Bicentennial Park, with polished steel, fresh landscaping and an abundance of beautiful granite it will definitely have some initial appeal. But ultimately, the inherent flaws of the design as a usable public space for people will lead to the parks demise. While we will be able to rectify this mistake with further design and additional investment, we will not be able to retrieve the history lost or return the money wasted.
I don’t support a continuance, rather I recommend denial of this item to provide for a complete redesign that includes the input of the community and the expertise of a proven public space professional. I would encourage the city to design a park (not to meet the 75th anniversary gala deadline next fall, but) that will still be cherished when the Civic Center’s 100 year anniversary gala takes place.
Care to Weigh In? Time is Running Out
In the past week since the Downtown Design Review Committee, Planning Department and Public Works clashed on the proposed makeover of the Civic Center park, I’ve heard only negative comments about the designs by Rand Elliott and Tulsa-based PDG Inc., which call for the removal of all trees (some of the biggest trees to be found downtown), sculptures, monuments and other landscaping. Read the full story on that debate here.
Rand Elliott doesn’t think small – I think it’s safe to say everyone would agree he always attempts to hit a home-run – he aspires to create great, eye-catching architecture and design. And I think his biggest fans and even his greatest critics would agree that the city is better off with his imprint. But what if one of those high-flying balls ends up being a foul? Will anyone tell the slugger when his latest hit didn’t go so well?
That’s the question ahead ahead for those who see this hit as a foul ball rather than a home run. I’m hearing that any differences between city planners and engineers is being ironed out behind the scenes and that the rare display of disagreement will disappear with a reapplication of the designs that skip over, for now, questions about the proposed archway, spinning towers and City Hall fountain.
Of course, that still leaves a lot of questions unresolved. I’ve been asked by more than a dozen different readers what they need to do to voice their opposition to these designs. They say these designs were not fully vetted, and some also are questioning whether the committee that reviewed this work consisted of too many people hand-selected by the design team.
This project HAS NOT been approved by the mayor and council. It must get five or more votes to move forward. So to those asking how they can voice their disapproval – or approval – now is the time to contact the mayor and council.
Contacts:
Ward 1 Councilman Gary Marrs: ward1@okc.gov
Ward 2 Councilman Ed Shadid: ward2@okc.gov
Ward 3 Councilman Larry McAtee: ward3@okc.gov
Ward 4 Councilman Pete White: ward4@okc.gov
Ward 5 Councilman David Greenwell: ward5@okc.gov
Ward 6 Councilwoman Meg Salyer: ward6@okc.gov
Ward 7 Councilman Skip Kelly: ward7@okc.gov
Ward 8 Councilman Pat Ryan: ward8@okc.gov
Mayor Mick Cornett: mayor@okc.gov
Project 180: What We’ll be Missing
It’s been a busy few weeks and I’m still trying to catch up on all that is happening downtown. We’ve seen a lot written about the cutbacks on Project 180. One early ambition that is apparently victim to all this is the desire to improve the intersection of NW 4, NW 3, E.K. Gaylord and Broadway.
A few years back Blair Humphreys, OKC’s own rising star on urban design and planning, suggested a change was long overdue for this intersection, a creation of the I.M. Pei Plan of the 1970s. Humphreys’ suggestion was rather simple: reconnect 3rd Street and Broadway, end E.K. Gaylord at 3rd where traffic either turns right or left instead of merging into one giant intersection with Broadway, 3rd and 4th Streets. Walkability Jeff Speck said a big “amen” to Blair’s concerns. Ironically, the project that prompted Blair to delve into the problems caused by this intersection, the construction of a new headquarters for the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, appears to be in a deep freeze. But the issues for downtown commuters and pedestrians remain the same.
Here is what was proposed early on with Project 180:
Notice that when given a chance to pursue the fix proposed by Blair Humphreys and Jeff Speck, designers at the instruction of city staff went instead with a “dressing up” of the existing grid instead. Keep in mind, city staff was never enthused about the changes proposed by Humphreys and Speck.
So what’s next? Does this issue die all together?
