Proposed US 412 Upgrade

[will_e_777]

is it going to have freeway lighting the entire way between Tulsa and OKC?

[Plutonic Panda]

is it going to have freeway lighting the entire way between Tulsa and OKC?

I-44? Yes

[roadman65]

Here's a view of the Cimarron Turnpike back when it still had a narrow raised grassy median. You can see that there was no margin for error when passing big trucks. It was scary.

Have long believed I-44 - from the MO state line to Tulsa, and also between Tulsa and OKC should have been completely rebuilt by now.   Utilizing the wide ROW to construct new main lines mostly to the Outside of current narrow roadway cross sections.  All new bridges and overpasses.  Far greater horizontal clearances.   Vertical curvature improvements (meaning wacking down hills and adding to fills) and some Horizontal clearance improvements as well.  85 mph design speed, with a 75 mph posted limit.  Trucks probably less.  This same approach could be used on the Cimarron as well as a few of the other aging turnpikes.   

Near Miami they've replaced two overpasses that I know to the standard 16' 5" clearance and left room for expansion. So probably they'll upgrade a few at a time and slowly change the freeway to more modern standards.  I just hope they don't tear down the Vinita Service Area despite it being narrow underneath for expansion and the 50s era 14 feet headroom, as that plaza is a classic feature of that turnpike.

[bugo]

The Vinita service plaza was rebuilt about a decade ago and the new arched building over the highway was opened in late 2014.

[Bobby5280]

The Vinita Service Plaza is on the Will Rogers Turnpike. Currently the Turner Turnpike between OKC and Tulsa is set for a complete 3x3 lanes upgrade.

If the OTA does expand portions of the Will Rogers Turnpike to a 3x3 lanes configuration it does look like such a thing could fit under the recently re-built arched building over the highway. It looks like there is several feet of space past the Jersey barriers at the far left and far right going under the building. It will probably be a really long time before OTA does any expansion like that there. Under the current Access Oklahoma plan I-44 would be widened to 3x3 from the US-412 interchange at Catoosa up to the SH-20 exit at Claremore.

is it going to have freeway lighting the entire way between Tulsa and OKC?

I-44? Yes

Is that written down anywhere on the plans? It would be nice if the future 3x3 upgrades on I-44 included the overhead lights installed on the concrete Jersey barrier. It adds a nice visual touch and makes that portion of I-44 just West of Tulsa feel more like a major Interstate highway. But I wouldn't expect OTA to install those lights the whole way between OKC and Tulsa. Going East of OKC I could see the overhead lights being installed from I-35 to the Kickapoo Turnpike interchange or maybe as far east as the Wellston exit. Going West of Tulsa I could imagine OTA ditching the lights at the Bristow exit. Overhead lights would be good going thru the Stroud exit (where the service plaza and toll gate is located).

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ I asked the OTA about it and that's what they told me. I'm not sure if there are any official plans yet due to the delayed plan which is now moving forward again.

[Bobby5280]

It will be interesting to see what the OTA ends up doing. I wouldn't object to them installing overhead lights along the entire length of the Turner Turnpike. But I'll be surprised if they actually follow through on that. I'm thankful OTA at least has plans in motion to widen that turnpike to 3x3 lanes the entire length. The Turner Turnpike is certainly busy enough to justify it. The highway feels really cramped for space in its current 2x2 configuration. The portion that opens up to 3x3 seems like a big relief when you get to it.

Overhead lights will improve night time driving safety wherever they're installed. But I can just imagine some people in Oklahoma who like to gripe about "government waste," pointing to that kind of big city highway design style out in a rural area as being a wasteful extravagance.

[Scott5114]

It will also be interesting to see how long they work if they are installed. I'm not sure about Tulsa, but OKC has many sections of disabled lighting because the wire has been stolen from them. Any attempt to get it fixed gets you a nice game of pass-the-buck between ODOT, the city government, and OG&E.

[Plutonic Panda]

They said more information could come out around October/November and that they'll focus on the OKC projects and I-44 between OKC and Tulsa so we'll see.

[intelati49]

They said more information could come out around October/November and that they'll focus on the OKC projects and I-44 between OKC and Tulsa so we'll see.

Any notes for Siloam Springs? Just looking to see if I can get a jump start on my thoughts.

[The Ghostbuster]

I suspect the Siloam Springs Bypass will be the last segment of the US 412 Interstate Upgrade that will be constructed. I would imagine they'd start on the western-most segment of the proposed Interstate and work their way eastward.

[Plutonic Panda]

They said more information could come out around October/November and that they'll focus on the OKC projects and I-44 between OKC and Tulsa so we'll see.

Any notes for Siloam Springs? Just looking to see if I can get a jump start on my thoughts.

I have no idea about that one. I'm excited to hear about it myself.

[yakra]

Is Oklahoma like to co-sign US 412 and future Interstate 42 together? How good is the state about co-signing Interstates with State and US Highways?

I took this picture a couple of weeks after I-540 was extended from Van Buren to Rogers, in 1999. It didn't go all the way to Bella Vista, it ended at the US 62 interchange and the freeway to the north was signed as solo US 71. When I-540 was renamed to I-49, it replaced the US 71 freeway between US 62 and then US 71B. This sign assembly probably didn't last long, but it's a rare glimpse into a fantastical world where Arkansas is as religious as signing highway overlaps as Oklahoma is. It was taken with a primitive 1999-vintage Vivitar digital camera, and it was getting dark, and I was driving at speed when I took the picture, so it had an unusual effect. Somebody years ago described it as "psychedelic". It's not one of my "better" pictures but it's one of my favorites.

1999? Holy blap! What did that bad boy use for storage media? How many images could it hold?

[bugo]

1999? Holy blap! What did that bad boy use for storage media? How many images could it hold?

It had 2 MB of built in memory, which held 32 images in normal quality or 16 images in "fine mode". It used a serial cable to connect to a computer. All images were 640x480 resolution. It used 4 AA batteries, which went dead within 5 minutes of using the camera. I still have the camera somewhere.

[edwaleni]

https://www.fox23.com/news/busy-tulsa-highway-could-become-oklahomas-newest-interstate/article_661988ba-6e11-11ee-9104-373d5129f7a5.html

[bugo]

Here is a link to a comment form for the US 412 project. I sent them a comment saying that I thought the numbers 46, 48 and 50 were better numbers than 42 for this road, and that I thought so because of the I-42 in North Carolina. If you think those numbers fit the road better, send a comment to them. It can't hurt.

[intelati49]

Lines on a map would have made the meeting a whole lot more interesting to me.

There were also a few concerns from citizens that may have been more directly addressed or evidence that would qualm said concerns if there were lines on the map to point to more directly than the existing route

It was interesting seeing a state representative there. I'll have to look her up and figure out her district.

[MikieTimT]

Lines on a map would have made the meeting a whole lot more interesting to me.

There were also a few concerns from citizens that may have been more directly addressed or evidence that would qualm said concerns if there were lines on the map to point to more directly than the existing route

It was interesting seeing a state representative there. I'll have to look her up and figure out her district.

That meeting happens in Mar./Apr.  Apparently, this one is just to see the few things that they've ruled out like trains/buses/bicycles as potential solutions, so this seems to mainly be mainly about getting comments to figure out support for things like a bypass of Siloam Springs, which will be the last thing that happens.  What I gathered from this meeting is that other than the western leg of the Springdale Northern Bypass, nothing happens in Arkansas for the next decade, which essentially makes this process moot as they'll have to start it over by then with Siloam Springs growing by 50% between now and then.

Unfortunately a state representative won't really be of use for funding this.  It'll take federal earmarks for it to happen before I-49 or I-57 get completed.

I see Oklahoma signing the I-35 to I-44 portion with whatever number they deem as Arkansas is pretty much paying lip service at this point.

Ex-commissioner Barnett was there and discussed why they 6-laned Siloam Springs back in '06 rather than select any of the bypasses which would have made this project much more feasible within the decade.  No support from any of the residents nor the city on any of the bypasses, either north or south, and the LOS was D at that point, with growth showing F within 5 years, so their hand was pretty much forced, and thus the flaming turd of a conundrum we face now.  Any northern bypass will go past Gentry, so unless they do new terrain along AR-264/AR-12 with the facility taking a northern turn just past the XNA connector from the looks of it.

[Plutonic Panda]

https://www.fox23.com/news/busy-tulsa-highway-could-become-oklahomas-newest-interstate/article_661988ba-6e11-11ee-9104-373d5129f7a5.html

Thanks for posting that. it also shows that Panasonic is still in top of building a plant in Pryor which would be a pretty big deal for the area.

[mvak36]

Here is a link to a comment form for the US 412 project. I sent them a comment saying that I thought the numbers 46, 48 and 50 were better numbers than 42 for this road, and that I thought so because of the I-42 in North Carolina. If you think those numbers fit the road better, send a comment to them. It can't hurt.

Thanks for the link. I left them a comment and told them pretty much the same thing. But I am wondering if they already submitted their application to AASHTO for this fall's meeting.

[DJStephens]

Lines on a map would have made the meeting a whole lot more interesting to me.

There were also a few concerns from citizens that may have been more directly addressed or evidence that would qualm said concerns if there were lines on the map to point to more directly than the existing route

It was interesting seeing a state representative there. I'll have to look her up and figure out her district.

That meeting happens in Mar./Apr.  Apparently, this one is just to see the few things that they've ruled out like trains/buses/bicycles as potential solutions, so this seems to mainly be mainly about getting comments to figure out support for things like a bypass of Siloam Springs, which will be the last thing that happens.  What I gathered from this meeting is that other than the western leg of the Springdale Northern Bypass, nothing happens in Arkansas for the next decade, which essentially makes this process moot as they'll have to start it over by then with Siloam Springs growing by 50% between now and then.
Unfortunately a state representative won't really be of use for funding this.  It'll take federal earmarks for it to happen before I-49 or I-57 get completed.
I see Oklahoma signing the I-35 to I-44 portion with whatever number they deem as Arkansas is pretty much paying lip service at this point.
Ex-commissioner Barnett was there and discussed why they 6-laned US - 412 within Siloam Springs back in '06 rather than select any of the bypasses which would have made this project much more feasible within the decade.  No support from any of the residents nor the city on any of the bypasses, either north or south, and the LOS was D at that point, with growth showing F within 5 years, so their hand was pretty much forced, and thus the flaming turd of a conundrum we face now.  Any northern bypass will go past Gentry, so unless they do new terrain along AR-264/AR-12 with the facility taking a northern turn just past the XNA connector from the looks of it.

Sounds very similar to the US - 69 Muskogee situation.  Kick the can down the road.   Like most parts of the country this is not an area that is suitable for "transit" or bicycle solutions.  Stripe some bike lanes?  Sure. But provide an adequate ROW width.  Do they have a city bus service?  Is it utilized at all?  Many pie in the sky "planner" or "engineer" types completely overlook dismal transit usage numbers.  And continue for push for "road diets" and other design regressive solutions that increase congestion.   

[swake]

Lines on a map would have made the meeting a whole lot more interesting to me.

There were also a few concerns from citizens that may have been more directly addressed or evidence that would qualm said concerns if there were lines on the map to point to more directly than the existing route

It was interesting seeing a state representative there. I'll have to look her up and figure out her district.

That meeting happens in Mar./Apr.  Apparently, this one is just to see the few things that they've ruled out like trains/buses/bicycles as potential solutions, so this seems to mainly be mainly about getting comments to figure out support for things like a bypass of Siloam Springs, which will be the last thing that happens.  What I gathered from this meeting is that other than the western leg of the Springdale Northern Bypass, nothing happens in Arkansas for the next decade, which essentially makes this process moot as they'll have to start it over by then with Siloam Springs growing by 50% between now and then.

Unfortunately a state representative won't really be of use for funding this.  It'll take federal earmarks for it to happen before I-49 or I-57 get completed.

I see Oklahoma signing the I-35 to I-44 portion with whatever number they deem as Arkansas is pretty much paying lip service at this point.

Ex-commissioner Barnett was there and discussed why they 6-laned Siloam Springs back in '06 rather than select any of the bypasses which would have made this project much more feasible within the decade.  No support from any of the residents nor the city on any of the bypasses, either north or south, and the LOS was D at that point, with growth showing F within 5 years, so their hand was pretty much forced, and thus the flaming turd of a conundrum we face now.  Any northern bypass will go past Gentry, so unless they do new terrain along AR-264/AR-12 with the facility taking a northern turn just past the XNA connector from the looks of it.

In 10 years Oklahoma will have it signed all the way to within 8 miles of the Arkansas state line.

[splashflash]

Lines on a map would have made the meeting a whole lot more interesting to me.

There were also a few concerns from citizens that may have been more directly addressed or evidence that would qualm said concerns if there were lines on the map to point to more directly than the existing route

It was interesting seeing a state representative there. I'll have to look her up and figure out her district.

That meeting happens in Mar./Apr.  Apparently, this one is just to see the few things that they've ruled out like trains/buses/bicycles as potential solutions, so this seems to mainly be mainly about getting comments to figure out support for things like a bypass of Siloam Springs, which will be the last thing that happens.  What I gathered from this meeting is that other than the western leg of the Springdale Northern Bypass, nothing happens in Arkansas for the next decade, which essentially makes this process moot as they'll have to start it over by then with Siloam Springs growing by 50% between now and then.
Unfortunately a state representative won't really be of use for funding this.  It'll take federal earmarks for it to happen before I-49 or I-57 get completed.
I see Oklahoma signing the I-35 to I-44 portion with whatever number they deem as Arkansas is pretty much paying lip service at this point.
Ex-commissioner Barnett was there and discussed why they 6-laned US - 412 within Siloam Springs back in '06 rather than select any of the bypasses which would have made this project much more feasible within the decade.  No support from any of the residents nor the city on any of the bypasses, either north or south, and the LOS was D at that point, with growth showing F within 5 years, so their hand was pretty much forced, and thus the flaming turd of a conundrum we face now.  Any northern bypass will go past Gentry, so unless they do new terrain along AR-264/AR-12 with the facility taking a northern turn just past the XNA connector from the looks of it.
An interstate right-of-way could be secured fairly easily along the airport south boundary from AR-612, no?  That could be a separate project, really if the powers that be wanted it.

Sounds very similar to the US - 69 Muskogee situation.  Kick the can down the road.   Like most parts of the country this is not an area that is suitable for "transit" or bicycle solutions.  Stripe some bike lanes?  Sure. But provide an adequate ROW width.  Do they have a city bus service?  Is it utilized at all?  Many pie in the sky "planner" or "engineer" types completely overlook dismal transit usage numbers.  And continue for push for "road diets" and other design regressive solutions that increase congestion.   

The situation is better than US 69 is now.  ODOT has tens of millions penned in for 2025 for widening the main throughfare in Muskogee, according to the 8 Year Plan.  Say goodbye to an interstate for decades unless the eastern bypass using the Muskogee Turnpike comes about.  Same thing is planned for Tushka. 
The way to get around that is to run a new alignment directly north to Coalgate to US 75 or connect over to the Indian Nation Turnpike well south of McAlester

[edwaleni]

More press, this time about the ARDOT public hearing on US-412 to an Interstate.

https://www.5newsonline.com/article/traffic/ardot-highway-412-interstate/527-1842ce29-49ec-4044-8082-db3b5097f0a8

SILOAM SPRINGS, Ark. — The Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT) is holding an in-person meeting discussing a plan to turn U.S. Highway 412 into an interstate.

ARDOT is working with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation to study the feasibility of a future interstate from Insterstate-35 in Oklahoma to Interstate-49 in Arkansas, which is about 190 miles.

This is the second meeting that discusses the plan titled the U.S. Highway 412 Planning and Environmental Linkages Study. At the first meeting, ARDOT presented the plan draft laying out the Need and Baseline Conditions Report.

In this meeting, which is taking place at John Brown University inside the Simmons Great Hall on Thursday, Oct. 19 from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., attendees will review the methodology of the plan describing how "transportation solutions are being evaluated for potential implementation on U.S. Highway 412," ARDOT said.

Dave Parker, Public Information Officer with ARDOT said this area was deemed of "high importance" in the Infrastructure Investment and JOBS Act signed into Law by President Biden.

He said this is only the second meeting in a deal that could take decades to finish.

"It's hard to imagine some of this when you think it's gonna be 20 to 30 years until all this is done. Just think about how Interstate 49 came to be," said Parker. "Sure, it's going to take a long time, but you have to start somewhere."

He said ARDOT will be doing planning environmental studies in the area.

"We look at the groundwater, we look at the land, we look at the air, we look at nature in that area, and all that's way before we even look at the design of the road, and impact to businesses or homes. That has to come first."

ARDOT says the public can make comments until Tuesday, Oct. 31, 2023.

The public can submit online comment forms directly to ARDOT or print them and mail them to ARDOT Environmental Division, 10324 Interstate 30, Little Rock, AR 72209.

[Bobby5280]

20-30 years? Unlike I-49 in the 1980's, it's not like they're going to have to build the proposed Interstate on an almost completely new-terrain path. Most of the highway's path already exists.

The Cimarron Turnpike needs just a few minor upgrades (which are already in progress). Some work is needed between the East end of that turnpike and downtown Tulsa. There's the gap between I-44 in Catoosa and the West end of the Cherokee Turnpike. That's a fairly easy upgrade to build. The hard part is building the last few miles from the East end of the Cherokee Turnpike in Dripping Springs to the Arkansas border. And then AR DOT has to do its part with a bypass of Siloam Springs. That shouldn't take 20-30 years to complete.

Of course, during the past 30 years the US government has become very deficient at planning and building infrastructure (like highways) with the future in mind. Instead, policy makers have been pandering to voters with tax cut candy. At the same time they're creating more and more red tape. With that in mind, yeah, I guess a "simple project" like this could indeed take 30 years to complete. When this nation was great at building big things a project like this could be knocked out in handful of years rather than a handful of decades.