Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Scott5114]

Look what I’m saying is that this will further complete Tulsa’s system. As for passenger rail, I don’t support the rail line proposal between the cities because it is a joke. Once they really propose HSR running down the turnpike, then I’ll support that. Not like it matters anyways.

I don't disagree we can't do better with the rail.  But something is more than nothing to start with.  Meanwhile adding a turnpike where it's not needed nor wanted isn't a wise investment and only furthers the state highway debt.

Turnpike bonds are paid for from toll revenue (chiefly that cross-pledged from the Turner and Will Rogers turnpikes). Nothing OTA does has any effect on the state highway budget.

[rte66man]

Look what I’m saying is that this will further complete Tulsa’s system. As for passenger rail, I don’t support the rail line proposal between the cities because it is a joke. Once they really propose HSR running down the turnpike, then I’ll support that. Not like it matters anyways.

I don't disagree we can't do better with the rail.  But something is more than nothing to start with.  Meanwhile adding a turnpike where it's not needed nor wanted isn't a wise investment and only furthers the state highway debt.

Turnpike bonds are paid for from toll revenue (chiefly that cross-pledged from the Turner and Will Rogers turnpikes). Nothing OTA does has any effect on the state highway budget.

Scott, you know that is not entirely true.  You know about supplanting. If OTA (which has a cap on its ability to issue bonds) builds Road A instead of ODOT, that frees up funds for other state funded projects. 

The Gilcrease extension may not be needed in many opinions.  However, as in many states, roads are often built as a political payoff.  Westside Tulsa has felt (rightly or wrongly) ignored.  Since this road has been planned since the 60's, this is a way to get that squeaky wheel oiled.  None of us particularly like the way roads are built here in OK, but politics is politics.  You do have to admit it is way better than it was 30 years ago.

[rte66man]

Construction on the new H.E. Bailey Turnpike toll plaza (on I-44 near mile marker 66) is finished. However OTA is not going to start operating the toll plaza until January 2018. I thought the plaza was supposed to open this fall. On a local news report they said OTA had all kinds of different testing and other work to do before bringing the new toll plaza into service. Once that plaza becomes operational OTA will demolish the old toll plaza just South of Chickasha. The demolition project will take about 3 weeks to complete. Removal of that old toll plaza will help make room for a new cloverleaf interchange that will be part of a new US-81 bypass. I don't know when construction of that bypass project will begin. Given the sorry condition of the state government's finances I imagine it could be at least a few years before construction begins.

ROW acquisition is still scheduled for FY2018.  I need to check and see if the recent changes in the 8 Year Plan have moved grading and paving out past FY2020.

[Baloo Uriza]

The Gilcrease extension may not be needed in many opinions.  However, as in many states, roads are often built as a political payoff.  Westside Tulsa has felt (rightly or wrongly) ignored.

Right, because the Gilcrease Extension is not popular, particularly in the Berryhill and Lefko Hill areas where it would go right through and take out a lot of residences and induce traffic from the industrial district.  They've only been fighting it for about half a century.  And there's a perception that the only thing that doesn't get ignored on the westside are the refineries.  Just drive around the westside, hard to ignore how the westside ever got that idea.

Since this road has been planned since the 60's, this is a way to get that squeaky wheel oiled.  None of us particularly like the way roads are built here in OK, but politics is politics.  You do have to admit it is way better than it was 30 years ago.

Oiling the squeaky wheel in this case would be getting City Hall to actually do something about the lack of opportunity and livability on the westside, and OklaDOT to back off on making the blight worse by trying to dump OK 12/Sequoyah Loop/Gilcrease Extension/whatever they call it next time they want to pitch it.

[Bobby5280]

I visited OKC this past weekend to do a little St Patrick's Day celebrating with some friends. I was finally able to check out the new I-44 toll plaza at mile marker 66. The toll plaza buildings may be pretty plain, but the whole thing is a big improvement over the old plaza South of Chickasha. And it's quite a bit better than the I-44 toll plaza South of Newcastle. That one is fairly annoying since the single Pike Pass lanes go to the right, outside of the plaza. That creates all sorts of weaving issues between faster Pike Pass account traffic and slower cash-only vehicles driving in the right lane blocking quick access to the Pike Pass lane. OTA never should have built the toll plaza like that. They might replace it with a more effective design 4-5 years from now.

The old toll plaza just south of Chickasha has been demolished. However, there are still Jersey barriers all over the site. Construction crews are replacing the old pavement (which will get rid of the speed zone rumble strips). They're not very far along with the effort. I expect they'll be working on it well into the summer.

[bugo]

The Muskogee Turnpike's western toll plaza at the Coweta interchange is now complete. It's nice not having to exit off the highway to go through the Pikepass lanes.

[Baloo Uriza]

The Muskogee Turnpike's western toll plaza at the Coweta interchange is now complete. It's nice not having to exit off the highway to go through the Pikepass lanes.

Could use the purple longitudinal lane markings on approach to the PIKEPASS lanes and additional EXIT and CASH lane and PIKEPASS ONLY markings on the pavement.  The curves seem to throw people off on the approach relative to the overhead signs, as I saw on Thursday heading to Fort Gibson and multiple drivers from the east coast making last moment dives from the passing lane, across the gore to the cash lanes.

[Scott5114]

Norman is in the wrong state. They've been working on upgrading our mastarm signage to comply with the 2009 MUTCD by replacing them with signs in this style:


I noticed on Saturday that they had replaced the ones at Main Street and Mercedes Drive with some in the new style. Unfortunately, the text was slightly off-center, so that the text was much closer to the top of the blade than the bottom.

Monday, I went through the same intersection, and the signs were completely gone. Presumably, they're making new ones. That's about the most un-Oklahoman signing practice I've seen. OKC or ODOT would have left it up off-center.

[Bobby5280]

I haven't seen the street name signs with text positioned too close to the top. But I would bet the text on those signs had decenders on the lower case letters. A correct design would have the text vertically centered on the sign blade in reference to the capital letter "M" height. A "designer" who doesn't care about details just types out the street name and vertically centers the whole object, regardless of what letters like "g, j, p & q" can do to throw off the vertical centering. And then curvy capital letters like "O" are actually taller than squared off letters like "E."

Here in Lawton I still see street name signs going up with the lower case letters reduced down to 75% of their normal size. The sign will have a big capital letter and absurdly tiny lowercase letters. Oh, and they often don't center the lettering properly either.

[Revive 755]

Norman is in the wrong state. They've been working on upgrading our mastarm signage to comply with the 2009 MUTCD by replacing them with signs in this style:

Except they made the pictograph too big to be MUTCD compliant:

If a pictograph is used on a D3-1 sign, the height and width of the pictograph shall not exceed the upper-case letter height of the principal legend of the sign.

[Baloo Uriza]

Norman is in the wrong state. They've been working on upgrading our mastarm signage to comply with the 2009 MUTCD by replacing them with signs in this style:

Except they made the pictograph too big to be MUTCD compliant:

If a pictograph is used on a D3-1 sign, the height and width of the pictograph shall not exceed the upper-case letter height of the principal legend of the sign.

How else were you supposed to know it didn't mean Lake Norman, NC?

[MNHighwayMan]

How else were you supposed to know it didn't mean Lake Norman, NC?

The sign is otherwise put together too well.

[Scott5114]

I haven't seen the street name signs with text positioned too close to the top. But I would bet the text on those signs had decenders on the lower case letters. A correct design would have the text vertically centered on the sign blade in reference to the capital letter "M" height.

Funny you say that: the legend was "Mercedes Dr." No descenders to blame, just someone not even bothering to hit the center button.

This isn't the first time that Norman has made a legitimate attempt at QA. There was one mastarm sign that a contractor installed that had text so horizontally compressed that it was nearly unreadable. The city quickly replaced it with one of their own signs.

[Bobby5280]

Funny you say that: the legend was "Mercedes Dr." No descenders to blame, just someone not even bothering to hit the center button.

There's actually a good chance their shop drawings mandated the upward shift of lettering placement on all signs to make room for decenders regardless if the sign lettering had any decenders or not. Maybe someone finally took notice of how stupid the end results were looking and decided to change it.

The whole problem goes back to changes in the MUTCD mandating mixed case lettering on signs. For the longest time most small street signs were set with uppercase lettering. To save money on material the sign panels provided only a small amount of negative space around the all-caps lettering. With the rules shifted to mixed case legends the street name sign panels all needed to be significantly taller. More room was needed those decenders, especially if the line of lettering was going to be properly centered on the panel. That translates into a larger, more costly sign panel. Rather than blow more money on taller sign panels we've been seeing all sorts of design travesties influenced by cost cutting. It makes me wonder if some of those really stupid looking street name signs with very tiny lowercase letters were made that way deliberately. They saw the rule about MUTCD approved fonts (with lowercase letters 75% of the cap letter height) and took that as an opportunity to keep using narrow panels meant only for uppercase lettering.

This isn't the first time that Norman has made a legitimate attempt at QA. There was one mastarm sign that a contractor installed that had text so horizontally compressed that it was nearly unreadable. The city quickly replaced it with one of their own signs.

When a sign (or any piece of graphic design work) has lettering stretched or squeezed out of its original, native proportions it's a pretty good indicator an amateur or hack did the "design" work.

I'll do just about anything to avoid distorting typefaces out of their normal proportions. I can't stand the warped, fun house mirror look of distorted type. You'll see it on many garbage-quality signs, often with the lettering set in a default font like Arial Bold or Black. God forbid the "designer" scroll down in the font list to a natively condensed or extended type choice.

Two kinds of "designers" distort type: ones who don't know better and others who just don't care. The ones who don't know better can learn and improve the quality of their work. As for the ones who don't care: f### them. They need to get another job and stop visually crapping on the landscape.

[Scott5114]

As of last night, the old red sign had been reinstalled. What?

[JMoses24]

As of last night, the old red sign had been reinstalled. What?

I'll be in Norman Wednesday night. I'll check on it.

[Scott5114]

The red sign is still there as of 2:30 AM today—but the green signs remain on the cross street. It is odd.

[Scott5114]

ODOT appears to be experimenting with enhanced mileposts on I-35 between Purcell and Norman. Rather than the MoDOT practice of posting them every .2 miles, they are posted at the .0 and .5s only. On the .0 posts, the decimal panel is omitted entirely.

When I went to Purcell on Thursday, they had only been posted down to exit 98 southbound. I was still seeing the backs of them northbound at least to exit 95.

Also, on the weirdness at Main & Mercedes in Norman—we're back to green signs as of yesterday, new ones, with the alignment issue corrected.

[bugo]

The Gilcrease Turnpike is unpopular? According to whom? It isn't needed? It will provide a much safer and better route from I-44 in midtown to US 64-412 west towards Sand Springs. It will bypass downtown and the nasty, slow, clogged and dangerous IDL. I don't get out to Sand Springs very often, but I'd happily pay the toll to avoid the deathtrap known as the Inner Dispersal Loop.

Nexus 5X

[Baloo Uriza]

The Gilcrease Turnpike is unpopular? According to whom?

Nearly everyone who has a business or home near the path of the thing.  It's not been popular at the town halls where it's been discussed.

I don't get out to Sand Springs very often, but I'd happily pay the toll to avoid the deathtrap known as the Inner Dispersal Loop.

Fixing the IDL would be money well spent.  And I don't mean repaving it, I mean a flat out redesign to get rid of the hard lane changes and surprise blind curves.  That ring is bad enough that if it took making it a one-way ring, closing some ramps permanently or eliminating a leg to untangle the ramp mess, I'd be in favor of that.

[Plutonic Panda]

The Gilcrease Turnpike is unpopular? According to whom?

Nearly everyone who has a business or home near the path of the thing.  It's not been popular at the town halls where it's been discussed.

I don't get out to Sand Springs very often, but I'd happily pay the toll to avoid the deathtrap known as the Inner Dispersal Loop.

Fixing the IDL would be money well spent.  And I don't mean repaving it, I mean a flat out redesign to get rid of the hard lane changes and surprise blind curves.  That ring is bad enough that if it took making it a one-way ring, closing some ramps permanently or eliminating a leg to untangle the ramp mess, I'd be in favor of that.

The people who live around the Gilcrease want it, they just don’t want it near them them. People are selfish and someone is going to be impacted by infrastructure that thousands of people will use daily.

As for the IDL, I would be against removing on part of it and widening the rest and modernizing it. It will be a billion plus dollar project, but it is needed. I suspect it will remain the way it is as OkDOT has “invested” in it recently.

[bugo]

There are very few houses in the ROW of the future Gilcrease Turnpike. The ones that were there (just south of US 64-412) were removed decades ago. This road will benefit far more than it will inconvenience.

As far as the IDL goes, there isn't a lot of room to expand it

[Plutonic Panda]

There are very few houses in the ROW of the future Gilcrease Turnpike. The ones that were there (just south of US 64-412) were removed decades ago. This road will benefit far more than it will inconvenience.

As far as the IDL goes, there isn't a lot of room to expand it

Eminent domaine and or elevated structures and tunnels. This country needs to start thinking big again. So tired of the status quo

Btw, this isn’t targeted at you. I know you’re thinking realistically, but it is sad to see things that won’t be done bc people don’t wanna think they’re possible. At any rate, it would at least be nice to see the IDL reconstructed and exits moved to the right with C/D lanes.

[Baloo Uriza]

There are very few houses in the ROW of the future Gilcrease Turnpike. The ones that were there (just south of US 64-412) were removed decades ago. This road will benefit far more than it will inconvenience.

As far as the IDL goes, there isn't a lot of room to expand it

Eminent domaine and or elevated structures and tunnels. This country needs to start thinking big again. So tired of the status quo

Btw, this isn’t targeted at you. I know you’re thinking realistically, but it is sad to see things that won’t be done bc people don’t wanna think they’re possible. At any rate, it would at least be nice to see the IDL reconstructed and exits moved to the right with C/D lanes.

I could see half the ramps being removed as being redundant, given that there's four streets that go straight across the IDL from one ramp to another ramp on the opposite side.

[Plutonic Panda]

I-40 at Exit 64 Interchange at Gary Boulevard and a mile or so of the interstate will be getting some upgrades. I believe this meeting is just an update to select the alternative: https://www.ok.gov/odot/Programs_and_Projects/Public_Meetings_and_Hearings/20190228.html