I-240 extension in Oklahoma City

[Bobby5280]

I must have missed the part where they suggested a Southern extension of the Kilpatrick Turnpike down thru Mustang. From the looks of it the Kilpatrick is all done, but with its Southern leg diverted over to Airport Road. Further extensions of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike Extension, going farther at both ends, East along OK-9 to I-35 and North along OK-4 up thru Mustang, would be something worth a bit of excitement.

IMO they also need to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike north to I-35. SH-74 should also be upgraded to a freeway to Waterloo and curve east to connect to I-35. Also complete the interchange at SH-74 and Hefner Parkway.

Agreed on all those. Except the Kickapoo Turnpike needs to be extended both North and South. The initial setup is only going to be of value to locals on the East side of the OKC metro, even if it gets signed as I-240. Really the thing ought to extend down and then Westward to I-35 in or South of Norman. And the Kickapoo Turnpike should connect into I-35 on the North side of the OKC metro too. Then it could be a proper I-35 bypass around the East side of OKC. If a Southern extension of the Kickapoo Turnpike were to connect to the H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension South of Norman that would actually make the turnpike function as a proper I-44 bypass of OKC. If the OTA is going to spend $5 billion on turnpike upgrades they ought to do something these ideas a reality.

[Scott5114]

Honestly, the best they could do is just end it so that it defaults onto SH-9 westbound toward Norman. Put the pressure on ODOT to upgrade SH-9 between there and I-35–it needs to be done anyway. Building something parallel to it but further south might be cheaper, but East Norman is growing like weeds, so traffic is going to keep growing on SH-9 no matter what. May as well put the money into what's needed now instead of building something that will only reach peak usefulness decades from now.

[Plutonic Panda]

Am I the only one skeptical though that they can get all of this done for 5 billion

[Bobby5280]

It depends on how long they take to build the projects in this plan. The plan doesn't appear very ambitious to me. It's not like there is a bunch of new turnpike mileage getting built or elaborate, show piece things like directional stack interchanges. The plan seems to be mostly widening projects to add a lane along a specific stretch or a new ramp here or there. $5 billion should be able to cover that -if they don't piddle around and let price inflation kill their project budgets.

Honestly, the best they could do is just end it so that it defaults onto SH-9 westbound toward Norman. Put the pressure on ODOT to upgrade SH-9 between there and I-35–it needs to be done anyway. Building something parallel to it but further south might be cheaper, but East Norman is growing like weeds, so traffic is going to keep growing on SH-9 no matter what.

I agree OK-9 needs to be upgraded to limited access. But it would not be easy or without controversy. The signaled intersections with 24th Ave SW, McGee Drive, Imhoff Road, Berry Road and Chautauqua Ave don't have a lot of available space for on/off ramps. And there certainly isn't enough room to add frontage roads. A 3x3 configuration with some tightly spaced slip ramps might be possible. But at least a couple of those intersections served with traffic signals would have to be cut off in a freeway configuration. There are more ROW issues farther East.

Really, OK-9 thru the South side of Norman needs to be upgraded to limited access regardless of where a Southern extension of the Kickapoo Turnpike was routed. If anything, the Kickapoo Turnpike should be routed around the South side of Norman and hook into I-35 just South of the Riverwind Casino complex. A new OK-9 freeway could be built from I-35 and go Eastward and end at the Kickapoo Turnpike.  In a perfect world with enough funding that's probably what would happen.

[Scott5114]

What controversy would there possibly be? The only thing that the East Side and West Side can agree on is that Highway 9 in its current configuration sucks. Hating on Highway 9 is as much of a Norman tradition as OU football and the Denco Darlin. You'd maybe get some complaints from the people who are directly affected by property takings, but they'd be shouted down by everyone else who has ever had to drive on the damn thing. Any protest could be nipped in the bud by spinning it as benefiting the university (which it would). Maybe OU could chip in a token sum to show how important it is to them.

McGee and Berry both connect to Imhoff, so you could just put an interchange at Imhoff, grade-separate McGee, and close Berry.

[Bobby5280]

I think the main controversy would be blow-back from home-owners who live next to the existing OK-9 highway. Several kinds of complaints are possible or even likely from that group. Obviously they would have worries about their property values being negatively affected. A new OK-9 freeway could be built mostly at grade, but it would have to be elevated over all the intersections I mentioned along with at least several others. Nearby home owners may not like the visual looks of that. Not every intersection along OK-9 currently served with a traffic signal can get its own freeway exit. I'm certain home owners whose intersection gets leap-frogged without any ramps would raise a stink about their access being "cut off" (even if all they have to do is drive another block to get on OK-9). A construction project to upgrade OK-9 into a freeway would be pretty disruptive. The traffic situation along OK-9 already sucks. A freeway construction project would make it worse for at least a couple or so years. Some people wouldn't have the stomach to put up with that even if the end result made things far better.

Then there's the general possibility of the usual anti-roads crowd rising up to block things. We live in a very politically "red" region, but Norman is a college town. And I'm certain there are at least a few people who would be screaming that we need to build more bicycle paths rather than a freeway that would help vastly improve traffic movement within the Central Oklahoma region. There are also conservative types who just don't want to spend any more money on roads than they have to. This state has a long history of being pretty cheap at it.

[Scott5114]

While Norman is liberal, it isn't really that particular flavor of liberal. Norman residents are pretty clear-eyed that our transit options aren't currently sufficient to allow someone to live a successful life here without having a car, and so road improvements are something that are generally politically popular. There is no seriously-considered contingent here, as there is in Austin, that favors the elimination or scaling down of major roads. And unlike much of the rest of the state, the citizenry is actually pretty accepting of taxes, and has voted in the past in municipal referendums to raise them to support road improvements.

[Bobby5280]

If the locals in Norman would be accepting of a OK-9 freeway conversion ODOT needs to develop some kind of game plan to make it happen (if they don't already have some plans in development). I have the feeling this kind of project would be something they would have to tackle in at least two or three phases, if not just one intersection at a time. Here in Lawton I'd be happy if they could work on Rogers Lane one intersection at a time, starting with 38th Street.

The first traffic-signaled intersection East of I-35, 24th Avenue SW, would be a very tricky one to upgrade. But that intersection is quite a traffic bottleneck. Any new freeway main lanes would have to be built over the existing surface street there since there is no room for new ramps. It's either that or several properties next to the intersection, such as Total Beverage Services, would have to be removed. Even with enough space the existing I-35/OK-9 interchange would have to be seriously reconfigured to work in addition ramps, even braided style ramps. Really, I'm kind of wondering why ODOT didn't address the 24th Ave SW/OK-9 intersection back when they did the big I-35 upgrade project in Norman.

Grade separations of McGee Drive, Imhoff Road, Berry, Chautauqua Avenue and Jenkins Ave would be easier. With the right plan those 5 could be completed in one phase, maybe one half of the road at a time. Getting those 5 intersections upgraded along with the bigger issue at 24th Ave would greatly ease the burden of traffic moving between I-35 and places like Lloyd Noble Center. OK-9 should be an 3x3 Interstate quality facility between I-35 and Classen Blvd bare minimum.

[Scott5114]

↑ Totally agreed with you there. Chautauqua and Jenkins may be a little trickier than they look on the map, though, as the empty space to the south of SH-9 is actually a nature preserve that I believe is managed by OU and is used to conduct research. The really interesting intersection is 12th Avenue SE, which my instincts say to just close and provide access through Cedar Lane Road, but there is a ton of traffic that heads south from SH-9 there to the newish housing additions near its intersection Cedar Lane Road. I would say the easternmost interchange that should be constructed should be at 24th Avenue SE (the other 24th Avenue, not the one near I-35); Norman Regional Hospital is building a branch hospital at that intersection, and an interchange would be useful there to keep the ambulances from having to try to time gaps across 50 MPH oncoming traffic.

[skluth]

It's four miles from I-35 to Classen Av on OK 9. This doesn't leave much room for interchanges unless you want a freeway where all the interchanges are too close like the Madison Beltline. (I used to live in Madison. You don't want that.) Marshall Av is a problem as the commercial properties north of OK 9 there can only be accessed via OK 9 or the winding streets of the subdivision to their east; it will either need its own interchange or an access road to 12th Av SE.  I agree Chautauqua would be tricky for an interchange, but Jenkins looks to have room for ramps on the NW and SW corners. I have no problems with new homeowners being slightly inconvenienced and using Cedar Lane Road rather than their current easier access at 12th Av SE as freeways by definition have limited access.

[bugo]

I don't know what to sign ... the section of I-44 from SH-74 to I-35.

Slap an I-644 or I-844 on it?

No. OKC has 3 interstates to choose from, Tulsa just has one. Tulsa might need those numbers one day. This road can be I-435.

[Scott5114]

You'll have x46s soon enough.

[Bobby5280]

The really interesting intersection is 12th Avenue SE, which my instincts say to just close and provide access through Cedar Lane Road, but there is a ton of traffic that heads south from SH-9 there to the newish housing additions near its intersection Cedar Lane Road.

Based on the configuration of the ramps for OK-9 to Classen Blvd (to the East of the intersection) ODOT might be able to fit in slip ramps for 12th Ave SE. But that intersection with Marshall Ave nearby would have to be connected with some kind of frontage road setup. Maybe a 2-way street parallel to the OK-9 freeway.

It's four miles from I-35 to Classen Av on OK 9. This doesn't leave much room for interchanges unless you want a freeway where all the interchanges are too close like the Madison Beltline.

That's why some of the intersections currently serviced with traffic signals would have to be passed over without any ramps. There isn't enough room off to the sides to accommodate space-saving features like braided ramps. If the highway between I-35 and Classen Blvd could be built as a mostly elevated freeway it would provide more design flexibility in the design of on/off ramps. Elevated freeways typically meet with one hell of a lot of resistance.

[Stephane Dumas]

IMO they also need to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike north to I-35. SH-74 should also be upgraded to a freeway to Waterloo and curve east to connect to I-35. Also complete the interchange at SH-74 and Hefner Parkway.

The Kickpapoo tpk could also extend south to I-35 to give a eastern north-south bypass of OKC for I-35 travellers.

I-44/Bailey Tpk could desserve more interchanges like the proposed US-81 bypass of Chickasha, US-277/OK-19 and OK-76 at Newcastle as that article mentioned.

[TXtoNJ]

Just build OK-9 in a trench with cantilevered frontage roads, like a more compact version of 35 in S. OKC.

[rte66man]

IMO they also need to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike north to I-35. SH-74 should also be upgraded to a freeway to Waterloo and curve east to connect to I-35. Also complete the interchange at SH-74 and Hefner Parkway.

The Kickpapoo tpk could also extend south to I-35 to give a eastern north-south bypass of OKC for I-35 travellers.

I-44/Bailey Tpk could desserve more interchanges like the proposed US-81 bypass of Chickasha, US-277/OK-19 and OK-76 at Newcastle as that article mentioned.

There will be a full cloverleaf where the 81 bypass meets the Bailey. It's one of the reasons they moved the toll gate

[plain]

I was playing around on GSV and noticed the newest section of the Kilpatrick Tpk (south of I-40) doesn't have the toll schedules listed at any of its toll plazas, not even the ramp plazas. Was that some kind of oversight or something?

[Scott5114]

I was playing around on GSV and noticed the newest section of the Kilpatrick Tpk (south of I-40) doesn't have the toll schedules listed at any of its toll plazas, not even the ramp plazas. Was that some kind of oversight or something?

Tolling is all electronic on the Kilpatrick now. I suppose they figured the toll schedules were extraneous information and it didn't need to be posted since you don't have to physically pull out cash anymore.

[plain]

That could very well be the reasoning but even the AETs here in the east have signs that tell you how much the tolls are. It's nice to know exactly how much is being deducted from your account.

[Plutonic Panda]

IMO they also need to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike north to I-35. SH-74 should also be upgraded to a freeway to Waterloo and curve east to connect to I-35. Also complete the interchange at SH-74 and Hefner Parkway.

The Kickpapoo tpk could also extend south to I-35 to give a eastern north-south bypass of OKC for I-35 travellers.

I-44/Bailey Tpk could desserve more interchanges like the proposed US-81 bypass of Chickasha, US-277/OK-19 and OK-76 at Newcastle as that article mentioned.

There will be a full cloverleaf where the 81 bypass meets the Bailey. It's one of the reasons they moved the toll gate

I wish they'd build direct connect.

[rte66man]

IMO they also need to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike north to I-35. SH-74 should also be upgraded to a freeway to Waterloo and curve east to connect to I-35. Also complete the interchange at SH-74 and Hefner Parkway.

The Kickpapoo tpk could also extend south to I-35 to give a eastern north-south bypass of OKC for I-35 travellers.

I-44/Bailey Tpk could desserve more interchanges like the proposed US-81 bypass of Chickasha, US-277/OK-19 and OK-76 at Newcastle as that article mentioned.

There will be a full cloverleaf where the 81 bypass meets the Bailey. It's one of the reasons they moved the toll gate

I wish they'd build direct connect.

Not nearly enough traffic to justify the cost.

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, cloverleaf interchanges are far cheaper to build than direct connect stacks. Oklahoma doesn't have a legit, modern full stack interchange anywhere in the state. There are several other locations far more deserving of that "first" than the future interchange with I-44 and the US-81 bypass in Chickasha. The I-40/I-44 interchange in OKC should be re-built as a full blown stack. At best, I could see the I-44/US-81 cloverleaf interchange being built with C/D lanes, but not anything more elaborate than that. Chances are OTA/ODOT already have standard cloverleaf plans finalized.

Just build OK-9 in a trench with cantilevered frontage roads, like a more compact version of 35 in S. OKC.

That would be too expensive and way too disruptive. The existing road and existing intersections would have to be torn out to excavate a trench and bridge new intersections across it. It would be much easier building new freeway "hills" over the existing intersections, likely one half of the road at a time -that way OK-9 could at least remain partially open throughout the construction process.

[TXtoNJ]

It's not too expensive if the alternative is the no-build option, and there's plenty of reason to think it would be. Only the 2.5 mi from 35 to Jenkins would need that treatment, anyway - can be a standard interstate-quality freeway east of there.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah the typical argument against everything in Oklahoma that it's too expensive to build

[Bobby5280]

A four level direct connect stack interchange would be sheer overkill for an I-44 interchange with a US highway bypass of a small town. Stack interchanges start out around the $300-$400 million cost range these days. The US-81 bypass will be upgrade-able to a divided Interstate quality freeway, but it's not going to be in that configuration initially. IIRC it will be a combination of limited access Super-2 and maybe some limited access divided 4-lane road. A cloverleaf interchange with I-44 is going to be good enough for that location.