Boise City US-287 Bypass

[Sykotyk]

I've been trying to find any info about this bypass. It seems to be in the later stages of development. Already a lone bridge has been built across US64/412/56 just west of the US287 intersection to the east of town. And they north-to-southeast reworking of the road to the north of town is present. Had no idea this was being done. Boise City has been in need of some type of bypass for a while. Any details? It looks like it will be a two-lane (possibly super-two), with at least some type of partial interchange to the east of town.

[J N Winkler]

According to the construction plans for job piece number 13337(19), which has just been advertised for a letting on August 19, the bypass will be I-56.  (Yes, I know . . .)  On a more serious note, the bypass is being built in multiple contracts.  Job piece number 13337(16) went to bid in August 2009.

The contract just advertised covers the length of the bypass from US 287 southeast of Boise City to the next north-south county section line road east of US 287 as it heads north away from the courthouse square.  In other words, it is a near-complete bypass of US 287 to the northeast of Boise City.  It will indeed be a Super Two, with a diamond interchange as the connection with US 287 southeast of Boise City, and a right-angle flat intersection where it connects with the length of the bypass being built under the previous contract.  (I don't have the plans for this older contract on this computer, but I think it establishes the connection with US 287 north of Boise City and does not go further west than that.)

[Scott5114]

Good to hear of a bypass actually being built in OK, but this will sadly do away with the awesome 7-way concurrency that takes place on the traffic circle there. Boise City had the aura of the last outpost of civilization, barely hanging on, when I was there in 2007. I can't imagine being bypassed will help the town any.

[agentsteel53]

Good to hear of a bypass actually being built in OK, but this will sadly do away with the awesome 7-way concurrency that takes place on the traffic circle there. Boise City had the aura of the last outpost of civilization, barely hanging on, when I was there in 2007. I can't imagine being bypassed will help the town any.

to think, I lived about 100 miles past there on US-64.  Well away from civilization.

does OK-325 count as being part of the concurrency, seeing as it terminates at the circle?

[Milepost61]

Recently I happened to randomly scroll past Boise City in Google Maps and was surprised to see a bypass around the east side of town in the aerial. When did it open?

I'm sure the US 287 truckers are loving not having to go through that traffic circle in town.

[NE2]

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3206.0

It's been open for probably at least a year, but Oklahoma is just getting around to submitting it to AASHTO with horrible grammar: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6658.msg147943#msg147943

[Scott5114]

Threads merged.

[rte66man]

Recently I happened to randomly scroll past Boise City in Google Maps and was surprised to see a bypass around the east side of town in the aerial. When did it open?

13337(16) US-287
NCIPY-017N(190)NI
Contract: 090518 Completion Date: 09/18/2011
2.979 MI. GRADE, DRAIN, SURFACE & BRIDGE US-287 NORTH SECTION OF BOISE CITY BYPASS.
$7,612,874.65

This from ODOT's Construction Report dated April 2012

rte66man

[Milepost61]

Is the bypass only US 287 or did they move OK 3 onto it also?

[corco]

Just 287 according to the maps associated with the AASHTO filings. I'll be there in a couple weeks to properly investigate.

[Scott5114]

I scanned through the attached Oklahoma Transportation Commission actions, and it appeared from those that OK 3 will be making the move as well.

[austrini]

I think its part of the Ports-to-Plains corridor, they're doing a lot of little bypasses in Texas for it and its been difficult to find information about them from the DOT because its funded differently somehow.

[Scott5114]

Just 287 according to the maps associated with the AASHTO filings. I'll be there in a couple weeks to properly investigate.

When you get down there you'll have to tell us whether the bypass has managed to, as ODOT said, "elimitante the truck trarffic".

[corco]

I was over there a couple weeks ago. It appears that SH-3 is staying on the old alignment for now- although it looks like they want 3 traffic using the bypass because while it is signed well along the old alignment, ODOT doesn't direct 3 traffic onto that alignment, and Guymon traffic is directed to stay on the bypass.

From 287/385/3 south at the beginning of the bypass



From 385/3 south approaching the courthouse- that looks like an old sign


Here's where conclusive evidence on the 3 thing starts

At the old spot where 56/64/287/412/3 split, now without 287


Approaching the courthouse from 56/64/412/3 west


At the 385/3 split


Reassurance shield after the 385/3 split- looks like the NORTH banner over 287 was replaced with TO- pardon the blurriness


Reassurance shield after that Amarillo sign above


Approaching the 287 bypass from 56/64/412/3 east


Reassurance shield on 287 north of the 56/64/412/3 junction


Error shields from 385/3 north approaching 287


From 287 south approaching 56/64/412/3, 56/64 omitted for whatever reason


At the end of that ramp


Didn't see any truck trarffic in town, but that doesn't mean it's been elimitanted

[bugo]

The exits are numbered?

[corco]

There's only one interchange, but it is numbered.

[Scott5114]

Have we ever filed a whole bypass under The Worst of Road Signs?

• All caps Clearview destinations (destinations are supposed to be mixed case, and all caps Clearview is always dumb looking), with straight arrows on the right rather than the left. Spelled out designations instead of shields for no reason.
• The new courthouse diagrammatic looks mostly okay and managed to come out in FHWA series...but the directions are stuck in little banner graphics (another 2009 MUTCD no-no) and seem like they'd be hard to read.
• Arial on the OK-3 shield!
• Lack of small-caps treatment on the 287 South BGS.
• OK-287 and OK-385? Good lord. Even if that was the correct designation, OK three digit shields don't look like that. They are supposed to use Series B. (And I think the shield may have been stretched too far, but it's hard to say.)
• ODOT and its contractors need to write on the chalkboard 500 times "YOU DON'T NEED TO PUT JCT ON SIGNS FOR FREEWAY EXITS". Of course it's a junction; it's a freeway off-ramp! If there was no junction there would be no ramp and no sign. This sign (and the US-287/Amarillo sign above) both have larger caps than lowercase letters. Maybe they shrunk the lowercase letters down to match the FHWA Series x-height ratios? If DOTs can't get this right they need to revoke the Clearview approval, since that increased x-height on Clearview is the only reason it is considered more legible than FHWA Series. Bonus points to ODOT for numbering the exit, but they get them taken away again for centering the exit tab.
• The new 3 shields look pretty bad.  OK shields are supposed to have the OK outline removed within a certain distance of the number, to make it stand out. Obviously this wasn't done here. That's a pretty careless OK outline, too.

[txstateends]

Have we ever filed a whole bypass under The Worst of Road Signs?

• All caps Clearview destinations (destinations are supposed to be mixed case, and all caps Clearview is always dumb looking), with straight arrows on the right rather than the left. Spelled out designations instead of shields for no reason.
• The new courthouse diagrammatic looks mostly okay and managed to come out in FHWA series...but the directions are stuck in little banner graphics (another 2009 MUTCD no-no) and seem like they'd be hard to read.
• Arial on the OK-3 shield!
• Lack of small-caps treatment on the 287 South BGS.
• OK-287 and OK-385? Good lord. Even if that was the correct designation, OK three digit shields don't look like that. They are supposed to use Series B. (And I think the shield may have been stretched too far, but it's hard to say.)
• ODOT and its contractors need to write on the chalkboard 500 times "YOU DON'T NEED TO PUT JCT ON SIGNS FOR FREEWAY EXITS". Of course it's a junction; it's a freeway off-ramp! If there was no junction there would be no ramp and no sign. This sign (and the US-287/Amarillo sign above) both have larger caps than lowercase letters. Maybe they shrunk the lowercase letters down to match the FHWA Series x-height ratios? If DOTs can't get this right they need to revoke the Clearview approval, since that increased x-height on Clearview is the only reason it is considered more legible than FHWA Series. Bonus points to ODOT for numbering the exit, but they get them taken away again for centering the exit tab.
• The new 3 shields look pretty bad.  OK shields are supposed to have the OK outline removed within a certain distance of the number, to make it stand out. Obviously this wasn't done here. That's a pretty careless OK outline, too.

And this sign-goof buffet has been in sight of the public for how long now??  >ugh< I think I need some eye wash after all this  8)

[txstateends]

OK, ahhh, better now

I was over there a couple weeks ago. [...]

From 287 south approaching 56/64/412/3, 56/64 omitted for whatever reason

OK, the exit there is numbered.  Does OK's DOT eventually want a US 287 freeway (or I-27, wish-wish) through the state?  None of US 287's exits are numbered between Fort Worth and Amarillo, except in Wichita Falls but that's where it overlaps with I-44 there.
(Unless the exit tab IS one of the sign goofs...)

[Scott5114]

OK, ahhh, better now

I was over there a couple weeks ago. [...]

From 287 south approaching 56/64/412/3, 56/64 omitted for whatever reason

OK, the exit there is numbered.  Does OK's DOT eventually want a US 287 freeway (or I-27, wish-wish) through the state?  None of US 287's exits are numbered between Fort Worth and Amarillo, except in Wichita Falls but that's where it overlaps with I-44 there.
(Unless the exit tab IS one of the sign goofs...)

I think it might have stemmed from a requirement in the 2009 MUTCD for all freeways to include exit numbers, even those that are not interstates. I am not sure that it would apply to a lone interchange like this, but ODOT appears to feel it does.

[J N Winkler]

I checked the construction plans for the Boise City bypass (or, to give it its chopblock title, "US 287 Boise City Relief Route") to see whether these were DOT/consultant or contractor errors.  The relevant job piece numbers are of the form 13337(XX)--I have 13337(16) and 13337(19) in my collection, but there may have been other contracts which I missed.

Taking Corco's pictures in sequence:



This is a DOT/consultant error (the contractor manufactured the sign faithfully as shown on the plan sheet).



Same as above, except the plan sheet shows the two panels butted together.



Here I refer to the large sign panel, not the route shield assembly ("sign salad") in the foreground.  The larger capital letter "A" in "Amarillo" is a contractor error; the plan sheet shows uppercase and lowercase letters in the correct height ratio.



This is a composite DOT-consultant/contractor error.  The plan sheet shows a trailblazer assembly using Oklahoma state route shields (meeting the correct standards for such, down to Series B for the digits) instead of the correct US route shields.  But it was a contractor decision to use Series D instead of Series B.  (Frankly I find it difficult to object because I feel the Series B digits called for in the official standard compromise legibility.)



This is another composite DOT-consultant/contractor error.  The layout, as shown on the plan sheet, calls for "JCT" at the overly large size used on this sign (16" for both all-uppercase "JCT" and for capital letters in the primary destination legend--if I were designing this sign and kept the "JCT" legend, which I agree is unnecessary, I would have put it at 12" capital letter height).  But it is the contractor's fault that the capital and lowercase letters in the primary destination legend are not in the correct proportions on the actual sign:  on the plan sheet they are.

This is partnership between the public and private sector at its finest:  what opportunity to screw up the one misses, the other will pick up.

[The High Plains Traveler]

Have we ever filed a whole bypass under The Worst of Road Signs?

• The new courthouse diagrammatic looks mostly okay and managed to come out in FHWA series...but the directions are stuck in little banner graphics (another 2009 MUTCD no-no) and seem like they'd be hard to read.

That new courthouse square graphic would imply that I could turn left at that point to go toward Clayton rather than circle the courthouse. Assuming it's one way as before, they should have cut out the lower left quadrant of that loop.

[Scott5114]

I posted a redo of this bypass in the Road Related Illustrations thread.

[Sykotyk]

My guess is that part of OK doesn't really deal with Freeways often and just don't understand proper signage, namely the JCT and the shields posted right before the BGS.

[blawp]

Gross incompetence.