AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?  (Read 50850 times)

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1908
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 11:45:57 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2018, 03:12:12 AM »

For what itís worth, an upgrade of US 75 through Sherman is in the works. Hereís the story:
http://www.heralddemocrat.com/news/20180322/txdot-unveils-plans-for-hwy-75-improvements
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3431
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:14 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #26 on: March 29, 2018, 12:25:19 PM »

I guess once this project up into Denison (at Morton St/FM-120) is completed that will leave about 6 miles from there to the Red River to improve/widen. I can certainly see TX DOT making US-75 3 lanes in each direction up to the Red River and maybe even replacing the old US-75 bridges across the Red River. I don't know how much ODOT would need to share in that cost however.

The Herald Democrat newspaper article says the intersection with US-75 and US-82 will be re-built, "creating additional capacity within the box that makes up the intersection of the two highways." It sounds like they'll add more lanes to the US-75 & US-82 main lanes and perhaps make some improvements to frontage roads as well since those will be re-routed slightly.

The bigger question is if TX DOT will design the new US-75/US-82 interchange where direct connect flyover ramps could be added in the future (such as building stubs, approaches or simply reserving room for them). The 4 mile US-75 project is estimated to cost $161 million. That's a lot of money, but it's nowhere near enough to include a 4-level direct-connect stack interchange. Stack interchanges start out at $250 million and go up from there these days.

At some point TX DOT will be forced to add flyover ramps to the US-75/US-82 interchange. It might be a tight squeeze avoiding the gas stations and other businesses on the four corners of that interchange box. Over the long term more development and traffic will be on both US-75 and US-82, especially if/when the Dallas North Tollway is extended up to US-82 via Preston Rd/TX-289. The DNT may eventually be dove-tailed into US-75 between Sherman and Denison. Lake Texoma is a big leisure attraction, as are casinos across the Red River (like the Choctaw Casino resort-hotel next to Durant).
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 839
  • Last Login: Today at 05:32:08 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2018, 12:44:28 PM »

If they extend I-45, I would guess they'd end it at the Denison interchange with US 69. I wouldn't be surprised if US 75 were truncated to Atoka, eventually.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3431
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:14 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2018, 01:36:26 PM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

If I-45 was extended North along US-75 it probably would indeed end at the US-69 interchange just South of the Red River and Texas travel center. To get I-45 across the river those two old US-75 bridges would need to be replaced (which wouldn't be all that difficult or costly to do; it's not like there's barge traffic navigating that part of the river). Oklahoma would have to do its own highway upgrades, some of which is planned or happening.

I could at least see I-45 (or "I-47") getting as far as Durant and US-70 within the next decade if there is a real push to Interstate designation. Atoka and Stringtown are strangely big political hurdles (even though they shouldn't be). The military angle, like what is being used to push I-14 development, could just as easily be applied here since there is a major Army installation just SW of McAlester. If not for the Atoka-Stringtown crap it should be feasible to extend I-45 at least as far North as I-40 in Checotah.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #29 on: March 29, 2018, 03:30:50 PM »

The bigger question is if TX DOT will design the new US-75/US-82 interchange where direct connect flyover ramps could be added in the future (such as building stubs, approaches or simply reserving room for them). The 4 mile US-75 project is estimated to cost $161 million. That's a lot of money, but it's nowhere near enough to include a 4-level direct-connect stack interchange. Stack interchanges start out at $250 million and go up from there these days.

If I had to make a guess based on past situations, TXDOT will, for the time being, put a volleyball at the 75/82 interchange.  If plans for a full freeway on US 82 from at least I-35 to Paris are forthcoming, then they'll bite the bullet, buy adjacent property, and install a stack or at least something resembling a turbine.  Volleyballs seem to be the TX method of choice when both funds and location are "tight".  But I think the assessment of US 75 -- regardless of whether Interstate status is sought -- as not only part of a major interregional corridor but also a weekend recreational egress for DFW is spot on -- and this latest push for expansion is a manifestation of that reality. 
Logged

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4320
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 30
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: February 17, 2020, 10:23:20 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #30 on: March 29, 2018, 03:42:13 PM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

This is true, but the border crossing was closed by the Canadian government a number of years ago.
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 839
  • Last Login: Today at 05:32:08 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #31 on: March 29, 2018, 03:52:51 PM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

No need for a redundant 75 just to end it in Denison. TxDOT tends to truncate US Route numbers where there's an overlapping interstate for the remainder of the route.

Since 75 wouldn't go anywhere in Texas anymore, and 69 is the more important route in SE OK, truncating 75 to Atoka would aid in navigation and reduce confusion.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #32 on: March 29, 2018, 03:55:12 PM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

This is true, but the border crossing was closed by the Canadian government a number of years ago.

At the risk of slipping into Fictional here -- if TX elects to extend I-45 north to the state line, the most rational course of action would be to truncate US 69 to Atoka and reroute US 75 over current US 69 from Sherman to Port Arthur (ironically, that routing just happens to intersect the other end of US 175).  Takes care of the US 69/I-69 conundrum (not that TXDOT gives a shit) in the process!
Logged

txstateends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1081
  • Location: north TX, not far from an interstate interchange and a US terminus
  • Last Login: June 05, 2019, 11:30:28 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #33 on: March 29, 2018, 08:51:49 PM »

I wouldn't worry about fictional slippage, since there is obviously some move, at least on the local level, to get interstate status.  The most logical numbering would be I-45.  According to the article in the link above, the state has funded the work that will start next year, so the state must think it's important, or they wouldn't have moved to fund it.  Also, if the traffic counts hold up or increase (especially the amount of truckers), that should just add to any move to make the corridor an interstate.
Logged
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

Brian556

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2405
  • Location: Lewisville, TX
  • Last Login: November 25, 2022, 08:02:28 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2018, 02:00:39 AM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

This is true, but the border crossing was closed by the Canadian government a number of years ago.

At the risk of slipping into Fictional here -- if TX elects to extend I-45 north to the state line, the most rational course of action would be to truncate US 69 to Atoka and reroute US 75 over current US 69 from Sherman to Port Arthur (ironically, that routing just happens to intersect the other end of US 175).  Takes care of the US 69/I-69 conundrum (not that TXDOT gives a shit) in the process!

I disagree.

I say it would be more logical to truncate US 75 to Atoka, and co-sign US 69 with I-45 from Denison TX to Big Cabin OK.

Logged

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11266
  • Stop making sense

  • Age: 45
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: Today at 07:08:50 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #35 on: March 30, 2018, 08:37:44 PM »

US-75 runs clear up to the Canadian border, a little over a mile East where I-29 ends. And then Manitoba highway 75 goes farther North from there to Winnipeg. There's no need to truncate US-75 at all, much less end it at Atoka.

This is true, but the border crossing was closed by the Canadian government a number of years ago.

At the risk of slipping into Fictional here -- if TX elects to extend I-45 north to the state line, the most rational course of action would be to truncate US 69 to Atoka and reroute US 75 over current US 69 from Sherman to Port Arthur (ironically, that routing just happens to intersect the other end of US 175).  Takes care of the US 69/I-69 conundrum (not that TXDOT gives a shit) in the process!

I disagree.

I say it would be more logical to truncate US 75 to Atoka, and co-sign US 69 with I-45 from Denison TX to Big Cabin OK.

Would CraIG COUnty move to the new freeway?
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

texaskdog

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3544
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:56:50 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #36 on: March 31, 2018, 04:36:51 AM »

Right now Texas isn't putting Interstate highway shields on anything new unless it has something to do with the I-69 project. I would even count I-2 as part of the I-69 effort. Elsewhere in Texas many US and State highway segments have been built (or are in the process of being upgraded) to Interstate quality without getting an Interstate designation. That includes US-75/US-69 leading up to the Red River. I think some of this has to do with the amount of federal funding going into these projects. If the state of Texas has to pay for the bulk of the improvements why would they put an Interstate shield on the finished project?

If ODOT indeed requested US-69 be included in the Interstate highway system up to I-40 & Checotah that would make sense. I have long thought US-69 should be upgraded to Interstate quality from the Red River to Big Cabin & I-44.

Unfortunately it appears other people within Oklahoma are blocking improvements of the US-69 corridor, despite the ridiculous amounts of heavy truck traffic and dangers the current road design pose to motorists. According to what I've read elsewhere in this form people along the corridor in towns like Atoka and Stringtown have blocked corridor improvements, afraid their towns will die off if "bypassed." Never mind the fact small towns in Oklahoma are losing population to aging, youth migration to opportunties elsewhere and young people in general having far fewer children than past generations.

Oklahoma's state government is broke. The latest crisis is over teacher pay. Oklahoma now ranks dead freaking last in the nation. We've already been losing teachers, police officers, fire fighters, etc to better pay in other states. Years ago the state government passed big tax cuts it thought would create all sorts of growth that never happened. Its balanced budget law has forced the state to make deep cuts into the bone on many things, including public education. A recent measure to fund teacher pay raises with a fuel tax hike failed to pass. The state's fuel tax hasn't changed since 1993. IMHO fuel taxes should only be used to fund roads.

Some Interstate quality upgrades to US-69 are planned for Calera, McAlester and Muskogee. These will be useful upgrades, but far more has to be done to get the rest of the corridor upgraded. Changes in mindset need to happen in Oklahoma's state government and at the federal level.

Texas could annex Oklahoma, but only if the Sooners change their name
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 11805
  • Mad man with a camera

  • Age: 62
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: Today at 09:01:12 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #37 on: March 31, 2018, 11:04:45 AM »

Right now Texas isn't putting Interstate highway shields on anything new unless it has something to do with the I-69 project. I would even count I-2 as part of the I-69 effort. Elsewhere in Texas many US and State highway segments have been built (or are in the process of being upgraded) to Interstate quality without getting an Interstate designation. That includes US-75/US-69 leading up to the Red River. I think some of this has to do with the amount of federal funding going into these projects. If the state of Texas has to pay for the bulk of the improvements why would they put an Interstate shield on the finished project?

If ODOT indeed requested US-69 be included in the Interstate highway system up to I-40 & Checotah that would make sense. I have long thought US-69 should be upgraded to Interstate quality from the Red River to Big Cabin & I-44.

Unfortunately it appears other people within Oklahoma are blocking improvements of the US-69 corridor, despite the ridiculous amounts of heavy truck traffic and dangers the current road design pose to motorists. According to what I've read elsewhere in this form people along the corridor in towns like Atoka and Stringtown have blocked corridor improvements, afraid their towns will die off if "bypassed." Never mind the fact small towns in Oklahoma are losing population to aging, youth migration to opportunties elsewhere and young people in general having far fewer children than past generations.

Oklahoma's state government is broke. The latest crisis is over teacher pay. Oklahoma now ranks dead freaking last in the nation. We've already been losing teachers, police officers, fire fighters, etc to better pay in other states. Years ago the state government passed big tax cuts it thought would create all sorts of growth that never happened. Its balanced budget law has forced the state to make deep cuts into the bone on many things, including public education. A recent measure to fund teacher pay raises with a fuel tax hike failed to pass. The state's fuel tax hasn't changed since 1993. IMHO fuel taxes should only be used to fund roads.

Some Interstate quality upgrades to US-69 are planned for Calera, McAlester and Muskogee. These will be useful upgrades, but far more has to be done to get the rest of the corridor upgraded. Changes in mindset need to happen in Oklahoma's state government and at the federal level.

Texas could annex Oklahoma, but only if the Sooners change their name

Texas wants so secede and I'm not sure Oklahoma would survive
Logged
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

texaskdog

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3544
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Kyle, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:56:50 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #38 on: March 31, 2018, 12:33:38 PM »

Have 75 run on the Indian Nation Turnpike, replace US 271 to Gladewater, TX 135 to Kilgore, and replace US 259 to Redfield.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2018, 12:36:33 PM by texaskdog »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #39 on: March 31, 2018, 02:25:49 PM »

Right now Texas isn't putting Interstate highway shields on anything new unless it has something to do with the I-69 project. I would even count I-2 as part of the I-69 effort. Elsewhere in Texas many US and State highway segments have been built (or are in the process of being upgraded) to Interstate quality without getting an Interstate designation. That includes US-75/US-69 leading up to the Red River. I think some of this has to do with the amount of federal funding going into these projects. If the state of Texas has to pay for the bulk of the improvements why would they put an Interstate shield on the finished project?

If ODOT indeed requested US-69 be included in the Interstate highway system up to I-40 & Checotah that would make sense. I have long thought US-69 should be upgraded to Interstate quality from the Red River to Big Cabin & I-44.

Unfortunately it appears other people within Oklahoma are blocking improvements of the US-69 corridor, despite the ridiculous amounts of heavy truck traffic and dangers the current road design pose to motorists. According to what I've read elsewhere in this form people along the corridor in towns like Atoka and Stringtown have blocked corridor improvements, afraid their towns will die off if "bypassed." Never mind the fact small towns in Oklahoma are losing population to aging, youth migration to opportunties elsewhere and young people in general having far fewer children than past generations.

Oklahoma's state government is broke. The latest crisis is over teacher pay. Oklahoma now ranks dead freaking last in the nation. We've already been losing teachers, police officers, fire fighters, etc to better pay in other states. Years ago the state government passed big tax cuts it thought would create all sorts of growth that never happened. Its balanced budget law has forced the state to make deep cuts into the bone on many things, including public education. A recent measure to fund teacher pay raises with a fuel tax hike failed to pass. The state's fuel tax hasn't changed since 1993. IMHO fuel taxes should only be used to fund roads.

Some Interstate quality upgrades to US-69 are planned for Calera, McAlester and Muskogee. These will be useful upgrades, but far more has to be done to get the rest of the corridor upgraded. Changes in mindset need to happen in Oklahoma's state government and at the federal level.

Texas could annex Oklahoma, but only if the Sooners change their name

Texas wants so secede and I'm not sure Oklahoma would survive

This calls for a re-reading of Dan Jenkins' (the guy who wrote Semi-Tough) novel Baja Oklahoma.  Touches on the mindsets within each state (filtered, like most Jenkins works, through the sports world).
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3683
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 25, 2022, 10:55:16 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #40 on: April 02, 2018, 05:30:51 PM »

I still don't think Interstate 45 will be extended north anytime soon, if ever.
Logged

nhoward45

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: July 19, 2022, 01:47:44 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #41 on: April 25, 2018, 05:49:09 PM »

I don't see Interstate 45 going north of Dallas, even with the proposed upgrade to U.S. 75 in Denison to Interstate standards.  As long as Oklahoma does nothing on US 69 or US 75, the extension is going nowhere.  The Sooner State is suffering from poor management in the public sector, whether in education or transportation.  It's a shame too, because Kansas is working on upgrading their stretch of US 69 from Fort Scott to the Oklahoma line over the next two decades.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6493
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Tulsa
  • Last Login: Today at 12:58:29 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #42 on: April 25, 2018, 09:56:50 PM »

Kansas and Oklahoma need a way to tie the US 69 freeway in KS into the Will Rogers Turnpike. I-44 to US 69 would make a nice alternative to I-44 to I-49 when going from Tulsa to Kansas City and beyond.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #43 on: April 26, 2018, 02:28:13 AM »

Kansas and Oklahoma need a way to tie the US 69 freeway in KS into the Will Rogers Turnpike. I-44 to US 69 would make a nice alternative to I-44 to I-49 when going from Tulsa to Kansas City and beyond.

If the US 69 freeway in KS were to be extended south to I-44, OK need not even be involved if such a freeway facility were to utilize the US 400/166 connection to I-44.  That would also obviate the need to bypass Baxter Springs and build a new-terrain connection from that town down to the Will Rogers Turnpike.  It would also be considerably shorter and consequently less costly. 
Logged

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16621
  • Nit picker of unprecedented pedantry

  • Age: 32
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 08:15:53 PM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #44 on: April 26, 2018, 05:48:18 AM »

Then you're getting Missouri involved, which is almost as broke as Oklahoma and has a competing facility in the form of I-49. And we see how easy it is for them to get their snippet of the BVB built.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #45 on: April 26, 2018, 04:11:59 PM »

Kansas and Oklahoma need a way to tie the US 69 freeway in KS into the Will Rogers Turnpike. I-44 to US 69 would make a nice alternative to I-44 to I-49 when going from Tulsa to Kansas City and beyond.

If the US 69 freeway in KS were to be extended south to I-44, OK need not even be involved if such a freeway facility were to utilize the US 400/166 connection to I-44.  That would also obviate the need to bypass Baxter Springs and build a new-terrain connection from that town down to the Will Rogers Turnpike.  It would also be considerably shorter and consequently less costly. 
Then you're getting Missouri involved, which is almost as broke as Oklahoma and has a competing facility in the form of I-49. And we see how easy it is for them to get their snippet of the BVB built.

I suppose any project considered within that particular "border" region will encounter obstacles no matter what jurisdiction in which it's routed.  But ironically it would likely be the main state containing such a route, KS, which would bear the burden of constructing an extension of the existing US 69 facility around Pittsburg and down to somewhere along the state line -- and they certainly haven't given any indication that this is on their radar in the near-to-middle term.  So speculation about any extension in the greater I-45 context north of I-44 would likely be classified as fictional.  Just because there's a partial facility there doesn't mean it's "corridor-ready" -- and, as the comment about the proximity of I-49 indicates, a more than viable alternative exists -- although not one with the potential to funnel "pass-through" dollars into KS coffers.  MO was wise to upgrade the US 71 corridor with what $$ they could amass; now they have the preferred connection south of KC.     
Logged

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1592
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: November 23, 2022, 08:07:07 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #46 on: April 26, 2018, 10:24:03 PM »

For what itís worth, an upgrade of US 75 through Sherman is in the works. Hereís the story:
http://www.heralddemocrat.com/news/20180322/txdot-unveils-plans-for-hwy-75-improvements
I thought the upgrade to Melissa was already overkill enough.
Logged

In_Correct

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 636
  • Safety > Danger ... Road Buffets > Road Diets

  • Location: TX
  • Last Login: November 24, 2022, 12:00:38 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #47 on: April 27, 2018, 11:59:02 AM »

The Unfinished Corridor is going to remained unfinished. If they wanted to finish it, they should have decades ago. I am glad that Interstate 35 has been finished. I am not sure how many protest over the upgrade to Interstate 35 (which could use improvement through Gainesville but that is still much better compared to The Unfinished Corridor) but as for Oklahoma they kept U.S. 77 and built the upgraded Interstate 35.

With The Unfinished Corridor there is several designation changes (U.S. 69 joins north of Denison. U.S. 75 joins north of Atoka.) and there is no new upgraded road west of towns, not even a toll road Choctaw Turnpike which should have been done to begin with. But instead they upgraded the existing Corridor to 4 lanes divided outside of towns. This means that bypassing towns is required. With the towns declaring ownership of the Corridor, they patrol the Corridor and sabotage attempts to bypass the towns.

That is the issue of finishing The Unfinished Corridor in to Oklahoma.

As for finishing The Unfinished Corridor up to Oklahoma, that requires the entire alignment of The Unfinished Corridor to have one designation:

Interstate 45.
Logged
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #48 on: April 27, 2018, 04:42:37 PM »

After 1956, the I-35 corridor up US 77 throughout most of OK was a fait accompli; every iteration of Interstate plans had an Interstate following that particular existing route (one version actually followed one of the old OK turnpike plans a bit west of the present I-35 alignment).  The only corridor up US 75/69 through Atoka and Muskogee was a proposal included within the original 4500-mile version of the 1968 Interstate additions; it was deleted when the legislation was cut back to 1500 miles later that year (the deletions also included an early version of what's now I-49 to the east).  However, the concept was revived in 1991 with the ISTEA legislation of that year; there was a codicil within the legislation that stated that ODOT could, at their option, designate an Interstate over US 69 from the TX state line to I-40 at Checotah once completed to Interstate standards.  And so far that hasn't occurred, although the corridor has been upgraded along certain segments -- but there is still some in-town mileage through both Atoka and several smaller towns (which apparently have sufficient political clout to forestall any attempt to bypass them).  At this point, holding one's breath for a more comprehensive corridor approach is an exercise in futility.  :ded: 
Logged

In_Correct

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 636
  • Safety > Danger ... Road Buffets > Road Diets

  • Location: TX
  • Last Login: November 24, 2022, 12:00:38 PM
Re: Extending I-45 to Oklahoma?
« Reply #49 on: April 27, 2018, 05:54:40 PM »

A possible result of attempting to finish The Unfinished Corridor could be multiple sections of Interstate 45 with still unfinished gaps in between them. Just as Interstate 49. Or in the case of Interstate 69, different sections completed with gaps in between them, some with a letter at the end of the designation.
Logged
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.