OKC Roads and Freeways Wishlist

[Plutonic Panda]

What transportation projects would you like to see happen in OKC?

I won't post my entire list tonight, but I'll get to a few. I won't list projects that are in the 8 year plan or planned by the OTA and all lanes will be general purpose unless specified otherwise.

Expansions

I-35

*I-40 to 240: 12 lanes(4GP/1 Aux/1 HOV each way)
*I-240 to Flood Ave.: 10 lanes(4GP/1 HOV each way)
*Flood Ave. to Highway 9: 8 lanes(adds one HOV each way) Note* It appears OkDOT has left room for the recently expanded freeway to be easily upgraded for additional lanes in the future.
*I-40 to I-44: 6 lanes
*I-44 to Covell Parkway(Edmond): 8 Lanes
*Covell Parkway to SH 33(Guthrie): 6 lanes
*SH-9 to Purcell: 6 lanes

I-40

*I-44 to Kilpatrick Tollroad: 10 lanes(4 GP/1 HOV each way)
*Kilpatrick Tollroad to Garth Brooks: 8 lanes
*Radio Rd. to Country Club Rd.(El Reno): 6 lanes
*I-35 to Douglas Rd.: 8 lanes

I-44

*I-240 to 39th Expressway: 10 lanes
*I-240 to H.E. Bailey Turnpike: 6 lanes
*I-35 to Luther: 6 lanes(this one isn't that necessary but I'd like to see it for future trends)
*I-35 to 39th Expressway: 8 lanes

I-235

*8 lanes for it's entire route

I-240

*I-35 to I-44: 8 lanes
*I-35 to I-40: 6 lanes

Kilpatrick Turnpike

*Broadway Ext. to I-35: 6 lanes
*McArhtur BLVD. to I-40: 6 lanes

Hefner Parkway

*I-44 to Kilpatrick: 8 lanes

Extensions, upgrades, and new freeways

*Hefner Parkway Extended as a loop around Edmond connecting to I-35. 4 lanes.
*H.E. Bailey Turnpike extended in both directions to form a Y in Yukon connecting to both Kilpatrick Extension and a new freeway built further west connecting to I-40 around Gregory Rd. 4 lanes.
*SH-9 extended as a loop around Norman with a new alignment shifted further south with a bridge over the river connecting directly over I-35. Further East it will connect to the future EOC(which seems like they are already planning for this according to the interchange diagrams). It will wrap around Lake Thunderbird. Additionally, there will be a new freeway connecting to US-177 Tecumseh which will be 4 lanes. SH-9/ new loop will be 4 lanes as well.
*US-177 upgraded to a freeway from I-40 to SH-270. 4 lanes.
*New freeway/expressway from following US-270 and US-377 to Ada. 4-6 lanes.
*WK. Jackson Parkway(I-44) extended east to meet the future EOC turnpike. 6 lanes.
*39th Expressway upgraded to fully controlled access facility with service roads from I-44 to Kilpatrick Turnpike. It will be capped with a park over it in downtown Bethany. 6 lanes + 2-3 lanes for service in each direction where possible.
*North Yukon Connector. A new controlled access facility North of Yukon going from I-40 to Kilpatrick meeting with the proposed upgraded 39th expressway corridor.
*New East to west corridor in OKC between Moore and Norman connecting I-35 to I-44.

[Plutonic Panda]

Miscellaneous projects

Caps

*I-40 cap around the Skydance Bridge. This one will be tricky because I want motorist to still be able to see the Skydance bridge but this is a great area for a cap. Maybe something really creative can be done like a large glass structure over the freeway where people can walk on around the Skydance Bridge. I don't think there is anything like this in the world and it will still allow people to see the bridge. One major draw back would be the maintenance required to clean it but I'm sure with todays technology something could be engineered that sits on rails and cleans the bottom portion every night. It wouldn't be cheap. My guess is around a 200-300 million for a setup like this. I'd support it!

*I-235 cap where possible in downtown.

*I-35 cap in Norman in between Main St. and Lindsey. This would connect the neighborhood to the east to a future redevelopment of the Ed Noble Parkway Center. This would be another tricky scenario due to the recent massive project to widen this freeway it would require it be lowered and I'm not sure if there is enough room to lower it enough without affecting the Lindsay and Main St. interchanges. Needless to say, chances of this one happening are at the bottom of the 3.

Other projects

*Grade separated intersections at major points along NW Expressway to make it, well, an expressway
*4 lane tolled underpasses along Broadway in Edmond at 33rd. and 15th.
*Sooner Rd. upgrades from I-240 to Norman. Widened to six lanes. Grade separated intersections where it makes sense.
*US-62 widened to 6 lanes from I-35 to Harrah
*New stack interchanges at I-35/I-240, Kilpatrick Turnpike and Broadway Ext., I-35/Kilpatrick Turnpike, I-40/I-44, and 39th Expressway and Hefner Parkway.
*New mixmaster project to create an elevated bridge for I-35 along I-40 so motorists can continue over I-40 without having to merge on it. The I-235/I-40/I-35 interchange would also undergo a massive reconstruction for new connections and would include a short realignment of Lincoln to directly connect at Reno. New direct connect ramps would also be added to Lincoln, Reno, and Sheridan. SW 5th St. would be extended underneath I-35 and cross over the river to connect with to the future AICC. I-40 would be shifted slightly to the north and double stacked in this stretch to allow for new development alongside the river.
*A new, massive, iconic I-35 bridge over the Oklahoma river
*Another new massive and iconic bridge for I-44 over the river.
*Direct connectors to a new massive parking garage at the state fairgrounds.
*Direct connector ramps going to an expanded Penn Square Mall Parking garage which would be adjacent to redeveloped Belle Isle development.

ROW for future freeways
Places I only want to see ROW bought and preserved for the possibility of new freeways built someday.

*East Edmond loop connecting I-44 to I-35 to my proposed North West Edmond Loop.
*Future loop around Piedmont and Extreme NW OKC wrapping around North El Reno
*US 81 freeway upgrades from I-40 to Enid
*SH-3 upgrades from Kilpatrick to US-81
*SH-74 branching off east before the river connecting to I-35 around Guthrie
*new east to west freeway around Seward connecting SH-74 to I-35
*US-62 upgrade

[froggie]

*borderline fictional territory*

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah quite a few of those things will never happen. Some of them are planned though some that are planned might not be the same scope as I'd like to see.

[Bobby5280]

The big project I wanted to see happen was the H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension being connected with the Kilpatrick Turnpike. Today such a thing is all but impossible, thanks to the Oklahoma-style habit of not properly planning for the future and taking care of the good ole boy's network.

The obvious path was converting S. Sara Road into a turnpike flanked with frontage roads. Such a thing was do-able back in the late 1990's when the first parts of the project were built (Interstate quality OK-4 bridges over the Canadian River and some ROW secured just North of the I-44/OK-4 interchange). Thanks to a few idiot deciders in Mustang and Yukon the space along S Sara Rd was allowed to be encroached by new housing developments, a new school and some retail development.

So now we have a South extension of the Kilpatrick Turnpike planned to attach into Airport Road rather than go South and East to Norman. The path for this dinky extension is so curvy and crooked that it should invoke laughter -mainly laughter directed at the "planners" who had their heads in their asses for the past 20 years. The Mustang Creek housing development literally blocked any direct, Southward extension of the Kilpatrick Turnpike (the planned extension does a big outward loop around that development and does a few other odd curves to dodge other newly built things). The developers might as well have laid out the housing plots in the shape of a middle finger. The development certainly was a cynical "f*** you" to the regional transportation needs of OKC.

Even if the Kilpatrick extension to Airport Road is built and the H.E. Bailey Turnpike is extended to Mustang it will be costly (both financially and politically) to connect the two turnpikes. The zone along SW 74th and S Sara Rd would function as a Breezewood.

As for other projects in the OKC area, I'd like to see the new freeway along OK-74 in Edmond extended 6 miles North and then looped East over to I-35.

I'd also like to see an expressway or freeway connection between Newcastle and Moore, starting with a conversion of the I-44/US-62/US-277 interchange at the North end of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike, crossing the Canadian River and then running parallel with Indian Hills Rd to I-35. Such a connection could be an alternative to the OK-9 path to I-35. That zone near Riverwind Casino is increasingly impossible to upgrade into a freeway due to more development being allowed to sprout up too close to the OK-9 main lanes.

Planners in Oklahoma just don't seem to know how to just buy a freeway's amount of ROW and just build a big divided street or at grade expressway along it for the time being. Texas has been doing this for decades. Oklahoma can't take a hint at all.

[Plutonic Panda]

Bobby, I like your list and can't agree with you enough about the lack of planning in Oklahoma. It's angering. I feel the same way about SH-37 Moore. That should have been a road with a huge median so it could at least become an Expressway one day. There's still no planning being done for NW OKC which will become a nightmare if OKC sees its population explode like recent boomtowns though with the recent outcomes with the incompetency in the state government, that might not be an issue.

If I'm really going out on a limb, I'd run SH-77 as a full freeway through Edmond. Couple of options could be to shift it the east of the railroad tracks. Lots of vacant lots there. The lots that are developed are either industrial or houses that aren't in the best of shape. Another option would be to tunnel underneath using a 2-3 mile tunnel surfacing north of the cemetery.

I get that the tunnel option seems crazy, but in Europe and actually lots of other countries now seemingly embracing freeway tunnels, if it ever catches on here in the US, one day it could be warranted. Only problem is, ROW needs to be preserved for the portals and the north section. Broadway is already wide enough to have a tight freeway with service roads. A few businesses would likely be impacted, but it would be minimal.

OKC is blessed to actually have a good freeway network and has a good grid system. Though my preference for suburban roads are the out of order, curvy roads like Dallas, I do see the benefits in a good grid system. But even a good grid system like OKC's will become choked with traffic if better planning isn't ensured.

[Plutonic Panda]

Haven't watched the video yet but judging by the thumbnail pick I don't like that bike lane. I don't think it will work here in the states because of distracted driving. In fact, I bike so much here in LA and my closest calls have been in painted bike lanes because it seems to me people let their guard down. I actually prefer biking in streets with no bike lanes vs. the painted ones.

I will say, I am opposed to any bike lane project that removes vehicle lanes. That increases congestion and causes drivers to become more aggressive. Not to mention the increased pollution added by congestion.

[Scott5114]

Seconding the request for SH-9 upgrades, especially east of I-35. Probably the #1 thing holding back eastside Norman. It wouldn't even be that hard; the corridor is protected, the ROW more or less there–oh, but of course, the money.

I'd also like to see an expressway or freeway connection between Newcastle and Moore, starting with a conversion of the I-44/US-62/US-277 interchange at the North end of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike, crossing the Canadian River and then running parallel with Indian Hills Rd to I-35. Such a connection could be an alternative to the OK-9 path to I-35. That zone near Riverwind Casino is increasingly impossible to upgrade into a freeway due to more development being allowed to sprout up too close to the OK-9 main lanes.

I'd be happy enough to just have another bridge somewhere between I-35 and I-44, perhaps as an extension of SH-130 (which would tie into Robinson on the Cleveland County side, if I remember right). Currently, getting between Newcastle and most of Cleveland County is awkward as all hell.

(Also, Plupan, careful with your US vs SH, or you might end up hired to work in the ODOT sign shop )

[Plutonic Panda]

Lol yeah I'm gonna fix that right now!

I want to rehash another point. I'm sure if you noticed but the plans submitted by OTA for the EOC/I-40 Turnpike now show a fully Interchange with a stub extending south which tells me they do plan on extending it. Whether it will wrap around Lake Thunderbird and follow SH-9 remains to be seen. Could eventually be OKC's version of what was done in Nashville with I-40 bypass(840) on a smaller scale.

Perhaps a Y could be formed north of Purcell. I'd still want to see OkDOT upgrade SH-9 to a fully controlled facility. Perhaps they could tie it US-177 in Shawnee. As far as an OTA bypass project would go, a section in East Edmond would need to be built as well. Perhaps they could tie it to I-35 slightly south of the Cimarron River.

[Plutonic Panda]

Another project I want to add is the joke of engineering that is the bridges on the Kilpatrick Turnpike in West OKC to be fixed! I'd even settle for a delay of six lane widening if these were fixed.

Is there a way to just do something to fix them or will it require a complete reconstruction?

[froggie]

What's the problem with the bridges?

[rte66man]

What's the problem with the bridges?

The bridges are over the North Canadian and overflow just north of the OK66 interchange.

They screwed up the engineering calculations so when the deck was poured, it didn't settle to the same level all over.  Each span has a gradual rise in the middle.  When you go over it at 70 MPH, it is like a bad roller coaster.

[rte66man]

The big project I wanted to see happen was the H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension being connected with the Kilpatrick Turnpike.

The obvious path was converting S. Sara Road into a turnpike flanked with frontage roads. Such a thing was do-able back in the late 1990's when the first parts of the project were built (Interstate quality OK-4 bridges over the Canadian River and some ROW secured just North of the I-44/OK-4 interchange). Thanks to a few idiot deciders in Mustang and Yukon the space along S Sara Rd was allowed to be encroached by new housing developments, a new school and some retail development.

Not exactly.  The Walmart on the NE corner of OK152 and Sara was already there before OK4 was connected to the south.  IIRC, the Lowes was already planned or in construction.  The retail on the north side of 152 running east from Sara Rd was already fairly extensive plus there is an older housing addition behind the MidFirst Bank. 

IMO, they screwed up more by letting the housing go in just south of the Kilpatrick/I40 interchange.

I think we mostly agree that advance ROW purchases make logical sense; however, with State government budgeting screwed up so badly, there is no way the commissioners could approve those types of expenditures when there isn't enough to fix what we already have.

[Bobby5280]

Not exactly.  The Walmart on the NE corner of OK152 and Sara was already there before OK4 was connected to the south.  IIRC, the Lowes was already planned or in construction.  The retail on the north side of 152 running east from Sara Rd was already fairly extensive plus there is an older housing addition behind the MidFirst Bank.

When the OK-4 twin bridges were completed across the Canadian River the Walmart Supercenter was the only significant thing taking up space on the corner of SW 74th and S Sara Rd. With that one property in place there was still some do-able alternatives for bringing the turnpike up through that zone. It could have still run along S Sara Rd, at the cost of clearing some homes on the West side of the road. The turnpike could have looped East around the Walmart property tying back into Sara Road farther north. Again, some homes would have to be cleared, but not many.

Today the corner of SW 74th and Sara Rd in Mustang is blocked in with development on all sides. The Lowes store was built between 2007 & 2010. Mustang Christian Academy, Monte Carel Family Dentistry, the OnCue gas station, St Anthony's Healthplex Mustang and Wendy's restaurant are all developments that went in years after the existing H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension was completed.

Plans for those bridges and the H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension had been in the works for years. Planners in Mustang and Yukon had to be aware of this and the potential for the Kilpatrick to loop through their towns and all the way over to Norman. Obviously they did not care the slightest bit about the bigger picture. They chose smaller short term gain style deals over something that could have paid off far better in the long term.

I think we mostly agree that advance ROW purchases make logical sense; however, with State government budgeting screwed up so badly, there is no way the commissioners could approve those types of expenditures when there isn't enough to fix what we already have.

Sadly, the mistakes of failing to secure ROW that I'm lamenting were made roughly 20 years ago, back when the state legislature wasn't the hyper-conservative, hyper-partisan mess that it is today. Back then planners could have bought and secured ROW for a future turnpike very easy and cheap. Now the propsect of connecting the H.E. Bailey and Kilpatrick Turnpikes in Mustang is a concept that gets more expensive and difficult each passing year. Today planners wanting to build such a project would have to pick which homes and businesses they want to clear to make room for the road.

Perhaps the least painful concept would involve clearing Blue Express Car Wash and having the turnpike cross at that point half a mile East of Sara Road. There is very little development North and South of that Car Wash. Only a few homes would have to be cleared for the turnpike to connect with the Kilpatrick extension. That's about the last do-able alternative, one that would cause the least amount of political fire storm.

Speaking of other freeway upgrades that are currently do-able, but not in OKC: in Lawton, converting Rogers Lane to an Interstate quality facility is do-able. The existing road (now designated US-62) between I-44 and the West side of town is really just a glorified street with no shoulders and hardly any median to separate the two directions of traffic. Fort Sill tore down the old Artillery Village housing area on the other side of the sound wall on Rogers Lane between Fort Sill Blvd and Sheridan Rd. They built new housing farther North on post. So there's plenty of clear ROW for a proper upgrade. The interchanges at Fort Sill Blvd and Sheridan Rd are already good enough. New exits would be needed at 38th, 52nd, 67th and 82nd Street -not to mention an upgraded interchange at I-44. At least the space is there to build such a thing for the time being.

[Plutonic Panda]

Who do you think are in cars? It's people. I could say the same thing about a rail system or bike lanes. They're built for rail cars and bikes not people!?

[Scott5114]

As for actual below ground subways in Oklahoma, that's a fantasy that won't come about for many years, if ever.

It may not even be technically feasible. Practically none of the housing stock in the OKC area has a basement. My understanding is that this is because central Oklahoma has an extremely high water table that makes digging deep enough for a basement problematic.

[rte66man]

The only place that I'm aware of in Oklahoma where ROW preservation was done as a deliberate decision was north OKC.  Sometime in the late 60's/early 70's, Memorial Road was built with a large median from Penn west to Portland to preserve what is now the Kilpatrick.  The Grand Blvd corridor had sections where it was always planned to run what is now I44 along the west side, but it never seemed to be a coherent decision.  Since there was little ROW preservation on Portland south from Memorial. it became very controversial to build the Hefner Parkway because parkland had to be taken.

The Creek Turnpike corridor in Tulsa was on planning documents by the late 50's, but I'm not aware that ODOT ever stepped in to buy ROW before the whole thing became an OTA project.

One place that ODOT has preserved ROW is the Duncan bypass.  ROW has already been purchased and fenced off in such a way that a full 4 lane freeway with exits every mile could be built with no additional ROW purchased.  There is no access to the bypass except at each section line intersection.  There are other places where ROW was preserved for future interchanges (US69 at Summit, US81 south of Chickasha, etc).  I'm sure there are others but none come immediately to mind.

[rte66man]

Sadly, the mistakes of failing to secure ROW that I'm lamenting were made roughly 20 years ago, back when the state legislature wasn't the hyper-conservative, hyper-partisan mess that it is today.

It was just as big of a mess then as it is now, just in a different way.  I worked there as a House Budget Analyst for 6 years in the 90's and can personally attest that the Dems would not have been in favor of ROW preservation.  They LOVED getting roads built to favor their PAC contributors just like the Repubs do today. 
I can't begin to describe the deals that were cut.  The Dems had enough votes to override any veto Walters or Keating could make.

The ODOT budget was a huge mess because of the pressure to build "my road" from legislators that no comprehensive plan could be adhered to for lack of funds.  Trust me, it was WAY worse back then for ODOT.

[Plutonic Panda]

Seeing as how over 90% of Americans own a car, it's a non-issue.

[Scott5114]

Posters who frequent the Transit board are advised to remember that the vast majority of the members of this board are primarily interested in roads, highways, and private automobiles. Transit fans are not to admonish users for their choice of mode of transport (and similarly roadgeeks are reminded not to admonish the transit fans). While road projects and transit projects often are forced to compete for the same transportation dollars, it is hoped that we can avoid road-oriented threads in other sections of the board being derailed with posts along the lines of

This interchange project is so expensive they should have spend that money on buying sixteen thousand buses instead  

Let us reflect on this before posts and/or posters have to start being excised. Remember, this is AARoads and not AARoadsAreAwful or AARoadsNeedToStopExisting.

[Plutonic Panda]

What's the problem with the bridges?

The bridges are over the North Canadian and overflow just north of the OK66 interchange.

They screwed up the engineering calculations so when the deck was poured, it didn't settle to the same level all over.  Each span has a gradual rise in the middle.  When you go over it at 70 MPH, it is like a bad roller coaster.

So it seems with that being the case the bridges will have to be entirely reconstructed.

[TXtoNJ]

Posters who frequent the Transit board are advised to remember that the vast majority of the members of this board are primarily interested in roads, highways, and private automobiles. Transit fans are not to admonish users for their choice of mode of transport (and similarly roadgeeks are reminded not to admonish the transit fans). While road projects and transit projects often are forced to compete for the same transportation dollars, it is hoped that we can avoid road-oriented threads in other sections of the board being derailed with posts along the lines of

This interchange project is so expensive they should have spend that money on buying sixteen thousand buses instead  

Let us reflect on this before posts and/or posters have to start being excised. Remember, this is AARoads and not AARoadsAreAwful or AARoadsNeedToStopExisting.

I don't think being interested in multimodal roads and transportation systems is mutually exclusive with being a roadgeek. In fact, I'd imagine there are a lot of us here who don't simply want more roads or bigger roads, but better ones.

[Bobby5280]

One place that ODOT has preserved ROW is the Duncan bypass. ROW has already been purchased and fenced off in such a way that a full 4 lane freeway with exits every mile could be built with no additional ROW purchased. There is no access to the bypass except at each section line intersection. There are other places where ROW was preserved for future interchanges (US69 at Summit, US81 south of Chickasha, etc). I'm sure there are others but none come immediately to mind.

I think it's strange how Duncan, of all places, could get a modest bypass built with ROW preserved so it could be upgraded years or decades from now to a 4 lane fully limited access highway. Plans are in the works to extend the bypass both North and South. Yet the same kind of steps could not be made on the South and East sides of the greater OKC metro area, an area far more populated and growing far faster than Duncan.

Regarding S 4th Street in Chickasha, it is interesting how they built frontage roads alongside the US-81 expressway. It's a fairly narrow alignment though. That piece of road may never be upgraded to a full blown freeway, especially with a new US-81 bypass planned to go a few miles West. But the frontage roads do a good job keeping lots of driveways and smaller streets from dumping slow moving traffic directly out onto the main lanes of the highway.

It was just as big of a mess then as it is now, just in a different way. I worked there as a House Budget Analyst for 6 years in the 90's and can personally attest that the Dems would not have been in favor of ROW preservation. They LOVED getting roads built to favor their PAC contributors just like the Repubs do today. I can't begin to describe the deals that were cut. The Dems had enough votes to override any veto Walters or Keating could make.

Yeah, wasting money on pork barrel roads built as political favors is just as bad as not having enough money to maintain an existing road system, much less improve and expand where it is legitimately needed. We've basically traded one bad problem in road building for another.

The situation in the 1990's reminds me of those dopey turnpike proposals (Clinton to Synder and Duncan to Davis). I call them dopey because they would have done virtually nothing to complement the overall Interstate highway system. They would not have helped large amounts of long distance traffic get from point a to point b. Even if those toll roads had been built vehicle counts on them would have been no greater than counts on US-183 and OK-7 today. The traffic levels might have even been less. Lots of people in rural areas like to shunpike.

Another way at looking at hardships people put themselves through is to pay for the expensive housing prices that seem to always plague urban areas while suburbia is much cheaper.

This is turning into a serious problem in large urban centers. Price inflation on housing and other living costs has become ridiculous, predatory and even turned into a weapon of class warfare. It's like a kind of class cleansing (a play on ethnic cleansing) is taking place. Major cities can't function without their blue collar workers and low level service industry workers. Who the hell is going to spend hours (and a fortune) commuting into an elite city just to flip burgers, pour coffee, work store counters, tend bar, etc? The whole vision of New Urbanism with people living, working and having fun all within a close distance would freaking implode if there is no room at all for people who bring in a modest pay check.

[froggie]

I'll be the first to agree that housing costs in urban areas is a problem...though that's partially a demand problem and partially a NIMBY problem (the latter for not wanting more dense development to be built in their "neighborhood").

I would also disagree with Bobby regarding blaming this on "New Urbanism".  One of the precepts of that is adequate and affordable housing...which in urban areas usually comes about from having more apartments.  But as I noted above, such developments are often opposed by neighborhoods.

Lastly, is it really that much cheaper to live in the suburbs when whatever housing cost savings you may get is eaten up by higher (sometimes MUCH higher) transportation costs?  Nevermind longer commute times which are not always easy to quantify in a monetary standard.

I don't think being interested in multimodal roads and transportation systems is mutually exclusive with being a roadgeek. In fact, I'd imagine there are a lot of us here who don't simply want more roads or bigger roads, but better ones.

This.  A thousand times this.

[rte66man]

One place that ODOT has preserved ROW is the Duncan bypass. ROW has already been purchased and fenced off in such a way that a full 4 lane freeway with exits every mile could be built with no additional ROW purchased. There is no access to the bypass except at each section line intersection. There are other places where ROW was preserved for future interchanges (US69 at Summit, US81 south of Chickasha, etc). I'm sure there are others but none come immediately to mind.

I think it's strange how Duncan, of all places, could get a modest bypass built with ROW preserved so it could be upgraded years or decades from now to a 4 lane fully limited access highway.

That was the deal Jari Askins cut in the House to get the votes needed to pass the bill.

The situation in the 1990's reminds me of those dopey turnpike proposals (Clinton to Synder and Duncan to Davis). I call them dopey because they would have done virtually nothing to complement the overall Interstate highway system. They would not have helped large amounts of long distance traffic get from point a to point b. Even if those toll roads had been built vehicle counts on them would have been no greater than counts on US-183 and OK-7 today. The traffic levels might have even been less. Lots of people in rural areas like to shunpike.

It was all pork.  They had to lard it up with everyone's pipe dream of 4 lane access (you build it and the economic development will follow) to get enough votes to get it out of committee.  Loyd Benson (House Speaker at the time) had enough stroke to get ODOT to widen 183 from Clinton to Frederick (his hometown) when the pikes went down in flames.