I-240 extension in Oklahoma City

[kphoger]

I'm perplexed at how a group of people in charge of roads could have so many stupid numbering ideas.

I have a sneaking suspicion that, outside of roadgeek communities, numbering is the least significant thing about roads.

Probably but I'm hardly a road geek who cares that much about signage and still can see how dumb this proposal is.

"People in charge of roads" are precisely the group I should most expect to "have so many stupid numbering ideas".  They know enough about the numbering conventions to be able to say "Hey, here's a new idea!  What if we..." and enough power to actually make it happen.

[Plutonic Panda]

I'm perplexed at how a group of people in charge of roads could have so many stupid numbering ideas.

I have a sneaking suspicion that, outside of roadgeek communities, numbering is the least significant thing about roads.

Probably but I'm hardly a road geek who cares that much about signage and still can see how dumb this proposal is.

"People in charge of roads" are precisely the group I should most expect to "have so many stupid numbering ideas".  They know enough about the numbering conventions to be able to say "Hey, here's a new idea!  What if we..." and enough power to actually make it happen.

Are you living under a rock? We have politicians who can't find money or will for vital projects but can Israel and Ukraine 100+ billion like nothing while our infrastructure rots. Mods delete if that's too political as I don't mean it to be but my point is our leaders are exactly the brightest bulb in the shed. Voters don't seem to care much either other than making signs. I don't see very many complaining about route signage.

[kphoger]

Are you living under a rock?

Nope.

We have politicians who can't find money or will for vital projects but can Israel and Ukraine 100+ billion like nothing while our infrastructure rots.

Has nothing to do with route numbers.

my point is our leaders are exactly the brightest bulb in the shed.

And my point wasn't that they are the brightest bulbs in the shed.

Voters don't seem to care much either other than making signs. I don't see very many complaining about route signage.

Nope, nobody but us geeks cares about the numbers or the signs.  And people in charge of roads.

[Plutonic Panda]

You're making a lot of assumptions that people in charge aren't road geeks just because they don't agree with you on a particular route number since we're generalizing.

What I said about other foreign affairs funding absolutely does have relevance with route since we're talking about the incompetency of politicians. You think politicians and leaders are dumb for making one decision I'm in agreeing in saying they are dumb in making many other decisions too so in this particular instance it shouldn't be news.

[kphoger]

You're making a lot of assumptions that people in charge aren't road geeks just because they don't agree with you on a particular route number since we're generalizing.

Yes, for the most part, that is my assumption.  But, more to the point, I imagine that the people in charge of roads who are roadgeeks are the most likely of anyone to come up with bonehead numbering ideas, because they (1) know enough about numbering to care, (2) are confident enough in themselves to think they can improve the system by breaking its conventions, and (3) have the power to pull it off.

We have politicians who can't find money or will for vital projects but can Israel and Ukraine 100+ billion like nothing while our infrastructure rots.

Has nothing to do with route numbers.

What I said about other foreign affairs funding absolutely does have relevance with route since we're talking about the incompetency of politicians. You think politicians and leaders are dumb for making one decision I'm in agreeing in saying they are dumb in making many other decisions too so in this particular instance it shouldn't be news.

No, it has nothing to do with route numbers.  The people who are deciding to send money to Israel and Ukraine are not the same people deciding what number to put on route signs.

[Henry]

I-344 and I-335; what are those planners smoking?

[Plutonic Panda]

I-344 and I-335; what are those planners smoking?

That's precisely what I'm saying. It doesn't take a road geek to see how dumb this proposal is. All of Kilpatrick could be an X44 number given both ends connect to I-44 with the southern end becoming SH-152 connecting to I-44.

I can understand I-335.

[Rover_0]

If anything, I-344 should be the Kickapoo Turnpike, seeing as it doesn't connect with I-35 at all (but does meet up with I-44), while what's being planned as 344 should be an x44 or x35 if not an I-240 extension. In any case, what's planned as 344 and 240 should end at I-40, not SH-152.

[Scott5114]

Just gonna quote myself here for those who are mad about I-240 and I-344 ending at each other:

It makes more sense if you look at the actual interchanges. The through movement at the changeover point favors SH-152/future I-240.


(green line is Kilpatrick Turnpike/future I-344, blue line is SH-152/future I-240)

Meanwhile the I-40/Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange is a standard cloverleaf (yes, we're still building them because we hate ourselves), so it would be awfully artificial to have a designation change in the middle of it.

[bugo]

"Artificial? There are a ton of Interstates that end at a cloverleaf. Future I-42 will end at a cloverleaf at I-35 is a future example.

[Scott5114]

How many Interstates become a different Interstate at the middle of a cloverleaf, however?

Roadgeeks find it perfectly logical to have a route number change there because it's crossing a different interstate and thus it satisfies The Rules. But your mom probably wouldn't get why the road randomly bops from 344 to 240. It makes a lot more sense for someone who doesn't know or care about The Rules to have two interstates end at each other at a junction like the Kilpatrick/152 junction than to change numbers in the middle of a thru movement.

[hotdogPi]

How many Interstates become a different Interstate at the middle of a cloverleaf, however?

Trumpet mainline: I-95/93 southern junction.
Also a trumpet mainline: I-76/80.
I-74/80, and this one's actually a cloverleaf.

[jlam]

I-494/694 off the top of my head

[Revive 755]

How many Interstates become a different Interstate at the middle of a cloverleaf, however?

Trumpet mainline: I-95/93 southern junction.
Also a trumpet mainline: I-76/80.
I-74/80, and this one's actually a cloverleaf.

* I-494 and I-694 at I-94 east of St. Paul
* I-270 and I-255 at I-55 south of St. Louis used to fully count, but that interchange is now a cloverstack.
* I believe I-270 and the former I-244 would have had this at I-70 in the St. Louis metro.

[Bobby5280]

If I-240 has to end at a dead end traffic intersection in freaking Mustang why extend it at all!?

My own opinion is I-240 is not worth extending at all EVER unless it gets extended to up I-40 at the other end on the West side of OKC. Otherwise leave it as it is with it ending at I-44. Any other configuration is just stupid. Two Interstate designations ending at a PARTIAL interchange to a surface street is just nonsense.

[Scott5114]

Your objection to this is the lack of an SH-152 east to Kilpatrick Turnpike north ramp?

[JMoses24]

At least the original idea of a beltway I-240 made some sense as a bypass, even though having two multiplexes with I-44 (and a third one with I-40) was questionable.

The hairbrained idea is this new one. If I-344 is to exist, in my view it should be on the Kickapoo only, and even then...once/if the Kickapoo is extended to I-35, it can be an even I-x35. Have I-240 end at I-40 on both ends; the Kilpatrick north of I-40 doesn't need to be an interstate.

[Bobby5280]

Your objection to this is the lack of an SH-152 east to Kilpatrick Turnpike north ramp?

I have multiple objections to the idea. It's bad enough two Interstates would be ending at an exit to a state highway. It's even worse the exit is a partial interchange.

ODOT and OTA might even have to revise this route signing scheme if they follow through on this I-344/I-240 plan. If the Tri-City Connector turnpike is built from Airport Road, West of Will Rogers Airport and down to I-44 that would be a logical extension for this I-344 idea (unless they sign another I-x44 number on it). I-240 could end at the Tri-City Connector's "Y" interchange with Airport Road. It would make more sense than the exit to OK-152.

[Scott5114]

Your objection to this is the lack of an SH-152 east to Kilpatrick Turnpike north ramp?

I have multiple objections to the idea. It's bad enough two Interstates would be ending at an exit to a state highway. It's even worse the exit is a partial interchange.

What state highway is being exited to here? It's not SH-152, because that's the through movement.

[Scott5114]

Also, for everyone who hasn't seen it, or who has seen it and is pretending they haven't: the reason the new interstate designations start with 3 is because all of OTA's highway numbers start with 3.

Given that this wouldn't be the first time an Interstate starting with 3 has both ends at an Interstate (I-335 KS has existed for 40 years), it's kind of lame to bitch about it now. Especially because I've never seen anyone demand KTA change their number to I-835.

[triplemultiplex]

(green line is Kilpatrick Turnpike/future I-344, blue line is SH-152/future I-240)

Routes exit off themselves all over the place.  I am unmoved by this.

Hopefully AASHTO slaps down these idiotic pitches from OK and assigns them some additional reading to help them redo their assignment.

[Scott5114]

I'm gonna need all of y'all to go take a gander at OK-77S and then come back and tell me this is so bad.

[bugo]

Also, for everyone who hasn't seen it, or who has seen it and is pretending they haven't: the reason the new interstate designations start with 3 is because all of OTA's highway numbers start with 3.

Or 4.

[Scott5114]

Also, for everyone who hasn't seen it, or who has seen it and is pretending they haven't: the reason the new interstate designations start with 3 is because all of OTA's highway numbers start with 3.

Or 4.

Technically correct is the best kind of correct.

[bugo]

They should just sign the Kilpatrick as an extension of I-240 and be done with it. To hell with OTA and their 3xx scheme.

I can't believe anybody thinks that the proposed triple terminus is acceptable. Two Interstates shouldn't terminate at a relatively minor interchange with a 3 digit state highway that is a 5 lane Arkansas Freeway that turns into a 2 lane road in less than 7 miles.  The fact that OK 152 is the mainline doesn't have anything to do with it, as a lot of Interstates exit off themselves. I-44 exits off itself in each direction in Catoosa, for example. Whoever came up with this idea must have been smoking some of that Oologah oregano that has been legal for the last 5 years.