Question about the construction at I-44 and US-169 (Tulsa)

[Bobby5280]

That weird new loop ramp is roughly 2500' in length. A direct connect flyover ramp would have been a similar length, but have a far faster travel speed. ODOT is spending all this money to replace one 20mph loop with another 20mph loop.

[sprjus4]

That weird new loop ramp is roughly 2500' in length.

The bridged portion is more like 900 to 1000' in length, not 2500'.

A full-on flyover would be closer to 2500' in length. A lot more bridge required.

[Bobby5280]

Bridged or not, that entire glorified cloverleaf ramp is about 2500' in length. A direct-connect flyover ramp might have a longer bridge, but the overall ramp length is hardly any longer and the traffic would be able to drive on such a ramp far faster.

[sprjus4]

Bridged or not, that entire glorified cloverleaf ramp is about 2500' in length. A direct-connect flyover ramp might have a longer bridge, but the overall ramp length is hardly any longer and the traffic would be able to drive on such a ramp far faster.

Bridged or not makes a huge different cost wise. A flyover ramp with a bridge double the length would likely cost double, along with having to realign the other ramps to accommodate the flyover.

The project utilized the existing loop ramp, and simply modified its upper approach on US-169 to "flyover" the opposing exit loop to eliminate the weave.

Traffic has the distance of the bridge plus a long acceleration lane onto US-169 North to reach appropriate speed to merge into traffic.

[Plutonic Panda]

This interchange should've been a fully directional stack.

[sprjus4]

This interchange should've been a fully directional stack.

Well, now of course you're talking about a $160 million or even more project, compared to the small $16 million improvement.

[kphoger]

This interchange should've been a fully directional stack.

Well, now of course you're talking about a $160 million or even more project, compared to the small $16 million improvement.

They can just borrow the money from California's surplus.

[Scott5114]

This interchange should've been a fully directional stack.

Well, now of course you're talking about a $160 million or even more project, compared to the small $16 million improvement.

They can just borrow the money from California's surplus.

For a while, California wouldn't even let their government employees travel to Oklahoma on state business. I doubt they'd lend them any money.

[Plutonic Panda]

This interchange should've been a fully directional stack.

Well, now of course you're talking about a $160 million or even more project, compared to the small $16 million improvement.

They can just borrow the money from California's surplus.

For a while, California wouldn't even let their government employees travel to Oklahoma on state business. I doubt they'd lend them any money.

And I'm pretty sure California has a deficit now.

[Tom958]

I know flyovers are expensive, but a bridge as long as they one they built here couldn't have been too much cheaper, could it?

A flyover would probably require a bridge double the length in this case.

And it'd push the northern end of the ramp far enough north to necessitate a CD between it and the 11th Street offramp. It'd also likely require land acquisition at that apartment complex. All in all, a flyover would likely be three times as expensive as what they did here.

Since I broached the subject, doing either type of project in the southbound direction would require a CD between it and the 21st Street offramp. Or would it? If they mirrored the current project and had the new loop ramp passing over the westbound-to-southbound loop ramp, no CD would be required. Maybe they'll do that before too long.

[kphoger]

For a while, California wouldn't even let their government employees travel to Oklahoma on state business.

Oklahoma was probably fine with that arrangement.

And I'm pretty sure California has a deficit now.

Glad you got the joke.

[BigOkie]

I drove this new segment of construction a few days ago.  My biggest takeaway?  The new cloverleaf segment leading up to it is no longer riddled with potholes and poorly done patches anymore (for now).  That was good enough for me at the time.

[eliasdaniels]

I actually had the opportunity to speak with an engineer on this project about a year ago, he told me the main reason for this over a traditional flyover was mainly the cost, and simplifying the project. The less of the interchange to change shape, the better.

[Plutonic Panda]

I mean, I'm not trying to be rude here, but duh. That's ODOTs go to excuse for everything. It's too expensive. Of course, it's not entirely their fault. The state doesn't properly fund them. All urban interchanges in Oklahoma City and Tulsa should be full directional stacks.

[sprjus4]

In fairness, has this ramp improvement helped address traffic? Everything doesn't necessarily need to be a large flyover. Ideally, of course, but money isn't infinite.

[Bobby5280]

It's pretty pathetic Oklahoma has no modern directional stack interchanges in the state. The closest thing we have is two interchanges on the IDL bordering the North side of downtown Tulsa. And those things are built mostly on dirt berms and have tight/slow ramp geometry. They're crappy.

The new standard is like the I-44/I-235 interchange in Oklahoma City: two flyovers and then two 20mph cloverleaf ramps butted together for nice weaving conflicts. Real modern. They're going to do some similar crap with the I-35/I-240 interchange. Woo hoo.

One actual directional stack is planned at I-35 and the Tri-City Connector. The project is in the design phase. But politics will try to derail the project until it is actually built.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^ and there's the LHP/Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange which when the current improvements are completed it will still only be half built. SMH.

[Bobby5280]

The first two flyover ramps of the Hefner Parkway & Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange were built back in the early 1990's, nearly 30 years ago. It's taking this long to get 2 more ramps. Maybe by the 2050's they'll add two more.

[sprjus4]

The new standard is like the I-44/I-235 interchange in Oklahoma City: two flyovers and then two 20mph cloverleaf ramps butted together for nice weaving conflicts. Real modern.

Curious - what are the traffic volumes on the loop ramps vs. flyovers? Additionally, it's important to note the "weaving" occurs on a separated 2 lane C/D roadway, away from the US-77 mainline. If those are lower volume movements, they may not warrant full flyovers.

In many cases, something similar to what was built there works perfectly fine in other areas. Not everything has to be flyovers.

[Plutonic Panda]

It should all flyovers even if traffic counts are lower. Flyovers are more efficient and time saving versus cloverleafs you don't have to slow down as much.

[swake]

It's pretty pathetic Oklahoma has no modern directional stack interchanges in the state. The closest thing we have is two interchanges on the IDL bordering the North side of downtown Tulsa. And those things are built mostly on dirt berms and have tight/slow ramp geometry. They're crappy.

The new standard is like the I-44/I-235 interchange in Oklahoma City: two flyovers and then two 20mph cloverleaf ramps butted together for nice weaving conflicts. Real modern. They're going to do some similar crap with the I-35/I-240 interchange. Woo hoo.

One actual directional stack is planned at I-35 and the Tri-City Connector. The project is in the design phase. But politics will try to derail the project until it is actually built.

What about I-40/I-44 in OKC and US-75/OK-11 in Tulsa?

[Plutonic Panda]

It's pretty pathetic Oklahoma has no modern directional stack interchanges in the state. The closest thing we have is two interchanges on the IDL bordering the North side of downtown Tulsa. And those things are built mostly on dirt berms and have tight/slow ramp geometry. They're crappy.

The new standard is like the I-44/I-235 interchange in Oklahoma City: two flyovers and then two 20mph cloverleaf ramps butted together for nice weaving conflicts. Real modern. They're going to do some similar crap with the I-35/I-240 interchange. Woo hoo.

One actual directional stack is planned at I-35 and the Tri-City Connector. The project is in the design phase. But politics will try to derail the project until it is actually built.

What about I-40/I-44 in OKC and US-75/OK-11 in Tulsa?

I-40/I-44 is a substandard interchange with left exits and Tulsa's is the same thing.

This is a stack https://maps.app.goo.gl/apvTYQ49BosRzrD17?g_st=ic

Not this https://maps.app.goo.gl/rGwpn9b1gtS3QZrM8?g_st=ic

That's a joke

[Plutonic Panda]

It's also worth noting that they plan a fully directional interchange at Osage expressway and Gilcrease tollway minus a ramp from WB Gilcrease to NB Osage which is a bit odd.

ODOT also needs to construct a full stack at US-412 and Gilcrease at some point.

[swake]

It's also worth noting that they plan a fully directional interchange at Osage expressway and Gilcrease tollway minus a ramp from WB Gilcrease to NB Osage which is a bit odd.

ODOT also needs to construct a full stack at US-412 and Gilcrease at some point.

Access Oklahoma is building a new interchange at US-412 per the project site.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's also worth noting that they plan a fully directional interchange at Osage expressway and Gilcrease tollway minus a ramp from WB Gilcrease to NB Osage which is a bit odd.

ODOT also needs to construct a full stack at US-412 and Gilcrease at some point.

Access Oklahoma is building a new interchange at US-412 per the project site.

Interesting it does say that but they don't show it in the map. I would imagine a stack interchange would be 100-200 million dollars at minimum. Multiply that by two for Osage Expressway interchange and that leaves 200 million for the remainder of the freeway to be built between the two points.