AARoads Forum

Did they ever even acquire and keep the Right Of Way for Chickasaw Turnpike's original destination?

And did they ever release a map of the original intended length?

A map of legislated future turnpikes can be found at https://www.facebook.com/StopTheEasternLoop/photos/rpp.139250256435966/233960086964982/?type=3&theater (https://www.facebook.com/StopTheEasternLoop/photos/rpp.139250256435966/233960086964982/?type=3&theater) See the profile picture.

The full route was to be Duncan-Sulphur-Ada-Henryetta

I'll be for All Electronic Tolling if/when the various toll road agencies around the US can settle on one single standard or multiple standards that are compatible with each other. Right now it's just a mess.

What happened to the effort to get PikePass tags compatible with TX Tag and HCTRA toll roads? It has been at least a couple years since the news was mentioned. Wasn't there also a deadline (which passed a year or two ago) to make all the electronic tolling systems around the country compatible with each other? What happened to that? As long as they keep farting around with that effort it will always be necessary to build toll booths and extra toll lanes in toll plazas.

The original Chickasaw turnpike plan was stupid. Duncan to Henryetta via Sulphur and Ada? In a big L-shape path? I'm glad that road was never built. Such a route would only serve local traffic. How many people in Henryetta have to drive to Duncan on a regular basis? I'm guessing not nearly enough trips to even pay a significant fraction of what the turnpike would cost to build and maintain. In big picture terms of long distance travel that original Duncan to Henryetta route would have had little appeal. Traffic coming up from DFW to pick up I-40 and go east would just take US-69 up to Checotah or just take I-30 out East of Dallas.

As for the existing Chickasaw turnpike, I don't think it's busy enough to add another pair of lanes. The only thing I would do to improve it is widen the 2 lane road slightly and install a Jersey or cable barrier down the center. The treatment would be similar to that short stretch of I-93 in New Hampshire (the Styles Bridges Highway). It's just 2 lanes with barrier separation. A third passing lane is available for a couple bits of the route.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 17, 2018, 01:46:19 PMWhat happened to the effort to get PikePass tags compatible with TX Tag and HCTRA toll roads? It has been at least a couple years since the news was mentioned.

Actually, it has been just a year since interoperability was announced for KS, OK, and TX (at least for K-Tag users).  I am not sure what the hold-up is with PikePass, which did have an existing interoperability relationship with NTTA TollTag but should have been able to transition seamlessly to the new interoperability arrangements since OTA is a signatory to the agreement and NTTA runs the interoperability hub.

In February 2017 I went to Houston and had to stay off the toll roads because interoperability was not yet in place.  The relevant agreement was signed sometime in the summer of 2017.  I went to Dallas last week and used the PGBT to avoid traffic on I-635 on the way home, so we'll see how K-Tag swallows that.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 17, 2018, 01:46:19 PMWasn't there also a deadline (which passed a year or two ago) to make all the electronic tolling systems around the country compatible with each other? What happened to that? As long as they keep farting around with that effort it will always be necessary to build toll booths and extra toll lanes in toll plazas.

The deadline was October 2016 and it passed without nationwide interoperability.  I am told that as the industry was able to placate Congress through testimony, no adverse action was taken, and the current goal is to have interoperability in place by 2022.

Edit:  I just checked my K-Tag account.  The current-activity summary for last Friday (2018-10-12) indicates transits of PGBT Main Lane Plaza 7 at 9.41 AM ($1.34) and PGBT Main Lane Plaza 8 at 9.47 AM ($1.24).  Oddly enough, I should also have toll charges for travel on KTA infrastructure (South Wichita to Southern Terminal, 2018-10-09, and Southern Terminal to South Wichita, 2018-10-12) but these have not posted.  I wonder if they are being processed as video/violation tolls.

How about, "turn it over to ODOT and get rid of it".

I get what they wanted it for, a link for Ada, but I think it was just way ahead of its time.

OK has been trying to get relief for I-35 for years now (think Sooner Expressway) and the Chickasaw (if ever completed) would definitely provide an alternate route for DFW-KC truck traffic via Tulsa to I-44 and I-49. (or US-69 if one prefers the Ft Scott Bypass Route)

The fact it never got finished probably doomed it to its current 2000 ADT.  Even if it finished as a Super-2 to Henryetta, that would have provided enough bypass to help avoid the backups in OKC, especially when there is an overturned rig anywhere north of Norman.

Also interesting is that this route was in "bad shape" in less than 20 years after construction. Obviously the tollroad underspec'ed it on purpose to save money, probably at the governor's behest. Talk about kicking the can down the road.

My relative in OKC thinks the OK Tollways are a masterpiece, I will have to ask if they have traveled the Chickasaw.

Quote from: BrandonHow about, "turn it over to ODOT and get rid of it".

That can be done if you don't mind fuel taxes in Oklahoma being hiked 10¢-20¢ per gallon to cover the building and maintenance costs from taking over 606 miles of superhighway.

I could see dismantling that short turnpike to Ada at least however. But even as a "free" road it's still not really busy enough to justify being 4-laned.

Quote from: Brandon on October 17, 2018, 06:01:29 PM
How about, "turn it over to ODOT and get rid of it".

Because ODOT won't take it.  As it was, they were forced to "contribute" to the cost of making the interchange with US177 a full diamond.  I don't know if OTA ever addressed the numerous pavement issues.

Quote from: rte66man on October 17, 2018, 10:18:08 PM

Quote from: Brandon on October 17, 2018, 06:01:29 PM
How about, "turn it over to ODOT and get rid of it".

Because ODOT won't take it.  As it was, they were forced to "contribute" to the cost of making the interchange with US177 a full diamond.  I don't know if OTA ever addressed the numerous pavement issues.

They did, which required the total shutdown of the turnpike for a few months. Apparently enough people use it that it caused traffic backups in Sulphur. Who knew?

Quote from: edwaleni on October 17, 2018, 08:42:42 PM
I get what they wanted it for, a link for Ada, but I think it was just way ahead of its time.

Ada absolutely should have a link to the Interstate system, but mirrored on the N-S axis, following SH-3. Connecting Ada to Dallas and Tulsa isn't really as important as connecting it to the much closer OKC metro.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 17, 2018, 09:58:33 PM

Quote from: BrandonHow about, "turn it over to ODOT and get rid of it".

That can be done if you don't mind fuel taxes in Oklahoma being hiked 10¢-20¢ per gallon to cover the building and maintenance costs from taking over 606 miles of superhighway.

I could see dismantling that short turnpike to Ada at least however. But even as a "free" road it's still not really busy enough to justify being 4-laned.

I was only discussing the Chickasaw Turnpike, not the entire system (which should remain tolled, IMHO).  Leave that turnpike as 2-lanes and just dump it from the system.

Quote from: Scott5114Ada absolutely should have a link to the Interstate system, but mirrored on the N-S axis, following SH-3. Connecting Ada to Dallas and Tulsa isn't really as important as connecting it to the much closer OKC metro.

Given the old turnpike fantasy map of odd-ball toll road routes in Oklahoma, one running from OKC at least to Ada makes sense. Getting farther into fictional territory, I think it would be a good idea to build a turnpike following on or somewhat parallel to the OK-3 route, connecting to I-49 in Arkansas near Texarkana, going up through Atoka and Ada on the way to OKC and then on NW to Okarche, spanning directly to Watonga then on to Woodward. Then the folks in Colorado could build a direct connecting route from Limon on down to Woodward. It would create an OKC to Denver Interstate working in a similar fashion for the Interstate system as I-44 does connecting OKC to St Louis. But the pork barrel guys here in this state gotta make these strange roads that go nowhere, such as a full blown turnpike from Henryetta to Hugo or a proposed turnpike from Clinton to Snyder.
:-/

Quote from: edwaleni on October 17, 2018, 08:42:42 PMAlso interesting is that this route was in "bad shape" in less than 20 years after construction. Obviously the tollroad underspec'ed it on purpose to save money, probably at the governor's behest. Talk about kicking the can down the road.

The OTA purposely builds highways that are of poor quality that won't last so they are always working on one part of the turnpike system or another. If the roads were all complete and none of it were under construction they would be required by state law to remove the tollbooths.

Nexus 5X

And then the state would be forced to dramatically hike the gasoline taxes. So many Oklahomans have this mindset that roads don't cost anything to build or maintain; they're "free."

In one respect I kind of wish they would remove the toll booths so we could see how the experiment would play out. The current gas tax funding structure wouldn't work. The recently passed gas tax hike isn't going to roads; it's going into teacher pay raises since they're among the lowest paid in the nation and fleeing to other states in droves. Nevertheless, voters think ODOT can perform miracles just with what they have. That's kind of like expecting a burger flipper at McDonalds to afford a mortgage on a 4000 square foot home. Given that situation ODOT will be forced to ID state routes to decommission and turn over to counties. The tax base is in a slide in many of these rural counties. Very few young people are staying; they're off to the big cities. It's quite a pickle with or without the turnpikes.

Quote from: bugo on November 22, 2018, 06:33:30 AM

Quote from: edwaleni on October 17, 2018, 08:42:42 PMAlso interesting is that this route was in "bad shape" in less than 20 years after construction. Obviously the tollroad underspec'ed it on purpose to save money, probably at the governor's behest. Talk about kicking the can down the road.

The OTA purposely builds highways that are of poor quality that won't last so they are always working on one part of the turnpike system or another. If the roads were all complete and none of it were under construction they would be required by state law to remove the tollbooths.

You know that's not true.  All of the bonds have to be retired before the roads could ever become free.  Since there's nothing preventing OTA from issuing more bonds, the roads will remain tolled in perpetuity. It has nothing to do with construction and maintenance. 

It all has to do with the controversial practice of cross pledging those bonds. The debt from the newer turnpikes is added to the mix. Then there's the issue that the Turner Turnpike and Will Rogers Turnpike are the only ones in the 600 mile OTA system that turn a profit.

Lots of Oklahomans, even here in my part of the state, hate the toll booths. I don't think many of them realize if the option of building a super highway as a toll road wasn't there, and that all the super highways in the state were built "free," Oklahoma would have far fewer limited access highways. The H.E. Bailey Turnpike never would have been built down thru Lawton to Wichita Falls if that highway had to be built using gasoline taxes. The same goes for the Indian Nation Turnpike, the Muskogee Turnpike, the Cimarron Turnpike (and spur to Stilltwater) and Cherokee Turnpike. The Chickasaw Turnpike, being a modest 2-lane route, would have never been built either.

I don't like paying tolls any more than anyone else. But I really hate trying to shunpike on road trips between Lawton and Oklahoma City. I remember putting up with that nonsense when I was a kid due to relatives who hated the turnpikes. We would make a road trip to the OKC Zoo or Frontier City. The drive took what seemed like forever since there's no reasonably direct path between the Lawton area and OKC using "free" roads. We burned up a lot more gasoline and time to avoid paying something like 25¢ or 40¢ at a toll booth. Just plain stupid.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 23, 2018, 01:01:25 PM
Then there's the issue that the Turner Turnpike and Will Rogers Turnpike are the only ones in the 600 mile OTA system that turn a profit.

I'd be curious to know how many toll roads nationwide turn a profit.

Quote from: kphoger on November 23, 2018, 01:10:17 PM

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 23, 2018, 01:01:25 PM
Then there's the issue that the Turner Turnpike and Will Rogers Turnpike are the only ones in the 600 mile OTA system that turn a profit.

I'd be curious to know how many toll roads nationwide turn a profit.

Bobby cites an oft-stated "fact" about the profitability of OTA turnpikes.  What is profitable?  Do you factor in overhead?  What about a maintenance sinking fund? I suspect what is generally meant is does the toll revenue exceed the cost of collecting the toll, routine maintenance, and the retirement of the bonds sold to build the road.  If that is true, then the Turner is a proverbial cash cow, the Will Rogers less so.  The HE Bailey between Chickasha and OKC is also profitable.  I suspect portions of the Kilpatrick and the Creek are also profitable.  The rest I suspect do not come close to making enough revenue to cover the three items mentioned above. 

I'm getting my stats from one of the people on the board of the OTA, who visited our civic club in Lawton as a guest speaker to talk about the turnpikes. I can't remember the guy's name. I'd have to do some digging through a bunch of club newsletters to find it. He told a brief history of the turnpikes, explained the cross pledging practice. He got into the "profitability" thing addressing the very common gripe of many Oklahomans: "the roads are paid for and the toll gates need to come down." The toll revenue generated by the Will Rogers and Turner Turnpikes is well above its costs (maintenance, personnel, etc). The other turnpikes don't generate enough toll revenue to offset all their costs. That includes the H.E. Bailey Turnpike.

^ This squares with some Tulsa World articles I've used as reference material for the Chickasaw Turnpike article on Wikipedia, although they are not particularly illuminating on what constitutes "profit".

As "profit" goes for a tollway, there is an operational profit and a gross profit.

Operational profit is the revenue collected minus the expenses to operate, including bond interest.

Gross profit is simply revenue minus the operating expenses.

Many of OK Turnpike sections have large revenues relative to their expenses and bond interest.

Others sections have a Gross Profit, but not an operational one.

In the early toll road days, bonding only occurred for certain sections built.  This provided a direct correlation between tolls collected and bonds financed.

However in the early 1990's, toll authorities began to ask their legislatures for the ability to refinance their bonds en masse .

This provided two major benefits.  Toll authorities could essentially become perpetual and they could tie their bond financing to the revenue of the entire system, not just particular segments.

This also helped the same authorities to mask operational losses on certain sections into the operational profits of others.  Some states sections were becoming woefully under-maintained because the tolls collected was not covering its operational costs, so they skimped on maintenance so the bonds could be paid on time.

Now with perpetual bonding capacity, they could now provide somewhat "equal" maintenance to the entire system without being punished on their bond payments.

Some states took it to the next level and are beginning to demand yet more toll roads to be built in areas that might not be so easy for the system to absorb.  Essentially turning the toll authority into a sort of "premium DOT" to its tax supported "Poor DOT".  With constituents demanding better roads but at the same time refusing to raise their gas taxes, politicians see toll authorities as their fallback.(or scapegoat)

This only works as long as the operating profits can be maintained on the busiest routes to subsidize the lesser ones.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 24, 2018, 07:06:07 PM
I'm getting my stats from one of the people on the board of the OTA, who visited our civic club in Lawton as a guest speaker to talk about the turnpikes. I can't remember the guy's name. I'd have to do some digging through a bunch of club newsletters to find it. He told a brief history of the turnpikes, explained the cross pledging practice. He got into the "profitability" thing addressing the very common gripe of many Oklahomans: "the roads are paid for and the toll gates need to come down." The toll revenue generated by the Will Rogers and Turner Turnpikes is well above its costs (maintenance, personnel, etc). The other turnpikes don't generate enough toll revenue to offset all their costs. That includes the H.E. Bailey Turnpike.

I wonder if an FOI request would provide a detailed breakdown, not just by turnpike, but by segment.  Some pikes (the Indian Nation from Henryetta to MacAlester and the Bailey from OKC to Chickasha) have segments that I believe are way more profitable than the remaining segments.  I would also like to see the breakdowns for the 2 urban pikes.

Quote from: rte66man on November 26, 2018, 07:57:43 AMI wonder if an FOI request would provide a detailed breakdown, not just by turnpike, but by segment.  Some pikes (the Indian Nation from Henryetta to MacAlester and the Bailey from OKC to Chickasha) have segments that I believe are way more profitable than the remaining segments.  I would also like to see the breakdowns for the 2 urban pikes.

The place to start is with the OTA annual financial reports (https://www.pikepass.com/about/CAFR.aspx).  A quick look at the 2017 report shows that revenue figures are broken down by turnpike, though not by segment, while the costs generally are not.  Some cost centers, such as operation of the PikePass system, are not directly referable to particular roadway segments.

As a very crude generalization, the Turner, Creek, and Kilpatrick turnpikes have annual revenues in the $30 million class, while other relatively heavily used turnpikes like the Will Rogers pull in about $20 million.  The Chickasaw pulled in $600,000 in 2017.

Traffic data might also be available for the Turnpike system as a whole, possibly through ODOT rather than the OTA, and if this is sufficiently well stratified by vehicle class, it can be combined with the toll rate schedule to generate a raw revenue estimate per segment that can be adjusted down to the actual revenue figures by applying a toll evasion percentage.  I think such an analysis would be my first step, not just as a check on the realism of any actual figures supplied by OTA, but also as a substitute for them if they charge enough for them under a FOI cost-recovery provision that it becomes expedient to abandon the request altogether.  (I have personally never known state officials in Oklahoma to go out of their way to use cost recovery to punish public requestors, but in Kansas they usually do.)

I thought this was interesting: 2017 Average Daily Traffic Count Reports (https://www.pikepass.com/PDF/Yearly%202017.pdf)

Quote from: US 89 on November 26, 2018, 12:37:34 PM
I thought this was interesting: 2017 Average Daily Traffic Count Reports (https://www.pikepass.com/PDF/Yearly%202017.pdf)

Wow, how old is that map?

I would not have guessed that parts of the Kilpatrick have an AADT nearly twice of any stretch of the Turner.

I guess you haven't been on old OK 33 between US 69 and the Arkansas border. It was curvy, dangerous, slow, deadly, narrow, winding, hilly, choked with traffic and had poor geometry. It was a death trap. It connected Tulsa and Oklahoma City and points west to the booming northwest Arkansas area and needed to be built. And if you can make it in more than 12 minutes longer than it would be then you would be going way too fast for that road. And if you get behind a slow moving vehicle, it will take even longer. And it's a scary drive, especially at night or in inclement weather. The turnpike is well worth the money.

This bumper sticker was common in northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas during the 1970s. I also remember seeing similar stickers for US 71.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4852/46024967042_0d943fd653_o.jpg)

Quote from: bugo on November 27, 2018, 10:09:46 AM
I guess you haven't been on old OK 33 between US 69 and the Arkansas border. It was curvy, dangerous, slow, deadly, narrow, winding, hilly, choked with traffic and had poor geometry. It was a death trap. It connected Tulsa and Oklahoma City and points west to the booming northwest Arkansas area and needed to be built. And if you can make it in more than 12 minutes longer than it would be then you would be going way too fast for that road. And if you get behind a slow moving vehicle, it will take even longer. And it's a scary drive, especially at night or in inclement weather. The turnpike is well worth the money.

This bumper sticker was common in northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas during the 1970s. I also remember seeing similar stickers for US 71.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4852/46024967042_0d943fd653_o.jpg)

I can remember many road trips in the late 80s and until 1993 or 1994 when the turnpike opened, traveling along that 2-lane section of 33 between Chouteau and Springdale with my grandparents.

Quote from: will_e_777 on November 27, 2018, 03:36:39 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 27, 2018, 10:09:46 AM
I guess you haven't been on old OK 33 between US 69 and the Arkansas border. It was curvy, dangerous, slow, deadly, narrow, winding, hilly, choked with traffic and had poor geometry. It was a death trap. It connected Tulsa and Oklahoma City and points west to the booming northwest Arkansas area and needed to be built. And if you can make it in more than 12 minutes longer than it would be then you would be going way too fast for that road. And if you get behind a slow moving vehicle, it will take even longer. And it's a scary drive, especially at night or in inclement weather. The turnpike is well worth the money.

This bumper sticker was common in northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas during the 1970s. I also remember seeing similar stickers for US 71.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4852/46024967042_0d943fd653_o.jpg)

I can remember many road trips in the late 80s and until 1993 or 1994 when the turnpike opened, traveling along that 2-lane section of 33 between Chouteau and Springdale with my grandparents.

When I was a student at TU in the late 70's, we used to drive to Fayetteville every year for the TU/Arkansas football game.  I hated driving OK33.  I was so thankful that Dan Holmes worked tirelessly to get that road improved.

No, you can't. I couldn't go any faster than 45 when I drove it. It took 30 minutes longer than taking the turnpike. Besides you can drive as fast as you have the balls to on the turnpike and it is a lot less stressful.

It's worth noting that 33 (current 412 Alternate) was probably much worse before the turnpike was built, by virtue of having far more traffic.

The one time I drove 412 Alternate (it was 412 Scenic at the time) I remember thinking that I now understood why the turnpike was there.

I drove the shun-pike for the Cherokee Turnpike exactly 1 time in all the trips I've taken to Tulsa.  I don't remember it being particularly treacherous, but I remember it taking noticeably longer primarily due to speed-zones towns.  I like to make a game of doubling the speed plates under the curve signs for those 30 and under, so curves aren't much of a bother.  It was mainly slowing down for towns that impacted the trip times.  The Cherokee Turnpike is reasonably priced for the time it saves.

Would anyone be surprised, if one day, Oklahoma decided to demolish the entire Chickasaw Turnpike? It doesn't seem very far-fetched to me.

I would. It's apparently used enough that the time it was shut down for reconstruction, it caused traffic jams in Sulphur. It's also a decent timesaver for people going from Ada to Dallas (which includes people going from Chickasaw Nation headquarters to their largest business, in Thackerville). If anything, I'd expect to see the remainder of it turned over to ODOT and the whole thing become SH-7 Spur.

There isn't one. The original route number system, established August 24, 1924, had north-south numbers with even numbers, and east-west numbers with odd numbers. Most of these original routes were replaced by US routes, and after that, the system was expanded in an ad-hoc manner, with routes getting whatever number was available at the time. There has never been a Great Renumbering as in other states; therefore, some of the original 1924 routes still exist. 9 and 11 are both examples of these.

Because of this, and OkDOT's general tendencies, oddities abound. 251A, for instance, when there's never been a 251, three instances of 9A (and no 9B or 9C), 56 Loop and 7 Spur, and more. There's plenty of instances of short highways that should be suffixed routes getting full two- or three-digit numbers (42, 89, 156) and a few lettered routes that are long enough to cross entire counties. It's a mess.

OK 11 used to go all the way to West Siloam Springs.

I discovered this highway while checking out some old Wagoner County, Oklahoma maps. This is SH 251D. It has four termini, much like the infamous OK 77S. I also discovered a SH 251B, SH 251C and SH 251E along with the extant SH 251A. The funny thing is that not only do these connect to SH 251, but there is no SH 251 and there likely never was one. These highways were mostly access roads for Fort Gibson Lake.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181228/749d6959e78cb0b1092b478558b77b92.jpg)

Quote from: bugo on December 28, 2018, 04:20:55 AM
OK 11 used to go all the way to West Siloam Springs.

And at one point, it went all the way to Boise City along what I believe is now US-64.

Quote from: rte66man on November 26, 2018, 07:57:43 AM
I wonder if an FOI request would provide a detailed breakdown, not just by turnpike, but by segment.  Some pikes (the Indian Nation from Henryetta to MacAlester and the Bailey from OKC to Chickasha) have segments that I believe are way more profitable than the remaining segments.  I would also like to see the breakdowns for the 2 urban pikes.

Traffic on the Muskogee Turnpike is usually much heavier on the BA-Muskogee segment than on the Muskogee-Webbers Falls segment so the profits would be higher on the western half of the highway.

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 27, 2018, 03:51:52 PM
I would. It's apparently used enough that the time it was shut down for reconstruction, it caused traffic jams in Sulphur. It's also a decent timesaver for people going from Ada to Dallas (which includes people going from Chickasaw Nation headquarters to their largest business, in Thackerville). If anything, I'd expect to see the remainder of it turned over to ODOT and the whole thing become SH-7 Spur.

The Chickasaw Turnpike also provides a type of bypass for Sulphur, which is very confusing to go through town. Another reason to support Chickasaw Turnpike is that because of its short length, it is basically a tolled bypass of Sulphur more so than a connection to Ada. On the other hand, half of that bypass is Spur 7.

It also brings back my original question of where is the Chickasaw Turnpike supposed to go? (That map is silly. I very much doubt a toll road parallel to U.S. 70.) I had convinced myself that it would have kept going west being north of Davis so it would not have to go through mountains. But the alignment that ends at S.H. 7 seems like they would have kept going south. And would Chickasaw Turnpike have gone southeast of Ada?)

Quote from: In_Correct on December 31, 2018, 10:46:24 AM
It also brings back my original question of where is the Chickasaw Turnpike supposed to go? (That map is silly. I very much doubt a toll road parallel to U.S. 70.) I had convinced myself that it would have kept going west being north of Davis so it would not have to go through mountains. But the alignment that ends at S.H. 7 seems like they would have kept going south. And would Chickasaw Turnpike have gone southeast of Ada?)

The original intent was for a turnpike from south of Davis to near Henryetta on I40 to serve as a shortcut from Dallas to Tulsa as well as a way to connect Ada to the rest of the world.  Lonnie Abbott was a legislator from Ada that had a lot of stroke.  He was the chief impetus behind getting the Chickasaw built.  He also got ODOT to 4 lane OK1 from Roff to Ada. I suspect he thought "get this part built and the rest would follow".