Have they begun to put up the new signs?
Not yet
Anybody seen any of this new signage yet? Or are there any plans to get it done?
Haven't seen anything. Considering the blatantly idiotic official ends of I-240 and I-335 at a friggin' partial exit to a surface street, I hope the routes don't get signed any time soon -if ever at all. I don't agree with the route number choices (344 and 335 are stupid) either.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 20, 2024, 12:25:10 AMHaven't seen anything. Considering the blatantly idiotic official ends of I-240 and I-335 at a friggin' partial exit to a surface street, I hope the routes don't get signed any time soon -if ever at all. I don't agree with the route number choices (344 and 335 are stupid) either.
I agree. I think that I-240 should end where it currently ends, I-344 should be saved for Lawton or Tulsa, and I-335 should not be used until the Kickapoo connects with I-35 through the south extension.
Quote from: SoonerCowboy on October 20, 2024, 03:56:10 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on October 20, 2024, 12:25:10 AMHaven't seen anything. Considering the blatantly idiotic official ends of I-240 and I-335 at a friggin' partial exit to a surface street, I hope the routes don't get signed any time soon -if ever at all. I don't agree with the route number choices (344 and 335 are stupid) either.
I agree. I think that I-240 should end where it currently ends, I-344 should be saved for Lawton or Tulsa, and I-335 should not be used until the Kickapoo connects with I-35 through the south extension.
Why stop there? I-240 is redundant to OK-3 so it should be saved for Memphis, I-235 and I-35 are redundant to US-77 so they should be saved for Wichita, and I-40 and I-44 should be US-66 and US-266.
QuoteWhy stop there? I-240 is redundant to OK-3 so it should be saved for Memphis, I-235 and I-35 are redundant to US-77 so they should be saved for Wichita, and I-40 and I-44 should be US-66 and US-266.
Uh, ha ha.
My complaint is still valid. We already have an OK-344 route assigned to the Gilcrease Turnpike. That is what should have ended up being I-344. Instead they're doing this duplicate nonsense, allowing a 344 turnpike route in Tulsa and a 344 turnpike route in OKC.
Again, this theme of using 3xx numbers for turnpike designations is very short-sighted. And if they were going to use Interstate numbers in this scheme it would have been better to use an I-340 number in OKC rather than "burn" the only designation Tulsa could have used. Or does the OTA think they'll be able to get designations like "I-364" and "I-351" approved? I don't even know how they're going to get the Tri-City Connector and East-West Connector signed (unless they want to route I-344 over both of them).
I don't mind the I-335 designation on the Kickapoo Turnpike as much as I dislike I-344 on the Kilpatrick. Still, it should have been an even-numbered route. "I-440" would have made perfect sense for the Kilpatrick (since it connects to both I-44 and I-40).
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 21, 2024, 06:34:00 PMthe only designation Tulsa could have used.
I-342 is available...
Though I agree with the general principle that the 3xx numbers for toll roads in Oklahoma was not a good idea, and has been executed even more terribly.
I drove the Creek Turnpike the other day (SH-364) shouldn't it have an I-XXX designation?
Quote from: jdingus on October 22, 2024, 10:39:48 AMI drove the Creek Turnpike the other day (SH-364) shouldn't it have an I-XXX designation?
The 64 is from US64, it links to I-44 at both ends, I-644 would be perfect as it has both numbers involved. However it's got to be 3xx as OK is strange about its non I-44 Turnpikes and their numbers.
(It doesn't
have to have an I-xxx designation, but as Oklahoma is going for blue-and-white shields on most of the other Turnpikes, its strange that the Creek Turnpike isn't getting them)
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 21, 2024, 06:34:00 PMAgain, this theme of using 3xx numbers for turnpike designations is very short-sighted.
I think it's fine, as Oklahoma only has, what, 12, 13 turnpikes, so they'd still have eighty-odd 3xx numbers to use. It's maybe a bit silly to involve Interstates in it, but whatever, it's far from the largest numbering atrocities ODOT has committed (I'm far more okay with that than whatever the hell is going on with OK-77S, OK-77D, and OK-63A, burning two-digit routes on things like OK-96 and OK-42, and so on).
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 21, 2024, 06:34:00 PMStill, it should have been an even-numbered route.
The first-digit even/odd rule for 3dis has gotten to be interpreted so many different ways by so many different DOTs that at this point I feel like it's lost all meaning.
Quote from: jdingusI drove the Creek Turnpike the other day (SH-364) shouldn't it have an I-XXX designation?
It might be able to use the "I-342" designation if/when I-42 is signed over portions of US-412 in Oklahoma. No other possible Interstate number designations would be available as long as OTA sticks to that I-3XX scheme. Can't use "I-340" in the Tulsa metro.
Quote from: Scott5114I think it's fine, as Oklahoma only has, what, 12, 13 turnpikes, so they'd still have eighty-odd 3xx numbers to use.
There wouldn't be a problem IF they had restricted that 3xx numbering theme to State highway numbers. Their act of including Interstate numbers in the scheme is what makes it so idiotic. The sheer idiocy is doubled having separate OK-344 and I-344 routes little more than an hour's drive apart along I-44.
Quote from: Scott5114The first-digit even/odd rule for 3dis has gotten to be interpreted so many different ways by so many different DOTs that at this point I feel like it's lost all meaning.
Even though the "rule" has been compromised more than a few times the even/odd rule still maintains a general understanding. Either way, "I-440" would have made infinitely more logical sense being applied to the Kilpatrick Turnpike than I-344. The strange numbering choice just smells like political malfeasance. I can easily imagine it being some jerk politician in the OKC region taking the I-344 number just to keep the Tulsa area from having it, despite the Gilcrease Expressway already being signed as OK-344.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 22, 2024, 07:03:06 PMTheir act of including Interstate numbers in the scheme is what makes it so idiotic.
Explain how. They are all just numbers.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 22, 2024, 07:03:06 PMEven though the "rule" has been compromised more than a few times the even/odd rule still maintains a general understanding.
So is the reason I don't understand it because I'm not a general? Does a captain understand it? How about a major?
In any event, there are enough exceptions to the rule that it imparts no useful knowledge. That makes it not really much of a rule.
Quote from: Scott5114Explain how. They are all just numbers.
The problem is pretty easy to understand. There are currently only 3 possible, plausible Interstate 3XX routes for turnpikes in Oklahoma
(4 if the I-42 thing actually happens). Oklahoma has considerably more turnpikes that can potentially be signed as Interstates than that. If the ACCESS Oklahoma program is completed the state will have even more.
Even just sticking to the "I-3XX" theme it would have made more sense to use "I-340" in the OKC metro and leave "I-344" for Tulsa. The "deciders" can't even manage something logical like that. Probably some guy in the state government had to exercise his inner-asshole and stick it to the Tulsa area by stealing that number for OKC.
With as stupid as Oklahoma's state lawmakers can be I would not be surprised if they made OTA reps apply to the federal government to get designations like "I-364" or "I-375."
I am surprised that the state went the Interstate route for the John Kilpatrick and Kickapoo Turnpikes instead of giving them state highway designations like they recently gave the other toll roads in the state. The John Kilpatrick could have been OK 335 or OK 352, and the Kickapoo could have been OK 340. I am okay with the Kickapoo being Interstate 335 assuming the extension to Interstate 35 is eventually constructed, although my preferred numbers for Interstate 344 would have been Interstate 440 or Interstate 644. Alas, the Interstate 240 extension, and the Interstate 335 and Interstate 344 designations are set in stone, so we'll have to accept that those are now their designations.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 22, 2024, 09:47:26 PMQuote from: Scott5114Explain how. They are all just numbers.
The problem is pretty easy to understand. There are currently only 3 possible, plausible Interstate 3XX routes for turnpikes in Oklahoma (4 if the I-42 thing actually happens). Oklahoma has considerably more turnpikes that can potentially be signed as Interstates than that. If the ACCESS Oklahoma program is completed the state will have even more.
Even just sticking to the "I-3XX" theme it would have made more sense to use "I-340" in the OKC metro and leave "I-344" for Tulsa. The "deciders" can't even manage something logical like that. Probably some guy in the state government had to exercise his inner-asshole and stick it to the Tulsa area by stealing that number for OKC.
With as stupid as Oklahoma's state lawmakers can be I would not be surprised if they made OTA reps apply to the federal government to get designations like "I-364" or "I-375."
That's not surprising, considering that they have the worst-looking signs in the field (especially the nightmarishly terrible text, shield and arrow placement). Now they have to make equally bad numbering schemes too? I can see how they want to reserve 300-series numbers for their toll roads, but this is irresponsible thinking on their part.
(In a perfect world, Tulsa would get an I-350 spur off I-50; however, that may never be realized, especially now that I-42 is going to take over the US 412 corridor one day.)
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 22, 2024, 07:03:06 PMCan't use "I-340" in the Tulsa metro.
They could renumber the Muskogee Turnpike
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 22, 2024, 09:47:26 PMThe problem is pretty easy to understand. There are currently only 3 possible, plausible Interstate 3XX routes for turnpikes in Oklahoma (4 if the I-42 thing actually happens). Oklahoma has considerably more turnpikes that can potentially be signed as Interstates than that. If the ACCESS Oklahoma program is completed the state will have even more.
So why do all of the turnpikes need Interstate designations if some of them do? After all, for decades Oklahoma had three turnpikes with Interstate designations and seven without and that worked just fine.
I'm not saying all of Oklahoma's turnpikes need Interstate designations. What I'm talking about is the "theme" ODOT and OTA is apparently trying to apply with 3-digit routes only starting in the number 3. It's just stupid. Using state highway numbers wasn't a problem since there are 99 potential route numbers that can be used.
Even though the turnpikes don't really need Interstate numbers the act of OTA placing Interstate designations on a couple turnpikes (Kilpatrick, Kickapoo) certainly does open the door of possibility for it to happen with other turnpikes. Why should the Kilpatrick Turnpike be given an Interstate number, but not the East-West Connector Turnpike? It can go on and on from there since Interstate routes are seen as "superior" to state highway routes. If OTA has to apply Interstate labels to more turnpikes they're going to be trapped since they painted themselves into a corner with the "I-3XX" template.
Interstate route numbers in Oklahoma should not be following that "I-3XX" model. They're going to have to be more flexible. Otherwise we could get crazy shit like "I-3344" applied to the East-West Connector Turnpike.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 24, 2024, 11:36:38 AMI'm not saying all of Oklahoma's turnpikes need Interstate designations. What I'm talking about is the "theme" ODOT and OTA is apparently trying to apply with 3-digit routes only starting in the number 3. It's just stupid. Using state highway numbers wasn't a problem since there are 99 potential route numbers that can be used.
Even though the turnpikes don't really need Interstate numbers the act of OTA placing Interstate designations on a couple turnpikes (Kilpatrick, Kickapoo) certainly does open the door of possibility for it to happen with other turnpikes. Why should the Kilpatrick Turnpike be given an Interstate number, but not the East-West Connector Turnpike? It can go on and on from there since Interstate routes are seen as "superior" to state highway routes. If OTA has to apply Interstate labels to more turnpikes they're going to be trapped since they painted themselves into a corner with the "I-3XX" template.
Interstate route numbers in Oklahoma should not be following that "I-3XX" model. They're going to have to be more flexible. Otherwise we could get crazy shit like "I-3344" applied to the East-West Connector Turnpike.
I am not seeing any reason why all of the turnpikes can't have 3xx numbers, some of which are interstates and the rest of which are state highways, though. It is not as though using I-335 for the Kickapoo Turnpike means that the east-west connector cannot be OK-337.
Presumably the reason why I-344 and I-335 got Interstate numbers is because someone thought they were more important. Or because Richard was responsible for coming up with the Tulsa area numbers and Clark was responsible for the OKC numbers. Or whatever.
I sort of hope we somehow get a US-362 out of this just because it seems like it would annoy everyone.
I would have been okay with the John Kilpatrick and the Kickapoo Turnpikes remaining unnumbered. However, it appears the days of Oklahoma's toll roads having no State or Interstate Highway designations have passed. We will just have to accept the designations each tollroad has been given, even if it personally gives us indigestion. At least they're not as bad as Interstates 99 and 238.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 21, 2024, 06:34:00 PMQuoteWhy stop there? I-240 is redundant to OK-3 so it should be saved for Memphis, I-235 and I-35 are redundant to US-77 so they should be saved for Wichita, and I-40 and I-44 should be US-66 and US-266.
Uh, ha ha.
My complaint is still valid. We already have an OK-344 route assigned to the Gilcrease Turnpike. That is what should have ended up being I-344. Instead they're doing this duplicate nonsense, allowing a 344 turnpike route in Tulsa and a 344 turnpike route in OKC.
Again, this theme of using 3xx numbers for turnpike designations is very short-sighted. And if they were going to use Interstate numbers in this scheme it would have been better to use an I-340 number in OKC rather than "burn" the only designation Tulsa could have used. Or does the OTA think they'll be able to get designations like "I-364" and "I-351" approved? I don't even know how they're going to get the Tri-City Connector and East-West Connector signed (unless they want to route I-344 over both of them).
I don't mind the I-335 designation on the Kickapoo Turnpike as much as I dislike I-344 on the Kilpatrick. Still, it should have been an even-numbered route. "I-440" would have made perfect sense for the Kilpatrick (since it connects to both I-44 and I-40).
It would have been more logical to make the Kilpatrick a continuation of I-240, since it would become a three-quarter loop around Oklahoma City.
Initially they were going to sign the Kilpatrick Turnpike as I-240. But then they went too far, wanting I-240 to overlap parts of I-44 and I-40 so it could also be signed onto the Kickapoo Turnpike as well. While that idea was silly, it wasn't as bad as this current I-344/I-240 setup.
I noticed I-344 signs at the Northwest Expressway/JKT "intersection" this evening.
Keep us posted if any of you see any more new Interstate 240/335/344 signs.
Looks like next time I need to drive to KC, I'll take the looooong way as now OKC has the majority of my closest unclinched interstates.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 22, 2024, 11:32:14 AMKeep us posted if any of you see any more new Interstate 240/335/344 signs.
I traveled most of the JKT today - as of today, most of the "guidance" signs (ie, "East I-344 turn right" with the shield and an arrow) have been changed over, but no changes to the reassurance/BGS type signs.
Can we get some photos?
I drove through eastbound I-44 to southbound I-335 on 11/20/24. All of the I-335 signage appeared to be present, BGS at the I-44 junction and trailblazers along the route.
I'll probably be in OKC sometime this week. I can try to grab some photos!
I got on the JKT today at Pennsylvania and they had the I-344 signs up indicating east and west and "toll" above it, but once you get on they still have the Kilpatrick signs up.
I used the Kickapoo turnpike from NE 23rd to SE 29th and they do now have I-335 signage up on the turnpike with the "toll" right above it. I think getting on it was still the Kickapoo signs.
Westbound Kilpatrick approaching Penn:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170621009_45ce46af7e_w.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qwSAmi)
Northbound Broadway Extension exiting at the Kilpatrick:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54169439117_488bc2c9d9.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qwLx1R)
Those yellow "toll" panels above the cardinal direction panels on post mounted signs look like a new thing. I've never seen those on I-44 turnpikes before.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2024, 01:47:23 PMThose yellow "toll" panels above the cardinal direction panels on post mounted signs look like a new thing. I've never seen those on I-44 turnpikes before.
Might be temporary just so the people that didn't get the news about the route numbering still know they're headed for the tollways they've always traveled.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on November 28, 2024, 05:50:19 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2024, 01:47:23 PMThose yellow "toll" panels above the cardinal direction panels on post mounted signs look like a new thing. I've never seen those on I-44 turnpikes before.
Might be temporary just so the people that didn't get the news about the route numbering still know they're headed for the tollways they've always traveled.
Such signage is appearing more and more around the country. Probably not temporary, but it is a somewhat new-ish standard.
I drove 335 and 344 today. Noticed that they are both signed. Except the BGS on I-40 doesn't have 344 or 335 at the respective Terminus. Drove 240 today as well. Didn't see any new 240 signs on Airport RD. Seems like OTA has done their part and ODOT needs to get with the program.
Holy shit, OTA actually looked at the spec book!
Although just uh. Try not to think about how stupid those bolt holes would look without it being on the pole. Just kind of. Ignore that.
I clinched all three interstates today, so I can confirm what jdingus said.
I-335 is completely signed via trailblazers and BGSs:
(https://imgur.com/sAKYHAs.jpg)
(https://imgur.com/PSHyeZy.jpg)
I-344 is signed via trailblazers and standalone shields, but it hasn't made it to BGSs yet:
(https://imgur.com/jqyNAbi.jpg)
I-240 still ends where it has ended as of earlier today.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54169439117_488bc2c9d9.jpg)
The I-344 shield on the "East" post was installed crooked. The shield is leaning to the left. Overall, the whole post assembly looks oddly out of alignment. I guess that's the price of them trying to re-use existing posts that weren't designed for wider 3-digit Interstate shields.
They could have just installed a couple of cross bars to properly accommodate the I-344 shields and help get everything installed straight and level. Instead we have more slap-dash crap.
Looks like the old Kilpatrick Tpk signs are now historic, here the last GSV showed them in May 2024 on OK-74 northbound.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MHAcfjAYUrJp6ZkGA
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on November 29, 2024, 09:39:11 PMLooks like the old Kilpatrick Tpk signs are now historic, here the last GSV showed them in May 2024 on OK-74 northbound.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MHAcfjAYUrJp6ZkGA
Based on my field observations today, many of them are still there, so see them while you can! But yes, they will soon be gone most likely.
Very cool, thanks for the pics. They actually did a pretty good job with these other than that silly crooked one.
Yeah, that crooked one really bothers me for some reason. I mean, come on how hard would it have been for the contractor just to make them straight.
I-240 still ends where it has ended as of earlier today.
[/quote]
I took my wife to the airport early this morning and can confirm that I-240 still ends at the I-44.
Quote from: Plutonic PandaYeah, that crooked one really bothers me for some reason. I mean, come on how hard would it have been for the contractor just to make them straight.
It wouldn't have been difficult at all
if they had actually thought about the job a little bit before trying to execute. I've seen other post-mounted "sign salads" where cross bars were used to span multiple posts and provide a straight, horizontal background for a variety of 2-digit and 3-digit route markers. It's not a new idea.
Instead we have installers improvising new bolt holes in spots not along the center of a 3-digit Interstate shield. It's no surprise that at least one of the shields wound up being installed crooked. One or more of the "bosses" was wanting to do stuff
quick and cheap. Combine that with one or more of the install crew trying to get shit done as fast as possible so they can arrive at beer-thirty exactly on time and not a moment late.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 01, 2024, 10:34:34 PMInstead we have installers improvising new bolt holes in spots not along the center of a 3-digit Interstate shield. It's no surprise that at least one of the shields wound up being installed crooked. One or more of the "bosses" was wanting to do stuff quick and cheap. Combine that with one or more of the install crew trying to get shit done as fast as possible so they can arrive at beer-thirty exactly on time and not a moment late.
It's so weird going from living with that sort of work to living in Nevada. It took what felt like forever for the City of Las Vegas to respond when the fluorescent tubes for one of the illuminated signs on Rainbow Boulevard burned out. Come to find out that's because when they finally did come out and work on it, they completely rewired it to use LED and had fabricated brand new sign panels for it, front and back, to boot.
I have a couple of other burned-out light reports turned in and they're taking similarly long. So I'm guessing they're doing the same thing there.
Swapping out the lighting from fluorescent based lamps to LED isn't really cheap. But doing the switch can save a lot of money in the long run via lower power usage and fewer maintenance calls.
Old T12 HO/D lamps or lamps that are high pressure sodium require high wattage ballasts for power supply. When switching to LED-based lamps the power supplies have to be swapped out. So you're going from one or more ballasts running at 600W or more to little dinky boxes running 60W. The LEDs last longer and drink a lot less electricity -at least that's the case for standard signage applications. Something like a big jumbotron that has tens of thousands (or even millions) of LED pixels is going to use some power.
I wish they would use the warm LED lighting instead of the bright blue lighting.
While the warm lighting is generally more aesthetically pleasing, I think the more blue-shifted lighting actually makes visibility better. Blue light in a home context is generally castigated for causing wakefulness by being close enough to daylight for the body's purposes, but of course this is a feature rather than a bug in a driving context.
6500K lighting yields more accurate colors than warmer lamps at 4500K or lower.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 02, 2024, 12:25:10 AMWhile the warm lighting is generally more aesthetically pleasing, I think the more blue-shifted lighting actually makes visibility better. Blue light in a home context is generally castigated for causing wakefulness by being close enough to daylight for the body's purposes, but of course this is a feature rather than a bug in a driving context.
Blue lighting is harmful to wildlife. But then you are in the desert.
Quote from: swake on December 02, 2024, 04:36:50 PMQuote from: Scott5114 on December 02, 2024, 12:25:10 AMWhile the warm lighting is generally more aesthetically pleasing, I think the more blue-shifted lighting actually makes visibility better. Blue light in a home context is generally castigated for causing wakefulness by being close enough to daylight for the body's purposes, but of course this is a feature rather than a bug in a driving context.
Blue lighting is harmful to wildlife. But then you are in the desert.
The desert has plenty of wildlife. (Though I'm not too fussed about anything bad happening to the scorpions. We found one on inspection day in the house we're buying, so that's going to be something I get to deal with. Guess I'd better figure out where to get some diatomaceous earth. We also saw a bee in the backyard, which is fine with me. They like to build giant hives under the rocks at the edges of town, so I'm guessing she came from one of those.)
So, I-335 and I-344 are signed, but not I-240 along I-44 or west of it. That's frustrating. I'm probably going to be in OKC in July.
Quote from: CoreySamson on November 29, 2024, 09:41:28 PMQuote from: Stephane Dumas on November 29, 2024, 09:39:11 PMLooks like the old Kilpatrick Tpk signs are now historic, here the last GSV showed them in May 2024 on OK-74 northbound.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MHAcfjAYUrJp6ZkGA
Based on my field observations today, many of them are still there, so see them while you can! But yes, they will soon be gone most likely.
How is I-335 signed on its south end? Any indication of where it actually ends?
Quote from: Rothman on December 08, 2024, 06:37:18 PMQuote from: CoreySamson on November 29, 2024, 09:41:28 PMQuote from: Stephane Dumas on November 29, 2024, 09:39:11 PMLooks like the old Kilpatrick Tpk signs are now historic, here the last GSV showed them in May 2024 on OK-74 northbound.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MHAcfjAYUrJp6ZkGA
Based on my field observations today, many of them are still there, so see them while you can! But yes, they will soon be gone most likely.
How is I-335 signed on its south end? Any indication of where it actually ends?
Everything south of I-40 is a two-lane road, so I'd hope it's not signed as an Interstate, though who knows with OTA...
GSV shows there is a Kickapoo Turnpike shield going northbound from S.E. 89th Street, so it might be worth looking to see what, if anything, happened to that.
From what I saw, all Kickapoo Turnpike shields have been replaced with I-335 shields, as I did not see a single Kickapoo shield. There was no pull through sign for I-335 going SB on I-335 at I-40 when I drove it. I would assume that I-335 currently ends at I-40.
But there were plenty of Kilpatrick Turnpike pull-through signs at major interchanges in OKC. Essentially everything OTA is responsible for is done while ODOT has not started yet.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 08, 2024, 08:56:28 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 08, 2024, 06:37:18 PMQuote from: CoreySamson on November 29, 2024, 09:41:28 PMQuote from: Stephane Dumas on November 29, 2024, 09:39:11 PMLooks like the old Kilpatrick Tpk signs are now historic, here the last GSV showed them in May 2024 on OK-74 northbound.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MHAcfjAYUrJp6ZkGA
Based on my field observations today, many of them are still there, so see them while you can! But yes, they will soon be gone most likely.
How is I-335 signed on its south end? Any indication of where it actually ends?
Everything south of I-40 is a two-lane road, so I'd hope it's not signed as an Interstate, though who knows with OTA...
GSV shows there is a Kickapoo Turnpike shield going northbound from S.E. 89th Street, so it might be worth looking to see what, if anything, happened to that.
Well, OTA had better hope that the southern extension is not cancelled, or they will be screwed in a very major way.
Quote from: Henry on December 09, 2024, 03:17:10 PMWell, OTA had better hope that the southern extension is not cancelled, or they will be screwed in a very major way.
If I-335 never meets I-35, it will not be a unique situation in the Interstate system. Instead the scenario will be similar to I-278 or I-678 in New York, where connections with the parent route were never completed.
The Google Maps Street View of Interstate 40 was updated last month in both directions. At the interchange with the Kickapoo Turnpike, the signs in both directions still sign the roadway as Kickapoo Turnpike, not Interstate 335. The signs at the John Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange similarly are signed only as Kilpatrick Turnpike, not Interstate 344. None of the other Street Views are recent enough to show Interstate 335 or Interstate 344 signs posted.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 09, 2024, 06:42:07 PMThe Google Maps Street View of Interstate 40 was updated last month in both directions. At the interchange with the Kickapoo Turnpike, the signs in both directions still sign the roadway as Kickapoo Turnpike, not Interstate 335. The signs at the John Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange similarly are signed only as Kilpatrick Turnpike, not Interstate 344. None of the other Street Views are recent enough to show Interstate 335 or Interstate 344 signs posted.
I believe Corey's info is more recent.
Quote from: HenryWell, OTA had better hope that the southern extension is not cancelled, or they will be screwed in a very major way.
I think the chances are pretty good the Kickapoo Turnpike (and I-335) will be extended down to I-35. The East-West Connector Turnpike to run East-West between Moore and Norman is in the design phase. AFAIK the biggest court battles over that are done. OTA isn't going to just build that turnpike to have it dead end somewhere near Lake Thunderbird. I-335 will at least connect into that. According to the Access Oklahoma web site the first few miles of the Kickapoo Turnpike extension going South of I-40 are in the design phase as well. The "Y" interchange between the two turnpikes and the South extension are still slated as "future projects".
I think the only thing that could mess up the South Extension to I-35 near Purcell is funding shortfalls. There aren't many obstacles in that rural area to obstruct the plan.
Just going to take 15 years or so...
I drove to OKC today from Henryetta and I-40 BGS have I-335 North to Edmond Westbound and I-335 North Tulsa Eastbound.
They must have changed them in the last 2 or 3 days. Cause they were still Turnpike Shields last Saturday.
Southbound Broadway Extension (US77) has the new I-344 shields on the BGS's. I go by when it is dark, but I'll try to grab one tomorrow.
With I-344 signed along the Kilpatrick Turnpike I figure it's only a matter of time before the I-235 designation gets extended North from I-44 up to the Kilpatrick Turnpike.
I agree that it should, but I doubt 235 will be extended. Also, I think the 240 extension was unnecessary, and that they should have left it OK 152.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 13, 2024, 01:55:05 PMI agree that it should, but I doubt 235 will be extended. Also, I think the 240 extension was unnecessary, and that they should have left it OK 152.
More Interstate = more opps to use 90% NHPP funding...at the expense of 80% NHPP funding...
344 is signed on the BGS on the Turnpike.
335 is fully signed
240 has yet to be signed.
Quote from: jdingus on December 17, 2024, 01:49:00 PM344 is signed on the BGS on the Turnpike.
335 is fully signed
240 has yet to be signed.
I still think I-240 should end at I-44 and since the JKT is I-344 then it should continue I-344 to I-44 even if that portion is not a toll road.
Any word on what the bypass around the airport will be signed?
I think there is still a chance I-344 could be extended along the proposed Tri City Connector turnpike that would start at Airport Road and go South around the West and South side of Will Rogers Airport and then end at I-44.
Of course, if OTA has to keep raising toll prices due to ballooning projected costs of ACCESS Oklahoma projects, we may end up seeing one or more of these proposed turnpikes get cancelled.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 17, 2024, 11:23:22 PMOf course, if OTA has to keep raising toll prices due to ballooning projected costs of ACCESS Oklahoma projects, we may end up seeing one or more of these proposed turnpikes get cancelled.
OTA will just end up charging everyone $100, because what are they gonna do about it?
If tolls get high enough the act of shunpiking becomes more financially sensible. If the OTA wanted to charge me $100 to use the H.E. Bailey Turnpike on a road trip between Lawton and OKC I'd damned sure take US-62 instead.
I think at least some people at OTA understand that scenario. If they push toll rates too high they'll have fewer vehicles using those roads and then they won't be getting the desired increase in toll revenue. Everyone knows highway tolls are very unpopular with most residents in Oklahoma. I've known people here who've driven well out of their way, killed a lot more and burned through more fuel to avoid tolls when the toll rates were a lot cheaper. I guess they're shunpiking out of principal.
Currently the PikePass toll rates are a bargain compared to most toll roads elsewhere in the nation. Most people in Oklahoma either don't know or don't care about that fact. They just want the toll gates removed (despite the likelihood that would unleash one hell of a gasoline tax price hike). A 15% bump in toll rates on January 1 followed by 6% bumps every other year will erode that bargain price. If the OTA keeps hiking prices after that they'll really be pushing their luck. The general public is already pretty angry about price inflation for so many other things.
Living in N Tx for a time. I would pay around $30 round trip on tolls for 34 miles round trip. We don't have it as bad here.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 19, 2024, 11:26:11 AMIf tolls get high enough the act of shunpiking becomes more financially sensible. If the OTA wanted to charge me $100 to use the H.E. Bailey Turnpike on a road trip between Lawton and OKC I'd damned sure take US-62 instead.
I mean, they could always do something like jack the non-Pikepass rates up on the Turner and Will Rogers, especially for higher axle numbers. Then the out-of-staters are paying for it.
The plate pay fees are pretty friggin' expensive. They're often as much as double the PikePass rate. OTA must be getting a pretty good "bonus" there already.
The OTA is certainly asking for trouble (or at least setting themselves up to be forced to answer lots of questions repeatedly) by "simplifying" the vehicle toll categories to small, medium and large. Are they going to be sending out new kinds of PikePass RFID stickers for this?
I always think about the people driving regular pickup trucks and pulling flatbed trailers loaded with all sorts of stuff. In the past they would be paying a per axle fee when paying cash at the manned toll booths. I assume they'll just be paying the "small" rate now, like anyone driving a pickup truck that isn't pulling a trailer.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 19, 2024, 11:26:11 AMIf tolls get high enough the act of shunpiking becomes more financially sensible. If the OTA wanted to charge me $100 to use the H.E. Bailey Turnpike on a road trip between Lawton and OKC I'd damned sure take US-62 instead.
Why not 277 instead of 62?
I'd take 277 for the leg from Elgin to Chickasha. I'm used to both routes (and 281) overlapping each other here.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 20, 2024, 12:11:03 PMI'd take 277 for the leg from Elgin to Chickasha. I'm used to both routes (and 281) overlapping each other here.
That jogged my memory as I've never understood why 277 wasn't terminated in Ninnekah where it meets US81. It is still signed north to the I44 Newcastle junction
I think it's weird US-277 no longer connects to its parent route in OKC.
Remember, Oklahoma also has the disconnected US266. Also has the unauthorized segment of US377
Quote from: rte66man on December 24, 2024, 05:01:10 PMAlso has the unauthorized segment of US377
Turns out that's authorized by federal law, and may have been the first highway designation written into law. It was unusual enough at the time that AASHTO had a bug up its butt about giving their approval even though Congress mandated it.
I drove the south end of the JKT this morning - everything is signed as I-344, but there is no "end" sign at the junction with SH-152.
No I-240 signs along SH-152 between the end of the JKT and I-44.
Does anyone know when they might number the exits on Interstate 344 and the Interstate 240 extension? Interstate 335 might get new exit numbers once the Kickapoo Turnpike is extended south of Interstate 40 to Interstate 35, although they may also remain unchanged.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2025, 02:19:02 PMInterstate 335 might get new exit numbers once the Kickapoo Turnpike is extended south of Interstate 40 to Interstate 35, although they may also remain unchanged.
As far as I can tell, this sentence contains zero information.
One thing I do know: the current exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike don't appear to make any sense. I realize the numbers are sort of supposed to continue I-35 exit numbers from the Red River. But do those exit numbers line up with the mileage of the proposed Kickapoo Turnpike extension down to I-35 near Purcell? What I'm asking is will the exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike extension start out in the 96-97 range near Purcell and jive with the 130 range numbers North of I-40?
Bobby, you've lived in Oklahoma long enough to know not to expect anything to make any damn sense...
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 13, 2025, 11:06:05 PMOne thing I do know: the current exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike don't appear to make any sense. I realize the numbers are sort of supposed to continue I-35 exit numbers from the Red River. But do those exit numbers line up with the mileage of the proposed Kickapoo Turnpike extension down to I-35 near Purcell? What I'm asking is will the exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike extension start out in the 96-97 range near Purcell and jive with the 130 range numbers North of I-40?
The Kickapoo Turnpike northern terminus exit number (149) is the same on both the Kickapoo and Turner Turnpikes. Perhaps that's where they wanted to match the mileage.
Quote from: Scott5114Bobby, you've lived in Oklahoma long enough to know not to expect anything to make any damn sense...
The people in charge of running the state keep coming up with new doozies to make us embarrassed to be living here. Yesterday I learned that
culture warrior Lisa Standridge authored and introduced a bill (SB 484) in the State Senate that would ban all cities and towns in Oklahoma other than OKC and Tulsa from using any city resources to operate homeless shelters or do homeless outreach.
Most non-profit organizations that run homeless shelters or do outreach rely heavily on state or federal grants. That's in addition to any donations they receive from individuals or businesses. That funding can often go through local city government channels rather than directly to the non-profit organizations.
Overall, Standridge's bill sounds pretty damned cruel and tone-deaf, especially in light of a worsening problem of homelessness due in part to a relentless rise in living costs. Banning shelters and outreach isn't going to make the problem magically go away. But when Oklahoma's "leaders" think in cartoon terms they tend to come up with cartoon legislation. This is just yet another thing making Oklahoma look like a bastion for assholes to the rest of the nation. Great thing for the state's image and marketability.
Of course, that would affect Norman, which has been having a pretty big homeless problem under the current mayor. But of course the homeless people don't congregate in the part of town that Standridge represents...
Standridge's bill would affect the Lawton area as well. We have a number of different agencies that would either be severely impacted or closed outright if that hateful piece of legislation were to pass.
I understand the anger coming from the general public. No one likes being bothered by a panhandler in a grocery store parking lot or in the median of a city street. No one wants to sit on a public bench after a homeless person was sleeping there (and maybe pissing on himself). Homeless people can trash up restrooms. Outdoor encampments can turn into a safety hazard (plus most people consider them an eye sore).
People like Standridge appear to think closing homeless shelters and cutting funding for outreach programs will make the problem magically disappear -as if the existence of these programs is encouraging homelessness in the first place. People in various un-housed situations aren't going to simply leave the state. A lack of shelters and outreach programs will put homeless people into greater physical danger. Some may be pushed into criminal activity to survive.
Lots of assholes tend to think anyone who is homeless is working some kind of scam. Many homeless people suffer from severe forms of mental illness. But hardly anyone wants to pay for these people to be in some kind of an institution, much less get any sort of help at all. So they're discarded on the streets instead. The only thing the general public seems to want is for these people to stay out of sight (and maybe die there).
We have one emergency shelter in Lawton specifically for battered women and their kids. Standridge's bill would force these women either onto the streets or back with their abusers. Oklahoma generally has a shitty track record in this department. The state prefers to act after the husband has murdered his wife and kids.
Standridge's bill can go right along with other punching-down legislation in the works on the federal end. The incoming administration wants to make big cuts to SNAP and other social safety net programs to punish lazy poor people and give rich people more tax cuts. Quite a few low wage service industry workers depend on food stamps and other assistance to make ends meet. Some of those workers are women with kids.
Every time I think OK can't get any worse...
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2025, 10:09:02 PMEvery time I think OK can't get any worse...
It's a very interesting contrast to read Bobby's post the same day I caught parts of the Nevada State of the State address (a portion of which was devoted to restructuring the state health and human services agency to better address mental health needs), to say the least.
Since the 240 extension has not been signed yet, and 335 and 344 have been, I wonder if the 240 extension will remain an unsigned route.
If it was up to me, the I-240 segment along Airport Road would remain unsigned. I can't see any benefit of signing Airport Road as I-240 from a standpoint of helping motorists navigate the highway system. If anything, signing that road as I-240, only for it to dead-end at a surface street in Mustang, would do more to confuse people.
Perhaps if they built the missing flyover ramp at the I-344/OK-152 interchange there might more justification to add I-240 signage on Airport Road. Even with a complete Y interchange the route signing situation would still stink. I-240 really should have been signed on that new portion of the Kilpatrick Turnpike up to I-40.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 16, 2025, 12:05:49 PMSince the 240 extension has not been signed yet, and 335 and 344 have been, I wonder if the 240 extension will remain an unsigned route.
The only reason that I-240 hasn't been signed yet is that ODOT hasn't gotten around to it (while OTA has completed their stuff regarding 335 and 344). I am pretty sure that ODOT won't leave a route half-unsigned. Patience, young Padawan.
Quote from: I-55 on January 14, 2025, 08:29:23 AMQuote from: Bobby5280 on January 13, 2025, 11:06:05 PMOne thing I do know: the current exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike don't appear to make any sense. I realize the numbers are sort of supposed to continue I-35 exit numbers from the Red River. But do those exit numbers line up with the mileage of the proposed Kickapoo Turnpike extension down to I-35 near Purcell? What I'm asking is will the exit numbers on the Kickapoo Turnpike extension start out in the 96-97 range near Purcell and jive with the 130 range numbers North of I-40?
The Kickapoo Turnpike northern terminus exit number (149) is the same on both the Kickapoo and Turner Turnpikes. Perhaps that's where they wanted to match the mileage.
The JKT doesn't have exit numbers (yet), but the mile markers are a continuation of the I-44 mileage from the east end that decrease down to 104.5 right at the junction with SH 152.
Southbound Broadway Extension:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54282489083_05635a7505_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qGKWQc)
Wow. What a lame patch job. Just cram it in there. And make it crooked for good measure. That style would make Caltrans proud. Are the traffic engineers trying out for design jobs at the neighborhood Fast Signs location?
I guess they had to make the I-344 marker too friggin' big so they would be sure it would cover up the old Kilpatrick OTA logo. Damn that's embarrassing looking. The only positive thing I can say about it is they at least used a state name Interstate shield rather than the typical neutered treatment with giant numerals stuffed into the space.
Quote from: rte66man on January 22, 2025, 10:28:47 PMSouthbound Broadway Extension:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54282489083_05635a7505_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qGKWQc)
I can see this now:
"ODOT: Proud to Make the Ugliest Signs in the World"
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 22, 2025, 10:47:08 PMI guess they had to make the I-344 marker too friggin' big so they would be sure it would cover up the old Kilpatrick OTA logo.
(https://i.imgur.com/R6m3QT4.jpeg)
Ugh. :banghead:
The installers had one job...
Five o'clock hit and they only had so much green reflective tape on them, I guess. (They did go back and fix it after a few days, and those signs have since been replaced entirely.)
The whole reason they numbered the JKT I-344 was the expansion down to the tri-city connector. 344 will connect to I-44 in the future.
Also Airport Road does need to be 240. They Might extend it to El Reno one day. Personally they should have just left 44 at I-35 in 1982. Kept 240 around the city.
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 16, 2025, 03:54:38 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on January 16, 2025, 12:05:49 PMSince the 240 extension has not been signed yet, and 335 and 344 have been, I wonder if the 240 extension will remain an unsigned route.
The only reason that I-240 hasn't been signed yet is that ODOT hasn't gotten around to it (while OTA has completed their stuff regarding 335 and 344). I am pretty sure that ODOT won't leave a route half-unsigned. Patience, young Padawan.
I'm fairly certain that's exactly something ODOT would do.
Then should existing Interstate 44 south of the Interstate 240 interchange have remained without a highway designation, or should it have had a different designation, such as Interstate 33?
I don't see I-44 getting re-named to something else because of planned ACCESS Oklahoma projects. There is no reason to do that anyway. The proposed Tri-City Connector turnpike would begin just East of the current I-335/I-240/SH-152 mash-up. It will extend South around the West and South sides of Will Rogers World Airport and merge into I-44 somewhere North of the Canadian River. The only potential overlap that could happen is crossing the Canadian River.
It would make sense to extend the I-344 designation along the Tri-City Connector in order to give I-240 a more logical terminus at its West end. The current West terminus sucks.
There's no telling what the East-West Connector designation could be. If OTA insists on a 3XX name and Interstate designation they'll be stuck having to extend the I-344 designation along that turnpike too. I think it would make more sense giving the East-West Connector a different I-x35 or I-x44 number.
The only way I could see something like "I-33" being applied to the OKC-Wichita Falls segment of I-44 is if it connected to another new corridor in Texas. It's getting into fictional territory, but the US-281 corridor running North of San Antonio could be a serious relief route for I-35. US-281 deserves to be Interstate quality from San Antonio up to Johnson City at the minimum. It could go so far as Lampasas where it could connected into proposed I-14. Extending up to Wichita Falls is a pretty big leap though.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 23, 2025, 06:30:33 AMQuote from: Bobby5280 on January 22, 2025, 10:47:08 PMI guess they had to make the I-344 marker too friggin' big so they would be sure it would cover up the old Kilpatrick OTA logo.
(https://i.imgur.com/R6m3QT4.jpeg)
Had to come back to this. That looks like a FL Toll Route on its side :spin:
The 74A route marker looks like a slot loading CD player with a disc poking out of it.
Is it better when they actually plan ahead? (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3912066,-97.4344843,3a,27.6y,118.91h,89.71t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sxYa5TPg-SzIVB7YW01wP6g!2e0!5s20110801T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D0.29417253208821137%26panoid%3DxYa5TPg-SzIVB7YW01wP6g%26yaw%3D118.90949367488894!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDEyNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D)
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 29, 2025, 01:25:16 AMIs it better when they actually plan ahead? (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3912066,-97.4344843,3a,27.6y,118.91h,89.71t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sxYa5TPg-SzIVB7YW01wP6g!2e0!5s20110801T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D0.29417253208821137%26panoid%3DxYa5TPg-SzIVB7YW01wP6g%26yaw%3D118.90949367488894!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDEyNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D)
Ooh, BBQ pulled pork! Oh... Subway.
Quote from: rte66man on January 22, 2025, 10:28:47 PMSouthbound Broadway Extension:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54282489083_05635a7505_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qGKWQc)
That is a disproportionately large I-344 shield!
The only good thing I can say about the Interstate shield on that sign is at least it's a proper state name shield with smaller Series C numerals that fit more comfortably in the space. Neutered shields with oversized Series D numerals just look stupid as hell.
Quote from: rte66man on January 22, 2025, 10:28:47 PMSouthbound Broadway Extension:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54282489083_05635a7505_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qGKWQc)
Holy crap, it looks like one of the enormous 270 and 495 shields on the Beltway.
Still no I=240 signs on Airport Road. They also updated the BGS on I-44 at Airport Road still says OK-152
Maybe they should drop the Interstate 240 extension and leave the roadway OK 152. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 25, 2025, 03:57:59 PMMaybe they should drop the Interstate 240 extension and leave the roadway OK 152. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do.
Maybe they should stripe the lane lines with Swiss Miss® vanilla pudding. It also wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do (though it would be a lot closer).
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 21, 2025, 09:05:28 AMQuote from: rte66man on January 22, 2025, 10:28:47 PMSouthbound Broadway Extension:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54282489083_05635a7505_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qGKWQc)
Holy crap, it looks like one of the enormous 270 and 495 shields on the Beltway.
Guess it's not the worst sign that's come out of Oklahoma
State named shields. Cool.
Are there any end signs at the ends of 335 or 344?
The Kickapoo Turnpike shields didn't last very long.
Quote from: bugo on March 28, 2025, 04:53:16 AMState named shields. Cool.
Are there any end signs at the ends of 335 or 344?
The Kickapoo Turnpike shields didn't last very long.
I did not see any EB at the Turner Turnpike. There were 344 shields on all the WB BGS's on the Turner
Quote from: bugo on March 28, 2025, 04:53:16 AMState named shields. Cool.
Are there any end signs at the ends of 335 or 344?
The Kickapoo Turnpike shields didn't last very long.
I have not seen any end signs on 335 either.
https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-city-westbound-i240-hazardous-materials-incident/64541009
The media and OKCFD is calling airport rd I-240 now
But still no Interstate 240 signs on Airport Rd.?
I haven't been up that way in a while