I-344 I-240 I-335 Signage

[roadman65]

I noticed that GSV from 3 months ago on I-344 at its southern terminus don't, still, yet acknowledge SH 152 as I-240.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ffAfXhNVY7T59FhT7?g_st=ac

[Rothman]

Yep, drove Airport Road in mid-July and it wasn't upgraded yet.

[Henry]

FWIW, I-240 should've continued up the Kilpatrick Turnpike and looped back to I-40, then I-344 could start from there.

[Rothman]

FWIW, I-240 should've continued up the Kilpatrick Turnpike and looped back to I-40, then I-344 could start from there.

Whole thing could have been on of the numbers.

[Scott5114]

FWIW, I-240 should've continued up the Kilpatrick Turnpike and looped back to I-40, then I-344 could start from there.

Except then what would you call this? https://www.accessoklahoma.com/tri-city-connector

With the numbering as it is now, it can be a I-344 extension.

[vdeane]

FWIW, I-240 should've continued up the Kilpatrick Turnpike and looped back to I-40, then I-344 could start from there.

Except then what would you call this? https://www.accessoklahoma.com/tri-city-connector

With the numbering as it is now, it can be a I-344 extension.

That map looks like something someone made for Fictional Highways.

If it becomes part of I-344, does that mean that we'd have a useless overlap for the end of I-240?

[I-55]

FWIW, I-240 should've continued up the Kilpatrick Turnpike and looped back to I-40, then I-344 could start from there.

Except then what would you call this? https://www.accessoklahoma.com/tri-city-connector

With the numbering as it is now, it can be a I-344 extension.

That map looks like something someone made for Fictional Highways.

It almost looks like they saw I-490 around O'Hare and thought "hey that's a great idea" and copied it over to OKC.

[/quote]
If it becomes part of I-344, does that mean that we'd have a useless overlap for the end of I-240?
[/quote]

Not unless that overlap extends over I-344 to I-40. Otherwise yeah, what's the point of keeping that part of 240

[Scott5114]

If it becomes part of I-344, does that mean that we'd have a useless overlap for the end of I-240?

If the I-240 extension request just lists the terminus as "I-344", then by not signing the I-240 extension until the I-344 extension is done, they neatly avoid any sort of overlap.

[vdeane]

If it becomes part of I-344, does that mean that we'd have a useless overlap for the end of I-240?

If the I-240 extension request just lists the terminus as "I-344", then by not signing the I-240 extension until the I-344 extension is done, they neatly avoid any sort of overlap.

Suddenly these numbers are starting to make a little bit of sense...

[Revive 755]

^ I-344 still would not.  If it does make it back to I-44 it should have been I-644 or I-844.

[Henry]

^ I-344 still would not.  If it does make it back to I-44 it should have been I-644 or I-844.

Neither does I-335, until it actually connects to its parent further south, which is in the works via a Kickapoo extension. Without that extension, I-340 would've been a better number.

[Bobby5280]

I think the Kilpatrick Turnpike should have been labeled "I-440" since the East end terminates at I-44 and the original West end terminates at I-40.

Pretty obvious stuff there. But no. OTA had to be special and use up the I-344 designation despite all the I-x35 and I-x40 designations available to the OKC metro. Tulsa can use only so many I-x44 designations. And the I-42 thing hasn't materialized yet either.

Indeed I-240 should have been routed up the extension of the Kilpatrick Turnpike so both ends of I-240 could terminate at I-40. Again, pretty obvious stuff. Yet the OTA had to go with nonsensical bullshit instead. Also, I see zero problem at all with the thru lanes of I-240 turning into I-440 at the I-40 interchange. There are other 3-digit Interstates that do that in the system.

The East-West Connector Turnpike might be able to carry the I-344 designation (via a messy overlap with I-44 over the Canadian River). It would make sense to at least sign I-344 along the proposed Tri-City Connector Turnpike that runs around the West and South sides of Will Rogers Airport down to I-44 just North of the Canadian River.

The North end of the Tri-City Connector and existing SH-152 freeway (aka Airport Road) would make a more logical terminus for that I-240 extension. It would be far better than the current arrangement where I-240 would drift off to a terminus that is a surface street intersection of SH-152 and SW 59th Street. That sucks ass. It's just idiotic. That segment of unsigned I-240 should remain not signed as long as I-240 continues to technically end at a surface street traffic signal. Don't sign I-240 along Airport Road until the Tri-City Connector is built.

As for the East-West Connector Turnpike splitting between Moore and Norman: while it could use I-344, why not use an I-x35 number? The East end is going to connect with I-335. They could sign it as "I-435" or "I-835." The "I-635" designation would make sense, but I would avoid that due to comparisons that would be drawn with the much bigger I-635 route nearby in Dallas.

[The Ghostbuster]

I concur Interstate 344 should have been Interstate 440. Maybe the original Interstate 240 beltway proposal should've been implemented (not that I was a huge fan of the proposal to begin with). I think 240 west of Interstate 44 should have been part of 344, since making OK 152 part of Interstate 240 was a superfluous designation to begin with.

[Scott5114]

And the I-42 thing hasn't materialized yet either.

What makes you say that? It's been approved by AASHTO. Meaning AASHTO would approve any x42. Whether a route is signed or not has zero bearing on anything AASHTO does.

Also, I see zero problem at all with the thru lanes of I-240 turning into I-440 at the I-40 interchange. There are other 3-digit Interstates that do that in the system.

Didn't your mama ever ask you if all your friends ran off a cliff if you would too?

As for the East-West Connector Turnpike splitting between Moore and Norman: while it could use I-344, why not use an I-x35 number? The East end is going to connect with I-335. They could sign it as "I-435" or "I-835." The "I-635" designation would make sense, but I would avoid that due to comparisons that would be drawn with the much bigger I-635 route nearby in Dallas.

I'm still kind of expecting it to be an OK-37 extension. It lines up pretty well with existing OK-37, and would explain why they suddenly needed to truncate 37 out of Moore a few years back.

OTA does seem to be favoring Interstate designations, except when they don't (like the OK-4 extension over the Bailey spur).