Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 12131415161718192021 LastLast
Results 401 to 425 of 505
Like Tree131Likes

Thread: Future highway or interstate expansion?

  1. #401
    Snowman's Avatar
    Snowman is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,984

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by OKCisOK4me View Post
    This. A very nice interchange. Hell, even the I-40/I-29 interchange in Amarillo is nicer than what 40/44 is now. Honestly needs to be 3 thru lanes in all directions. Every highway feeding into it in every direction is 3 or 4 lanes until you get to the interchange and then it's 2 thru lanes. The whole interchange is one big corkscrew!
    The biggest delays I see from the 40/44 junction are from where 44 southbound is so backed up it stops traffic on the bridge of the junction, so changing the junction itself will not do much. It might clear the clot faster once the issue on 44 clears up. If you added a lane to 40 westbound they could park out of the way of the people staying on 40.

  2. #402
    venture's Avatar
    venture is offline David
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    14,221

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
    The biggest delays I see from the 40/44 junction are from where 44 southbound is so backed up it stops traffic on the bridge of the junction, so changing the junction itself will not do much. It might clear the clot faster once the issue on 44 clears up. If you added a lane to 40 westbound they could park out of the way of the people staying on 40.
    The biggest problem there in my opinion is the 40 WB to 44 WB/SB on ramp being the SW 15th exit ramp. These high traffic interchanges really need to avoid a situation like that.

    Granted we are talking about a transportation department that doesn't have an issue with people smashing into each other on I-240 at I-35 every day, so I don't expect anything different to come about. Well until the department head gets in a wreck there and then I bet they get it going immediately. :-P

  3. #403
    Kokopelli is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Seems to me the congestion in OKC is a two headed creature there is local and there is pass through traffic.

    What would be interesting to know is how much of the traffic that goes through OKC on I40 and I35 continues on the same interstate and how much enters on one and exits on the other. In other words how much north bound I40 into OKC exits either east or west on I35 and vice a versa? And how much of that is truck traffic?

    Where I am headed with this is, we might be able to accomplish more by building bypasses that avoid OKC completely. Doing so would be cheaper than loops around OKC and then the savings could be used to support mass transit in OKC.

    How much would OKC traffic be reduced if there was a I35 to I40 link that ran from Pauls Valley / Purcell are to Weatherford area. A I35 link to I40 link that ran from Pauls Valley or Purcell to east of Shawnee. Same thing for north of OKC.

  4. #404
    hoyasooner is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,961

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    tens of billions ..... not so much
    It cost almost a billion to build 4 miles of the Crosstown. You guys are proposing 50-60 miles of loop. Yes, tens of billions is accurate.
    OKCisOK4me likes this.

  5. #405
    Sid Burgess's Avatar
    Sid Burgess is offline Platinum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,884
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Take a look at a map of Paris. You'll see there is benefit to running 'through' traffic around the city. The core isn't corrupted with highways. I think it is a better model than trying to deal with all the traffic intersecting in the same area you are trying to develop. It's a waste of really valuable land and create massive physical barriers.

    I'd like to see 235 Removed and 40 between 44 and 35 removed.

    In other words, if you create loops, you can remove interior highways. Highways become boulevards and can be developed on. Madrid did something similar as well.
    It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer. -Albert Einstein

  6. #406
    Plutonic Panda's Avatar
    Plutonic Panda is online now Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,867

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by hoyasooner View Post
    It cost almost a billion to build 4 miles of the Crosstown. You guys are proposing 50-60 miles of loop. Yes, tens of billions is accurate.
    Crosstown was also 10 lanes and had to rebuild a bunch of bridges and was slightly below grade and had to use a ton of concrete. I understand what you're saying. I don't think tens of billions of dollars is accurate though.
    ou48A likes this.

  7. #407
    Plutonic Panda's Avatar
    Plutonic Panda is online now Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,867

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kokopelli View Post
    Seems to me the congestion in OKC is a two headed creature there is local and there is pass through traffic.

    What would be interesting to know is how much of the traffic that goes through OKC on I40 and I35 continues on the same interstate and how much enters on one and exits on the other. In other words how much north bound I40 into OKC exits either east or west on I35 and vice a versa? And how much of that is truck traffic?

    Where I am headed with this is, we might be able to accomplish more by building bypasses that avoid OKC completely. Doing so would be cheaper than loops around OKC and then the savings could be used to support mass transit in OKC.

    How much would OKC traffic be reduced if there was a I35 to I40 link that ran from Pauls Valley / Purcell are to Weatherford area. A I35 link to I40 link that ran from Pauls Valley or Purcell to east of Shawnee. Same thing for north of OKC
    .
    I've kind of thought up on that, and I asked myself, would you really want to do that? I mean building a bypass where people just skip OKC, I don't think is a good thing, imo. What about the people who decide they might want to get off and look around in a slit second or drive through the city and maybe realize we actually have electricity here!!! lol

  8. #408
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by sidburgess View Post
    Take a look at a map of Paris. You'll see there is benefit to running 'through' traffic around the city. The core isn't corrupted with highways. I think it is a better model than trying to deal with all the traffic intersecting in the same area you are trying to develop. It's a waste of really valuable land and create massive physical barriers.

    I'd like to see 235 Removed and 40 between 44 and 35 removed.

    In other words, if you create loops, you can remove interior highways. Highways become boulevards and can be developed on. Madrid did something similar as well.
    Now your are talking. I would even bring my own shovel and help remove them.
    Third Place

  9. #409
    Kokopelli is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    I've kind of thought up on that, and I asked myself, would you really want to do that? I mean building a bypass where people just skip OKC, I don't think is a good thing, imo. What about the people who decide they might want to get off and look around in a slit second or drive through the city and maybe realize we actually have electricity here!!! lol
    In the old days that is one of the reasons city fathers everywhere wanted the main highways running through the main streets of their towns and frankly today it is part of the reason we have so much gridlock.

    Plus it wouldn't be a law that you have to take the bypass. So you have to ask yourself how much traffic would that be as opposed to how much pass trough traffic could be routed around.

  10. #410
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    They built 840 around the south side of Nashville that misses the city by 30 miles.
    Third Place

  11. #411
    Plutonic Panda's Avatar
    Plutonic Panda is online now Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,867

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    They built 840 around the south side of Nashville that misses the city by 30 miles.
    Is it usually busy?

  12. #412
    MagzOK is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    ODOT was ready to roll with an outer loop to the west of OKC to alleviate I35 and other internal interstates from thru-traffic, however they met extreme opposition of the "not in my backyard" crowd. Personally I think an eastern loop is necessary. Man I used to drive to Choctaw regularly and it took forever getting all the way through due to all the small roads and stop signs at nearly every intersection. If there's any stretch of land in the area that needs a larger facility it would be through there. Talk about spurring economic growth along a freeway through eastern Oklahoma County. Choctaw, Nicoma Park, Harrah, they ought to look at the growth along the JKT in north OKC. But I guess folks live in eastern Oklahoma county for its "rural-ness" and don't want economic development, so easy for me to advocate a highway through their back yards.

  13. #413
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    They built 840 around the south side of Nashville that misses the city by 30 miles.
    Is it usually busy?
    The part I drive isn't busy because it doesn't go through any urban areas. I go on it from I-24 to I-40. It keeps me from having to driving through Nashville which depending on time of day can save me an hour or more. I can drive through the scenery of rural Tennessee instead of fighting with Nashville rush-hour. There are not even gas stations at any of the exits and I hope it stays that way but sprawl follows freeway exits. I would prefer that it not have any exits and just routed thru traffic around the city with no way on or off. If needed they could just put a gas station in the center median somewhere. The only thing good about it now is that it is so far from Nashville no one will choose to live that far out and commute anywhere.
    Third Place

  14. #414
    BoulderSooner is offline Platinum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,112

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    The part I drive isn't busy because it doesn't go through any urban areas. I go on it from I-24 to I-40. It keeps me from having to driving through Nashville which depending on time of day can save me an hour or more. I can drive through the scenery of rural Tennessee instead of fighting with Nashville rush-hour. There are not even gas stations at any of the exits and I hope it stays that way but sprawl follows freeway exits. I would prefer that it not have any exits and just routed thru traffic around the city with no way on or off. If needed they could just put a gas station in the center median somewhere. The only thing good about it now is that it is so far from Nashville no one will choose to live that far out and commute anywhere.
    how is it possible that it is not busy ... where is all the induced traffic
    Stew likes this.

  15. #415
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    how is it possible that it is not busy ... where is all the induced traffic
    Because it doesn't serve anyone that lives in Nashville. People that live in the area would have to go out of their way to use it. It was specifically built to by-pass them - not make their commute easier (outside of reducing thru traffic on urban freeways). Which I guess the induced demand would appear along the existing urban freeway.

    Third Place

  16. #416
    Plutonic Panda's Avatar
    Plutonic Panda is online now Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,867

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    The part I drive isn't busy because it doesn't go through any urban areas. I go on it from I-24 to I-40. It keeps me from having to driving through Nashville which depending on time of day can save me an hour or more. I can drive through the scenery of rural Tennessee instead of fighting with Nashville rush-hour. There are not even gas stations at any of the exits and I hope it stays that way but sprawl follows freeway exits. I would prefer that it not have any exits and just routed thru traffic around the city with no way on or off. If needed they could just put a gas station in the center median somewhere. The only thing good about it now is that it is so far from Nashville no one will choose to live that far out and commute anywhere.
    Well, I still don't really like that idea. People that choose to go around might have make a quick, last minute decision to get off and explore the city or stop at a restaurant and help out the economy there.

  17. #417
    CaptDave is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,027

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    Well, I still don't really like that idea. People that choose to go around might have make a quick, last minute decision to get off and explore the city or stop at a restaurant and help out the economy there.
    Then it wouldn't really be a bypass would it? 840 is actually a bypass until you get into the Smryna/Murphreesboro area.

    Highways in cities are the ones that cause induced demand. Comparing an actual bypass to a highway in a city is apples to oranges.

  18. #418
    Dubya61 is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,986

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Atlanta is a little weird when it comes to mass transit. Most of the people want it but the civic leaders in surrounding cities and counties don't want it. I think they are afraid their local corporate base will relocate downtown if the commute gets easier because the traffic is a major selling point for the outer ring communities.
    JTF, I spoke with a former mayor of one of the in-close 'burbs recently and asked him what would make his city contribute to a rail-based connection to Bricktown / CBD. He told me that there was no good reason for him to contribute to his locals to find an easier way to spend money outside of his taxable base (or words to that effect). If I read him right, he was saying that it would cause his municipality to lose sales tax revenue.

  19. #419
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dubya61 View Post
    JTF, I spoke with a former mayor of one of the in-close 'burbs recently and asked him what would make his city contribute to a rail-based connection to Bricktown / CBD. He told me that there was no good reason for him to contribute to his locals to find an easier way to spend money outside of his taxable base (or words to that effect). If I read him right, he was saying that it would cause his municipality to lose sales tax revenue.
    Which begs the question - what kind of hell hole was he mayor of that would cause the population to flee with the first cheap way out? . You should ask the former Mayor how he feels about roads connecting to his town from other areas.

    Of course, his attitude is no different from many of the suburbs around Salt Lake City who had the same short-sighted mentality. Then they found out that no one wanted to move to or shop in their town because it didn't have regional transit. Now they are standing in line to get rail service.
    Third Place

  20. #420
    hoyasooner is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,961

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Which begs the question - what kind of hell hole was he mayor of that would cause the population to flee with the first cheap way out? . You should ask the former Mayor how he feels about roads connecting to his town from other areas.

    Of course, his attitude is no different from many of the suburbs around Salt Lake City who had the same short-sighted mentality. Then they found out that no one wanted to move to or shop in their town because it didn't have regional transit. Now they are standing in line to get rail service.
    That's exactly right. When DC installed their Metro subway system, the Georgetown area of the city told them they didn't want it. They didn't want the riff-raff having an easy way into their area of town. Now they'd love to get service there, but it would be too expensive to do at this point.

    I live in MWC, and I'm quite familiar with where the train tracks run in that area. You'd be looking at two great locations for a rail stop. The first is at Reno and Sooner Rd. There's a whole lot of nothing at that intersection right now. It would be easy to put a station there. The land around it, dominated by an Anthony's and a strip mall, would go up in value fairly quickly. With decent zoning and a good growth plan you could turn it from a neglected area into a thriving shopping area. The second place is on Air Depot in what is currently a Golden Corral parking lot. Midwest City's most heavily travelled road could get a sizeable amount of foot traffic, which would increase the density of an already successful restaurant corridor.

    The places where these rail stops are built draw development. They increase property values. It becomes not just a place to get on the train, but a destination. People who get off the plane at Will Rogers never have to rent a car. When they don't rent a car, they will stay at a hotel on the rail line. They will eat at restaurants within easy walking distance. Those locations become highly valuable, especially if you steer new construction away from huge parking lots and towards nice sidewalks and urban amenities.

    Edit: Imagine if each stop had its own tiny Bricktown. Not a copy of Bricktown, but a Main Street-styled development for a block or two in all directions. Think people in Midwest City, or Edmond, or Norman might like that?

  21. #421
    Rover is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,907

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Actually, with the new jobs coming downtown, the suburbs should like the trains coming out that way. It will be easier for them to keep urban sprawling as the people can live more cheaply out there and commute downtown to the jobs. Then, they can get out of town when their day is over. Electric commuter trains is one of the things that spurred suburban development on the east coast cities.

  22. #422
    Just the facts's Avatar
    Just the facts is offline Kerry Decker
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    12,737

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rover View Post
    Actually, with the new jobs coming downtown, the suburbs should like the trains coming out that way. It will be easier for them to keep urban sprawling as the people can live more cheaply out there and commute downtown to the jobs. Then, they can get out of town when their day is over. Electric commuter trains is one of the things that spurred suburban development on the east coast cities.
    ...which is why I am opposed to park and ride lots. All mass transit riders should start and end as pedestrians. Trains should connect urban centers, not giant remote parking lots.

    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/com...-car-use/5034/

    On paper, park-and-ride facilities seem like the ultimate transport compromise. Free or cheap parking near transit stations should, if the theory holds, make partial transit riders of metro area residents who used to drive the whole way into work. The system acts like a nicotine gum for daily commutes — weaning people slowly off the single-occupancy car.

    In reality, some transport experts wonder whether park-and-ride does more harm than good. A study of park-and-ride facilities from the early 1990s found they don't necessarily ease congestion because they unleash latent demand for road space. Other research has come out similarly skeptical that park-and-ride reduces car use, though much of it has centered on bus-based transit.

    A new study of park-and-ride at rail-based transit stations doesn't offer much in the way of encouragement. In an upcoming issue of the Journal of Transport Geography, Dutch researcher Giuliano Mingardo reports that park-and-ride facilities in two major metro areas create four measurable "unintended effects" that not only limit the benefits of transit but may even increase vehicle travel in the metro area.
    Third Place

  23. #423
    macfoucin's Avatar
    macfoucin is offline Participating Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    51

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    I'm curious has anyone floated the idea of extending highway 9 at the RiverWind casino east of I-35? This would alliviate some congetsion on I-35 and provide another "over the river" route into Norman besides I-35.
    Future highway or interstate expansion?-hwy-9-extension.jpg

  24. #424
    Sid Burgess's Avatar
    Sid Burgess is offline Platinum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,884
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by macfoucin View Post
    I'm curious has anyone floated the idea of extending highway 9 at the RiverWind casino east of I-35? This would alliviate some congetsion on I-35 and provide another "over the river" route into Norman besides I-35.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	hwy 9 extension.jpg 
Views:	214 
Size:	561.8 KB 
ID:	4205
    No clue if anyone has considered it but that is a really interesting idea.
    It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer. -Albert Einstein

  25. #425
    adaniel is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,235

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by macfoucin View Post
    I'm curious has anyone floated the idea of extending highway 9 at the RiverWind casino east of I-35? This would alliviate some congetsion on I-35 and provide another "over the river" route into Norman besides I-35.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	hwy 9 extension.jpg 
Views:	214 
Size:	561.8 KB 
ID:	4205
    My only issue with this is that OK-9 in its current form serves as a reliever to Lindsey Street. If you reroute the road, I imagine most people would then skip over to Lindsey and clog it up even more than it is now (which is hard to imagine).

    I do agree with your premise that another river crossing in Norman would be nice.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Highway 69/75 working to become interstate
    By KayneMo in forum Other Communities
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 09-29-2013, 09:34 PM
  2. Abandoned area between the new and old Interstate 40 (Reno to SW 7th St)
    By UnFrSaKn in forum General Real Estate Topics
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 05-05-2012, 10:36 PM
  3. Interstate from OKC to Denver?
    By KayneMo in forum Transportation
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 06-10-2011, 02:59 PM
  4. Little Flower Church copes with the relocation of Interstate 40
    By urbanity in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-17-2010, 11:19 AM
  5. Research Park - Future Expansion
    By Patrick in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-20-2005, 05:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1