I heard a rumor from a friend a while back saying that there is talk about putting another I-240 like loop further south somewhere between Moore/Norman, or even south of Norman. Anyone know anything about this?

I heard a rumor from a friend a while back saying that there is talk about putting another I-240 like loop further south somewhere between Moore/Norman, or even south of Norman. Anyone know anything about this?

Heard once about some plan that was an east-west thing roughly around where Indian Hills Road/I-35...from a friend of mine who has a place out there...

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=14978&page=1

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=23077&page=1

there are more but I didn't search for them

The idea was proposed 10-15 years ago...connecting the Kilpatrick south to Highway 9 then moving north in the Lake Thunderbird area and reconnecting with I-240 I think. Anyway, Normanites revolted and the HE Bailey "spur" was all that came of it.

I believe the plan is now dead, where it was suppose to go new nieghborhoods and business are along the path of it, unless they changed the panning of where this road was suppose to go then this plan has died.. to bad becasue we really need a actual loop around the city to releive traffice coming from norman area..

the long range planning of odot and has always been very poor .. south west okc would explode with growth if we had a southwest loop ... and NW okc would benifit from a north west loop ..

That is the long-range goal, but it is certainly dead for now. A lot of the tracts where the freeway is proposed to go around Moore and SW OKC have been developed in already.

And BoulderSooner, NW OKC has a loop.

My ex-father-in-law has a place at 149th/May; I remember years ago he said they were talking about that SW Loop going along roughly at 149th --- never heard anymore about it, though, for many years.

http://www.oklongrangeplan.com/faqs/

9. What is the status of the proposed Southwest Outer Loop around Oklahoma City?

An Outer Loop Corridor Study was conducted by ODOT, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority, and the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments between 1998 and 2002.

This study identified a Southwest Outer Loop conceptual alignment that would connect the current endpoint of the Kilpatrick Turnpike (near SW 15th and Sara Road in Canadian County) and I-35 (near Indian Hills Road in Cleveland County).

A number of preliminary steps remain before this project could proceed. These steps include updating current development and land use information and conducting an environmental assessment. Additional communication and cooperation between affected local governments, ACOG, and ODOT will need to occur.

In addition, sufficient funding sources for preliminary engineering, right of way acquisition, utility relocation, design, and construction have not been identified. As a result, these projects are not currently included in the Department’s 8-Year Construction Work Program.

To avoid development that has occurred they would have to connect much further west and south then is really feasible for a SW loop. ODOT really missed the boat.

To avoid development that has occurred they would have to connect much further west and south then is really feasible for a SW loop. ODOT really missed the boat.

The road is basically there with the HE Bailey Spur which loops around going to Mustang, It's not really developed at all and could easily be improved to limited access. It the area north of the South Canadian River in Canadian County where the problems would begin.

It would be nice if we could get another Northbound option from Norman. About the only area that it could would though is going up 48th on the East side and on the west side of Draper Lake. That area is starting to fill in, at least around Highway 9 in Norman, but there is still room to do it. It would also get most of the traffic off of Sooner Road/12th.

It would be nice if we could get another Northbound option from Norman. About the only area that it could would though is going up 48th on the East side and on the west side of Draper Lake. That area is starting to fill in, at least around Highway 9 in Norman, but there is still room to do it. It would also get most of the traffic off of Sooner Road/12th.

It's been rumored forever that Western/60th St is supposed to be 4 lanes all the way from 134th in OKC to Robinson in Norman. I'd like to see it happen, but we'll see...

It's been rumored forever that Western/60th St is supposed to be 4 lanes all the way from 134th in OKC to Robinson in Norman. I'd like to see it happen, but we'll see...

I could be just as happy if it reached Tecumseh, now that it's been widened to the east.

aren't they already in the process of widening western to 4 lanes all the way down to norman?

I remember as a kid back in The early 90's living in Choctaw and my parents and neighbors were talking about a loop from I-44(Turner) down thru Eastern OK county connecting to I-40/240!Does anyone else remember hearing this?

I grew up and lived in SW okc and there was always talk about it. The path I heard last was crossing I-44 near SW 149th and then cutting through south Moore/north Norman ending at I-35. I actually saw a sign a few wears ago at 149th and May that said "No to Z route" or something similar. I remember an article that said the proposed path took it right through Moore's nicest neighborhood. If they would have put this in 15 years ago it would have been great but I think it's essentially dead now.

That is the long-range goal, but it is certainly dead for now. A lot of the tracts where the freeway is proposed to go around Moore and SW OKC have been developed in already.

And BoulderSooner, NW OKC has a loop.

you right .. my bad i meant north east ..


I remember as a kid back in The early 90's living in Choctaw and my parents and neighbors were talking about a loop from I-44(Turner) down thru Eastern OK county connecting to I-40/240!Does anyone else remember hearing this?

yep that was the plan but local residents killed it in the public comments process ..

very sad as it would have meant great growth for that area

A Plan at one time (dot is buying right of way ... have a relative that lives on 102S ) Starting at Hwy 102 S (Grand Casino Exit) Going S to Hwy #9 Then West to Norman and I-35. This Would be a Loop, 4 lane hwy all the way.
Then there was a Plan to 4 lane all the way From Norman into Tecumseh up to Hwy 177 on hwy 9 , Hwy 177 4 lanes ends at Hwy 9 east of Tecumseh. Then use the existing 4 lane (Hwy 177) to link into I-40 going North.
Yes i remenber that east of Choctaw going s to hook up at I-40 and I believe it was Choctaw rd as the loop rd. This weeks Choctaw news is has a piece of news about 6 lanes for I-40 from I-240 east to county line.

Now that I live in Mustang the Bailey spur works for me.

Do you have a link to that news article?

Something like this would be pretty neat to see someday.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/general-civic-issues/2013d1345287539-anyone-remember-proposed-sw-loop-okc-future.jpg

I do have a question though and this is not related to this, but I found this link through trying to find the news article.

ODOTS long range plan has this in it


► I-35 Corridor The I-35 Trade Corridor Study completed in 1999 made the following recommendations for I-35 in Oklahoma:
 From the Kansas/Oklahoma Border to
northern transition of Oklahoma City:
six lanes
 From the northern transition of
Oklahoma City to the Oklahoma City
core: eight lanes
 For the Oklahoma City Core: eight lanes
with additional construction of a relief
route
 From the Oklahoma City Core to
southern transition of Oklahoma City: six lanes with additional construction of a relief route
 From the southern transition of Oklahoma City to the Oklahoma/Texas border: eight lanes
 Construction costs were estimated at $880 million for Oklahoma

Are they suggesting widening I-35 to six lanes all the way through Oklahoma? I didn't really get that. That is some serious road work if they want to do that. Couldn't imagine what it'd cost.

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/p-r-div/lrp_2010-2035/lrp_2010-2035_with-maps.pdf

The Article about Hwy 102 was in the Shawnee news star about a yr or so ago and I believe the County wide news also .. I've never seen that map but it looks like what they were talking about in the 90's about a loop around OKc going thru Choctaw, The Choctaw news paper came out Monday i think and i saw it on a co-worker desk as i was leaving wk, just got a glance at it. For some reason i believe the rd widening of I-35 is suppose to go to chicago? from where ever it starts ? in texas 6 lane .. Yup That is Serious road Works !

Gotcha, I completely forgot about the papers man haha :p

8 lanes from South OKC to the Texas border for $880 million. Somebody at ODOT forgot to drop down a couple of zeros.

8 lanes from South OKC to the Texas border for $880 million. Somebody at ODOT forgot to drop down a couple of zeros.It's not like they are reconstructing they whole highway like they were with I-40. It's two lanes each way added. It's doable. Not sure if it really needs it, but it's doable.

It's not like they are reconstructing they whole highway like they were with I-40. It's two lanes each way added. It's doable. Not sure if it really needs it, but it's doable.

Plupan, I'm shocked that you aren't sure a freeway needs more lanes. :D

It's not like they are reconstructing they whole highway like they were with I-40. It's two lanes each way added. It's doable. Not sure if it really needs it, but it's doable.

Every bridge, overpass, underpass, and interchange would need to be rebuilt. Any idea how many of those there are between Norman and Texas?

Every bridge, overpass, underpass, and interchange would need to be rebuilt. Any idea how many of those there are between Norman and Texas?

Don't forget dynamiting through the Arbuckles.

Don't forget dynamiting through the Arbuckles.

Not necessary, venture. They can just build one of Plupan's favorite flyovers. LOL

Do you have a link to that news article?

Something like this would be pretty neat to see someday.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/general-civic-issues/2013d1345287539-anyone-remember-proposed-sw-loop-okc-future.jpg

I think the western extension of the Kilpatrick you show from Yukon down to north Norman could be doable and successful even today. I am not sure there is currently the demand for the eastern loop though. I do like the spur from the 44/35 junction down to Tinker AFB. I think a better way is needed to get from Edmond to the east metro area. However, there is so much development along that path through Midwest City I don't see a freeway ever being possible there.

Plupan, I'm shocked that you aren't sure a freeway needs more lanes. :DNot sure if it needs to be 8 lanes, I was thinking 20 ;) j/k

Every bridge, overpass, underpass, and interchange would need to be rebuilt. Any idea how many of those there are between Norman and Texas?You have a point, but would they really need to reconstruct every single one?

Don't forget dynamiting through the Arbuckles.

I-35 is already 3 lanes through most of the Arbuckle's. They have the slow lane for semis to the top of the grade on both sides.

You have a point, but would they really need to reconstruct every single one?

No. They would widen them like they have done the bridge over the South Canadian.

A Plan at one time (dot is buying right of way ... have a relative that lives on 102S ) Starting at Hwy 102 S (Grand Casino Exit) Going S to Hwy #9 Then West to Norman and I-35. This Would be a Loop, 4 lane hwy all the way.
Then there was a Plan to 4 lane all the way From Norman into Tecumseh up to Hwy 177 on hwy 9 , Hwy 177 4 lanes ends at Hwy 9 east of Tecumseh. Then use the existing 4 lane (Hwy 177) to link into I-40 going North.
Yes i remenber that east of Choctaw going s to hook up at I-40 and I believe it was Choctaw rd as the loop rd. This weeks Choctaw news is has a piece of news about 6 lanes for I-40 from I-240 east to county line.

Years ago I remember hearing from a guy who lived in Norman about a group of investors back in the 80's/90's trying to put together a package for a big pro football stadium somehwere in the Hwy 9/west side of Norman area, all in conjunction with a big, new highway project...sure sounds like it might have been this very one....the plans supposedly died when someone from OKC told the investors it would mess up their downtown revitalization plans that were in the works...lol

I think the western extension of the Kilpatrick you show from Yukon down to north Norman could be doable and successful even today. I am not sure there is currently the demand for the eastern loop though. I do like the spur from the 44/35 junction down to Tinker AFB. I think a better way is needed to get from Edmond to the east metro area. However, there is so much development along that path through Midwest City I don't see a freeway ever being possible there.

The routing of the SW loop from Yukon to Norman has been elimated due to construction of neighborhoods across the alignment... Any loop would have to go far SW, taking it too far out to make any sort of sense.

Rep. Joyner has filed a bill to require ODOT to complete a study for a 4-lane highway/expressway in eastern Oklahoma County this session, FYI. HB2494 Bill Information (http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=hb2494&Session=1400) I, for one, would be opposed to any new highway construction in Oklahoma County or the surrounding counties.

"The Department of Transportation shall conduct a comprehensive
engineering study concerning the construction of a high-speed
limited-access four-lane highway solution in Oklahoma County, east
of Tinker Air Force Base. The results of the study shall be
submitted to the Governor, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate no later
than December 31, 2015."

The routing of the SW loop from Yukon to Norman has been elimated due to construction of neighborhoods across the alignment... "

I don't get it. Why would ODOT care about cutting a neighborhood in half? They never cared before because every freeway they ever built did exactly that.

I don't get it. Why would ODOT care about cutting a neighborhood in half? They never cared before because every freeway they ever built did exactly that.

Is that a rhetorical question?

Even though I know you the answer, I'll respond. ODOT built other highways through neighborhoods because they were generally inhabited by minority populations with little economic clout, who therefore could not fight the projects.

Think about it this way. The Centennial Expressway and Lake Hefner Parkway opened up within 2-3 years of each other. The Centennial was blasted through a then populated and largely poor and run down Deep Deuce with little care for the surrounding neighborhood. Lake Hefner Parkway runs near affluent areas like Quail Creek and has gentle curves, no streetlights, no overhead signs, etc. to minimize visual blight.

Two different freeways built during the same time and their approach to design couldn't be more different. The only real difference is the project area these two went through.

Every bridge, overpass, underpass, and interchange would need to be rebuilt. Any idea how many of those there are between Norman and Texas?

Including even drainage ditches, approximately 88 structures or more counting the Canadian River bridge and the Red River bridge.... I was bored.

No. They would widen them like they have done the bridge over the South Canadian.That's what I thought. There might some deficient bridges that might need to be replaced, but other than that, I don't see them replacing every bridge.

The routing of the SW loop from Yukon to Norman has been elimated due to construction of neighborhoods across the alignment... Any loop would have to go far SW, taking it too far out to make any sort of sense.

Rep. Joyner has filed a bill to require ODOT to complete a study for a 4-lane highway/expressway in eastern Oklahoma County this session, FYI. HB2494 Bill Information (http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=hb2494&Session=1400) I, for one, would be opposed to any new highway construction in Oklahoma County or the surrounding counties.

"The Department of Transportation shall conduct a comprehensive
engineering study concerning the construction of a high-speed
limited-access four-lane highway solution in Oklahoma County, east
of Tinker Air Force Base. The results of the study shall be
submitted to the Governor, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate no later
than December 31, 2015."I would support it. I know, I know, big surprise, but I think it could some good out there.

I don't get it. Why would ODOT care about cutting a neighborhood in half? They never cared before because every freeway they ever built did exactly that.I thought those weren't neighborhoods?

They punted on the SW loop when they decided to just take Highway 4 due south to I-44 where the Hwy 9 interchange is. Would be nice to at least see a spur build roughly along Indian Hills or near Tecumseh out to the Newcastle exit of I-44 (Hwy 62/277). That adds in another bridge across the river and doesn't make people drive well to the southwest out of the way. It also allows people going to the airport to completely avoid the cluster of Moore and I-240/35 during rush hour - especially when they start to rebuild that interchange in the next 39 years.

An east side loops seems pretty pointless right now. Of course anything new would have to be completely tolled. There isn't enough money as it is.

Think about it this way. The Centennial Expressway and Lake Hefner Parkway opened up within 2-3 years of each other. The Centennial was blasted through a then populated and largely poor and run down Deep Deuce with little care for the surrounding neighborhood. Lake Hefner Parkway runs near affluent areas like Quail Creek and has gentle curves, no streetlights, no overhead signs, etc. to minimize visual blight.

Two different freeways built during the same time and their approach to design couldn't be more different. The only real difference is the project area these two went through.

Your statement is wrong on so many counts that it's hard to know where to start on a rebuttal. While the statement "The only real difference is the project area these two went through" is correct on its face, its those exact differences that decided the design. Both routes had been present on planning documents (an most roadmaps) since the early 60's if not before. The ROW for the LHP had already been preserved as it was part of Grand Boulevard (north of 39th St to the lake), then they took parkland for most of the rest (up past Hefner Rd). I recall well just how much open space was at the junction of Grand and NW Hwy. I also remember the dogfight there was to get enough parkland to build it around the east side of the lake. I know there were no houses taken in the lake portion.

I235 on the other hand did pass through so-called "blighted" areas. However, they did bury it from the end of the 23rd St/BNSF overpass down past NE 4th. That eliminated the need for sound barriers such as you see north of Hefner Rd on the LHP. The matter of overhead signage has more to do with MUTCD standards for interstate highways that an aesthetic decision by ODOT. Since LHP is only a state highway (and in a much less dense area of entrances and exits, there is no need for overhead sign gantries. That would have been a waste of $$$. I don't know what curves you deal with on 235 but the ones I drive are as gentle if not more gentle that the ones on the LHP.

<climbs down off soapbox>

For Gods sake. If we whined about every neighborhood a highway cut through, OKC would be like Austin or Denver with u manageable traffic jams and far less economic success. Highways are put through areas that cost the least to cut through. Should they have cut the Hefner Parkway through Quail Creek solely to pay more money and even things out? Sometimes blight gets taken down. I'd far rather have OKC highway system. I dont hear any whining about I235s lights but here.........do YOU live near I235? Did you live there before it was built? Under what line of reason are you against ANY new highways in Oklahoma county? How unbelievably short and closed minded can you be?

For Gods sake. If we whined about every neighborhood a highway cut through, OKC would be like Austin or Denver with u manageable traffic jams and far less economic success. Highways are put through areas that cost the least to cut through. Should they have cut the Hefner Parkway through Quail Creek solely to pay more money and even things out? Sometimes blight gets taken down. I'd far rather have OKC highway system. I dont hear any whining about I235s lights but here.........do YOU live near I235? Did you live there before it was built? Under what line of reason are you against ANY new highways in Oklahoma county? How unbelievably short and closed minded can you be?

Yes, I live 0.5 miles east of I-235. Lived 0.5 miles west of it from 2005-2012.

It's unbelievably short and closed minded to think that highways are necessary and "do some good out there" whenever built. The public funding required to build such a new road, in a sparsely populated area, far outweighs any potential benefit. It would encourage low density growth that would end up further stretching already thin public budgets.

Finally, who would pay for it? Repubs want to cut taxes (despite a revenue shortfall) - would you be ok with another toll road? The bill asks ODOT to study it, not OTA.

For Gods sake. If we whined about every neighborhood a highway cut through, OKC would be like Austin or Denver with u manageable traffic jams and far less economic success.

So you support ODOT continuing the southwestern outer-loop even if it goes right through existing subdivisions (thanks PluPlan for reminding me a subdivision is not neighborhood)?

Yeah they kind of screwed up down there and not making a planned right of way for a future highway.

Would be nice to at least see a spur build roughly along Indian Hills or near Tecumseh out to the Newcastle exit of I-44 (Hwy 62/277). That adds in another bridge across the river and doesn't make people drive well to the southwest out of the way. It also allows people going to the airport to completely avoid the cluster of Moore and I-240/35 during rush hour - especially when they start to rebuild that interchange in the next 39 years.

I think this is a very important point and something that really needs to be considered and made a priority, especially with the rapid growth of Newcastle and Blanchard. Having just that one bridge over the river is a logistical nightmare, even before the current I-35 rebuild in Norman. If access over this bridge is disrupted for any reason, it literally cuts off Cleveland County from all the other areas just south and west of Norman. The construction has only increased the frequency of the backups that won't end anytime soon with the Lindsey and HWY 9 phases still on the schedule.

Many of the residents of those communities (and others like Lexington and Purcell) rely on access to Norman and back for shopping, work, and school. A short spur from Indian Hills or Tecumseh Rd. from I-35 over to I-44 would create another bridge over the river and increase access between the two areas. It would be relatively short and right of way issues would be minimal due to the fact most of this land is in a flood plain to begin with. And even if it were built as a toll road, it would be well worth the $1 or whatever the charge would be to drivers.

Newcastle is really only 5-6 miles to the west of Norman as the crow flies, but the shortest route between the two currently is about 15 miles because of the river. And when southbound I-35 in Norman is at a standstill...which is very common these days...one must either sit in traffic and wait it out or travel up I-35 (or 60th Ave NW) to 19th St. in Moore (149th) and then west over to I-44 and back south to get to those communities simply because of the river and no other bridge to cross. That's 20-25 miles, 30-35 minutes, and a bazillion stop signs and wasted fuel just to get between two communities that are literally 6 miles from each other. And then add another 10-15 minutes and another 10 miles on top of that just to get to Blanchard from Norman. It's ridiculous.

So you support ODOT continuing the southwestern outer-loop even if it goes right through existing subdivisions?I would under certain circumstances.

I would under certain circumstances.

I wouldn't. At one time, when I lived in Mustang, they were suggesting a route that would have gone directly through my house. It's easy to say, plupan, when it doesn't affect you.