Driving Forward OK - Oklahoma Turnpike Improvements and New Construction

I figured this should probably have it's own thread.

As the Governor announced today, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority is planning a total of 6 different projects across the state's network of turnpikes. The projects are as follows:

Gilcrease Expressway

• 2.5 miles
• $28 million from OTA and partnership with City of Tulsa
• New road construction
• This project connects L.L. Tisdale to I-44 and completes the Western loop around the Tulsa metro area. It will help relieve urban traffic congestion during peak periods. It will also provide a new and more direct route to city attractions and points of interest in the Tulsa urban core. This will bolster safe access to Tulsa along with economic growth and opportunity.

Northeast OK County Loop

• 21 miles
• $300 million
• New construction
• This project will allow for a connection from Eastern Oklahoma County to vital intersections for travel. This will produce a drive-time reduction to access Tulsa from the OKC Metro and a needed new loop to alleviate current congested traffic in the Oklahoma City area. Construction will link I-40 and I-44 (Turner Turnpike) in Eastern Oklahoma County.

Muskogee Turnpike

• 9.5 miles
• $42 million
• Reconstruction of Turnpike from “ground-up” for safety and modernization of toll plaza
• This reconstruction will occur between Creek Turnpike interchange and State Highway 51 near Coweta. It will allow for a safer and more drivable surface and provide increased safety features.

HE Bailey Turnpike

• 7.5 miles
• $32 million
• Turnpike reconstruction for lanes and safety features and toll plaza modernization for better access for PikePass customers
• This project will provide wider lanes and enhanced safety features for travel as well as improved technology for toll plaza locations for customer convenience between Bridge Creek and North Meridian Avenue near Newcastle.

Turner Turnpike

• 22 miles
• $300 million
• Reconstruction for more lanes and safety features including lights and other future safety enhancements
• The Turner Turnpike is a vital turnpike corridor that connects Oklahoma’s two metro areas. Improving safety and convenience on this road is a priority for the OTA. This reconstruction/safety project will occur between Bristow and the Creek Turnpike West (State Highway 364) section of the Turner Turnpike. In the last five years there have been 15 fatalities and 514 wrecks on this section of road. This project will create an “urban turnpike corridor” with lighting, wider lanes and the addition of lanes. It will allow for the future creation of truck-specific lanes for quick and safe access.

Southwest OKC Extension

• 7 miles
• $190 million
• New construction
• This project will be an extension of the Kilpatrick Turnpike that will connect SW OKC and the metro area at-large with the urban core. It will increase access and offer another route for Will Rogers World Airport. It will occur between I-40 and State Highway 152/Airport Road.

These projects, totaling $892 million dollars, will be funded by bonds and repaid by turnpike user fees. Work on these projects is expected to begin in the third quarter of 2016.

More information can be found here: Driving Forward OK

So I am guessing eminent domain will be used on the houses that are already there on the SW OKC extension?

That's all great news! Goes to show the turnpike system was never meant to be free nor will it ever. Look forward to seeing these improvements on Google Maps in the years to come...

I used to hate the turnpike system, and really it is a still a very regressive tax, but I am happy for the infrastructure it brings. After using turnpikes in other states, which are becoming much more prolific, I have to say Oklahoma has a very good turnpike system. Compared to most states the fares are very reasonable and there isn't a toll booth every 3 miles like in FL or TX. Also many states are selling (really long term leases) their turnpikes to foreign companies, which I really disagree with.

I think all of these projects sound good. I am really surprised that they aren't putting in a Turnpike from the Creek Turnpike to Bixby in Tulsa. Bixby has terrible highway access and has expanded like crazy recently. The new East Loop seems pretty far out there, but I guess it will help encourage sprawl, seems like there are more pressing concerns that could have been addressed now.

OTA has been very careful to clearly state they haven't picked firm routes for the 3 new pikes yet. The Turner part is WAY past due. Hoping they grab enough ROW so the high speed rail can use it.

They need to fix the bridge on the Kilpatrick just north of 39th St. That thing is insane. 20 bone jarring bumps that have caused several accidents in the 10 or so years I've been driving it. My kids call it the bumpy bridge, I think it's more like a very large washboard or cattle guard stretched out over a 1/4 mile. OKCisOK4Me was lucky enough to hear me complain on a daily basis for over a year. I doubt anything will be done, or even proposed, but I still felt the need to bitch a bit. Carry on.....

This gives a little more detailed information.

http://media.wix.com/ugd/7181a5_aeb3...69a802528f.pdf

The Turner bypass east of Tinker and east the I-40/I-240 split is necessary to help pull some of those Tulsa (and beyond) to TX truck traffic out of the metro, but it needs to be extended down to highway 9 or even reconnect with i-35 around Purcell. If the TX bound truckers just get pulled onto I-240 and head west to reconnect on I-35 at the Godawful I-35/I-240 interchange, it won't do much to fix the problem, since most of the southbound traffic from downtown stays on I-35 until Moore and Norman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

I used to hate the turnpike system, and really it is a still a very regressive tax, but I am happy for the infrastructure it brings. After using turnpikes in other states, which are becoming much more prolific, I have to say Oklahoma has a very good turnpike system. Compared to most states the fares are very reasonable and there isn't a toll booth every 3 miles like in FL or TX. Also many states are selling (really long term leases) their turnpikes to foreign companies, which I really disagree with.

I think all of these projects sound good. I am really surprised that they aren't putting in a Turnpike from the Creek Turnpike to Bixby in Tulsa. Bixby has terrible highway access and has expanded like crazy recently. The new East Loop seems pretty far out there, but I guess it will help encourage sprawl, seems like there are more pressing concerns that could have been addressed now.

---

It's actually a usage tax not regressive. Despite your opinions on whether its regressive or not, taking the turnpike is 100% optional, don't like it, don't take it. That makes it a usage tax not regressive. A tax can only be regressive if it's mandatory.

I think toll roads are an excellent answer to highway needs. The notion they are a regressive tax makes no sense. Where I do have a problem is where proposals are made to take a free road and turn it to a toll road. Toll lanes are fine as long as the tolls are reasonable.

I think the only way the proposed projects are going to be built is with tolls. Those that don't want to use them won't have to pay for them. I especially like the east OK County proposal though i hope it can be brought in closer to town.

The IRS says tolls are a regressive tax and holy smokes they are the taxman.

Quote:

---

User fees often are considered regressive because they take a larger percentage of income from low-income groups than from high-income groups. These include fees for licenses, parking, admission to museums and parks, and tolls for roads.

---

So eh at the very least it's debatable.




https://apps.irs.gov/app/understandi...hm03_les02.jsp

Not sure how that would apply here since there are alternatives "the poor" could take. That would apply to things like toll bridges to which swimming would be the only alternative or licenses which may be required.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stew

The IRS says tolls are a regressive tax and holy smokes they are the taxman.



So eh at the very least it's debatable.




https://apps.irs.gov/app/understandi...hm03_les02.jsp

---

That doesn't say they are regressive, it says they often are, so there's plenty of wiggle room in their definition. If every road in the state was a toll road then hell yeah it would be regressive, but many of our toll turnpikes are very optional. I've lived in the metro area for about 10 years now, and I'm pretty sure I've used them no more than a dozen times or so.

I understand they're connecting the Kilpatrick Turnpike at I-40 to Highway 152 (Airport Road). But I'm wondering if there will be an EASY connection to Highway 4 going south of Mustang and connecting back to I-44 / HE Bailey Turnpike.

Right now traversing this stretch from SW 15th through Mustang proper is the biggest nightmare, but if you could get off the Kilpatrick Turnpike at Highway 4 / 152 and travel straight south until I-44 / HE Bailey this would be a much better western route during rush hour.

I know it's not the sexy urban infill everyone wants, but I would think this SW expansion would help fill in a lot of that vacant land between Mustang and the city

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pahdz

I know it's not the sexy urban infill everyone wants, but I would think this SW expansion would help fill in a lot of that vacant land between Mustang and the city

---

Possibly, but I don't understand how they're going to do it without displacing quite a few people...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cafeboeuf

Possibly, but I don't understand how they're going to do it without displacing quite a few people...

---

Yeah I agree, or just making some incredibly winding road that will have traffic issues eventually because everyone will slam on their brakes because "oh no a curve!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pahdz

Yeah I agree, or just making some incredibly winding road that will have traffic issues eventually because everyone will slam on their brakes because "oh no a curve!"

---

OMG. 99% of all traffic jams here are caused by curves, or hills that people can't see over the top. The fear of the unknown!

I think the connector to airport road will be quite useful. Access from that part of town to the northwest part of town is quite tough. I used to live on NW expressway almost where it joined the turnpike. As many know I worked at WRWA -- it was always a disaster getting to work with no real easy way to go. This would have helped a lot.

I think the rest of it isn't "useless", but rather unnecessary as our state has more pressing issues right now. I can't speak for Tulsas projects though as I am not that familiar with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pahdz

I know it's not the sexy urban infill everyone wants, but I would think this SW expansion would help fill in a lot of that vacant land between Mustang and the city

---

I can't speak for Tulsa's needs as I live in OKC, but I agree with you. The SW extension actually makes some sense, but it would make a hell of a lot more sense if they connected it to the HE Bailey turnpike.

I agree that connecting to HE Bailey, as well as airport rd, would be the best. However the lack of planning and right of way in the mustang area is going to make it really hard to do it without displacing a lot of families.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAW

The Turner bypass east of Tinker and east the I-40/I-240 split is necessary to help pull some of those Tulsa (and beyond) to TX truck traffic out of the metro, but it needs to be extended down to highway 9 or even reconnect with i-35 around Purcell. If the TX bound truckers just get pulled onto I-240 and head west to reconnect on I-35 at the Godawful I-35/I-240 interchange, it won't do much to fix the problem, since most of the southbound traffic from downtown stays on I-35 until Moore and Norman.

---

I agree with this…^
A bypass around the east side of the OKC metro would make I-35 less crowed and safer…. We need another bridge over the river somewhere south of Norman near Noble IMO.
But I don’t understand why this project is so far east. It seems like it would be better if it was moved about 5 miles west?

I understand the need to extend the Kilpatrick Turnpike to the airport but sometime in the future it would be good if this turnpike was further extended south of the airport to near HY 37 and 44, then on to west Norman and eventually intersected at I-35 and HY- 9 just north of the river.

I wish they would do it right after they complete the current planned improvements. If all goes as planned, this should all be completed by 2020.

A loop around Norman was needed yesterday. Hopefully they plan for the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowFlyinDuc

They need to fix the bridge on the Kilpatrick just north of 39th St. That thing is insane. 20 bone jarring bumps that have caused several accidents in the 10 or so years I've been driving it. My kids call it the bumpy bridge, I think it's more like a very large washboard or cattle guard stretched out over a 1/4 mile. OKCisOK4Me was lucky enough to hear me complain on a daily basis for over a year. I doubt anything will be done, or even proposed, but I still felt the need to bitch a bit. Carry on.....

---

I asked about that here a while back and was given the information that they miscalculated the load between spans and it was supposed to flatten out once the concrete was poured, and they apparently assigned that task to the 1st-year psychology students (because even 1st-year engineers shouldn't've been able to screw it up that badly), and it's happened on quite a few other bridges/flyovers on the Kilpatrick. Huge, huge, huge embarrassment that we can't even figure that out properly, I'm amazed that it got all the way through and finished, it's pretty much completely inexcusable, never ever driven over anything that badly in any other state in the union (and I've been through a lot of them).