Future highway or interstate expansion?

[HangryHippo]

I was thinking about this thread yesterday as I was driving from 44 and Northwest Expy to 40 Eastbound to the Shields exit. It was about 6:30 in the evening and it was laughable how little traffic there was in relation to road capacity, especially the new I-40. Of course it could be that I just got back from the Northeast, where it took me 3 hours to go 90 miles on the NJ turnpike.

I could possibly see OTA upgrading OK-4 between the HE Bailey Spur and the current terminus of JK Turnpike, forming a defacto "loop" around western OKC, but that area is developing quickly so any ROW acquisition will not be cheap. I think they would get far more benefit for the dollar from upgrading the Hefner Pkwy/JK Turnpike Interchange.

Otherwise, I am not seeing the crushing need for new highways like some claim on here. What I do see is aging bottlenecks that need to be replaced. 240/35 really needs to get its funding fastracked. 240 and 44 have plenty of capacity for traffic passing through but most won't take it, especially truckers, because of the dangerous interchange at 35. And local leaders should at least start planning to replace 44/40, its really on its last legs. For the record, I am not some suburban basher, and am completely okay with a level of planned growth out that way. But completely new highways? Nah...lets just try to maintain what we have a little better. We can even make plans to widen them in the future.

But I guess most of this thread is kinda "what could be" anyway.

I posted something very, very close to this in another thread about the stretches of highways not being the actual problem, as most are overbuilt anyhow. I believe it's actually the idiotic number of curb cuts, cloverleaf ramps, short merge lanes, driveways, intersections with stop lights/signs, and piss poor interchanges that interfere with the flow of traffic in OKC more than anything else. Unfortunately, these are also the same things ODOT seems loathe to fix.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yep - but it would all be auto-centric development. Alas, there is no money to pay for any of these new roads so dream away.

Not if a light rail was included with this. Also, you could make the roads tolled and that would solve the money problem.

[Plutonic Panda]

I-75 in north Atlanta is 16 lanes. From 7AM to 9:30AM and 3PM t0 7PM it is 5 mph.

Well, if they develop mass transit and that still doesn't work, they should build a new elevated express lane system that is tolled and do something while they're doing nothing.

[Just the facts]

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.

[bchris02]

OKC should build something like the "High-Five" interchange in Dallas or the Big-I in Albuquerque to replace 40/44. Out of all the interchanges I have to deal with, that one is probably the worst.

[Buffalo Bill]

OKC should build something like the "High-Five" interchange in Dallas.

Why?

What would you propose to be carried by each of the 5 levels?

[OKCisOK4me]

OKC should build something like the "High-Five" interchange in Dallas or the Big-I in Albuquerque to replace 40/44. Out of all the interchanges I have to deal with, that one is probably the worst.

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!

[CuatrodeMayo]

the completion of the "inner loop" with a highway connecting I44/I35 interchange and the I240/I40 interchange .. would do wonders to develop the inner NE side of town

I doubt it. Development along I-35 between I-44 and I-40 isn't exactly going crazy right now...

[bchris02]

I doubt it. Development along I-35 between I-44 and I-40 isn't exactly going crazy right now...

That area is always going to suffer as far as development goes because its in OKC school district. The suburban areas that are booming are those in suburban school districts.

[Kokopelli]

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.

[Snowman]

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.

[venture]

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

[Kokopelli]

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.

[hoya]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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

[Just the facts]

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.

[Kokopelli]

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.

[Just the facts]

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

[Plutonic Panda]

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

Is it usually busy?

[MagzOK]

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.

[Just the facts]

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.

[BoulderSooner]

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

[Just the facts]

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.

[Plutonic Panda]

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.