Widgets Magazine
Page 19 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1415161718192021 LastLast
Results 451 to 475 of 521

Thread: Future highway or interstate expansion?

  1. #451

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    It doesn't go through Draper
    Plupan, look again. It does show a freeway crossing Lake Draper.

  2. #452

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    We will eventually need three highway loops.......
    Says who?

  3. Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    no what? Don't stay ahead of the curve? Don't support any suburban growth and help traffic move faster? No they aren't going to eventually be built?
    With the shortest commute time of almost any metro, you're right, we should def be worried about faster movement on highways. And no, they will never be built. Never like that map.

  4. Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    I like the idea of extending Kilpatrick from the I-40 terminus around to tie in with the H.E. Bailey. Or at least get past Mustang and tie into where Highway 4 picks up again south of Mustang. But like some have said, there is a lack of will to get this done and Mustang is building up with new development that would be in the way.

  5. Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    I like the part where the newly-reprieved Tower Theater and all of the hard revitalization work currently happening along NW 23rd is bulldozed to make way for six lanes of traffic.

  6. #456

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    It's a plan that destroys historic portions of the city so that you can get to the middle of nowhere even more quickly.

  7. Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    The map is great! A great way to bankrupt DOT and the state even faster. lol

  8. Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Not that I agree with the map or not, but I don't see what the issue is with the outer highway going over a lake. Tampa has 6 highways / major roads going across Tampa Bay, Some of those are miles long. More expensive? Probably, but not unheard of and not uncommon for cities along the shores. San Fran, NYC, New Orleans, Miami, US 1 from the mainland to Key West have several.

  9. #459

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by eatokc.com View Post
    Not that I agree with the map or not, but I don't see what the issue is with the outer highway going over a lake. Tampa has 6 highways / major roads going across Tampa Bay, Some of those are miles long. More expensive? Probably, but not unheard of and not uncommon for cities along the shores. San Fran, NYC, New Orleans, Miami, US 1 from the mainland to Key West have several.
    It makes more sense to go over a lake/bay if it is a route that goes from a major city to another major city saving forty miles verses the alternative and is not as easily avoided as that area is. A loop (especially one that is a turnpike) serves a much more local/near-regional access, with a tiny percentage of drivers paying a premium to avoiding rush hour peaks on the freeway, it should have at least three to five miles of collection area on either side to draw traffic from, which would put it south of Draper & the future one to begin with (as 240 already serves most of the land around Draper).

    Not only is it more expensive to build initially, it requires much more costly maintenance costs at a faster cycle. It also can hurt development/use of the lakes. It cuts down the area it serves, depressing possible revenue collection to offset maintenance/construction costs. Plus there is a chance the lakes would be drained for a construction project like this, putting the city at risk of water shortage till completed.

  10. #460

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    So maybe this? I want to note, really only the blue, light blue, and purple parts were really serious along with the widening.

    I'll see if I can't do an cad rendering of a couple before I go to sleep. They won't be anything special, but give an idea.




    Some key notes:

    *The Norman and Edmond loops are the most important.

    *The Bethany highway construction was an issue, but I did the measurements through Google Earth and in most places, there is enough room to build a 10 lane highway like the Crosstown, however, my version would only be 8 lanes, 4 lanes each way, which two lanes of service road each way before downtown Bethany and then the service roads end. I would place an elevated rail along the highway that would turn into a street car once it reaches downtown Bethany. The highway would be below grade and a park would be placed over the highway through downtown Bethany. The whole project shouldn't cost more than 1.5 billion dollars. The highway would then come at grade about a mile or so after/before downtown Bethany to the west. I'll post pictures showing the measurements, lane widths, and design of the highway soon.

    *Every single one of the proposed highway expansions would start out at 4 lanes, except the Bethany highway.

    Highway widenings or modifications:

    I-240 from I-44 to I-35:

    *widened to eight lanes
    *Reconstructed in cement
    *Service roads reconstructed in cement and widened to three lanes each way
    *LED street lights added
    *Exit and entry ramps completely reconfigured
    *More landscaping and beautification

    I-35 from I-40 to Highway 9

    *widened to 4 lanes each way plus an HOV lane each way
    *service roads widened to three lanes each way where possible and two way converted to one way(Ala Moore service roads)
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on way service roads
    *light-rail line added in the middle of the highway from downtown Norman to DT OKC
    *LED lights added
    *more beautification added

    I-35 from I-40 to I-44

    *reconstructed in cement
    *widened to six lanes
    *service roads made three lanes each way and made one way
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on one way service roads
    *more landscaping and beautification
    *led lights

    Airport road

    *one lane each way added
    *made into a toll road
    *led street lights added

    Hefner Parkway(existing portion)

    *no widening
    *more beautification added
    *led street lights added
    *made into a toll road

    Kilpatrick Turnpike from MacArthur to I-40

    *one lane each way added
    *new service road built with two lanes each way
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on one way service roads
    *led lights added

    Kilpatrick from MacArthur to 235(BE)

    *no widening
    *Service roads/Memorial(service road) reconstructed in cement and made three lanes each way
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on service roads

    I-35 from I-44 to 2nd(Edmond)

    *all road interchanges reconfigured and reconstructed
    *no widening
    *led lights added
    *service roads reconstructed in cement and made three lanes each way
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on one way service roads

    I-35 from 2nd St. to Waterloo

    *one way service roads added; two lanes each way
    *dedicated u turn on both sides, dedicated right turn, and dual left turn at all intersections on one way service roads
    *Danforth interchange reconstructed
    *2nd street interchange reconstructed
    *Coffee Creek Rd. interchange added
    *highway reconstructed in cement and made 6 lanes
    *Waterloo interchange reconfigured and reconstructed
    *Sorgum Mill Rd. interchange added


    I-44 from I-40 to I-240

    *reconstructed in cement to 8 lanes
    *led lights added
    *all road interchanges and bridges reconstructed in cement
    *iconic bridge over Oklahoma river added
    *bike trail and light-rail built along highway

    I-40 from I-35 to Post Rd.(Midwest City)

    *reconstructed in cement
    *widened to eight lanes
    *service road reconstructed in cement, made one way, and two lanes each way
    *big public art and pedestrian bridge creating a park in front of Tinker AFB
    *LED lights added

    I-240 from I-35 to I-40

    *one lane each way added
    *led lights added

    I-40 from Post Rd. to HWY 99

    *one lane each way added

    Interchanges

    I-35/I-240 Interchange: 5 stack due to HOV lanes and service roads run through
    I-35/I-40 ? stack.... just ramps reconfigured to right side of the highway and completely re-imagine of the portion of I-40 and I-35 segment. I will post renderings later.
    Kilpatrick/235: both clover leafs turned into flyovers and missing ramp connections added(sb 235 to eb Kilpatrick)
    Kilpatrick/Hefner Expressway: 4 stack(eventual 5 stack if Hefner and Kilpatrick ever get HOV) adding all missing ramp connections
    Kilpatrick/I-35: completely reconstructed with all exits/entries made fly-overs to right side of highway
    I-40/I-44: 4 stack

    Again, all expansions would be tolled and interchanges either four or five stack depending on HOV lanes. All of the expansions would also start out at four lanes.


    ----------------------------

    Please let me know what you agree with, if you agree with any of it, or would like to see. I fully expect a bunch of people getting at me for sprawl, unsustainable building etc. So, before you get at me for that, I want to say I'm not suggesting we do all of this right now and some of it may be 30-50 years down the road. The main part and focus of my plan is the Edmond and Norman loops as well as I-35 from DT OKC to Norman which I think should be taken care of before 2021. Light-rail is also a huge initiative that I think should be tied in with any future highway funding. Meaning any new highway that gets constructed or expanded should have to be matched with the equivalent light-rail or street car expansion.

    I'll have to do the cad rendering a little later. I usually use infrastructure modeler, but it is freaking out on me lately for some reason. Very tired and only sleep until 10, so can't do the rendering now, bt I will later.

  11. #461

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Humm, Waterloo highway and another going down Douglas. I guess I'll be living in the middle of an interchange. To let you know, Waterloo east of I-35 is building up with some somewhat pricey homes.( $300-550k range) I think it needs to be moved a bit more to the north say Simpson rd or Seward. By the time it would be built, it would be running through a built out area of homes on 1 ac+ lots.

  12. #462

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    So maybe this? I want to note, really only the blue, light blue, and purple parts were really serious along with the widening.

    I'll see if I can't do an cad rendering of a couple before I go to sleep. They won't be anything special, but give an idea.




    Some key notes:
    Here's my plan for OKC. I consider it slightly more realistic than the massive number of freeways presented here.


  13. #463

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by hoyasooner View Post
    Here's my plan for OKC. I consider it slightly more realistic than the massive number of freeways presented here.

    Interesting. So when a future Norman and/or Edmond loop gets announced, I'll remember this.

  14. #464

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Oh, and an east side new highway is already being planned.

  15. #465

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    One thing that I would change. The I-35/I-44 interchange doesn't need reconstruction in my opinion. I would reconstruct the I-40/I-44 interchange instead.

  16. #466

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
    One thing that I would change. The I-35/I-44 interchange doesn't need reconstruction in my opinion. I would reconstruct the I-40/I-44 interchange instead.
    what I meant was if I44 was ever to be continued east which I'm sure will happen down the road.

  17. #467

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    I-44 already continues to the east... via the Turner Turnpike. I see what you're talking about, but I'm a bit perplexed as to why we would need to build an entire highway through the Spencer area. I-35, US 62, and I-40 already serve the east side fairly well, don't they?

  18. #468

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by jompster View Post
    I-44 already continues to the east... via the Turner Turnpike. I see what you're talking about, but I'm a bit perplexed as to why we would need to build an entire highway through the Spencer area. I-35, US 62, and I-40 already serve the east side fairly well, don't they?
    I can see the point in having an east highway to connect Edmond to Tinker. That said, I think extending the Kilpatrick down to Norman would much more beneficial, allowing a much easier commute from Norman to NW OKC and vice versa. There just isn't strong enough growth currently in eastern Oklahoma county that I would think that freeway would be justified in the near term.

  19. #469

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Assuming that any of this is remotely possible.......

    Toll roads must have the traffic numbers and tolling volume to justify the initial investment, which are backed by bonds. Otherwise, you end up like the toll road in Austin (Texas SH 130) that was about 4 weeks away from defaulting this summer because it has so little traffic on it. Granted that was a standalone road by a private enterprise, whereas OTA is backed by cross bonding. Even still, I'd think they would be skittish on doing something like a toll loop largely through the middle of nowhere around Edmond or Norman; they actually declined to build a toll expanding the Gilcrease Expy in Tulsa for this very reason.

    Also, I don't think Bethany would appreciate having most of its commercial district "eminent domain'ed" to build a freeway that adds zero extra capacity. Same with Mustang.

  20. #470

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    Interesting. So when a future Norman and/or Edmond loop gets announced, I'll remember this.
    My money is still on the Bat Signal.

  21. #471

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by hoyasooner View Post
    Here's my plan for OKC. I consider it slightly more realistic than the massive number of freeways presented here.

    More realistic and probably cheaper to build.

  22. #472

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by adaniel View Post
    Assuming that any of this is remotely possible.......

    Toll roads must have the traffic numbers and tolling volume to justify the initial investment, which are backed by bonds. Otherwise, you end up like the toll road in Austin (Texas SH 130) that was about 4 weeks away from defaulting this summer because it has so little traffic on it. Granted that was a standalone road by a private enterprise, whereas OTA is backed by cross bonding. Even still, I'd think they would be skittish on doing something like a toll loop largely through the middle of nowhere around Edmond or Norman; they actually declined to build a toll expanding the Gilcrease Expy in Tulsa for this very reason.

    Also, I don't think Bethany would appreciate having most of its commercial district "eminent domain'ed" to build a freeway that adds zero extra capacity. Same with Mustang.
    There be no buildings torn down in Bethany. I'll post more about that later.

    As for the Eastside highway, I know what you're saying which is why I clearly said, it would be a highway that would be built down the road.

  23. #473

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by hoyasooner View Post
    My money is still on the Bat Signal.
    Ok. Considering it wouldn't even cost $1,000 to build a light that could shine a bat signal on low clouds, maybe you're right. Oklahoma isn't a very progressive state.

  24. #474

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Buffalo Bill View Post
    More realistic and probably cheaper to build.
    100+ billion dollars worth of super talls, huge artificial Lake, floating blimps that shine light down. More realistic than a loop or expansion of some sort that I guarantee you, is going to be announced by 2021. OK buddy, say whatever you want to say to help you sleep at night.

  25. #475

    Default Re: Future highway or interstate expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by jompster View Post
    I-44 already continues to the east... via the Turner Turnpike. I see what you're talking about, but I'm a bit perplexed as to why we would need to build an entire highway through the Spencer area. I-35, US 62, and I-40 already serve the east side fairly well, don't they?
    You're abolsutely correct. I just meant probably closer to 2025-2030(ish) assuming development takes off in the eastern metro.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Interstate from OKC to Denver?
    By KayneMo in forum Transportation
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 04-04-2021, 06:49 PM
  2. Highway 69/75 working to become interstate
    By KayneMo in forum Other Communities
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-21-2016, 10:56 AM
  3. 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, 09:36 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, 10:19 AM
  5. Research Park - Future Expansion
    By Patrick in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-20-2005, 04:38 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
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO