I-35/I-44 Interchange

[Plutonic Panda]

Thanks. I didn’t see it in a quick trip through the ODOT 8 year plan I looked at this morning. Any idea how much it is projected to cost? Keep thinking that 4 miles of going from 2 lanes each way to 4 in the center of town is gonna be very costly.

Pardon me, I went and dug further to make sure I was remembering things correctly. I’m still not quite sure about it all but here’s what I found.

First off here’s a link to preferred alternative which widens the entire road to six lanes plus auxiliary lanes where needed. It also completely reconstructs the existing road and service roads. It competes the current gaps in the service roads and changes them to one way. That project is somehow expected to cost $15,000,000(which I’m not understanding how that’s possible) and begins in 2031. Again, here’s a link to the preferred alternative chosen back in 2020: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...218/update.pdf

Now there is some sort of a project in 2028 which will do something and cost 50,000,000 dollars worth of work for something 0.790 miles long. So whatever it is it’s big. It says I-35 grade, drain, bridge, and surface and runs from 15st to the Oklahoma River impacting both NB and SB lanes. Bottom of page 63: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...CWP%20book.pdf

Here is additional link from an interactive map and another link to the project webpage:

https://oklahoma.public.dotmapsapp.com/map

https://oklahoma.gov/odot/programs-a.../20200218.html

[BoulderSooner]

Yes, and unfortunately, all of those highways (except for I-35) abruptly end at Memorial. The Kilpatrick curves to its east/west alignment, SH74 goes from a freeway to a 4 lane divided limited access to Waterloo just north of Memorial, and I-235/Broadway Extension quickly ends as a freeway coming into Edmond at the first of many stoplights working north along Broadway.

74 is freeway until 164th currently (2 miles north of memorial) and very soon will be freeway for an additional mile until 178th

and the future plan is an overpass at 178th as well .. making it freeway standard until 192nd

[_Cramer_]

Pardon me, I went and dug further to make sure I was remembering things correctly. I’m still not quite sure about it all but here’s what I found.

First off here’s a link to preferred alternative which widens the entire road to six lanes plus auxiliary lanes where needed. It also completely reconstructs the existing road and service roads. It competes the current gaps in the service roads and changes them to one way. That project is somehow expected to cost $15,000,000(which I’m not understanding how that’s possible) and begins in 2031. Again, here’s a link to the preferred alternative chosen back in 2020: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...218/update.pdf

Now there is some sort of a project in 2028 which will do something and cost 50,000,000 dollars worth of work for something 0.790 miles long. So whatever it is it’s big. It says I-35 grade, drain, bridge, and surface and runs from 15st to the Oklahoma River impacting both NB and SB lanes. Bottom of page 63: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...CWP%20book.pdf

Here is additional link from an interactive map and another link to the project webpage:

https://oklahoma.public.dotmapsapp.com/map

https://oklahoma.gov/odot/programs-a.../20200218.html

I am guessing the massive 2028 project is the new suspension bridge and widening. I expect this gets bumped up if the Olympic events come to fruition.

[Pete]

Now there is some sort of a project in 2028 which will do something and cost 50,000,000 dollars worth of work for something 0.790 miles long. So whatever it is it’s big. It says I-35 grade, drain, bridge, and surface and runs from 15st to the Oklahoma River impacting both NB and SB lanes. Bottom of page 63: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...CWP%20book.pdf

Yes, it's $50MM for rebuilding the I-35 bridges across the OK River with a suspension feature and a pedestrian path and viewing area:

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.p...14#post1227514

[Snowman]

I am guessing the massive 2028 project is the new suspension bridge and widening. I expect this gets bumped up if the Olympic events come to fruition.

Granted the events most speculated to be here would not need the bridge modified, as take place entirely on the whitewater course. So we would also need to get the flatwater events too for the bridge project to have that kind of urgency.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yes, it's $50MM for rebuilding the I-35 bridges across the OK River with a suspension feature and a pedestrian path and viewing area:

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.p...14#post1227514

That has to be waaaaaaay more than 50 million. I’m no engineer but aren’t they rebuilding it from scratch also to remove the piers for competition rowing? We’re talking about a 14 lane suspension bridge with a pedestrian path. I’m assuming there is more sources of money that will be involved?

[Urbanized]

Is $50 M the state component, and the balance would be matching federal? Federal transit matches can often be as much as 10 to 1, maybe more. I’m not well-versed enough on this project to speak to it, but without digging in I’d expect federal to make up the bulk of the project costs, and I’d expect for those to be…A LOT. I’d think the I-35 bridge rebuild would be in the hundreds of millions.

[Snowman]

Is $50 M the state component, and the balance would be matching federal? Federal transit matches can often be as much as 10 to 1, maybe more. I’m not well-versed enough on this project to speak to it, but without digging in I’d expect federal to make up the bulk of the project costs, and I’d expect for those to be…A LOT. I’d think the I-35 bridge rebuild would be in the hundreds of millions.

Likely $50M is what is projected to be spent in 2028, and most of the rest of phases are not even on the 8 year plan yet. IIRC it is typically the opposite, federal and state money would be on the plan, and if there was local match from cities might not.

[Urbanized]

The Saint Anthony Falls Bridge in Minneapolis, coincidentally an I-35 bridge, collapsed in 2007, and was replaced quickly using a 90/10 federal/state match in 2008. The bridge crosses the Mississippi, but that’s near its headwaters and the river there is pretty narrow. The bridge looks similar in scale to what this bridge would be, but it was post-tensioned concrete and nothing fancy or especially expensive; what was most important was to get it finished quickly.

That bridge cost $234 million. In 2008.

[Urbanized]

Edit: after reading linked documents it appears the estimated project cost will be $165M.

[Urbanized]

Likely $50M is what is projected to be spent in 2028, and most of the rest of phases are not even on the 8 year plan yet. IIRC it is typically the opposite, federal and state money would be on the plan, and if there was local match from cities might not.

Ah, that could be the case. But to be clear no way is the state paying anywhere close to the majority of the project costs on an interstate highway bridge over a river.

[Pete]

^

Federal money will be a big part of this; I found those renderings and details of the new bridges and pedestrian bridge as part of a federal application.

And of course, this is an interstate highway and thus federal funds would likely pay the majority.

[Urbanized]

Yeah, I dug in a bit and discovered the total project cost is estimated to be around $165.7 million with local match coming from the state at $29 million and the City at around $4 million.

[Pete]

[HFAA Alum]

I know this one is probably as mundane of a project to follow, but this is still relatively close to where I used to reside over on the north side. Any significant updates?

[bombermwc]

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

[MagzOK]

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

I used to work in the industry -- now it was over 25 years ago -- but federal regulations back then were such that if you fully reconstruct an interchange it has to be to 'current' design safety standards and left-hand exits were removed from the books some years ago. Not sure if this is strictly related to interstates I don't remember that.

[BoulderSooner]

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

replacing all the 63rd bridges was required ... and widening all of i35 100% required this work ..

[jdross1982]

Wish this had better renderings to see the end look.

[BoulderSooner]

Wish this had better renderings to see the end look.

https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/...date-final.pdf

this is the final alignment ...

not great but better then anything in this thread ...

the new main line bridge build over 63rd is the future North bound I35 ... but it will first be used to carry the south bound traffic .. so they can demo the existing south bound bridge and build the new south bound ....

they will then move south bound traffic to the final alignment move north bound to its new bridge and then demo the existing north bound bridge ..



once the North to west traffic moves to the new ramp the rest of this project should move relatively quickly

[bombermwc]

I used to work in the industry -- now it was over 25 years ago -- but federal regulations back then were such that if you fully reconstruct an interchange it has to be to 'current' design safety standards and left-hand exits were removed from the books some years ago. Not sure if this is strictly related to interstates I don't remember that.

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

[flyfisher07]

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

There was also not enough room for SB I35 to be widened to 3 lanes going under the existing NB I35 left exit to WB I44 bridge. This was likely another main reason to completely revamp the interchange.

[baralheia]

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

It's also a safety thing. The left lane is supposed to be the fast lane, but slower traffic that needs to exit on a left exit can disrupt that fast flow of traffic.

[Mesta Parker]

It's also a safety thing. The left lane is supposed to be the fast lane, but slower traffic that needs to exit on a left exit can disrupt that fast flow of traffic.

And some people think they need to slow down to 50 mph 1/4 to 1/2 mile before the exit!