# Civic Matters > Ask Anything About OKC >  I-35 in OKC

## traxx

Didn't know where else to put this or where it fit, so I put it here.

A lot of what people see of our city is what they see when they pass through on I-40 and I-35. At least on I-40 they can see downtown and if the park and everything else comes to fruition then the view from I-40 will only get better.

But those traveling north and south through the city don't really get a feel for our city and downtown. I-35 south of I-40 is mostly industrial. Then you take a jog on I-40 to north I-35 before you get to downtown. And north I-35 is mostly barren and industrial too. I think it's better than it is south of I-40 but there's still not a lot that promotes OKC. You get to see Frontier City but that's about it. 

I don't know what the answer is but I don't think we're putting our best foot forward with the view from I-35.

----------


## MagzOK

Yes, I've always thought it was ugly.  I travel to Dallas frequently and wonder each time why OKC doesn't approach ODOT and somehow make 35 more aesthetically pleasing with new signage, maybe new sign posts like the bent ones they're using near the new I44/BWX interchange.  Maybe even paint the concrete/bridges or just something.  It's so barren and full of, well, concrete.

----------


## Zuplar

A couple of years ago when I drove out to Palm Springs I noticed how nice I40 was in Albuquerque. They have quite a bit of LED lighting under the overpasses and it's really pretty neat. Very simple, can't possible cost much to maintain, and something memorable about ABQ I remember. 

Basically imagine the pedestrian bridge on 40 lit up, but every major overpass.

----------


## bradh

It's pretty hideous.  I transferred here from DFW in 2009 and my only perception of OKC when I got the call to move was what we saw when we drove I-35 from DFW to Wichita to see my inlaws, which was frequent.

----------


## traxx

> It's pretty hideous.  I transferred here from DFW in 2009 and my only perception of OKC when I got the call to move was what we saw when we drove I-35 from DFW to Wichita to see my inlaws, which was frequent.


Yep. This is exactly the path I'm talking about. And how a lot of people see OKC.

I know businesses in similar fields tend to follow closely with each other. Maybe if we could get one business (that didn't want to be downtown anyway) to build a nice campus on north I-35 then others would follow suit. Kind of like the medical facilities on Broadway Extension. Those are nice looking buildings.

----------


## rte66man

> It's pretty hideous.  I transferred here from DFW in 2009 and my only perception of OKC when I got the call to move was what we saw when we drove I-35 from DFW to Wichita to see my inlaws, which was frequent.


My impression of Dallas would suck if I based it on 35E between Denton and Dallas even before all the construction.  I think that 35 between 240 and 40 is a lost cause EXCEPT for the view northbound right after you pass under SE 15th.  That makes up for all the rest of the ugliness in my book.

----------


## bradh

At least on 35E you have Lake Lewisville, Downtown Dallas, and...well that's it lol

----------


## d-usa

I think I-35 is slowly coming along:

- The Skydance Bridge
- Oklahoma Riverfront & Whitewater Center
- Improving Downtown Skyline
- Wheeler District
- Native American Cultural Center (at some point, I hope)

Areas I think could be improved and become potential focal points in the future:

- Crossroads Mall area (maybe there will be better development after that interchange gets fixed)
- Adventure District
- Covell

----------


## Teo9969

> I think I-35 is slowly coming along:
> 
> - The Skydance Bridge
> - Oklahoma Riverfront & Whitewater Center
> - Improving Downtown Skyline
> - Wheeler District
> - Native American Cultural Center (at some point, I hope)
> 
> Areas I think could be improved and become potential focal points in the future:
> ...


Most of your first list is I-40

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I-35 through Norman, Norman, and Moore are pretty. I-35 needs to be 10 laned from downtown OKC to Norman and hopefully some of the surrounding development within the OKC portion can be completely redone. It would be nice to see I-35 bridge over the OKC river be rebuilt into a massive new bridge and a true mix master built into the I-35/235/I-40 interchange with elevated bridges connecting I-35 directly without even having to get on I-40. ODOT needs to spend about half a billion or so on that but given how they can barely fund current projects, I don't see that happening without some big initiative taken and as traffic isn't that horrible right now that initiative probably won't be there for some time.

I-35 is going to be reconstructed as part of ODOT's 8yr plan between I-44 and I-40 and widened to six lanes so hopefully we will see some nice investment in that area. They are also adding capacity on I-35 over the Oklahoma River a couple miles to the south I believe in 2021 or something. I would at least like a lane each way to be added for a HOT lane as opposed to HOV lane where it is tolled for single riders during rush hours and free for HOV and then becomes a regular lane the rest of the time. They could also use that to help fund light-rail to Norman and the airport.

As far as any other projects currently in the works or on ACOG's agenda is widening I-35 from Norman to Goldsby to six lanes and I-35 in North Edmond to from 2nd St. to Waterloo and eventually to Stillwater  to six lanes though none of those projects are funded. Keep in mind those are just widenings and don't really show whether or not they will have anything to enhance the look of the area though wider highways are generally associated with larger cities and might impress passerby's.

The Norman project will look really cool once they get that finished as will the 240/35 interchange. 

I do wish they'd stop industrial sprawl out on I-35 in east OKC as there are plenty of other spots that can go to and let suburban residential sprawl fill up as it would look nicer.

I have noticed a lot of the smaller cities seem to not look so great from the interstates with the exception of Albuquerque, Nashville, and St. Louis. Memphis and Tulsa are much, much worse looking except for I-44 through Tulsa which has one spot which I think takes the cake for the best urban freeway in Oklahoma though that will change as I think the Kilpatrick, I-44, and I-35 in OKC are transformed through the next decade in terms of highway construction and private development alongside the freeways.

----------


## d-usa

> Most of your first list is I-40


Skydance bridge is visible from I-35, as is the entire downtown area.
You are physically driving on I-35 for everything else on that list, including the section shared with I-40.

----------


## KayneMo

I think the view from I-35 between the Kilpatrick and I-40 is quite nice due to the woodlands and topography. I-35 between I-40 and about 27th St in Moore, however, could use a bit of beautification and redevelopment. I-44 is my favorite freeway to view OKC from.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

We could have a full loop around the city like a Kansas City and divert a lot of traffic--a majority of which would not care about the views. While you do mention the industrial sections of I-35, I-40 has plenty of industrial business along it as well. 

As for the park, you're not going to be able to see that from I-40 since it will be up and behind the retaining walls surrounding both sides of the interstate.

My only concern with I-35 is widening that last stretch between I-44 and NE 23rd.

----------


## stile99

> We could have a full loop around the city like a Kansas City and divert a lot of traffic.


Theoretically that was the ultimate goal of the Kilpatrick, and look where we are with that.  The Southwest part is going to be completely messed up, and the East part is 'controversial', to put it mildly.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

> Theoretically that was the ultimate goal of the Kilpatrick, and look where we are with that.  The Southwest part is going to be completely messed up, and the East part is 'controversial', to put it mildly.


Word.

----------


## baralheia

> Skydance bridge is visible from I-35, as is the entire downtown area.
> You are physically driving on I-35 for everything else on that list, including the section shared with I-40.


Honestly, the Skydance Bridge is not very visible from I-35. It sits a mile and a half west of I-35, and it's pretty hard to tell what it is from that vantage point if you're not familiar with it. Similarly, Wheeler District is two and a quarter miles west of I-35 and is not visible at all from that vantage point. That said, I do agree that the downtown skyline view is fairly good and constantly getting better too, and the boathouse district looks pretty cool from the highway too.

----------


## Zuplar

Found a picture of the simple lighting ABQ does on I40 that I think has a nice look, especially at night and early morning.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Found a picture of the simple lighting ABQ does on I40 that I think has a nice look, especially at night and early morning.


That looks awesome!

----------


## rte66man

> Found a picture of the simple lighting ABQ does on I40 that I think has a nice look, especially at night and early morning.


Won't work here in OK as ODOT can't even keep the overhead illumination going.  I can't imaging how many of those bridge lights would go out in a month and not be replaced.  For example, the high mast lighting at I44 and Lincoln has been out (mostly) for 15 years!

----------


## MagzOK

> Won't work here in OK as ODOT can't even keep the overhead illumination going.  I can't imaging how many of those bridge lights would go out in a month and not be replaced.  For example, the high mast lighting at I44 and Lincoln has been out (mostly) for 15 years!


OG&E handles all the lighting after it's built, just FYI.  But yes it's always dark over there at night.

----------


## HangryHippo

What is the reason why ODOT doesn't manage the lighting?

----------


## traxx

> I think I-35 is slowly coming along:
> 
> - The Skydance Bridge - Can barely be seen from I-35 even if you know what you're looking for.
> - Oklahoma Riverfront & Whitewater Center- Can be seen but not as well as from I-40.
> - Improving Downtown Skyline - Can be seen but not the same kind of impact you get from say I-235 near the Sheridan exit.
> - Wheeler District - Cannot be seen from I-35.
> - Native American Cultural Center (at some point, I hope) - Maybe...someday. But right now not much more than a pile of dirt.
> 
> Areas I think could be improved and become potential focal points in the future:
> ...


Look at Google streetview at the point before you have to veer off to the east to continue on I-35. From that vantage point you don't get a good idea of what's going on in OKC. The view from 35 doesn't make that much or that good of an impact. I-35 is not OKC putting it's best foot forward to people passing through. From I-35 there's just not much that would make people passing through want to stop, see what's happening in OKC, and stay awhile.

----------


## MagzOK

> What is the reason why ODOT doesn't manage the lighting?


I'm not totally sure, but anytime you call to report a light out you're routed to OG&E unless you get someone nice enough to just take the info and tell you they'll pass it along to them.

----------


## traxx

> You are physically driving on I-35 for everything else on that list, including the section shared with I-40.


Where do you think I-35 is?

----------


## d-usa

For some reason I had the location of the Wheeler District in the same spot as the cultural center when I was trying to visualize driving the shared I-40/I-35 stretch. I don't know what I was thinking there.

----------


## Zuplar

> Won't work here in OK as ODOT can't even keep the overhead illumination going.  I can't imaging how many of those bridge lights would go out in a month and not be replaced.  For example, the high mast lighting at I44 and Lincoln has been out (mostly) for 15 years!


This is why we can't have nice things.

----------


## Teo9969

> Won't work here in OK as ODOT can't even keep the overhead illumination going.  I can't imaging how many of those bridge lights would go out in a month and not be replaced.  For example, the high mast lighting at I44 and Lincoln has been out (mostly) for 15 years!


Wouldn't something like overhead illumination be much more susceptible to all sorts of crappy weather that blasts through OK and cause those things to function improperly? At the very least under bridge lighting would be easier to maintain than high mast lighting.

----------


## baralheia

I'm not entirely sure, but I kinda think that OG&E only replaces light bulbs when they're called out. Nearly all of the under bridge lighting on I-240 from Shields to May was burnt out for at least a year... OG&E fixed it all a day after I called. There are many, many other areas where lighting is dead and nothing seems to happen unless a local resident calls OG&E. I guess they're only responsible for maintenance, not for inspection.

----------


## rte66man

> I'm not entirely sure, but I kinda think that OG&E only replaces light bulbs when they're called out. Nearly all of the under bridge lighting on I-240 from Shields to May was burnt out for at least a year... OG&E fixed it all a day after I called. There are many, many other areas where lighting is dead and nothing seems to happen unless a local resident calls OG&E. I guess they're only responsible for maintenance, not for inspection.


You are correct.  Last week I spoke to my mole inside ODOT about the poor status of the overhead illumination. He said exactly what you surmised.  OG&E only fixes it if someone calls or emails them about an outage.

----------


## baralheia

That's kind of infuriating. If OG&E is contractually obligated to maintain the lighting, they really should have an inspector that travels around specifically to look for dead lighting.

You can e-mail them about a street light outage? That would be super useful to have, as I have a long list of spots that need lighting repairs, and doing it over the phone takes a lot of time because they want to write a ticket for each one with you on the line. Is that e-mail address something that you would be able to share?

----------


## SOONER8693

Is OG&E responsible for the entire state? The reason I ask is this. I have to take my wife, flight attendant for United, to or pick her up occassionaly from Tulsa airport. In most cases it is late at night or very early morning. The same situation exists on the Tulsa highways. Hundreds, maybe thousands of lights not working. Really makes for a dangerous situation in many cases.

----------


## Bunty

> That's kind of infuriating. If OG&E is contractually obligated to maintain the lighting, they really should have an inspector that travels around specifically to look for dead lighting.


If everybody at OG&E gets off work at 5pm, then nobody is in any position to check the lights.

----------


## traxx

I never would've thought to call OG&E because I would've thought it fell under ODOT's responsibility. Also, shouldn't outages and such be fairly easy to monitor via computer? I wouldn't think that someone would have to physically drive around Oklahoma to see where street lights are out or need replacing.

----------


## Bullbear

> Is OG&E responsible for the entire state? The reason I ask is this. I have to take my wife, flight attendant for United, to or pick her up occassionaly from Tulsa airport. In most cases it is late at night or very early morning. The same situation exists on the Tulsa highways. Hundreds, maybe thousands of lights not working. Really makes for a dangerous situation in many cases.


Was in Tulsa for Oktoberfest Saturday night, the highways around downtown are mostly Dark and dangerous and this is at 10pm. It was so odd. I searched the internet for answers the next day because I wondered why on earth. Turns out they have been crippled with Copper theft. they are saying it could take them up to 6 months to get them operational again.

----------


## stile99

> I never would've thought to call OG&E because I would've thought it fell under ODOT's responsibility. Also, shouldn't outages and such be fairly easy to monitor via computer? I wouldn't think that someone would have to physically drive around Oklahoma to see where street lights are out or need replacing.


Very few light bulbs have the ability to report when they have burned out, and the very few that have that ability are not used in streetlights because as one might expect, they cost considerably more than just a standard bulb.  It's not like reporting a streetlight is out is even close to difficult, and OG&E isn't going to send someone out cruising just to see if any have gone out.  Nobody suggesting they do so really wants to pay the increased rates to pay the people doing this, pay for the truck they are driving, and pay for the gas they are using.

----------


## TheTravellers

> Very few light bulbs have the ability to report when they have burned out, and the very few that have that ability are not used in streetlights because as one might expect, they cost considerably more than just a standard bulb.  It's not like reporting a streetlight is out is even close to difficult, and OG&E isn't going to send someone out cruising just to see if any have gone out.  Nobody suggesting they do so really wants to pay the increased rates to pay the people doing this, pay for the truck they are driving, and pay for the gas they are using.


It actually is kind of difficult, as baralheia said, and I've experienced that too - it just takes too long to try to get a person on the phone, then explain it's a streetlight, location, etc.

The cities do that kind of drive-by for burned-out traffic lights, potholes, signs, etc., don't they?  So why can't OG&E send someone out at night once a week to drive certain parts of the city, rotating every week so the city gets covered in a certain amount of weeks?  I'm pretty sure there's someone on the night shift at some OG&E location somewhere that's not completely occupied every single minute of their shift that could have that added to their job description and it wouldn't cost that much so as to result in a rate increase (although I'd bet OG&E would try to get an increase).

----------


## baralheia

> Very few light bulbs have the ability to report when they have burned out, and the very few that have that ability are not used in streetlights because as one might expect, they cost considerably more than just a standard bulb.  It's not like reporting a streetlight is out is even close to difficult, and OG&E isn't going to send someone out cruising just to see if any have gone out.  Nobody suggesting they do so really wants to pay the increased rates to pay the people doing this, pay for the truck they are driving, and pay for the gas they are using.


Spread across the entire customer base, the cost to have a few employees do a drive-by inspection on a semi-regular basis would be next to nothing. I'd happily pay that tiny fraction extra to make that happen. Either OG&E, ODOT, or the City really should be doing this; it reflects badly on OKC (and to a lesser extent, ODOT) for so much street and highway lighting to be inoperative.

----------


## stile99

> The cities do that kind of drive-by for burned-out traffic lights, potholes, signs, etc., don't they?


Nope.  They rely on reports for that.  That's why OKC and many other cities have an app, and/or a section on the city website to report it.  Check it out, okc.gov has a large friendly box that says "Report it'.  Once there you can report everything you mentioned, traffic lights, potholes, signs, and even the etc.  It does refer you to OG&E's number for the street lights, because as mentioned, that's on OG&E.  If you want a more convenient way to report it (email, text message, web form) then that suggestion would also go to OG&E.  The City of Edmond website has a section as well.  Under "How Do I?", choose "Report a Concern" and again, exactly what you mention is there.  Traffic lights, potholes, signs, and many other concerns as well...including street lights, Edmond not being OKC.  Norman's website has it as well.  So does Moore.  So does Yukon.  The fact is cities are NOT going to pay people to do this, they have outsourced it to citizens, and while one or two people might claim they would be more than happy to pay a couple more dimes to make it happen, if you actually ran a poll and asked people if they would pay an extra quarter per month on their trash bill to have someone drive around reporting lights out, the overwhelming response would be no.  

And before anyone says "Well, the meter readers and the cops and the mayor and X and Y and Z could do it", yes.  You're right.  I'm not going to argue that, they could.  And so could you.  Like it or not, the city has decided it is going to be you.

----------


## TheTravellers

^^^  Good to know, I haven't been using the city website much because it's sucked horribly and been less than useful in the past, haven't used the new one much, will have to go through it to see how much less it sucks.  :Smile:   Not sure if the "Report It" was there in the old design, I never noticed it, but I'll check it out.  And I hope they pay attention to the reports, not just blackhole them like happens so many times in the "contact us" sections of websites.

----------


## baralheia

> ^^^  Good to know, I haven't been using the city website much because it's sucked horribly and been less than useful in the past, haven't used the new one much, will have to go through it to see how much less it sucks.   Not sure if the "Report It" was there in the old design, I never noticed it, but I'll check it out.  And I hope they pay attention to the reports, not just blackhole them like happens so many times in the "contact us" sections of websites.


The City of OKC's Action Center, where you can report issues, is actually really well run. I've reported numerous issues before and had some sort of response within a day or two each time. Good stuff. They also have an app for Android and iOS called "OKC Connect" that lets you report issues via your smartphone, and it works quite well too. The only frustrating part is there's no easy method for reporting a bunch of streetlights that need repairs because of how long the process takes over the phone with OG&E, and they only take calls from 8am to 5pm. OG&E does at least fix the reported issues pretty quickly though.

----------


## traxx

> Nope.  They rely on reports for that.  That's why OKC and many other cities have an app, and/or a section on the city website to report it.  Check it out, okc.gov has a large friendly box that says "Report it'.  Once there you can report everything you mentioned, traffic lights, potholes, signs, and even the etc.  It does refer you to OG&E's number for the street lights, because as mentioned, that's on OG&E.  If you want a more convenient way to report it (email, text message, web form) then that suggestion would also go to OG&E.  The City of Edmond website has a section as well.  Under "How Do I?", choose "Report a Concern" and again, exactly what you mention is there.  Traffic lights, potholes, signs, and many other concerns as well...including street lights, Edmond not being OKC.  Norman's website has it as well.  So does Moore.  So does Yukon.  The fact is cities are NOT going to pay people to do this, they have outsourced it to citizens, and while one or two people might claim they would be more than happy to pay a couple more dimes to make it happen, if you actually ran a poll and asked people if they would pay an extra quarter per month on their trash bill to have someone drive around reporting lights out, the overwhelming response would be no.  
> 
> And before anyone says "Well, the meter readers and the cops and the mayor and X and Y and Z could do it", yes.  You're right.  I'm not going to argue that, they could.  And so could you.  Like it or not, the city has decided it is going to be you.


I went to OKC.gov and clicked report it and here's what I got:



> Use this Online Service Request to report non-emergency code violations, such as high weeds, abandoned vehicles or other neighborhood problems.


It's not really a code violation so I'm not sure it fits. And I don't think average, Joe citizen knows that OG&E is responsible for replacing and or fixing street lights. I believe that most people think it's a city thing. 

Also, in my earlier post, I didn't mean that they should have light bulbs that report when they're burned out. Someone had mentioned about when whole sections of street lights were out and that would seem to be a circuit problem. I would think that that kind of thing would be managed via computer monitoring and thus would be reported via computer monitoring instead of a citizen having to call up.

----------


## stile99

> I went to OKC.gov and clicked report it and here's what I got:
> 
> It's not really a code violation so I'm not sure it fits. And I don't think average, Joe citizen knows that OG&E is responsible for replacing and or fixing street lights. I believe that most people think it's a city thing.


Go back and try again, choosing the New Service Request button.  There is a dropdown box to choose the type of report.  "Streets/traffic lights/drainage is indeed an option, and then the subtype dropdown box is active.  Several options are available, including traffic signal malfunction and traffic light timing, pothole, and street marker/traffic sign down, damaged, or missing.  And many other options in that subtype field alone, nevermind the almost two dozen other main options (including 'other' which itself has almost a dozen subtypes), which I think more than fulfills the 'etc' requirement.

And again, using that form and choosing OG&E and then OG&E street light outage does indeed inform Joe Citizen that it is not a city thing and gives him the correct contact info.  You can even report issues with Cox Cable.  OG&E is absolutely OG&E's issue, and it really isn't difficult to see why this is.  You may THINK it is a city issue, but it simply isn't.  You may THINK the city would be able to take the report, but if you have any experience with unions, any at all, you know that the first commandment is Thou Shalt Stay The Hell Our Of Our Baliwick.  The second commandment is We're Not Kidding Buzz Off, and the third is If You Ask One More Time We're Filing A Grievance.  Cox has no union preventing the city from taking reports, so the option is there.

----------


## rte66man

> Go back and try again, choosing the New Service Request button.  There is a dropdown box to choose the type of report.  "Streets/traffic lights/drainage is indeed an option, and then the subtype dropdown box is active.  Several options are available, including traffic signal malfunction and traffic light timing, pothole, and street marker/traffic sign down, damaged, or missing.  And many other options in that subtype field alone, nevermind the almost two dozen other main options (including 'other' which itself has almost a dozen subtypes), which I think more than fulfills the 'etc' requirement.
> 
> And again, using that form and choosing OG&E and then OG&E street light outage does indeed inform Joe Citizen that it is not a city thing and gives him the correct contact info.  You can even report issues with Cox Cable.  OG&E is absolutely OG&E's issue, and it really isn't difficult to see why this is.  You may THINK it is a city issue, but it simply isn't.  You may THINK the city would be able to take the report, but if you have any experience with unions, any at all, you know that the first commandment is Thou Shalt Stay The Hell Our Of Our Baliwick.  The second commandment is We're Not Kidding Buzz Off, and the third is If You Ask One More Time We're Filing A Grievance.  Cox has no union preventing the city from taking reports, so the option is there.


I always wondered why there was a difference.  Thanks for the explanation.

----------


## traxx

It's going to take out of the box thinking to beautify I-35. Since this is a site for discussion, we can spitball all kinds of thoughts and ideas here.

----------


## baralheia

One last post on electronically submitting repair requests for lighting to OG&E: I contacted customer service and they said that you can e-mail them a list of streetlights needing repairs and, once they've created the repair tickets, they'll e-mail you back with the ticket numbers. The e-mail they said to use is CUSTCAREDEPT@oge.com.

----------


## traxx

Another thing about the appearance of our city is how dark it looks at night. I was driving north on 235 last night and noticed how dark downtown and the surrounding areas looked. I don't know what the solution is, but having the city more lit up would make it appear more lively as well.

----------


## zefferoni

> Is OG&E responsible for the entire state? The reason I ask is this. I have to take my wife, flight attendant for United, to or pick her up occassionaly from Tulsa airport. In most cases it is late at night or very early morning. The same situation exists on the Tulsa highways. Hundreds, maybe thousands of lights not working. Really makes for a dangerous situation in many cases.


Tulsa area would be PSO/AEP or one of the electric coops.

----------


## rte66man

> One last post on electronically submitting repair requests for lighting to OG&E: I contacted customer service and they said that you can e-mail them a list of streetlights needing repairs and, once they've created the repair tickets, they'll e-mail you back with the ticket numbers. The e-mail they said to use is CUSTCAREDEPT@oge.com.


Just sent them a request to fix the lights at I-44 and Lincoln.  I'll post the results when I get them.

----------


## rte66man

The reply I got:

We sent work order 900808182 regarding your request below. Also, in the future and to better assist you, if you could submit your phone number in addition to your request, this would assist our service crews in contacting you if there are any questions. 

Thanks,
OGE  Online Services 

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

Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 6:22 PM
To: CUST CARE DEPT
Subject: Streetlight Outages

The following streetlights are out:

I-44 eastbound (south side) between I235 and Lincoln Blvd.
High mast lights at I44 and Lincoln.  The 2 masts on Lincoln are 3-light assemblies.  Only one of the lights on each are working.

----------


## traxx

Well I'm so glad that this thread has quickly derailed into 'how to report burnt out lights' instead of how to make the view from the interstate more appealing. Mind you that plenty of interstate travelers come through in the daytime as well.

----------


## rte66man

> Well I'm so glad that this thread has quickly derailed into 'how to report burnt out lights' instead of how to make the view from the interstate more appealing. Mind you that plenty of interstate travelers come through in the daytime as well.


I always thought one of the the first steps should be to ensure the entryways were well-lit.  Didn't mean to derail anything.

----------


## traxx

> I always thought one of the the first steps should be to ensure the entryways were well-lit.  Didn't mean to derail anything.


You're fine.

I also think it should be well lit. Once it's well lit and you can see things, what do we do about what people see? A lot of what's along I-35 is industrial. I don't think it looks appealing and doesn't entice people passing through to stop off in OKC.

----------


## rte66man

> You're fine.
> 
> I also think it should be well lit. Once it's well lit and you can see things, what do we do about what people see? A lot of what's along I-35 is industrial. I don't think it looks appealing and doesn't entice people passing through to stop off in OKC.


Too true.  IMO ODOT should concentrate on the northbound approach on I-35.  When you come out of the underpass forSE 15th, the view of downtown is breathtaking.  Just don't look right to the AICC.  At least until it gets finished.  But that is already on another thread.

----------


## traxx

In that section you speak of, ODOT needs to go from the old truss structure for the street signs to the new style. This will clear up a lot of visual clutter.

----------


## Scott5114

^I don't know that the sign gantries are really a good place to spend beautification money. After all, pretty much every state uses truss gantries, including Texas, California, and New York. People aren't going to judge us by our gantries. Besides, it's personal preference. I don't like the monotube gantries because they look weak and unsubstantial. I always feel like the signs are going to slip off of them. That's just an aesthetic feeling, though—I know full well the gantries are engineered to be just as reliable as the truss type. If anything, I'd prefer using a slightly lower-profile truss design similar to the box gantry that Kansas uses.

One of the things this stretch of I-35 has going against it was that it was reconstructed in the 90s and early 2000s. That falls in the time period where it's too recent to justify upgrades but too far back to see the kind of aesthetic work that we now see on Interstates, like we do on I-40, I-35 through Norman, etc. There's also the problem that south OKC close into I-35 is simply not very visually distinct. That is going to be more of a problem to solve, since what are you going to do, buy out all the machine shops and banks and motels alongside it and build something nicer looking?

----------


## traxx

I think the monotube looks more substantial and strong than the truss type. Just a difference of opinion I suppose. I also don't know that a significant amount of money should be spent on changing that either, my thought was just that it could clear up the clutter and view of DT from I-35.

The second part of your post was more what I was addressing in the first place. It's more about what's built along I-35 than the actual road itself. And your question of 'what are you going to do' is what was at the heart of my OP. That's why I said it would take thinking outside the box. Buying out the owners of those buildings and putting something nicer looking there instead isn't a realistic solution. That's why I wanted to discuss it and get other people's takes and ideas. Not that any of us have the wherewithal to make any changes but I just wanted to discuss ideas since this is a discussion board.

----------


## KayneMo

In regards to I-35 between I-240 and I-40, I would love to see that whole corridor redeveloped have offices and high-density residential, similar to North Central Expressway in Dallas (US 75), from downtown to LBJ.

When I-35 was built in OKC, it was on the east side of the city through mostly undeveloped land. After completion, I assume that is when industry moved in and was built along the corridor between 40 and 240 because it was open land and had easy access to and from the freeway. That whole corridor would first to need to be rezoned from Industrial to high-density Commercial and high-density Residential.

----------


## Scott5114

> I think the monotube looks more substantial and strong than the truss type. Just a difference of opinion I suppose. I also don't know that a significant amount of money should be spent on changing that either, my thought was just that it could clear up the clutter and view of DT from I-35.


It would take a decent chunk of change to do, in any case. I don't know about the monotubes but I've heard the trusses quoted as being $20,000 a pop, not counting the signs attached. Probably not a good use of money when the trusses remain well within their expected service life. (California has some trusses in service that were put up in the 1950s.)

----------


## traxx

Driving up 235 the other day I think this is one of the most impressive views of OKC currently. I know it doesn't look it on google maps but if you actually drive it, it makes OKC look fairly dense and impressive considering what it used to look like. As I stated before in this thread, most people travelling through are not going to see this view.

----------


## _Kyle

Ughhhhh I hate OG&E and ODOT

----------


## traxx

Again, not really an OG&E/ODOT thread and I kinda hate that this thread got derailed by all those posts. That pretty much killed this thread. I think originally we were having some good discussion of thoughts on how to beautify our city to those passing through on I-35 but got derailed by the how to report non-working street lights posts.

----------


## macfoucin

Lighting situation or lack thereof is relevant and is an important part of how the metro appears to outsiders travelling thru. On an unrelated topic, the Chelios Diner sign near SE 15th street has always bugged me.  It looks very "homemade".

----------

