# Civic Matters > Ask Anything About OKC >  BEWARE!!! Crosstown Blvd Speedtrap

## metro405

All drivers that use Crosstown Blvd. and you know who you are beware of the speed trap from 65- 45 mph instantly.....OCPD's new fave hangout you have been warned

----------


## rezman

I thought that large of a drop was illegal, and that speed was supposed to be stepped down in  increments, ... say  65-55-45-35, or something similar.

----------


## TheTravellers

Hmmm, be nice if we had a thread about known speed traps, but that's probably not something Pete would like to be on here...

----------


## Roger S

Odd.... I drive through there regularly and I've never been trapped.... Guess paying attention to speed limit signs helps.... Seems to be a foreign concept to too many drivers.

----------


## metro405

> I thought that large of a drop was illegal, and that speed was supposed to be stepped down in  increments, ... say  65-55-45-35, or something similar.


Yes I agree from 65-55 mph would be acceptable

----------


## kevinpate

where is this at on the crosstown? And, is it construction based, rather than a trap?

----------


## hfry

I've drove the crosstown everyday for the past two years on my way to Norman and never knew it went down to 45? I was also under the impression it was 60 the whole way through? I did however notice 4 motorcycle cops there on Tuesday working east bound by shields.

----------


## venture

Pay attention to "reduce speed ahead" signs and you'll be fine. Ignore it, then pay up.

----------


## BrettM2

> I've drove the crosstown everyday for the past two years on my way to Norman and never knew it went down to 45? I was also under the impression it was 60 the whole way through? I did however notice 4 motorcycle cops there on Tuesday working east bound by shields.


I think he means the new Boulevard connections and not the actual interstate.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> Hmmm, be nice if we had a thread about known speed traps, but that's probably not something Pete would like to be on here...


Can't understand why he would not. It is not illegal or vulgar and it is keeping us informed. You're not implying that Pete is in favor of speed traps are you?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Pay attention to "reduce speed ahead" signs and you'll be fine. Ignore it, then pay up.


Or they could do the logical thing and not have the speeds limited to 45mph on a four to six lane evelated highway with 9ft. Lanes.

----------


## hfry

That makes much more sense! Haha I obliviously read to fast. Thanks!

----------


## BoulderSooner

Don't speed on broadway north 13th.  Unless you would like a ticket

----------


## BrettM2

> Or they could do the logical thing and not have the speeds limited to 45mph on a four to six lane evelated highway with 9ft. Lanes.


The logical thing is to follow the posted speed limit.  It doesn't matter how many lanes or how wide, the limit is the limit.  (I'm well aware how road set up influences the feeling of how fast you should go but that is actually irrelevant because the speed limit is the law.)

----------


## Martin

> Don't speed on broadway north 13th.  Unless you would like a ticket


isn't that stretch posted at some ridiculous limit like 35? -M

----------


## Snowman

> All drivers that use Crosstown Blvd. and you know who you are beware of the speed trap from 65- 45 mph instantly.....OCPD's new fave hangout you have been warned





> I thought that large of a drop was illegal, and that speed was supposed to be stepped down in increments, ... say 65-55-45-35, or something similar.


The speed limit on the crosstown freeway is 60 (granted most people are driving 65 to 70), which drops to 50 on the ramp between the freeway and boulevard, then drops to 45.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> The logical thing is to follow the posted speed limit.  It doesn't matter how many lanes or how wide, the limit is the limit.  (I'm well aware how road set up influences the feeling of how fast you should go but that is actually irrelevant because the speed limit is the law.)


That's entrapment than. We pay for the roads and to have them set a speed limit that is unreasonable and to just accept it and move on is ridiculous. I'm not saying we all need to go out there and speed, but the city or whoever needs to either up the limit or demolish the road and build it as an urban BLVD. that would actually require lower speeds. I be the only reason ODOT put the speeds that low is so people couldn't say it's a high-speed freeway through downtown.

That road as it is should be 65MPH all the way to Blackwelder Ave. then drop to 55MPH to Klein then drop to 45 after Classen then drop to 35MPH after Shartel and then drop to 30MPH after Walker that is the slowest it should be in my opinion. I'm sure others will jump(or would have if I didn't point this out) that it's just my driving record and blah blah, but I am looking at this from a logic standpoint.

Having a wide, elevated, limited access highway at 45MPH is entrapment. Simple as that. I don't even use the BLVD., so I'm not biased here, just speaking from my perspective.

BTW, when the BLVD. first opened, I would go there every once in awhile with some friends that had some higher end cars and we would fly down that sucker in the middle of the night when there was no traffic, so I know that BLVD. can handle higher speeds. Granted the speeds shouldn't be anywhere close to how we were going, but I do know they should be 10-20 MPH faster than what they are now.

But you are right, the law is the law and I'm not arguing with that. I'm arguing that there needs to be a change. However this state already has extremely low speed limits on most of the streets and actually has higher speed limits on certain streets where I think they should actually be lower, so I'm probably just wasting my time here.

----------


## Snowman

> That's entrapment than. We pay for the roads and to have them set a speed limit that is unreasonable and to just accept it and move on is ridiculous. I'm not saying we all need to go out there and speed, but the city or whoever needs to either up the limit or demolish the road and build it as an urban BLVD. that would actually require lower speeds. I be the only reason ODOT put the speeds that low is so people couldn't say it's a high-speed freeway through downtown.
> 
> That road as it is should be 65MPH all the way to Blackwelder Ave. then drop to 55MPH to Klein then drop to 45 after Classen then drop to 35MPH after Shartel and then drop to 30MPH after Walker that is the slowest it should be in my opinion. I'm sure others will jump(or would have if I didn't point this out) that it's just my driving record and blah blah, but I am looking at this from a logic standpoint.
> 
> Having a wide, elevated, limited access highway at 45MPH is entrapment. Simple as that. I don't even use the BLVD., so I'm not biased here, just speaking from my perspective.
> 
> BTW, when the BLVD. first opened, I would go there every once in awhile with some friends that had some higher end cars and we would fly down that sucker in the middle of the night when there was no traffic, so I know that BLVD. can handle higher speeds. Granted the speeds shouldn't be anywhere close to how we were going, but I do know they should be 10-20 MPH faster than what they are now.
> 
> But you are right, the law is the law and I'm not arguing with that. I'm arguing that there needs to be a change. However this state already has extremely low speed limits on most of the streets and actually has higher speed limits on certain streets where I think they should actually be lower, so I'm probably just wasting my time here.


Pretty much sums up how non-freeway highways are designed, they know people will speed and will not even get down to 5 - 10 miles over it hundreds of feet past the signs, so that is what you end up with. 

It also reminds me of some of the problems about letting state DOTs controlling the design of main streets. A street is to serve pedestrians, bikes, cars, trucks and promote development of buildings on either side; a road is to promote driving long distances from one place to another; what DOTs end up is shoehorning in a poor mix of the two that do neither well.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Pretty much sums up how non-freeway highways are designed, they know people will speed and will not even get down to 5 - 10 miles over it hundreds of feet past the signs, so that is what you end up with. 
> 
> It also reminds me of some of the problems about letting state DOTs controlling the design of main streets. A street is to serve pedestrians, bikes, cars, trucks and promote development of buildings on either side; a road is to promote driving long distances from one place to another; what DOTs end up is shoehorning in a poor mix of the two that do neither well.


Yeah. I think every department should work with each other when 'their' projects come in contact with each other, but I think ODOT should be relieved of its duties when it comes to controlling rail. The cities should control the streets, ODOT builds highways and controls waterways, and a new division for rail is established.

----------


## Urbanized

Glad I got the go-to-jail speeds on my motorcycle on that stretch out of my system already. It was pretty open and inviting for a while...

----------


## AP

> Or they could do the logical thing and not have the speeds limited to 45mph on a four to six lane evelated highway with 9ft. Lanes.


I think you are thinking of I-40. I think the OP is talking about the western part of the new boulevard.

----------


## Spartan

> Or they could do the logical thing and not have the speeds limited to 45mph on a four to six lane evelated highway with 9ft. Lanes.


Naturally, I mean this is our prized Boulevard de Oklahoma City we are talking about, you should be able to drive 60 meaning 75.

----------


## Buffalo Bill

> isn't that stretch posted at some ridiculous limit like 35? -M


Re: Broadway north of 13th. 

Worse. It's 30. Northbound you have to ride your brakes due to the hill just south of 16th Street. I know at least 6 people with tickets there. Oklahoma County Sheriffs hang out in the renovation statio parking lot in unmarked cars.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I think you are thinking of I-40. I think the OP is talking about the western part of the new boulevard.


I-40 is ten lanes. I'm talking about the BLVD. the very Western part of the BLVD. that is already there.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Naturally, I mean this is our prized Boulevard de Oklahoma City we are talking about, you should be able to drive 60 meaning 75.


Well, most people don't go more than 10 over here, and that is a stretch. You can fly by people doing the speed limit in this city.

Take it as it is, but the BLVD. is there and that's what we have, so appropriate speeds need to be set.

----------


## betts

Speed limit is going to be 25 in the non-elevated portion.  Personally I'm hoping for speed bumps.  There will be a lot of potential pedestrians crossing the boulevard.  OKC must become a more pedestrian-friendly downtown.  This whole conversation illustrates why the boulevard was a disastrous idea.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

For reals Betts! The fact that anyone is surprised about a "speedtrap" here is no surprise at all for those of us who have been pushing for slower speed limits on the boulevard. To slow from 65 to 45 from the exit, and driving on the flyover ramp toward the old I-40 alignment, if you lay off the gas pedal on that exit only ramp, you'll easily be doing 40 by the time you hit the 45mph limit. Bravo for the speedtrap!

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> For reals Betts! The fact that anyone is surprised about a "speedtrap" here is no surprise at all for those of us who have been pushing for slower speed limits on the boulevard. To slow from 65 to 45 from the exit, and driving on the flyover ramp toward the old I-40 alignment, if you lay off the gas pedal on that exit only ramp, you'll easily be doing 40 by the time you hit the 45mph limit. Bravo for the speedtrap!


What is the point of having lower speeds on a street where no one is going to be walking? Seriously. Explain the point of that.

----------


## betts

Who said no one is going to be walking on the boulevard?  Or at least crossing it?  The park will undoubtedly have adjacent housing.  No one will be walking from there to school, Thunder games, to the Myriad Gardens, to downtown restaurants?  How about convention goers?  They will never be going to the park?  Or people attending events at the park won't be crossing the boulevard?  People drive down my street at 40-50 mph sometimes (all I've seen doing that under the age of 30) and I worry that a pedestrian will be hit.  How about a street with high pedestrian traffic?  OKC police can add to their coffers on the boulevard all they want as far as I'm concerned.  Teach drivers early that there are consequences to breaking the law there.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Who said no one is going to be walking on the boulevard?  Or at least crossing it?  The park will undoubtedly have adjacent housing.  No one will be walking from there to school, Thunder games, to the Myriad Gardens, to downtown restaurants?  How about convention goers?  They will never be going to the park?  Or people attending events at the park won't be crossing the boulevard?  People drive down my street at 40-50 mph sometimes (all I've seen doing that under the age of 30) and I worry that a pedestrian will be hit.  How about a street with high pedestrian traffic?  OKC police can add to their coffers on the boulevard all they want as far as I'm concerned.  Teach drivers early that there are consequences to breaking the law there.


Have you even been on the BLVD? There are no sidewalks. It isn't even at grade. ItsIt's elevated. No one is walking on it. It's a highway.

----------


## Urbanized

The problem is that it was built for 70 MPH speeds, but limited at 45. The lanes aren't 9 feet. More like 11 or 12. People don't (naturally) set their speeds based upon speed limit signs. They base it upon how fast the road FEELS. We respond instinctively to our built environment. DESIGN is the problem here; NOT the people who are intuitively responding to that design. It's a bait and switch.

----------


## jn1780

> Who said no one is going to be walking on the boulevard?  Or at least crossing it?  The park will undoubtedly have adjacent housing.  No one will be walking from there to school, Thunder games, to the Myriad Gardens, to downtown restaurants?  How about convention goers?  They will never be going to the park?  Or people attending events at the park won't be crossing the boulevard?  People drive down my street at 40-50 mph sometimes (all I've seen doing that under the age of 30) and I worry that a pedestrian will be hit.  How about a street with high pedestrian traffic?  OKC police can add to their coffers on the boulevard all they want as far as I'm concerned.  Teach drivers early that there are consequences to breaking the law there.


No one is going to be walking on the western half. It's a  a glorified ramp. Might as well be able to drive fast through this deserted  stretch of road until you actually get to the first intersection.

----------


## Urbanized

Part of the problem on the existing approaches is that they will encourage continued high speeds on the at-grade portion. An example of this effect is the people who fly off of I-235 and routinely hit Walnut, the Walnut Street bridge, and even (the ultra-wide) Mickey Mantle in Bricktown at 40-50 mph.

That's why the portion of the boulevard yet left to be designed SHOULD have narrowed lanes, wide sidewalks, protected bike lanes, street trees, parking lanes, and as many design cues as possible (BESIDES speed limit signs) to tell drivers to slow the eff down. But honestly, I wouldn't count on many of those, either.

----------


## Spartan

That would require this city to stand up to one of the most aggressive cabals of traffic engineers ever..




> Well, most people don't go more than 10 over here, and that is a stretch. You can fly by people doing the speed limit in this city.
> 
> Take it as it is, but the BLVD. is there and that's what we have, so appropriate speeds need to be set.


It's astounding because the way traffic engineers think is not the physical determinism that you outline. The approach is universally applied to linear infrastructure, like sewer lines and power lines, where you can improve and adjust flow and service levels accordingly. In other words, in theory a speed limit controls the flow of traffic on a roadway and will bring it down to a speed that works to meet the mitigation assurances ODOT has lined out in the EIS.

Traffic engineers should be empowered to draw specs and nothing more, particularly create policy, because they do not have policy backgrounds and the policies they tend to create resemble the same fragmented understanding of urban environments. Yesterday in Columbus our chief mobility engineer was just ran over on a street that I argued to him a month ago was too wide and fast. It's horrifying because as masses of people return to our downtowns, more people are going to die because our planning and traffic policies don't value pedestrians and bicyclists.

This boulevard is an epic fail, and this thread with people complaining about speeding tickets merely contributes a little more to the evidence. The state needs to reach some kind of agreement to stop doing damage to OKC.




> Have you even been on the BLVD? There are no sidewalks. It isn't even at grade. ItsIt's elevated. No one is walking on it. It's a highway.


We know. That's the problem. Use your brain.

----------


## Urbanized

Here are compelling numbers on mixing speed and pedestrians:

Effects of Speed on Pedestrian Fatality Rates




> Newton's laws dictate that a doubling in vehicle speed results in a stopping distance four times as long and four times as much kinetic energy absorbed during an impact. Driver response times further increase stopping distances. As a result, a small increase in roadway traffic speeds results in a disproportionately large increase in pedestrian fatalities...
> 
> ...Relationship of Vehicle Speed to Odds of Pedestrian Death in Collision
> 
> Vehicle Speed       Odds of Pedestrian Death
> 20 mph                  5%
> 30 mph.                 45%
> 40 mph.                 85%
> ...

----------


## Urbanized

The problem isn't the people speeding. The problem is the people who designed the road in such a way as to make people feel like they SHOULD be speeding.

----------


## Tritone

Relax.  When the potholes develop drivers will slow down.  Problem solved.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> The problem is that it was built for 70 MPH speeds, but limited at 45. The lanes aren't 9 feet. More like 11 or 12. People don't (naturally) set their speeds based upon speed limit signs. They base it upon how fast the road FEELS. We respond instinctively to our built environment. DESIGN is the problem here; NOT the people who are intuitively responding to that design. It's a bait and switch.


Thank you. That's that's what I'm trying to say. I  guess I'm not good at wording or phrasing my thoughts.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> We know. That's the problem. Use your brain.


OK< so why are we advocating for lower speed limits on this portion then when we know there will be no pedestrians around and no reason not to have higher speeds?

----------


## Spartan

No, I am advocating for ACOG to form its own DOT and then get recognized by federal DOT as Central Oklahoma's official coordinating agency, and get its own direct appropriations from now on. A la Chicago DOT.

ODOT does a great job designing roadways for the Guymon or Vinita

----------


## catch22

> The problem is that it was built for 70 MPH speeds, but limited at 45. The lanes aren't 9 feet. More like 11 or 12. People don't (naturally) set their speeds based upon speed limit signs. They base it upon how fast the road FEELS. We respond instinctively to our built environment. DESIGN is the problem here; NOT the people who are intuitively responding to that design. It's a bait and switch.


Exactly. Signage will never reduce the speed limit of the design.

SW 54th street north of the airport is designed for 60 MPH, has only 1 intersecting street (Air Cargo Rd) between Portland and MacArthur, and only two actively used driveways (Metro Tech and the Guard base). 54th Street goes under Meridian as an underpass, and has high speed exits to connect to Meridian. It is posted for 45 mph. Without being a conspiracy theorist, I think the city deliberately overdesigns certain roads with the intention of posting a really slow speed limit for revenue. Sw 54th is one of the most patrolled streets in the city when it comes to speed traps. I've been using it for 5 years and at least twice a week they have the speed traps up. Gotta keep the city revenue coming in.

----------


## catch22

> Exactly. Signage will never reduce the speed limit of the design.
> 
> SW 54th street north of the airport is designed for 60 MPH, has only 1 intersecting street (Air Cargo Rd) between Portland and MacArthur, and only two actively used driveways (Metro Tech and the Guard base). 54th Street goes under Meridian as an underpass, and has high speed exits to connect to Meridian. It is posted for 45 mph. Without being a conspiracy theorist, I think the city deliberately overdesigns certain roads with the intention of posting a really slow speed limit for revenue. Sw 54th is one of the most patrolled streets in the city when it comes to speed traps. I've been using it for 5 years and at least twice a week they have the speed traps up. Gotta keep the city revenue coming in.


Edit: SW 54th street has 11 1/2 foot lane widths. I-44 just east of the airport has... 12 foot lane widths. So, 6 inches is the difference between interstate highways speed and 45 mph OCPD speed trap speeds.

----------


## betts

> Have you even been on the BLVD? There are no sidewalks. It isn't even at grade. ItsIt's elevated. No one is walking on it. It's a highway.


The part you've been on will connect with the at-grade portion.  I don't trust people to slow down when they magically arrive at at-grade.  In the two blocks where I live, there are two lights at the ends and a stop sign in the middle.  It's a residential street and we still have people screaming through at 40-50 mph at times, running the stop sign.  It's definitely going to happen on the boulevard and something bad is going to happen to a pedestrian and the unlucky person who hits them.  The more speed traps on the boulevard, the merrier, as you can only get a ticket if you're breaking the law.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

> What is the point of having lower speeds on a street where no one is going to be walking? Seriously. Explain the point of that.


You just need to learn to slow down son...

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> You just need to learn to slow down son...


Alright

----------


## Tritone

It is kind of mean to build a road that could easily handle higher speed (SW 54th is an excellent example) and then impose a lower speed limit. 

I can see Urbanized's point about the "feel" of a road and figure that's what Plutonic Panda is writing about.

We all probably need to slow down once in a while; I know I've been rolling along comfortably, looked at the speedo-meter and thought "Whoa! I'm going way too fast."  Having a high speed limit at one end of the boulevard where there are no pedestrians could certainly cause me to forget to slow down when I got to the pedestrian-rich environment.  Rumble strips would probably help but maybe not.

----------


## tfvc.org

There are other roads that feel like they should be at a slower speed rate and are marked at higher.  South Western between Norman and OKC used to be that way when it was a dangerous narrow 2 lane road.  Marked at 55 but should have been at 35-40.  Now it is a nice wide 4 laner and it feels like it should be 60-65 in places.

----------


## Spartan

Yikes... South Western is four lanes all the way to Robinson now?

----------


## Anonymous.

Horrible quality, but just for clarification of what the OP is talking about**:

In yellow is where they start shooting your speed, and the red/blue circle is where they sit.

----------


## RadicalModerate

I thought They tore down The Crosstown Expressway at least a couple of years ago.
Oh. For just a moment there, I forgot for a second, that this is now the Crosstown Boulevard.
Sorry for any Confusion.

Take that as a low-key, suburban, Spartan: "Yikes"!
Without the symbolism implied.

----------


## RadicalModerate

On the other hand . . .
At least auto-traffic will be diverted away from the fledgling Elementary School Downton.
And not lead weary travelers to the former site of the last vestiges of Stage Center.

(with apologies to Anonymous  =)

----------


## tfvc.org

> Yikes... South Western is four lanes all the way to Robinson now?


Tecumseh.

----------


## turnpup

My husband and I took this into downtown today from I-40.  When we exited and kept going the same speed (before the speed trap curve), he said, "What's the purpose of having two highways going to the same place?"  I told him that's what we're all complaining about here on OKCTalk.

Didn't see any cops out radaring, but it sure does look like a speed trap.  I mean, the sign is placed right as you go around the curve.  It could easily be missed.

----------


## metro405

Good point made and true




> The problem is that it was built for 70 MPH speeds, but limited at 45. The lanes aren't 9 feet. More like 11 or 12. People don't (naturally) set their speeds based upon speed limit signs. They base it upon how fast the road FEELS. We respond instinctively to our built environment. DESIGN is the problem here; NOT the people who are intuitively responding to that design. It's a bait and switch.

----------


## metro405

Dude you are making excellent points and you are correct in your assessment




> OK< so why are we advocating for lower speed limits on this portion then when we know there will be no pedestrians around and no reason not to have higher speeds?

----------


## Geographer

Here's a fun map I found about maximum speed limits across the world.

Image - Greater Greater Washington

----------


## TheTravellers

> Can't understand why he would not. It is not illegal or vulgar and it is keeping us informed. You're not implying that Pete is in favor of speed traps are you?


True, not illegal, just don't want to draw unwanted attention to OKCTalk, so sure, I'll go ahead and start a speed trap thread, mods can delete if they find it objectionable.  :Smiley122:   I have a radar detector, haven't gotten busted since I've had it, but there are some sneaky places they're hiding that folks would probably like to know about...

----------


## Urbanized



----------


## Snowman

> 


reminded me of this one I saw last week

----------


## RadicalModerate

Before I wandered onto this thread, I thought the only speedtraps in Oklahoma were Forest Park, Luther and Arcadia . . .
Oklahoma Speed Traps | The National Speed Trap Exchange
Dang. Talk about ignorance being bliss . . .

----------

