Injuries and death? How many deaths have occurred there? My experience in driving it every day is that stupidity causes most of the accidents. That isn't going to change with the new interchange.

It absolutely would. The stupidity of the drivers is exacerbated by the stupidity of the interchange designs.

In regards to equal representation, OKC and Tulsa collectively represent 2/3 of the state population, if not a bit more. It's also important to note that the 2/3 of population they do represent is in a FAR, FAR smaller area in comparison to the vast rural areas of the state. I don't think it's unfair in the least to prioritize projects in the metro areas, especially as they serve, once again, a FAR larger amount of vehicles/people per day than rural projects do.

Not to say rural citizens don't also deserve their fair share of allocation of funds, but I also don't think it's unfair that Tulsa or OKC would receive priority.

I don't disagree that more people use the city interchanges and highways, but there has to be equal representation. Everybody pays taxes and deserves their share of government services, roads and bridges, etc. It's just the way it is.

But it seems like that would be a tradeoff that people living in BFE areas would have to be aware of when they choose to live there... you cant have the best of both worlds.... wide open space with no neighbors for miles (whatever it is one might like about living in BFE) AND expect a brand new multi million dollar highway from town straight to your driveway.

But it seems like that would be a tradeoff that people living in BFE areas would have to be aware of when they choose to live there... you cant have the best of both worlds.... wide open space with no neighbors for miles (whatever it is one might like about living in BFE) AND expect a brand new multi million dollar highway from town straight to your driveway.

No one is talking about that. It's a bridge replacement. Do you want them to build their own bridge?

I deleted several posts that were way too personal and attacking.

Please debate the issue, not individuals. And absolutely no name calling otherwise you will get a vacation from your posting privileges.

No one is talking about that. It's a bridge replacement. Do you want them to build their own bridge?

No one said they were talking about that.

No one said they were talking about that.

No one is demanding a multi million dollar highway to their acreage in Guymon. This is about bridge replacements getting funding. You can navigate around potholes, you cannot maneuver around a bridge that has collapsed. Given the number of structurally deficient bridges in the state that could collapse at any time, I am happy to see bridge work in the budget even for rural areas. If this means the interchange work will be a little slower, that's fine. The interchanges will get done. There's a finite amount of political will to get bridges repaired in this state. You have to get them done while the money and politics are on your side.

No one is demanding a multi million dollar highway to their acreage in Guymon.


No one said that they were.

There is already a focus on the larger metro projects. What percentage would you consider to be "fair"? It's already nearly 66% to the metro areas.

I repeat my question: What percentage/priority do you think is fair? I did a very quick and dirty (read as not perfectly accurate) analysis of the August 2016 Bid Openings on the ODOT site:

1 24,297,148 19.85
2 6,041,675 4.81
3 16,935,986 13.49
4 23,986,000 19.03
5 4,784,442 3.81
6 4,015,000 3.20
7 10,450,682 8.32
8 34,504,967 27.48

Division 4 encompasses OK County and points north. Division 8 is Tulsa County and NE OK. Based on this, I don't see that the more urbanized areas have much to complain about.

I am working on a broader analysis that will factor in type of road (interstate, US, etc), funding source, as well as a longer time frame to give a more true picture of how the pie is divided.

No one said that they were.

You did earlier.emphasis added.


But it seems like that would be a tradeoff that people living in BFE areas would have to be aware of when they choose to live there... you cant have the best of both worlds.... wide open space with no neighbors for miles (whatever it is one might like about living in BFE) AND expect a brand new multi million dollar highway from town straight to your driveway.

You did earlier.emphasis added.

No I didnt. I said they CANT expect that. I didnt say they WERE expecting it. I never once claimed that ANYONE said that.

Guys, for thousands of years people have been using speech mechanisms like analogies and parables to illustrate a principle. This isn't new.
If you can understand the PRINCIPLE behind not expecting a brand new highway from Guyman to your land 20 miles away, then you can understand other more subtle tradeoffs when living in BFE. For instance, that mega-highway used by tens of thousands of people a day could take precedence over forgotten old bridge that 10 people a day drive over.

I think another factor besides "accidents" and "deaths" to consider is the impact that loosing a bridge will have on the area.

Was it Newcastle that lost a bridge a few years ago that resulted in people having to take an hour plus detour vs a 15 minute trip twice a day? If a bridge has to be shut down, entire counties could be affected with people getting to work, emergency services being able to respond, kids being able to get to school, farmers and ranchers being able to reach their fields.

I think another factor besides "accidents" and "deaths" to consider is the impact that loosing a bridge will have on the area.

Was it Newcastle that lost a bridge a few years ago that resulted in people having to take an hour plus detour vs a 15 minute trip twice a day? If a bridge has to be shut down, entire counties could be affected with people getting to work, emergency services being able to respond, kids being able to get to school, farmers and ranchers being able to reach their fields.

The HWY 39 bridge between Purcell and Lexington was shut down for months over safety concerns. People had to drive to Norman and use I-35/hwy 77 to get back and forth. That would be a good 45 minutes to 1 hour additional commute time.

The HWY 39 bridge between Purcell and Lexington was shut down for months over safety concerns. People had to drive to Norman and use I-35/hwy 77 to get back and forth. That would be a good 45 minutes to 1 hour additional commute time.

That's the one I was thinking about, thanks.

The HWY 39 bridge between Purcell and Lexington was shut down for months over safety concerns. People had to drive to Norman and use I-35/hwy 77 to get back and forth. That would be a good 45 minutes to 1 hour additional commute time.

Yes that bridge has real safety concerns and had already been slated for replacement before the shutdown. The problem with the term "structurally deficient" is it is a very manipulative term pushed by ASCE and construction groups to push for more bridge funding. There are bridges that truly have structural issues that need to be replaced, there are others that just don't meet modern standards but are just fine for continued service. http://www.virginiadot.org/info/resources/bridge_defs.pdf

Anyways, here is a little more accident data. In the city of OKC proper, there were 7351 accidents on limited access highways last year or over 20 per day. If your main concern with money allocation is safety and/or school bus safety, I think the best bang for your buck is the urban centers.

I am not against spending in the rural areas, but it is ridiculous how bad they have allowed the interchanges in OKC get and that they will take almost 20 years from the initial design letting to completion for a sub-par design. Meanwhile they are replacing bridges in rural areas that don't truly need replacement, i.e. they are nice to haves not required to haves.

I have no problem with the Purcell bridge being expedited, even if the funding had to come from smaller projects in OKC or Tulsa.

Meanwhile they are replacing bridges in rural areas that don't truly need replacement, i.e. they are nice to haves not required to haves.

Please give some examples.

No I didnt. I said they CANT expect that. I didnt say they WERE expecting it. I never once claimed that ANYONE said that.

Guys, for thousands of years people have been using speech mechanisms like analogies and parables to illustrate a principle. This isn't new.
If you can understand the PRINCIPLE behind not expecting a brand new highway from Guyman to your land 20 miles away, then you can understand other more subtle tradeoffs when living in BFE. For instance, that mega-highway used by tens of thousands of people a day could take precedence over forgotten old bridge that 10 people a day drive over.

Your quote in full:

"But it seems like that would be a tradeoff that people living in BFE areas would have to be aware of when they choose to live there... you cant have the best of both worlds.... wide open space with no neighbors for miles (whatever it is one might like about living in BFE) AND expect a brand new multi million dollar highway from town straight to your driveway."

Since you state they can't expect it, you imply they DO expect a multi-million $$$ highway to their driveway. If they don't expect it, then your argument falls apart.

Speaking from personal experience, I know of no one who moves far into the boonies that expects to have a multi-million highway to their driveway. Most are happy if the county keeps the section line road relatively free of ruts.

Getting back to my original point, what is the balance between urban and rural? This state has been having that fight since statehood. I believe ODOT does about as good of a job with that balance as they can given the limited funding available.

Your quote in full:

"But it seems like that would be a tradeoff that people living in BFE areas would have to be aware of when they choose to live there... you cant have the best of both worlds.... wide open space with no neighbors for miles (whatever it is one might like about living in BFE) AND expect a brand new multi million dollar highway from town straight to your driveway."

Since you state they can't expect it, you imply they DO expect a multi-million $$$ highway to their driveway. If they don't expect it, then your argument falls apart.

Speaking from personal experience, I know of no one who moves far into the boonies that expects to have a multi-million highway to their driveway. Most are happy if the county keeps the section line road relatively free of ruts.

Getting back to my original point, what is the balance between urban and rural? This state has been having that fight since statehood. I believe ODOT does about as good of a job with that balance as they can given the limited funding available.

You cant expect to jump to Mars.



Try your logic again. I know what I said, and its not what you claim I said. Your fabrication of an implication =/= me stating something.

You are stuck in this bizarre limbo between the literal and the figurative.... on one hand you want to pretend that you cant understand the basic concept of an analogy, which means you took my statement literally...but on the other hand, you cant acknowledge that my statement literally does not state what you claim it states.... so you went with " well it implies XYZ, simply cause I say so".

You cant expect to jump to Mars.



Try your logic again. I know what I said, and its not what you claim I said. Your fabrication of an implication =/= me stating something.

You are stuck in this bizarre limbo between the literal and the figurative.... on one hand you want to pretend that you cant understand the basic concept of an analogy, which means you took my statement literally...but on the other hand, you cant acknowledge that my statement literally does not state what you claim it states.... so you went with " well it implies XYZ, simply cause I say so".

Dude, what the hell are you even talking about? What do you expect these people to do? For whatever reason my post was deleted, but yeah, just f@ck the people who give you food. Don't worry about them. Let their infrastructure fall apart.

Once again, would you care to answer rte66man's question about what you think a fair amount would be?

This has to do with political realities. Our state infrastructure including rural roads and bridges have been neglected for years and they are getting worse. The political will has been, and always will be there to fix the major interchanges in OKC. The political willpower has not existed for quite some time in the rural areas, and likely that will fizzle very soon as the state continues to suffer economically. It is very smart to tackle these projects NOW, because in a year or two they will be forgotten about for the next 25 years . With the seismic awakening of Oklahoma, and the continually decreasing funding, we have to take care of these structurally deficient bridges and overpasses NOW, because this may be the state's best opportunity for many years to do it.

You can call me whatever names you want Sancho, but the reality of our state's political and economic climate is very serious.

Dude, what the hell are you even talking about? What do you expect these people to do? For whatever reason my post was deleted, but yeah, just f@ck the people who give you food. Don't worry about them. Let their infrastructure fall apart.

Once again, would you care to answer rte66man's question about what you think a fair amount would be?

What in the **** are you talking about?

No one gives me food.

I dont have "the" answer for his question. Regardless of what the "right" answer is, it doesnt nullify or diminish the principle of my post.

If you live in BFE your expectation of public services decreases. Is that even debateable?

They cant expect a tax-payer funded subway to be built from Gyman to Beaver to service 42 people a day, can they?


Queue the functionally illiterate:
"OMG, they didnt ask for a subway! They just give you food! Im going to pretend I dont understand analogies rather than just agree with the simple principle!!!! But what about the fooooooooooood?!!!"

Stop the histrionics and just agree or disagree with the point. Do you think that people living in BFE should expect less access to public services than people living in densely populated areas?

This has to do with political realities. Our state infrastructure including rural roads and bridges have been neglected for years and they are getting worse. The political will has been, and always will be there to fix the major interchanges in OKC. The political willpower has not existed for quite some time in the rural areas, and likely that will fizzle very soon as the state continues to suffer economically. It is very smart to tackle these projects NOW, because in a year or two they will be forgotten about for the next 25 years . With the seismic awakening of Oklahoma, and the continually decreasing funding, we have to take care of these structurally deficient bridges and overpasses NOW, because this may be the state's best opportunity for many years to do it.

You can call me whatever names you want Sancho, but the reality of our state's political and economic climate is very serious.

Me calling you a name has nothing to do with your opinion on this issue, which i mostly agree with.

What in the **** are you talking about?

No one gives me food.

I dont have "the" answer for his question. Regardless of what the "right" answer is, it doesnt nullify or diminish the principle of my post.

If you live in BFE your expectation of public services decreases. Is that even debateable?

They cant expect a tax-payer funded subway to be built from Gyman to Beaver to service 42 people a day, can they?


Queue the functionally illiterate:
"OMG, they didnt ask for a subway! They just give you food! Im going to pretend I dont understand analogies rather than just agree with the simple principle!!!! But what about the fooooooooooood?!!!"

Stop the histrionics and just agree or disagree with the point. Do you think that people living in BFE should expect less access to public services than people living in densely populated areas?

No one gives you food? Oh wait, I'm sorry. Let me draw it out with a crayon to be more specific for you. You must be special. The people who grow your food which you then buy. But hey, let's make the whole point about the food now. It's all about food. That is why I even posted. Think about the food.

I see. You don't have an answer to his question. Totally cool. Let's just bitch about it instead.

Oh, and no. I think that every single person in Oklahoma should have a 50 lane highway going straight to their front door with an HSR stop no more than a minute walk from any major intersection. That's what I think.

Sometimes I hunt for camels and find the fecal matter left behind and using chopsticks, place the fecal matter back inside of them in case they missed out on any nutrients that they might need.

BTW on a side note: I'm rolling into OKC for about a week next week and need a buy a poncho and you look like just the man who could point me in the direction of where I could find one. I want one from the black market so I can get it cheaper. But don't tell anyone. Needs to be around 55'' W 70" L and then I'll have it hemmed by using someone who will tell me it shipped from somewhere else and they've been handling it(several references in this post) from Uruguay but that don't mean I ought to be judged.

No one gives you food? Oh wait, I'm sorry. Let me draw it out with a crayon to be more specific for you. You must be special. The people who grow your food which you then buy. But hey, let's make the whole point about the food now. It's all about food. That is why I even posted. Think about the food.

I see. You don't have an answer to his question. Totally cool. Let's just bitch about it instead.

Oh, and no. I think that every single person in Oklahoma should have a 50 lane highway going straight to their front door with an HSR stop no more than a minute walk from any major intersection. That's what I think.

Sometimes I hunt for camels and find the fecal matter left behind and using chopsticks, place the fecal matter back inside of them in case they missed out on any nutrients that they might need.

BTW on a side note: I'm rolling into OKC for about a week next week and need a buy a poncho and you look like just the man who could point me in the direction of where I could find one. I want one from the black market so I can get it cheaper. But don't tell anyone. Needs to be around 55'' W 70" L and then I'll have it hemmed by using someone who will tell me it shipped from somewhere else and they've been handling it(several references in this post) from Uruguay but that don't mean I ought to be judged.

Could this be any more ironic? You literally said that people give me food. I never said that people expect a super highway from their driveway to town. Lol.
First you ignore my point and try to make my post all about something I NEVER said...next you get into a huff when I respond to something you literally did say in your post. Wow. YOU are the one that made it about this falsehood of being given food, not me. I didnt bring it up, you did.


Really let this sink in... your ENTIRE response to me is based on ignoring the point of my analogy and frothing at the mouth over something I NEVER said... I didnt say it literally. I didnt say it figuratively. I didnt imply it.
Yet you are going insane over the fact that I responded to something you LITERALLY said to me.

I never claimed to have the right answer to that question. I never attempted to answer it. I never "bitched" about it.

I used the term functionality illiterate in a hyperbolic way, but I am starting to think you actually are.


And I have no clue what you are going on about? Is that supposed to be an insult or are you just already drunk ?

You are coming off like an emotional basketcase.

Re-surfacing fully underway. You may have noticed the last 3-4 weeks there has been a lot of concrete patchwork done at the major problem areas.

The first round of asphalt has been laid upon the southbound passing lane.

Re-surfacing fully underway. You may have noticed the last 3-4 weeks there has been a lot of concrete patchwork done at the major problem areas.

The first round of asphalt has been laid upon the southbound passing lane.

I saw the paving equipment this morning while driving NB. I wondered if it was just waiting or if they'd started; thanks for the update. Hope rain doesn't get in the way too much, since they've started.

I repeat my question: What percentage/priority do you think is fair? I did a very quick and dirty (read as not perfectly accurate) analysis of the August 2016 Bid Openings on the ODOT site:

1 24,297,148 19.85
2 6,041,675 4.81
3 16,935,986 13.49
4 23,986,000 19.03
5 4,784,442 3.81
6 4,015,000 3.20
7 10,450,682 8.32
8 34,504,967 27.48

Division 4 encompasses OK County and points north. Division 8 is Tulsa County and NE OK. Based on this, I don't see that the more urbanized areas have much to complain about.

Your data is valid, but your suggesting that just because OKC and Tulsa are allocated more funds than rural parts of the state, that those living there shouldn't have much to complain about. I just find that to be a bare bones comparison and not a valid way to determine what is fair and what is not. How many people will these funds benefit? Are these projects serving 1 million+ people? Or are they serving a small town? What sort of economic impact do they enable, or impede if not funded? How does that affect a metropolis versus a small town? What sort of existing infrastructure is in need of rehabilitation? Several major interchanges that will take 15 years to complete? Or a rural bridge that is structurally sound, but not up to modern code? Or maybe a rural bridge that is structurally deficient and largely impacts the area's inhabitants? How does drivers' safety play into these comparisons? And also the amount of drivers? Do we prioritize the needs of the many over the needs of the few? Or vice versa?

I think it's pretty obvious that OKC and Tulsa are allocated a larger amount of funds because, well, they're concentrated monsters in comparison to the rural populations spread across a huge area of the state. It's also obvious however, that receiving a larger share of the pot does not mean OKC and Tulsa have it good. I-44/235 and I-240/I-35 are prime examples. It's incredulous they will take such a long time to finish. Completely unbelievable that they have been allowed to degrade to such an obsolete and unsafe state, especially considering their importance. I'm sure the same can be said for structurally deficient bridges across the state, but I am ignorant of those situations.

I still believe the metro areas should be prioritized, except in the case of infrastructure that requires immediate attention. Just my 2 cents. In a perfect world, or actually let me reword that: In a REASONABLE world, Oklahoma would get its act together and change the funding mechanisms for our road infrastructure; along with a whole host of reformation in general. I digress on that point however, as that is for another thread.

Considering the fact that the OKC and Tulsa MSAs are home to more than 60% of the state's population - and that they probably generate more like 75% or more of the state's revenue - I think it is MORE than fair that the rest of the state is getting more than half of the funds. The bigger cities also have much more complex (read expensive) highway systems due to volume, much of which includes rural Oklahomans in town to do some sort of business. Rural Oklahoma has zero to gripe about according to those numbers.

Looks like the resurfacing project is about done.

Your data is valid, but your suggesting that just because OKC and Tulsa are allocated more funds than rural parts of the state, that those living there shouldn't have much to complain about. I just find that to be a bare bones comparison and not a valid way to determine what is fair and what is not. How many people will these funds benefit? Are these projects serving 1 million+ people? Or are they serving a small town? What sort of economic impact do they enable, or impede if not funded? How does that affect a metropolis versus a small town? What sort of existing infrastructure is in need of rehabilitation? Several major interchanges that will take 15 years to complete? Or a rural bridge that is structurally sound, but not up to modern code? Or maybe a rural bridge that is structurally deficient and largely impacts the area's inhabitants? How does drivers' safety play into these comparisons? And also the amount of drivers? Do we prioritize the needs of the many over the needs of the few? Or vice versa?

I think it's pretty obvious that OKC and Tulsa are allocated a larger amount of funds because, well, they're concentrated monsters in comparison to the rural populations spread across a huge area of the state. It's also obvious however, that receiving a larger share of the pot does not mean OKC and Tulsa have it good. I-44/235 and I-240/I-35 are prime examples. It's incredulous they will take such a long time to finish. Completely unbelievable that they have been allowed to degrade to such an obsolete and unsafe state, especially considering their importance. I'm sure the same can be said for structurally deficient bridges across the state, but I am ignorant of those situations.

I still believe the metro areas should be prioritized, except in the case of infrastructure that requires immediate attention. Just my 2 cents. In a perfect world, or actually let me reword that: In a REASONABLE world, Oklahoma would get its act together and change the funding mechanisms for our road infrastructure; along with a whole host of reformation in general. I digress on that point however, as that is for another thread.

Thanks for the reasoned response. You point out the main thing that troubles me: broken funding mechanism. All of you other points are equally valid. IMO the biggest problem is the politics of urban v rural. I doubt that will ever be resolved. I still maintain that ODOT does about as well as can be expected given the factors you mention. If they attempted to spend 75% on OKC and Tulsa, I doubt the Commission would approve the bids.

Considering the fact that the OKC and Tulsa MSAs are home to more than 60% of the state's population - and that they probably generate more like 75% or more of the state's revenue - I think it is MORE than fair that the rest of the state is getting more than half of the funds. The bigger cities also have much more complex (read expensive) highway systems due to volume, much of which includes rural Oklahomans in town to do some sort of business. Rural Oklahoma has zero to gripe about according to those numbers.

See Architect2010's quote. He names almost all of the factors that ODOT is required to consider when deciding how funds are spent. I will dig out the relevant language and post it a little later.

We're saying the same thing.

See Architect2010's quote. He names almost all of the factors that ODOT is required to consider when deciding how funds are spent. I will dig out the relevant language and post it a little later.

from http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/cwp-8-year-plan/cwp_ffy2016-ffy2023/cwp_ffy2016-2023.pdf page 8

Balancing Process
The balancing of the Construction Work Plan progressed in accordance with the roles and responsibilities generally defined in the following outline:
Field Division Engineers
The development of Construction Work Plan begins with our Field Division Engineers and is guided by their knowledge of the transportation needs and priorities in their respective Divisions. They and their staff work to maintain an understanding of the condition of the roads and bridges in their areas of responsibility. In addition, other key Department Divisions collect and analyze transportation data factoring the following general characteristics as applicable and listed in no particular order:
• surface condition
• bridge condition
• geometrics (vertical and horizontal alignment)
• average annual daily traffic (AADT)
• percentage of truck traffic
• accident history
• local, regional and national traffic patterns
• capacity
The understanding gained from this information is then coupled with the careful consideration of the Field Division’s condition and capacity assessments of the highway network and the associated critical needs, their anticipated improvement budgets, and further communication with the Division’s Transportation Commissioner. The Field Division Engineers then review and validate the scheduled Construction Work Plan projects and formulate a group of new projects to be added in accordance with the projected funding availability.

Found this on the ACOG site:

http://www.acogok.org/transportation-planning/encompass-2040/74815-2/

Scroll down to C5 - Regional High Crash Locations. Very enlightening

As I was driving towards downtown this morning, as I do every morning, I noticed that they had paved more asphalt on I-235. In the area that the new asphalt was put down, they hadn't swept any of the loose gravel and the vehicles in front of me were throwing it all over my car! I'm not talking about little tiny pieces of sand. I'm talking about good sized pieces of gravel. Did anyone else experience this? Very unprofessional of the paving company.

As I was driving towards downtown this morning, as I do every morning, I noticed that they had paved more asphalt on I-235. In the area that the new asphalt was put down, they hadn't swept any of the loose gravel and the vehicles in front of me were throwing it all over my car! I'm not talking about little tiny pieces of sand. I'm talking about good sized pieces of gravel. Did anyone else experience this? Very unprofessional of the paving company.

Pretty typical given the quality of road construction here in OKC, I'm sad to say. I've had it happen.

As I was driving towards downtown this morning, as I do every morning, I noticed that they had paved more asphalt on I-235. In the area that the new asphalt was put down, they hadn't swept any of the loose gravel and the vehicles in front of me were throwing it all over my car! I'm not talking about little tiny pieces of sand. I'm talking about good sized pieces of gravel. Did anyone else experience this? Very unprofessional of the paving company.

Yup. I didn't feel too bad for the Lexus following too closely that was on his cell phone when I hit the patch of loose gravel, though.

The resurfacing project finished ahead of schedule (nice bonus for the contractor). Making this stretch much more pleasant to drive on.

Next phase begins in January which includes the construction of the northbound 6 full lanes from 36th to just south of the interchange (current merge-point is 36th). And includes the demolition of 50th st bridge and replacement BNSF rail bridge.

That is going to look crazy without the bridges for awhile. I hope some takes a lot of pictures.

That is going to look crazy without the bridges for awhile. I hope some takes a lot of pictures.

You know I'll be documenting the whole shebang.

You know I'll be documenting the whole shebang.haha I figured. I'll be keeping a very close eye on this forum and AARoads. This will be very exciting to see see this transformation!

The resurfacing project finished ahead of schedule (nice bonus for the contractor). Making this stretch much more pleasant to drive on.

Next phase begins in January which includes the construction of the northbound 6 full lanes from 36th to just south of the interchange (current merge-point is 36th). And includes the demolition of 50th st bridge and replacement BNSF rail bridge.

Anyone who follows this more closely or knows the details know whether or not the replacement BNSF rail bridge will contain space for future tracks? I think it is 2 tracks right now, but would be nice if they planned for the future and made room for additional tracks.

Anyone who follows this more closely or knows the details know whether or not the replacement BNSF rail bridge will contain space for future tracks? I think it is 2 tracks right now, but would be nice if they planned for the future and made room for additional tracks.

The plans do not call for extra track capacity. The I44 overpass only has room for one so it would also have to be expanded. So would the 63rd St overpass, etc. The cost to double track north of the 23rd St yard is beyond anything ODOT and/or BNSF can handle given greater needs elsewhere.

It does not appear so, no - the rail bridge only appears to be wide enough for 1 track. Currently, the BNSF Red Rock Sub is single track from the north end of Nowers Yard (at approximately NW 42nd St) to near Britton (approx. NW 94th St). To my knowledge, BNSF does not currently have any plans to make the Red Rock Sub 2MT (2 main tracks); multiple sidings for passing trains exist over the Red Rock's length through the metro area, and current freight traffic volumes don't yet necessitate going 2MT.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/i44i235a.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/i44i235b.jpg

IMO, it is absolute horse**** that they're not putting in a flyover ramp from NB I-235 to WB I-44.

IMO, it is absolute horse**** that they're not putting in a flyover ramp from NB I-235 to WB I-44.

They are

They are

I see a red cloverleaf loop there. Am I misreading the diagram?

North is to the right in that picture, west to the top of it.

North is the right side of this diagram.

So the flyovers are north 235 to west 44 in orange.
And east 44 to north 235/63rd street exit. Orange.

South 235 to east 44 will be a bigger cloverleaf but separated from the main north south bridge

And west 44 to south 235 will merge much better than previously

I'm looking forward to the two flyovers as I will probably use them a fair amount. Eventually.

North is to the right in that picture, west to the top of it.


North is the right side of this diagram.

So the flyovers are north 235 to west 44 in orange.
And east 44 to north 235/63rd street exit. Orange.

South 235 to east 44 will be a bigger cloverleaf but separated from the main north south bridge

And west 44 to south 235 will merge much better than previously

My apologies. I withdraw my absurd outrage and will learn to read a diagram. Thanks to both of you for correcting me!

So very glad we won't need to use 235 very much at all, if ever, due to where we moved to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So by the time it's done in 2022 or later, it will have needed to have all this done for at least 30 years because that's how long it's been over capacity/FUBARed, par for the course...

So very glad we won't need to use 235 very much at all, if ever, due to where we moved to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So by the time it's done in 2022 or later, it will have needed to have all this done for at least 30 years because that's how long it's been over capacity/FUBARed, par for the course...

We, unfortunately, HAVE to use it frequently because of where we moved to! During school, twice a day in each direction. The little one won't graduate high school until 2025, so we're stuck with whatever hassles it brings. That's just the way it goes I guess. My husband was excited to hear of the northbound flyover to westbound 44, as it's his route to work.

My apologies. I withdraw my absurd outrage and will learn to read a diagram. Thanks to both of you for correcting me!

Now THAT is how to Internet. Well done, Bill Brasky!

My apologies. I withdraw my absurd outrage and will learn to read a diagram. Thanks to both of you for correcting me!

A good engineer NEVER publishes a diagram that does not have north facing up (top of page), unless the item in question is too long vertically. In this case, it would have been easy to publish vertically... Also, they did a poor job labeling; if you rotate the image to put north on top, then the 63rd Street label would be upside down.

Your understanding of the graphic is ODOT's/engineer's fault, not yours! :)

/rant

They've been using that screwy west to the top layout for this project for years, I have diagrams saved with a 2010 timestamp on them that look like the above. I've never understood why.

We, unfortunately, HAVE to use it frequently because of where we moved to! During school, twice a day in each direction. The little one won't graduate high school until 2025, so we're stuck with whatever hassles it brings. That's just the way it goes I guess. My husband was excited to hear of the northbound flyover to westbound 44, as it's his route to work.

I feel for ya, especially if it's anywhere close to rush hours. Now that we're in Venice, we're able to take surface streets to almost anywhere we want to go, don't know where your school is, but too far away for surface streets? During rush hours when I had to go to/from downtown, I'd just go down Western or Eastern, depending on where I was going, and it was almost always faster than Broadway/235. We just avoid Broadway/235 whenever possible, even when we lived in North B-F-Edmond, but it's just us two, no kids, so that may play into it...

I feel for ya, especially if it's anywhere close to rush hours. Now that we're in Venice, we're able to take surface streets to almost anywhere we want to go, don't know where your school is, but too far away for surface streets? During rush hours when I had to go to/from downtown, I'd just go down Western or Eastern, depending on where I was going, and it was almost always faster than Broadway/235. We just avoid Broadway/235 whenever possible, even when we lived in North B-F-Edmond, but it's just us two, no kids, so that may play into it...

Western is our best alternative to the highway, but I'd sure hate to have to use it a lot. In the mornings, we take Broadway Ext to Britton and then over to school. Generally I use Western to come home because southbound Broadway is already stop and go all the way back to downtown. Good to have a street option. Some people will not be as fortunate.

They've been using that screwy west to the top layout for this project for years, I have diagrams saved with a 2010 timestamp on them that look like the above. I've never understood why.

I asked my daughter (who works in the ODOT Bridge Division) why they do this. She said it is keyed off of how the initial survey is done. If the original survey is keyed to run in a particular direction, then all following blueprints, photos, etc have to follow that orientation; else you end up with the confusion shown above. All of the related software has to tie together for continuity. When that continuity fails in construction, then you have a real problem.

I'm assuming ODOT sees no need to re-orient the documents for public consumption, but that might be better answered by Public Affairs.