That thing will be just as congested as it is today in a few years - very few. It is called induced demand and the automobile/highway building cabal (I kid - a little) has mastered this self fulfilling circle. We need to maintain what we have now for highway infrastructure and dedicate more time, effort, and capital to alternate modes of transportation.

That thing will be just as congested as it is today in a few years - very few. It is called induced demand and the automobile/highway building cabal (I kid - a little) has mastered this self fulfilling circle. We need to maintain what we have now for highway infrastructure and dedicate more time, effort, and capital to alternate modes of transportation.

The middle lanes will cost drivers an arm and a leg in order to keep the speeds up. The free lanes will be bumper to bumper. Lol

The middle lanes will cost drivers an arm and a leg in order to keep the speeds up. The free lanes will be bumper to bumper. Lol

Yep, that's one major problem with this road. What's going to happen to the masses that can't afford the tolls day in and day out?

It also bears repeating that this thing is being financed through some pretty complicated measures. This is a public/private road financed by about $1.4 billion in loans to be paid back with congestion pricing tolls that could be as high as 55 cents per mile in the "Lexus Lanes" (in comparison the John Kilpatrick Turnpike is about 8 cents/mile). The company operating this road is a Spanish company, Cintras, that has a shady track record. Oh, and it will be tolled for the next 50+ years.

I wouldn't mind if OTA wanted to put in some toll lanes, but I can't think of a freeway in OK that has serious enough congestion to warrant that. Most of our problems are due to outdated designs and decades of deferred maintenance now taking their toll. Only way you can fix that is more money, really no way to get around it.

I can't imagine a time when we would ever need something like that no matter how quickly it could be built.Eh, we probably won't.

Excuse me if I'm skeptical that those freeways will look like that in 3 years. Dallas has been working on and rebuilding those roads for much longer than 35 years. There have been many reincarnations of I35 and LBJ.

No matter how it’s financed it shouldn’t take Oklahoma about 35 years to physically rebuild I-35….
We are doing something wrong and in a major way when it takes that long for the physical construction of something as simple as the rebuilding of a relatively short stretch of I-35.

So THAT'S what they were building when we were down in Dallas during OU-Texas. We were staying at a hotel along Midway Blvd north of I-635, and there's a ton of this construction already going on. I saw what looked like ramps parallel to the main highway, and asked a couple of people what they were, and no one really knew. They're the spur lanes shown in that video.

Man, that's a monstrously amibtious project. In my estimation, I just don't see OKC's population density getting to the point where a structure remotely like that is even in the cards. The broader Dallas area is so immense that to even draw an analogy between it and OKC's traffic issues is an apples-to-oranges effort. Drive in OKC for a while, then drive in Dallas for a while, and you'll get what I mean. OKC has *nothing* remotely like the volume that traverses 635 in an average day.

That thing will be just as congested as it is today in a few years - very few. It is called induced demand and the automobile/highway building cabal (I kid - a little) has mastered this self fulfilling circle. We need to maintain what we have now for highway infrastructure and dedicate more time, effort, and capital to alternate modes of transportation.Not completely sold on that idea. First off one road that I can think of out of the back of my mind is Shields. Six lane road and it doesn't completely fill up everyday. There are more examples of this. MANY MORE. I would have to think for awhile. I guess the real test will be the new I-40. As of right now, it doesn't seem to be horribly congested.

Not completely sold on that idea. First off one road that I can think of out of the back of my mind is Shields. Six lane road and it doesn't completely fill up everyday. There are more examples of this. MANY MORE. I would have to think for awhile. I guess the real test will be the new I-40. As of right now, it doesn't seem to be horribly congested.

Have you driven Shields southbound between 430-630pm?

Have you driven Shields southbound between 430-630pm?Yes, and it is not to horribly bad. Go drive on Preston Rd. though Dallas during rush hour and that is baaaaaaaad traffic.

Yes, and it is not to horribly bad. Go drive on Preston Rd. though Dallas during rush hour and that is baaaaaaaad traffic.I agree
I have driven down Preston Rd many times. The volume of traffic on it and on plenty of other major Dallas streets make South Shields at rush hour look like a walk in the park.

I dove on Preston this past fall during the OU-Texas week end.
Preston RD is bad around the Dallas country club but I think it gets worse the further north you go.

So THAT'S what they were building when we were down in Dallas during OU-Texas. We were staying at a hotel along Midway Blvd north of I-635, and there's a ton of this construction already going on. I saw what looked like ramps parallel to the main highway, and asked a couple of people what they were, and no one really knew. They're the spur lanes shown in that video.

Man, that's a monstrously amibtious project. In my estimation, I just don't see OKC's population density getting to the point where a structure remotely like that is even in the cards. The broader Dallas area is so immense that to even draw an analogy between it and OKC's traffic issues is an apples-to-oranges effort. Drive in OKC for a while, then drive in Dallas for a while, and you'll get what I mean. OKC has *nothing* remotely like the volume that traverses 635 in an average day.

I also saw this on my OU –Texas weekend… But I knew about it in advance.
I have learned the hard way that it pays to do a detailed search of Texas road construction for this trip.

What struck me then was the scale of the project and how it dwarfed OKC I-40 project that we made such a big deal about.
I also remember thinking that we really need to increase our states ambitions and time lines when building needed infrastructure in our state

I agree
I have driven down Preston Rd many times. The volume of traffic on it and on plenty of other major Dallas streets make South Shields at rush hour look like a walk in the park.

I dove on Preston this past fall during the OU-Texas week end.
Preston RD is bad around the Dallas country club but I think it gets worse the further north you go.Oh, definitely. Richardson, TX is like Edmond traffic on steroids. It's nuts. Esp. Coit Rd. Wowzers man. lol

No matter how it’s financed it shouldn’t take Oklahoma about 35 years to physically rebuild I-35….
We are doing something wrong and in a major way when it takes that long for the physical construction of something as simple as the rebuilding of a relatively short stretch of I-35.

As I said, the area in Dallas being discussed has been under construction and rebuilding mode for an equally long time. Neither state had planned for the current needs when the freeways were first built. The needs and construction designs and techniques have changed considerably over that 35 year period.

One thing I really think should be done though....Is FIRST build a regional HSR and build expansive light-rail system throughout..... Tulsa, OKC, Little Rock, DFW, Houston, ect... THEN you can accurately describe true traffic counts and build the highways accordingly. I think a light-rail would be used a lot more than people would think in OKC.

Too late for that. We gutted our rails for our roads and we seem to be content with keeping it that way.

Also, you are saying to allow the rail traffic to define demand. Demand is extremely fluid and will take the easiest method.

If rail is easy, people will take rail. If driving and parking is easy, people will drive. But, you can't have both, because if one is more easy to use than the other by a wide margin, the other will not be used.

No I don't think it should define demand. I think it should give a general idea how many people will use LR instead of the highways. Grand Central Station(I think it called) in NYC is getting a massive expansion and already has over 1 million a day in and out. Almost twice the pop. of OKC. I'm sure there are people that would use highways if not for the rail transit. Instead of building these massive highways without a light-rail, I think they should build the light-rail first and then go back to building the highways. Thats all.

As I said, the area in Dallas being discussed has been under construction and rebuilding mode for an equally long time. Neither state had planned for the current needs when the freeways were first built. The needs and construction designs and techniques have changed considerably over that 35 year period.

Discussions about a project are an entirely different matter that the physical disruptions that are caused during the actually construction.

The physical disruptions of the construction are more damaging to area business and to commuters than mere discussions. In this case we are talking about 35 years of physical construction compared a lengthy discussion. There is no reasonable comparison on the impact to ordinary people

We have a moral obligation IMHO to build our projects in a fiduciary way but also as quickly as they can practically done while still being fiscally responsible.

Discussions about a project are an entirely different matter that the physical disruptions that are caused during the actually construction.

The physical disruptions of the construction are more damaging to area business and to commuters than mere discussions. In this case we are talking about 35 years of physical construction compared a lengthy discussion. There is no reasonable comparison on the impact to ordinary people

We have a moral obligation IMHO to build our projects in a fiduciary way but also as quickly as they can practically done while still being fiscally responsible.

You were making comparisons of the projects in the two cities. Neither of the areas have been under continous construction for 35 years. There have been no more disruptions in OKC than in Dallas even with the many different projects in both cities.

I have no disagreement with your second point.

You were making comparisons of the projects in the two cities. Neither of the areas have been under continous construction for 35 years. There have been no more disruptions in OKC than in Dallas even with the many different projects in both cities.

I have no disagreement with your second point.

If I recall correctly the reconstruction of I-35 in OKC from I-40 south started in about 1985 and that it will be around 2020 when everything is done. I-35 OKC hasn’t been worked on 100% of that time but clearly and without question the length of total disruption to the people has been longer in OKC on I-35 than it will be with the Dallas project on the video.


But regardless of that, my main point is that we need to find a way to speed our projects up……
How do we get that done?

If I recall correctly the reconstruction of I-35 in OKC from I-40 south started in about 1985 and that it will be around 2020 when everything is done. I-35 OKC hasn’t been worked on 100% of that time but clearly and without question the length of total disruption to the people has been longer in OKC on I-35 than it will be with the Dallas project on the video.


But regardless of that, my main point is that we need to find a way to speed our projects up……
How do we get that done?I think over time as our tax base grows. I think the time has come to start planning for widening I-35 to 8 lanes. It is always backed up during rush hour and nearly at a standstill.

If I recall correctly the reconstruction of I-35 in OKC from I-40 south started in about 1985 and that it will be around 2020 when everything is done. I-35 OKC hasn’t been worked on 100% of that time but clearly and without question the length of total disruption to the people has been longer in OKC on I-35 than it will be with the Dallas project on the video.


But regardless of that, my main point is that we need to find a way to speed our projects up……
How do we get that done?


The OKC project has not been just one project or plan that has taken 35 years to complete. It has been numerous separate projects or plans which is exactly the same as the Dallas freeways. Your comparison doesn't work.

I wish I had an answer for your last question, but I don't.

I think over time as our tax base grows. I think the time has come to start planning for widening I-35 to 8 lanes. It is always backed up during rush hour and nearly at a standstill.

You're contradicting yourself now, PluPan. You were just saying a few posts ago that we should have light rail before any more highway projects are started.

You're contradicting yourself now, PluPan. You were just saying a few posts ago that we should have light rail before any more highway projects are started.Yeah, realistically that will never happen. I think that is what should happen. But, I understand it won't. So, realistically thinking, we need to find a way to speed up our projects I agree with that and also happen to think to time in nearing(arguably already here) to begin plans to widen I-15 to 8 lanes.

Actually I think we might see light rail along that corridor before I35 is expanded to 8 lanes.

Well they could do it as one project.

Well they could do it as one project.

The Oklahoma River could turn into chocolate tomorrow too. LOL

Hey, I'm just throwing ideas out there. :p

Also, you are saying to allow the rail traffic to define demand. Demand is extremely fluid and will take the easiest method.

If rail is easy, people will take rail. If driving and parking is easy, people will drive. But, you can't have both, because if one is more easy to use than the other by a wide margin, the other will not be used.

Several cities now prohibit any new parking except for residential if rail based mass transit is available. The best way to reduce congestion is to not provide a place to park. Of course, this requires alternatives to be available.

The OKC project has not been just one project or plan that has taken 35 years to complete. It has been numerous separate projects or plans which is exactly the same as the Dallas freeways. Your comparison doesn't work.

I wish I had an answer for your last question, but I don't.

I have known they were different contracts, but to the public that matters very little.
But it sure seems like Stemmons I - 35 has not been torn up creating delays anywhere as much as our I-35.


Finding ways to speed up our projects will probably require reform via legislation by our states elected leaders?
It needs to become a priority, but somebody would probably need to give up some of their power to control projects?

Actually I think we might see light rail along that corridor before I35 is expanded to 8 lanes.

The plan that I have heard talked about would roughly follow I -35. But it would not be light rail, It would be commuter rail.
The plan is to double track the line. The plan calls for Norman to have 2 stops. One at OU and another on the north edge of town near Tecumseh Street.

I am not sure but there are so many people who live in far east Norman and south of Norman that a stop near Highway 9 might be worth consideration.

If all commuter rail does is making living all over the southern plains easier I would prefer they not even build it. You shouldn't have to drive to a train station. By making remote stations you ensure that the primary use is in-bound in the morning and out-bound in the afternoon. We can't afford to keep wasting transportation dollars like that.

If all commuter rail does is making living all over the southern plains easier I would prefer they not even build it. You shouldn't have to drive to a train station.

JTF, I agree with you a LOT, and could almost qualify as one of your acolytes, but this last comment makes me mad. Why can't I live on the fringes and use the rails without having to park in front of someone's house? Shall we just put a wall around the city? I know you've thought this through a LOT more than I, but I pay taxes in OKC, too. Can't I use the mass transit?
OK. Fire away. Afterall, I was angry when typing this.

If all commuter rail does is making living all over the southern plains easier I would prefer they not even build it. You shouldn't have to drive to a train station. By making remote stations you ensure that the primary use is in-bound in the morning and out-bound in the afternoon. We can't afford to keep wasting transportation dollars like that.

But yet people have been driving to the train station in many locations, for many years.
Thousands of people drive to the park and rides of DART’s light rail system every day.. What’s the difference?

Dubya61 - let's stick with Norman first. Why can't people drive to downtown Norman to a station? This would expand the hours of use. As for Choctaw, a station at Main St would be great. They could even put in a parking garage if they like. There is nothing wrong with connecting downtown Choctaw to the rest of central Oklahoma. If we are going to build stations let's do it in places where TOD can have the best impact and promote walkability at both ends of the trip.

isn't it in the state's constitution that oklahoma cannot borrow money to fund highway construction? i have never heard of that in other states and that is what allows the dallas region to constantly widen their roadways. i'm not a bog fan of incurring debt, but a little bit wouldn't hurt if it's really necessary.

Dubya61 - let's stick with Norman first. Why can't people drive to downtown Norman to a station? This would expand the hours of use. As for Choctaw, a station at Main St would be great. They could even put in a parking garage if they like. There is nothing wrong with connecting downtown Choctaw to the rest of central Oklahoma. If we are going to build stations let's do it in places where TOD can have the best impact and promote walkability at both ends of the trip.

Most people who commute to OKC from Norman live on Norman’s north or west sides. For thousands of these people it would take a minimum of 20 minutes to drive to downtown Norman. The downtown Norman parking is very poor for daily commute. By the time most people driveto downtown, wait on the train and actually arrive at their end train destination they could have driven in about ½ the time.

Projected ridership does not justify a downtown Norman station. It would be an extremely poor expenditure of very limited public that would be far better utilized someplace else.…. The planers know this…. That’s why the plans call for a bus / train station at OU and a park and ride station on the north side of Norman. They know this is where the most amount of people in Norman would use the train. A small bus could easily service the downtown Norman area from the train stations.

But I do like the idea of studding the feasibility of a park and ride station near HY-9

So like I said, if the goal of commuter rail is just to make sprawl more tolerable then why build it at all?

So like I said, if the goal of commuter rail is just to make sprawl more tolerable then why build it at all?

Actually it would encourage in fill.
Over time living closer to a train station becomes more attractive for many commuters. It a big improvement over what we have.
Dart has park and ride stations in areas that are not built up yet people drive to them all the time.

Kerry's ideal world is one were everyone walks or rides a bicycle everywhere.

Kerry's ideal world is one were everyone walks or rides a bicycle everywhere.

I think that is a mischaracterization (is that a word?) - I think JTF thinks people should have that choice available to them. I agree with that. I would like to be able to walk or ride a bicycle safely to work or to other places but you really can't do that in most of OKC. It is undeniable that OKC is massively biased toward the automobile and it is often impossible, and usually very difficult, to get anywhere without a car. The city has acknowledged it made a huge mistake in not building sidewalks for over 20 years and now we are paying the price. Fortunately, steps are being taken to rectify that mistake but it is going to take some time.

I may have been overstating what Kerry wants slightly but not by much. I don't really think he only wants choices. He wants some options removed entirely. (IE not having an I40 at all through downtown)

Choices that don’t serve very many people such as a down town Norman commuter rail station cost a lot of money.
These are limited resources that could most likely be utilized far more effectively elsewhere.

The Revolving Door: Oklahoma?s Gary Ridley ? Asphalt Lobbyist, DOT Chief | Streetsblog Capitol Hill (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/01/30/the-revolving-door-oklahomas-gary-ridley-asphalt-lobbyist-dot-chief/)

Will OK ever learn? Could there be any more obvious conflict of interest? Incompetence at least for failure to actually have a plan that objectively analyzes ALL modes of transportation. Is it not obvious why we should rename that agency ODOR?

I'm not impressed by the article. Her previous article about Ohio DOT felt more informed. Probably because she lives in Ohio. Quoting the people she did really doesn't help her, in my opinion. Plus, she missed all of the pro-rail things Ridley has actually done. I think Ridley is pretty tame compared to Ohio's guy. It's hard to call it a conflict of interest when his work history, even as exec. director of that assoc., means he knows something about transportation. The bigger picture is what's ahead now that we know he's retiring.

I am not so sure cafe - the has been a lot of stalli.... I mean studying about rail but not much real progress. We are extremely highway centric and the agency does not appear to be very objective in looking at anything else.

We have an opportunity most places never get in that we could start building new and better transportation infrastructure before it becomes something that negatively affects quality of life in the state. OKC and other population centers in OK are going to continue increasing in population and we need to decide now if we want to continue laying more and more concrete that will never be enough to satisfy the induced demand; or start working on real plans that provide better alternatives. We systematically ignore life cycle and long term costs for exclusively building more highway infrastructure. They do a pretty good job when it comes to building new highway interchanges and the like, but are like most of us when outside their comfort zone and the results are mixed at best.

I understand and agree it isn't a "need" right now, but failing to get ahead of the eventual need when we have an opportunity to do so is a failure in leadership in my opinion. But you are likely closer to the folks over there than I. I can only speak about what I have heard them say in a few meetings and what their actions and policies appear to be.

(I agree the article isn't breaking new ground, but I don't think many people realize we nearly have had a revolving door between the Asphalt Association and ODOT. The appearance should make people question for whose benefit is the agency truly working for.)

I may have been overstating what Kerry wants slightly but not by much. I don't really think he only wants choices. He wants some options removed entirely. (IE not having an I40 at all through downtown)

You are about I-40. I would not have rebuilt it. I would removed the entire section between 235 and 44 and re-established the grid. I would have then made a new I-40 connecting to Airport Road and some point near Yukon on the current I-40. This new bypass route wouldn't have any exits. This would result in local access to downtown but all thru- traffic would be routed around the city.

JTF: So you dont want "thru traffic" to be able to stop and spend their time & money in OKC?

JTF: So you dont want "thru traffic" to be able to stop and spend their time & money in OKC?

I'm sure through traffic would stop and get their gas and fast food on I-240 or I-44 just as much as they would have on the crosstown freeway. No loss of money spent in OKC.

I'm sure through traffic would stop and get their gas and fast food on I-240 or I-44 just as much as they would have on the crosstown freeway. No loss of money spent in OKC.
But then we couldn't have built the iconic Skydancer bridge (according to the Mayor, the express intent of the design was to get those "thru traffic" drivers to stop, visit and spend money).

To be clear, the Crosstown Freeway is not required for people driving between Barstow, California, and Wilmington, North Carolina. Through traffic can re-route to I-240 (which, of course, would simply be I-40 in the absence of the Crosstown Freeway). Let's say the new I-40 was never built. If the Mayor was adamant about some version of the Skydancer Bridge to attract the I-40 travellers, he could have constructed it somehow over I-240. It would be just as effective as luring hapless souls off the interstate there as it is downtown.

Where exactly between 44 and 35 are those people stopping now? How long do you think it will take to payoff Skydance bridge using tax collections from people who were inspired to stop because of it?

Hmmm for some reason the character formatting options are absent...

JTF: Good question to ask the Mayor...LOL I am sure there were a decent share of folks that pulled off for Stockyards City/Cattlemans (even though at least part of that isn't actually in OKC) and the Bass Pro/Toby Keiths/Bricktown area that with the relocation and Council ban on billboards (except those that were grandfathered in), that wouldn't even be aware of those places if the crosstown wasn't there. And I am all for returning to the grid where it makes sense (like with the Boulevard). But to me it doesn't make sense when you are talking about an interstate.

Dubya61: granted their options for access are less now with the relocation than before thanks to ODoT. Of course it isn't required for those folks, but it is the most direct path...why send folks several miles out of the way...kind of the point of interstate systems is to get folks from point A to point B in the least amount of time/distance. With many large metropolitan areas, taking a loop around the city may actually be faster than taking the most direct path. We just don't have the traffic congestion to justify it.

Well it doesn't even matter Larry because they already spent the $600 million. They aren't going to tear out the freeway now.

I'm sure through traffic would stop and get their gas and fast food on I-240 or I-44 just as much as they would have on the crosstown freeway. No loss of money spent in OKC.

The money required to update I-240 and I-44 so they could handle the extra traffic would probably exceed the cost of the new I-40

The money required to update I-240 and I-44 so they could handle the extra traffic would probably exceed the cost of the new I-40Well, it's getting close for them to have do that anyways.

The plan that I have heard talked about would roughly follow I -35. But it would not be light rail, It would be commuter rail.
The plan is to double track the line. The plan calls for Norman to have 2 stops. One at OU and another on the north edge of town near Tecumseh Street.

I am not sure but there are so many people who live in far east Norman and south of Norman that a stop near Highway 9 might be worth consideration.

There are a lot more in the area along Highway 9 than along Tecumseh in North Norman.


Most people who commute to OKC from Norman live on Norman’s north or west sides. For thousands of these people it would take a minimum of 20 minutes to drive to downtown Norman. The downtown Norman parking is very poor for daily commute. By the time most people driveto downtown, wait on the train and actually arrive at their end train destination they could have driven in about ½ the time.

That's a pretty shallow viewpoint and likely not true. If you get North of Robinson and West of I-35...the population numbers really start to fall off. Your core is much further south and east of those areas.

However let's be honest. Let's say the terminating point is downtown. For people living in North Norman or West Norman along I-35, then the train is almost pointless. The commute time will jump significantly (almost double) in most cases. The only people it will attract are those that don't want to drive and/or pay for parking downtown. As far as station placement in Norman, I would probably look at...

- Along Classen just north of where it turns off of 12th SE, North of Constitution on the present day site of the OU Motel, Classen Self Storage, etc. That would be ideally suited to serve campus and much of the core of SE Norman.

- Norman Amtrak Downtown - Maybe...this one might be more of an optional stop.

- Westheimer Airport along Flood probably around or just north of Rock Creek since the area near Robinson is a bit too packed right there. Plus it is still somewhat central to those North and South of that area.

However, observing how classic commuter rail works in places like Chicago...I'm not sure it is going to really make a dent. Much like what Kerry is pointing out. If you have too many stops along the way, that is going to make it take longer. Will people really give up the ability to go from downtown to home in south Norman in 30-45 minutes depending on traffic (sometimes faster/slower) just to take a train that will probably take more than hour to make the trip (especially if you add in Moore and South OKC stops).

If I look at commuter rail options from the Western Chicago burbs, it works great there because the highway system is poorly laid out and is packed with traffic. OKC's highways aren't anywhere near as bad.

Our highways are not packed yet, but they will be one day. Rush hour used to only be an hour AM and PM. But very quickly it is growing past those times. Long term we will need rail.

I've noticed the increasing amount of cars during rush hour. It is starting to get bad. But, we are nowhere near what Atlanta, Houston, or Dallas is though.