1/3 of it is already the Indian Nation Turnpike, it would be nice to see that extended north to connect to Tulsa using the existing 75 corridor with bypasses built around Henryetta and Okmulgee. The highway will already be built to turnpike standards through Tulsa County by 2030.

The southern leg would need to be a new turnpike that extends north from Durant to connect to the Indian Nation Turnpike near McAlester. It would involve upgrading the corridor to turnpike standards and building new bypasses at Atoka, Stringtown and Savanna.


When the last large round of turnpike building was going on in the mid 1990's, there was a serious proposal to build a turnpike from the northern edge of Bryan County (where the current freeway ends) to McAlester. It was to run 1-2 miles east of US69. At that time, Gene Stipe and the Little Dixie crowd still had outsized influence with the Legislature and killed it before you could blink. Things have changed over the past 30 years. IMO it's time to make another run at building it.

When the last large round of turnpike building was going on in the mid 1990's, there was a serious proposal to build a turnpike from the northern edge of Bryan County (where the current freeway ends) to McAlester. It was to run 1-2 miles east of US69. At that time, Gene Stipe and the Little Dixie crowd still had outsized influence with the Legislature and killed it before you could blink. Things have changed over the past 30 years. IMO it's time to make another run at building it.

Pretty sure Gene Stipe had a lot to do with the Indian Nation Turnpike being built to Hugo. Agree it’s time to revive the Durant Turnpike and extend I-45 north to Tulsa. That would give NE OK a third interstate: I-44, future interstate for 412 to I-35/NW Arkansas and I-45 all the way to the Gulf Coast.

Looks like Norman city council is determined to fight this new turnpike. I sure hope they aren't successful. As a property owner in the area, I'm looking forward to the expansion. Will give me much quicker access to the land.

Looks like Norman city council is determined to fight this new turnpike. I sure hope they aren't successful. As a property owner in the area, I'm looking forward to the expansion. Will give me much quicker access to the land.

Quite a few people in Norman are not happy about it. Not really sure they can do much about it but Nextdoor and Facebook Norman groups are gathering pitchforks!

Quite a few people in Norman are not happy about it. Not really sure they can do much about it but Nextdoor and Facebook Norman groups are gathering pitchforks!
Would this turnpike contribute or take away the quality of life in Norman?
Many that I have spoken with feel the later.

Looks like Norman city council is determined to fight this new turnpike. I sure hope they aren't successful. As a property owner in the area, I'm looking forward to the expansion. Will give me much quicker access to the land.

they don't have much ability to stop it

Would this turnpike contribute or take away the quality of life in Norman?
Many that I have spoken with feel the later.

it would sure improve my quality of life.

Would this turnpike contribute or take away the quality of life in Norman?
Many that I have spoken with feel the later.

I feel like it is all about who you ask. For me personally it would great to be able to get to 44 faster without having to take 240. I drive all over the state for job sites so just a quicker route for me.

I think if you lived anywhere near it you might have a different view on it taking your home/land/noise etc.

I feel like it is all about who you ask. For me personally it would great to be able to get to 44 faster without having to take 240. I drive all over the state for job sites so just a quicker route for me.

I think if you lived anywhere near it you might have a different view on it taking your home/land/noise etc.

A significant number of people I socialize with use Thunderbird for mtn. biking, fishing, and hiking.
They are opposed and don't necessarily live in the proposed path.

I don't see how this expansion will impact Thunderbird areas for mtn. biking... Is that a concern?

That's a super weird complaint once again, considering Highway 9 already exists going right by Thunderbird immediately to the south.

That's a super weird complaint once again, considering Highway 9 already exists going right by Thunderbird immediately to the south.

I guess the folks with that concern must be super weird along with the entire City Council. Who knew?

I guess the folks with that concern must be super weird along with the entire City Council. Who knew?

If that is their specific complaint, then yes. I'd hope that the Norman City Council has better reasoning than that.

I don't see how this expansion will impact Thunderbird areas for mtn. biking... Is that a concern?

No way. US-412 goes over Lake Keystone and travels for miles right between the two arms of the lake. US-69 crosses lake Eufaula in two places and runs down the entire length of the lake. Both highways are interstate quality limited access and are much closer to their lakes than this highway will be and neither hampers the use of the lakes at all.

No way. US-412 goes over Lake Keystone and travels for miles right between the two arms of the lake. US-69 crosses lake Eufaula in two places and runs down the entire length of the lake. Both highways are interstate quality limited access and are much closer to their lakes than this highway will be and neither hampers the use of the lakes at all.

I've been to Lake Hefner for jogging and other uses probably dozens of times if not over a hundred, Hefner Parkway being right next to it has never impacted my use of the lake other than convenient access for getting there.

Makes me wonder if improved access is the actual complaint here.

I don't have a dog in this fight. But if this highway will siphon off cross-country travelers that might otherwise stop in Norman and get gas, a bite to eat, etc. than I can see why the City Council may be against it. My guess is it will, at the margins, negatively impact businesses and tax receipts.

As an OKC partisan that loves the look of the skyline, especially now, it makes me at least a little bit sad that a lot of travelers will now only be exposed to rural expanses as they traverse the metro area. A small thing.

it would sure improve my quality of life.

Hey no doubt it will improve some lives. It won't impact my life one way or the other. I was just sharing what I hear in the parking lot after a ride and drinking a beer or two.

I don't have a dog in this fight. But if this highway will siphon off cross-country travelers that might otherwise stop in Norman and get gas, a bite to eat, etc. than I can see why the City Council may be against it. My guess is it will, at the margins, negatively impact businesses and tax receipts.

As an OKC partisan that loves the look of the skyline, especially now, it makes me at least a little bit sad that a lot of travelers will now only be exposed to rural expanses as they traverse the metro area. A small thing.

While that makes sense for small towns where there are more travelers stopping than those shops have local customers. However it seems like there is at least two reasons that cross-country traveler argument would not be correct in this case.

First due to the N/S segment being much closer to Norman, than it is OKC, it seems it will likely to develop the kind of suburban density that is in most of Norman eventually, while it still is an open question if that will happen along the existing Kickapoo turnpike. So Norman would then go from an option along ~20% of the routes between 35 entering/leaving it to/from where 44 enters/leaves OKC, to the primary if not only options along the turnpike route.

Second the amount of income growth for the city on north and east side that enables seems likely orders of magnitude higher than what there is from travelers stopping on the way through. Granted there is arguments about the ROI of suburban style growth patterns but the issues from that tend to be decades after the current city leaders will be gone, while the biggest benefits could happen in their terms.

Makes me wonder if improved access is the actual complaint here.

this is exactly what i think as well. those in my friend group who are opposed to it, have hinted that they don't like the idea that it will be much easier for people to use the lake. they mentioned about it getting popular and over crowded.

I don't have a dog in this fight. But if this highway will siphon off cross-country travelers that might otherwise stop in Norman and get gas, a bite to eat, etc. than I can see why the City Council may be against it. My guess is it will, at the margins, negatively impact businesses and tax receipts.

There aren't really a whole lot of places along I-35 in Norman that are convenient stops for travelers as it is now. Most of the gas stations and restaurants along that stretch are far enough away from the highway that a traveler passing through wouldn't see them from the road, and/or they would be inconvenient to get to and get back to the highway from. If I were a long-distance traveler passing through, I'd probably be more apt to make those stops in either OKC proper or Goldsby, just because it's easier.

There aren't really a whole lot of places along I-35 in Norman that are convenient stops for travelers as it is now. Most of the gas stations and restaurants along that stretch are far enough away from the highway that a traveler passing through wouldn't see them from the road, and/or they would be inconvenient to get to and get back to the highway from. If I were a long-distance traveler passing through, I'd probably be more apt to make those stops in either OKC proper or Goldsby, just because it's easier.

I35 itself through Norman is great as long as you're just driving through, however Norman traffic on Robinson, Main, Tecumseh though that area is awful. When they widened it years ago, they should have dug out 35 from between just north of HWY 9 to at least north of Robinson thus allowing for Main and Robinson to go over the interstate at ground level with service roads up top. See US75 Central Expressway in Dallas from about just north of downtown to about NW Highway. ODOT should have done this through Moore as well. Norman exits will only get worse like 19th St in Moore which is a train wreck through there! Just awful, awful planning and execution.

This is why I hope that OTA, when they build their pikes through here -- especially the east/west route over to 44 -- they build a facility complete with service roads. I hope they don't just build it two lane, rural style, as I like to call it.

I know, I know. All it takes is money.

I35 itself through Norman is great as long as you're just driving through, however Norman traffic on Robinson, Main, Tecumseh though that area is awful. When they widened it years ago, they should have dug out 35 from between just north of HWY 9 to at least north of Robinson thus allowing for Main and Robinson to go over the interstate at ground level with service roads up top. See US75 Central Expressway in Dallas from about just north of downtown to about NW Highway. ODOT should have done this through Moore as well. Norman exits will only get worse like 19th St in Moore which is a train wreck through there! Just awful, awful planning and execution.

This is why I hope that OTA, when they build their pikes through here -- especially the east/west route over to 44 -- they build a facility complete with service roads. I hope they don't just build it two lane, rural style, as I like to call it.

I know, I know. All it takes is money.

It's not all a money issue. OK HAS to get away from this obsession with two way access roads. Those went out in the 1970s.

It's not all a money issue. OK HAS to get away from this obsession with two way access roads. Those went out in the 1970s.

Absolutely right! I meant to add that to my statement all it takes is money AND decent planning. LOL

However ODOT already knows one-way service roads -- look at I240, the Broadway Extension, etc. And they have that project in Edmond where they're going to do that along I35.

I was trying to dig up some information on the 1999 proposal from ODOT and OTA to have a "loop" around OKC. It was apparently fought against pretty hard and failed. Just can't find a lot of info.

I was trying to dig up some information on the 1999 proposal from ODOT and OTA to have a "loop" around OKC. It was apparently fought against pretty hard and failed. Just can't find a lot of info.


Maybe this?
https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/1999/05/25/outer-loop-plan-narrowed-officials-unveil-proposal-for-southwest-portion/62241285007/

Yes! I found the Norman transcript did what I was working on as well! Combined all the old news articles about the battle of the Outer Loop in 98-99.

https://www.normantranscript.com/news/turnpike-withdrawn-how-norman-residents-beat-back-the-1998-outer-loop/article_b596bcdc-ac93-11ec-8b70-ef0632499149.amp.html

The number one issue is safety, the proposed turnpikes would no doubt make I-35 a safer Highway.

On a side note, I find it somewhat humorous when I hear a few talk about how the land they have, has been in the family since Statehood. How did they get it, they took it from the Native Americans with no compensation given.

The number one issue is safety, the proposed turnpikes would no doubt make I-35 a safer Highway.

On a side note, I find it somewhat humorous when I hear a few talk about how the land they have, has been in the family since Statehood. How did they get it, they took it from the Native Americans with no compensation given.

that is not what happened

I'm curious on the potential benefit of the extended freeways/turnpikes for OU games. Having grown up in Tulsa and frequented OU football games, getting in/out via I-35 was always a slow-paced adventure. Being able to take the Kickapoo to/from SH-9 looks like it should be able to speed up the trip for anyone looking to bypass the regular OKC traffic.

Yes! I found the Norman transcript did what I was working on as well! Combined all the old news articles about the battle of the Outer Loop in 98-99.

https://www.normantranscript.com/news/turnpike-withdrawn-how-norman-residents-beat-back-the-1998-outer-loop/article_b596bcdc-ac93-11ec-8b70-ef0632499149.amp.html

It appears that OTA learned to bite off pieces at a time to dilute the opposition.

If Norman really doesn't want it, just push it out past Thunderbird and bring it through the edge of Pink as to help Pink grow into a nice suburb with a nice big QT or OnCue at the exit to spur economic development and tax revenue for the tiny community. But I have a feeling it's just going to be built no matter the opposition just like the Kickapoo. This outer loop was needed over 20 years ago, and it's even more needed now!

I'd say terminate it at Indian Hills road and then cut back to I-35. Skip the east side of Norman altogether.

I'd say terminate it at Indian Hills road and then cut back to I-35. Skip the east side of Norman altogether.

On of the entire points is to be able to skip the metro and have another way across the river south of Norman.

On of the entire points is to be able to skip the metro and have another way across the river south of Norman.

Yes, to move the truck traffic off of I-35 and anyone else heading Northeast. On the flip side, this would at least alleviate that traffic on I-35 from Moore and on Northward through the metro.

Interesting OTA meeting yesterday. Lots of noise around the Norman area proposal.

I feel for anyone that is going to lose their home in this, just like with any project like this. But honestly, I don't think the state or OTA care at all. They knew exactly what they were doing when they drew the plans, so it's not like they just realized that these homes were targeted. We'll see them letting the residents vent for a while, and then they'll pull the trigger. They'll be some sort of lawsuit filed (that the residents lose), we'll delay 5 extra years from all of that, but in the end it will get done. I don't mean to be cynical, but I'm not sure what kind of change these folks think they are going to effect.

I feel for anyone that is going to lose their home in this, just like with any project like this. But honestly, I don't think the state or OTA care at all. They knew exactly what they were doing when they drew the plans, so it's not like they just realized that these homes were targeted. We'll see them letting the residents vent for a while, and then they'll pull the trigger. They'll be some sort of lawsuit filed (that the residents lose), we'll delay 5 extra years from all of that, but in the end it will get done. I don't mean to be cynical, but I'm not sure what kind of change these folks think they are going to effect.

This pretty well reflects my POV.

Interesting that the Oklahoma GOP platform for 2020 states the party is against the use of eminent domain for the construction of toll roads.

If you hit the Google wayback machine, you can find defunct "Stop the OTA!!!" sites for every single expansion. It's basically a fait accompli. Soon, there will be solicitations and meetings from trial lawyers who are going to help landowners get top dollar for their land. That's all you can really do at this point.

If you hit the Google wayback machine, you can find defunct "Stop the OTA!!!" sites for every single expansion. It's basically a fait accompli. Soon, there will be solicitations and meetings from trial lawyers who are going to help landowners get top dollar for their land. That's all you can really do at this point.

Very well stated Midtowner, that's the bottom line. When those attorneys knock at your door it's all about $DOUGH$ and how to make the green bread rise.

Very well stated Midtowner, that's the bottom line. When those attorneys knock at your door it's all about $DOUGH$ and how to make the green bread rise.

If I was being forced to sell through eminent domain I would most certainly want a lawyer with expertise to assist me. I wouldn't trust OTA even a little bit.

I don’t necessarily agree with OTA here, but these extra highways are going to be very good for the families with large holdings along the proposed routes.

If I was being forced to sell through eminent domain I would most certainly want a lawyer with expertise to assist me. I wouldn't trust OTA even a little bit.

Definitely don't. While it's not really in my wheelhouse, my dad was a lawyer at the old Highway Department, and then in private practice, he represented lots of landowners. He won some cases where his appraisals were hugely off from the Commissioners' Awards. If you're going to litigate, you actually want a cruddy lowball offer. If you get 10% above the Commissioner's Award, you get attorney's fees paid by the state.

Definitely don't. While it's not really in my wheelhouse, my dad was a lawyer at the old Highway Department, and then in private practice, he represented lots of landowners. He won some cases where his appraisals were hugely off from the Commissioners' Awards. If you're going to litigate, you actually want a cruddy lowball offer. If you get 10% above the Commissioner's Award, you get attorney's fees paid by the state.

Right, there's the trick right. If the judge decides that he thinks you should have gotten less than the offer, then not only are you out that difference, but the fees to go with it. So having all of the people needed to help make that determination is key before you even start the fight. Do you consider the price before the project or the worth of the property because of the project? Do you use the assessor's estimate or a market appraiser? So many moving parts for each of those plots. And even if you win and get more, you still lose your home in the end.

Norman is Oklahoma City largest suburban area with 127,988 city, 295,528 county and the state's largest university with a medical campus of colleges in OKC.

If you've ever been to an OU football game you know how difficult traffic can be on game days going in and out of Norman from multiple directions. It's pure chaos and frustrating for drivers.

Toll roads proposed by ODOT: Are they the answer... Growth and accessibility will continue to be good; Norman firms that need to expand, and for the city-county to attract businesses and companies that might want to relocate to the area.

We know something needs to be done about the traffic--relief is 30 years long overdue.

This highway is going to continue to degrade our region and the budgets of our local municipalities by exacerbating sprawl. It is also a continuance of practices that encourage climate disaster. Building highways is only going to waste our money and our children's future.

This highway is going to continue to degrade our region and the budgets of our local municipalities by exacerbating sprawl. It is also a continuance of practices that encourage climate disaster. Building highways is only going to waste our money and our children's future.

climate disaster .... hahahahhahahhahahhahahah

this will reduce the pollution of the metro by diverting truck traffic ..

climate disaster .... hahahahhahahhahahhahahah

this will reduce the pollution of the metro by diverting truck traffic ..

Completely missing the point of the climate argument. Asphalt itself is bad for the environment (https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-not-just-cars-make-pollution-it-s-roads-they-drive-too#:~:text=For%20road%20asphalt%2C%20emissions%20 increased,%2C%20sunny%20weather%2C%20Gentner%20say s.), not to mention the fact that it encourages more driving thus increasing auto emissions.

That being said I think this expansion helps intra-metro movement. I just wish we'd similarly invest in more low-emission public transit options.

It's not the act of driving that's so bad, it's the amount of resources required to keep sprawl maintained. Miles of asphalt, water lines, sewer lines, police and fire coverage, etc. Because ultimately this road will induce more development in the area, thereby increasing the amount of net negative producing land. We already have plenty of infrastructure we will never be able to maintain. This might be good for sales tax in the short term, but its a bad investment and our children will pay.

Norman is Oklahoma City largest suburban area with 127,988 city, 295,528 county and the state's largest university with a medical campus of colleges in OKC.

If you've ever been to an OU football game you know how difficult traffic can be on game days going in and out of Norman from multiple directions. It's pure chaos and frustrating for drivers.

Toll roads proposed by ODOT: Are they the answer... Growth and accessibility will continue to be good; Norman firms that need to expand, and for the city-county to attract businesses and companies that might want to relocate to the area.

We know something needs to be done about the traffic--relief is 30 years long overdue.

With a little over half of highway 9 between i44 and i35 already built to freeway standards, it is almost a little surprising they are not planning to upgrade the rest of that segment

https://www.normantranscript.com/induced-demand-alternatives-to-turnpikes/article_2ac83805-9a83-52b9-a00f-eb5317fddd52.html

"Civil engineers, scholars and transportation organizations affirm the Fundamental Law of Road Congestion, or induced demand –- more road capacity or additional roads brings more traffic, and therefore, more congestion over time.

It is a law that OTA’s deputy director and chief engineer Joe Echelle said he is unfamiliar with during a City Council study session Tuesday night.

The law of induced demand dates back to the 1960s and over the years since has been affirmed by universities, civil engineers, policy think tanks and other transportation organizations.

The Transportation Research Board calls the evidence of induced demand “strong” and found it is often “ignored, underestimated, or misestimated in the planning process,” according to its 2020 report, Induced Vehicle Travel in the Environmental Review Process.

“Underestimating induced travel will generally lead to overestimation of the traffic congestion relief benefits a highway expansion project might generate, along with underestimation of its environmental impacts,” the report states."

Chief engineer meets the clueless criteria needed to serve Dr. Stitt. This administration whether dealing with public health, Native American sovereignty, roads, tourism dept. is inept.

Norman is Oklahoma City largest suburban area with 127,988 city, 295,528 county and the state's largest university with a medical campus of colleges in OKC.

If you've ever been to an OU football game you know how difficult traffic can be on game days going in and out of Norman from multiple directions. It's pure chaos and frustrating for drivers.

Toll roads proposed by ODOT: Are they the answer... Growth and accessibility will continue to be good; Norman firms that need to expand, and for the city-county to attract businesses and companies that might want to relocate to the area.

We know something needs to be done about the traffic--relief is 30 years long overdue.


I can't see where this proposal will alleviate football traffic from the south or the north.

I can't see where this proposal will alleviate football traffic from the south or the north.

the only part where it might would be people from tulsa who come down for games. My thoughts on the turnpike are this... it certainly will take some of the traffic for those going from dallas to tulsa, or tulsa to dallas, and that would happen no matter which side of lake thunderbird they built. But if the only way to keep the indian hills part is to put it on this side, then i think it should be on the west. Currently it takes anywhere from 20-45 minutes, just to get across norman right now. if this takes people who work in okc but live on the east side of norman off of norman streets to get home, that will help significantly with norman daily traffic. also the bridge across the river could be huge for both north norman and south moore, for getting people from tri-cities to come here to shop rather than mustang.

not to mention the economic development impact this could have of speeding up the connection layer between moore and norman, that has been very slow to develop over the past 2 decades.

Don’t most people that drive from Tulsa to Dallas cut down on the turnpike through McAlester?

Don’t most people that drive from Tulsa to Dallas cut down on the turnpike through McAlester?

a lot depends upon what part of dallas they are going to. if they are going to Plano, Frisco, Dallas, yes... but i know many Dallas Cowboys fans who actually come through OKC, because they say it's usually faster to get to Arlington that way, due to dallas traffic

same for Texas motor speedway

the only part where it might would be people from tulsa who come down for games. My thoughts on the turnpike are this... it certainly will take some of the traffic for those going from dallas to tulsa, or tulsa to dallas, and that would happen no matter which side of lake thunderbird they built. But if the only way to keep the indian hills part is to put it on this side, then i think it should be on the west. Currently it takes anywhere from 20-45 minutes, just to get across norman right now. if this takes people who work in okc but live on the east side of norman off of norman streets to get home, that will help significantly with norman daily traffic. also the bridge across the river could be huge for both north norman and south moore, for getting people from tri-cities to come here to shop rather than mustang.

not to mention the economic development impact this could have of speeding up the connection layer between moore and norman, that has been very slow to develop over the past 2 decades.
I'd like to know the number of fans in the stands on gameday that come from Tulsa. My guess it is a insignificant %.

My issue has been the lack of answers and ignorance of such things as induced demand from OTA & ODOT. This is a seat of the pants operation that is typical of the Stitt administration.

a lot depends upon what part of dallas they are going to. if they are going to Plano, Frisco, Dallas, yes... but i know many Dallas Cowboys fans who actually come through OKC, because they say it's usually faster to get to Arlington that way, due to dallas traffic

same for Texas motor speedway

No, The Sam Rayburn Tollway from US-75 is much faster to Arlington. You never go through Dallas at all. The only time I go through OKC is to go to Fort Worth or the suburbs north of Fort Worth.

I'd like to know the number of fans in the stands on gameday that come from Tulsa. My guess it is a insignificant %.

My issue has been the lack of answers and ignorance of such things as induced demand from OTA & ODOT. This is a seat of the pants operation that is typical of the Stitt administration.

It is 6 dates out of the year. The amount of people who would or would not use the new turnpike for OU home games is pretty irrelevant.

Induced demand theory is a total crock.

This is because it fails to look at roads as a system. Sure, if you expand, say, I-235 from 6 lanes to 12 you are going to get more traffic on I-235. But these cars don't spawn out of nothingness like enemies in a Mario game. Traffic is attracted to the better route, resulting in decreases in usage of local streets and parallel highways like I-35 or I-44. The act of improving a highway does not cause people to take new trips that they otherwise wouldn't have. People drive because they have somewhere to go. The only people that drive on a new highway solely because a new highway was built are roadgeeks, and there aren't enough of them to meaningfully affect traffic counts.

If induced demand theory was actually true, you'd see a bunch of bustling, vibrant towns with clogged streets and successful businesses along Route 66 because their traffic would have remained the same and all of the traffic on the Interstate was just induced demand. But that's not what happened. The Interstate was the best route so traffic moved to it and the old route became a ghost town.

It is 6 dates out of the year. The amount of people who would or would not use the new turnpike for OU home games is pretty irrelevant.

agreed. my point about it is that it is insignificant. to me the best part of this whole thing is the development that can occur along this turnpike, and i have yet to year a reason why it won't happen. East norman has always been stuck in a situation of is it urban or is it rural... and this will change it substantially to the urban side. and that is good for norman, whether the norman residents know that or not.