Does anyone know what they are doing at this junction??

working on the connectors to the east boulevard

I believe you are talking about the bridge to the new boulevard

Not the new crosstown junction but right north of the river in between the north/south lanes of 35/235....

It is the northbound I35 connection to the boulevard.It seems out of place but tt will ramp off just north of the river and then I believe go over i40 and then connect to the boulevard.Let me try and find a picture.

Yep that is north bound 35 to west bound blvd

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20C.pdf

That's cool, I didn't think about I35 connecting to Crosstown.... Thanks guys!

10770 Not the best editing but you can see where it disconnects from the north bound just north of the river.

Thanks again!

Of course! It will be interesting to see them do this bridge and they seem to be moving at a good pace!

This junction is already a nightmare. Just wait until they're done "connecting" it all. It's going to suck in the worst way possible.

Am I reading the far east end of this (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20C.pdf) right in that the connection from NB 35 to the Boulevard will be a fly-over? That'd make Panda happy if he was still with us.

I don't quite think it's going to suck and it's unrealistic to say it before it's even built. But a flyover is what it looks like to me but I dunno I think Panda likes his flyovers from the right side of the highways. He wasn't fond of exit lefts if I remember right.

They have a crane out there between the NB/SB of 35 just North of the river. It looks like they are installing a large sign across the road ?

I don't quite think it's going to suck and it's unrealistic to say it before it's even built. But a flyover is what it looks like to me but I dunno I think Panda likes his flyovers from the right side of the highways. He wasn't fond of exit lefts if I remember right.

I don't see it as unrealistic. Plenty of people understood what kind of catastrophe the crosstown OKC Blvd was going to be before it was built and worked to change it. The changes at this junction are going to make navigating it a nightmare.

One extra exit ramp is going to make it a nightmare. I don't think so.


And for those asking this is not really a flyover. It goes over the 40W 35s ramp. Then under i40E. Then over I40W then inder 235South and under the lincoln bridge.

One extra exit ramp is going to make it a nightmare. I don't think so.


And for those asking this is not really a flyover. It goes over the 40W 35s ramp. Then under i40E. Then over I40W then inder 235South and under the lincoln bridge.

Right, boulder. :rolleyes:

One extra exit ramp is going to make it a nightmare. I don't think so.


And for those asking this is not really a flyover. It goes over the 40W 35s ramp. Then under i40E. Then over I40W then inder 235South and under the lincoln bridge.

Ahh, I can envision it now, thanks.

The way they are terminating the east bound side of this is crazy. Two lanes to Lincoln by the river sports, but no entrance off Lincoln. The only highway entrance is to EB 40, on a cloverleaf no less. Bricktown already has pretty bad highway access, here is the chance to fix that and they completely blow it. To make it worse, the EB40 entrance dumps on to 40 right before the S 35 exit only, this is going to kill traffic right there.

Panda was right that Oklahoma is incapable of designing a decent interchange.

Not being able to hop on EB 40 right there really cramps my style as I work in the river district, but oh well

This junction is already a nightmare. Just wait until they're done "connecting" it all. It's going to suck in the worst way possible.

Other than at the peak of rush hour in the evening it is not that bad and a major reason for an issue at the intersection is traffic stops at times in both lanes on the bridge over the river, so the biggest issue is further up the road.

Why do we care if bricktown has "direct highway access?". That's exactly what's wrong with the planners of this city.

Why do we care if bricktown has "direct highway access?". That's exactly what's wrong with the planners of this city.

Because there are 1.3 million people living in the metro and only a few thousand living downtown?

People driving in to support events and businesses are what makes it all work and easy access facilitates that...

Because there are 1.3 million people living in the metro and only a few thousand living downtown?

People driving in to support events and businesses are what makes it all work and easy access facilitates that...

I don't live downtown and I've never had a problem getting to Bricktown or felt that access was any deterrent to visiting.

Am I reading the far east end of this (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2014/140507/Alternative%20C.pdf) right in that the connection from NB 35 to the Boulevard will be a fly-over? That'd make Panda happy if he was still with us. did someone say flyover!?

Ps, I'm still with you, I just moved to Cali and am not posting because sometimes I tend to make personal attacks and such so I'm trying not to post.

Why do we care if bricktown has "direct highway access?". That's exactly what's wrong with the planners of this city.

Then move the ball park and the arena out of downtown, but if you want to host events highway access is good to have. OKC has by far the most annoying highway access downtown of any city (Except maybe Manhattan, but I didn't drive there) I've ever been to, and at least for the foreseeable future, bricktown and downtown need outside money. I just don't understand why when ODOT has the opportunity to correct the issue, they screw it up, and are going to kill traffic on EB40 at the same time.

did someone say flyover!?

Ps, I'm still with you, I just moved to Cali and am not posting because sometimes I tend to make personal attacks and such so I'm trying not to post.

How are you liking SoCal? I love it there. If I could afford a house on two engineering salaries I would move there in a second.

Because there are 1.3 million people living in the metro and only a few thousand living downtown?

People driving in to support events and businesses are what makes it all work and easy access facilitates that...

No it doesn't. If we make it that much easier for people to access downtown, you remove all incentive to actually live downtown. No thank you.

did someone say flyover!?

Ps, I'm still with you, I just moved to Cali and am not posting because sometimes I tend to make personal attacks and such so I'm trying not to post.

Fair enough - in that case can you at least explain or show your evidence of where the Japanese commit suicide and die young as a direct result of Japan's comprehensive rail transit system?

Then move the ball park and the arena out of downtown, but if you want to host events highway access is good to have. OKC has by far the most annoying highway access downtown of any city (Except maybe Manhattan, but I didn't drive there) I've ever been to, and at least for the foreseeable future, bricktown and downtown need outside money. I just don't understand why when ODOT has the opportunity to correct the issue, they screw it up, and are going to kill traffic on EB40 at the same time.

Annoying highway access? Are you joking? Why? Because it takes more than 30 seconds to access downtown from the interstate? Is this some kind of sick joke?

Bricktown and Downtown is hard to get to from the interstate? Maybe if you don't know the roads.

Not that my opinion matters at all, but I think the East end connections of the boulevard is the biggest waste of money in the past decade in OKC. Totally uncalled for.

Fair enough - in that case can you at least explain or show your evidence of where the Japanese commit suicide and die young as a direct result of Japan's comprehensive rail transit system?
Number 7. List of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate)

Also, I never said they die young; I have understood that the japs actually have a longer lifespan than a lot of countries.

I'm just curious as to why the average lifespan keeps going up in the USA, aka, suburban nightmare.

Fair enough - in that case can you at least explain or show your evidence of where the Japanese commit suicide and die young as a direct result of Japan's comprehensive rail transit system?
Well so far every city I've been to has a setup going into their downtown like what OKC is getting. I love the Boulevard. Would have been nice if were six lanes though.

As I talk to more and more people in different cities, in person, I am starting to find out just how small the minority of the anti-group/pro walkability really is. It's incredible that like 90% of people I talk to don't even know about this new urbanism crap and push to lessen the automobiles grip on American Society.

Another reason I stopped posting is because of the disconnect a few people have here like when someone says Dallas has bad traffic. It is laughable. Dallas has great traffic most of the time. Even traffic in LA is overblown by a of people. That being said, it does have it's moments, but luckily they're smart and still have highway widening projects involved coupled with rail extensions.

:ot:

I vote we all stop talking in this thread unless it's specifically about the construction project on topic.

:ot:

I vote we all stop talking in this thread unless it's specifically about the construction project on topic.

Because, if we don't, my head is going to explode.

Number 7. List of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate)

Also, I never said they die young; I have understood that the japs actually have a longer lifespan than a lot of countries.

I'm just curious as to why the average lifespan keeps going up in the USA, aka, suburban nightmare.

Again - please educate us on how Japan's comprehensive public transit system is in some way related to their high suicide rate.

And yes, life expectancy in the US is going up - pretty sure it's still well below Japan's.

Because, if we don't, my head is going to explode.

Haha guilty as charged. I was just trying to learn from pulplan about how and why we would all become suicidal like the Japanese if we build more comprehensive public transit systems here (and less boulevards and unnecessarily wide interstates) - so it's somewhat related to this topic... ok fine it's not, my apologies!

Well so far every city I've been to has a setup going into their downtown like what OKC is getting. I love the Boulevard. Would have been nice if were six lanes though.

As I talk to more and more people in different cities, in person, I am starting to find out just how small the minority of the anti-group/pro walkability really is. It's incredible that like 90% of people I talk to don't even know about this new urbanism crap and push to lessen the automobiles grip on American Society.

Another reason I stopped posting is because of the disconnect a few people have here like when someone says Dallas has bad traffic. It is laughable. Dallas has great traffic most of the time. Even traffic in LA is overblown by a of people. That being said, it does have it's moments, but luckily they're smart and still have highway widening projects involved coupled with rail extensions.

That last line is where you fail and fail spectacularly - because you don't and will never understand that widening roads ALONG WITH rail extensions is illogical and self-defeating. There's a reason DART and Metrolink are vastly underutilized. But you don't and won't get that.

Again - please educate us on how Japan's comprehensive public transit system is in some way related to their high suicide rate.

And yes, life expectancy in the US is going up - pretty sure it's still well below Japan's.dude, I never said that. What is wrong with you?

That last line is where you fail and fail spectacularly - because you don't and will never understand that widening roads ALONG WITH rail extensions is illogical and self-defeating. There's a reason DART and Metrolink are vastly underutilized. But you don't and won't get that.
Well you're wrong. If LA double decked all of its highways, that would solve traffic issues. Atlanta is considering to double deck the downtown connector; if they do that, then it will definitely ease traffic congestion.

I didn't fail on any of my lines. If what you said was true, the Kilptratick Turnpike would be overflowed with traffic along the new 10 lane Crosstown. When it was six lanes it would always back up, now traffic flows smoothly until you get to the crappy interchange.

Same thing with 635 in Dallas and I'll be back on here specifically for your when the 35E expansion is done.

Yes, LA has extreme congestion, but surely you wouldn't expect a 8-12 lane highway to handle 21 million people in the SoCal area. Sort of translates to how train stations in certain parts of Europe are so crowded you have to wait until the next train.

Also, to the person that said get back on topic, I wish you people would do the same for the Boulevard Construction Updates thread that you constantly derail with the same crap always said on here about large highways and roads.

Anyways, this is the last I'll say about the issue...

dude, I never said that. What is wrong with you?

You did in another thread - or maybe it was this one, can't remember for sure. It was during one of your usual rants against public transit/walkability/density, etc - and somewhere along the lines of "well if public transit is so great, then why does Japan have such a high suicide rate and unhealthy population" - or something of the sort. Anyway it's obvious you live in your own fantasy land and I'm glad you're right at home in LA, so we'll just agree to disagree. Maybe I'll dig up the post if I have nothing better to do later (not likely).

Well you're wrong. If LA double decked all of its highways, that would solve traffic issues. Atlanta is considering to double deck the downtown connector; if they do that, then it will definitely ease traffic congestion.

I didn't fail on any of my lines. If what you said was true, the Kilptratick Turnpike would be overflowed with traffic along the new 10 lane Crosstown. When it was six lanes it would always back up, now traffic flows smoothly until you get to the crappy interchange.

Same thing with 635 in Dallas and I'll be back on here specifically for your when the 35E expansion is done.

Yes, LA has extreme congestion, but surely you wouldn't expect a 8-12 lane highway to handle 21 million people in the SoCal area. Sort of translates to how train stations in certain parts of Europe are so crowded you have to wait until the next train.

Also, to the person that said get back on topic, I wish you people would do the same for the Boulevard Construction Updates thread that you constantly derail with the same crap always said on here about large highways and roads.

Anyways, this is the last I'll say about the issue...

Haha somehow I find that hard to believe.

And LOL, Atlanta. Atlanta may be even more of a lost cause than OKC. At least the Thunder aren't packing up from downtown and moving to Edmond yet - because that's exactly what the Braves are doing.

Just to add, what I meant by saying this is the last I'll say on this issue is I'm done with this particular conversation. I'll chime in on future debates and add my 2 cents in future freeway construction; but you already knew that.

PluPan, how's it going in LA?



Just to add, what I meant by saying this is the last I'll say on this issue is I'm done with this particular conversation. I'll chime in on future debates and add my 2 cents in future freeway construction; but you already knew that.

You did in another thread - or maybe it was this one, can't remember for sure. It was during one of your usual rants against public transit/walkability/density, etc - and somewhere along the lines of "well if public transit is so great, then why does Japan have such a high suicide rate and unhealthy population" - or something of the sort. Anyway it's obvious you live in your own fantasy land and I'm glad you're right at home in LA, so we'll just agree to disagree. Maybe I'll dig up the post if I have nothing better to do later (not likely).if you don't, I'll have to find it myself because I remember what you are talking to about. I didn't mean to imply that a lack of highways and dense urban developments were linked to suicide, I said that because it has been said by one or two posters on this forum before that suicide was linked to suburban subdivisions with cul-de-sacs and I called that out by saying if that were true, than why do other extremely dense urban countries have extremely high suicide rates? I was not trying to imply the development practices were a direct result of that. I have no idea what is going through someone's mind when they choose to commit suicide. It's a very serious topic and quite alarming.

Look man, I like mass transit probably as much you do. I just like highways way more than you do. I have been using the bus and rail a f$ck ton since I've been here and I love it. I wish OKC would do subway in the core and light rail throughout the city. I also happen to think 20 lane highways can be built where warranted. You obviously don't like that. Fine. We can agree to disagree.

My issue is when 'facts' like induced demand get thrown out there because that is garbage. There is no such thing as "induced demand" on a highway. It's comical. I want you to sit and tell me if we widened I-35 to Norman from downtown to 16 lanes with a HSR commuter rail running down the middle that it would become congested.

Just adding a lane in each direction on a super congested highway and the highway not changing isn't induced demand. It's called idiocracy. A 3 year old could tell you that one lane added in each direction on a congested highway isn't going to change a thing.

Large, wide Highways and great urbanism can coexist. It does here in LA. There are tons of people walking all over the place right next to 14 lane highways and things are built right to the street with street interaction. They only thing that can be improved is the rail lines, but if you go to metro and check out their coming soon, they adding tons of miles of new rail lines with more planned.

I applaud people like you who push mass transit. Keep doing it, there is a huge need for it in OKC. Instead of fighting a future highway proposal like what is inevitable in OKC, how you say cool, my city is growing and new infrastructure is being built. Now instead widening I35 to Norman to 18 lanes, how about we widen it to 10 and build a light-rail line to downtown Norman and Campus corner. That seems more reasonable.

Instead of widening 235 one day, how about we actually reduce it to 4 lanes underground, build a narrow, low speed limit, six lane hybrid blvd(parallel parking outside of rush hour hours on the side) a greenbelt in its place, and add rail down the BLVD, add rail down Lincoln, and let's narrow Classen from six to four lanes and add Dutch and protected bike lanes with a street car running down it. That would be a win win for everyone, would it not?

How are you liking SoCal? I love it there. If I could afford a house on two engineering salaries I would move there in a second.
In love it here man. Love the weather, the restaurants, cough Cougars cough, beach, mountains ;)

PluPan, how's it going in LA?
It's going great man. Got a job at Disneyland and have an audition to perform in parades and I start my classes for acting in July at Lee Strasberg. I really like it here it's so cool.

Ps, Trader Joes is officially my favorite store!

Welcome to SoCal, but don't forget OK.

Welcome to SoCal, but don't forget OK.
Ill be honest here: there is little no almost nothing I miss about Oklahoma or OKC. My family and the severe storms are exciting, but it feels good to be out that place.

Large, wide Highways and great urbanism can coexist. It does here in LA. There are tons of people walking all over the place right next to 14 lane highways and things are built right to the street with street interaction. They only thing that can be improved is the rail lines, but if you go to metro and check out their coming soon, they adding tons of miles of new rail lines with more planned.

I applaud people like you who push mass transit. Keep doing it, there is a huge need for it in OKC. Instead of fighting a future highway proposal like what is inevitable in OKC, how you say cool, my city is growing and new infrastructure is being built. Now instead widening I35 to Norman to 18 lanes, how about we widen it to 10 and build a light-rail line to downtown Norman and Campus corner. That seems more reasonable.

Instead of widening 235 one day, how about we actually reduce it to 4 lanes underground, build a narrow, low speed limit, six lane hybrid blvd(parallel parking outside of rush hour hours on the side) a greenbelt in its place, and add rail down the BLVD, add rail down Lincoln, and let's narrow Classen from six to four lanes and add Dutch and protected bike lanes with a street car running down it. That would be a win win for everyone, would it not?

I don't have all day (nor does anyone else) to point out every flaw in your post, but - the mere notion of referring to LA and Dallas as examples of "great urbanism" is simply a non-starter. You can believe what you want to believe, but Dallas and LA by no definition whatsoever are "great urban" cities. Do they have pockets of density and walkability? Sure, but as cities, not even close. So if you can't understand that, then this entire conversation is for naught. You have your brilliant ideas of what great urbanism is, which are - shall we say - mildly detached from reality.

They can add all the rail lines they want, but if they keep widening the highways along with it, it'll just turn into another DART - an overfunded, overhyped albatross that's impractical and unusable, and frankly unnecessary. Why would you pay to take the train if you can drive everywhere and park for free? I know these concepts make no sense to you though so I'll stop wasting my time. Pick up Walkable City and read the relevant chapter.

Not to mention who's going to pay for all these 30 lane highways - apparently not you. Always easy to build things and make someone else pay for them!

My issue is when 'facts' like induced demand get thrown out there because that is garbage. There is no such thing as "induced demand" on a highway. It's comical. I want you to sit and tell me if we widened I-35 to Norman from downtown to 16 lanes with a HSR commuter rail running down the middle that it would become congested.

Induced Demand is a valid concept. Humans will take the path of least resistance. If its easier and more cost efficient to live in BFE and work downtown than it is to live and work downtown, people will sprawl. If its easier and more cost efficient to live distant from your workplace than to collocate the two, people will sprawl. If you consistently make a long commute easy and cheap, developers will continue to make money off of sprawl. If you widen I-35 from downtown to Norman to 16 lanes with a HSR commuter rail running down the middle, developers will make Purcell the next part of the OKC metro CSA -- sprawl -- and it (I-35, in all its 16-lane glory) would become congested.

Yeah, in 30 years, and that is being conservative. Let's also not confuse growth with what people who use induced demand as an excuse not to build highways. The Kilpatrick Turnpike will eventually need to be widened to 8 lanes and one day far down the line 10 lanes; that is not induced demand, that is growth. Same reason why is doesn't back up now along with the new Crosstown because you don't see hordes of people driving on it because there are more lanes, there are going to be more lanes if more people start driving it.

Growth follows infrastructure. We could remove Kilpatrick, 240, and the Broadway Extension and OKC would be a lot more dense. Large highways were built and people decided they wanted to take advantage of that by sprawling out with nice large homes with large laws and a green landscape as opposed to cement and asphalt everywhere. Even if the highways were built like they are, people still could have demanded dense urban developments. Now granted, white flight played a role in these spread out communities, but doesn't change the development practices.

BTW, The highway widening would go from downtown OKC to Norman. Hell, just widening I-35 to 10 lanes with HOV and then 8 with HOV and light rail to Norman would solve traffic problems for the next 10-20 years if not more.

...Growth follows infrastructure... ...Large highways were built and people decided they wanted to take advantage of that by sprawling out..
LOL PluPan, in one breath you reject the concept of induced demand and in the next breath you make induced demand a cornerstone of your argument. Are you sure you know what induced demand is?

I don't have all day (nor does anyone else) to point out every flaw in your post, but - the mere notion of referring to LA and Dallas as examples of "great urbanism" is simply a non-starter. You can believe what you want to believe, but Dallas and LA by no definition whatsoever are "great urban" cities. Do they have pockets of density and walkability? Sure, but as cities, not even close. So if you can't understand that, then this entire conversation is for naught. You have your brilliant ideas of what great urbanism is, which are - shall we say - mildly detached from reality.

They can add all the rail lines they want, but if they keep widening the highways along with it, it'll just turn into another DART - an overfunded, overhyped albatross that's impractical and unusable, and frankly unnecessary. Why would you pay to take the train if you can drive everywhere and park for free? I know these concepts make no sense to you though so I'll stop wasting my time. Pick up Walkable City and read the relevant chapter.

Not to mention who's going to pay for all these 30 lane highways - apparently not you. Always easy to build things and make someone else pay for them!I never said Dallas was a great example for urbanism. In regards to LA with pockets of urbanism? Are you high? You can't go anywhere in this city without seeing buildings pushed right up against the street, stupid cyclists holding up traffic, bike lanes all over the place, parallel parking on nearly every road, tons of people walking down the street. . . I mean I've even been spending a lot of time in the downtown which has huge roads, skybridges, highways surrounding it, road tunnels, and elevated roads in some parts, and get this, the streets are extremely vibrant, walkable, and there are tons of people out. They have like two city targets and nearly every store you could think of just in their downtown. Everything that I've on here that causes lack of street life, is not correct. Same thing in Dallas, although Dallas is smaller.

With Dallas, you don't see as many people walking on the street throughout the city as you do in LA, but it's a heck of lot more than I saw in OKC, Tulsa, or KC.

I explored a lot of cities on my way out here and I noticed a reoccurring theme in the cities most impressive and fastest growing to me, large roads, large highways, light rail, and new large highway construction or expansion.

LOL PluPan, in one breath you reject the concept of induced demand and in the next breath you make induced demand a cornerstone of your argument. Are you sure you know what induced demand is?
So don't act like if we widen a highway by six lanes in each direction it will fill up because of induced demand because that's crazy. What I've seen when people use the induced demand argument is one lane being added to a congested highway and it not fixing anything because it doesn't. That is not induced demand at work, that's just lack of common sense. LA just recently added a lane in each direction to the 405 and do you think it helped at all?

I'm just saying with the expansive highway system OKC built, it is just now nearing capacity and with the recent widening of Crosstown, Kilpatrick, parts of I-35, and I-40 to El Reno coupled with the panned widenings of I-40 and 240, OKC is staying ahead of the curve.

Now with what we saw with white flight, the highways held their own for years and years. They could have built urban developments, but they chose to build what they wanted to build. Just because you enable something to happen, doesn't mean it will happen unless someone genuinely wants it to. That's why have these large tract homes. People want to live there. I've never understood why people on here always point to good schools as being a reason for suburban development. Yeah, people might move to a suburban community because it has good schools, but that doesn't mean the development practices are suburban because of that fact.

I don't have all day (nor does anyone else) to point out every flaw in your post, but - the mere notion of referring to LA and Dallas as examples of "great urbanism" is simply a non-starter. You can believe what you want to believe, but Dallas and LA by no definition whatsoever are "great urban" cities. Do they have pockets of density and walkability? Sure, but as cities, not even close. So if you can't understand that, then this entire conversation is for naught. You have your brilliant ideas of what great urbanism is, which are - shall we say - mildly detached from reality.

They can add all the rail lines they want, but if they keep widening the highways along with it, it'll just turn into another DART - an overfunded, overhyped albatross that's impractical and unusable, and frankly unnecessary. Why would you pay to take the train if you can drive everywhere and park for free? I know these concepts make no sense to you though so I'll stop wasting my time. Pick up Walkable City and read the relevant chapter.

Not to mention who's going to pay for all these 30 lane highways - apparently not you. Always easy to build things and make someone else pay for them!


As for DART, I'm going to guess you've never ridden it. I started riding it a lot and it was always used and very frequently by the less fortunate who probably rely on it to get to and from work. DART is great. No matter what you say about it. It's new and when high density developments are announced around the stations which will happen and already has, remember that I told you so. Dallas is sure doing something right because it is one of the fastest growing cities out there. Go have a look how many people were added into the metro last year. It's just weird because they don't follow the guidelines of your beloved Jeff Speck guy. Wonder how they grow. :p

As far as who will pay for my 20 billion in highway expansions, I'd venture to say the same people that are paying for the 98 billion dollar HSR being built or the same way billions in rail or highway expansion are found in other cities. This may come as a shock to people outside of OKC, but single highway or rail projects over a billion dollars are more frequent than you'd think in actual cities.

Thre is obviously two types of people in this world. The urbanists and the suburbans. In San Diego, downtown and midtown are becoming more and more dense with condos and residential towers in an urban paradise; however, when a developer announced plans for a medium density city/residential/hotel development in the suburb of Del Mar, the residents got enough signatures on a petition to stop since it is feared it will be too crowded.

LOL PluPan, in one breath you reject the concept of induced demand and in the next breath you make induced demand a cornerstone of your argument. Are you sure you know what induced demand is?

That is too funny. Pulplan is so set in his ways and out of touch with reality that he doesn't even know what he's typing anymore. Poor guy!

As for DART, I'm going to guess you've never ridden it. I started riding it a lot and it was always used and very frequently by the less fortunate who probably rely on it to get to and from work. DART is great. No matter what you say about it. It's new and when high density developments are announced around the stations which will happen and already has, remember that I told you so. Dallas is sure doing something right because it is one of the fastest growing cities out there. Go have a look how many people were added into the metro last year. It's just weird because they don't follow the guidelines of your beloved Jeff Speck guy. Wonder how they grow. :p

As far as who will pay for my 20 billion in highway expansions, I'd venture to say the same people that are paying for the 98 billion dollar HSR being built or the same way billions in rail or highway expansion are found in other cities. This may come as a shock to people outside of OKC, but single highway or rail projects over a billion dollars are more frequent than you'd think in actual cities.

Fair enough - I've rode the DART only a handful of times - mostly because we have zero reason to actually visit Dallas. If we want to go to an actual city we go elsewhere.

No one is saying Dallas isn't growing - absolutely it is - but let's not pretend it's all of a sudden turning into New York or Chicago in terms of it's density, walkability, and sustainability. Dallas is blessed with a large, educated population, and even more cheap land for all of them to build their McMansions. So no doubt, Dallas' growth is impressive, it's just not sustainable without destroying the environment or furthering the indebtedness of the coming generations who will live there.