I saw this article this morning, and I figured it would be a great discussion topic here.

Bumpy road has drivers fighting back on Facebook (http://www.okcfox.com/story/29097650/bumpy-road-has-drivers-frustrated-fighting-back-on-fix-waterloo-road-facebook-page)

My stance on this issue has changed over the years on this. I used to understand their plight, but I'm starting to understand that we have far too many roads that need maintenance closer to the city. I know everybody has their examples, but you can take a look at Portland, and it is full of potholes. This is likely damage from the recent rains, of course, but they need to be repaired before we start a massive project on waterloo! Honestly, this city needs a better plan with its suburban roads. I really don't know where they should draw the line, but they need to make all the roads north of say Covell county roads (if they aren't already). Just grind up the concrete and make a nice dirt road out of it and let the county pay for them. That will never happen because of all of the rich people out there, but that is what needs to happen. Unless I'm thinking of this wrong....I'm sure you guys will enlighten me :)

One final note on this. If they are going to go ahead with this project, they need to make sure they take the time and build a road that will last. It seems pretty common practice to compact the (dry) clay, throw a few inches of gravel down, and then add a few layers of asphalt. This just doesn't work. As soon as that clay gets wet, it is like jelly and just squishes around creating potholes, cracks, and sloughing of the road surface. Like I said, I've seen it in my neighborhood, and I'm starting to see it on some newly constructed roads. (rant over).

ODOT is going to completely rebuild the bridge , a half mile of the road, and the on/off ramps at Waterloo and I35 in 2016 or 2017 I believe.

I just wish they would build a limited access interstate in its place but build few on/off ramps to prevent sprawl and use it for easier access into Edmond looping to Henfer Parkway.

I think ODOT should build a loop around "felony flats" to facilitate quicker entry and egress.

Man, I figured you guys would have been all over this one. Maybe it has just been beat to death.

Plutonic Panda - How is what you are suggesting any different than what Houston has done (not a sarcastic question)? They have multiple loops and are currently building an "outer" loop that is going to be 600 miles in length. That system has limited suburban sprawl.

The bridge at Waterloo and I-35 is supposed to be completely redone in the next 2 years and I think they will include a small expansion of Waterloo road to 4 lanes over to Sooner road to reduce traffic in the area. Long term, they should expand Waterloo from Sooner to Broadway to 4 lanes. Eventually, (probably 10-15 years from now) expand it to 4 lanes from Broadway to Portland.

Its the only exit from Covell to Seward RD which is a good 7-8 mile stretch. Some don't realize how many people this exit serves both east and west of I-35 and in both Lincoln and Oklahoma Counties. Not as dramatic as Covells plans but it needs to be a 4 lane all the way to Portland for the long term so both counties need to work together

Man, I figured you guys would have been all over this one. Maybe it has just been beat to death.

Plutonic Panda - How is what you are suggesting any different than what Houston has done (not a sarcastic question)? They have multiple loops and are currently building an "outer" loop that is going to be 600 miles in length. That system has limited suburban sprawl.it doesn't need to be different. It's our own highway, not Houstons. Houston is handling their sprawl just fine. It's a better city than OKC could ever hope to be. Go look at the proposals they have and the things under construction there.

This is OKC, not Paris, not NYC, and this in the suburbs.

it doesn't need to be different. It's our own highway, not Houstons. Houston is handling their sprawl just fine. It's a better city than OKC could ever hope to be. Go look at the proposals they have and the things under construction there.

This is OKC, not Paris, not NYC, and this in the suburbs.

Look, I'm from Houston and love the city, but do you even go there? Define "handling sprawl." I can tell you my most recent visit to my hometown, a suburb of Houston, was quite miserable, where a 10 mile drive between family members' homes times have quadrupled.

But OKC will never be what Houston is so it's nothing to worry about. A small highway connector from 35 to 75 where Waterloo runs is a fantastic idea.

I am all for delineating a surface transportation zone and not repair any roads outside of it. When they become impassable they get ground up and turned into gravel/dirt roads. If the people who want to live out there want pavement they are free to write a check big enough to cover the costs. Live where you want but pay for your choice.

I know this concept will offend my fellow right wingers who want government to support their lifestyle.

I am all for delineating a surface transportation zone and not repair any roads outside of it. When they become impassable they get ground up and turned into gravel/dirt roads. If the people who want to live out there want pavement they are free to write a check big enough to cover the costs. Live where you want but pay for your choice.

I know this concept will offend my fellow right wingers who want government to support their lifestyle.

Last I checked, people that live off Waterloo pay property tax, sales tax and probably way more gas tax than someone living in mid-town, all to pay for their roads. Not to mention a ton of the road work in Edmond is mostly paid for by the feds, I am sure the people in 500K homes are paying their share of federal taxes as well.

Now when these people get on highways *gasp* and travel to OKC, they pay sales tax; a large part of which is funneled to pay for all the urbanist's projects. Since you think people should pay for their own living areas, I move that OKC give all the suburbanist (including suburban and rural OKC) refunds on their sales tax and the urbanist can fund Maps themselves.

My friend is designing the new Waterloo Bridge. He proposed using a Diverging Diamond Interchange, which would be the first in Oklahoma. I think this concept would help that interchange a lot.

They also need to add an interchange to either Sorghum Mill or Coffee Creek. The area out there is expanding rapidly and having 2 exits in 7 miles won't cut it.

http://www.divergingdiamond.com/ I've actually been through the interchange in the picture, I realized after I passed through that it was a Diverging Diamond.

Zorba, you get a like for your post. Sorgrum Mill is more likely due to the fact that you would have to buy out some expensive homes at Coffee Creek rd. They both should have had interchanges built years ago. Poor planning. Consider that water and sewer lines are being extended north and east in Edmond as new residential lot additions are added, the new proposed elementary and high schools are built and the Willow Wood or what ever the current name for the 2 miles sections mixed use developement that the Frankfort family plans on developing on Douglas blvd are built. Now tell me what the traffic is going to look like. The mile section roads will need to be upgraded to 4 lane. Like it or not, Edmond is growing and will continue to grow. The road system will need to be upgraded, not down graded to gravel. Its not a few people living on large acreages in huge, expensive homes.

My friend is designing the new Waterloo Bridge. He proposed using a Diverging Diamond Interchange, which would be the first in Oklahoma. I think this concept would help that interchange a lot.


I drove through one of those last year (Joplin maybe I think). When I first drove towards it I was thinking "what the heck was the designer of this crap smoking" but as soon as I drove through the intersections I was amazed at just how much sense that design makes and how smooth everything was flowing.

I drove through one of those last year (Joplin maybe I think). When I first drove towards it I was thinking "what the heck was the designer of this crap smoking" but as soon as I drove through the intersections I was amazed at just how much sense that design makes and how smooth everything was flowing.

first one I drove through was at Front St and 435 in KC, tripped me out.

Last I checked, people that live off Waterloo pay property tax, sales tax and probably way more gas tax than someone living in mid-town, all to pay for their roads. Not to mention a ton of the road work in Edmond is mostly paid for by the feds, I am sure the people in 500K homes are paying their share of federal taxes as well.

Now when these people get on highways *gasp* and travel to OKC, they pay sales tax; a large part of which is funneled to pay for all the urbanist's projects. Since you think people should pay for their own living areas, I move that OKC give all the suburbanist (including suburban and rural OKC) refunds on their sales tax and the urbanist can fund Maps themselves.

And taxes can always go up if they aren't pulling in enough revenue.

When you get to decide how much money you make, you can't live outside your means.

What would be nice (but unrealistic in today's funding crisis) would be for ODOT to start buying ROW along Waterloo before more of it gets developed. That way they could eventually "do a Memorial", then add a freeway/tollway when needed.

Too late, its already developed. Million dollar homes north of Oak Tree and some less expensive in the $200 and $300K.

Last I checked, people that live off Waterloo pay property tax, sales tax and probably way more gas tax than someone living in mid-town, all to pay for their roads. Not to mention a ton of the road work in Edmond is mostly paid for by the feds, I am sure the people in 500K homes are paying their share of federal taxes as well.

Now when these people get on highways *gasp* and travel to OKC, they pay sales tax; a large part of which is funneled to pay for all the urbanist's projects. Since you think people should pay for their own living areas, I move that OKC give all the suburbanist (including suburban and rural OKC) refunds on their sales tax and the urbanist can fund Maps themselves.

MAPS was passed by a public vote mostly as a plan to enhance the quality of life, and was all built without debt. The problem with projects like this are they don't generate enough tax revenue to pay for their construction, maintenance, and eventual replacement. The fact that bonds have to be sold (borrowing from the future to pay for things now) should be the first red flag that we can't afford this stuff. Local government is increasing living off the equivalent of credits cards, and we have already seen how that eventually turns out.

City after city around America have been looking at the long-term consequences and costs associated with continuing this type of development pattern and the finding are not pretty. In many cases the tax increase that is going to be necessary to pay for this stuff simply is unattainable - that amount of money simply doesn't exist. So if we can't possibly afford to maintain it then why are we even building it? With streets decaying all over the city why are we continuing to expand and build new streets so far out? If you want to know why things like MAPS became necessary - THIS (continued expansion and diversion of public funds to the fringe) is why.

Imagine if all of metro OKC was divided up in to 1,000 squares. Would It be too much to ask that the people living and the businesses operating in each square produce/generate enough tax revenue to cover the costs associated with providing public services to their square? Asked a different way, should some squares be allowed to operate at a deficit, meaning they don't generate enough tax revenue to cover their associated costs - thus shifting their tax burden to others? If the answer to that is yes - should a square consisting of multi-million dollar homes be one of them?

Don't equate Edmond growth paid for with Edmond tax money with Oklahoma City money. The fixing of Waterloo will come from county money and Edmond money, not Oklahoma City money.

MAPS was passed by a public vote mostly as a plan to enhance the quality of life, and was all built without debt. The problem with projects like this are they don't generate enough tax revenue to pay for their construction, maintenance, and eventual replacement. The fact that bonds have to be sold (borrowing from the future to pay for things now) should be the first red flag that we can't afford this stuff. Local government is increasing living off the equivalent of credits cards, and we have already seen how that eventually turns out.

City after city around America have been looking at the long-term consequences and costs associated with continuing this type of development pattern and the finding are not pretty. In many cases the tax increase that is going to be necessary to pay for this stuff simply is unattainable - that amount of money simply doesn't exist. So if we can't possibly afford to maintain it then why are we even building it? With streets decaying all over the city why are we continuing to expand and build new streets so far out? If you want to know why things like MAPS became necessary - THIS (continued expansion and diversion of public funds to the fringe) is why.

Imagine if all of metro OKC was divided up in to 1,000 squares. Would It be too much to ask that the people living and the businesses operating in each square produce/generate enough tax revenue to cover the costs associated with providing public services to their square? Asked a different way, should some squares be allowed to operate at a deficit, meaning they don't generate enough tax revenue to cover their associated costs - thus shifting their tax burden to others? If the answer to that is yes - should a square consisting of multi-million dollar homes be one of them?

First, I support Maps, but I don't see how you can argue that every square should cover its own weight, while at the same time supporting a program that dumps sales tax from 600+ square miles mostly into 2 square miles.

Last time I looked at the demographics of the Metro the highest average household incomes are North of Covell up to Waterloo. So please show me any example of a city that is tearing up paved roads and replacing them with gravel in the middle of their highest average income districts.

I seriously doubt the areas south of the Oklahoma river are covering their own weight in taxes, lets bulldoze those streets first and for that matter all their parks, since parks don't generate any revenue. How about the bus system, is it paying its own way?