Good news the work will be done, but yet another fleecing of the taxpayer and unnecessary traffic disruption with this project taking 4 years. The idea that this type of project takes 48 months to complete is complete and utter BS.

I wonder if a possible Trump transportation stimulus would speed things up.

I thought the NewsOK article said the total reconstruction would take 8 years, which is utter horse****!

Oh, god, you're right. I was just looking at the graphic, but the story does say 8 year project. Your description of it as "horse****" is spot on.

I truly don't understand why our legislature, governor, ANYONE drags ODOT and the contractors before a committee to explain this crap. Why do we constantly settle for this?

The main reason that these projects take so long is funding. If ODOT had all the money to do the entire interchange up front, they could get it done just as quickly as our neighboring states... but because we don't adequately fund our state government and the Oklahoma Constitution requires state agencies to work on a cash basis and not incur debt, ODOT is forced to complete projects piecemeal. Phase 1a - relocating the service road in the SW quadrant of the intersection and reconstructing the ramp from eastbound I-240 to southbound I-35, is only the second phase of a project chopped into 6 phases. Once phases 1 and 1a are complete, then there will be no further work done to the interchange until at least 2020.

Here's an updated construction timeline map from ODOT (click to embiggen):

http://www.odot.org/newsmedia/press/2016/I-35_I-240%20Crossroads%20UPDATED%2011-10-16.jpg (http://www.odot.org/newsmedia/press/2016/I-35_I-240%20Crossroads%20UPDATED%2011-10-16.jpg)

The main reason that these projects take so long is funding. If ODOT had all the money to do the entire interchange up front, they could get it done just as quickly as our neighboring states... but because we don't adequately fund our state government and the Oklahoma Constitution requires state agencies to work on a cash basis and not incur debt, ODOT is forced to complete projects piecemeal. Phase 1a - relocating the service road in the SW quadrant of the intersection and reconstructing the ramp from eastbound I-240 to southbound I-35, is only the second phase of a project chopped into 6 phases. Once phases 1 and 1a are complete, then there will be no further work done to the interchange until at least 2020.

Here's an updated construction timeline map from ODOT (click for larger map):

http://www.odot.org/newsmedia/press/2016/I-35_I-240%20Crossroads%20UPDATED%2011-10-16.jpg (http://www.odot.org/newsmedia/press/2016/I-35_I-240%20Crossroads%20UPDATED%2011-10-16.jpg)
I don't think the average joe realizes how stupid and restrictive the OK constitution is

Im not sure why everyone thinks Texas does everything perfect. They spend a lot of money on roads, yes, but they also do a helluva lot of toll road construction these days too. Any new road in the DFW area is toll just like in OK.

Take a look at 635 and you can see how they spend a WHOLE lot of money to float the road above the express lanes, but gone are the HOV, in come the TOLL express lanes with varying prices. Not sure how that's an improvement for traffic flow. It's still just as clogged the entire length of 635 as it has been for 30 years. And short of buying up a couple billion dollars more of frontage, they're stuck. They simply pushed some of the cost off to those willing to pay the toll (which i would bet are either the wealthy or the visiting through traffic).

Want to talk about long term projects....I think Texas holds the current record for the 35W work in Forth Worth. It has a planned timeline of at LEAST 20 years. It's a complete disaster and if you've ever driven through that in the last 5 years, you know what i mean. The frontage roads/city streets are actually FASTER than the interstate.....absorb that for a minute. I saved almost an hour of sitting in traffic by letting Google Maps take me through parts of the frontage/city to bypass it at 2pm on a Friday. What the crap would rush hour look like.

Not to mention how when you get out of the main city interstates, the TX state highways are piles of complete crap. Yeah they're all glitzy in the cities and whatever, but outside of the cities they are even worse than OK state highways. I'm actually often impressed at how the "off-the-beaten-path" highways in OK are in such good shape considering the lower traffic. One thing that's helped that is how many of them were built with concrete and not asphalt, so they've held up better.

So say what you will, but i think NOT having the debt is still the better way to go. If we did incur debt, i think we'd simply see a longer term between projects because we'd also have interest to pay off, not just waiting for dollars to build up. And stop thinking the grass is greener in TX....it's not. It's a different variety, but it's still grass.

Im not sure why everyone thinks Texas does everything perfect. They spend a lot of money on roads, yes, but they also do a helluva lot of toll road construction these days too. Any new road in the DFW area is toll just like in OK.

Take a look at 635 and you can see how they spend a WHOLE lot of money to float the road above the express lanes, but gone are the HOV, in come the TOLL express lanes with varying prices. Not sure how that's an improvement for traffic flow. It's still just as clogged the entire length of 635 as it has been for 30 years. And short of buying up a couple billion dollars more of frontage, they're stuck. They simply pushed some of the cost off to those willing to pay the toll (which i would bet are either the wealthy or the visiting through traffic).

Want to talk about long term projects....I think Texas holds the current record for the 35W work in Forth Worth. It has a planned timeline of at LEAST 20 years. It's a complete disaster and if you've ever driven through that in the last 5 years, you know what i mean. The frontage roads/city streets are actually FASTER than the interstate.....absorb that for a minute. I saved almost an hour of sitting in traffic by letting Google Maps take me through parts of the frontage/city to bypass it at 2pm on a Friday. What the crap would rush hour look like.

Not to mention how when you get out of the main city interstates, the TX state highways are piles of complete crap. Yeah they're all glitzy in the cities and whatever, but outside of the cities they are even worse than OK state highways. I'm actually often impressed at how the "off-the-beaten-path" highways in OK are in such good shape considering the lower traffic. One thing that's helped that is how many of them were built with concrete and not asphalt, so they've held up better.

So say what you will, but i think NOT having the debt is still the better way to go. If we did incur debt, i think we'd simply see a longer term between projects because we'd also have interest to pay off, not just waiting for dollars to build up. And stop thinking the grass is greener in TX....it's not. It's a different variety, but it's still grass.

Lots of wisdom here. I take the annual trek to Dallas for OU-Texas just about every year, and the construction on I35E from Denton to Dallas is virtually impassable on that Friday afternoon. Several years ago, I discovered what I think is the 380 loop eastbound toward the Tollway and it is a *breeze* back to 635. Yeah, its a toll road, but given that the construction turns I35E into a parking lot for literally *hours* I think it's a cheap investment to save time. I don't know what road planning whiz kid came up with the idea of rebuilding ALL of I-35E between Denton at Dallas at essentially the same time, but I'd have to think it was someone who never has to *drive* it. To say it's nightmarish is like saying the Titanic had an ice problem.

It's funny when people talk about bad traffic now that la is my home lol :p

But what boggles my mind is the at grade crossings in west Texas on interstates. I don't care how low the traffic counts are, no excuse for that. Although Texas now has plans to upgrade every one, I still have trouble believing they're there now.

Interesting that despite not specifically naming a state, people assumed I was referencing Texas. Though that's not entirely wrong, Texas isn't the only state I was thinking of that has a better-funded DOT that can get similar projects done much faster... MoDOT was more at the front of my mind when I made that statement. Of course, no state is without it's troubles; no DOT is without it's lemon projects - but other states seem to have their stuff together enough to get "simple" interchange projects done much more quickly than ODOT, and a large part of that is funding. Now, I'm certainly not saying all highway projects should be done on credit, running up a huge deficit. But not having that funding vehicle as an option, combined with a seeming inability to properly fund the department in the first place, results in a "simple" interchange project like the I-35/I-240 interchange that stays under construction for 6-8 YEARS. If ODOT could fund the entire project right now, it could be fully complete in one to two years.

IMO, if you want to look for the best roads and highways, look no further than Utah. That state not only has the best quality roads I've ever seen, but the designs are great as well.

Interesting that despite not specifically naming a state, people assumed I was referencing Texas. Though that's not entirely wrong, Texas isn't the only state I was thinking of that has a better-funded DOT that can get similar projects done much faster... MoDOT was more at the front of my mind when I made that statement. Of course, no state is without it's troubles; no DOT is without it's lemon projects - but other states seem to have their stuff together enough to get "simple" interchange projects done much more quickly than ODOT, and a large part of that is funding. Now, I'm certainly not saying all highway projects should be done on credit, running up a huge deficit. But not having that funding vehicle as an option, combined with a seeming inability to properly fund the department in the first place, results in a "simple" interchange project like the I-35/I-240 interchange that stays under construction for 6-8 YEARS. If ODOT could fund the entire project right now, it could be fully complete in one to two years.

Ironically I was just talking to someone from rural Kansas, now living in Kansas City the other day and they kept going on about how terrible the condition of Missouri roads are and how much needs done.

Ironically I was just talking to someone from rural Kansas, now living in Kansas City the other day and they kept going on about how terrible the condition of Missouri roads are and how much needs done.

When I lived in KC, roads were almost always better in Kansas(This may have changed with state funding problems since becoming Brownbackistan). Also, the Triangle(US-71/I-470/i-435 interchange) was under construction for almost the entire 6 years I lived there. The Missouri side did have much better snow removal, though.

That being said, I think our cash-only rules for state agencies are silly. Debt is tool for individuals, businesses and governments. With interest rates low, ODOT could have issued bonds and gotten the major projects done in a reasonable time. 8 years to finish work on the busiest interchanges in the city is absurd, but 8 years to pay off the bonds for that work is perfectly reasonable.

That being said, I think our cash-only rules for state agencies are silly. Debt is tool for individuals, businesses and governments. With interest rates low, ODOT could have issued bonds and gotten the major projects done in a reasonable time. 8 years to finish work on the busiest interchanges in the city is absurd, but 8 years to pay off the bonds for that work is perfectly reasonable.

Exactly! Very well said, NoOkie.

You lose economies of scale funding somethin over the course of 8 years with stop and start construction. All the interest the government saves goes right out the window because they aren't getting a buying in bulk discount. Econ 101.

That's making the assumption that each subcontracted job purchases through a master entity and that supplies of the same type are all purchased through the same method for each piece....that's not the case. It's up to each subcontractor to secure their supplies, and they purchase those from various sources....including what stock that company currently has. Remember, the bid is set for a set dollar amount and the contractors work to keep their own budgets in line with that. The cheaper expenses simply mean more profit on the project for the contractor.

That's making the assumption that each subcontracted job purchases through a master entity and that supplies of the same type are all purchased through the same method for each piece....that's not the case. It's up to each subcontractor to secure their supplies, and they purchase those from various sources....including what stock that company currently has. Remember, the bid is set for a set dollar amount and the contractors work to keep their own budgets in line with that. The cheaper expenses simply mean more profit on the project for the contractor.

I don't think he means a literal bulk discount on concrete, rebar, and jersey barriers.

I think he means by consolidating phases, the same contractor may be used which would reduce the overall cost.

For example, Phase 1 of Project XYZ may cost $450,000, with a 2 year break in work before Phase 2 which costs a separate $450,000. If Phase 1 and 2 were the same phase, the reduced cost from NOT stopping and starting work may bring the total bid to $800,000. A $100,000 savings over bidding them separately multiple years apart.

I don't think he means a literal bulk discount on concrete, rebar, and jersey barriers.

I think he means by consolidating phases, the same contractor may be used which would reduce the overall cost.

For example, Phase 1 of Project XYZ may cost $450,000, with a 2 year break in work before Phase 2 which costs a separate $450,000. If Phase 1 and 2 were the same phase, the reduced cost from NOT stopping and starting work may bring the total bid to $800,000. A $100,000 savings over bidding them separately multiple years apart.

I see what you're saying, and we face the same thing on some of our projects where one customer has multiple phases. It does save overhead costs to add phases as change orders to the original contract because you may avoid administrative costs, mobilization, etc., and while those translate to lower cost/higher profit for a contractor, the contractor could also pass those savings on to the state. However, it all depends on which contractor comes in with the best bid for each phase. If a second contractor bids your theoretical Phase 2 at $375,000, then the total bid would still be less.

I see what you're saying, and we face the same thing on some of our projects where one customer has multiple phases. It does save overhead costs to add phases as change orders to the original contract because you may avoid administrative costs, mobilization, etc., and while those translate to lower cost/higher profit for a contractor, the contractor could also pass those savings on to the state. However, it all depends on which contractor comes in with the best bid for each phase. If a second contractor bids your theoretical Phase 2 at $375,000, then the total bid would still be less.

That same contractor would likely bid less on the total contract anyhow, for example 775,000. Either way- the state would be better off.

Another thing, a contractor would likely charge a lower price for a contract of longer duration as it would equal more security for the company. A 5-year contract might be more attractive than a 2 year contract with no guarantee of getting the second contract several years later.

Right, and that makes sense as well. It's kind of a "six of one, half dozen of another" sometimes. It's all in how the projects are let out to bid. When you break it up into separately bidded phases, you will get some undercutting from competitors instead of selling all your eggs to the same bidder. But it really would seem better to let multiple phases to the same contractor. It would just be nice to get them all done much faster. I'm sure they're offering incentives on this as they are on the 235/44/77 interchange.

So what the above comments tell me is that it would be better (in that view) to not do phases, rather award the contract in one large lump...even if the work is completed in phases. It certainly would help speed things up, but with the way funding goes, even if we saved some overall, i dont think we'd have funds available to do that. We'd have to focus dollars on singular projects at a time instead of spreading them out around the state. So it's a change in view that the public would have to agree to. Are we ok with all dollars for 3 years going to one junction? Even if that junction is in Tulsa? Or do we feel better getting parts of it at a time while all of the state gets something?

So what the above comments tell me is that it would be better (in that view) to not do phases, rather award the contract in one large lump...even if the work is completed in phases. It certainly would help speed things up, but with the way funding goes, even if we saved some overall, i dont think we'd have funds available to do that. We'd have to focus dollars on singular projects at a time instead of spreading them out around the state. So it's a change in view that the public would have to agree to. Are we ok with all dollars for 3 years going to one junction? Even if that junction is in Tulsa? Or do we feel better getting parts of it at a time while all of the state gets something?

Well it is impractical the way things are set up in the Constitution. This is one of those times that using debt as a tool would be for the public and state's benefit. As it is currently setup, you are right it would have to focus on one or two larger projects at once and forget everything else for several years. Which is not good.

A major part of the problem is ODOT is run by the contractors. Not literally, of course, but they exert major influence to get highly favorable contract terms and payments, with penalties that are rarely enforced and incentives that are for what they normally would do anyway (e.g., finish by X date). ODOT contract monitors roll over for the builders. In fairness to them, many want to be more aggressive, but know that when they are, they will promptly get a call from someone in the legislature complaining (because the contractor is a donor or friend).

I say all of this with the belief that tomorrow wont have this problem based on what was being said on the radio about the closure being until 3pm today.

2 left lanes of westbound were closed this morning. The result, complete stoppage all the way back to Sooner Rd as of 7:30am. A commute that normally takes me about 12 minutes, just shy of an hour today!!!!

I swear that the person that plans the westbound closures usually has his/her head up their rear and doesn't plan these things out worth a damn. If you need to close lanes, fine, close the outside lanes that you're working on, and leave the inside lane(s) open for the through traffic so the merging traffic is where the slow-down is, not the THROUGH stuff. Remember we're dealing with quite a few merging areas here...Easter, 35 from south, 35 from north, AND the 2 left lane closures......only to have it all swerve to the INSIDE lane.

So why was this done like this? I guess is to minimize the amount of effort expended to set up/take down the traffic cones for the above suggestion. Although i still feel like my method is the way they should have approached this from the beginning and not by doing the opposite (closing inside lanes and routing to the outside).

It's really frustrating when you drive through this every day and see so many people just sitting around playing with themselves too. Doesn't matter what time of day either. And what have we gotten out of this so far? A new center barrier that has new light and sign anchors, a rebuilt road surface that's lower than it was before (that'll totally help that flooding right) and is obviously temporary since it sucks so bad. I can't imagine what kind of crappy work is left on this portion since it was the 'easy' part.

I bet they originally intended this to just be weekend work, but the bad weather Friday delayed things.

Well now it's the eastbound turn today. Only they took even longer to get started. By 730 am yesterday, the asphalt eater was already done with a full lane on the westbound side. Today at 730, they were still moving cones on the eastbound side to get ready for the work.

I REALLY dont understand why they are eating up the temporary asphalt already. So much of this project doesn't really seem to make sense....

Stupid contractor decision for Wednesday - make westbound close 2 left lanes, but then only have them closed for about 50 feet before it opens back up to 2 lanes. Let's go ahead and see how many people we can piss off today since the amount of road with cones on it was longer than the amount of road that actually had the lane closure. **** people.....

Stupid contractor decision for Wednesday - make westbound close 2 left lanes, but then only have them closed for about 50 feet before it opens back up to 2 lanes. Let's go ahead and see how many people we can piss off today since the amount of road with cones on it was longer than the amount of road that actually had the lane closure. **** people.....

This is why I've been avoiding I-240 completely. The reason for so many cones is because people don't know what "_____ lane closed" or |\ and |/ signs mean and try to get over at the last second.

Excatlly, every day is a new puzzle to try to figure out. The engineer on this project has to be an complete idiot because the schedule of what to do when has absolutely no cohesiveness. In any other project, you tear out the old crap and build the permanent stuff. You just leave the other parts alone until you're ready to do that. WIth this project, for example, they should have taken the outside lane out and left the inside 2 lanes alone until the outside was 100% complete. Then you've got a full 2 lanes open the whole time. WHen the inside is done, rip out the inside lanes on both sides and you can build the new center crap at the same time. It's not as though the timelines would interfere with the next phase since we're what, 2 years away from that. It might also help then by being able to focus on one area at a time since they seem to be so scatter-brained and short staffed that if you happen to catch someone actually DOING something when you drive by, they're often just picking their butt.

Excatlly, every day is a new puzzle to try to figure out. The engineer on this project has to be an complete idiot because the schedule of what to do when has absolutely no cohesiveness. In any other project, you tear out the old crap and build the permanent stuff. You just leave the other parts alone until you're ready to do that. WIth this project, for example, they should have taken the outside lane out and left the inside 2 lanes alone until the outside was 100% complete. Then you've got a full 2 lanes open the whole time. WHen the inside is done, rip out the inside lanes on both sides and you can build the new center crap at the same time. It's not as though the timelines would interfere with the next phase since we're what, 2 years away from that. It might also help then by being able to focus on one area at a time since they seem to be so scatter-brained and short staffed that if you happen to catch someone actually DOING something when you drive by, they're often just picking their butt.

In general I would agree that the process of construction has been....to say the least...curious, but I do think the next phase of the project - the EB I-240 to SB I-35 ramp - is actually supposed to dovetail with the end of this first phase - within something like a month or so, as I understand it (at least I think someone in this thread posted a contract release for it). It's the *NEXT* part that's two years out - and I think that's the startup on the part that actually interchanges with I-35. While it's long overdue, that's going to be a nightmare once it starts.

What's really gonna suck is that if the budget issues can't get worked out this time around and OKDOT has to take more cuts, they said there will be major impacts to the 8 year plan which would likely include ones like these which are already spread out.

I've been watching the concrete walls going up for months now, wondering what they were going to do with the top since they didn't seem to be lining up. My fear was that they'd do something stupid to cap it of instead of something nice. Well my fears have been confirmed this morning. They're pouring concrete in a mold fashion, which is a different height for every column of stone so it looks like complete crap. I grantee that the thinner sections are going to crack and crumble off in the short term. So far every step of this project has appeared to be done on the cheap...and it shows. And we're not even to the complicated parts yet!

Well it might not be as bad as i thought. They started adding pre-cast caps on top of the crappy molded concrete yesterday. Looks a LOT better when those got put in.

Well it might not be as bad as i thought. They started adding pre-cast caps on top of the crappy molded concrete yesterday. Looks a LOT better when those got put in.

I'm interested in what appears to be the startup for the ramp work - I think they're doing some prep and material movement into the area just SW of the interchange, and it looks to me like they're getting close (closer?) to starting to carve out the route for the new ramp....still has me a little puzzled.

I believe the next phase of work begins on March 6.

I drive by everyday on the way to work. I too was wondering what they were going to do with the uneven top. Seems the cap has solved the problem. I did notice the lines of the squares along the wall are not lined up in some areas. I am guessing this is due to putting up the wall in sections. I can only look for so long at the lines before I have look back at the road. They just look off and not done well. Not sure why, but it seems the wall is taking a long time to build.

Another thing, on the westbound lane are they going to get rid of the rest of the concrete slope (you can see it before the bridge right below the off ramp). It looks bad with the new wall stopping at the old sloped concrete. There is also a tiny bit left on the east bound lane after the bridge.

Agree, for something so new, it seems stupid that it's already out of alignment....and is taking a LONG time to do.

As for the sections they left, i think this relates to where the new ramps will integrate with the old road. So it looks weird right now, but in 10 years when the project is done, i dont think it will look so weird.

They are only going to work within the scope of the current project. It wouldn't make sense to spend the time and effort to blend in the new stuff with the old stuff when the old stuff will eventually be replaced also.

I know 63rd and I-235 will look bad for years since that ramp will be the last to be replaced.

I have one more gripe about the work that was done. The road that was paved is not smooth. It is wavy and has lumps if that makes sense. The first time I drove on it I thought I was on the Kolpatrick turnpike bridge. Ok. The road is not that bad, but you hopefully get my point. A new paving should be smooth without bumps and lumps.

I have one more gripe about the work that was done. The road that was paved is not smooth. It is wavy and has lumps if that makes sense. The first time I drove on it I thought I was on the Kolpatrick turnpike bridge. Ok. The road is not that bad, but you hopefully get my point. A new paving should be smooth without bumps and lumps.

Agree completely. I thought I was just being overly critical when I noticed how uneven the surface is in both directions, although I think it is much more pronounced on the westbound side. I drive this route EVERY day and that was one of the first things I noticed - the new surface is *not* even/level. It actually makes you think your suspension is screwed up! But when you realize the "bouncies" stop once you get past the new driving surface, you also realize it isn't your car!

^ I had assumed the new pavement was temporary, like what was done on 235 just south of 44, is it not?

^ I had assumed the new pavement was temporary, like what was done on 235 just south of 44, is it not?

Not the portion I'm talking about. This was new, excavated, rebuilt road.

Just from my experience on driving on the section of 77 that they widened in Slaughterville all the new pavement they laid down was really bumpy and uneven until they were ready to open all lanes of traffic, then they put on a top coat of asphalt that was really smooth. I have a feeling that is what they are going to do there.

Just from my experience on driving on the section of 77 that they widened in Slaughterville all the new pavement they laid down was really bumpy and uneven until they were ready to open all lanes of traffic, then they put on a top coat of asphalt that was really smooth. I have a feeling that is what they are going to do there.

There's no final topcoat to put on. This is finished highway, with new center dividers, permanent signage, the works. They *did* have some temporary pavement put in while they *constructed* these new roads - and these were excavated out several feet, rebar put in, surfacing done - there's just nothing to indicate this "bumpy" stretch is anything but permanent. A new layer of stuff on top isn't going to fix the "bumpy" this stretch of road has - it isn't like a few potholes or some scuffs - this is a distinct rolling variability in what should be a substantially level surface. It shouldn't make me think I need new shocks.

Why is this surprising to people? Almost everything done in Oklahoma is subpar and below standards you'd see in other cities that are in almost any other state than Oklahoma.

Why is this surprising to people? Almost everything done in Oklahoma is subpar and below standards you'd see in other cities that are in almost any other state than Oklahoma.

+1

Why is this surprising to people? Almost everything done in Oklahoma is subpar and below standards you'd see in other cities that are in almost any other state than Oklahoma.

Not true, plupan, and you know it.

Why is this surprising to people? Almost everything done in Oklahoma is subpar and below standards you'd see in other cities that are in almost any other state than Oklahoma.

Actually all of the new construction that has been done so far in Norman has been pretty good in my opinion. The new Main St./I-35 interchange, the Robinson Underpass both have been done as good as I've seen projects in other cities. I'm sure once the Lindsey street interchange is finally done, it will look great also. Unfortunately, it does appear it is having quite an impact on some businesses but that's another thread (which we already have).

The paving that's on 240 right now is not the permanent stuff. I'd actually be surprised if it didn't end up being concrete when it's said and over. They did a lot of work to pull out and re-bed the road (a lot of wasted effort if you ask me for what little elevation changed) but it's not the finished product. Just look at the shoulder width on the inside lane and you can see that they dont have it done. Remember, they have space on the inside reserved for construction workers right now....and that will still have to be re-leveled and paved as well to re-adjust the lines/etc.

The paving that's on 240 right now is not the permanent stuff. I'd actually be surprised if it didn't end up being concrete when it's said and over. They did a lot of work to pull out and re-bed the road (a lot of wasted effort if you ask me for what little elevation changed) but it's not the finished product. Just look at the shoulder width on the inside lane and you can see that they dont have it done. Remember, they have space on the inside reserved for construction workers right now....and that will still have to be re-leveled and paved as well to re-adjust the lines/etc.


Hmm....just not sure I can get on board with that. The narrow interior shoulder is as much because they've maxed out the room for the lanes as anything else. The interior road was scraped down to raw earth and rebuilt. I just can't fathom that's a temporary situation. Mebbe someone at DOT could answer a question in that vein....

I dropped a line to the OKDOT via their "Contact Us" page and asked about the surfacing issue along this stretch. We'll see what, if anything, they have to say.

Something else i thought about is if you look at the current paving, there's no drainage. It only rolls off to the construction area right now. I dont THINK they would just shove it to the shoulder in the permanent state. At least i would hope they wouldn't.

I just got a reply back from the ODOT!

From their letter back to me, the surfacing is going to be replaced because it was deemed by ODOT inspectors to be "substandard." It was supposed to be replaced at contractor expense this weekend, but weather forecasts have pushed that back.

So it WAS lousy work :) Three cheers to the ODOT for inspections and getting it replaced!

They did put another layer down on the westbound side. it is better, but we'll see how it settles. it's still crap compared to the old road.

That's what happens when you employ PawPaw Dingleyberry's Construction Company to do the projects.

They did put another layer down on the westbound side. it is better, but we'll see how it settles. it's still crap compared to the old road.

That's what happens when you employ PawPaw Dingleyberry's Construction Company to do the projects.

The westbound side was the worse of the two. I traveled the eastbound side today and it was....okay. Won't know about the westbound side until tonight.

Westbound seems fine. But the new stuff seemed fine at first until the bed settled. So we'll see.

They were doing something last night over night, but i dont know what. The 2 inside lanes were closed again. At least this time, they did it during the night instead of screwing with rush hour.

Westbound seems fine. But the new stuff seemed fine at first until the bed settled. So we'll see.

They were doing something last night over night, but i dont know what. The 2 inside lanes were closed again. At least this time, they did it during the night instead of screwing with rush hour.

The westbound side is....better, but I still notice a bit of the "bouncies" as before. We'll see how it goes. The eastbound side is OK.

soonerdave. Thanks for checking with ODOT on the road status. I have driven both sides and feel there is an improvement, but could still be better. That contractor probably lost so serious cash having to repave.

soonerdave. Thanks for checking with ODOT on the road status. I have driven both sides and feel there is an improvement, but could still be better. That contractor probably lost so serious cash having to repave.

Yup, I suspect so. I think this is the final product because lane striping has been laid down.

My lone remaining objection to this area is the rather sudden lane shift of about two feet just as you cross into the new area, then the switch back as you exit onto the existing (old) pavement. I'm really concerned about people not paying attention, driving "straight," and either getting hit or hitting someone that suddenly moved into "their" lane.

Well remember the current "old" layout is temporary as that whole interchange is going to go. So much like other interchange re-dos, things will be a bit weird for a years while the get through it.

The I-35 south to I-40 east ramp was like this for a LONG time until the final phase of the project.....drive all and BAM, TURN NOW!

According to NewsOk, this project has also been suspended.