General thread for discussing traffic issues in OKC, current or future.

Thanks for removing the other posts Pete, but this thread isn't needed either. Not with multiple threads about OKC roads and OKC drivers already existing, that's the definition of traffic. Including one specifically about traffic, in case anyone disagrees that roads and drivers aren't sufficient.

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=42512

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=43335

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=33409

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=37254

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=35613

A quick glance shows we've been in circles about this issue for some time, with the same players repeating the same positions, and as you noted sometimes threadcrapping on unrelated threads as well. While I understand the point of a dedicated thread, there's already dozens of them, and a small number of people have demonstrated they most certainly will not restrict their opinions to those threads. I'm not going to specifically call anyone out, but I think addressing that problem would be more effective than yet another thread.

That said, it's my opinion but it's your board, do as thou wilt.

Well, I'll start this one off with a comment I made under the streetcar thread. One thing that I am most confused about Oklahoma City transportation is: We seek density in the core to promote WALKABILITY and use of MASS TRANSIT, but we continue to build roads (East County connector, flyover ramps etc) and parking garages galore)! OKC traffic can hardly be considered congested by any measure (outside of a few windows of time). Seems the focus on building more highway lane miles encourages unnecessary sprawl, further excerbates poor maintenance and promotes driving. Why would anyone choose mass transit when driving is relatively congestion free almost anytime of any day of the week and there is more than sufficient parking downtown? Oklahoma city has 600 plus square miles of pavement that is not IMO maintained very well and it goes without saying that safety is impacted by streetlight outages. If OKC is going to remain a car dependent city, then why don't we focus more of an effort on vegetation on the sides and medians, proper lighting, bicycle lanes. Maybe someone out there can enlighten me.

Well, I'll start this one off with a comment I made under the streetcar thread. One thing that I am most confused about Oklahoma City transportation is: We seek density in the core to promote WALKABILITY and use of MASS TRANSIT, but we continue to build roads (East County connector, flyover ramps etc) and parking garages galore)! OKC traffic can hardly be considered congested by any measure (outside of a few windows of time). Seems the focus on building more highway lane miles encourages unnecessary sprawl, further excerbates poor maintenance and promotes driving. Why would anyone choose mass transit when driving is relatively congestion free almost anytime of any day of the week and there is more than sufficient parking downtown? Oklahoma city has 600 plus square miles of pavement that is not IMO maintained very well and it goes without saying that safety is impacted by streetlight outages. If OKC is going to remain a car dependent city, then why don't we focus more of an effort on vegetation on the sides and medians, proper lighting, bicycle lanes. Maybe someone out there can enlighten me.

Some of it can be attributed to multiple agencies being in the OKC area - ODOT building highways (that's their thing and I doubt they're going to pivot to mass transit-friendly projects anytime soon, and not sure if they should/could), OTA building turnpike extensions (same concerns about them), and then OKC (grudgingly being slowly dragged out of their cars-all-the-time-screw-everybody-else attitude).

If they would fix the bottlenecks on the highways we would be in pretty good shape. Someone should be fired for what they created at I-40 & I-44

If they would fix the bottlenecks on the highways we would be in pretty good shape. Someone should be fired for what they created at I-40 & I-44
THIS! Holy hell - it's a travesty that the bridges are still two lanes.

THIS! Holy hell - it's a travesty that the bridges are still two lanes.

I can't believe there's no concrete plans to fix this interchange anytime soon. It's like a dumbed-down version of DFW's stack interchanges.

I can't believe there's no concrete plans to fix this interchange anytime soon. It's like a dumbed-down version of DFW's stack interchanges.

Surely they had to know what they were creating here. It's the biggest cluster in the city. Just a total mess during rush hour.

Seems like ODOT has no capacity for future capacity planning - build it for (barely) what's needed now, and no thoughts for future expansion, just do it and move on to the next project to be done the same half-assed way.

Surely they had to know what they were creating here. It's the biggest cluster in the city. Just a total mess during rush hour.

I'm sure it has to be at least a few decades old. It was probably fine when they built it, but it has clearly far outlived its use at this point.

I can't believe there's no concrete plans to fix this interchange anytime soon. It's like a dumbed-down version of DFW's stack interchanges.

2024 in the ODOT 8year plan is 40.5 mil to rebuilt the I40 bridges over I44

2024 in the ODOT 8year plan is 40.5 mil to rebuilt the I40 bridges over I44

I will retract my earlier post, then. Thanks for the info!

2024 in the ODOT 8year plan is 40.5 mil to rebuilt the I40 bridges over I44
Great. Only 5 more years for them to start and 15 until they finish!

good ness. well, at least OKC now has some big city traffic on it's freeways. ....

Seems like ODOT has no capacity for future capacity planning - build it for (barely) what's needed now, and no thoughts for future expansion, just do it and move on to the next project to be done the same half-assed way.

We need to inject like 1% of Plupan into ODOT's veins.

I'm sure it has to be at least a few decades old. It was probably fine when they built it, but it has clearly far outlived its use at this point.

It was planned in the early 60's and completed over 40 years ago. At the time it was built, they didn't know any better.

I'm really entertained by all the talk of this interchange being built for what was needed at the time, not built for what would be needed in the future. In the past when the idea of building for 20 years from now instead of 20 years ago has been floated on this very site, the response has usually been "You don't really need that, in fact, you don't even really need the road you have now. Roads're bad, mmmmkay?".

The really funny part is this is usually from someone who does not drive that road daily, and possibly has never driven the road at all. Sometimes it's from someone out of state who hasn't even bothered to look at the area on Google Maps.

i'm really entertained by all the talk of this interchange being built for what was needed at the time, not built for what would be needed in the future. In the past when the idea of building for 20 years from now instead of 20 years ago has been floated on this very site, the response has usually been "you don't really need that, in fact, you don't even really need the road you have now. Roads're bad, mmmmkay?".

The really funny part is this is usually from someone who does not drive that road daily, and possibly has never driven the road at all. Sometimes it's from someone out of state who hasn't even bothered to look at the area on google maps.
bingo!

We need to inject like 1% of Plupan into ODOT's veins.

Even 1% of pulplan is too much.

This thread is irrelevant. You want to live in a big city? This is nothing. I recently realized the reason why I HATE LA. It’s OKC on steroids. Wake up, grow up, get your streetcar going in lines not loops and give up a few f’ing lanes for bikes and pedestrians. I hate all these opinions from people who’ve never travel...and no less than by car!

This thread is irrelevant. You want to live in a big city? This is nothing. I recently realized the reason why I HATE LA. It’s OKC on steroids. Wake up, grow up, get your streetcar going in lines not loops and give up a few f’ing lanes for bikes and pedestrians. I hate all these opinions from people who’ve never travel...and no less than by car!

Haha right? What's with the bottleneck traffic people are talking about? For 1-2 hours per day, tops?

And at the same time it floors me that on 16th St in the Plaza how there isn't one single traffic light or crosswalk. It should not be a life threatening experience to walk around my neighborhood, but it is.

Hey, Travellers, where are you? You have some posters to bitch at! ;)

Hey, Travellers, where are you? You have some posters to bitch at! ;)

They're not as condescending as you, so I wasn't gonna bother. :p But yeah, since you called... It's all relevant - the people in Weatherford probably bitch about their traffic too and people in OKC laugh at them, most likely. Then someone from LA will bitch about their traffic and someone from Mexico City will laugh at them and say "You wanna see *real* traffic, come here!". And there are places in OKC where the traffic can get miserable, but no, it's not as miserable for as long or in as many places as it is in bigger cities. Still, something's f-ed up when you have to sit through 5 or 6 cycles of lights at Memorial and May, it's either bad programming/design or too much traffic. I've lived in and driven in Chicago and suburban Chicago traffic as well as Seattle and South Sound traffic, so I have experience outside of OKC and it's worse there than it is here, but that doesn't mean traffic is just peachy keen here.

Well sorry I was Condescending. That was not my intention.

I quite enjoyed driving in LA. There was a lot of traffic, but everybody seemed much more pleasant to drive with, and they were very accommodating to motorbike riding the dashes. Here, somebody would have swerved over to knock them off the motorbike. Our traffic here gets annoying sometimes at the rushes, but it's nothing by which to get terribly bothered.

Ho Chi Minh City... now THAT was some bad traffic. Crosswalks and stoplights both are just weak suggestions.

I do agree with stile99 on this one. It's baffling why they didn't design all this for future growth, but what's done is done and all we can hope is the re-build will do exactly that.

I'm really entertained by all the talk of this interchange being built for what was needed at the time, not built for what would be needed in the future. In the past when the idea of building for 20 years from now instead of 20 years ago has been floated on this very site, the response has usually been "You don't really need that, in fact, you don't even really need the road you have now. Roads're bad, mmmmkay?".

The really funny part is this is usually from someone who does not drive that road daily, and possibly has never driven the road at all. Sometimes it's from someone out of state who hasn't even bothered to look at the area on Google Maps.

No one who was planning OKC freeways in the 60's could have anticipated that I44 just north of the Amarillo junction would be the busiest road in all of OK measured by AADT. The reason is no one could have foreseen the explosive growth in the far northwest necessitating the Hefner Parkway, which is the primary feeder for the great majority of the traffic on I44 at the Amarillo junction.

I've lived and worked in the OKC metro for the last 25 years and pass through that interchange multiple times each week. While people bitch about this junction as well as Dead Man's Curve (I44/OK74/OK66), at least give planners credit for making I44 8 lanes between them.

It’s getting close for that stretch of I-44 to get the 10 or even the 12 lane treatment. But before that happens, the bottleneck at I-44/I-40 junction needs to be addressed. I bet that becomes OkDOT’s top priority after the current interchange projects are completed.

It seems OkDOT’s next priorities will be I-40/I-44 interchange and Belle Isle Freeway which they will widen to 8 lanes and possibly trench or lower to at grade removing the viaduct.

I can attest that rush hour traffic in OKC is nothing compared to rush hour traffic in Denver. Upgrading a handful of bottlenecks such as around the fairgrounds and l44 at 39th St. Expressway would go a long way to speeding traffic along.

It’s getting close for that stretch of I-44 to get the 10 or even the 12 lane treatment.

no thx

I can attest that rush hour traffic in OKC is nothing compared to rush hour traffic in Denver. Upgrading a handful of bottlenecks such as around the fairgrounds and l44 at 39th St. Expressway would go a long way to speeding traffic along.

Yes that is true. Fix the bottlenecks and it will be so much better.

no thx

Fortunately it will likely end up happening regardless of the views from a small group of people so I am not worried.

I can attest that rush hour traffic in OKC is nothing compared to rush hour traffic in Denver. Upgrading a handful of bottlenecks such as around the fairgrounds and l44 at 39th St. Expressway would go a long way to speeding traffic along.

Yeah, bottlenecks are where the problems are. I'm willing to bet you see a peak in effectiveness when you reach a certain number of lanes. 4 lanes at most going in one direction is the most that is really needed. Add more for major interchange or highway exits/entrances lanes. I can see how more lanes are more usual in larger cities because you are traveling a greater distance so your more likely to stay in the same lane for a greater amount of time before getting back to the left or right to exit.

Yeah, bottlenecks are where the problems are. I'm willing to bet you see a peak in effectiveness when you reach a certain number of lanes. 4 lanes at most going in one direction is the most that is really needed. Add more for major interchange or highway exits/entrances lanes. I can see how more lanes are more usual in larger cities because you are traveling a greater distance so your more likely to stay in the same lane for a greater amount of time before getting back to the left or right to exit.
Huh? You seem to contradict yourself. You say 8 lanes max in OKC gives peak effectiveness but in other cities it’s a different number?

It’s basic math. There is x number of cars using the lanes each hour and if there aren’t enough lanes then the LOS drops and you eventually see congestion.

The induced demand fallacy is vastly overstated and no such example in OKC can be used to support it other than trying to say that growth that would have happened regardless is induced demand which is malarkey. If induced demand were real, than why isn’t the Crosstown always backed up? Why isn’t Kilpatrick backed up? Why aren’t the new lanes on I-40 in West OKC always jammed? The reason why is induced demand might exists but to what extent is the real question. If it were bad enough to where it would render new infrastructure worthless upon completion, than why would we bother building any at all? That includes electric lines, water, gas, mass transit lines, etc. Yet you never see anyone argue induced demand as a reason not to build those things.

Only freeways because there is a hidden agenda to change the way we live because the new urbanists have this idealistic way of living they think everyone should live. Unfortunately for them, there is this little thing called reality and facts that get in the way of their goals. Unfortunately for those who live in the real world, their fantasy world of bike lanes and trains everywhere—which doesn’t exist for an alternative for those who would need that as an option in the absence of freeways or wide roads—[they] have to deal with the consequences of a lack of investment in freeway facilities and car based infrastructure or these stupid road diets that are plaguing LA among other various metros based on a number of flawed arguments.

A better way to factor in what those would call induced demand is latent demand which is a real issue. The induced demand theory only takes into account a widened freeway in the project area, not the other commuting corridors and mind you, almost always in a city that has horrid traffic in the majority of its freeways.

I can easily make the case for the Sepulveda pass project did tons of good and anyone wishes, I will, that publications like Strongtowns or Citylab love to bash like any freeway project that comes to fruition. The Katy freeway is another example. But hey, let’s pretend if we didn’t widen them while tens or hundreds of thousands of people moved to the region while the project was underway, that traffic wouldn’t have been worse than it was after it was widened. That is a lack of planning and yes, more lanes would have solved the problem.

Mass transit does NOT reduce traffic and in fact the case can be made it makes it worse. This does not mean I am against mass transit. I am a daily user of the red line which is a heavy subterranean rail line in LA connecting DTLA to The Valley and I cycle over 150 miles a week. I see great benefit in it and I would love to see OKC invest in real mass transit. While some might consider this ironic, that is why I am AGAINST the streetcar and I’m not a fan of the current BRT line on NWE as I don’t see it as a real BRT line rather it’s a glorified bus line.

I am open to some street diets and I’m more and more appreciation the idea of Classen being narrowed to 4 lanes which protected bike lane and a dedicated bus lane in each direction. There is a few other roads I think could use a “right sizing” which is my preferred term as I don’t like the term “road diet.”

I am more than happy to debate with anyone about this topic. I have read probably every article about induced demand there is to read. I just don’t buy it. I am not naive, there are some facts behind it to support it, but I believe those facts point to something else than induced demand.

In the end, we will need to see our funding being more evenly distributed among various modes of transit. Neglecting freeways and car based infrastructure for any reason is my biggest beef and is a step backwards.

PS, this isn’t directed at you, JN1780. Only my first question was at you. The rest is intended to spark a debate as this is sort of part of the conversation this thread was started on.

Yeah, bottlenecks are where the problems are. I'm willing to bet you see a peak in effectiveness when you reach a certain number of lanes. 4 lanes at most going in one direction is the most that is really needed. Add more for major interchange or highway exits/entrances lanes. I can see how more lanes are more usual in larger cities because you are traveling a greater distance so your more likely to stay in the same lane for a greater amount of time before getting back to the left or right to exit.


I will say, without adding a single lane, if OkDOT improved the deficiencies like bottlenecks and poor designs(cloverleaf interchanges for major freeways, exits or entries on the left side of the highway, among other substandard interchange fixes) it would go a long way in improving traffic in the metro.

I also would NOT be opposed to building a light rail to Norman before a single lane was added on I-35.

I really don’t get the complaining about traffic in OKC. I left work at SW 59th and Meridian at 4:25, I was at Chilis at NW Expressway and Rockwell at 4:50. 25 minutes. And I didn’t speed, lane jump or do anything to hurry. In DFW, KC, Denver, St. Louis or any other BIG cities that I’ve been in that distance would take twice that at the same time of day. Forget NYC, LA and the like.

The problem with adding more lanes is its just not possible due to prior road design. For instance if you wanted to add an extra lane in 44 between Baptist and I-40 the overpasses and underpasses weren’t made with this in mind. So you would need a major cost to redo them. Heck, 40/44 is not wide enough but going over 40 west or east is only 2 lanes and will take 10 years to make 3.

Another beef is almost every 4 lane interchange does not have an extra right turn lane for the last 100 or so feet. I realize we can’t do them all at once but when they redo those roads why not take the easement and add them in? This is standard in most large cities. Our engineers need to spend a few weeks driving around in other state large cities to get a clue.

I really don’t get the complaining about traffic in OKC. I left work at SW 59th and Meridian at 4:25, I was at Chilis at NW Expressway and Rockwell at 4:50. 25 minutes. And I didn’t speed, lane jump or do anything to hurry. In DFW, KC, Denver, St. Louis or any other BIG cities that I’ve been in that distance would take twice that at the same time of day. Forget NYC, LA and the like.

“Non rush hour”

The problem with adding more lanes is its just not possible due to prior road design. For instance if you wanted to add an extra lane in 44 between Baptist and I-40 the overpasses and underpasses weren’t made with this in mind. So you would need a major cost to redo them. Heck, 40/44 is not wide enough but going over 40 west or east is only 2 lanes and will take 10 years to make 3.

Another beef is almost every 4 lane interchange does not have an extra right turn lane for the last 100 or so feet. I realize we can’t do them all at once but when they redo those roads why not take the easement and add them in? This is standard in most large cities. Our engineers need to spend a few weeks driving around in other state large cities to get a clue.
Are you referring to surface roads or freeways? In either case I disagree for a variety of reasons. Main one in this case is there is more than enough room on just about every corridor in the OKC metro to add lanes with few exceptions.

Furthermore, you seem to contradict yourself or give yourself room for error by saying “without huge costs.” In this day in age especially when BRIC countries(not just them) have ramped up construction projects regarding their infrastructure, costs of raw materials are going up. Combine this with increasing costs of infrastructure development here in the states due to various red tape laws(some are needed) and union requirements, I can’t argue with you that is hasn’t become expensive, in some cases just flat out cost prohibitive, to improve our infrastructure. Something has to be done however.

It is never cheap to build something the right way and to have good infrastructure will require us to spend money. ROW is something that is an obstacle but doesn’t mean it’s not possible for a project to proceed. Tell that to 60s era planners, for better or worse, who got the job done. Though there are cons in massive diving freeways, other areas were built with new housing among with existing areas becoming more dense. We are capable of coming up with solutions to mitigate the impacts such as community division, fine particulates being emitted, c02 emissions, urban heat island effect, etc...

There are also other methods than simply adding surface lanes like tunnels or elevated lanes that can be planned for when traffic warrants an expense like that. I don’t believe that traffic in OKC is at that point yet and shouldn’t be for another decade or so. We can increase lane capacity with things like turn lanes, grade separated intersections, reducing curb cuts, among other various improvements without adding more lanes.

I do agree with you that there is a lack of planning recently in Oklahoma on so many levels.

One thing that really bothers me is how cut off each subdivision is from another. This is easily observed by looking at Google Maps. If you look at neighborhoods in a square mile, you can see how one home on the west side of the square mile could drive one mile to east side of it to reach a commercial development there but instead they end up having to drive to the only mile road they have access to, a half mile either north or south, than a full mile to the east, than another 1/2 mile to the north or south again. That’s a full 2 miles to get to a store that is one miles or less from their house due to subdivisions being completely cut off from another. You can’t even walk or bike there in many cases. There are so many examples of this.

It isn’t really that big of a deal at the moment in OKC, but in major cities where it can take over 20 minutes to traverse a mile during peak hours, it quickly becomes less than ideal. But the point is, there should be better planning on this end.

Same goes for lack of planning to expand roads and freeways. Case in point, look at the Kilpatrick extension through Mustang. Look at how many curves it has to take. There is absolutely zero planning for future freeways through the areas of OKC growing rapidly like the northwest and southwest sections. They allowed a subdivision to be built right at the end of the Kilpatrick Turnpike Stub.

At the end of the day; there are plenty of solutions without adding lanes to be had. Encouraging or even incentivizing off peak work hours. Ensuring a decentralization of job centers so everyone isn’t going to the same place to work which crowds freeways at one time—this is also relieved with off peak job hours. Telecommuting. Incentivizing carpooling. Converting left hand shoulders to HOV lanes during peak hours and giving solo drivers the option to pay for it(this is technically adding a lane but not really expanding the freeways footprint much. Reducing deficiencies which can increase lane capacity. Adding visual barriers on the median to prevent people from looking at the other side of the freeway(reduces rubbernecking).

Another thing I personally believe will increase capacity of roads by a huge number is self driving cars. Self driving cars should prevent a number of traffic jams which are caused by stupid things like bad driving, some idiot going below the speed of traffic for no reason, rubbernecking, etc. Some people don’t believe in that or think it’s a long ways out, but I see huge benefit in autonomous cars.

“Non rush hour”


What is considered rush hour in OKC? In those cities he listed that I’m familiar with, that is rush hour. Rush hour in LA starts at 4:30am and ends at midnight. LOL... I’m joking, partly.

Same goes for lack of planning to expand roads and freeways. Case in point, look at the Kilpatrick extension through Mustang. Look at how many curves it has to take. There is absolutely zero planning for future freeways through the areas of OKC growing rapidly like the northwest and southwest sections. They allowed a subdivision to be built right at the end of the Kilpatrick Turnpike Stub.


Actually ACOG and ODOT together attempted to save the corridor from I-40 over south and east to I-35 but the public in the area ripped them because they didn't want the highway in their back yards. Of course the City of OKC was on board, but Mustang, Norman, Moore -- they bickered about who would get the exits/revenues and then when their public bases outlashed well their support left, too. The same exact thing was done on the east side when cities came together and did nothing but argue about it and the backyardigans didn't want the loop to mess up their rural setting. All this arguing and both ACOG and ODOT gave up the studies. Both loops were dead -- I hardly ever remember any positive stories on them. This is why IMO they eventually be built to everyone's dismay and be built as turnpikes because they basically build where they want to and don't have to do all the public stuff ODOT does. Look at the turnpike extensions already being built today. OTA is building them and they are just doing it at the direction of the Authority. Public meetings? "Sure you can voice your concerns, but they're going in regardless, so get ready." :) Remember all the opposition we heard in the news and stuff? Well it's all drowned out now because the projects are just moving forward. Like I said, I can't wait until OTA eventually takes that loop and comes in south of Norman and hooks into I35. I bet it's in the works somewhere deep in the OTA safe.

a couple examples:
https://newsok.com/article/2734466/out-of-the-loop-proposed-route-would-bypass-moore

https://newsok.com/article/2654622/outer-loop-plan-narrowed-officials-unveil-proposal-for-southwest-portion

I tell ya, the loops should have been built by now. That being said, I'm a capacity guy -- I love highways and adding to them, high interchanges, etc. I love lane miles -- I like my space and my truck likes the lanes.

Take care

Actually ACOG and ODOT together attempted to save the corridor from I-40 over south and east to I-35 but the public in the area ripped them because they didn't want the highway in their back yards. The same exact thing was done on the east side when cities came together and did nothing but argue about it. All this arguing and both ACOG and ODOT gave up the studies. Both loops were dead, there was never ever any positive stories on them. This is why IMO they eventually be built to everyone's dismay and be built as turnpikes because they basically build where they want to and don't have to do all the public stuff ODOT does. Look at the turnpike extensions already being built today.

a couple examples:
https://newsok.com/article/2734466/out-of-the-loop-proposed-route-would-bypass-moore

https://newsok.com/article/2654622/outer-loop-plan-narrowed-officials-unveil-proposal-for-southwest-portion

I tell ya, the loops should have been built by now. That being said, I'm a capacity guy -- I love highways and adding to them, high interchanges, etc. I love lane miles -- I like my space and my truck likes the lanes.

Take care

I reacall in the late 90’s talk about turnpike between Choctaw/Harrah and the cities out there wanted no part of it. Since traffic was not the same volume they gave up due to bad press and the saying of its not needed. If only they had pressed forward then I think the same thing happened on southwest side. The ability to drive from 40 to 35 soith of 40 to west of 35 in Norman is a total mess now. Turnpike takes you to airport when you need to go south. Its several miles out of way so still will require cars to exit on city streets for a jaunt. Too bad it wasn’t reserved as now its not usable for longer distances without exiting. And as we build further south and west of where it is going in they will have to traverse lots of city streets.

You think it should be ok to ride the dashes on your cycle. Really?

Actually ACOG and ODOT together attempted to save the corridor from I-40 over south and east to I-35 but the public in the area ripped them because they didn't want the highway in their back yards. Of course the City of OKC was on board, but Mustang, Norman, Moore -- they bickered about who would get the exits/revenues and then when their public bases outlashed well their support left, too. The same exact thing was done on the east side when cities came together and did nothing but argue about it and the backyardigans didn't want the loop to mess up their rural setting. All this arguing and both ACOG and ODOT gave up the studies. Both loops were dead -- I hardly ever remember any positive stories on them. This is why IMO they eventually be built to everyone's dismay and be built as turnpikes because they basically build where they want to and don't have to do all the public stuff ODOT does. Look at the turnpike extensions already being built today. OTA is building them and they are just doing it at the direction of the Authority. Public meetings? "Sure you can voice your concerns, but they're going in regardless, so get ready." :) Remember all the opposition we heard in the news and stuff? Well it's all drowned out now because the projects are just moving forward. Like I said, I can't wait until OTA eventually takes that loop and comes in south of Norman and hooks into I35. I bet it's in the works somewhere deep in the OTA safe.

a couple examples:
https://newsok.com/article/2734466/out-of-the-loop-proposed-route-would-bypass-moore

https://newsok.com/article/2654622/outer-loop-plan-narrowed-officials-unveil-proposal-for-southwest-portion

I tell ya, the loops should have been built by now. That being said, I'm a capacity guy -- I love highways and adding to them, high interchanges, etc. I love lane miles -- I like my space and my truck likes the lanes.

Take care
Thank you for the insight. That is interesting to know about the proposed freeways and efforts to preserve ROW. I jumped the gun a bit on blaming the government for the lack of preservation as I know far too often it’s due to opposition that there corridors aren’t preserved or built.

It would be very nice to have a freeway link north of the river and south of 34th st. in Moore as well. Not sure if it could be done today. At this point, a nice parkway with limited access along the river would be nice.

You think it should be ok to ride the dashes on your cycle. Really?

Why not? I've seen it in action in Los Angeles. It was my perception that it caused people to be more mindful of their presence. People were much better drivers there, though - or so it seemed.

You think it should be ok to ride the dashes on your cycle. Really?

It is safer for motorcycles to filter it seems and makes sense. It’s not legal and it is at the same time in Cali. I do it. What is your beef with it?

Its actually safer for motorcycles to try to ride 5 mph faster than the rest of the traffic.

I’ve been riding motorcycles for over 40 years. Out in LA, where lane splitting is far more common, and motorists are generally used to it, or have learned to look for it, it’s still dangerous, but not a big problem.

I won’t attempt it here. Not these days anyway. Besides the fact that it is illegal, there’s far to many self centered idiots driving in this town that will purposely swerve at you just to keep you from passing them. Then there’s the tail gaters and red light runners.... I love riding, but It’s getting bad here.

There could be a sub thread called “ Traffic Manners in OKC”... or the lack there of.

^^^^ there already is a thread like that?

^^^^ there already is a thread like that?

https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=37254

^^^ Thanks. Yes, I've visited that thread.... It was meant as tongue in cheek.

This is interesting, Oklahoma is one of the 15 states that has already exceeded pre pandemic VMT:

https://www.equipmentworld.com/better-roads/article/15065746/trip-reports-15-states-exceeding-prepandemic-traffic

To comment on everything up thread, I know it can be problematic to create too much capacity, but if there's one place to plan for the future, it's interstate interchanges. At least regrade and redrain for additional lanes to be added 20+years out, even if you're not pouring concrete for another 20 years. There's got to be a better way to plan for things than providing just enough for now only to have to screw traffic up again at a major interchange 20-30 years later. The collective loss of time to the city because of traffic at that junction (and others) is a major social and economic issue. We need to think about what happens if OKC has an Austin/Seattle style boom sometime in the next 30 years and have the foresight to spend a little bit of extra money and time now to save us what will be a lot more money and a lot more time between now and 2050.

To comment on everything up thread, I know it can be problematic to create too much capacity, but if there's one place to plan for the future, it's interstate interchanges. At least regrade and redrain for additional lanes to be added 20+years out, even if you're not pouring concrete for another 20 years. There's got to be a better way to plan for things than providing just enough for now only to have to screw traffic up again at a major interchange 20-30 years later. The collective loss of time to the city because of traffic at that junction (and others) is a major social and economic issue. We need to think about what happens if OKC has an Austin/Seattle style boom sometime in the next 30 years and have the foresight to spend a little bit of extra money and time now to save us what will be a lot more money and a lot more time between now and 2050.

The only way to mitigate that is to give more options in terms of public transportation. If the state doesn't invest in things like high-speed rail or subway lines, the problems will continue to exist. You can build and expand as much interstate you want, all that does is further congest the roads for the future. Then there's maintenance delays for road fixing and bridge repairs, and then there's more of a chance of an accident to occur since there will be more drivers. And since there will be more drivers, there will be a need to maintenance those bridges and roads more frequently. It's time we stop living in the 20th century and start looking to expand our travel options to make the state friendlier to travel and tourism.

Induced demand is malarkey and there is zero evidence of it in OKC. There are no numbers for how much traffic accounts for induced demand nor is a distinction made from it and latent demand.