I love sprawl because it’s fun to drive really fast on freeways and plus you find these cool and quirky mom and pop shops in the endless strip malls every now and then and it allows for affordable housing. Cities that establish urban growth boundaries has higher housing costs.

I wish we had a metro rail system to connect all of this before it gets filled in with sprawl.

1808118082
This is from the city of norman's website:
https://ago-item-storage.s3.amazonaws.com/e974a839acdf4ea583b166cd180c9cbe/PlanNorman_Public_Draft_Plan_1-31-18.pdf?X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEG0aCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJGMEQCIB8i 4hZNPAw39EiLu8CBcf7nReD286zMY5%2BUF1fyO%2FAZAiBLie SnoX2pwNN3Do87BdYUlPmiPLa8KihkQnnUX4oKgiq9BQjF%2F% 2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F8BEAAaDDYwNDc1ODEwMjY2NS IMiD%2Fyl2t5UAgkiWlCKpEFDeWkylJbuxfJFfABtqAnL9RNMp Gks88UrGYcED6HrEc1RH2pALihZsqBFIY%2Bj%2BkrRWtHPiSM iBIFnidCSgpgGky19P28KARZyNVbIUmR15%2FafCm9A2fAThPw nlJ1rUbFEpaiVl%2BlYzhdOFN%2F7%2FgYaojziti%2B7CmmfV ZGdv8s7EhckDd%2Bnww5joFItR2ZIryVit4VElv3gYSU95l%2F an6h7r4lLLeG53CleGO7gIQfVV2OC0lAfYtI4YdFdJ7%2FNfa9 sD0rMEahHICv4eCyW6nD5jRJLHYF15TbSKRiIl8tXOluk8MrSe Z9IasBXUDd4FeLhN1wO23%2F%2FyDXZKC7ilsQutZR4Rs%2Fxk TJP50AyHUw2%2F5SSavivnJLDn9oztvPV%2FiFRROSSRMZMJGX i3w6IKT3lTo3CieCTdK3GUmH1gRoAgM1VbvlTnQv7Dw67KFqEu sX9jmMrQczq93wLQiWS6Kne6zxvJTd4nRU4c6QoVAyKOsKJ9pg KN4o8Mb6q%2FyC0rxKrx32HCvKSR2hHy1jW8u7c2kyEE81XoWe go3%2FQ9M11WbTRpGSuHH4smjG8K3O6hVzNqz3oA6RPOrEiDVY LNaO3%2Bo5kJJx0EMl7qnoxQc8yfWYgxQINmHvCEn4ynSoqQf2 1zGR%2FKWn9bmCfeL1b4XVfbdUtwaldYO420MO%2B6ekYpi%2F Gk0Le6AXMg9%2FZVHe56DIKXFiWsFVSqfnRYcTY37jZLWqqH7a MESAkWdcJ7Q6kOWvLdQ%2B1VgDLrYVpY3OCF7W%2Fl%2BgxyH4 cvVv4Z7y5aHbgA9UpeZ9FMLpdqBc5HUFS4giglu%2B%2FhQZF0 AWsqIZ9%2BGgQ%2FWcJT36ffM2wla2zRKscSHlycLV9gwh7MJW Fmc3pFwPMOGwzaQGOrIB0N7ZkyJG%2Fgzj702%2Bdqotb32r5A w7anzpbs6P4VGv%2FLLrmoQJSvmAyqSkpf9i6PSgIuoVCIguZF yPD1OBjIP9lClMVPkRYd3PbC2nV9C0zaK8SPgG6xtjVUXUJpGl fHHMW45hG8JCT4zceZF6%2BK496K8jDrv9voOP1%2FR5ci%2B2 KnnDKPEKt6kJ0rOEarMp%2Fk9Qi%2FuWTEPh2oVstGZVZT%2FY TN8qGnOaMp9KCRCx54ZR4JKJOw%3D%3D&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20230621T211413Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAYZTTEKKE2RXSI5PC%2F20230621%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=2e0a6f1fd349de3646044964f6232a3afaf62646 1f5edfcf1db9af16b5907185

It will generate tons of new sprawl for sure. I'm not hugely excited about seeing endless tracts of copy-paste houses, gas stations, and the same handful of fast food joints every few miles. Still, the silver lining is that getting to DFW and Norman from Tulsa will be easier, not to mention the obvious metro benefits for OKC.

I just wish growth didn't equal mindless sprawl.

I absolutely agree with you in theory about sprawl. But I don't see this generating a lot of sprawl because one you get north of Norman it is so far removed from any existing development. Who are the people that want to live in close contact to that highway as opposed to a highway in a part of town that is much closer to things?

I-35 has been in place my entire lifetime and there has not much growth along it in North OKC with the exception of some industrial and highway-related uses. If there isn't cut-and-paste sprawl there, I fail to see it popping up that far east.

Maybe I just feel ornery about this whole highway in general. But I just don't see it.

**removed**

1808118082
This is from the city of norman's website:
https://ago-item-storage.s3.amazonaws.com/e974a839acdf4ea583b166cd180c9cbe/PlanNorman_Public_Draft_Plan_1-31-18.pdf?X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEG0aCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJGMEQCIB8i 4hZNPAw39EiLu8CBcf7nReD286zMY5%2BUF1fyO%2FAZAiBLie SnoX2pwNN3Do87BdYUlPmiPLa8KihkQnnUX4oKgiq9BQjF%2F% 2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F8BEAAaDDYwNDc1ODEwMjY2NS IMiD%2Fyl2t5UAgkiWlCKpEFDeWkylJbuxfJFfABtqAnL9RNMp Gks88UrGYcED6HrEc1RH2pALihZsqBFIY%2Bj%2BkrRWtHPiSM iBIFnidCSgpgGky19P28KARZyNVbIUmR15%2FafCm9A2fAThPw nlJ1rUbFEpaiVl%2BlYzhdOFN%2F7%2FgYaojziti%2B7CmmfV ZGdv8s7EhckDd%2Bnww5joFItR2ZIryVit4VElv3gYSU95l%2F an6h7r4lLLeG53CleGO7gIQfVV2OC0lAfYtI4YdFdJ7%2FNfa9 sD0rMEahHICv4eCyW6nD5jRJLHYF15TbSKRiIl8tXOluk8MrSe Z9IasBXUDd4FeLhN1wO23%2F%2FyDXZKC7ilsQutZR4Rs%2Fxk TJP50AyHUw2%2F5SSavivnJLDn9oztvPV%2FiFRROSSRMZMJGX i3w6IKT3lTo3CieCTdK3GUmH1gRoAgM1VbvlTnQv7Dw67KFqEu sX9jmMrQczq93wLQiWS6Kne6zxvJTd4nRU4c6QoVAyKOsKJ9pg KN4o8Mb6q%2FyC0rxKrx32HCvKSR2hHy1jW8u7c2kyEE81XoWe go3%2FQ9M11WbTRpGSuHH4smjG8K3O6hVzNqz3oA6RPOrEiDVY LNaO3%2Bo5kJJx0EMl7qnoxQc8yfWYgxQINmHvCEn4ynSoqQf2 1zGR%2FKWn9bmCfeL1b4XVfbdUtwaldYO420MO%2B6ekYpi%2F Gk0Le6AXMg9%2FZVHe56DIKXFiWsFVSqfnRYcTY37jZLWqqH7a MESAkWdcJ7Q6kOWvLdQ%2B1VgDLrYVpY3OCF7W%2Fl%2BgxyH4 cvVv4Z7y5aHbgA9UpeZ9FMLpdqBc5HUFS4giglu%2B%2FhQZF0 AWsqIZ9%2BGgQ%2FWcJT36ffM2wla2zRKscSHlycLV9gwh7MJW Fmc3pFwPMOGwzaQGOrIB0N7ZkyJG%2Fgzj702%2Bdqotb32r5A w7anzpbs6P4VGv%2FLLrmoQJSvmAyqSkpf9i6PSgIuoVCIguZF yPD1OBjIP9lClMVPkRYd3PbC2nV9C0zaK8SPgG6xtjVUXUJpGl fHHMW45hG8JCT4zceZF6%2BK496K8jDrv9voOP1%2FR5ci%2B2 KnnDKPEKt6kJ0rOEarMp%2Fk9Qi%2FuWTEPh2oVstGZVZT%2FY TN8qGnOaMp9KCRCx54ZR4JKJOw%3D%3D&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20230621T211413Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAYZTTEKKE2RXSI5PC%2F20230621%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=2e0a6f1fd349de3646044964f6232a3afaf62646 1f5edfcf1db9af16b5907185

I'm getting an access denied error when picking the link and the images are too small to see. Any way to get a better quality image added?

I'm getting an access denied error when picking the link and the images are too small to see. Any way to get a better quality image added?

Oh sure. The PDF is linked on this page under PlanNorman: https://www.normanok.gov/your-government/departments/planning-and-community-development/planning-projects

The maps are on pages 97 and 99. They refer to Norman's urban growth boundary. Though not official, all of the area in grey is meant to remain rural in character and have properties ten acres or more in size.

In regard to sprawl, i think it comes down to if they plan on including exists or not. On the northern leg, they do not have but a couple of exits on the entire path. If you have to drive a few miles to get to the onramp/offramp, it will put a damper on the growth near the road. And remember, these things are going where there is no frontage rd either. So its only at those mile grids where there's even an option right now. Unless someone chooses to develop a frontage, there's very little in the way of commercial opportunity on this entire stretch.

In regard to sprawl, i think it comes down to if they plan on including exists or not. On the northern leg, they do not have but a couple of exits on the entire path. If you have to drive a few miles to get to the onramp/offramp, it will put a damper on the growth near the road. And remember, these things are going where there is no frontage rd either. So its only at those mile grids where there's even an option right now. Unless someone chooses to develop a frontage, there's very little in the way of commercial opportunity on this entire stretch.

Which further benefits the pass through traffic as there is little exiting or merging traffic slowing trucks down.

So that's either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your take.

If you're looking for it to offload local traffic or help spur development, well it's not currently set up to do that.
If you're looking for it to only offload through traffic, well it appears that this is going to be it's #1 job.

So that's either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your take.

If you're looking for it to offload local traffic or help spur development, well it's not currently set up to do that.
If you're looking for it to only offload through traffic, well it appears that this is going to be it's #1 job.

Yes, I think it's number 1 job will be to take through-traffic going from Tulsa to Norman, or Tulsa to Texas. Or vice versa. For those people, it will shave time off their travel. Which is good for them, and will marginally improve the traffic situation on I-35 for a few years. It will not be that great for OKC's economy and for travel-related businesses along I-35 but the highway will serve a purpose.

So that's either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your take.

If you're looking for it to offload local traffic or help spur development, well it's not currently set up to do that.
If you're looking for it to only offload through traffic, well it appears that this is going to be it's #1 job.

I think initially it will be built mostly for pass-through. It will be available for more than that once development dictates it.

I see many benefits to the South Extension. For anyone South of Norman along or near I-35 travelling east on I-44, I-40, or going to Thunderbird it will be a great option. And of course vice versa. I can even see this being used as an alternative route to Tinker during peak traffic times.
Noble/Slaughterville will have direct access to 1-35. Another S Canadian river crossing has been badly needed for years and this helps with that as well.

The ACCESS Oklahoma turnpike expansion will be allowed to proceed following a split ruling Tuesday by the Oklahoma Supreme Court to validate the $5 billion toll road expansion plan.

Looks like it's all systems go for the turnpike plan.

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/2023/08/01/oklahoma-supreme-court-ruling-oklahoma-turnpike-authority-access-can-move-forward/70506013007/

Awesome news!

agreed. this is great news. hopefully we will now get an updated timeline and project order. i'm really hoping for the bridge across the river from 44 to 35 being done quickly.

Here’s a KFOR article: https://kfor.com/news/local/state-supreme-court-approves-oklahoma-turnpike-authority-bonds-for-new-toll-roads/

I’m so excited about this. I live freeways and stack interchanges and this will bring many to OKC. I can’t wait!

Here’s a KFOR article: https://kfor.com/news/local/state-supreme-court-approves-oklahoma-turnpike-authority-bonds-for-new-toll-roads/

I’m so excited about this. I live freeways and stack interchanges and this will bring many to OKC. I can’t wait!

PP be honest, have you had "intimate relations" with a car?

PP be honest, have you had "intimate relations" with a car?
I won’t confirm or deny whether or not a fleshlight can fit into a tailpipe.

I won’t confirm or deny whether or not a fleshlight can fit into a tailpipe.

um....well..... so..... about these new projects. which ones do we think are going to be completed first?

Press release:

***********

Oklahoma Supreme Court rules for full validation of new turnpike routes
The Oklahoma Turnpike Authority appreciates the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision affirming OTA’s statutory authority to build new turnpike alignments proposed in the ACCESS Oklahoma $5 billion, 15-year long-range plan. This plan is designed to Advance and Connect Communities and Economies Safely Statewide.

First announced as a long-range plan in December 2021, ACCESS Oklahoma includes construction projects across the turnpike network, such as widening the I-44/Turner, I-44/Will Rogers, and John Kilpatrick turnpikes as well as adding and enhancing nearly two dozen access points along existing turnpikes. The program also includes rehabilitating numerous bridges, finishing the loop around Tulsa’s northwest side and building reliever routes in the Oklahoma City metro, completing the Outer Loop.

Today’s ruling is the 14th time the OTA has received bond validation from the Supreme Court for new turnpike routes since 1950.

“This bond validation creates certainty for OTA, its bondholders and citizens who now know without doubt that these final three legs of the Oklahoma City Outer Loop meet the legislative intent to provide reliever routes through the metro area and fight increasing traffic congestion,” said Oklahoma Secretary of Transportation Tim Gatz. “This allows one of the most ambitious state transportation plans in Oklahoma history to move forward. It will increase safety and travel reliability, provide new connections to communities and improve traffic flow by integrating with the state highway system.”

Today’s ruling allows the OTA to confidently return to the Council of Bond Oversight to reapply for approval to issue up to $500 million in bonds and to begin the process of selling bonds to fund planning and construction of three proposed turnpike alignments in the Oklahoma City metro area and to improve existing toll roads. It’s worth noting, turnpike revenue bonds are payable solely from the tolls and other OTA revenues and do not constitute indebtedness of the state.

In the coming weeks, OTA engineers and consultants will resume their diligent work on the ACCESS Oklahoma plan, including working with our federal, state and local partners, to develop the best solutions for the three newly validated routes as well as the entire ACCESS program.

The OTA is committed to paying close attention to Oklahoma’s increasing traffic congestion, as well as to any adverse effects on people, property and the environment.

For more information and project updates, visit the ACCESS Oklahoma website or call the ACCESS Oklahoma hotline at 1-844-562-2237.

For background:

The need for reliever routes into the southern Oklahoma City metro area is undeniable. In 2019, law enforcement officials responded to an average of five traffic-related crashes every day on I-35 between I-40 and Purcell. Transportation officials predict that in just seven years, motorists driving during peak travel times will experience a significant surge in stop-and-go conditions, causing a shockwave in traffic delays. It’s worth noting, the five collisions daily do not include unreported incidents when drivers simply exchange insurance information.

agreed. this is great news. hopefully we will now get an updated timeline and project order. i'm really hoping for the bridge across the river from 44 to 35 being done quickly.

The priority will be to widen the Turner all the way to Oklahoma City.

The priority will be to widen the Turner all the way to Oklahoma City.
That is not the priority. The priority is for the South OKC Metro Projects.

That is not the priority. The priority is for the South OKC Metro Projects.

Not in the near future it isn't. The new turnpike extensions will take years before construction starts. Expanding Turner, Will Rogers and John Kilpatrick along with improvements to interchanges are first. All will come at much cheaper price tags and have a more immediate impact on traffic.

Turner, JKP, Will Rogers and improvements to interchanges = 2.105 billion. Gilcrease, Tri-City, East/West and South Ext = 2.895 billion.

And the landowners will join those before them with all of the defunct anti-turnpike websites, dead FB groups, etc. They'll all move, get their checks and our metros will progress. In the end, all of these FOIA requests and Open Meetings objections cost nothing but a few months. They were focused on the process where they might have better spent their time and energy making sure that the compensation offered by OTA was fair.

I do like that our FOIA and Open Meetings laws' teeth became a little stronger through the process in that OTA was forced to a do-over for their non-compliance.

Not in the near future it isn't. The new turnpike extensions will take years before construction starts. Expanding Turner, Will Rogers and John Kilpatrick along with improvements to interchanges are first. All will come at much cheaper price tags and have a more immediate impact on traffic.

Yeah, The Turner followed by the Will Rogers are OTA's cash cows. There is a reason why Play by plate is last on these two turnpikes. OTA wants to make sure they have everything right with it before dumping cash entirely.

all of these projects will get going around the same time ..

The priority will be to widen the Turner all the way to Oklahoma City.

I have to agree on this point. The Turner in its current two-lane form has become quite dangerous. (Looking at those burn marks all over the pavement will kind of cement that impression.) Get that thing sorted out to three-lane all the way and restrict trucks to the right two lanes like the portion between Bristow and Tulsa. It's much safer and flows much better.

Hmmmmm


The agency says that money is necessary for surveys and design of a new turnpike in Cleveland County.

- https://kfor.com/news/local/state-supreme-court-approves-oklahoma-turnpike-authority-bonds-for-new-toll-roads/

JR Article:


OKLAHOMA CITY – The state’s highest court will allow the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority to sell $500 million in bonds to fund its controversial expansion plan.

With the Oklahoma Supreme Court voting 6-3 in the authority’s favor to permit the sale of up to $500 million of second senior lien revenue bonds, its $5 billion Access Oklahoma plan will move forward.

The court required the OTA’s response following a previous ruling that reversed a district court decision that the authority violated the Open Meetings Act when it unveiled turnpike expansion plans at the tail end of a February 2022 board meeting without sufficiently disclosing its details in a meeting agenda.

The Bureau of Reclamation in January denied the OTA’s initial request for usage of federal land and easements across east Norman title land to connect its proposed south extension to an east-west connector road.

Following the denial, the OTA claimed a route is possible in another area across its easements.

Reclamation told the OTA in January that it doesn’t object to the authority routing the turnpike across Norman Project Pipeline and flowage easements if the crossings are designed in a way that doesn’t interfere with “Reclamation’s easement interests or impact operation, maintenance and replacement” of Norman pipeline infrastructure.

In April, engineering plans for the project were put on pause while the OTA addressed the bond validation issue.

Oklahoma Secretary of Transportation Tim Gatz said he believes “validation” is about the financing for routes that are defined in the statute to the extent that it’s “OK to issue bonds.”

Justices Yvonne Kauger, James Winchester, James Edmondson, Noma Gurich, Richard Darby and John Reif ruled in the agency’s favor, stating that striking down the OTA’s ability to exercise statutory discretion to determine routes would “lead to additional litigation.”

Additionally, they stated that siding with the OTA stands by 30 years of precedence, “allowing the OTA the broad authority to determine routes within the locations authorized by the legislature.”

In a dissent, Justices Dustin Rowe, Dana Kuehn and Stacie Hixon stated “the majority’s decision confers upon the OTA incredibly broad discretion without any cognizable limits.”

The OTA now will resubmit an application to the five-member Council of Bond Oversight and work with the Bureau of Reclamation to change the alignment of the planned south extension, which would run north and south just west of Lake Thunderbird.

Gatz said it could be “several years” before construction on the project begins.

“As we work through the coming months, we will get about the business of beginning to create a more detailed schedule, and we’ll be able to talk much more extensively about what we believe realistic time frames are for (the project),” Gatz said.

Since the unveiling of Access Oklahoma, residents in east Norman have communicated their frustration and scrutinized the agency as the future of hundreds of properties remains uncertain. The OTA did not allow public comment at Tuesday’s meeting.

Tassie Katherine Hirschfeld, volunteer with the grassroots organization Oklahomans for Responsible Transportation and lead plaintiff in the Open Meetings Act lawsuit, said Tuesday’s ruling shows the Oklahoma Supreme Court will allow the OTA to grab “any land it wants at any time for any reason.”

Hirschfeld, an east Norman resident, said Justice Winchester has conflicts of interest that merit recusal, referring to his marriage with Susan Winchester, cabinet secretary for Gov. Kevin Stitt.

“I feel very strongly that (his recusal) was merited in the Open Meetings Act case and this case,” Hirschfeld said.

Hirschfeld said a petition for rehearing is likely and asserted that the agency’s southern extension route was not approved by the Legislature.

“The OTA argument is, in my opinion, ridiculous,” Hirschfeld said. “There should be a legislative process to approve highway routes. Otherwise, you have this autocratic agency with concentrated power, no oversight, no accountability, like we are here silent today in the meeting, because they would not let us address the board.”

A petition for rehearing must be filed within 20 days of the court’s opinion.

- https://journalrecord.com/2023/08/01/court-ruling-allows-5b-turnpike-expansion-plan-to-move-forward/?utm_term=Ruling%20allows%20%245B%20turnpike%20pla n%20to%20move%20forward&utm_campaign=Court%20ruling%20allows%20%245B%20tur npike%20expansion%20plan%20to%20move%20forward&utm_content=Editorial&utm_source=Act-On+Software&utm_medium=OKC&email=plutonicpanda@gmail.com

Question for all of those opposed to the turnpike expansion. The OTA's charter states that the routes need to be approved by the state legislature. In the recent supreme court case the OTA says the routes were approved in the mid 90's. I have to think that if the legislature approved them once they could amend or revoke that approval if they wanted to. Has only questioned their representative about this?

Question for all of those opposed to the turnpike expansion. The OTA's charter states that the routes need to be approved by the state legislature. In the recent supreme court case the OTA says the routes were approved in the mid 90's. I have to think that if the legislature approved them once they could amend or revoke that approval if they wanted to. Has only questioned their representative about this?

The corridors were approved. ODOT did all the studies and ended up with "Alternate Z" which is the current corridor. I think it was the late 1990s or early 2000s. There was so much backlash from the public and state reps got involved -- which ODOT answers to -- then they shelved it. Now OTA has taken over and they answer to nobody.

Hmmmmm

- https://kfor.com/news/local/state-supreme-court-approves-oklahoma-turnpike-authority-bonds-for-new-toll-roads/

“To be clear, we are at the very beginning stage of this long range plan. Construction in the Norman area specifically likely will be several years away from today,” explained Gatz

OTA still has to figure out how to avoid Bureau of Reclamation land around Lake Thunderbird. Looks like it would have to be pushed west at least a quarter mile, if not more, to avoid that wetland area, or else go around the lake to the east.

My understanding is that the east side of the lake would involve tribal land and that's why they went west of the lake.
To avoid the federal lands they would have to move 1.5 miles or more west of the originally proposed route. Take that with a grain of salt though.

My understanding is that the east side of the lake would involve tribal land and that's why they went west of the lake.
To avoid the federal lands they would have to move 1.5 miles or more west of the originally proposed route. Take that with a grain of salt though.

which would help develop East Norman and Noble more instead of being further east and therefore more out of the way.

I have to agree on this point. The Turner in its current two-lane form has become quite dangerous. (Looking at those burn marks all over the pavement will kind of cement that impression.) Get that thing sorted out to three-lane all the way and restrict trucks to the right two lanes like the portion between Bristow and Tulsa. It's much safer and flows much better.

I don't understand why OTA hasn't put up signs like that on the 3 lane sections already. Just the other day going into Tulsa there were 3 semi's going 60 MPH trying to pass each other for almost the entire portion between Bristow to the Sapulpa gate. Blocking every car from being able to pass or drive the actual posted speed limit.

“To be clear, we are at the very beginning stage of this long range plan. Construction in the Norman area specifically likely will be several years away from today,” explained Gatz

I've heard Gatz say many times he feels like this segment is one of the most important of the new build segments because he THINKS (I don't believe it will) it will pull traffic, specifically trucks, off I-35 and reduce congestion inside OKC by providing a 'faster' option around the urban core. The only way that would make sense would be if the northern terminus wasn't at the Turner and they planned to keep going north to hook back into I-35 between northern Edmond/Guthrie. Where the chose to do the interchange with the Turner, if they did do that they would obliterate Luther in the process. But I guess when did OTA care about stuff like that, just makes it more expense though.

I bet they'll start the acquisition process for land in 2024 - he's just saying that to keep from making people even more mad. Construction docs will take a year or two I'm sure but doesn't mean they aren't almost immediately going to start working on it just because the plows don't show up to start dirt/site work tomorrow.

I don't understand why OTA hasn't put up signs like that on the 3 lane sections already. Just the other day going into Tulsa there were 3 semi's going 60 MPH trying to pass each other for almost the entire portion between Bristow to the Sapulpa gate. Blocking every car from being able to pass or drive the actual posted speed limit.
The segment closer to tulsa is planned to be further expanded to include dedicated truck lanes.

The segment closer to tulsa is planned to be further expanded to include dedicated truck lanes.

I mean I wouldn't put it past OTA to dream up something like that, but does not seem practical at all. Where did you hear that from? Wouldn't make much financial sense to expand and rip up a section they just finished. 3 lanes each direction is fine, they just need to ticket and enforce a 'trucks in right two lanes only' policy. They don't need a 4th lane with a trucks only lane. Then you'd have trucks in all 4 lanes blocking everyone going 60 mph trying to pass each other at the speed of 0.1 MPH each haha.

I don't understand why OTA hasn't put up signs like that on the 3 lane sections already. Just the other day going into Tulsa there were 3 semi's going 60 MPH trying to pass each other for almost the entire portion between Bristow to the Sapulpa gate. Blocking every car from being able to pass or drive the actual posted speed limit.

I absolutely love truckers except for this one issue - one passing the other at .001 MPH faster than the other.....

I mean I wouldn't put it past OTA to dream up something like that, but does not seem practical at all. Where did you hear that from? Wouldn't make much financial sense to expand and rip up a section they just finished. 3 lanes each direction is fine, they just need to ticket and enforce a 'trucks in right two lanes only' policy. They don't need a 4th lane with a trucks only lane. Then you'd have trucks in all 4 lanes blocking everyone going 60 mph trying to pass each other at the speed of 0.1 MPH each haha.
They won’t tear the road up. It’ll be an expansion on each side of the new road. I saw it in the description for the Driving Forward Program which said it included a design for future truck lanes to be installed and I called and they confirmed.

It would likely be an additional two lanes each way on its own facility if it’s anything like other truck lanes I’ve seen.

I've heard Gatz say many times he feels like this segment is one of the most important of the new build segments because he THINKS (I don't believe it will) it will pull traffic, specifically trucks, off I-35 and reduce congestion inside OKC by providing a 'faster' option around the urban core. The only way that would make sense would be if the northern terminus wasn't at the Turner and they planned to keep going north to hook back into I-35 between northern Edmond/Guthrie. Where the chose to do the interchange with the Turner, if they did do that they would obliterate Luther in the process. But I guess when did OTA care about stuff like that, just makes it more expense though.

I bet they'll start the acquisition process for land in 2024 - he's just saying that to keep from making people even more mad. Construction docs will take a year or two I'm sure but doesn't mean they aren't almost immediately going to start working on it just because the plows don't show up to start dirt/site work tomorrow.

Not saying it isn't important bc it obviously is. The point in question was priority and simply by the amount of work needed to get the newer sections off the drawing board and into implementation is like you said 2-3 years from now. Priority to me is addressing the junctions they have identified, expand the turner to complete the 4 lanes along with JKP improvements.

They won’t tear the road up. It’ll be an expansion on each side of the new road. I saw it in the description for the Driving Forward Program which said it included a design for future truck lanes to be installed and I called and they confirmed.

It would likely be an additional two lanes each way on its own facility if it’s anything like other truck lanes I’ve seen.

That definitely feels unnecessary but OTA does love to spend money. I did relook at aerial maps and they do have some very wide right of way and looks like some of the bridges they did build to like 150 feet wide in that section from Bristow into Tulsa. If they really are planning to build something like how managed toll lanes work in Texas and other places with being completely separated I can only imagine how astronomical the cost for all the new on/off ramps, etc. need for completely separate areas. And if they weren't completely separated like that I don't really see the point in it either. There's not that much traffic - it does need to be 6 lanes all the way but not more than that and enforce the trucks in right 2 lanes only.

If they want to spend that I'd much rather see them dedicate the right of way to high speed rail. They have enough space for it and just allow OTA become a full fledged transit organization so they can profit off the rail line too and no political power struggle inside ODOT that way either. It wouldn't take a ton of modification on grade issues to likely be able to run a train 100+ mph along that right of way area if they buy up 150+ feet the entire way down to I-35 in OKC.

Not saying it isn't important bc it obviously is. The point in question was priority and simply by the amount of work needed to get the newer sections off the drawing board and into implementation is like you said 2-3 years from now. Priority to me is addressing the junctions they have identified, expand the turner to complete the 4 lanes along with JKP improvements.

Yeah, I get it - just think Gatz was posturing a bit because he's trying to turn the heat down a bit with the Norman issues but that is one section they feel very strongly about. I don't happen to believe what they're doing is going to help whatsoever with getting any traffic off I-35 especially with no northern connect back to I-35.

Priority 1 absolutely should go to the Turner first and get it done. It's the most congested turnpike in the state and needs the upgrades. Being able to bump up the speed limit to 80 the entire way will be great too. I do hope that they start construction on this as soon as possible and get it done.

Adding ramps to existing facilities should definitely be priority 1B - it's stupid for OTA to not have more on/off ramps for the turnpikes in many areas. Like the Muskogee Turnpike could have a lot more usage if they have ramps on crossing roads past the BA to 51. That whole area around Oneta to Coweta is blowing up with new housing and you can't get on the turnpike anywhere except 51 in Coweta and when 51 and the turnpike merges in BA.

Yeah, I get it - just think Gatz was posturing a bit because he's trying to turn the heat down a bit with the Norman issues but that is one section they feel very strongly about. I don't happen to believe what they're doing is going to help whatsoever with getting any traffic off I-35 especially with no northern connect back to I-35.

Priority 1 absolutely should go to the Turner first and get it done. It's the most congested turnpike in the state and needs the upgrades. Being able to bump up the speed limit to 80 the entire way will be great too. I do hope that they start construction on this as soon as possible and get it done.

Adding ramps to existing facilities should definitely be priority 1B - it's stupid for OTA to not have more on/off ramps for the turnpikes in many areas. Like the Muskogee Turnpike could have a lot more usage if they have ramps on crossing roads past the BA to 51. That whole area around Oneta to Coweta is blowing up with new housing and you can't get on the turnpike anywhere except 51 in Coweta and when 51 and the turnpike merges in BA.

100% also agree there should be a northern extension like you mentioned but I think they could guide it west of main Luther to avoid most homes and businesses in central Luther and get back to I35 like you mentioned. So many things could be added onto this overall 5B project but it would make it 8-10B but fun to think about.

It's too far east of I-35 to ever get thru traffic off the highway, IMO, even if they did ever extend it up to Guthrie or wherever. People don't even take TX-130 to bypass Austin, and that toll road is much closer to a much more congested stretch of I-35. On the other hand, I do think it'll work swimmingly to divert a lot of the traffic that is going from I-35 to I-40 or I-44.

It's too far east of I-35 to ever get thru traffic off the highway, IMO, even if they did ever extend it up to Guthrie or wherever. People don't even take TX-130 to bypass Austin, and that toll road is much closer to a much more congested stretch of I-35. On the other hand, I do think it'll work swimmingly to divert a lot of the traffic that is going from I-35 to I-40 or I-44.

I don't think it will either, I-35 congestion would have to get significantly worse for the amount of extra time it would take for someone to go that far east and then back west to I-35 to make it worth paying money to do so too.

There's can't be much regional traffic that uses I-35 to access I-40 or I-44 from the north or south. Only areas for be from like Ardmore coming north that would make sense. If someone is coming north from say DFW they're going over to 75 to go north before they take I-35. If their goal was to get somewhere northeast of OKC. I can't see how this segment really does much for alleviating regional congestion that funnels through the urban core now. The only benefit I really see for regional traffic flow would be Tulsa residents being able to access the Norman area faster for game days.

People don’t use the 130 because it’s a toll road. I bet usage would go up if TxDOT bought the road back and made it free to drive.

People don’t use the 130 because it’s a toll road. I bet usage would go up if TxDOT bought the road back and made it free to drive.

Sure. But OTA isn’t about to make the Kickapoo a free road and ODOT isn’t about to buy it from them, thus my point still stands.

It's too far east of I-35 to ever get thru traffic off the highway, IMO, even if they did ever extend it up to Guthrie or wherever. People don't even take TX-130 to bypass Austin, and that toll road is much closer to a much more congested stretch of I-35. On the other hand, I do think it'll work swimmingly to divert a lot of the traffic that is going from I-35 to I-40 or I-44.

We drive to South Padre often and absolutely take 130. I have noticed over the last three years that traffic has become much heavier on it and there has been more infrastructure going up around the exits. However, avoiding Austin and all the traffic in and out of Austin on I35 is worth a whole lot more than avoiding OKC as it is not near as congested

Sure. But OTA isn’t about to make the Kickapoo a free road and ODOT isn’t about to buy it from them, thus my point still stands.
I’m not saying it doesn’t but I’m saying there is a reason 130 is underused and it isn’t because it’s too far outside of the way of austin. Austin has seriously big city rush hour traffic. No city in Oklahoma has that including OKC for now. Though OKC will likely find itself in this situation at some point and perhaps that is when it would be more comparable.

any updates as to when we might know anything new on these projects? like an order and timelines?

i saw on BondBuyer (i don't have an account to read the whole article) that the OTA bonds are now priced as of october 17th.

People don’t use the 130 because it’s a toll road. I bet usage would go up if TxDOT bought the road back and made it free to drive.

lol

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/texas-tollway-truck-traffic-up-over-25

millions of people use it currently and that number keeps going up

That’s not even 10,000 trucks a day. My point is more people would use this road if it were free and not Shunpike it by going through I 35 through downtown Austin you just love to argue.

I haven't been out that way much but l bet TX 130 will benefit hugely from the Tesla complex as well as other major employers recently going that direction.

New bonds have been issued to move these projects forward. It shouldn’t be too long now before we start to movement on some of these projects: https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/first-bonds-sold-for-5-billion-15-year-turnpike-project/article_d18b410a-7d99-11ee-9546-5358b3f9b38b.html#tracking-source=home-top-story

New bonds have been issued to move these projects forward. It shouldn’t be too long now before we start to movement on some of these projects: https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/first-bonds-sold-for-5-billion-15-year-turnpike-project/article_d18b410a-7d99-11ee-9546-5358b3f9b38b.html#tracking-source=home-top-story

and sold at over 5% interest thanks to the worthless lawsuit that only delayed this it cost the OTA (are really the state/taxpayer) millions and millions of dollars in interest payments .. which will delay future turnpike expansion and upkeep.

and sold at over 5% interest thanks to the worthless lawsuit that only delayed this it cost the OTA (are really the state/taxpayer) millions and millions of dollars in interest payments .. which will delay future turnpike expansion and upkeep.

Yeah people fighting for their homes is a worthless endeavor. Give me a break.