Likely $50M is what is projected to be spent in 2028, and most of the rest of phases are not even on the 8 year plan yet. IIRC it is typically the opposite, federal and state money would be on the plan, and if there was local match from cities might not.
Ah, that could be the case. But to be clear no way is the state paying anywhere close to the majority of the project costs on an interstate highway bridge over a river.

^

Federal money will be a big part of this; I found those renderings and details of the new bridges and pedestrian bridge as part of a federal application.

And of course, this is an interstate highway and thus federal funds would likely pay the majority.

Yeah, I dug in a bit and discovered the total project cost is estimated to be around $165.7 million with local match coming from the state at $29 million and the City at around $4 million.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/3544010424a.jpg

I know this one is probably as mundane of a project to follow, but this is still relatively close to where I used to reside over on the north side. Any significant updates?

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

I used to work in the industry -- now it was over 25 years ago -- but federal regulations back then were such that if you fully reconstruct an interchange it has to be to 'current' design safety standards and left-hand exits were removed from the books some years ago. Not sure if this is strictly related to interstates I don't remember that.

I still dont really understand the "why" behind this. What do we get out of the much more expensive right exit flyover, that we didn't get with the left exit flyover?

The work to widen 35 there didn't require this to be done to cross 63rd since the bridge is south of the flyover junction.

The whole thing seems like a waste of money compared to work that needs to be done elsewhere in town.

replacing all the 63rd bridges was required ... and widening all of i35 100% required this work ..

Wish this had better renderings to see the end look.

Wish this had better renderings to see the end look.

https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/odot/documents/meetings/a2015/151006/update-final.pdf

this is the final alignment ...

not great but better then anything in this thread ...

the new main line bridge build over 63rd is the future North bound I35 ... but it will first be used to carry the south bound traffic .. so they can demo the existing south bound bridge and build the new south bound ....

they will then move south bound traffic to the final alignment move north bound to its new bridge and then demo the existing north bound bridge ..



once the North to west traffic moves to the new ramp the rest of this project should move relatively quickly

I used to work in the industry -- now it was over 25 years ago -- but federal regulations back then were such that if you fully reconstruct an interchange it has to be to 'current' design safety standards and left-hand exits were removed from the books some years ago. Not sure if this is strictly related to interstates I don't remember that.

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

There was also not enough room for SB I35 to be widened to 3 lanes going under the existing NB I35 left exit to WB I44 bridge. This was likely another main reason to completely revamp the interchange.

Makes sense. I don't buy the argument about the widening requiring the flyover move since the bridges are south enough from the current flyover to not require a change. But this makes sense. I don't disagree that the consistency for "exit to the right" makes sense. It's just a LOT of money for something sort of trivial, comparatively. That means when we look at Airport Rd from 44 and Guthrie's 1st exit, the I44 East to 40 North ramps/etc.....all of those are going to require that same change....and the LOTS of money to go with them.

It's also a safety thing. The left lane is supposed to be the fast lane, but slower traffic that needs to exit on a left exit can disrupt that fast flow of traffic.

It's also a safety thing. The left lane is supposed to be the fast lane, but slower traffic that needs to exit on a left exit can disrupt that fast flow of traffic.

And some people think they need to slow down to 50 mph 1/4 to 1/2 mile before the exit!

Drove this tonight and the flyover ramp from NB 35 to WB 44 was open.

Drove this tonight and the flyover ramp from NB 35 to WB 44 was open.

good deal ..

Drove the flyover this morning, very nice addition to this interchange

I went back and looked, but couldn't find it. It looks like it is built for two lanes to exit NB 35 to WB 44. Will that narrow at some point or will two lanes merge with 44?

I went back and looked, but couldn't find it. It looks like it is built for two lanes to exit NB 35 to WB 44. Will that narrow at some point or will two lanes merge with 44?

my guess is that it merges from 2 to 1 some where before the end of the flyover .

The old bridge from nb35 to w44 has started to come down

Would love to see a drone shot sometime soon, the footprint has really changed

Would love to see a drone shot sometime soon, the footprint has really changed

This is from about a month ago:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/3544010424a.jpg

R.I.P. Haunted House

Thanks Pete!
That one is a bit dated as the NB I 35 to WB I 44 is complete, along with E I 44 and E I 44 to I 35. The old exit 133 along with one of the bridges is almost gone. I am sure I traveled under that bridge thousands of times over the years. I am speculating how the I 35 traffic will be diverted to demolish and build at least one more new bridge over NE 63rd. Thanks again for your work on this site.

R.I.P. Haunted House

Did it get torn down?

No, just the loss of the business, which was such a charming, out-of-the-way, OKC experience from another time. Those have become much more few and far between these days.

Last I heard the property - including the house - had been repurposed as a home for traumatized boys in the foster care system.

Drove through there this past week and I have to say the signage is very confusing. The new flyover for WB I44 from NB 35 is open. So on one hand it says, 44West go right, but if i remember right, the signs about 1/4 mile back just said 44, go right. Then it says 44 East, stay left. I'm not even sure why they have that sign on the 35 NB path to be honest. I dont remember it being there before since you haven't yet crossed the 44 path at that point. I'm sure that they will make it far more clear when the permanent signs are in and the whole mess is cleaned up.

So they have hit a milestone with that flyover being open. But it's still a big mess. Just a horrible squeeze of a mess. And I still don't really understand why we needed anything done here. I get why its a flyover now, but even doing this as a project seemed silly. It's a WHOLE lotta money to not get much benefit in an area that sees some of the lights big interstate traffic in the city.

Drove through there this past week and I have to say the signage is very confusing. The new flyover for WB I44 from NB 35 is open. So on one hand it says, 44West go right, but if i remember right, the signs about 1/4 mile back just said 44, go right. Then it says 44 East, stay left. I'm not even sure why they have that sign on the 35 NB path to be honest. I dont remember it being there before since you haven't yet crossed the 44 path at that point. I'm sure that they will make it far more clear when the permanent signs are in and the whole mess is cleaned up.

So they have hit a milestone with that flyover being open. But it's still a big mess. Just a horrible squeeze of a mess. And I still don't really understand why we needed anything done here. I get why its a flyover now, but even doing this as a project seemed silly. It's a WHOLE lotta money to not get much benefit in an area that sees some of the lights big interstate traffic in the city.

I think those bridges and overpass needed to be replaced anyway. Its also part of the long term plan of expansion of I-35. I guess if they are doing all that work anyway, they might as well move the exit to the right.

I think those bridges and overpass needed to be replaced anyway. Its also part of the long term plan of expansion of I-35. I guess if they are doing all that work anyway, they might as well move the exit to the right.

this is correct ... .and has been stated a bunch in this thread in response to bombermwc ..... .....

I think those bridges and overpass needed to be replaced anyway. Its also part of the long term plan of expansion of I-35. I guess if they are doing all that work anyway, they might as well move the exit to the right.

I believe its been said earlier on the thread that if you are going from one highway to another, ie. I-35NB to l-44WB, Federal regulations require a right-hand exit. This standardizes the way the roads work to help reduce the # of drivers making the sudden, last-second lane changes. It also forces the OKDoT to more often design interchanges like the rest of the country. Now if the OKDOT would stop designing in loops at major interchanges (like l-35 and l-240)......

I believe its been said earlier on the thread that if you are going from one highway to another, ie. I-35NB to l-44WB, Federal regulations require a right-hand exit.

it is not required it is best practice ... of the 2 finals alt for this project 1 kept the left exit to 44 ..

all of the bridges needed to be replaced which is another reason this project needed to happen ..

see the presentation here

https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/odot/meetings/a2015/151006/presentation_e.pdf

This project is going to provide significant improvement to flow in the area and should reduce accidents resulting from last second shifts in lanes at the exit point. Expansion of 35 lanes will also help in the area. I will say, it is an absolute mess right now and driving through it leads to great confusion due to the shifting of heights in the lanes. Excited to see what they get done these next 2 nights.

I believe its been said earlier on the thread that if you are going from one highway to another, ie. I-35NB to l-44WB, Federal regulations require a right-hand exit. This standardizes the way the roads work to help reduce the # of drivers making the sudden, last-second lane changes. It also forces the OKDoT to more often design interchanges like the rest of the country. Now if the OKDOT would stop designing in loops at major interchanges (like l-35 and l-240)......

If they could do that on I-44, specifically between Western and Penn (NW Expressway and Classen exits to the left), I would love that...

If they could do that on I-44, specifically between Western and Penn (NW Expressway and Classen exits to the left), I would love that...

I-44 has its own long range plan to hopefully completely remove the elevated bridge. Won't happen within 8 years though.

this is correct ... .and has been stated a bunch in this thread in response to bombermwc ..... .....

No i understand why the flyover is there. Yes, that's been made very clear. I just dont think we really NEEDED to do ANYTHING at this junction. With so many other junctions in need of such major work, this just didn't make sense. It diverted money away from moving the MUCH MUCH MUCH busier 240 project. And after this one is done, it's not going to correct any issues with traffic flow, because there weren't any.

And again, with the I-35 changes, the work that was done here, doesn't contribute to it. The bridges that were already redone (deep Fork Creek bridge), would have been able to accommodate any lane additions in parallel with the old junction. We've spent a LOT of money, to really not get much of a difference out of it. 63rd's bridge already had 3 lanes to it.

So i'm not re-hashing the same question. I'm just saying that the explanations for why this project was started to begin with, lack something to stand on in my opinion. Now had we done something at 44/39th/etc. I mean that one is jammed full with cars. 44/35 here just simply is NEVER full of cars. When was the last time you ever saw any sort of backup at this junction in any direction that would warrant this much effort? And again, the existing bridges could already accommodate any 35 expansion to 3 lanes.

It just smells of a pork barrel project for someone rather than being needs based. Or potentially some federal funding that had to go somewhere, so they made up a reason "enough".

No i understand why the flyover is there. Yes, that's been made very clear. I just dont think we really NEEDED to do ANYTHING at this junction. With so many other junctions in need of such major work, this just didn't make sense. It diverted money away from moving the MUCH MUCH MUCH busier 240 project. And after this one is done, it's not going to correct any issues with traffic flow, because there weren't any.

And again, with the I-35 changes, the work that was done here, doesn't contribute to it. The bridges that were already redone (deep Fork Creek bridge), would have been able to accommodate any lane additions in parallel with the old junction. We've spent a LOT of money, to really not get much of a difference out of it. 63rd's bridge already had 3 lanes to it.

So i'm not re-hashing the same question. I'm just saying that the explanations for why this project was started to begin with, lack something to stand on in my opinion. Now had we done something at 44/39th/etc. I mean that one is jammed full with cars. 44/35 here just simply is NEVER full of cars. When was the last time you ever saw any sort of backup at this junction in any direction that would warrant this much effort? And again, the existing bridges could already accommodate any 35 expansion to 3 lanes.

It just smells of a pork barrel project for someone rather than being needs based. Or potentially some federal funding that had to go somewhere, so they made up a reason "enough".

the 63rd street bridges needed to be replaced ... the fly over bridge needed to be replaced .....

those things NEEDED to happen .. see presentation .. i just linked

No i understand why the flyover is there. Yes, that's been made very clear. I just dont think we really NEEDED to do ANYTHING at this junction. With so many other junctions in need of such major work, this just didn't make sense. It diverted money away from moving the MUCH MUCH MUCH busier 240 project. And after this one is done, it's not going to correct any issues with traffic flow, because there weren't any.

And again, with the I-35 changes, the work that was done here, doesn't contribute to it. The bridges that were already redone (deep Fork Creek bridge), would have been able to accommodate any lane additions in parallel with the old junction. We've spent a LOT of money, to really not get much of a difference out of it. 63rd's bridge already had 3 lanes to it.

So i'm not re-hashing the same question. I'm just saying that the explanations for why this project was started to begin with, lack something to stand on in my opinion. Now had we done something at 44/39th/etc. I mean that one is jammed full with cars. 44/35 here just simply is NEVER full of cars. When was the last time you ever saw any sort of backup at this junction in any direction that would warrant this much effort? And again, the existing bridges could already accommodate any 35 expansion to 3 lanes.

It just smells of a pork barrel project for someone rather than being needs based. Or potentially some federal funding that had to go somewhere, so they made up a reason "enough".

Never seems super busy when I drive it, but I also think the same thing about I-35 from 10th Street going north the 3 to 4 miles up to this interchange. And there is a lot of talk about how there is a desperate need to add lanes to that stretch. Possibly even double decking it. I also recall hearing about the creek in that area needs/needed a massive rework in order to provide a solid, long-term base for roadway and real estate development. Like it is going to be good for development of the Adventure District, the area around the softball stadium and the west side of I-35 from 36th to 63rd?

And there is a lot of talk about how there is a desperate need to add lanes to that stretch. Possibly even double decking it.

double decking it??

that was not one of the options studied ... ..

double decking it??

that was not one of the options studied ... ..

I agree. I mean talk here on OKC Talk, of course. The best, most intelligent forum on the internet.

(Is Pete watching?)

system made a duplicate post...removing this one since its the last on the page and the duplicate is the first on the next.

the 63rd street bridges needed to be replaced ... the fly over bridge needed to be replaced .....

those things NEEDED to happen .. see presentation .. i just linked

Again, WHY?

A lot of what they put in that presentation, is vague and doesn't hold water. They mention Deep Fork in this. That bridge had already been replaced! And dont' tell me we're going to spend all these millions just to correct a height deficiency on a 2 lane road underneath it. That's BS. Same logic for the 40mph curves? Have you ever felt like you wanted to take a Dallas 5 high flyover at 85 mph? As for the bridges, if they were so bad off, then why do all this instead of what we did on 44 near Penn Square? Those bridges were far worse off in terms of criticality. We also didn't have to move the Classen or NWXway exits to the right to do that bridge work (again, right hand exits are NOT required....only recommended).

My point is, all of this for this interchange is a collection of reasons someone put together to make the story full enough to get it done. But there were alternatives that would have been a lot cheaper to get all of this done. They give alternatives and a matrix, but i would say I simply disagree with their evaluation of the immediate need of those and whether some of them are insufficient.

I'm beating a dead horse that's already passed the finish line so i guess there's no point in continuing the conversation. The project is on the last end at this point. The overall thing I'm trying to say here is that with all the other projects ODOT has that are in DESPERATE need, this was not one of them. That money could have gone a long way to getting some other projects completed.

Again, WHY?

A lot of what they put in that presentation, is vague and doesn't hold water. They mention Deep Fork in this. That bridge had already been replaced! And dont' tell me we're going to spend all these millions just to correct a height deficiency on a 2 lane road underneath it. That's BS. Same logic for the 40mph curves? Have you ever felt like you wanted to take a Dallas 5 high flyover at 85 mph? As for the bridges, if they were so bad off, then why do all this instead of what we did on 44 near Penn Square? Those bridges were far worse off in terms of criticality. We also didn't have to move the Classen or NWXway exits to the right to do that bridge work (again, right hand exits are NOT required....only recommended).

My point is, all of this for this interchange is a collection of reasons someone put together to make the story full enough to get it done. But there were alternatives that would have been a lot cheaper to get all of this done. They give alternatives and a matrix, but i would say I simply disagree with their evaluation of the immediate need of those and whether some of them are insufficient.

I'm beating a dead horse that's already passed the finish line so i guess there's no point in continuing the conversation. The project is on the last end at this point. The overall thing I'm trying to say here is that with all the other projects ODOT has that are in DESPERATE need, this was not one of them. That money could have gone a long way to getting some other projects completed.

Over Deep Fork (Structural Deficient) * 
Over NE 63rd Street (At-Risk) 
NB I-35 to WB I-44 (Fracture Critical)

also this project needed to be done to because of the future I35 expansion (both north and south of this interchange ) and the 44 expansion west of this interchange ..

The old style fracture critical will all need to be replaced eventually. I personally can't envision any way to have added extra lanes to I35 much less 44. This intersection has been a pinch point for decades. I am personally happy to see the progress in this area.

Over Deep Fork (Structural Deficient) * 
Over NE 63rd Street (At-Risk) 
NB I-35 to WB I-44 (Fracture Critical)

also this project needed to be done to because of the future I35 expansion (both north and south of this interchange ) and the 44 expansion west of this interchange ..

I think you can't interpret that any other way but DESPERATE. I agree that capacity-wise, there are projects in more need but risking a bridge failure takes priority.

It was two lanes on the bridges over 63rd Street. Instead of trying to widen the bridge to account for widening to six lanes, they opted to rebuild the bridges (structural deficient, etc) as they are going to expand to 6-8 lanes all the way from Edmond to south of Norman. Like the 235/44/77 interchange, it bottlenecks there it will be smoother going through. Also, that right hand exit NB to WB is better than a left exit.

I think you can't interpret that any other way but DESPERATE. I agree that capacity-wise, there are projects in more need but risking a bridge failure takes priority.

ODOT actually replaces a few bridges instead of slapping band aids on them and it gets accused of doing pork projects. go figure.

Actually, the whole effort to replace All the structurally deficient bridges in Oklahoma in the last 10 years probably had a bigger impact on the I-240 and I-35 interchange than this one interchange. Which this is what all this is about, an interchange on someone's side of town.

I live on the south side of town now, so I'm looking forward to the new I-240 and and I-35 interchange also.

It was two lanes on the bridges over 63rd Street. Instead of trying to widen the bridge to account for widening to six lanes, they opted to rebuild the bridges (structural deficient, etc) as they are going to expand to 6-8 lanes all the way from Edmond to south of Norman. Like the 235/44/77 interchange, it bottlenecks there it will be smoother going through. Also, that right hand exit NB to WB is better than a left exit.

Yeah, there was no widening those bridges. They are deficient bridges.

So I guess they have abandoned the original NB I 35 bridge over NW 63rd. Well on the way to demoing(?) the old abutments for NB I 35 to WB I 44. Even put some sod down...

Again, WHY?

A lot of what they put in that presentation, is vague and doesn't hold water. They mention Deep Fork in this. That bridge had already been replaced! And dont' tell me we're going to spend all these millions just to correct a height deficiency on a 2 lane road underneath it. That's BS. Same logic for the 40mph curves? Have you ever felt like you wanted to take a Dallas 5 high flyover at 85 mph? As for the bridges, if they were so bad off, then why do all this instead of what we did on 44 near Penn Square? Those bridges were far worse off in terms of criticality. We also didn't have to move the Classen or NWXway exits to the right to do that bridge work (again, right hand exits are NOT required....only recommended).

My point is, all of this for this interchange is a collection of reasons someone put together to make the story full enough to get it done. But there were alternatives that would have been a lot cheaper to get all of this done. They give alternatives and a matrix, but i would say I simply disagree with their evaluation of the immediate need of those and whether some of them are insufficient.

I'm beating a dead horse that's already passed the finish line so i guess there's no point in continuing the conversation. The project is on the last end at this point. The overall thing I'm trying to say here is that with all the other projects ODOT has that are in DESPERATE need, this was not one of them. That money could have gone a long way to getting some other projects completed.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/i-35-narrowed-to-one-lane-due-to-emergency-bridge-repairs/ar-AA1oV9vI?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=8432db61fa6d439fe36897d01d5d8e02&ei=25

once again .. this wasn't complicated

Well let's not get hyperbolic. Bridges like this have this happen sometimes. It in itself doesn't make it useless. Bridges over waterways like rivers have holes that pop up all the time. It's just a matter of the vibration and the concrete rubbing. Yes they need to fix it immediately. But that doesn't deem the bridge ready to doze. It's rare that I've been able to go over a bridge over the Mississippi River over the course of my life that one of them hasn't had a lane closed for this very thing. And those same bridges have been there for at least 60 years for sure.

It's the media's job to make as big a deal as possible to make you think everything is bigger than it is. So I would caution and just read that as a traffic alert. They actually did very little to blow that one out of proportion because the local news teams kept it to just a traffic alert too. Had I-35 been 3 lanes in both directions (which the bridge can accommodate), then even the alert wouldn't have made the news.

Well let's not get hyperbolic. Bridges like this have this happen sometimes. It in itself doesn't make it useless. Bridges over waterways like rivers have holes that pop up all the time. It's just a matter of the vibration and the concrete rubbing. Yes they need to fix it immediately. But that doesn't deem the bridge ready to doze. It's rare that I've been able to go over a bridge over the Mississippi River over the course of my life that one of them hasn't had a lane closed for this very thing. And those same bridges have been there for at least 60 years for sure.

It's the media's job to make as big a deal as possible to make you think everything is bigger than it is. So I would caution and just read that as a traffic alert. They actually did very little to blow that one out of proportion because the local news teams kept it to just a traffic alert too. Had I-35 been 3 lanes in both directions (which the bridge can accommodate), then even the alert wouldn't have made the news.

But our favorite thing to do here it to get hyperbolic. Boo this man!

Well let's not get hyperbolic. Bridges like this have this happen sometimes. It in itself doesn't make it useless. Bridges over waterways like rivers have holes that pop up all the time. It's just a matter of the vibration and the concrete rubbing. Yes they need to fix it immediately. But that doesn't deem the bridge ready to doze. It's rare that I've been able to go over a bridge over the Mississippi River over the course of my life that one of them hasn't had a lane closed for this very thing. And those same bridges have been there for at least 60 years for sure.

It's the media's job to make as big a deal as possible to make you think everything is bigger than it is. So I would caution and just read that as a traffic alert. They actually did very little to blow that one out of proportion because the local news teams kept it to just a traffic alert too. Had I-35 been 3 lanes in both directions (which the bridge can accommodate), then even the alert wouldn't have made the news.

Yeah, they're going to be a little quicker to replace a bridge over the Deep Fork than the Mississippi. Lol

Yeah, they're going to be a little quicker to replace a bridge over the Deep Fork than the Mississippi. Lol

yep cost is just a little bit different .....

Well let's not get hyperbolic. Bridges like this have this happen sometimes. It in itself doesn't make it useless. Bridges over waterways like rivers have holes that pop up all the time. It's just a matter of the vibration and the concrete rubbing. Yes they need to fix it immediately. But that doesn't deem the bridge ready to doze. It's rare that I've been able to go over a bridge over the Mississippi River over the course of my life that one of them hasn't had a lane closed for this very thing. And those same bridges have been there for at least 60 years for sure.

It's the media's job to make as big a deal as possible to make you think everything is bigger than it is. So I would caution and just read that as a traffic alert. They actually did very little to blow that one out of proportion because the local news teams kept it to just a traffic alert too. Had I-35 been 3 lanes in both directions (which the bridge can accommodate), then even the alert wouldn't have made the news.

Yeah, even just thinking back to the old crosstown, it seemed like they had fixed hundreds of these on it in the last couple decades before it was replaced.

That's my point...and i realize im beating a dead horse that's already been shot and moved to the site of the road. I just very much disagree with ODOT's evaluation of the immediacy of this project compared to others.

On the Tulsa thread, the US77-I-44 interchange is a good example of how the money spent on this project, could have helped get that one more along the way for completion. It really does have a need that's present now. And we have Tulsa Bridge-henge because of the way they built what they did, without the rest of the money. And we're years away from that being done now because funds are being spent elsewhere.

I'm not going to promise to shut up on this because it think it's screams of pork barrel for someone that pushed it through for their own desires. But i'll try to keep the complaining to a minimum. It's happened and i'll have to get over it.

There would be even more complaining if ODOT didn't throw Tulsa a bone and at least get the project started. Just like there would be even more complaining if they waited for all the I-240/I-35 money to come in. Ideally, it would be nice if ODOT could issue bonds to do all these projects at one time, but that's not how it works in this state.

A bad bridge deck is different than structural issues with the beams and piers. You can only put off replacement for so long. The state set out to replace all the structurally deficient bridges and its getting close to accomplishing that goal.

Traffic shifted last night. South bound 35 has moved to the new northbound bridge. The old southbound bridge can now be torn down and rebuilt which is the last piece to finishing this project in this phase.

Ran by yesterday and glad the eb 44 to sb 35 merge lane so improved. They have already demoed the old deck and I recon they should have the old bridge removed this week.