I'm not sure that I agree with that.

On the NE turnpike, there are zero frontage roads. But if you ask the people that live near there, that's the way they want it. They didn't want the road there in the first place, but at least that way, it's not spurring development changing the environment in the area they built in BECUASE it was rural. The exit at 23rd is on the road that was already the commercial hub, so there's no loss there.

I would say Norman is pretty similar. If the residents who already don't want the road, had frontages, it would do exactly as you said. It would spur development. I get the impression that Norman itself doesn't want frontage roads. And they're being as uncooperative as possible in the whole affair. So by not including them now, it means if anyone wants them later, it's on Norman's dime. And if you ask the residents that live near where it's going, i think they would say that they are totally fine with it being an "express" route from point to point with no exits.

You are correct that if there are more exist, then there would be more traffic in/out. But there is also a cost balance between building that access and then also now putting in all the pay-by-plate gear too. There really has to be quite a large amount of traffic on those ramps to make it worth it. Going west to I35, that might get you a good amount and then back to the exit. but I think an onramp in this area going east, well it's not a high volume direction for local traffic. Not many people going from rural north Norman to say, Shawnee and back. My guess is that their studies show that it's more the through traffic that they're focusing on and not planning to see much frontage traffic anyway.