Lol. Go back to page 1 of this thread, post #21. 10+ years ago and this interchange is still 1/2 year from completion.
Lol. Go back to page 1 of this thread, post #21. 10+ years ago and this interchange is still 1/2 year from completion.
Pete, thank you for keeping the progress on this project before us visually. I appreciate all of your photos.
I might've missed it, but Pete did you post the specs about the drone you use for photos? Does it hold up well in the Oklahoma wind? I'd love to blow some of my stimulus money on something sturdy.
Any idea what the repave on the cloverleaf with blacktop (1st photo) which appears to go nowhere is for?
If you mean what is inside the i44 eastbound to i235 southbound, that looks like it is part of the foundation they will add concrete on top of later for the new cloverleaf.
After they tear down the existing N/S bridge, a wider bridge will be built. The new southbound mainline will be roughly the same size as the old N/S bridge between traffic and breakdown lanes, then another set of lanes west of that will have the all the cloverleaf interactions and 63rd merging resolve themselves away from the main southbound traffic lanes.
If they could move along with the 63rd off-ramps and complete that portion, that would be a big help at rush hour.
Once they finish the new northbound lanes over I-44, this project should move very fast towards completion.
It does look like it's getting close to completion. I hope that as they do complete it, they have a plan for extensive landscaping within the cloverleafs, and on all the grassy spaces between the ramps. Not just a few scrub trees, but they could really finish off the project properly with some sharp beautification. I've seen this in many other cities, it would really look nice. Does anybody know if this is in the final plans?
Like so many others, i'm glad this will be done soon. Then we can get back to that 240 junction that's been ignored.
I wonder if we’ll see it soon or have to wait until the 8yr plan is updated this fall.
That would be a great use of the money. These huge projects use a ton of resources and manpower. Those construction dollars travel through lots of hands in the local economy. And better infrastructure sets the state up for better growth potential in the future. Is it legal? BoulderSooner seems to have a good grasp on the politics of these sorts of things, maybe he can chime in.
I know they didn't put many restrictions on the relief money, so in theory there's probably a way to get it done.
All they'd have to do is say we're spedning a good chunk of the money for better roads, divided between the 2 metros and rural parts. Who's against better roads? Especially, when OK taxpayers don't have to pay a dime. Could finish 240/35 and redo 44/40. OKC metro would have 0 bottlenecks at that point.
There are currently 14 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 14 guests)
Bookmarks