Highway 69/75 working to become interstate

[Just the facts]

How to kill a small town:

Step 1) Put an interstate through it
Step 2) done

[Plutonic Panda]

How to kill a small town:

Step 1) Put an interstate through it
Step 2) done

I'm not understanding the reasoning behind that. Many many small towns have thrived due to interstates. A bunch even abuse it and have cops tagging people for going 5mph over the speed limit, making them hundreds of thousands of dollars, for towns of 1,000 people, that is a lot.

[LakeEffect]

I'm not understanding the reasoning behind that. Many many small towns have thrived due to interstates. A bunch even abuse it and have cops tagging people for going 5mph over the speed limit, making them hundreds of thousands of dollars, for towns of 1,000 people, that is a lot.

Thrived? Name one.

[Plutonic Panda]

Thrived? Name one.

The town where I live, does Edmond work for you?

Need me to be more specific, tell me. Many interstates were built to connect to large cities and I know there were small towns that directly benefited from the interstate system. If you want proof, I'll do some research when I get a chance.

[LakeEffect]

The town where I live, does Edmond work for you?

Need me to be more specific, tell me. Many interstates were built to connect to large cities and I know there were small towns that directly benefited from the interstate system. If you want proof, I'll do some research when I get a chance.

Please do. Edmond did not develop due to interstates. It developed due to its proximity to OKC. We are talking about small towns NOT in proximity to large urban areas.

[Plutonic Panda]

Please do. Edmond did not develop due to interstates. It developed due to its proximity to OKC. We are talking about small towns NOT in proximity to large urban areas.

Ah, yes because OKC is a huge urban area, even after it's urban core was destroyed, Edmond still grew and thrived. I'll do a little research later.

[venture]

ODOT can keep them funded through the taxes people already pay. Interstates do NOT need to be tolled. If this highway were to have a 90MPH speed limit, then I will definitely warm up to the idea of it being tolled. I don't mind seeing some intercity highways being tolled either, but not interstates.

Many already hit on this...funding is not there for more interstates. That is why major projects like 235/44 and 35/240 are pushed out over many many years.

People using the Turner Turnpike will be paying for the up keep, not anybody down there.

Probably true since I would imagine traffic would be fairly low considering the interstate bypasses Tulsa to east.

major construction projects are dragged out because ODOT can't borrow money for road construction. The revenue will increase as the local economy there strengthens from having an interstate going through it. Nearly Every major city has an interstate either running through it or right next to it.

Interesting. So we should continue raising the debt to build more roads without worrying about actually having the cash to pay for it? So exactly when should we start worrying about being fiscally responsible? I think back to Ohio's GOP governor who recently borrowed against the state's turnpike, which has been profitable and self sufficient for years, to get a couple billion dollars to fund projects no where near it. I'm having a hard time understanding exactly where this love for increasing debt by the billions is coming from from so-called conservatives.

The town where I live, does Edmond work for you?

Need me to be more specific, tell me. Many interstates were built to connect to large cities and I know there were small towns that directly benefited from the interstate system. If you want proof, I'll do some research when I get a chance.

Oh bless your heart. Edmond grew because of being in a major metro area. You mentioned in your next post that they still grew when OKC weakened...that's pretty much the history of every suburb in this country. I would definitely advise on doing more research. Some of the comments you have been making lately really make no sense and are night and day to the ones you use to make. Of course it is also curious on the individual who seems to like every one of your nonsensical posts and where their beliefs lie. I'll chalk this up to just getting bad or biased information from some people that is clouding your better judgement.

[Plutonic Panda]

Many already hit on this...funding is not there for more interstates. That is why major projects like 235/44 and 35/240 are pushed out over many many years.



Probably true since I would imagine traffic would be fairly low considering the interstate bypasses Tulsa to east.



Interesting. So we should continue raising the debt to build more roads without worrying about actually having the cash to pay for it? So exactly when should we start worrying about being fiscally responsible? I think back to Ohio's GOP governor who recently borrowed against the state's turnpike, which has been profitable and self sufficient for years, to get a couple billion dollars to fund projects no where near it. I'm having a hard time understanding exactly where this love for increasing debt by the billions is coming from from so-called conservatives.



Oh bless your heart. Edmond grew because of being in a major metro area. You mentioned in your next post that they still grew when OKC weakened...that's pretty much the history of every suburb in this country. I would definitely advise on doing more research. Some of the comments you have been making lately really make no sense and are night and day to the ones you use to make. Of course it is also curious on the individual who seems to like every one of your nonsensical posts and where their beliefs lie. I'll chalk this up to just getting bad or biased information from some people that is clouding your better judgement.

Obviously Edmond has grown with a huge help from OKC. Edmond has grown when OKC was weak and is still growing when it is strong. It doesn't matter, it continues to grow no matter what OKC is doing. I just used Edmond as a first classic example, and the interstate system has benefited Edmond.

You can't immediately fund multi billion dollar projects and the best way to do them is take a bond out, so you can build the whole thing immediately as opposed to waiting and spreading the projects out over a course of x years. Texas has the best credit rating because they pay back their loans on time, I'm sure we could do the same, as long as we don't take out more than we can handle. Tolling INTERSTATES(i only capitalize that to emphasize the word, a system of nationally connected highways that were paid by the tax payers up front, and should remain free) is not the answer.

Now, if cities want toll themselves to pay for highways that have already been paid for by taxpayer dollars, then thats fine, no problemo. I actually think a new loop is needed around Edmond and I would 100% support a toll road.

We will have the cash to pay for it, ODOT is already redoing 235/44 interchange, so obviously the money is there. The only difference is, ODOT is choosing to spread it out over 10 years as opposed to taking out a loan, just building the damn thing, improving traffic flow and potentially saving lives. and paying the money borrowed later. Yes, I know there interest to account for as well.

[venture]

You can't immediately fund multi billion dollar projects and the best way to do them is take a bond out, so you can build the whole thing immediately as opposed to waiting and spreading the projects out over a course of x years.

So exactly how much debt should we take on? When does it stop? Toll roads give an option to pay as you go essentially, but thats a top for the other thread. Projects are already being spread out over many years because of funding limitations. I-35 has been a great example of that as it has been going on for well over 15 years - which I don't expect you to remember much of that.

Texas has the best credit rating because they pay back their loans on time, I'm sure we could do the same, as long as we don't take out more than we can handle.

Would you like to use a lifeline on that statement? You make a lot of claims about how great Texas is (consider moving?) but you don't back up your claims. Texas does not have the best credit rating according to S&P. Texas as an AA+ raiting, the same as Oklahoma. Who has a better, AAA, credit rating? Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming. No Texas.

Tolling INTERSTATES(i only capitalize that to emphasize the word, a system of nationally connected highways that were paid by the tax payers up front, and should remain free) is not the answer.

I think we all know what the interstates are, but that's for the elementary definition. Tolling interstates has been around since the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956. What did this law also do? It removed federal aid from construction costs for the toll roads. Of course that changed and now federal funds can be used for toll roads. Of course at this point we can't go back and toll existing interstates without congressional approval, but anything new is fair game. The Fed doesn't have the money to pay for the roads we have now, so that makes tolling the next logical funding method. Of course we could follow your plan to just keep racking up Debt, but at some point the investors are going to want their money - in which case more debt will be taken on to pay down other debt.

Now, if cities want toll themselves to pay for highways that have already been paid for by taxpayer dollars, then thats fine, no problemo. I actually think a new loop is needed around Edmond and I would 100% support a toll road.

We are getting too far off course at this point, but I just have to scratch my head at the logic being used to propose yet another loop through Edmond.

We will have the cash to pay for it, ODOT is already redoing 235/44 interchange, so obviously the money is there. The only difference is, ODOT is choosing to spread it out over 10 years as opposed to taking out a loan, just building the damn thing, improving traffic flow and potentially saving lives. and paying the money borrowed later. Yes, I know there interest to account for as well.

So...we have the cash to pay for it...but don't have the cash in reality for it, hence the part of spreading the project out over 10 years. I can't possibly be the only one seeing the logical fallacies in your argument on this.

[bradh]

Thrived? Name one.

Even though it's not an interstate, but Kendleton, TX did...for a while

The Biggest Little Speed Trap in Texas - CNN iReport

The most notorious is Kendleton, a town of 500 southwest of Houston that operated a speed trap on U.S. 59 for more than 20 years. In a series of audits, the comptroller's office found the town failed to pay more than $1.6 million in excess highway fines through the 1990s. Kendleton subsequently declared bankruptcy and disbanded its police force.

[venture]

Even though it's not an interstate, but Kendleton, TX did...for a while

The Biggest Little Speed Trap in Texas - CNN iReport

I think you misread their post on what they mean by thrived. The way I took it was how a town has thrived because of the interstate itself, not because of speed trap revenue. The example given by PluPan was Edmond as thriving because of an interstate. So using that context, your response is a little off.

[bradh]

I think you misread their post on what they mean by thrived. The way I took it was how a town has thrived because of the interstate itself, not because of speed trap revenue. The example given by PluPan was Edmond as thriving because of an interstate. So using that context, your response is a little off.

I did, but some people thrived in Kendleton (the cops)

[LakeEffect]

I did, but some people thrived in Kendleton (the cops)

And the taxpayers, a bit.

If we had built the interstate system to always begin and end outside of cities, things may have been different. As soon as we started running them through and/or around cities, small towns began to fail.

[Plutonic Panda]

I think you misread their post on what they mean by thrived. The way I took it was how a town has thrived because of the interstate itself, not because of speed trap revenue. The example given by PluPan was Edmond as thriving because of an interstate. So using that context, your response is a little off.

Are you suggesting that I was suggesting the towns were thriving because of a piece of concrete? So, if I understand that right, that is the same thing as saying, the streetcar won't benefit anything because what can some pieces of metal do? The interstates move billions possibly even trillions of dollars of commerce a year, it is what the interstates do! The move things, at peoples own comfort and control. I prefer to drive a car to California as opposed to riding a HSR, and I want nice highways to do it on. Just like people that want nice fast trains to move around on, I support HSR and Mass Transit.

I also heavily support widening and expanding highways when it's due, and it seems like there are a few people round these parts who don't want anything to do with highways at all and want every building right up against the street. I know that isn't entirely accurate, but man it sure seems like a hidden agenda is prevalent every now and then. I guess we just have to fundamentally disagree with the idea of tolling interstates, because I really think that is scam. The damn things have already been paid for and should be used by everyone, if they choose.

You can bypass intercity highways with ease and not much time lost, depending on traffic. Traveling from state to state, that's a different story.

[BG918]

This has been discussed before. With increasing traffic and the general northward growth of DFW it seems to be gaining more traction. This new interstate could be an extension of I-45, and could eventually connect Tulsa to Dallas.

From Wikipedia:
In the early 1990s, some portions of US-75 in Oklahoma were slated to become part of the Interstate Highway System. The 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) states that "upon the request of the Oklahoma State highway agency, the Secretary shall designate the portion of United States Route 69 from the Oklahoma-Texas State line to Checotah in the State of Oklahoma as a part of the Interstate System."[3] This would have created an Interstate route from Interstate 40 south to the Texas line, including the portion of US-75 co-signed with US-69 south of Atoka. The legislation was unclear whether the route would enter Texas to connect with or become an extension of Interstate 45. A current plan is to construct a new segment of the Oklahoma Turnpike along the US-69 corridor to bring it to corridor standards.