Kilpatrick Turnpike to be widened

[warreng88]

Kilpatrick Turnpike to be widened
By Brian Brus
Journal Record
Oklahoma City reporter
Posted: 06:29 PM Tuesday, January 17, 2012

OKLAHOMA CITY – The Kilpatrick Turnpike in the northern part of the Oklahoma City metropolitan area will be widened from four lanes to six, Oklahoma Turnpike Authority officials said Tuesday.

The turnpike, the first phase of which was opened 20 years ago, is quickly running out of capacity for traffic, Deputy Director Tim Stewart said. Annual automobile growth has been 3 percent to 5 percent, and traffic has reached an average of more than 55,000 vehicles per day on its busiest section.

However, original plans allowed for that to happen someday, with extra space in the median intended for widening. So most of the work on the project won’t spill out to Memorial Road running parallel to the turnpike, Stewart said. No new right of way will be required.

The project, estimated at $60 million, is comprised of about eight miles from MacArthur Boulevard to Eastern Avenue, including eight bridges. Stewart said construction will replace the BNSF Railroad bridge as well, which raised some concerns from Oklahoma City Council members with the development of a commuter transit system in mind.

Authority officials said BNSF has asked for enough space for future expansion of a second track, but no intent has been clarified for commuter rail yet. The state Transportation Department is also working with BNSF and project managers.

City Hall for several years has been planning the development of a central hub for multimodal transit to include bus and rail. Some of the city’s MAPS 3 sales tax issue projects are expected to tie into the system, and the placement of a new convention center takes the hub into consideration.

Stewart said the authority will also provide a Kilpatrick Turnpike noise barrier near Eastern Avenue to protect the interests of The Oaks neighborhood nearby.

Final plans for the project are due Feb. 7, with bids awarded March 2. Construction is expected to begin in April. The full project will take two years to complete. Stewart said contract details will include clear periods during the heaviest holiday shopping traffic in November and December.

The authority was created by the state Legislature in 1947 to operate and maintain the turnpike system across the state, which now totals about 600 miles. The authority receives no tax revenues; all repairs and operations are paid by tolls, and major projects are covered by bonds that are also paid covered by tolls. Stewart said bond funds have already been secured to widen Kilpatrick and the work will not affect current toll rates. Cash plazas will remain in place.

[MadMonk]

How about before they do that, they finish bringing it further south to tie into the H.E. Bailey and Hwy 9? They also need to have a better way for drivers to get on the turnpike going west from Hefner parkway and south from the turnpike onto the parkway.

[RadicalModerate]

There's a rumor going around that some of the state's bridges are in less than satisfactory condition . . .

[Bill Robertson]

They also need to have a better way for drivers to get on the turnpike going west from Hefner parkway and south from the turnpike onto the parkway.

Other than going 5 stories in the air what's wrong with that interchange?

[OklahomaNick]

No! Put that money towards the I-235 / I-44 interchange.. That is SO desperately more needed..

[Snowman]

This is being funded by the turnpike authority.

There's a rumor going around that some of the state's bridges are in less than satisfactory condition . . .

Unless it is one of the turnpike bridges then it is not going a high priority to them and outside of widening turner then them doing a drastic increase in bridge work is unlikely.

No! Put that money towards the I-235 / I-44 interchange.. That is SO desperately more needed..

Pretty much all the money spent on the turnpike system comes from the turnpike system or loans that will be payed off by it's use, while they may pay for junctures with interstates, they do not pay for large projects not involving a turnpike at all. Besides the work planed for the i235/i44 juncture is fully funded through ODOTs budget plan.

[Richard at Remax]

double post. what snowman said

[metro]

Other than going 5 stories in the air what's wrong with that interchange?

He said WEST, the ramp your referring to goes EAST. To go west, you have to get off on Memorial, go through three stoplights, then pay to get back on the turnpike to head west.

[adaniel]

Yeah, a flyover would be very nice there for Nouthbound to Westbound traffic.

Just out of curiousity, why would you be upset if its five stories up? Those high flyover ramps minimize ROW costs significantly, especially now since that corner is so built up.

[Richard at Remax]

Ill take 20 stories of flyovers if it means no cloverleaf design

[Snowman]

Yeah, a flyover would be very nice there for Nouthbound to Westbound traffic.

Just out of curiousity, why would you be upset if its five stories up? Those high flyover ramps minimize ROW costs significantly, especially now since that corner is so built up.

The northbound to eastbound fly over could have been done much shorter and using more of the run on the ground. So first less prone to icing, second costs less in original construction and third less costly to maintain over time. It probably was done so the eventual northbound to westbound flyover could split off of it and go over the westbound to southbound flyover but at this point the only benefit of the extra height is you have gravity on your side when you are getting to the points needing acceleration.

[Bill Robertson]

He said WEST, the ramp your referring to goes EAST. To go west, you have to get off on Memorial, go through three stoplights, then pay to get back on the turnpike to head west.

Oops! I must have been directionally challenged this morning. And I go by there every day.

[OKCisOK4me]

I don't know why the article discusses the BNSF bridge... Kilpatrick goes over the tracks, not the other way around. I think the author is confusing the BNSF bridge that goes over 235 down by 50th Street, which would be an ODOT project as opposed to an OTA project.

[MDot]

I don't know why the article discusses the BNSF bridge... Kilpatrick goes over the tracks, not the other way around. I think the author is confusing the BNSF bridge that goes over 235 down by 50th Street, which would be an ODOT project as opposed to an OTA project.

It threw me off when I first read that part of the article but your suggestion makes sense.

[LakeEffect]

I don't know why the article discusses the BNSF bridge... Kilpatrick goes over the tracks, not the other way around. I think the author is confusing the BNSF bridge that goes over 235 down by 50th Street, which would be an ODOT project as opposed to an OTA project.

The author is using the correct bridge, but not explaining it well. The bridge in question carries Kilpatrick over the tracks. The question is, will the bridge be long enough to allow 3 tracks underneath... will the abutments be separated far enough apart as to allow trains to pass below unimpeded.

[OKCisOK4me]

The author is using the correct bridge, but not explaining it well. The bridge in question carries Kilpatrick over the tracks. The question is, will the bridge be long enough to allow 3 tracks underneath... will the abutments be separated far enough apart as to allow trains to pass below unimpeded.

Ummm, that's what I said...that it goes over the tracks on Kilpatrick.

And as far as tracks go, there's already a mainline track and a spur line track to the lumber place just north of 122nd St. They would only be asking for one more mainline track which probably would be shared exclusively between freight and commuter (if ever expanded north to Edmond). There is only one company in the US that has a three track main and that is Union Pacific up in Nebraska. BNSF doesn't need that in Oklahoma.

[MDot]

^^this is a completely different topic but I thought BNSF had 3 tracks on the Cajon Pass?

[OKCisOK4me]

^^this is a completely different topic but I thought BNSF had 3 tracks on the Cajon Pass?

That's a co-op line, jointly used by Union Pacific and BNSF. Originally built by an AT&SF subsidiary, it was two lines and then I guess (and according to Wikipedia) a third main was added in 2003. Union Pacific has one line through there, although not always following the same path as BNSF, I believe. As far as triple tracking, I forgot about BNSF's Alemeda Corridor in LA, which is 11 miles of sub grade triple track to the Port of Los Angeles.

As far as Union Pacific's triple track mainline, I was only thinking of that due to the length of triple track which is roughly 110 miles. ;-)

Sorry for the distraction, back to topic.

[RadicalModerate]

Although "the fix was in", prior to my initial introduction to this particular project, just the other night, via a local TV news broadcast, my gut reaction was WPA/CCC Project[?].

Oh . . .
WPA: Worthless Pinheaded Appropriation
CCC: Clueless Corrupt Construction

I know my acronym dictionary is a little out of date, but WTF?

[Frustratedoptimist]

Whether its the Kilpatrick or other similar widenings in this region, the purpose of the widening is usually to alleviate rush hour traffic for 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes at night. Commuting time, typically 5 to 10 more minutes a day, is considered and accepted by those of us who chose to live and work in a location that would require us to drive it. And while the widening may lessen congestion (I don't believe it does, as more cars tend to show up), it encourages higher speeds, which increases the likelihood of life-ending accidents to occur. Which is worse - 10 minutes added to our days or $50 million and more traffic fatalities? I know what I would choose. And how will $5-7 gallon gas impact turnpike revenues?

[MDot]

Whether its the Kilpatrick or other similar widenings in this region, the purpose of the widening is usually to alleviate rush hour traffic for 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes at night. Commuting time, typically 5 to 10 more minutes a day, is considered and accepted by those of us who chose to live and work in a location that would require us to drive it. And while the widening may lessen congestion (I don't believe it does, as more cars tend to show up), it encourages higher speeds, which increases the likelihood of life-ending accidents to occur. Which is worse - 10 minutes added to our days or $50 million and more traffic fatalities? I know what I would choose. And how will $5-7 gallon gas impact turnpike revenues?

I think I know what your screen name means...

[ljbab728]

I think I know what your screen name means...

I think he or she is Kerry (Just the Facts) in disguise.

[MDot]

I think he or she is Kerry (Just the Facts) in disguise.

Haha, wouldn't surprise me.

[bluedogok]

This is being funded by the turnpike authority.


Unless it is one of the turnpike bridges then it is not going a high priority to them and outside of widening turner then them doing a drastic increase in bridge work is unlikely.


Pretty much all the money spent on the turnpike system comes from the turnpike system or loans that will be payed off by it's use, while they may pay for junctures with interstates, they do not pay for large projects not involving a turnpike at all. Besides the work planed for the i235/i44 juncture is fully funded through ODOTs budget plan.

This is correct, when Lake Hefner Parkway was being built the ODOT money was able to be moved from the partial interchange designed for Memorial Road due to the Kilpatrick Turnpike being funded and OTA money being used for the entire interchange that was built, that helped speed up completion of LHP. The reason why there was no LHP-NB -> KT-WB flyover built at the same time was the fact that the Kilpatrick Turnpike pretty much ended just west of Portland, the west extension came several years after the original leg from Portland to I-35 was completed.

[OKCisOK4me]

They had an extension planned for the turnpike long before it terminated at Portland (cuing Oil Capital) so you think they would have planned for this like they do with most flyover ramps in Texas...