Highway from I-35/44 to I-40 ??

[MWC59]

We need a highway running from I-35/44 & Kilpatrick Tpk. southeast to I-40 east of Tinker AFB. You Thoughts

[OKCisOK4me]

No

[kevinpate]

in a word ... why?

[BoulderSooner]

would be a huge help in developing the Northeast/east side of OKC ..

[stlokc]

We do not need a highway there. The traffic isn't such a nightmare to warrant it. It would be very expensive. And as far as developing Northeast/East OKC, that is a vast, wide area. It will take generations to develop with or without a highway, why is it something we should worry about right now? More sprawl for the sake of sprawl?

[Just the facts]

would be a huge help in developing the Northeast/east side of OKC ..

Why does the northeast/est side of OKC need developing?

[HangryHippo]

Why does the northeast/est side of OKC need developing?

This is exactly my question. We already have trouble developing, at least in a quality manner, all the areas we are trying to focus on now. Why in the world do we need to add another area to that??

[grandshoemaster]

This is from a thread in the Midwest City Del City section. It is as close as you will get. 10-25-12
And people who don't live on the eastside are probably not going to understand why this would be good.

[BoulderSooner]

This is exactly my question. We already have trouble developing, at least in a quality manner, all the areas we are trying to focus on now. Why in the world do we need to add another area to that??

development is going to continue to happen and it would be better to be on the close in east and north east side .. then for it to continue to the west north west and north

[ou48A]

If it’s not need now, it eventually will be needed.
In fact long range plans call for an I-35 by pass around the east side of the metro.

This would only be part of it. It would start south and east of Norman and generally run in a northerly direction. Norman needs another bridge across the river….. This project would provide it while at the same time offering a degree of relief for folks driving I-35.

[OKCisOK4me]

in a word ... why?

Because even though Oklahoma City is a suburban city...the future of gas may very well lead to an urban setting. NW OKC is the big side of the city and there is new development there all the time. Is it really necessary to develop the NE part of the city when the city itself can hardly pay for police as it is? City is already stretched thin as it is. Hire another 1000 police officers first.

[ou48A]

...the future of gas may very well lead to an urban setting.

If we will develop GTL.... I am not too worried about extremely high gasoline prices in the long term.

[kevinpate]

Hopefully you meant 100 and not 1000 officers.

[Richard at Remax]

They need to start with widening I35 between 44 and Fort Smith junction before anything like this

[adaniel]

^
Bingo. Way too many backlogged projects to be building a highway that won't be needed for a very long time. I may be open if OTA wanted to build a toll road.

People from the east side of the metro can either use 40 to 35 or Highway 102 to get to 44. Are there really that many people from MWC/DC needing to get to 44?

[BoulderSooner]

^
Bingo. Way too many backlogged projects to be building a highway that won't be needed for a very long time. I may be open if OTA wanted to build a toll road.

People from the east side of the metro can either use 40 to 35 or Highway 102 to get to 44. Are there really that many people from MWC/DC needing to get to 44?

it would be a toll road if it ever got built

[HangryHippo]

^
Bingo. Way too many backlogged projects to be building a highway that won't be needed for a very long time. I may be open if OTA wanted to build a toll road.

People from the east side of the metro can either use 40 to 35 or Highway 102 to get to 44. Are there really that many people from MWC/DC needing to get to 44?

This is an excellent point as well. While I understand some people consider them the end of the world, highways are probably going to have to move to toll roads. As time goes on, if cities are unwilling to develop other transportation infrastructure (trains, better buses) more roads will have to be tolled. There's just no other way to keep up if people won't be pushed to using other means or if those other means aren't available.

[Video Expert]

it would be a toll road if it ever got built

I agree it would be a toll road. And trust me, when we get closer to that bond expiring in 2028 or whatever it is now,the OTA will want to propose a new toll road to add more years to the debt in order to continue that cash coming in. With that said, a controlled access highway would be a great addition for people in the East Metro to have better and faster access to I-40 and I-44 and ultimately to other areas of the metro. It would also probably spur more growth in the East Metro. But as a free road, there are much higher priorities for ODOT to tackle. For example, getting the I-240/I-35 interchange rebuilt along with the completion of the I-235/I-44 interchange. Those interchanges are so poorly designed and outdated, it's dangerous for drivers not to mention embarrassing at the same time.

Let's face facts though...not everyone wants to live in a dense, downtown urban "utopia". Many people and families still and will continue to prefer to live in the suburbs or in outlying areas away from the urban core for various reasons. Obviously, others will prefer to live in a more urban environment depending on their situation, needs, and preferences. Different strokes for different folks. My opinion is that we should be accepting that as our metro grows, it's going to continue to consist of a mixture of downtown growth along with suburban growth and doesn't have to necessarily be an either/or proposition.

[BoulderSooner]

i agree with you but

A. we know that the city is going to keep growing ...

b. most of us think growth closer in is better than growth farther out

[Dubya61]

I'm an east Metro guy, and I don't think any further highway is needed. If the ACOG would get on the ball with an RTA that would encompass the true Metro, a lot of this discussion would be moot.

[BoulderSooner]

I'm an east Metro guy, and I don't think any further highway is needed. If the ACOG would get on the ball with an RTA that would encompass the true Metro, a lot of this discussion would be moot.

why do you think the growth of OKC has pretty much 100% ignored the east side

[Video Expert]

b. most of us think growth closer in is better than growth farther out

It appears to me by the most recent metro population statistics that most people are still choosing to live further out or in suburbs rather than closer to the city's core. I'm not saying that's better, but that's just a fact. With that said, there's also been many more people than ever before choosing to live downtown than in the past as it has continued to grow and more and more residential properties have been developed.

Please don't misunderstand me as I'm all for growth at the core and obviously think it is a good thing to see downtown continue its forward evolution. With more retail and so forth, I'm sure that is going to happen even at a quicker pace. My original point was that growth is going to continue to occur both closer in and further out regardless because everyone has their own individual preferences as to where they want to work and live in the metro...in spite of what other people might think is "better"

[Video Expert]

I'm an east Metro guy, and I don't think any further highway is needed. If the ACOG would get on the ball with an RTA that would encompass the true Metro, a lot of this discussion would be moot.

You'll see a toll road well before that ever happens.

[Dubya61]

why do you think the growth of OKC has pretty much 100% ignored the east side

That's a great question. I don't think it's because people in Choctaw/Harrah/Newalla/Stella/east Norman can't get to I-44 easily. The (other thread's) discussion of making Choctaw/Hogback Road a state highway should solve that for some. For me (further east), I can get to I-44 and points east through OK Hwy 102 or US Hwy 177. I think there are some miserably depressed / blighted areas (Jones, Spencer, etc.) that are beyond OKC's ability to either affect or care and mar the growth that is happening (mostly north). Choctaw is trying to foster some growth with their new town center, but that's Choctaw, not OKC. Harrah is treading water, economically and progress-wise and seems to be content as it is. Again, that's Harrah, not OKC. Newalla is just barely on OKC's radar, but OKC has to traverse three pretty large and independent entities (Del City, Midwest City and Tinker AFB) to get there and realize that it's open for growth and development. Shawnee's not extending any tendrils or olive branches in that direction and seems to be pondering whether or not they should slow down sprawl / growth except for casinos. In any case, Shawnee's growth seems to be east towards Seminole and engulfing the interstate leaving behind a rotting vacant old town.
I don't think this interstate / toll road is needed to relieve I-35 of traffic. We need an RTA to develop some lines from Norman to Edmond (and others) to relieve I-35 of traffic.
I'm not sure that OKC needs to grow east until it can (and not necessarily in this order) 1) tie in Tinker with solid, reliable public transit, 2) solve Jones/Spencer property values and schools, 3) make friends with Choctaw/Harrah and public transit, 4) make the ACOG involve Shawnee, and 5) set down some RTA lines that address all these urbanizations.

[grandshoemaster]

It appears to me by the most recent metro population statistics that most people are still choosing to live further out or in suburbs rather than closer to the city's core. I'm not saying that's better, but that's just a fact. With that said, there's also been many more people than ever before choosing to live downtown than in the past as it has continued to grow and more and more residential properties have been developed.

Please don't misunderstand me as I'm all for growth at the core and obviously think it is a good thing to see downtown continue its forward evolution. With more retail and so forth, I'm sure that is going to happen even at a quicker pace. My original point was that growth is going to continue to occur both closer in and further out regardless because everyone has their own individual preferences as to where they want to work and live in the metro...in spite of what other people might think is "better"

I agree with this. However, I doubt this will turn into a toll road. Here is an entry from "plmccordj" that explains some of this:


A lot of this is already a done deal and paid for. As most of you probably already know, I-40 is scheduled to be widened to six lanes at the I-40 and I-240 merge all the way out to the county line. At the same time, Choctaw Road has already been scheduled and paid for to be widened from SE 44th to SE 89th street with a turning lane near I-40. If you read the Choctaw city web site, they already have intentions to widen Choctaw Road to four lanes from where Oklahoma City ends on up until NE 63rd. The Choctaw Road widening project was paid for on a 2007 bond election that passed overwhelmingly. You may remember everyone on the downtown threads were giddy with joy that all of the bond projects passed just before the MAPS III came around. I live at I-40 and Choctaw Road and I am thrilled with this happening.

I work at Tinker and every day there is a back up of traffic beginning around Post Road lasting to just past Choctaw Road. It is so bad sometimes that I prefer to drive down SE 59th to avoid it. The city already has measures to limit the density in the area by zoning the lots as no more than one dwelling per acre. This may prevent density but it fills up the available land at a faster rate causing sprawl that everyone fears so much. Anyway, this is not a big surprise. I am glad that something is being planned. The secret is out and people have discovered that the East is a nice area to live and like it or not, people are going to come.