Future highway or interstate expansion?

[Jesseda]

What ever happened to finishing the turnpike loop from the mustang area to moore/norman? and is their any plans for future highways or tolls etc for the okc metro. I hope that something is planned soon.

[LakeEffect]

Are you trolling?

[adaniel]

Last I heard, the SW loop, while not completely scuttled, is on the backburner by OTA, who would rather focus on keeping up its current stock of roads.

There is no reserved ROW for any new highway and development has progressed willy-nilly in the SW quandrant of the city. In fact, there is a rather large neighborhood at the current southern end of the JKT that would have to be completely bought out for any new expansion.

It seems that upgrades to OK 4 and OK 152 would be enough to manage traffic flow for the foreseeable future.

[Jesseda]

Are you trolling?

how is what I am asking "TROLLING"

[BoulderSooner]

a sw loop and an inner NE loop would both be very helpful

[LakeEffect]

Helpful for what?

[BoulderSooner]

a inner NE loop would spur millions of dollars of development in the near in east side of the OKC metro .. a highway from say I40/I240 north to were I44 meets I 35

[stlokc]

I disagree that a NE "loop" would spur development. Most of it is in the OKC school district, so you won't be seeing a lot of residential growth. It would be extremely remote for any kind of office use. Conceivably, I suppose it could support industrial development, but there are already better positioned corridors to the west and south. Also I don't think the traffic is there to support it.

The metro area does not need more highways, but if there were to be one, the only barely logical thing would be to extend Lake Hefner parkway north for a few miles.

[sgt. pepper]

I disagree that a NE "loop" would spur development. Most of it is in the OKC school district, so you won't be seeing a lot of residential growth. It would be extremely remote for any kind of office use. Conceivably, I suppose it could support industrial development, but there are already better positioned corridors to the west and south. Also I don't think the traffic is there to support it.

The metro area does not need more highways, but if there were to be one, the only barely logical thing would be to extend Lake Hefner parkway north for a few miles.

I could not agree more. The traffic lights on a 70MPH road is not smart. That area is growing rapidly and to extend the freeway is just common sense...but there is not too much of that in the ODOT office.

[catch22]

If you extend it, you make development even easier further out. At what point do you stop the sprawl?

[Video Expert]

how is what I am asking "TROLLING"

It isn't really, but I think cafeboeuf is assuming you knew in advance some of the negative responses you will eventually generate from a significant segment of this community that will have nothing to do with actually answering your question. I'll give you some examples here in advance.

1. "We don't need any more highways. They help foster evil 'urban sprawl'."
2 "We need 'light rail'. Trains and Streetcars are the answer...not freeways!"
3. "I'm glad the SW Loop is on the backburner. All we'll get from it is 'bad growth' and more 'cookie cutter' housing additions."
4. "Suburban highways do not help or contribute to the 'urban core.'
5. "Get ready for more 'cheesy' strip centers and big box retailers."
6. "Oklahoma City is already too spread out. Everyone should live in or near Downtown/Midtown."
7. "That's just what we need...another multi-laned expressway."

I could go on, but I think you'll get the point.

[LakeEffect]

Well put.

[Just the facts]

I would be all for a freeway loop around OKC provided one thing - it didn't have any exit ramps and would just be a route to funnel thru-traffic around the city (kind of like 840 around Nashville or the M-system in the UK).

[Video Expert]

Well put.

Thank you!

[Video Expert]

You should get an award or something. But since you're not an urbanist, no one will put you in for one. Bummer.

Well that's ok I guess. I appreciate you pseudo-nomination though!! I hope I covered most of the bases. Now...can we all keep our focus on the Mystery Tower thread instead of getting sidetracked here??

[sgt. pepper]

It isn't really, but I think cafeboeuf is assuming you knew in advance some of the negative responses you will eventually generate from a significant segment of this community that will have nothing to do with actually answering your question. I'll give you some examples here in advance.

1. "We don't need any more highways. They help foster evil 'urban sprawl'."
2 "We need 'light rail'. Trains and Streetcars are the answer...not freeways!"
3. "I'm glad the SW Loop is on the backburner. All we'll get from it is 'bad growth' and more cookie cutter housing additions."
4. "Suburban highways do not help or contribute to the 'urban core.'
5. "Get ready for more cheesy strip centers and big box retailers."
6. "Oklahoma City is already too spread out. Everyone should live in or near Downtown/Midtown."
7. "That's just what we need...another multi-laned expressway."

I could go on, but I think you'll get the point.

Who are YOU to tell people where to live?? ...LOL We can live where we want, our government hasn't taken that away from us yet.

I like light rail, but it is not for everybody....I guess you are going to demand that we take light rail VS freeways? Don't go telling people what to do (outside legal limits), not a good idea.

[sgt. pepper]

If you extend it, you make development even easier further out. At what point do you stop the sprawl?

Until we don't need it anymore.

[Video Expert]

Who are YOU to tell people where to live?? ...LOL We can live where we want, our government hasn't taken that away from us yet.

Well maybe they should take that issue up and try and force everyone to live where they want us to live. I trust they know what's best for us.

I like light rail, but it is not for everybody....I guess you are going to demand that we take light rail VS freeways? Don't go telling people what to do (outside legal limits), not a good idea.

So I guess you have a problem being dumped off at some train station and walking perhaps a mile or two to your eventual destination? We could all use the exercise, right? Or taking a bus or cab from there? What do you have against buses and cab drivers? I guess you think we should just be able to have the freedom to use an automobile to drive from Point A to Point B whenever we want. That's so outrageous!

[sgt. pepper]

Well maybe they should take that issue up and try and force everyone to live where they want us to live. I trust they know what's best for us.

What????



So I guess you have a problem being dumped off at some train station and walking perhaps a mile or two to your eventual destination? We could all use the exercise, right? Or taking a bus or cab from there? What do you have against buses and cab drivers? I guess you think we should just be able to have the freedom to use an automobile to drive from Point A to Point B whenever we want. That's so outrageous!

Of course I do. That is not outrageous at all, if I want to drive 500 feet to get a gallon of milk, I should be able to do so because that is my choice. I walk....a lot because I choose to and it is good for me, but I am not going to force a person to do that if they don't want to even though it is best for them, are you kidding me? I ride my bike, I work out almost every day, I have nothing against busses or cab drivers. What I have a problem with is people who think they know what is best for me, telling me what I should do. The law will dictate that for me....don't run a red light, that is not good for you or somebody else. But as of right now, there is no law against me living 50 miles from downtown.

[Rover]

I would be all for a freeway loop around OKC provided one thing - it didn't have any exit ramps and would just be a route to funnel thru-traffic around the city (kind of like 840 around Nashville or the M-system in the UK).

M system has lots of exits and extends inside the loop in several places. However, none go completely through. You have to take the ring around to the next M and take it or another artery into the center. Doesn't stop cars into London though....still lots of traffic.

[Just the facts]

The M-system in the UK went through various stages. The original system was rural only. Then, like America, they started building urban freeways but a UK study in the 90s ('94 I believe) showed that traffic on urban freeways grew faster than they could build the capacity. They concluded the more they built the worse traffic got so they stopped building them. They instead started investing that money back into the rail systems which had been neglected for decades.

If anyone is having trouble sleeping here the 1994 report.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...fic-report.pdf

[Richard at Remax]

After spending the week in the suburbs of Houston they definitely didn't get that memo.

[HangryHippo]

Who are YOU to tell people where to live?? ...LOL We can live where we want, our government hasn't taken that away from us yet.

I like light rail, but it is not for everybody....I guess you are going to demand that we take light rail VS freeways? Don't go telling people what to do (outside legal limits), not a good idea.

Someone's got their tea party panties in a wad...

[catch22]

Who are YOU to tell people where to live?? ...LOL We can live where we want, our government hasn't taken that away from us yet.

I like light rail, but it is not for everybody....I guess you are going to demand that we take light rail VS freeways? Don't go telling people what to do (outside legal limits), not a good idea.

No, but why should the government build an expressway to your front door?

Why should I pay for you to have an expressway to you front door.

If you want to live somewhere, you should pay the full cost to live out there, instead of a government subsidy to do it.

[Plutonic Panda]

It isn't really, but I think cafeboeuf is assuming you knew in advance some of the negative responses you will eventually generate from a significant segment of this community that will have nothing to do with actually answering your question. I'll give you some examples here in advance.

1. "We don't need any more highways. They help foster evil 'urban sprawl'."
2 "We need 'light rail'. Trains and Streetcars are the answer...not freeways!"
3. "I'm glad the SW Loop is on the backburner. All we'll get from it is 'bad growth' and more 'cookie cutter' housing additions."
4. "Suburban highways do not help or contribute to the 'urban core.'
5. "Get ready for more 'cheesy' strip centers and big box retailers."
6. "Oklahoma City is already too spread out. Everyone should live in or near Downtown/Midtown."
7. "That's just what we need...another multi-laned expressway."

I could go on, but I think you'll get the point.

You nailed it lol