Tulsa, INCOG, and ODOT are going to be requesting funds to replace the I-244 bridge over the Arkansas River.
It would be great if we could get something that would represent Tulsa's past but also be progressive and iconic. Maybe and Art Deco bridge???
Quote from: Composer on June 23, 2009, 10:01:18 PM
Tulsa, INCOG, and ODOT are going to be requesting funds to replace the I-244 bridge over the Arkansas River.
It would be great if we could get something that would represent Tulsa's past but also be progressive and iconic. Maybe and Art Deco bridge???
At this point I'd just be satisfied with something that I didn't fear would drop me in the drink every time I drove over it.
maybe this time they could clean up the remains of the last few bridges that the contractor just plops in the river? Huge chunks of concrete and rebar make for a treacherous area beneath the bridges. tough on my boat hulls.
Quote from: waterboy on June 24, 2009, 06:53:51 AM
maybe this time they could clean up the remains of the last few bridges that the contractor just plops in the river? Huge chunks of concrete and rebar make for a treacherous area beneath the bridges. tough on my boat hulls.
Most definitely, and I think it would include such a clean-up. The part that intrigues me is that the rail line would be placed under the road on the bridge, does that mean the existing rail bridge would be demolished as well? That would be much better having the 11th/SW Blvd. bridge, Avery 'pedestrian' bridge, and then just one large bridge for I-244 and the rail line. Hopefully they add some style to it. It doesn't have to be a cable-stayed suspension bridge but maybe an arch or at least some interesting lighting could really make it standout as a landmark within Tulsa, much like the 23rd St. bridge. Maybe something like the I-40 bridge over the Mississippi between Arkansas and Tennessee but smaller with one arch in the middle:
(http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/9/7/5/1/0/ar118262438901579.jpg)
What we have currently, a jumbled mess right by downtown:
(http://www.urban-photos.com/gallery/albums/city_galleries/tulsa/tulsa_45_9439.jpg)
Cities that look new, shiny, interesting, or whatever have bridges that are a notch above plane functional bridges. Some concrete stamped details in the side. Texture. Stained a different color. A facade even. Or maybe just painted or a couple lights.
Nearly all the bridges in Tulsa are "as cheap as possible with no frills at all. Given that a bridge is a centerpiece that travelers HAVE to look at, we are missing an easy way to give a positive impression.
I notice that every time I travel.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on June 24, 2009, 11:46:21 AM
Nearly all the bridges in Tulsa are "as cheap as possible with no frills at all. Given that a bridge is a centerpiece that travelers HAVE to look at, we are missing an easy way to give a positive impression.
It was in keeping with the "Oklahoma is OK". I hope we decide to do better.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on June 24, 2009, 11:46:21 AM
Nearly all the bridges in Tulsa are "as cheap as possible with no frills at all.
Some of the bridges along I-44 in Tulsa (where Lewis crossses I-44 and also where I-44 crosses Darlington off the top of my head) have a neat metal mesh railing that was kinda cool to look at. I would, of course, like something grand to make our highways more attractive, but even a small detail like those railings would be a welcome sight.
I remember as a kid visiting Pittsburgh and seeing all the cool bridges and wondering why Tulsa didn't have the same. I now realize Pittsburgh built those bridges in the late 19th century and early 20th century when that was how bridges were built, and also the rivers in Pittsburgh are navigable for boats and barges making larger spans necessary. In Tulsa the majority of the bridges minus the Pedestrian bridge, Avery bridge, and old Jenks bridge were built in the mid to late 20th century and not since French fur traders plied the water has the river been navigable for boats (minus rowboats on Zink Lake and waterboy's airboat, of course). So that is why we have such boring, functional bridges. It would be nice to break the trend though with this very highly visible bridge (second only to I-44) and also on the proposed Gilcrease Expy. bridge.
SXWX,
I'm talking regular highway overpasses in Kansas City, Denver, Des Moines, Minneapolis and their suburbs. Just an underpass, not grand navigable bridge spans. Just details on regular old bridges - that we all drive under every day. That all look very uninviting and dilapidated, if not just plane and cheap.
I vote for putting I244 under the river ;D
Anyone have any news on the I-244 bridge?
I saw this little tidbit in the TW story about Kaiser's recent philanthropy that was interesting (and encouraging). I'd much rather see an architect design our new 244 bridge than ODOT...
The Interstate 244 bridge, for which the foundation has provided an architect.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746)
Quote from: SXSW on August 17, 2009, 04:15:55 PM
I'd much rather see an architect design our new 244 bridge than ODOT...
+1.
I saw that, too, and I'm excited to hear it! Kaiser could do a lot for Tulsa just by paying architect's fees for various buildings and structures.
Far too much of Tulsa has been "designed" by engineers (and national chains) in recent decades. Somewhere in the past decades we went from cutting edge, beautiful, unique architecture to: "what's the cheapest thing I can build?"
Can't wait to see the design. And certainly hope/expect it will include the rail option.
Quote from: PonderInc on August 18, 2009, 01:25:24 PM
Can't wait to see the design. And certainly hope/expect it will include the rail option.
Me too. I like the idea of consolidating the three bridges into one.
Quote from: SXSW on June 24, 2009, 02:25:10 PM
I remember as a kid visiting Pittsburgh and seeing all the cool bridges and wondering why Tulsa didn't have the same. I now realize Pittsburgh built those bridges in the late 19th century and early 20th century when that was how bridges were built, and also the rivers in Pittsburgh are navigable for boats and barges making larger spans necessary. In Tulsa the majority of the bridges minus the Pedestrian bridge, Avery bridge, and old Jenks bridge were built in the mid to late 20th century and not since French fur traders plied the water has the river been navigable for boats (minus rowboats on Zink Lake and waterboy's airboat, of course). So that is why we have such boring, functional bridges. It would be nice to break the trend though with this very highly visible bridge (second only to I-44) and also on the proposed Gilcrease Expy. bridge.
I enjoy watching Pittsburg Pirates home games, not for the team but for the view behind centerfield. I wish Tulsa had something like that.
(http://www.woolflowers.net/archives/pnc%20park%202.JPG)
Quote from: SXSW on June 24, 2009, 08:27:58 AM
Most definitely, and I think it would include such a clean-up. The part that intrigues me is that the rail line would be placed under the road on the bridge, does that mean the existing rail bridge would be demolished as well? That would be much better having the 11th/SW Blvd. bridge, Avery 'pedestrian' bridge, and then just one large bridge for I-244 and the rail line. Hopefully they add some style to it. It doesn't have to be a cable-stayed suspension bridge but maybe an arch or at least some interesting lighting could really make it standout as a landmark within Tulsa, much like the 23rd St. bridge. Maybe something like the I-40 bridge over the Mississippi between Arkansas and Tennessee but smaller with one arch in the middle:
Something like this:
(http://bridgehunter.com/photos/10/88/108814-M.jpg)
I would prefer a multi-span rainbow arch style bridge like this one, albeit on a much larger scale:
(http://bridgehunter.com/photos/10/00/100059-M.jpg)
Since the roadway is close to the river, a bridge in a similar style would easily fit.
Anything would be preferable to the plain concrete steel stringer bridge that ODOT will undoubtedly build. Some highway departments have pride in what they build, but ODOT would rather punt when they have a chance to score a touchdown.
Personally I'd like to see a through truss bridge, but I won't hold my breath.
Here's the issue: large spans and added height cost money. On the Arkansas river there is no navigation, the bank height is not a real issue and there is no valley to span. Hence, they would be wasted elements for the most part.
I will want to see a cool bridge, but I doubt we spend the money to get something like the ones shown above because it isn't needed. Anyone have examples of lower bridges over non-navigable waterways that are cool?
Are we getting entirely new bridge spans or just decking? They've stripped off a lot of decking around the IDL, but I've not seen any steel spans disappearing yet.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 21, 2009, 12:35:49 PM
Are we getting entirely new bridge spans or just decking? They've stripped off a lot of decking around the IDL, but I've not seen any steel spans disappearing yet.
Although off topic I'll reply. The IDL remodel is new bridge decks. They said the steel spans are fine for the most part but there may be some slective work to them.
FWIW, as part of the I-40 relocation in OKC, there is going to be a pedestrian birdge built across the interstate. I am not sure about it's funding, but ODOT mentions it on their website as part of the relocation, which also includes sound walls. Granted, this is only a pedestrian brigde, but it shows that ODOT may be warming up to the idea of marrying form and function. Here's a pic (http://imaginativeamerica.com/2008/09/i-40-pedestrian-bridge/) of the bridge.
Quote from: tshane250 on August 21, 2009, 01:58:31 PM
FWIW, as part of the I-40 relocation in OKC, there is going to be a pedestrian birdge built across the interstate. I am not sure about it's funding, but ODOT mentions it on their website as part of the relocation, which also includes sound walls. Granted, this is only a pedestrian brigde, but it shows that ODOT may be warming up to the idea of marrying form and function. Here's a pic (http://imaginativeamerica.com/2008/09/i-40-pedestrian-bridge/) of the bridge.
reminds me a bit of the Chords Bridge in Jerusalem by Calatrava.
http://www.europe-re.com/files/processed/00093500/93509_Inauguration_CalatravaBridge_kl.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Calatrava_Jerusalem.jpg
Quote from: cannon_fodder on August 21, 2009, 12:00:24 PM
Here's the issue: large spans and added height cost money. On the Arkansas river there is no navigation, the bank height is not a real issue and there is no valley to span. Hence, they would be wasted elements for the most part.
I will want to see a cool bridge, but I doubt we spend the money to get something like the ones shown above because it isn't needed. Anyone have examples of lower bridges over non-navigable waterways that are cool?
Dallas is getting a spectacular Calatrava-designed suspension bridge over its Trinity River which makes the Arkansas look like the Mississippi. In Dallas' case they wanted something really nice to revitalize the riverfront and the TXDOT bridges wouldn't cut it, hence the hiring of Calatrava. Another reason I'm glad an architect has been hired for this project..
http://www.trinityrivercorridor.com/html/trinity_bridges.html (http://www.trinityrivercorridor.com/html/trinity_bridges.html)
It's difficult to argue against a pretty bridge. How much are you willing to pay?
While I'd prefer something spectacular, especially if Kaiser is funding the design, I would take something, anything other than your typical boring causeway-style bridge. This scene outside Pittsburgh could almost be mistaken for the area west of Tulsa by Sand Springs sans pretty bridges and low water lock and dam:
(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd360/pittsburghrules/sharpsburg/DSC08558.jpg)
Here is a website with the TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grant info. and maps/studies related to the I-244 bridge which will replace both spans with a new double span bridge with the north span double-decked with two rail lines, one for future HSR and the other for LRT/commuter rail, below the highway. There will also be a new pedestrian bridge incorporated to connect the west bank trail to the east bank trail north of the current bridge. I'm not sure what the current progress is though, or if the project was even awarded the $95 million in TIGER funds. It appears the existing rail bridge, Avery bridge, and SW Blvd. bridge are all staying and the new bridge will go pretty much where the current bridge is located.
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm)
I'm still hoping for an interesting design, or at least interesting lighting. Here is an example of a double-deck bridge that includes a pedestrian/bike trail component, something like this would be great:
(http://blog.oregonlive.com/news_impact/2009/09/I5-CRC-Overlook-091809.jpg)
...or if we really want to get fancy, a cable-stayed bridge:
(http://blog.oregonlive.com/news_impact/2009/09/I5-Cable-Stay-Mainline-091809.jpg)
SXSW, you got me all excited for about three seconds, because I thought designs for the bridge had been released!
I really hope we get a beautiful, interesting bridge instead of, say, every other strictly utilitarian bridge in Tulsa. Throwback, modern, art deco, whatever, just make it interesting!
Quote from: SXSW on January 11, 2010, 03:41:44 PM
Here is a website with the TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grant info. and maps/studies related to the I-244 bridge which will replace both spans with a new double span bridge with the north span double-decked with two rail lines, one for future HSR and the other for LRT/commuter rail, below the highway. There will also be a new pedestrian bridge incorporated to connect the west bank trail to the east bank trail north of the current bridge. I'm not sure what the current progress is though, or if the project was even awarded the $95 million in TIGER funds. It appears the existing rail bridge, Avery bridge, and SW Blvd. bridge are all staying and the new bridge will go pretty much where the current bridge is located.
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm)
I'm still hoping for an interesting design, or at least interesting lighting. Here is an example of a double-deck bridge that includes a pedestrian/bike trail component, something like this would be great:
(http://blog.oregonlive.com/news_impact/2009/09/I5-CRC-Overlook-091809.jpg)
Only problem is this is a deck truss bridge, and deck truss bridges are out of style since the Minneapolis I-35W bridge collapse. I doubt we'll see any new deck trusses built ever again.
A sad thing about the current I-244 bridges is the fact that they were built in 1967 and they're already falling apart. They built the bridge as cheaply as they possibly could and we're paying the price today.
Funding for this round of TIGER Grants should be announced this month...
"DOT 112-09
Monday, July 30, 2009
Tel.: (202) 366-4570
Email: Sasha.Johnson@dot.gov
U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood to Announce TIGER Discretionary Grant Awards Early in Effort to Accelerate Recovery Spending
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today said he will accelerate stimulus spending and announce $1.5 billion in TIGER Discretionary Grants as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act one month early. The TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Discretionary Grant program will award Recovery funds on a competitive basis to projects that have a significant impact on the nation, a region or metropolitan area and can create jobs and benefit economically distressed areas.
"Our top priority with the Recovery Act is to get money out the door quickly in order to put people to work and get the economy back on track," said Secretary LaHood.
As part of the ongoing effort to accelerate spending, Secretary LaHood created a review team to expedite the application process for the $1.5 billion TIGER Discretionary Grant program. That will enable the Department to announce the grants in January 2010 – one full month ahead of the statutory deadline. "
via... http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2009/dot11209.htm
The aesthetic design work hasn't been done because no-one knows if it will happen or not, so if it does get approved, don't expect pictures anytime soon.
I believe the rail component is supposed to be two lines and parallel and slightly lower than the auto component.
The application can be found here http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm if anyone is interested in further reading....
Quote from: sgrizzle on January 12, 2010, 09:33:04 AM
The aesthetic design work hasn't been done because no-one knows if it will happen or not, so if it does get approved, don't expect pictures anytime soon.
I believe the rail component is supposed to be two lines and parallel and slightly lower than the auto component.
Yes the current proposal calls for: 2 rail lines, 1 for HSR and 1 for LRT/Commuter, below the southbound auto lanes of the north bridge. There are also plans for a bike/pedestrian trail below or to the side of the north bridge where the west bank trail would be extended west where it currently intersects SW Blvd. to where the tracks cross SW Blvd. where it would then join up with the bridge and to the trail on the east bank. It sure would be nice if they created a entrance/exit for the bridge trail for a future extension of the west bank trail northwest of SW Blvd. along the south shoreline near the refinery. The south bridge would be auto only.
As far as the design goes we know George Kaiser has granted funds to hire an architect for the project. But at this point we don't know who the architect is or what the 'design budget' is for the bridge. I'm hoping for something like the images I posted but would even be happy with something like the Sailboat Bridge at Grand Lake with some awesome night-time lighting.
Sailboat Bridge
(http://www.leesresort.com/pelicans_smaller.jpg)
PDF of I-244 bridge plans
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/alignment.pdf (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/alignment.pdf)
Booyah!
I-244 multimodal bridge awarded $49.5M grant
Pg 5 & 37 - http://tinyurl.com/yj5lzqb
The engineering selection is underway by ODOT
QuoteProject Benefits:
The project will improve the condition of the existing bridge facilities and minimize operations and maintenance expenditures. The region's economic competitiveness will be enhanced by significant improvements for both truck and rail freight movement over the Arkansas River. The I-244 project, with its key multimodal elements, is critical to Tulsa's proposed transit-oriented development plans. Without this bridge, a planned commuter rail line linking Tulsa's Central Business District and Tulsa's West Bank areas is unable to proceed.
Wow, that's great.
Page 37.
Now where will the remaining funding come from?
Is there anyone that can screw this up?
Quote from: Townsend on February 17, 2010, 05:31:43 PM
Wow, that's great.
Page 37.
Now where will the remaining funding come from?
Is there anyone that can screw this up?
Sure there is.
Inhofe is one.
Coburn is another.
Quote from: Markk on February 17, 2010, 10:38:24 PM
Sure there is.
Inhofe is one.
Coburn is another.
Nope, if what I read in the .pdf is correct, the federal funding is there already.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 17, 2010, 11:02:27 PM
Nope, if what I read in the .pdf is correct, the federal funding is there already.
Just for the westbound side, according to this morning's paper. Now they have to figure out something for the eastbound direction.
So the trick is going to be getting the state funding?
From what I can tell the Westbound side is the one that will have the rail and bikelane components (since it costs twice as much as the Eastbound). So this is the most important side to get done if we want to get our "starter rail" plans going in downtown.
The westbound is the one that makes sense for the muli-modal due to the rail alignment.
Something I find really curious is why did they put a fresh coat of asphalt on the old 11th St./SW Blvd/Route 66 bridge, but yet we are not allowed access to walk or bike across? Anyone know?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 18, 2010, 08:28:40 AM
The westbound is the one that makes sense for the muli-modal due to the rail alignment.
Something I find really curious is why did they put a fresh coat of asphalt on the old 11th St./SW Blvd/Route 66 bridge, but yet we are not allowed access to walk or bike across? Anyone know?
Might be to help stave off any further deterioration of the roadbed and the structural part thats immediately underneath. Plus at least it looks tidy now.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 18, 2010, 08:28:40 AM
The westbound is the one that makes sense for the muli-modal due to the rail alignment.
Something I find really curious is why did they put a fresh coat of asphalt on the old 11th St./SW Blvd/Route 66 bridge, but yet we are not allowed access to walk or bike across? Anyone know?
Seal it against further breakdown.
We all know how brutal pedestrian traffic is ::)
We get sentimental about the strangest things in Tulsa and have let better treasures than this get torn down.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 18, 2010, 08:46:17 AM
We all know how brutal pedestrian traffic is ::)
We get sentimental about the strangest things in Tulsa and have let better treasures than this get torn down.
I have a pdf somewhere that says they were sealing it and inspecting it trying to figure out what to do with it. They wanted to make it open for festival space but that is still cut off as well for the time being.
I've also been told that this bridge had been used in the past as a good place to "dispose of things"
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 18, 2010, 08:50:49 AM
I've also been told that this bridge had been used in the past as a good place to "dispose of things"
FAIL! If that's a reason they think they need to keep it gated off.
Things can be disposed of off the 23rd St. or existing SW Blvd. auto bridge now.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 18, 2010, 08:56:52 AM
FAIL! If that's a reason they think they need to keep it gated off.
Things can be disposed of off the 23rd St. or existing SW Blvd. auto bridge now.
Give people a lot of cement shoes have you?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 17, 2010, 11:02:27 PM
Nope, if what I read in the .pdf is correct, the federal funding is there already.
In honor of the aforementioned senators, I stubbornly stand by my answer in spite of all facts, logic, reason, or common sense to the contrary.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 18, 2010, 09:13:00 AM
Give people a lot of cement shoes have you?
What size shoe do you wear? Muwaahahahahah!
The TW article about the new bridge...curious what the design will be and if Kaiser is still involved?
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100218_16_A1_Amilli142989 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100218_16_A1_Amilli142989)
I have got to quit reading the comment section of the TW web site. My eyes are bleeding.
Hmm. Kinda bummed about this. I was honestly expecting a new bridge to replace everything coming over the Arkansas. All of 244, Southwest Blvd, commuter/passenger train track and pedestrian walkway. I mean, this is a lot better than nothing, but I was hoping to completely get rid of this eyesore.
Quote from: Nik on February 18, 2010, 12:19:54 PM
Hmm. Kinda bummed about this. I was honestly expecting a new bridge to replace everything coming over the Arkansas. All of 244, Southwest Blvd, commuter/passenger train track and pedestrian walkway. I mean, this is a lot better than nothing, but I was hoping to completely get rid of this eyesore.
I figured the railroad bridge would be demo'd after the new bridge is built with the new tracks underneath but I'm not sure. SW Blvd. and the Avery Bridge aren't going anywhere.
I just hope this is a bridge that has been designed and not just engineered, with some interesting lighting features.
It would be possible to put SW BLVD under the northbound bridge when it's replaced, but there is little need to do so.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 18, 2010, 01:59:44 PM
It would be possible to put SW BLVD under the northbound bridge when it's replaced, but there is little ZERO need to do so.
FIFY
Quote from: SXSW on February 18, 2010, 01:15:12 PM
I figured the railroad bridge would be demo'd after the new bridge is built with the new tracks underneath but I'm not sure. SW Blvd. and the Avery Bridge aren't going anywhere.
I just hope this is a bridge that has been designed and not just engineered, with some interesting lighting features.
I read the original request from earlier in this thread and it is referred to as a "multi-modal" bridge. I thought I remembered the proposal saying that the railroad was included in the bid. So, kinda surprised to hear the new bridge is just for half of 244.
Quote from: Nik on February 18, 2010, 04:39:55 PM
I read the original request from earlier in this thread and it is referred to as a "multi-modal" bridge. I thought I remembered the proposal saying that the railroad was included in the bid. So, kinda surprised to hear the new bridge is just for half of 244.
My (limited) understanding of this project is that north and southbound traffic will have to be routed onto the current south 'northbound' bridge. They will then tear down the north bridge and rebuild it as a double-decker with road surface on top and tracks/bike trail below. Once that bridge is finished they will route all of the traffic onto it and do the same thing with the south bridge except it won't be double-decked. I'm surprised they are putting a bike path underneath; I guess that means the Avery bridge will stay off limits? That would make for a great, wide jogging/bike path across that historic bridge.
Quote from: Nik on February 18, 2010, 04:39:55 PM
I read the original request from earlier in this thread and it is referred to as a "multi-modal" bridge. I thought I remembered the proposal saying that the railroad was included in the bid. So, kinda surprised to hear the new bridge is just for half of 244.
The southbound side is multimodal. The northbound side is vehicle only. The southbound side will be about 65ft across, which is plenty to do everything without having to double-deck two bridges.
Designs are expected to be completed by the end of 2010 with construction starting in early 2011.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100218_11_0_Workco345659 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100218_11_0_Workco345659)
Couldn't the light rail line be installed on the Avery or the exisiting 11st Street Bridge?
I am 75% certain the Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Railway interurbans ran on the Avery Bridge up to the 1940s anyway.
The are federal regulations restricting the mix of light rail and conventional trains. It would be better to have the two new track footprints reserved for commuter and intercity rail.
Oh yes. This is spectacular news. This is likely the most expensive segment of the Oklahoma spoke of the South Central Corridor.
Quote from: Transport_Oklahoma on February 18, 2010, 06:43:20 PM
Couldn't the light rail line be installed on the Avery or the exisiting 11st Street Bridge?
I am 75% certain the Tulsa-Sapulpa Union Railway interurbans ran on the Avery Bridge up to the 1940s anyway.
The Cyrus Avery Bridge, formerly the 11th Street Bridge, had a rail line in a depressed area in the middle, but the depression was taken away and the bridge was converted to all highway traffic by 1935.
And, no, the current Avery Bridge could not handle a train ... or any other vehicle for that matter. It's too deteriorated. Vision 2025 envisioned rehabbing the bridge. But once the measure passed and the sales-tax money was available for an extensive engineering study, it was determined that the bridge was in much worse shape than anticipated and that all of the money earmarked for Route 66 projects would have been eaten up by fixing the bridge. So they closed off the bridge and pray that some substantial money will be there in the future to properly rehab the structure.
QuoteThe Cyrus Avery Bridge, formerly the 11th Street Bridge, had a rail line in a depressed area in the middle, but the depression was taken away and the bridge was converted to all highway traffic by 1935.
I believe you, but is there a photograph or diagram showing this? This is the first time I have heard someone confirm it.
Quote from: Transport_Oklahoma on February 18, 2010, 08:47:04 PM
I believe you, but is there a photograph or diagram showing this? This is the first time I have heard someone confirm it.
I got the information from ODOT.
It is also on a plaque near the bridge and flags. The above history that is.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on February 18, 2010, 08:30:54 PM
The Cyrus Avery Bridge, formerly the 11th Street Bridge, had a rail line in a depressed area in the middle, but the depression was taken away and the bridge was converted to all highway traffic by 1935.
And, no, the current Avery Bridge could not handle a train ... or any other vehicle for that matter. It's too deteriorated. Vision 2025 envisioned rehabbing the bridge. But once the measure passed and the sales-tax money was available for an extensive engineering study, it was determined that the bridge was in much worse shape than anticipated and that all of the money earmarked for Route 66 projects would have been eaten up by fixing the bridge. So they closed off the bridge and pray that some substantial money will be there in the future to properly rehab the structure.
I wouldn't be too heartbroken if they had to tear down the Avery bridge. However, instead of putting the bike path under the new bridge why not spend the extra money to properly rehab the Avery bridge and put the bike path there? I hate seeing it fenced off.
Quote from: SXSW on February 19, 2010, 12:35:26 PM
I wouldn't be too heartbroken if they had to tear down the Avery bridge. However, instead of putting the bike path under the new bridge why not spend the extra money to properly rehab the Avery bridge and put the bike path there? I hate seeing it fenced off.
Funny you should mention that ...
A number of cyclists and other states have been really increasing their efforts in the last few years to either build new bike trails, convert abandoned railroad beds, or convert abandoned segments of road next to or near Route 66. Illinois already has built segments for the Route 66 Bike Trail, and are building more. Other states on Route 66 are looking at the same thing.
So I think your idea for the Avery Bridge has merit, and I suspect the idea will gain traction.
Quote from: SXSW on February 19, 2010, 12:35:26 PM
I wouldn't be too heartbroken if they had to tear down the Avery bridge. However, instead of putting the bike path under the new bridge why not spend the extra money to properly rehab the Avery bridge and put the bike path there? I hate seeing it fenced off.
I'm trying to figure out where the bike path would lead on the south end of the south bound 244 bridge. It's all rail yard or refinery now. Off the north end the trail goes over the rail bed and around to Newblock Park. It's a little harder justifying rehabbing the Avery Bridge for pedestrian traffic when there's a protected pedestrian lane over the bridge just down stream of it and other than taking down the fencing. I'm trying to figure out what re-hab could possibly be needed for moderate pedestrian loads on that bridge.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 19, 2010, 02:56:58 PM
I'm trying to figure out where the bike path would lead on the south end of the south bound 244 bridge. It's all rail yard or refinery now. Off the north end the trail goes over the rail bed and around to Newblock Park. It's a little harder justifying rehabbing the Avery Bridge for pedestrian traffic when there's a protected pedestrian lane over the bridge just down stream of it and other than taking down the fencing. I'm trying to figure out what re-hab could possibly be needed for moderate pedestrian loads on that bridge.
My thoughts exactly. Either spend the money to structurally stabilize the Avery bridge for joggers and bikers or tear it down. Otherwise the bridge will continue to sit unused and fenced off like a relic of the past, and it's not even really visible due to the SW Blvd./11th St. bridge to the south and 244 bridge to the north. Other than historic value is there really a point to it being there? I think building the current SW Blvd./11th St. bridge and then letting the Avery bridge fall into disrepair was its eventual death wish.
My question for the planners of this bridge is how do they intend to get joggers and bikers from the west and east bank river trails onto the new 244 bridge? Will you have to cross SW Blvd./11th St. at-grade or will there be some kind of bridge/ramp? The same problem exists for putting the trail on the Avery bridge as you have to cross a busy street. And will the tracks underneath the bridge be solely used for future HSR and commuter/light rail or will they also be used by BNSF for freight trains? If so will the railroad bridge to the north eventually be demolished?
Pic from the TW showing the congested 244/SW Blvd./11th St. river crossing into downtown
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20100219_A9_a12244bridgereplace2192010.jpg)
I can't wait to see some designs for this. Am I making this up, or do I remember GKFF putting money toward the architectural/design part of this?
Quote from: dsjeffries on February 19, 2010, 03:55:58 PM
I can't wait to see some designs for this. Am I making this up, or do I remember GKFF putting money toward the architectural/design part of this?
According to this TW article from last August 17th the Kaiser Foundation has provided an architect for the bridge. That's all I know.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746)
I posted this pic on the first page of this thread but it gives you a good view of the current conditions in this area
(http://www.urban-photos.com/gallery/albums/city_galleries/tulsa/tulsa_45_9439.jpg)
What is the style of the old 11th street bridge you guys wouldn't mind seeing destroyed? Artist, you have any input as to its style and relevance? Is it the same style as the original 21st street bridge that architects recreated with the newer bridge? Just wondering. BTW, its not totally useless. Lots of dregs ocassionally live within its arches.
Also, that old railroad bridge that was built in the late 1800's out of native stone quarried from around Chandler park that shows little sign of deterioration in spite of multiple daily runs of tons of freight for over a hundred years......tear it down? So you can build, what, a better bridge?
Quote from: waterboy on February 20, 2010, 12:00:15 PM
What is the style of the old 11th street bridge you guys wouldn't mind seeing destroyed? Artist, you have any input as to its style and relevance? Is it the same style as the original 21st street bridge that architects recreated with the newer bridge? Just wondering. BTW, its not totally useless. Lots of dregs ocassionally live within its arches.
Also, that old railroad bridge that was built in the late 1800's out of native stone quarried from around Chandler park that shows little sign of deterioration in spite of multiple daily runs of tons of freight for over a hundred years......tear it down? So you can build, what, a better bridge?
Is that bridge supposed to be replaced? I thought the rail component of the new bridge was for a new commuter rail line, not to replace the existing freight line.
Remarks made by SXSW and Nik and confusion as to the definition of multimodal.
The old rr bridge is solid and historical. The original 11th street bridge looks to me to be Art Deco. Of course, few people actually get to see the old bridges anymore since the ugly, high maintenance eyesores carrying I-244 spouted up between them.
Quote from: waterboy on February 20, 2010, 12:00:15 PM
Also, that old railroad bridge that was built in the late 1800's out of native stone quarried from around Chandler park that shows little sign of deterioration in spite of multiple daily runs of tons of freight for over a hundred years......tear it down? So you can build, what, a better bridge?
You are forgetting about the jobs that will be created by replacing a bridge that could last forever with a bridge that will only last 20 years. ;D
Quote from: waterboy on February 20, 2010, 12:38:54 PM
The old rr bridge is solid and historical. The original 11th street bridge looks to me to be Art Deco. Of course, few people actually get to see the old bridges anymore since the ugly, high maintenance eyesores carrying I-244 spouted up between them.
I'm not advocating tearing down the railroad bridge and the Avery bridge but was interested in what their uses will be once the new I-244 bridges are finished. If any bridge needs to be demolished it's the SW Blvd./11th St. bridge that hides the Avery bridge. If the Avery bridge was more visible I'm sure there would be more effort put into restoring it at least for bike/pedestrian traffic.
I don't understand the need for a bike/jogging trail underneath the bridge when you could use the Avery bridge for that purpose. In that case it would be nice to see the east and west bank trails go underneath the SW Blvd./11th St. bridge to connect to the Avery so you wouldn't have to cross the busy street. It looks like that is similar to what is proposed by INCOG: http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/trail.pdf (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/trail.pdf)
Cyrus Avery Bridge (courtesy of curry_allison at flickr)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3805499178_82911e9fcd.jpg)
Quote from: rwarn17588 on February 19, 2010, 01:05:16 PM
Funny you should mention that ...
A number of cyclists and other states have been really increasing their efforts in the last few years to either build new bike trails, convert abandoned railroad beds, or convert abandoned segments of road next to or near Route 66. Illinois already has built segments for the Route 66 Bike Trail, and are building more. Other states on Route 66 are looking at the same thing.
So I think your idea for the Avery Bridge has merit, and I suspect the idea will gain traction.
I walked across this bridge earlier today:
http://www.bridgehunter.com/ar/pulaski/junction/ (http://www.bridgehunter.com/ar/pulaski/junction/)
It was amazing. They did an excellent job converting it to a ped bridge. And mostly left the structure alone.
Quote from: SXSW on February 20, 2010, 09:59:51 PM
I'm not advocating tearing down the railroad bridge and the Avery bridge but was interested in what their uses will be once the new I-244 bridges are finished. If any bridge needs to be demolished it's the SW Blvd./11th St. bridge that hides the Avery bridge. If the Avery bridge was more visible I'm sure there would be more effort put into restoring it at least for bike/pedestrian traffic.
I don't understand the need for a bike/jogging trail underneath the bridge when you could use the Avery bridge for that purpose. In that case it would be nice to see the east and west bank trails go underneath the SW Blvd./11th St. bridge to connect to the Avery so you wouldn't have to cross the busy street. It looks like that is similar to what is proposed by INCOG: http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/trail.pdf (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/pdfs/trail.pdf)
Cyrus Avery Bridge (courtesy of curry_allison at flickr)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3805499178_82911e9fcd.jpg)
Sorry if I misunderstood. I see both bridges, the old rail road and the old 11th street mostly from the river looking up as I float under them. I just don't want to see us mistakenly tear down more of our history unless necessary. Tear down the Southwest boulevard bridge first.
I have read several comments here about opening up the Avery Bridge to Ped traffic, which seems logical, however, the width of the bridge and the potential capacity the bridge could physically carry is the problem. Cars and Trucks produce a specific type of load on a bridge; pedestrians produce quite another. The concern is that you could get too many people on that bridge, and in some cases they might be running. The type of waves/vibration produced by this rhythmic sort of impact is actually more dangerous than filling it with cars driving across.
Anyway, I think the price tag to get the bridge to engineering standards was about 14 million dollars, 5 or so years ago.
Also, when we first proposed this Multi-Modal Bridge (the idea actually came out of INCOG when we were doing our Transit Studies using the existing railway lines), we were looking at different ways to get across the river...we looked at Southwest Blvd, Avery (No way, BTW) and the idea of building a new RR bridge. We realized that the easiest way for this to happen was to hang new rail under one of the 244 bridges, which we knew needed replacement...this was Pre-35W Minneapolis bridge collapse...after the collapse we knew they were going to have to address this. We just didn't know it would be this fast.
As far as the SW Blvd idea, it is not a bad one...I loved the idea for streetcar. We looked at using the railway ROW past OSU Medical from West Bank, (forseeing development there..alternatively, you could stay on street up 23rd and turn right on SW BLVD) coming up SW Blvd past the RT 66 memorial, past Regional/OSU Med center, cutting through the western edge of the State office building parking lot, and up third street, past the Convention Ctr addition, The BOK Center, Crowne Plaza/Main St./PAC, and turning around in the Blue Dome/East Village (Greenwood-ish). But...you need at least 12-18 inches of slab to inlay rail into the roadbed. I don't think it was ever determined how thick that bed is...and certainly the bridge would need an engineering analysis to determine feasibility.
I was just thinking how nice it would be to have streetcars when I was driving on 13th street yesterday.
As far as using the Avery bridge for pedestrian traffic, so long as we don't get any marching bands or armies walking across it in lockstep, higher order vibrational modes are pretty unlikely. Not that there shouldn't be an engineering study done to make sure it can support the weight of our lard. ;)
Quote from: SXSW on February 19, 2010, 04:06:12 PM
According to this TW article from last August 17th the Kaiser Foundation has provided an architect for the bridge. That's all I know.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20090817_16_A1_TheGeo807746)
GK sent Jack Crowley, who worked on the multimodal plan for the bridge instead of it being a straight vehicular bridge. Nothing aesthetic was planned at that time. They were also shooting for simultaneous dual bridge replacement instead of just the one.
Quote from: nathanm on February 21, 2010, 03:20:14 PM
I was just thinking how nice it would be to have streetcars when I was driving on 13th street yesterday.
As far as using the Avery bridge for pedestrian traffic, so long as we don't get any marching bands or armies walking across it in lockstep, higher order vibrational modes are pretty unlikely. Not that there shouldn't be an engineering study done to make sure it can support the weight of our lard. ;)
According to "When Oklahoma Took the Trolley", 13th between Delaware and Louisville had trolley tracks way back when.
Wait a second for me to put on my flak jacket....
How about asking the pedestrian and bicycle communities for donations to repair/upgrade the Avery bridge. It could be turned into a toll bridge to help maintain it. Maybe the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority would be interested.
Quote from: Red Arrow on February 21, 2010, 05:21:59 PM
According to "When Oklahoma Took the Trolley", 13th between Delaware and Louisville had trolley tracks way back when.
Yeah, I was thinking about it because there are several places between Delaware and Harvard where the former location of the tracks is plainly obvious.
It seems the asphalt over the old track bed deteriorates at a different rate than the rest of the street, so it doesn't get replaced all at once, leaving a strip of asphalt down the middle of the street that's a different age than the rest of the street.
Was the track west of Delaware on 11th or 6th?
Quote from: nathanm on February 21, 2010, 05:36:11 PM
Yeah, I was thinking about it because there are several places between Delaware and Harvard where the former location of the tracks is plainly obvious.
It seems the asphalt over the old track bed deteriorates at a different rate than the rest of the street, so it doesn't get replaced all at once, leaving a strip of asphalt down the middle of the street that's a different age than the rest of the street.
Was the track west of Delaware on 11th or 6th?
The tracks turned west on 11th. Those were the Oklahoma Union Traction tracks.
The Tulsa Street Railway had tracks along 4th, east to Madison, north to 1st, east to Lewis, south to 7th then east to the TU area.
Michael Bates posted a nice map of the trolley lines but I don't remember the thread title.
Edit: found the post/link
http://www.batesline.com/archives/2009/12/tulsa-streetcar-and-interurban-l.html
Quote from: Red Arrow on February 21, 2010, 06:07:09 PM
Edit: found the post/link
http://www.batesline.com/archives/2009/12/tulsa-streetcar-and-interurban-l.html
Excellent! Thanks for looking it up. :)
Quote from: Red Arrow on February 21, 2010, 05:21:59 PM
According to "When Oklahoma Took the Trolley", 13th between Delaware and Louisville had trolley tracks way back when.
Wait a second for me to put on my flak jacket....
How about asking the pedestrian and bicycle communities for donations to repair/upgrade the Avery bridge. It could be turned into a toll bridge to help maintain it. Maybe the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority would be interested.
If I remember right, "fixing up the bridge" was supposedly a 7 digit number. That'd be a heck of a bake sale.
Quote from: sgrizzle on February 21, 2010, 10:02:17 PM
If I remember right, "fixing up the bridge" was supposedly a 7 digit number. That'd be a heck of a bake sale.
It might take 2 or 3.
Quote from: nathanm on February 21, 2010, 05:36:11 PM
Yeah, I was thinking about it because there are several places between Delaware and Harvard where the former location of the tracks is plainly obvious.
It seems the asphalt over the old track bed deteriorates at a different rate than the rest of the street, so it doesn't get replaced all at once, leaving a strip of asphalt down the middle of the street that's a different age than the rest of the street.
Was the track west of Delaware on 11th or 6th?
I'm curious if that's the reason for the odd curbing on 13th at about Evanston or College. Would there have been a trolley station or turntable at Louisville?
Quote from: Conan71 on February 22, 2010, 09:19:00 AM
I'm curious if that's the reason for the odd curbing on 13th at about Evanston or College. Would there have been a trolley station or turntable at Louisville?
\
My guess would be there was a short section of double track to allow trolleys going in opposite directions to pass each other.
I looked at Google street view. A stop is a possibility too but a stop by itself would probably stay single track.
Turntables were, at most, rare on trolley lines. A lot of trolleys were double ended. They could be driven "forward" from either end of the trolley by pulling down one trolley pole and putting the one at the other end of the trolley up. Some early single truck trolleys had a single pole that looked like it would swing around. Single ended trolleys usually had a loop at the end of the line. Since trolleys can turn a lot shorter radius than a regular main line train, the room required wasn't too much since they would be slow.
The Frisco bridge has an intersting history, too. Notice every other column is cut stone. Those are the original. The original design had long truss sections on top of these. I think it was single track.
Some time around the first world war or before they added the cement columns between the originals, removed the truss sections, and placed plate girders atop all the columns to form the double track bridge that is there today.
In the 1986 flood I remember them parking car loads of rock on the bridge to keep it from being swept away.
It is not practical to use the existing bridge for frequent passenger operations because not only is the bridge used for through freight, interchange, and industry trains, but also because switch engines are dragging long cuts of railcars out of the bowl tracks partially over the bridge in order to shove into the departure tracks to make up trains. This switching goes on 24 hours day. And except in a recession, 365 days a year.
There are alternatives IMO, but building a new rail crossing for passenger ops is the ideal solution.
Now as far as streetcars crossing the Arkansas River, look at these picture to see how it is done in Little Rock.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/3129050457/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/3129050457/)
This was a pre-existing automobile bridge and they removed a lane and/or a sidewalk and added the necessary slab.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/96706689@N00/4380410887/)
And Tulsa wouldn't have to deal with a curving, hog back bridge.
Garver, LLC was selected as the engineering firm for the new westbound bridge:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100302_11_A3_TheOkl310767&archive=yes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100302_11_A3_TheOkl310767&archive=yes)
If we can't get something with an arch or cables I do hope they at least give some thought to the lighting, like Minneapolis' St. Anthony Falls Bridge:
(http://www.johnweeks.com/i35w/npics/i35wnight03.jpg)
Past Work:
http://www.garverusa.com/portfolio/transportation.php
Quote from: sgrizzle on March 02, 2010, 08:22:45 PM
Past Work:
http://www.garverusa.com/portfolio/transportation.php
ohhhhh gimmie gimmie gimmie.
(http://pic.phyrefile.com/c/cl/clockwerk/2010/03/02/bridge.jpg) (http://img.phyrefile.com/clockwerk/2010/03/02/bridge.jpg)
Quote from: OSU on March 02, 2010, 09:08:54 PM
ohhhhh gimmie gimmie gimmie.
(http://pic.phyrefile.com/c/cl/clockwerk/2010/03/02/bridge.jpg) (http://img.phyrefile.com/clockwerk/2010/03/02/bridge.jpg)
I saw that and thought the same thing. Maybe we could get just one cable-stayed tower instead of two? :)
Quote from: OSU on March 02, 2010, 09:08:54 PM
ohhhhh gimmie gimmie gimmie.
I drove by that bridge a couple of months ago. It looks rather nice. Anything even remotely as nice will be a landmark for Tulsa.
I'd love to see something in more of an art deco style.
This style of double-decker bridge would look amazing in Tulsa:
(http://bridgehunter.com/photos/12/57/125707-L.jpg)
Sadly this is likely what we will end up with:
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1162/1474828046_9913427f8f.jpg?v=0)
The drawings in the application suggest it won't look much different than what is there now. It will just be a little higher up to clear the trains underneath.
Quote from: Transport_Oklahoma on March 04, 2010, 01:04:44 AM
The drawings in the application suggest it won't look much different than what is there now. It will just be a little higher up to clear the trains underneath.
That stinks I was really hoping that we would actually get something interesting for a change.
(http://www.admit-one.net/webimages/bridge.jpg)
Keep in mind most of the good looking bridges posted are long spans over navigation channels. Relatively speaking, all you need to get over the arkansas where 244 crosses is a big dirt mound and an orange dodge charger.
Quote from: sgrizzle on March 04, 2010, 01:51:41 PM
Keep in mind most of the good looking bridges posted are long spans over navigation channels. Relatively speaking, all you need to get over the arkansas where 244 crosses is a big dirt mound and an orange dodge charger.
+5
Quote from: sgrizzle on March 04, 2010, 01:51:41 PM
Keep in mind most of the good looking bridges posted are long spans over navigation channels. Relatively speaking, all you need to get over the arkansas where 244 crosses is a big dirt mound and an orange dodge charger.
Looks like them Duke boys done got themselves in a heap a trouble.......
Quote from: sgrizzle on March 04, 2010, 01:51:41 PM
Keep in mind most of the good looking bridges posted are long spans over navigation channels. Relatively speaking, all you need to get over the arkansas where 244 crosses is a big dirt mound and an orange dodge charger.
There would also be longer spans (better looking bridges) if the river was deep enough to make fewer tall supports more economical than many short ones. However, a plain vanilla bridge in better shape than the one on I-44 at Malfunction Junction/161st(?) E Ave (by the Casino) will still be a reasonable deal.
Maybe we can get Waterboy to put masts/sails on his kayaks that would require taller bridges. ;D
Quote from: wavoka on March 04, 2010, 03:51:53 PM
Looks like them Duke boys done got themselves in a heap a trouble.......
They wrecked a lot of cars doing that. I forget the number. A friend is a MOPAR fan and he told me it was at least dozens.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 04, 2010, 08:52:34 PM
There would also be longer spans (better looking bridges) if the river was deep enough to make fewer tall supports more economical than many short ones. However, a plain vanilla bridge in better shape than the one on I-44 at Malfunction Junction/161st(?) E Ave (by the Casino) will still be a reasonable deal.
Maybe we can get Waterboy to put masts/sails on his kayaks that would require taller bridges. ;D
Its normally about 3ft deep below the Avery/11th/RR/SW/244 complex of bridges and about 3/8 of a mile across. Actually, bridges have always scared me since I was a kid travelling over the 11th street bridge (apparently I had good reason to be fearful). I lost power on my airboat and collided with the hwy97 bridge in Sand Springs a few years back....scared the bejeezus out of some nice family from Jenks. :D I just hope they clean up the debris from replacing any bridges over the river as they have failed to do in the past.
Another double-decker bridge with an arch that carries I-279 in Pittsburgh. The Alleghany is actually narrower than the Arkansas but also is navigable (notice the yachts by PNC Park). It still would be cool to see an arch or something interesting. They could really create a landmark with this bridge.
(http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e235/UrbaniDesDev/NorthShore9-07.jpg)
There is a public meeting to discuss the new bridge this Thursday, April 29 at 6 pm in the Event Hall at the TCC Center for Creativity (9th & Boston). I have a banquet to attend in Norman that night otherwise I would definitely go. I believe they are going to talk about the design, function, and other aspects of the bridge so if you can attend please do so we (hopefully) don't get another boring bridge over the Arkansas.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100426_11_0_TheOkl981828 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100426_11_0_TheOkl981828)
I will try to be there.
Does anyone have any updates? I assume design/engineering is currently ongoing. I was in Dallas recently and noticed their Calatrava-designed bridge near downtown is under construction. It will really be a nice landmark though in an odd location and over a mostly dry Trinity River. Their bridge (below) is being built for $93 million and is a cable-stayed span with a 400 foot arch. Our new bridge (the westbound double-decker) is supposed to cost $87 million with no word on what the design will be. I realize the bridge in Dallas is not a double-decker and is only 1,900 ft. long compared to our nearly 3000 ft. but I would hope for that amount of money we at least get something interesting. Something with arches that matches the style of our two other nice bridges, 23rd Street and Avery, would be a nice touch.
Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge in Dallas
(http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/Hunt%20Hill%20Bridge.jpg)
Quote from: SXSW on June 18, 2010, 06:29:48 PM
Does anyone have any updates? I assume design/engineering is currently ongoing. I was in Dallas recently and noticed their Calatrava-designed bridge near downtown is under construction. It will really be a nice landmark though in an odd location and over a mostly dry Trinity River. Their bridge (below) is being built for $93 million and is a cable-stayed span with a 400 foot arch. Our new bridge (the westbound double-decker) is supposed to cost $87 million with no word on what the design will be. I realize the bridge in Dallas is not a double-decker and is only 1,900 ft. long compared to our nearly 3000 ft. but I would hope for that amount of money we at least get something interesting. Something with arches that matches the style of our two other nice bridges, 23rd Street and Avery, would be a nice touch.
Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge in Dallas
(http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/Hunt%20Hill%20Bridge.jpg)
Which highway in Dallas? I-30, Stemmons/I-35E or the 183?
This bridge will likely be mostly architecturally boring, but consider this it the westbound bridge and any aesthetics will be hidden largely by the eastbound bridge.
I agree that our bridge will probably be architecturally boring but since the Arkansas River is not navigable, it is probably the best we will do.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 18, 2010, 10:56:13 PM
I agree that our bridge will probably be architecturally boring but since the Arkansas River is not navigable, it is probably the best we will do.
Neither is the Trinity in Dallas and they are doing a cable-stayed bridge. They wanted a landmark not 'just another bridge' to get from Point A to Point B..
Quote from: SXSW on June 19, 2010, 12:18:21 AM
Neither is the Trinity in Dallas and they are doing a cable-stayed bridge. They wanted a landmark not 'just another bridge' to get from Point A to Point B..
Find some $ and maybe we could too. With the present budget situation, what are you willing to give up to get a pretty bridge?
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 19, 2010, 09:50:01 AM
Find some $ and maybe we could too. With the present budget situation, what are you willing to give up to get a pretty bridge?
There are some $ from the Kaiser Foundation for the design of this bridge, I don't know how much though or who the architect is; could be Santiago Calatrava for all we know. :)
If the new bridges follow the same layout as the current ones adding some arches or something similar could go a long way toward making the bridges a nicer gateway into downtown. See below for a quick MS Paint 'rendering' of how something so simple can add a lot.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/bridge.jpg)
The I-35 bridge is Minneapolis is pretty utilitarian but is pretty sweet looking at night with the help of LED lights. Something like this would be really cool and wouldn't cost much more to implement.
(http://www.johnweeks.com/i35w/npics/i35wnight03.jpg)
Don't get me wrong, I would like a pretty bridge. If given the choice between a plain bridge or a structurally deficient bridge, I'll take the plain bridge. The Minneapolis bridge is certainly nicer than a bunch of straight lines. It would look nice in a picture like the one you doctored of Tulsa but would it be readily visible to casual observers?
Quote from: SXSW on June 19, 2010, 12:18:21 AM
Neither is the Trinity in Dallas and they are doing a cable-stayed bridge. They wanted a landmark not 'just another bridge' to get from Point A to Point B..
And it is and will continue to be roundly mocked throughout the state of Texas. Just an absurd use of money--a true vanity project. Not that the same could be said if Tulsa built something similar--after all, the Arkansas actually has
some water in it. But there's got to be a balance somewhere between form and function. The Dallas bridge's form will be so far from its function as to be laughable.
I do agree that it would be nice if there could be some element of design built into the new span. It's almost a waste of dollars not to have aesthetic considerations included when you're rebuilding.
Keep in mind, that new bridge in Minneapolis was the result of this:
(http://heidelblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/minneapolis_bridge_collapse.jpg)
So I'll have to agree with Red Arrow
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 19, 2010, 10:52:38 AM
Don't get me wrong, I would like a pretty bridge. If given the choice between a plain bridge or a structurally deficient bridge, I'll take the plain bridge.
Quote from: Floyd on June 19, 2010, 01:17:08 PM
And it is and will continue to be roundly mocked throughout the state of Texas. Just an absurd use of money--a true vanity project. Not that the same could be said if Tulsa built something similar--after all, the Arkansas actually has some water in it. But there's got to be a balance somewhere between form and function. The Dallas bridge's form will be so far from its function as to be laughable.
There is some water in the Trinity River. I was reading a story the other day about a couple of guys who kayaked from Fort Worth to Dallas recently.
I didn't mean to imply that the Trinity River was dry. But Dallas is literally putting this bridge:
(http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/Hunt%20Hill%20Bridge.jpg)
over this:
(http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicv/vfiles18378.jpg)
I'll guess that when the river floods it would look really cool.
LOL, maybe Broken Arrow can come up with an extravagant $100M bridge over Haikey Creek.
http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13679888 (http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13679888)
ODOT Lands Federal Money To Rebuild Tulsa's I-244 Arkansas River Bridge
QuoteTULSA, Oklahoma -- The Oklahoma Department of Transportation says it's excited to report that it's landed almost $50 million from the federal government to replace the westbound I-244 bridge over the Arkansas River in Tulsa.
ODOT and the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration signed the formal TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Grant agreement Wednesday, December 15th, 2010.
ODOT says the grant was actually awarded in February, and will provide $49.4 million of the estimated $80 million needed to replace the I-244 bridge. Now that the formal agreement has been signed, ODOT can start the project, which means putting it out for bid in March.
2/18/2010 Related story: Feds Give ODOT $50 Million Grant For I-244 Bridge Project
According to ODOT the replacement bridge will be "multi-modal"; incorporating a new section of the westbound highway, two dedicated future rail lines and an area for bicycle/pedestrian traffic into a double-decker style bridge.
The federal money for the project is coming from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
According to a news release from the U.S. Department of Transportation, "Recovery Act dollars will pay for the replacement of the existing bridge, which is in deteriorated condition. It requires excessive lane closures for maintenance work, creating delays for travelers and extensive costs for the state. It is ranked as one of the worst five interstate bridges in the state, according to ODOT."
ODOT is already moving forward with construction. It announced Wednesday that the left lane of east and westbound I-244 on the west leg of the IDL will be closed until further notice to build a median access road.
The road will be used as a future detour route for the I-244/Arkansas River bridge project.
How long has the west leg of 244 been fully open after the rehab? 2 or 3 months, if that?
Edited to fix stupid missing word.
The rendering is conceptual. Hopefully that is just showing the multi-modal nature of the bridge. I'm still hoping the architects the Kaiser Foundation hired are able to do something interesting with this bridge. I also wonder why they need the pedestrian/bikeway? Use the funds to build that to rehab the Avery Bridge for that use instead. I hate seeing that bridge just sitting there, at least make it useful.
Quote from: SXSW on December 15, 2010, 09:31:09 PM
The rendering is conceptual. Hopefully that is just showing the multi-modal nature of the bridge. I'm still hoping the architects the Kaiser Foundation hired are able to do something interesting with this bridge. I also wonder why they need the pedestrian/bikeway? Use the funds to build that to rehab the Avery Bridge for that use instead. I hate seeing that bridge just sitting there, at least make it useful.
I second that.
I posted this on the "Tulsa's Exciting Rail" page, it has some good info without all of the technical info.
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2010/100429/i-244presentation.pdf (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2010/100429/i-244presentation.pdf)
If we are going to get a utilitarian bridge the Marquam Bridge in Portland, OR (also a double decker) is a good example:
(http://bridgehunter.com/photos/12/68/126823-L.jpg)
Sadly that is what I see in our future too.
Quote from: SXSW on December 15, 2010, 09:31:09 PM
The rendering is conceptual. Hopefully that is just showing the multi-modal nature of the bridge. I'm still hoping the architects the Kaiser Foundation hired are able to do something interesting with this bridge. I also wonder why they need the pedestrian/bikeway? Use the funds to build that to rehab the Avery Bridge for that use instead. I hate seeing that bridge just sitting there, at least make it useful.
I see no reason it can't be used now other than the alignment with current roadways and the bum haven under the existing eastbound 244 bridge. If it can't be used by pedestrians due to structural problems, then it should be torn down if it's in that bad of shape.
If that's all the better we can do, let's save the money for something else and keep the bridge we have. ::)
Quote from: Conan71 on December 16, 2010, 10:38:31 AM
If it can't be used by pedestrians due to structural problems,
I believe that is the case but I cannot find a link this morning.
Quote from: Townsend on December 16, 2010, 10:23:53 AM
Sadly that is what I see in our future too.
I don't know what the design budget is and how involved Kaiser's architects are in the process. Hopefully we will all be pleasantly surprised. Let's hope it doesn't look like the conceptual rendering, that is awful even if it's just to show how a multi-modal bridge can look.
The Avery bridge isn't a lost cause. It has holes in it but seems plenty strong for bikes and people. Its just that if you make it totally a pedestrian bridge and it becomes heavily used, there is no strength in it for rescue vehicles, festivals etc. that it will inevitably need to be productive. Then, add it to the list of bridges that will need some recurring maintenance.
Someone (important and wealthy) needs to take this historic DECO bridge under their wing. I bet it will be more expensive to tear it out and haul it off than to make it suitable for limited use.
Quote from: waterboy on December 16, 2010, 03:09:51 PM
The Avery bridge isn't a lost cause. It has holes in it but seems plenty strong for bikes and people. Its just that if you make it totally a pedestrian bridge and it becomes heavily used, there is no strength in it for rescue vehicles, festivals etc. that it will inevitably need to be productive. Then, add it to the list of bridges that will need some recurring maintenance.
Someone (important and wealthy) needs to take this historic DECO bridge under their wing. I bet it will be more expensive to tear it out and haul it off than to make it suitable for limited use.
Sounds like a good next project for the Kaiser Foundation once the river trails are complete. What a great way to bring together the new trails on both banks by rehabilitating the Avery Bridge. The only problem is crossing SW Blvd. It would be great to see that bridge open again and the Route 66 museum finally built on the hill right there.
Quote from: Conan71 on December 16, 2010, 10:38:31 AM
I see no reason it can't be used now other than the alignment with current roadways and the bum haven under the existing eastbound 244 bridge. If it can't be used by pedestrians due to structural problems, then it should be torn down if it's in that bad of shape.
They have done work to preserve it so it's not getting worse, but it will take a lot of money to make it usable by the public again. No-one wants to demo it since it is fixable (with enough money) and it one of the very few existing Route 66 bridges, not to mention adjacent to avery plaza and the upcoming Route 66 museum.
Quote from: sgrizzle on December 16, 2010, 03:46:49 PM
They have done work to preserve it so it's not getting worse, but it will take a lot of money to make it usable by the public again. No-one wants to demo it since it is fixable (with enough money) and it one of the very few existing Route 66 bridges, not to mention adjacent to avery plaza and the upcoming Route 66 museum.
My point is, how rickety does a concrete bridge like that need to be so that it cannot withstand a 200 pound or so pedestrian or a bunch of them streaming over the bridge? Other than the homeless colony off the west end of the bridge, I can't see what the danger is in opening it up to foot and bicycle traffic now.
I'm all for preservation of public treasures, but our sentimentality for concrete & steel items is getting really expensive.
They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.
Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.
I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.
P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.
Quote from: sgrizzle on December 17, 2010, 09:59:10 AM
They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.
Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.
I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.
P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.
They should turn it into a farmers market. Install cloth canopies down each side and rent 10' x 20' booths.
Quote from: Gaspar on December 17, 2010, 10:09:58 AM
They should turn it into a farmers market. Install cloth canopies down each side and rent 10' x 20' booths.
I think that is a great idea!
Used to live in St. Louis and we had a great open air farmers market that I went to every weekend.
We could call it The Bridge Market. Great way to get folks downtown to engage in commerce.
There have been a few comments in this thread about how to spiffy up a plain bridge. One involved arches. Maybe we could get corporate sponsorship from a company famous for arches.
Running for cover now.....
Quote from: sgrizzle on December 17, 2010, 09:59:10 AM
They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.
Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.
I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.
P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.
Apparently I wasn't clear on my statement. Of course it's not costing anything "as-is". I was making a general statement about how costly preservation is of marginally historically significant public structures all around the country. Old water towers, old bridges, old courthouses, etc.
I think this blogger from OKC is having trouble with the thought that Tulsa might get a new bridge.
http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703 (http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703)
Quote from: joiei on January 13, 2011, 11:47:17 AM
I think this blogger from OKC is having trouble with the thought that Tulsa might get a new bridge.
http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703 (http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703)
Egads, and with all the federal dollars they get they bemoan us a measly 50 mill? Heck a single south Tulsa intersection can cost more than that. Tulsa is working to become more pedestrian/commuter friendly on many fronts. Its a process that will take a generation to get established, but we have started. There are multiple facets to this plan that are being worked on. This bridge is one part of that. You can pull out of that context any single piece and easily criticize it to high heaven if you wish, but you will only look pitifully ignorant to those of us who live here and know the "big picture" plan that is underway.
I was quite thrilled that Tulsa got this. Its said to be for "High Speed Rail", thats how we go the federal money. But we locals know its really for local commuter rail. Kudos to us for being clever enough to get it to happen. After all, we all know in our hearts that Oklahoma will not fund a high speed rail system from OKC to Tulsa, and us continuing to push our core areas to be more pedestrian/commuter friendly first, would be the best scenario if by some miracle they were to fund rail to OKC. (frankly if I had the choice I would rather spend the money on encouraging pedestrian friendly development and mass transit in the city than between the cities at this point)
As for "where would some soccer mom in Jenks park her SUV",,, apparently the writer is unaware of the types of development going in, now and in the future, near the river in Jenks. Even a more "infilled" Tulsa Hills could be seen as part of the ever growing river corridor. Plus, its well known that if we are to start commuter rail in Tulsa, the most expensive part is the first couple miles and couple of bridges in and near downtown. Once you get that (from the West Bank and its development potential to downtown and to the Fin Tube site) you got it made. The rest is almost an easy breasy situation that most other cities would kill for. The rails are already there going to just the places you would want them to go in the future. Kudos again for Tulsa doing whatever it takes to get that first, tough, expensive, mile or so done, by whatever the means lol. We usually get screwed by OKC so have learned that if we want it done, we are going to have to do it, however we can do it 8).
Quote from: Conan71 on February 18, 2010, 08:28:40 AM
The westbound is the one that makes sense for the muli-modal due to the rail alignment.
Something I find really curious is why did they put a fresh coat of asphalt on the old 11th St./SW Blvd/Route 66 bridge, but yet we are not allowed access to walk or bike across? Anyone know?
What you see is a thin sealant (black because they contain carbon black as a UV inhibitor) to help with freeze-thaw damage and to reduce weed growth in the cracks. An asphalt overlay would have required a sign identifying the site as the former location of the historic Avery Route 66 Bridge...it holds itself up just fine but unfortunately not much else.
Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum? Was it not at least partially funded by V2025? That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so.
And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck. Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead?
Quote from: SXSW on January 13, 2011, 09:35:02 PM
Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum? Was it not at least partially funded by V2025? That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so.
The preliminary design contract negotiations are underway.
Preliminary discussions with River Parks, Michael Wallis and Green Country Marketing regarding interest in office space. Anticipate two-phase design beginning in 2010. Phase I: programming space for office, interpretive/static displays, conference meeting room, 3rd floor restaurant and street level commercial (gift shop, coffee shop etc). Phase II: design drawings. Combined Phase I & II time frame estimated up to 18 months. Construction time frame estimate up to 18 months.
Quote from: SXSW on January 13, 2011, 09:35:02 PM
And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck. Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead?
The feds didn't give money for a completely unrelated project, they gave the money for this one bridge.
Quote from: SXSW on January 13, 2011, 09:35:02 PM
Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum? Was it not at least partially funded by V2025? That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so.
And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck. Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead?
Rehab of the Avery Bridge is not a viable option. It is structurally inadequate to do much more than hold itself up (not all that long ago an individual fell through the deck to their waist while walking on it)
Additionally, the funding source for the new bridge is "multi-modal" which means it must serve multiple methods of ground transportation making it more efficient (than having multiple bridges with individual uses) thus satisfying the Federal funding requirement.
The pre-design activities necessary for the Route 66 Visitor's center are now underway. Overall this project was delayed approximately 4 years by cash flow limitations with Vision 2025 created when additional funds were allocated to the Arena (BOK Center). Presently, I expect construction to begin in 2 1/2 years depending on the final program and costs.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on January 14, 2011, 12:46:02 PM
Rehab of the Avery Bridge is not a viable option. It is structurally inadequate to do much more than hold itself up (not all that long ago an individual fell through the deck to their waist while walking on it)
If that is the case, is there really any long-term viable purpose served by leaving it standing, other than the long-shot hope that a pot of gold will come along that will pay to preserve it for some purpose? I understand its place in the pantheon of Avery Rt. 66 lore and I love old stuff, but at some point it's just a concrete and rebar reminder of how we don't take care of things very well.
Quote from: DTowner on January 14, 2011, 02:00:20 PM
If that is the case, is there really any long-term viable purpose served by leaving it standing, other than the long-shot hope that a pot of gold will come along that will pay to preserve it for some purpose? I understand its place in the pantheon of Avery Rt. 66 lore and I love old stuff, but at some point it's just a concrete and rebar reminder of how we don't take care of things very well.
I would think its historic status would qualify it for some kind of grant to fix it up, but maybe not. The only hope I see is that once the Route 66 museum is built (likely 3-4 years from now) that by then there will be more interest in the area, and subsequently more interest to rehabilitate the bridge. I think it will take a combination of an historic landmark grant and help from the Kaiser Foundation (or something similar) to ever get it fixed up.
Sounds like its a goner. Maybe we should just take off the top and leave the arches.
Quote from: waterboy on January 14, 2011, 04:17:36 PM
Sounds like its a goner. Maybe we should just take off the top and leave the arches.
You're not the first to suggest this. The arches are in better shape than the deck. Still tremendously expensive as it would have to be worked from the river bed or adjacent bridge.
Quote from: SXSW on January 14, 2011, 03:05:01 PM
I would think its historic status would qualify it for some kind of grant to fix it up, but maybe not. The only hope I see is that once the Route 66 museum is built (likely 3-4 years from now) that by then there will be more interest in the area, and subsequently more interest to rehabilitate the bridge. I think it will take a combination of an historic landmark grant and help from the Kaiser Foundation (or something similar) to ever get it fixed up.
Unfortunately, there are few really significant HP grants available for something like this. Most HP projects get a boost from tax credit financing. Where the HP resource is owned by the public the tax credit help gets watered down significantly because since municipalities don't pay federal income tax you have to market (sell) the credits. It is complicated and expensive often consuming half of the face value of the credits.
Groundbreaking Set for I-244 Multi-Modal Bridge
QuoteA groundbreaking will be held at 10 a.m., Friday, April 15, to kick off construction of a new multi-modal bridge spanning the Arkansas River on westbound I-244 in Tulsa. The Oklahoma Department of Transportation and the City of Tulsa will turn ceremonial dirt at the parking lot adjacent to the skybridge over Riverside Drive at Southwest Boulevard. The skybridge leads to the Cyrus Avery Route 66 Centennial Plaza.
The Oklahoma Transportation Commission has approved a contract with Manhattan Road and Bridge Co. to replace this structurally deficient bridge with a double-decker bridge. The cost of construction is $64 million; the cost of construction time is $14 million, bringing the total bid to $78 million. Work is expected to begin in mid-spring 2011, and the project is scheduled to be complete in two years.
The new structure will incorporate highway lanes on the top side, with two dedicated future rail lines and an area for bicycle and pedestrian traffic underneath. The project cost is a combination of federal funds, including a nearly $50 million federal TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Grant in February 2010. This grant cycle was extremely competitive, with more than 1,400 applications submitted nationwide. The I-244 multi-modal bridge is considered one of the top projects in the country to receive this funding.
The existing westbound I-244 bridge will be removed and the new bridge built along the current alignment. During construction westbound traffic will detour onto the eastbound I-244 bridge which will accommodate two-way traffic. The existing eastbound bridge is scheduled for replacement in 2013, although the $30 million estimated project cost is not fully funded at this time
http://www.cityoftulsa.org//enews/2011/4-13-11/i-244.aspx?utm_source=eNews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4-13-11 (http://www.cityoftulsa.org//enews/2011/4-13-11/i-244.aspx?utm_source=eNews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4-13-11)
Any better renderings out there? Besides that one that has been posted that looks like more of a diagram showing how a multi-modal bridge works.
Quote from: SXSW on April 14, 2011, 11:06:37 AM
Any better renderings out there? Besides that one that has been posted that looks like more of a diagram showing how a multi-modal bridge works.
I've never read anything that indicates we're getting anything more than said textbook diagram / "rendering". Just maybe all the textbooks can be updated and show Tulsa's new bridge as an example of the most basic, form follows function, bridge for bridgemaking 101.
Boring: yes.
Ugly: yes
Spans the river: yes
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 14, 2011, 11:26:33 AM
I've never read anything that indicates we're getting anything more than said textbook diagram / "rendering". Just maybe all the textbooks can be updated and show Tulsa's new bridge as an example of the most basic, form follows function, bridge for bridgemaking 101.
Boring: yes.
Ugly: yes
Spans the river: yes
Maybe. Still curious about GKFF's involvement in the design of this bridge. I know they hired an architect but haven't heard anything else, which makes me believe we haven't seen the real renderings yet. GKFF is also funding the additional design work for the I-44 expansion.
This new bridge in Portland is the same type as I-244 with roadway above and rail lines & bike/ped path below. Fairly utilitarian but still pretty nice.
(http://blog.oregonlive.com/news_impact/2009/09/I5-CRC-Overlook-091809.jpg)
I know it is simple but I know I would be happy with that if they built something similar here.
It would be better certainly with some cool lighting at night. I think it would look pretty nice compared to what we have now.
Quote from: stageidea on April 14, 2011, 11:45:29 AM
I know it is simple but I know I would be happy with that if they built something similar here.
It would be better certainly with some cool lighting at night. I think it would look pretty nice compared to what we have now.
It's basically the same set-up, just with exposed V bracing (something the final design will likely have to support the roadway above) and a little style for their bridge column supports and bike/ped path. Little things like the detailing on the rails would make a big difference. That is where the architect comes in and takes ODOT's utilitarian "design" and add some pizzazz, at least that's the hope..
A few things:
This bridge will only be for Westbound 244, the eastbound bridge will remain - and although it is scheduled for replacement as well, the funds are not yet there?
The multi-modal use includes pedestrian crossing & "future rail" - Does this mean that the old rail bridge will remain?
Would have been awesome if we could have replaced all 4 bridges (rail, EB244, WB244, 11th street) with one.
Quote from: YoungTulsan on April 14, 2011, 01:50:15 PM
A few things:
This bridge will only be for Westbound 244, the eastbound bridge will remain - and although it is scheduled for replacement as well, the funds are not yet there?
The multi-modal use includes pedestrian crossing & "future rail" - Does this mean that the old rail bridge will remain?
Would have been awesome if we could have replaced all 4 bridges (rail, EB244, WB244, 11th street) with one.
This bridge only got funded because it is multi-modal, so.. no funding for the other bridge.
The existing rail bridge remains as this is for two additional passenger rail lines, not replacing the freight rail.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 14, 2011, 02:31:43 PM
This bridge only got funded because it is multi-modal, so.. no funding for the other bridge.
The existing rail bridge remains as this is for two additional passenger rail lines, not replacing the freight rail.
ODOT does have the other replacement bridge on it's schedule as part of it's normal funding after this bridge is completed.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2011/20110415_orangecone0404040404015.jpg)
Our Bridge diagram is coming closer to reality
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 15, 2011, 04:08:07 PM
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2011/20110415_orangecone0404040404015.jpg)
Our Bridge diagram is coming closer to reality
Anyone friends enough with the Mayor to tell him about his hair?
Quote from: Townsend on April 15, 2011, 04:17:30 PM
Anyone friends enough with the Mayor to tell him about his hair?
(http://garlinggauge.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/droopy.gif)
The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition. Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent? I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me. It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?). I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really. I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it. Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy.
Quote from: bacjz00 on April 15, 2011, 09:06:58 PM
The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition. Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent? I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me. It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?). I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really. I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it. Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy.
Where did you see that at? Oh, wait a minute, the World..I'm sorry.
Both sides of this bridge are rated 'structurally deficient'.
http://www2.news9.com/bridgetracker/
Quote from: bacjz00 on April 15, 2011, 09:06:58 PM
The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition. Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent? I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me. It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?). I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really. I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it. Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy.
[sigh]
This is an old argument. This bridge is one of the worst in the country. It's currently in worse condition than that one in St Paul/Minneapolis that collapsed. (no joke, I drove over that the day before it collapsed) The bridge needs replaced. Period. And since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be
forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.
And by the way, the other direction will be replaced in 2013.
Quote from: ZYX on April 15, 2011, 10:42:21 PM
[sigh]
This is an old argument. This bridge is one of the worst in the country. It's currently in worse condition than that one in St Paul/Minneapolis that collapsed. (no joke, I drove over that the day before it collapsed) The bridge needs replaced. Period. And since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.
If it were really important enough to someone to have a pretty bridge, they could start a grass roots fund raiser. It's probably not too late for some cosmetic changes. Stop depending on a few rich benefactors. I find it amusing when someone here posts what they think on which project the (rich Tulsa family of your choice) should spend their money. If you can afford to be on this forum, you can probably afford to contribute a few bucks to your favorite cause.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 16, 2011, 09:11:42 AM
If it were really important enough to someone to have a pretty bridge, they could start a grass roots fund raiser. It's probably not too late for some cosmetic changes. Stop depending on a few rich benefactors. I find it amusing when someone here posts what they think on which project the (rich Tulsa family of your choice) should spend their money. If you can afford to be on this forum, you can probably afford to contribute a few bucks to your favorite cause.
When did I say anything about some "rich family" building us a pretty bridge? I didn't. I said the government was being forward thinking for a change, and that instead of building it exactly how it was, they're upgrading it to a double decker. Sheesh...
Quote from: ZYX on April 16, 2011, 10:31:22 AM
When did I say anything about some "rich family" building us a pretty bridge? I didn't. I said the government was being forward thinking for a change, and that instead of building it exactly how it was, they're upgrading it to a double decker. Sheesh...
QuoteAnd since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.
I thought you were joining the "it's not enough improvement" group. My comments still stand but they are not (and weren't really intended to be) directed to you or anyone in particular personally. It's a group think that I see wanting something done on someone else's money. We are all included in that to some extent.
I like what The Artist is doing with his Deco Museum. It's a passion that he is putting his personal resources into. I finally got around to sending some $ to the museum to put my $ where my words are. A pretty bridge can be the same concept. If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 16, 2011, 11:13:03 AM
I thought you were joining the "it's not enough improvement" group. My comments still stand but they are not (and weren't really intended to be) directed to you or anyone in particular personally. It's a group think that I see wanting something done on someone else's money. We are all included in that to some extent.
I like what The Artist is doing with his Deco Museum. It's a passion that he is putting his personal resources into. I finally got around to sending some $ to the museum to put my $ where my words are. A pretty bridge can be the same concept. If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.
"Rich benefactors" or local corporations are behind most civic improvements in Tulsa, and in most cities. It is no mystery that GKFF is involved in numerous projects, including this one. If they wanted to solicit more funds from regular people they could.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 16, 2011, 11:13:03 AM
If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.
Why is that?
Look, the bridge is paid for by gas taxes filtered through the feds. We pay those taxes. It can easily and correctly be argued that as Tulsa is the largest city without non-toll interstate access in the nation that we are already being shortchanged in a major way by the state and feds on our return for these taxes.
Additionally, currently Oklahoma City is getting a new showplace highway downtown with the highway being moved, buried and with several decorative bridges in order to enhance the downtown area there. If current tax monies can pay for that there, where they already have far superior highway access, superior highways overall and rail access that we don't have (but contribute tax money for, both state and federal) that we can ask for a more decerative bridge in our downtown. Many cities have such bridges nationally and I'm not aware that any of them had to make any such local contribution. Why should we? We already pay tons of toll money in addition to our gas taxes that other places to not have to pay.
Quote from: swake on April 16, 2011, 02:05:47 PM
Many cities have such bridges nationally and I'm not aware that any of them had to make any such local contribution. Why should we? We already pay tons of toll money in addition to our gas taxes that other places to not have to pay.
You might want to check that. I would love for Tulsa to have a signature bridge, but they're expensive. Dallas is dealing with a massive clusterfart where they had Calatrava design a new I-30 bridge but nobody stepped up to pay for it. TDOT is now moving forward with designs for a "normal" bridge because the city doesn't have the money and the feds won't earmark for it.
Cautionary tale here: http://www.nbcdfw.com/traffic/transit/119221594.html
Swake, you are only partially correct. Yes OKC is getting their highway moved, but those bridges over it would be plain and boring if it weren't for MAPS III funds.
But OKC getting all this money to move their highway a few blocks south is pretty darn unfair to me. And what really frustrates me is that many OKCites say that Tulsa has recieved too much highway money and that said money was wasted. Are you kidding me? Last time I checked we weren't spending tens of millions of dollars to move I-40 five blocks south.
Quote from: ZYX on April 16, 2011, 07:00:44 PM
Swake, you are only partially correct. Yes OKC is getting their highway moved, but those bridges over it would be plain and boring if it weren't for MAPS III funds.
But OKC getting all this money to move their highway a few blocks south is pretty darn unfair to me. And what really frustrates me is that many OKCites say that Tulsa has recieved too much highway money and that said money was wasted. Are you kidding me? Last time I checked we weren't spending tens of millions of dollars to move I-40 five blocks south.
They're probably talking about the $75 million we got for the IDL. That WAS needed and has been for some time. OKC residents should shut their cakeholes about the money we get, considering we don't have a professional basketball team that got tax breaks from the state for coming here.
Most of what I've read says that our gasoline tax doesn't come close to paying for our roads. The gas tax is usually the first thing brought up by road warriors when they want to squash a public transit rail project. The fact that buses use "free" roads rather than pay to maintain their right of way is also neglected.
Quote from: Hoss on April 16, 2011, 07:13:50 PM
They're probably talking about the $75 million we got for the IDL. That WAS needed and has been for some time. OKC residents should shut their cakeholes about the money we get, considering we don't have a professional basketball team that got tax breaks from the state for coming here.
Shouldn't OKC people be happy about the rail aspect of this bridge? From OKC's mindset, all roads between Tulsa and OKC are one-way moving southwest. I would think they would be in favor of anything that brings Tulsa consumers to them.
I was told last month the bridge project was slated to commence yesterday. Anyone hear of any updates? I'm not anxious for more asspain construction tie ups right now, but we might as well get it over with.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 19, 2011, 08:59:22 AM
I was told last month the bridge project was slated to commence yesterday. Anyone hear of any updates? I'm not anxious for more asspain construction tie ups right now, but we might as well get it over with.
The official start was yesterday. They are going to have to build new ramps, particularly on the north end, to get all traffic moved to the eastbound bridge before they can start real construction. Expect to see work starting in the next few days, but it is not scheduled for completion for 2 years.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 19, 2011, 02:12:36 PM
The official start was yesterday. They are going to have to build new ramps, particularly on the north end, to get all traffic moved to the eastbound bridge before they can start real construction. Expect to see work starting in the next few days, but it is not scheduled for completion for 2 years.
The cross-over ramp was built as a part of the 244 re-hab so that's in place. I'm assuming they will remove part of the center barrier on the south end to cross back. I think 576 days was what the contractor bid the job at, according to the presentation I sat through. So if we are lucky about 19 months. Any idea on when we can expect the bridge to close?
Between this project on my preferred route to work, I-44, or taking surface streets looks like a frustrating commute for the next couple of years. I just wish they could have put this off until after I-44 is done as this will put more traffic over on I-44 which is anything but safe right now between Yale and Lewis.
Stupid question:
How does one get from downtown Tulsa to southbound 75 now?
- Detroit 244 ramp?
- 8th Street northbound and go counter-clockwise..
- Southwest Blvd
- Riverside?
My experience: southwest blvd is slow going
The 244 counter-clockwise detour is most likely slow going
Everyone else's experience?
I was out of town last week... Is this a nightmare like I imagine it is?
You can't get there from here.
Stay off of 51/64...its a mess westbound.
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 22, 2011, 08:17:10 PM
Stupid question:
How does one get from downtown Tulsa to southbound 75 now?
- Detroit 244 ramp?
- 8th Street northbound and go counter-clockwise..
- Southwest Blvd
- Riverside?
My experience: southwest blvd is slow going
The 244 counter-clockwise detour is most likely slow going
Everyone else's experience?
I was out of town last week... Is this a nightmare like I imagine it is?
Is 7th Street by Houston not accessible anymore?
Quote from: Townsend on May 23, 2011, 09:24:32 AM
Is 7th Street by Houston not accessible anymore?
Houston is the last open westbound exit (or is over the weekend, anyway)
Quote from: nathanm on May 23, 2011, 09:31:01 AM
Houston is the last open westbound exit (or is over the weekend, anyway)
That will get right on to 244 W/75 S then.
Quote from: Townsend on May 23, 2011, 09:38:27 AM
That will get right on to 244 W/75 S then.
Ya, I noticed this morning that the bridge is still open and the westbound/southbound) traffic is not yet using the eastbound/northbound bridge.. And that the 7th street ramp is still open.
But when that detour gets implemented I don't see how the 7th street ramp can remain open... as it dumps you right onto the bridge (past the detour)
Why is the HWY 75 ramp from I-244 (North Leg of the IDL) Eastbound still closed? I thought it would reopen now that the First Street exit is open.
Quote from: rdj on May 23, 2011, 10:35:40 AM
Why is the HWY 75 ramp from I-244 (North Leg of the IDL) Eastbound still closed? I thought it would reopen now that the First Street exit is open.
Grizzle - is that the section you told me about?
If it is then apparently they made the clearance too low.
Quote from: Townsend on May 23, 2011, 10:40:08 AM
Grizzle - is that the section you told me about?
If it is then apparently they made the clearance too low.
I guess the ol' close enough for government work didn't fit in this case.
Quote from: Townsend on May 23, 2011, 10:40:08 AM
Grizzle - is that the section you told me about?
If it is then apparently they made the clearance too low.
Yup.. apparently 6 inches isn't always 6 inches.
Quote from: sgrizzle on May 23, 2011, 01:00:02 PM
Yup.. apparently 6 inches isn't always 6 inches.
You're dirty.
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 22, 2011, 08:17:10 PM
Stupid question:
How does one get from downtown Tulsa to southbound 75 now?
- Detroit 244 ramp?
- 8th Street northbound and go counter-clockwise..
- Southwest Blvd
- Riverside?
My experience: southwest blvd is slow going
The 244 counter-clockwise detour is most likely slow going
Everyone else's experience?
I was out of town last week... Is this a nightmare like I imagine it is?
I live near 31st & Yale and work off Hwy 75 and West 41st. They are determined my commute will be pure hell for at least the next year or two. Once they get a westbound Yale on-ramp to I-44 operational again, it will get easer....no...wait, that will be about the time they start construction on the Lewis segment of I-44.
I'm trying all sorts of things, so far, 31st to Riverside, to 21st bridge to SWB, has worked okay, just a lot of stop lights on my commute.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 23, 2011, 02:44:53 PM
I live near 31st & Yale and work off Hwy 75 and West 41st. They are determined my commute will be pure hell for at least the next year or two. Once they get a westbound Yale on-ramp to I-44 operational again, it will get easer....no...wait, that will be about the time they start construction on the Lewis segment of I-44.
I'm trying all sorts of things, so far, 31st to Riverside, to 21st bridge to SWB, has worked okay, just a lot of stop lights on my commute.
I drove by Yale/I44 Westbound and was almost sure it was open this weekend.
I've done the same tests you've done Conan. Have you tried Highway 51 out of my neighborhood to 75N to 244W? I've been using that.
Quote from: Townsend on May 23, 2011, 02:51:31 PM
I drove by Yale/I44 Westbound and was almost sure it was open this weekend.
I've done the same tests you've done Conan. Have you tried Highway 51 out of my neighborhood to 75N to 244W? I've been using that.
As of last Thursday night, there's no WB entrance open on I-44 west of 41st St. until Lewis. The frontage road is open at Yale but I don't think there will be an entrance at Yale until all the WB lanes are open. I have considered the 244 detour, but what happens when they take down the bridge. That will be another cluster F...
Actually, I plan to commute via bike 3-4 days a week now, so I'll just take the bike route starting at 36th St. I left my old truck at work so I will have a vehicle when I need it during the work day.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 23, 2011, 02:58:31 PM
I have considered the 244 detour, but what happens when they take down the bridge. That will be another cluster F...
I'm hoping for other options to become easier by then. I have no idea how long until they blow it up and create a new low water dam there. Look out Aquaman!
Quote from: Conan71 on May 23, 2011, 02:44:53 PM
I live near 31st & Yale and work off Hwy 75 and West 41st. They are determined my commute will be pure hell for at least the next year or two. Once they get a westbound Yale on-ramp to I-44 operational again, it will get easer....no...wait, that will be about the time they start construction on the Lewis segment of I-44.
I'm trying all sorts of things, so far, 31st to Riverside, to 21st bridge to SWB, has worked okay, just a lot of stop lights on my commute.
When I worked at 23rd and Jackson and lived at 16th and Memorial, I found out nearly 4 years too late that the 15th to Harvard/21st to Jackson over the River Bridge was quicker than my old commute of north on Memorial to I-244 and get off by the refinery. And less mileage.
Quote from: Hoss on May 23, 2011, 06:26:48 PM
When I worked at 23rd and Jackson and lived at 16th and Memorial, I found out nearly 4 years too late that the 15th to Harvard/21st to Jackson over the River Bridge was quicker than my old commute of north on Memorial to I-244 and get off by the refinery. And less mileage.
Unfortunately with a growth in density along the 21st St. Corridor, especially near St. John's, you can get some pretty good congestion heading west.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 23, 2011, 07:37:24 PM
Unfortunately with a growth in density along the 21st St. Corridor, especially near St. John's, you can get some pretty good congestion heading west.
I got it worse back then when they were doing all that construction in the late 90s/early 00s. My brother was the electrical foreman for the St John's build.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 23, 2011, 07:37:24 PM
Unfortunately with a growth in density along the 21st St. Corridor, especially near St. John's, you can get some pretty good congestion heading west.
Actually now that Utica from 21st to Terwilliger is under construction, East/West on 21st @ Utica is a green light for about 5 minutes, then North/South on Utica gets about 30 seconds to proceed. I think 21st & Wheeling got left on a stupid timer from when the water main break construction was going on, and no one bothered to fix it though. Consider taking the neighborhood streets. That is a scenic area of town :D
If you don't like road construction and delays, you should try living where I do behind the Promenade. First it was widening Yale, then the highway overpass/interchange over Yale, then Darlington. Now its messing with 41st, the exits and entrances from the highway to Yale, (sometimes they are open, sometimes you have to exit the highway at Sheridan or Lewis and not Yale, you never can really know) and now the area of 41st going over the highway is a mess. West bound off Yale and onto the highway was closed for the longest time though it looked done to me so have no idea why it was closed. Sometimes almost all my potential exits going south from my house and east and west are messed up and rerouted. Egads, I will be glad when its all over lol. Been at least 7 years I have been here and something has been under construction. The only consolation I have is that when I am home, just about everything I need is right nearby. Its trying to get to another part of town for work or meetings thats the challenging part lol. Will be stellar when its all done.... whenever that will be.
Quote from: TheArtist on May 24, 2011, 08:19:13 AM
If you don't like road construction and delays, you should try living where I do behind the Promenade. First it was widening Yale, then the highway overpass/interchange over Yale, then Darlington. Now its messing with 41st, the exits and entrances from the highway to Yale, (sometimes they are open, sometimes you have to exit the highway at Sheridan or Lewis and not Yale, you never can really know) and now the area of 41st going over the highway is a mess. West bound off Yale and onto the highway was closed for the longest time though it looked done to me so have no idea why it was closed. Sometimes almost all my potential exits going south from my house and east and west are messed up and rerouted. Egads, I will be glad when its all over lol. Been at least 7 years I have been here and something has been under construction. The only consolation I have is that when I am home, just about everything I need is right nearby. Its trying to get to another part of town for work or meetings thats the challenging part lol. Will be stellar when its all done.... whenever that will be.
QuoteThe overall project is expected to be complete in 2013.
This doesn't include the Sheridan project but I'd hazard that won't take much longer than 2013.
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/i44riverside/index.htm (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/i44riverside/index.htm)
This project has diverted a far higher percentage of lost idiots to the southwest corner of downtown. The Houston exit from the BA (where people are forced off) is just full of morons who don't have any clue where they're going.
It used to be a fairly quiet intersection. Now you can pretty much count on someone trying to kill you with completely ridiculous and unpredictable turns.
I see they've even put up a big "no through traffic" sign at the hospital there to prevent idiots from clogging up the hospital entrance.
Even that crazy Mayfest trucker nutjob exited there.
Quote from: TheTed on May 31, 2011, 11:30:29 AM
This project has diverted a far higher percentage of lost idiots to the southwest corner of downtown. The Houston exit from the BA (where people are forced off) is just full of morons who don't have any clue where they're going.
It's diverted this idiot to 75N for now until I can't do that anymore then I'll prob help clog up 23rd, SW BLVD, or I44.
If you live or work on the West side of the river...you're inconvenienced until 2013 or 2014.
Quote from: Townsend on May 31, 2011, 11:37:16 AM
It's diverted this idiot to 75N for now until I can't do that anymore then I'll prob help clog up 23rd, SW BLVD, or I44.
If you live or work on the West side of the river...you're inconvenienced until 2013 or 2014.
Are Southwest Blvd or 23rd ever really crowded? I've never seen that many cars on them. Maybe I just haven't seen them at rush hours. But mid-day they seem fairly quiet.
Quote from: TheTed on May 31, 2011, 12:06:09 PM
Are Southwest Blvd or 23rd ever really crowded? I've never seen that many cars on them. Maybe I just haven't seen them at rush hours. But mid-day they seem fairly quiet.
The lines can be long heading West on 23rd at the intersection. SW Blvd isn't bad for now but the switch over might be problematic. Time will tell.
Quote from: Townsend on May 31, 2011, 12:17:27 PM
The lines can be long heading West on 23rd at the intersection. SW Blvd isn't bad for now but the switch over might be problematic. Time will tell.
SW Blvd turning south from 23rd could be kinda nasty at times. It's been over 10 years since I worked over there with any regularity (23rd and Jackson to be specific), but I also took the 21st Street bridge and east on 21st home (at the time I was living at 16th and Memorial).
Quote from: Townsend on May 31, 2011, 11:37:16 AM
It's diverted this idiot to 75N for now until I can't do that anymore then I'll prob help clog up 23rd, SW BLVD, or I44.
If you live or work on the West side of the river...you're inconvenienced until 2013 or 2014.
I made the commute to my office via bike last Thursday for the first time, 45 minutes including adding in some miles by riding north to the SW Blvd bridge then back to the soccer fields south of PSO then up W. 41st to my office. I'll be doing it a whole lot more especially after that major clusterf*ck starts up.
This bridge is going to cause traffic to really snarl in the SW corner of the IDL/244/75.
Quote from: TheTed on May 31, 2011, 11:30:29 AM
This project has diverted a far higher percentage of lost idiots to the southwest corner of downtown. The Houston exit from the BA (where people are forced off) is just full of morons who don't have any clue where they're going.
It used to be a fairly quiet intersection. Now you can pretty much count on someone trying to kill you with completely ridiculous and unpredictable turns.
I see they've even put up a big "no through traffic" sign at the hospital there to prevent idiots from clogging up the hospital entrance.
Even that crazy Mayfest trucker nutjob exited there.
This. I take that exit when I go home from work everyday, and it's become a total nightmare. I started taking the Cincinnati exit to avoid it. What do people not understand about "THIS ROAD IS CLOSED AHEAD"?
Quote from: kylieosu on June 01, 2011, 10:26:12 AM
This. I take that exit when I go home from work everyday, and it's become a total nightmare. I started taking the Cincinnati exit to avoid it. What do people not understand about "THIS ROAD IS CLOSED AHEAD"?
Hard to read signs when their head is buried in a smart phone.
23rd and SW Blvd gets congested from commuters turning south onto SW Blvd to use the I-244 entrance from 4pm on. At least the construction along SW Blvd is complete now.
The real issue I see is in the morning when the Eugene Field school zone lights are flashing, people have been blazing through more than usual. Would love to see some police planted around the school during this time as I always see very young kids running across the street instead of using the pedestrian bridge.
Lots of work going on the bridge project...I noticed they've stripped the southwest IDL entrance ramp to 75S/244W down to the girders. I hope that this ramp is able to be widened slightly when redone and also that the transition to the new bridge won't have a sharp change in radius at the bottom like the current one does. That onramp to 75S/244W has always bothered me...if nothing else a concrete wall or even some pylons would be advisable as a separation between that lane and through traffic for a longer distance before allowing cars to change lanes. For through traffic, it's never been advisable to travel the inside lane of 244W coming off the IDL if someone is coming down the ramp, because a lot of those cars seem to drift into traffic.
Westbound bridge officially closed now...all traffic flowing on the eastbound bridge. This is going to be a huge project.
Does anyone know what the design of this thing looks like? Is there a reason it hasn't been released or it just that there's nothing to see cause it will look like every single other ODOT bridge built in the last 20 years.
Quote from: bacjz00 on June 13, 2011, 02:33:55 PM
Westbound bridge officially closed now...all traffic flowing on the eastbound bridge. This is going to be a huge project.
Does anyone know what the design of this thing looks like? Is there a reason it hasn't been released or it just that there's nothing to see cause it will look like every single other ODOT bridge built in the last 20 years.
What is the nearest on ramp to get to 75 South now? I think I might go have a drink at back alley and some $1 sliders and wait a bit for the craziness to die down today.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on June 13, 2011, 02:44:53 PM
What is the nearest on ramp to get to 75 South now? I think I might go have a drink at back alley and some $1 sliders and wait a bit for the craziness to die down today.
I use 75 N to 244 W to 75 S. Keep an eye on it though. They swapped sides. You exit Left to get to 75 south/244 W. Anyone going home that way tonight, may God have mercy on their souls. There will be mighty anger on the North side of the IDL tonight. MIGHTY ANGER.
Quote from: bacjz00 on June 13, 2011, 02:33:55 PM
Westbound bridge officially closed now...all traffic flowing on the eastbound bridge. This is going to be a huge project clusterf*ck.
Does anyone know what the design of this thing looks like? Is there a reason it hasn't been released or it just that there's nothing to see cause it will look like every single other ODOT bridge built in the last 20 years.
FIFY
Townsend, I finally decided to get on the BA at 31st & Yale then head westbound on I-44, that wasn't too congested around 8am. I think I will avoid the construction area on the 244 segment as much as possible until the new bridge opens. Of course the shifting lanes of I-44 can always cause a problem here and there and the Lewis bridge project will be a major mess.
I just hope I outlive the construction.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 13, 2011, 03:40:39 PM
Townsend, I finally decided to get on the BA at 31st & Yale then head westbound on I-44, that wasn't too congested around 8am. I think I will avoid the construction area on the 244 segment as much as possible until the new bridge opens. Of course the shifting lanes of I-44 can always cause a problem here and there and the Lewis bridge project will be a major mess.
I just hope I outlive the construction.
Tell me about it.
As for the I244 issue...I was actually impressed how well they re-worked it. You still have two lanes both ways and the traffic backups (minus operator error) should be ok once everyone understands it.
Quote from: Townsend on June 13, 2011, 03:45:43 PM
Tell me about it.
As for the I244 issue...I was actually impressed how well they re-worked it. You still have two lanes both ways and the traffic backups (minus operator error) should be ok once everyone understands it.
I was thinking of the huge CF which ensued during all the IDL construction, no one seemed to understand it and there was no shortage of assholes causing slowdowns for everyone else by trying to ram themselves into a line of cars right at the last second. Convince me it's not causing snarls and I might try it. I believe BA to I-44 is a shorter distance to our respective destinations right now rather than having to go north of downtown, is it not?
Quote from: Conan71 on June 13, 2011, 03:48:23 PM
I was thinking of the huge CF which ensued during all the IDL construction, no one seemed to understand it and there was no shortage of assholes causing slowdowns for everyone else by trying to ram themselves into a line of cars right at the last second. Convince me it's not causing snarls and I might try it. I believe BA to I-44 is a shorter distance to our respective destinations right now rather than having to go north of downtown, is it not?
I 44 takes me a bit farther out of my way. 244 meets up with 44 and I continue on towards the West-Southwest for a while.
I'll let you know how it fares.
Quote from: Townsend on June 13, 2011, 03:56:22 PM
I 44 takes me a bit farther out of my way. 244 meets up with 44 and I continue on towards the West-Southwest for a while.
I'll let you know how it fares.
Really? Seems 44 would be more of a straight shot since you go further south from our hoods then west, rather than looping north three miles then back. I don't even really worry about distance anymore it's wear on the nerves.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 13, 2011, 04:16:41 PM
Really? Seems 44 would be more of a straight shot since you go further south from our hoods then west, rather than looping north three miles then back. I don't even really worry about distance anymore it's wear on the nerves.
Well, I've sold myself on a bag of goods. I don't want to be on 44. I'll try your way in the AM and give you my report.
21st to SWBLVD is the straightest shot for me but it's a splinter in my butt.
Actually there's no splinterless way to cross over to the West side these days.
Fastest way to 75 south out of downtown is to take Detroit north to 244 West. IDL Open all the way around from there...don't tell ALL your friends though. ;).
(SW Blvd = Disaster)
I think my options are
- 23rd St -> Jackson -> 25th St -> 24th St on-ramp
- Riverside
- Detroit -> 244W
<unrelated rant>Looking at the map reminds me: That south-bound 244 exit to 2nd street and then t-boning @ Frisco/BOK is retarded. I mentioned this when they were doing all the IDL work, but that ramp should just simply exit to Charles Page / 3rd street.
And with out the ramp, that 2-block stretch of 2nd street could become a 2-way street
Only thing in the way: a church... we've got plenty of them already.
</unrelated rant>
My elderly in-laws are going to love all of this when they come visit us on the hill from OKC. When the IDL was being refurbished every time they would visit I would get a call about 30 minutes after they left asking for help because they'd ended up God knows where and couldn't figure out how to get back to the Turner Turnpike.
The switch (and ensuing confusion) about the 75/I-244 ramp and the 64/51 ramp will blow my father in laws mind and he may end up in Coweta by the time he calls me.
Having driven thru there several times the detour isn't that bad. However, I'm going to against the primary traffic flow. I was impressed they poured the crossover portion while doing the IDL refurbish so they could make the switch quicker and easier.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 13, 2011, 04:16:41 PM
Really? Seems 44 would be more of a straight shot since you go further south from our hoods then west, rather than looping north three miles then back. I don't even really worry about distance anymore it's wear on the nerves.
I gave it a shot this morning.
I will continue to drive that way for a while. I realized there are different styles of drivers on 44 compared to 244/75. They seem to be even less pleasant but I'm up for the challenge.
I felt like Dark Helmet with the types of drivers I was surrounded by.
I e-mailed ODOT to see if I could get some more detailed renderings or plans for the bridge project. I'm sure they're all very busy right now, but if I get anything back I'll be sure to post it here.
Quote from: Townsend on June 14, 2011, 11:19:08 AM
I gave it a shot this morning.
I will continue to drive that way for a while. I realized there are different styles of drivers on 44 compared to 244/75. They seem to be even less pleasant but I'm up for the challenge.
I felt like Dark Helmet with the types of drivers I was surrounded by.
I tried it this morning and was amazed. I was wondering where all the traffic was. Only problem I saw were a couple of people on cell phones who took up a lane and a half negotiating the S-curves.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 10:23:06 AM
I tried it this morning and was amazed. I was wondering where all the traffic was. Only problem I saw were a couple of people on cell phones who took up a lane and a half negotiating the S-curves.
It was better this morning. It was a different time today. (about an hour later) So I'll try it again tomorrow.
I rolled through around 8am. It's also helping with school being out. I cannot believe the contrast on the BA and elsewhere with traffic. It's like 1/2 the idiots sleep in now.
Quote from: bacjz00 on June 15, 2011, 10:08:54 AM
I e-mailed ODOT to see if I could get some more detailed renderings or plans for the bridge project. I'm sure they're all very busy right now, but if I get anything back I'll be sure to post it here.
They have a whole page on it:
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm
You might see if you can get any info out of the George Kaiser Foundation. They are the ones funding the design, or at least funding the hiring of an architect to assist ODOT/Manhattan Road & Bridge. That's all I know.
Quote from: sgrizzle on June 15, 2011, 10:55:46 AM
They have a whole page on it:
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/recovery/tiger/tulsa_i244/index.htm
D'oh! Well I was kind of hoping for a rendering, but this is good stuff!
Question, they managed to rebuild the I-40 bridge that was hit by the barge in something like 90 days and that included beams, decking and perhaps even a pier or two. Any reason they couldn't throw more men at this, work round the clock, and finish the project in a year? I believe they get a $25K per day bonus for each day it's finished early. I think this has a 550 or 580 day time table, correct?
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 12:52:37 PM
Question, they managed to rebuild the I-40 bridge that was hit by the barge in something like 90 days and that included beams, decking and perhaps even a pier or two. Any reason they couldn't throw more men at this, work round the clock, and finish the project in a year? I believe they get a $25K per day bonus for each day it's finished early. I think this has a 550 or 580 day time table, correct?
It's going to be a lot longer than that. When they finish this bridge they are going to start on the other one. You can double that time frame.
Quote from: swake on June 15, 2011, 01:45:03 PM
It's going to be a lot longer than that. When they finish this bridge they are going to start on the other one. You can double that time frame.
They've already funded the East bound?
Quote from: Townsend on June 15, 2011, 02:09:10 PM
They've already funded the East bound?
Watch, we'll get the west bound finished then we will be in full austerity mode. By that time the eastbound bridge will be decked in boiler plate and the undercarriage strung with chicken wire to keep concrete chunks from falling on the wildlife and homeless folks below.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 03:50:22 PM
Watch, we'll get the west bound finished then we will be in full austerity mode. By that time the eastbound bridge will be decked in boiler plate and the undercarriage strung with chicken wire to keep concrete chunks from falling on the wildlife and homeless folks below.
Sounds nice: boiler plate with concrete chunks and austerity gravy.
Quote from: carltonplace on June 15, 2011, 04:02:13 PM
Sounds nice: boiler plate with concrete chunks and austerity gravy.
Sop that up.
Quote from: Townsend on June 15, 2011, 02:09:10 PM
They've already funded the East bound?
No. I believe it is scheduled to begin work the same year the west bound bridge will be finished. Hopefully they will be able to identify funding over the next two years.
Anyone take note that they're dumping the old road surface into the river? It is creating a "mini" dam across the river and the water nearby is deep green. Clouds of cement dust also cover the area. Of course they flush the river starting around 6pm to wash it all downstream to Jenks/Bixby and the nav channel. I seriously doubt that is to keep Terns from nesting or because of drought as has been proffered.
Truth is its cheaper than hauling the debris away. The concrete company at 23rd actually would be fined for doing the same thing (and have been).
I just hope the plans include removing the debris below the new bridge unlike the past.
Indeed.
My two observations:
1) wow, they're making quick work of removing the bridge surface (they were almost completely done this morning)
2) oh... because they're just letting it fall into the river below... environment enshmironment
We need "Two News Works For You" to determine if they're going to do any retrieval / cleanup
Quote from: BKDotCom on June 16, 2011, 12:29:00 PM
Indeed.
My two observations:
1) wow, they're making quick work of removing the bridge surface (they were almost completely done this morning)
2) oh... because they're just letting it fall into the river below... environment enshmironment
We need "Two News Works For You" to determine if they're going to do any retrieval / cleanup
Let's hope for a useful lurker.
Its actually worse than just an environmental thing. Since the water is low I have observed lots of people wading & swimming in the pools of water in Zink Lake each evening as I jog past. Its hot, they're stupid and poor. Lots of fishermen wading below the dam as well. They doubtless have not seen the green pools of water upstream of them.
Cement dust is dangerous. Warnings are printed all over cement bags warning of the silica that can harm your lungs and warning to wear protective gear before handling. Even the cement plants are required to spray water on their lots to keep it from becoming airborne.
Some of the clouds of silica released from the jackhammers probably now reside in my lungs from running within 30 yards of their work. Were you sitting in the traffic jam on the Rt66 bridge with your a/c on while they were hammering? You breathed it too.
But they are making good time as noted. >:(
Quote from: AquaMan on June 16, 2011, 05:50:48 PM
Its actually worse than just an environmental thing. Since the water is low I have observed lots of people wading & swimming in the pools of water in Zink Lake each evening as I jog past. Its hot, they're stupid and poor. Lots of fishermen wading below the dam as well. They doubtless have not seen the green pools of water upstream of them.
Cement dust is dangerous. Warnings are printed all over cement bags warning of the silica that can harm your lungs and warning to wear protective gear before handling. Even the cement plants are required to spray water on their lots to keep it from becoming airborne.
Some of the clouds of silica released from the jackhammers probably now reside in my lungs from running within 30 yards of their work. Were you sitting in the traffic jam on the Rt66 bridge with your a/c on while they were hammering? You breathed it too.
But they are making good time as noted. >:(
Did you happen to get any pictures or video? If so, let me know.
Quote from: AquaMan on June 16, 2011, 05:50:48 PM
Its actually worse than just an environmental thing. Since the water is low I have observed lots of people wading & swimming in the pools of water in Zink Lake each evening as I jog past. Its hot, they're stupid and poor. Lots of fishermen wading below the dam as well. They doubtless have not seen the green pools of water upstream of them.
Cement dust is dangerous. Warnings are printed all over cement bags warning of the silica that can harm your lungs and warning to wear protective gear before handling. Even the cement plants are required to spray water on their lots to keep it from becoming airborne.
Some of the clouds of silica released from the jackhammers probably now reside in my lungs from running within 30 yards of their work. Were you sitting in the traffic jam on the Rt66 bridge with your a/c on while they were hammering? You breathed it too.
But they are making good time as noted. >:(
You are getting incremental amounts of asbestos if you walk, run, ride a bike, or just stand on a street corner for 10 minutes from brake dust. Even a good wind storm stirs up small parts of silica.
Avery Drive is closed for a month for a re-pave so I had to ride back in from Sand Springs via the Katy Weds. night. after descending from the ped bridge over the RR tracks, there was a smattering of 6 to 8" concrete chunks under the old 244 bridge from the decking. Unfortunately some cyclist managed to hit one of those chunks and turn his front wheel into a taco. Luckily it wasn't me. I agree, they need to do a better job of cleaning up after themselves.
Quote from: dsjeffries on June 17, 2011, 09:33:15 AM
Did you happen to get any pictures or video? If so, let me know.
They'll be done before I can get back over there with a cam. Last nite I cut my run short to cross on the 23rd street bridge to be upwind from them. From a mile away you could see two distinct plumes of concrete dust rising and rivers of rock falling to the river basin creating nice splashes below.
The small amounts of brake dust don't really compare to visible clouds of airborne concrete dust. They should at least wet the surface before pulverising it.
I heard that they are dropping the concrete in the river on purpose to create the base for a riverbed road for the contractor to use. Hope the CORPS has signed off and I'm glad I'm downstream of the new road/dam. :P
Driving in this morning, I noticed that even though they have not demolished the northernmost piers, there's a concrete pumping boom and vertical re-bar sticking up near the south bank. I'd guess they are already pouring piers. Nice to see progress like this already.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 22, 2011, 09:22:11 AM
Driving in this morning, I noticed that even though they have not demolished the northernmost piers, there's a concrete pumping boom and vertical re-bar sticking up near the south bank. I'd guess they are already pouring piers. Nice to see progress like this already.
Yes, they have been pouring them all week. Interesting single round pier design. One thing I noted is that the lime from the cement dust is spreading out downstream in pools and creating a hard surface where there used to be sand. Looking farther downstream you can see that this may have happened before. It appears to be the surface of a concrete road with scoring but in reality is probably the remains of previous road destruction that has been wetted, dried, then baked over and over. Of course some of it is just the bedrock of the river basin.
Anyway, I will sure be glad when they finish up. Any idea when?
Quote from: AquaMan on July 22, 2011, 10:51:35 AM
Yes, they have been pouring them all week. Interesting single round pier design. One thing I noted is that the lime from the cement dust is spreading out downstream in pools and creating a hard surface where there used to be sand. Looking farther downstream you can see that this may have happened before. It appears to be the surface of a concrete road with scoring but in reality is probably the remains of previous road destruction that has been wetted, dried, then baked over and over. Of course some of it is just the bedrock of the river basin.
Anyway, I will sure be glad when they finish up. Any idea when?
I thought they said 576 days after commencement. I'm guessing they are wanting to get in on some of that early completion bonus cash. It would be nice if they had it done in a year. The continued drought helps manage river levels while they are pouring the piers. Hopefully they won't get a lot of weather slowdowns when it comes to decking.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 22, 2011, 10:55:06 AM
I thought they said 576 days after commencement. I'm guessing they are wanting to get in on some of that early completion bonus cash. It would be nice if they had it done in a year. The continued drought helps manage river levels while they are pouring the piers. Hopefully they won't get a lot of weather slowdowns when it comes to decking.
It's not just the drought, it's also the gate being down at the zink dam while they effect repairs.
Quote from: custosnox on July 22, 2011, 07:08:41 PM
It's not just the drought, it's also the gate being down at the zink dam while they effect repairs.
FYI - The gates are schedule to be 100% up by early August.
Earlier the better. I miss workouts on Zink Lake with my little orange kayak.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 26, 2011, 09:35:56 AM
FYI - The gates are schedule to be 100% up by early August.
Whoop Whoop!
There's an article in today's Tulsa World about the progress on the construction. Ironically, the article was called "I-244 bridge construction breakdown". Breakdown had me worried. Anyway, there's a new rendering that includes some slightly more decorative, slightly art deco, slightly better than nothing pyres/columns on either side of the upper deck. Looks like that's the best architectural/design element we're gonna get out of this, folks...
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2011/20111128_A11_A11bridge1128.jpg)
Btw, here's the article: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111128_11_A11_Afewmo914337 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111128_11_A11_Afewmo914337)
Moving tracks into this? I wonder if the plan is to abandon-in-place the existing tracks? Perhaps another pedestrian rail walking/biking/fishing bridge?
Such a shame we choose mediocrity in our designs.
The $78 million project will incorporate highway lanes on the top side, with two dedicated future rail lines and an area for bicycle and pedestrian traffic underneath.
http://www.newson6.com/story/14423859/construction-on-double-deck-bridge-set-to-begin
The $49.5 million grant will be combined with about $37 million in state funds to replace the westbound side of the I-244 crossing near downtown with a double-decked, multimodal bridge capable of accommodating four lanes of vehicular traffic and both high-speed and light rail as well as pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100218_16_A1_Amilli142989
The new lines will not affect freight rail traffic, because the bridge will be used for passenger rail only, Mitchell said. Including the rail line on the bridge was a main reason ODOT received federal funding, she said.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110415_11_A1_CUTLIN233072
I'm still trying to figure out where this commuter rail is going to go, or if they are just going to put the rail on there, with no tracks beyond the bridge, just so they can get the funding for this bridge.
I believe it's stated in the aricle that they included the rail for future use to get $42mil of the funding.
Quote from: custosnox on November 28, 2011, 01:58:21 PM
I'm still trying to figure out where this commuter rail is going to go, or if they are just going to put the rail on there, with no tracks beyond the bridge, just so they can get the funding for this bridge.
I'm still wondering why it is only 3 lanes and I'm curious how many people counted the lanes in the picture and wondered how 4=3.
Glad they left the 6th street onramp/SW Blvd exit lane on there though.
That's a lot of work to not expand it at all.
Not that it is too much of a bottleneck but I would rather have an extra traffic lane for the future than railroad tracks that I don't see being used in the next 15 years.
Hopefully I'm wrong on the tracks.
Quote from: Weatherdemon on November 29, 2011, 09:21:49 AM
I'm still wondering why it is only 3 lanes and I'm curious how many people counted the lanes in the picture and wondered how 4=3.
Glad they left the 6th street onramp/SW Blvd exit lane on there though.
That's a lot of work to not expand it at all.
Not that it is too much of a bottleneck but I would rather have an extra traffic lane for the future than railroad tracks that I don't see being used in the next 15 years.
Hopefully I'm wrong on the tracks.
Current bridge IS 4 lanes. Rendering also appears to be 4 lanes.
http://g.co/maps/fp9gj
Quote from: Hoss on November 29, 2011, 09:47:07 AM
http://g.co/maps/fp9gj
Always scary seeing what kind of condition that thing was in when looking at the ariels. I didn't know that it was Red Fork expressway.
Quote from: Hoss on November 29, 2011, 09:47:07 AM
Current bridge IS 4 lanes. Rendering also appears to be 4 lanes.
http://g.co/maps/fp9gj
The new bridge has one more lane of traffic (although it'll initially be striped/configured for the same number of lanes)
The old bridge consisted of 3 through lanes and one auxiliary lane
The new bridge is 4 through lanes and an auxiliary lane.
Src: http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/mwg-internal/de5fs23hu73ds/progress?id=kKT00w5Xid
Edit: And yes, the TW article says the new bridge has 3 lanes.
Edit: And yes there are correctly 5 lanes or traffic in the rendering (note the yellow line dividing the 4 lanes from the future 5th lane)
Quote from: BKDotCom on November 29, 2011, 10:03:08 AM
The new bridge has one more lane of traffic (although it'll initially be striped/configured for the same number of lanes)
The old bridge consisted of 3 through lanes and one auxiliary lane
The new bridge is 4 through lanes and an auxiliary lane.
Src: http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/mwg-internal/de5fs23hu73ds/progress?id=kKT00w5Xid
Edit: And yes, the TW article says the new bridge has 3 lanes.
Edit: And yes there are correctly 5 lanes or traffic in the rendering (note the yellow line dividing the 4 lanes from the future 5th lane)
OK.
Thanks.
I understood the current bridge as 3 through lanes with 1 on/off ramp lane but didn't see the config for the new one actually allowed room for another lane via repainting if needed.
Thanks!
They are gonna build this to what it should have been for 1986 traffic. Just like the I-44 event going on now. It will be great for the 1986 world.
Oh, wait...that was only 25 years ago!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 29, 2011, 12:33:47 PM
They are gonna build this to what it should have been for 1986 traffic. Just like the I-44 event going on now. It will be great for the 1986 world.
Oh, wait...that was only 25 years ago!!
For the curious:
Tulsa's population "growth":
1980: 360,919
1990: 367,302
2000: 393,049
2010: 391,906
Quote from: BKDotCom on November 29, 2011, 03:05:31 PM
For the curious:
Tulsa's population "growth":
1980: 360,919
1990: 367,302
2000: 393,049
2010: 391,906
Plus all the people from the growth areas of Jenks, Sand Springs, Sapulpa, Owasso, Skiatook, Coweta, Catoosa, Claremore, Collinsville who also use those roads and bridges.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 29, 2011, 03:12:45 PM
Plus all the people from the growth areas of Jenks, Sand Springs, Sapulpa, Owasso, Skiatook, Coweta, Catoosa, Claremore, Collinsville who also use those roads and bridges.
^^^
This. I love how people tend to not see the big picture.
Quote from: BKDotCom on November 29, 2011, 03:05:31 PM
For the curious:
Tulsa's population "growth":
1980: 360,919
1990: 367,302
2000: 393,049
2010: 391,906
And every one of them uses Memorial Drive south of the Creek Turnpike.
Quote from: Red Arrow on November 29, 2011, 04:14:55 PM
And every one of them uses Memorial Drive south of the Creek Turnpike.
I sure love my mid-town location.
Quote from: Red Arrow on November 29, 2011, 04:14:55 PM
And every one of them uses Memorial Drive south of the Creek Turnpike.
Sounds like you could use some commuter rail to Bixby. (Not
for you, but to get the other schlubs off the road)
We need a high speed rail from OKC to Tulsa, with decent local commuter spokes to Moore/Norman/Edmond/Yukon/Midwest City from OKC and to Jenks/BA/Skiatook/Owasso/Catoosa/Bixby from Tulsa.
I agree wholeheartedly. I just doubt we'll see high speed rail around here any time soon. OKC seems to have little interest and the price tag would be pretty darn high, since the existing route isn't suitable for high speed operation.
My great grandkids won't live long enough to see it. And most of them aren't even here yet.
Quote from: Conan71 on November 29, 2011, 04:29:02 PM
I sure love my mid-town location.
When we moved here in 1971, Memorial was 2 lane (total) south of the railroad tracks at 41st. It didn't matter regarding traffic. Take a look at Google Maps at the newer housing additions. They are more dense than a lot of Tulsa proper.
Quote from: nathanm on November 29, 2011, 04:31:48 PM
Sounds like you could use some commuter rail to Bixby. (Not for you, but to get the other schlubs off the road)
I think there is enough population to support rail up Memorial. The question is whether enough people are going to the same places. Rail won't help the Saturday and Sunday shopping traffic. It's only going to get worse with more shopping going in on the west side of Memorial between 101st and 111th. The apartments going in by 126th will be a traffic disaster. A lot more people in the morning are getting on 169 northbound than the turnpike westbound. That might be a good indicator for rail but I am not going to hold my breath waiting.
Quote from: Red Arrow on November 29, 2011, 05:52:10 PM
When we moved here in 1971, Memorial was 2 lane (total) south of the railroad tracks at 41st. It didn't matter regarding traffic. Take a look at Google Maps at the newer housing additions. They are more dense than a lot of Tulsa proper.
My dad's law office was out in Broken Arrow at Kenosha and Elm back in those days. I think the core of BA at the time was maybe 3 square miles and Bixby was way out in the sticks when a friend's mother bought a mini ranch out on 121st (mosquito alley) in the mid 1970's. You've definitely witnessed a lot of density increase in 40 years.
Quote from: Conan71 on November 29, 2011, 07:18:53 PM
and Bixby was way out in the sticks
It sure was. We were a caravan of 3 cars with walkie-talkie communication. We turned south on Memorial from I-44. Somewhere around 61st street, civilization was a mile behind us. I called on the radio and asked if we were going to Texas. Dad said no, it was only a few more miles. The next day we kids did some exploring of our new home town. There was a bunch of not-much between 111th and the river going farther south to downtown Bixby. There was still a fair amount of activity in downtown.
Quote from: nathanm on November 29, 2011, 04:46:51 PM
the existing route isn't suitable for high speed operation.
I've flown over a lot of it between Tulsa to near Chandler. The curves would probably make an uncomfortable high speed ride even if the track and cars were capable. On top of that, the route goes through too many of the towns along the way. A by-pass would be needed to avoid too many at grade crossings. I would be surprised if a train could even match the time of a trip down the turnpike with the present route.
Quote from: Red Arrow on November 29, 2011, 10:30:57 PM
It sure was. We were a caravan of 3 cars with walkie-talkie communication. We turned south on Memorial from I-44. Somewhere around 61st street, civilization was a mile behind us. I called on the radio and asked if we were going to Texas. Dad said no, it was only a few more miles. The next day we kids did some exploring of our new home town. There was a bunch of not-much between 111th and the river going farther south to downtown Bixby. There was still a fair amount of activity in downtown.
We moved to 21st & Memorial in 1963. City limits sign was about 100 feet east of Memorial on 21st - population 161,000. South on Memorial, when got past 31st, it was two lane, through high school. Remember one winter when driving in front of Village Inn, skidded on ice and almost went into the 6' deep bar ditch on side of road.
31st & Sheridan - heading east on 31st - just a little ways past Sheridan, turned to gravel road - past the Pitezel's place, who was State Representative for a long time.
Broken Arrow - would leave the high school parking lot with a friend who had a 1957 Ford. Could go down Sheridan, get on BA, and be on main street BA in less than 15 minutes - going very fast. When got off at 161st E. Ave, go to 61st and turned left toward main. South of 61st it was all gravel road and farms to the river.
How much taller is the new bridge going to be? I drove by and realized there still needs another level right?
Quote from: Townsend on June 08, 2012, 03:15:40 PM
How much taller is the new bridge going to be? I drove by and realized there still needs another level right?
I think the lower deck is there on the lower portion. It's hard to tell when you're driving by, but the part you can see as you drive past is the top deck.
Quote from: dsjeffries on June 08, 2012, 04:30:07 PM
I think the lower deck is there on the lower portion. It's hard to tell when you're driving by, but the part you can see as you drive past is the top deck.
Makes it look like the train and pedestrians will need to enter the bridge from a tunnel.
Quote from: Townsend on June 08, 2012, 04:53:58 PM
Makes it look like the train and pedestrians will need to enter the bridge from a tunnel.
Maybe Kaiser will surprise us with a subway system! ;)
Quote from: Townsend on June 08, 2012, 03:15:40 PM
How much taller is the new bridge going to be? I drove by and realized there still needs another level right?
You mean you don't drive an SUV and can see the lower deck??
Quote from: dsjeffries on June 08, 2012, 05:08:07 PM
Maybe Kaiser will surprise us with a subway system! ;)
Tulsa is blessed with too many petroleum pipelines for that to happen.
Thats why Inhofe promoted a monorail system back when he was still considered rational.
Quote from: patric on June 08, 2012, 09:04:53 PM
Tulsa is blessed with too many petroleum pipelines for that to happen.
Thats why Inhofe promoted a monorail system back when he was still considered rational.
Really? How many pipelines go under downtown Tulsa? I always thought they skirted downtown.
Quote from: dsjeffries on June 08, 2012, 05:08:07 PM
Maybe Kaiser will surprise us with a subway system! ;)
I would be happy with a (real) trolley system.
I would be happy with a real bus system lol
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 30, 2011, 09:37:51 AM
We moved to 21st & Memorial in 1963. City limits sign was about 100 feet east of Memorial on 21st - population 161,000. South on Memorial, when got past 31st, it was two lane, through high school. Remember one winter when driving in front of Village Inn, skidded on ice and almost went into the 6' deep bar ditch on side of road.
31st & Sheridan - heading east on 31st - just a little ways past Sheridan, turned to gravel road - past the Pitezel's place, who was State Representative for a long time.
Broken Arrow - would leave the high school parking lot with a friend who had a 1957 Ford. Could go down Sheridan, get on BA, and be on main street BA in less than 15 minutes - going very fast. When got off at 161st E. Ave, go to 61st and turned left toward main. South of 61st it was all gravel road and farms to the river.
My grandparents bought a house a block west of Utica on 36th in 1948 when my dad was 9. 36th was a gravel road that ended two doors down from them. My dad grew up playing in the dense rural woods beyond the house towards Lewis.
Quote from: BKDotCom on June 08, 2012, 07:01:19 PM
You mean you don't drive an SUV and can see the lower deck??
Not anymore. I'm afraid I'm low to the ground and would need a booster car to see that.
Quote from: patric on June 08, 2012, 09:04:53 PM
Tulsa is blessed with too many petroleum pipelines for that to happen.
Thats why Inhofe promoted a monorail system back when he was still considered rational.
A monorail? Monorail.... MONORAILLLLLLLL MONORAIL!!!!!!!!!! Sorry... I blame the Simpsons.
Quote from: swake on June 10, 2012, 09:57:27 AM
My grandparents bought a house a block west of Utica on 36th in 1948 when my dad was 9. 36th was a gravel road that ended two doors down from them. My dad grew up playing in the dense rural woods beyond the house towards Lewis.
Things grew really fast from then on for quite a while... well, until now, actually. I bet his woods didn't last very long after that. They built houses fast! Always liked that part of town.
We moved to 36th and Harvard in mid 50's and by then it was still right at the edge of town - even a little out of town. Got to see my first tornado there. And we got the first Lawn Boy mower in the neighborhood! They were red then instead of green. Dad saved a long time to buy that thing. They were very expensive, but cut like crazy.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 11, 2012, 10:08:11 PM
Things grew really fast from then on for quite a while... well, until now, actually. I bet his woods didn't last very long after that. They built houses fast! Always liked that part of town.
We moved to 36th and Harvard in mid 50's and by then it was still right at the edge of town - even a little out of town. Got to see my first tornado there. And we got the first Lawn Boy mower in the neighborhood! They were red then instead of green. Dad saved a long time to buy that thing. They were very expensive, but cut like crazy.
Our first power mower was a Lawn Boy. It was super quiet, 2 stroke, and had a cover over the entire engine. It was gold colored. My grandparents sold them at their hardware store so I expect dad got a discount. Since I cut the grass, I really appreciated it. We got it pretty much as soon as dad figured I wouldn't cut my foot off. Before that it I had to use a RA powered reel mower.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 11, 2012, 10:14:24 PM
Our first power mower was a Lawn Boy. It was super quiet, 2 stroke, and had a cover over the entire engine. It was gold colored. My grandparents sold them at their hardware store so I expect dad got a discount. Since I cut the grass, I really appreciated it. We got it pretty much as soon as dad figured I wouldn't cut my foot off. Before that it I had to use a RA powered reel mower.
We used a hand pushed reel mower until that time. I could push it about 10 feet at the time. Not surprised he bought that.
There was an old 1940's Yazoo mower in the family that I got to run when visiting grandparents. This thing was deadly. There was a motor over a big deck. Underneath was a solid metal disk with 3 triangular shaped blades attached at the edge. More like a 24" diameter circular saw mounted sideways and only three teeth. Whew! It cut grass fantastic, and I remember Dad and uncles cutting small trees up to about 3" with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLUI2hjO7Ig
Bridge milestone over the weekend: All the beams are in place
Pretty cool video posted by ODOT earlier this year, wasn't sure if this had already been posted. Anyone know where we can get updates in realtime on project status?
River Parks Authority FB post:
The Oklahoma Department of Transportation is asking for citizen input on the revised design of the bike/pedestrian span underneath the new I-244/Arkansas River bridge. Press release, diagrams, and feedback channels are all in this PDF:
http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf (http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf)
According to what I read here, this is getting input on the future design of the EASTBOUND bridge which hasn't even been funded yet. As far as I can tell, the current westbound bridge that's being constructed isn't affected by this.
Quote from: Townsend on October 29, 2012, 03:55:25 PM
River Parks Authority FB post:
The Oklahoma Department of Transportation is asking for citizen input on the revised design of the bike/pedestrian span underneath the new I-244/Arkansas River bridge. Press release, diagrams, and feedback channels are all in this PDF:
http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf (http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf)
I don't understand the need for this pedestrian crossing on the new bridge since there is already crossing on the SW BLVD/11TH ST bridge and additional crossing if the historic 11th St Bridge is ever opened.
Quote from: carltonplace on October 30, 2012, 11:14:50 AM
I don't understand the need for this pedestrian crossing on the new bridge since there is already crossing on the SW BLVD/11TH ST bridge and additional crossing if the historic 11th St Bridge is ever opened.
1. Current bridge means crossing through traffic.
2. 11th won't ever open
Quote from: carltonplace on October 30, 2012, 11:14:50 AM
I don't understand the need for this pedestrian crossing on the new bridge since there is already crossing on the SW BLVD/11TH ST bridge and additional crossing if the historic 11th St Bridge is ever opened.
Is this slashdot.org? RTFA :)
The revised proposal effectively removes the trail from the eastbound bridge. Instead it just ties into the westbound bridge's trail.
It does retain short little bit of trail on the east side that goes out to a "lookout area" but dead-ends there.
Edit: Overall, I like the revised plan better.. I'm not sure of the lookout area though.. unless it's well lit.
The lookout area appears to be the new best place to get pooped on by a bird.
Streetlights are going up on the new bridge
Drove by the other day and my car's too low to see the bridge well.
Where's the access for the rail system on the bridge? Am I mis-remembering?
Quote from: BKDotCom on November 10, 2012, 06:14:48 AM
Streetlights are going up on the new bridge
They are blue.
Quote from: swake on December 14, 2012, 03:59:23 PM
They are blue.
I think it's the same color as the lights on the traffic circle. Might be part of our branding. "Tulsa, we have blue lights."
Quote from: Townsend on December 14, 2012, 04:05:35 PM
I think it's the same color as the lights on the traffic circle. Might be part of our branding. "Tulsa, we have blue lights."
I've always thought Tulsa should embrace the color blue more. The city badge has blue, the state flag is blue, and our namesake university's primary is blue. Similar to how Fort Worth has adopted purple is support of TCU.
Quote from: Townsend on December 14, 2012, 02:06:24 PM
Drove by the other day and my car's too low to see the bridge well.
Where's the access for the rail system on the bridge? Am I mis-remembering?
The rail and pedestrian bridges reach dry land first, then the rail line veers west. You can see the two rail bridges and pedestrian bridge somewhat in this picture: https://maps.google.com/?ll=36.144923,-96.004334&spn=0.001222,0.002393&t=k&z=19
The on ramp from the BA to the new bridge looks like it's nearing completion. Anyone hear when the new bridge will open?
Quote from: Conan71 on December 15, 2012, 10:35:30 AM
The on ramp from the BA to the new bridge looks like it's nearing completion. Anyone hear when the new bridge will open?
2013
;D
Quote from: sgrizzle on December 15, 2012, 10:49:47 AM
2013
;D
:P Anyone up for an over/under pool on how long it is before some drunk decides to try it out before New Years?
Quote from: Conan71 on December 15, 2012, 10:50:44 AM
:P Anyone up for an over/under pool on how long it is before some drunk decides to try it out before New Years?
Are they from Owasso?
Has anyone noticed the deco-style shield they've installed around the base of the one of the street lamps toward the south-end of the bridge? I notice it in the mornings as I drive-in. I kinda like it! I'm not sure if those are going to go on every lamp or not? Don't know how one would take a picture of it since traffic is moving so fast there. Anyone else care to describe it better than I?
We can check it out later this week when it opens
http://www.newson6.com/story/20375549/tulsas-newest-bridge-over-arkansas-river-set-to-open
Best quote form the article:
"Once the new bridge opens, ODOT says traffic will shift onto it and the old bridge will be demolished and rebuilt. "
I hope that should read "remaining old bridge".... "once funding is approved and all the bids are in"
Edit: It beat the Boulder bridge.... How much longer before we can get to all that stuff?!
I don't get it. Is the new bridge intended to replace the old bridge both directions? Or is it intended to be only one direction? Is it saying that it will be both directions for the time being while the other bridge is rebuilt? And now you're saying the other bridge is not funded yet? I'm thoroughly confused.
Edit: Found that Tulsa World is more informative
Westbound I-244 bridge to open before Christmas
By JARREL WADE World Staff Writer
Published: 12/18/2012 3:47 PM
Last Modified: 12/18/2012 3:47 PM
The westbound Interstate 244 bridge over the Arkansas River is planned to open before Christmas and possibly this week, an Oklahoma Department of Transportation spokesman said Tuesday.
Mark Zishka, an ODOT Tulsa-area construction engineer, said crews are hoping to get the new multimodal bridge open to traffic this week, although the full project is not scheduled to be finished for several months.
"This week possibly. We're seriously trying to finish by the holidays," Zishka said.
Once completed, the multimodal bridge will carry three lanes of vehicular traffic.
Below the lanes, the bridge will support two rail lines and a pedestrian bridge.
Zishka said traffic will be allowed onto the bridge and traffic will run normally for several months on separate bridges, aside from lane closures as crews finish work on the bridge.
In March, the eastbound bridge is scheduled to go out for bids to be replaced, Zishka said.
Construction on that bridge is planned to start several months later, and traffic will be diverted onto the new westbound bridge, he said.
The eastbound bridge will not be multimodal except for plans currently being worked on to either have a pedestrian walkway similar to the westbound bridge or possibly to have a viewing station, Zishka said.
Check back with tulsaworld.com for more information about when traffic begins to flow onto the new bridge.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20121218_11_0_Thewes216198
Quote from: DowntownDan on December 18, 2012, 03:51:24 PM
I don't get it. Is the new bridge intended to replace the old bridge both directions? Or is it intended to be only one direction? Is it saying that it will be both directions for the time being while the other bridge is rebuilt? And now you're saying the other bridge is not funded yet? I'm thoroughly confused.
Edit: Found that Tulsa World is more informative
Ya... last I've heard for the East-bound bridge is that they're still working out the plans (at least for the pedestrian part). The quote in the KOTV article is (at best) confusing.
The new West bound Bridge is set to open tonight and all of the detours will be eliminated. Westbound SH64/51 to US75 will reopen and there will be no need to use I-244 to get to US75. The east bound bridge is funded, but construction will be delayed a few months while the project is put out for bid. Once replacement starts all traffic accross the river at I244 (west bound and east bound) will be diverted to the new west bound bridge.
It will be nice to be able to get to Westbound US75 from Denver Ave again. Today, I either have to go around downtown on I244 or to Southwest BLVD and 21st St.
Quote from: carltonplace on December 19, 2012, 09:16:03 AM
The new West bound Bridge is set to open tonight and all of the detours will be eliminated. Westbound SH64/51 to US75 will reopen and there will be no need to use I-244 to get to US75. The east bound bridge is funded, but construction will be delayed a few months while the project is put out for bid. Once replacement starts all traffic accross the river at I244 (west bound and east bound) will be diverted to the new west bound bridge.
It will be nice to be able to get to Westbound US75 from Denver Ave again. Today, I either have to go around downtown on I244 or to Southwest BLVD and 21st St.
I'm tempted to go that way to work in the morning, but not sure what kind of confused asshattery will be going on where it splits left for 244 west and right for 244 east for those who haven't been down that way since the project started.
Quote from: Conan71 on December 19, 2012, 09:30:48 AM
I'm tempted to go that way to work in the morning, but not sure what kind of confused asshattery will be going on where it splits left for 244 west and right for 244 east for those who haven't been down that way since the project started.
Tomorrow will be interesting.
Quite a bit still unclear as to what ramps and interchanges are opening up over night.
Quote from: BKDotCom on December 19, 2012, 09:38:06 AM
Tomorrow will be interesting.
Quite a bit still unclear as to what ramps and interchanges are opening up over night.
Dust off the General Lee and have fun with it.
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRwC6lGXr_kD9N2ak0hp5ZZaZBoHR0j6eHU05TmBLq0FtBCha-g3KhyZ0FfGw)
Quote from: Conan71 on December 19, 2012, 09:30:48 AM
I'm tempted to go that way to work in the morning, but not sure what kind of confused asshattery will be going on where it splits left for 244 west and right for 244 east for those who haven't been down that way since the project started.
Conan, I'm having a hard time picturing where you're talking about. Maybe I'm just a positive guy, but I think most will be able to handle this opening just fine. I klnow I am looking forward to having our soutbound access to 75 back from downtown (from 7th street). This has been a MAJOR inconvenience and has generally added 10 minutes of drive time home for me for the past 1-2 years.
Quote from: bacjz00 on December 19, 2012, 01:24:22 PM
Conan, I'm having a hard time picturing where you're talking about. Maybe I'm just a positive guy, but I think most will be able to handle this opening just fine. I klnow I am looking forward to having our soutbound access to 75 back from downtown (from 7th street). This has been a MAJOR inconvenience and has generally added 10 minutes of drive time home for me for the past 1-2 years.
Oddly enough I found taking Detroit to get out of downtown to be just as fast (if not faster) than taking 7th street. Sure seems like it should take longer.
Now that all this detour stuff is over I'll share "my" little secret to the Detroit/Cincinnati on-ramps: If there's a line of cars a mile long on Detroit : go around them / go around the block / get on from Cincinnati! Ya boneheads! There are "two checkouts" so to speak... nobody is using the Cincinnati checkout.
Quote from: BKDotCom on December 19, 2012, 02:44:10 PM
Oddly enough I found taking Detroit to get out of downtown to be just as fast (if not faster) than taking 7th street. Sure seems like it should take longer.
Now that all this detour stuff is over I'll share "my" little secret to the Detroit/Cincinnati on-ramps: If there's a line of cars a mile long on Detroit : go around them / go around the block / get on from Cincinnati! Ya boneheads! There are "two checkouts" so to speak... nobody is using the Cincinnati checkout.
I suppose that depends entirely on which end of downtown you work :)
But yeah, that makes sense. I've been using Detroit quite a bit and it moves ok. Still adds close to 10 minutes for me by the time I make it up there, wait in line, move in slow merging traffic all the way around the IDL and then cram into those really skinny lanes in the detour sectino of the IDL where traffic moves along at a brisk 45 MPH.
This bridge opening is awesome. Plus we can use our new rehabbed IDL on the west side again!! We only got to use it for what 2 weeks?
Quote from: bacjz00 on December 19, 2012, 01:24:22 PM
Conan, I'm having a hard time picturing where you're talking about. Maybe I'm just a positive guy, but I think most will be able to handle this opening just fine. I klnow I am looking forward to having our soutbound access to 75 back from downtown (from 7th street). This has been a MAJOR inconvenience and has generally added 10 minutes of drive time home for me for the past 1-2 years.
The split just past Houston. In Tulsa, driving appears to be a passive or secondary activity for most drivers. Texting, putting on make up, reading the Tulsa World or just tuning their chainsaw seems to be the primary activity behind the wheel.
It was nice of the wind to take down all of the road work and detour signs for ODOT.
There was some uncertainty with drivers this morning but not too bad. The bridge seemed nice and smooth this morning as I drove across it.
The bridge is nice and wide with blue poled bright street lights. Very nice change!
They do need to smooth it out as it is a little wavy. Not Creek Turnpike wavy but wavy all the same. There may be a period of time you need to wait before doing that so I'm not too terribly worried at this point.
I loved driving around downtown with squeaking through the barriers! Speed limit was still 45 on Christmas night but I'm assuming that's to allow people time to get used to the newness and won't last long.
Quote from: Conan71 on December 19, 2012, 03:56:45 PM
The split just past Houston. In Tulsa, driving appears to be a passive or secondary activity for most drivers. Texting, putting on make up, reading the Tulsa World or just tuning their chainsaw seems to be the primary activity behind the wheel.
I'm not tuning the chainsaw...I'm usually just sharpening the blade...they get dull so fast, and it takes so much time, what better way to use that wasted, unproductive time behind the wheel...?
When does the bullet train start running?
Quote from: YoungTulsan on December 31, 2012, 02:57:13 AM
When does the bullet train start running?
Right after we buy it.
Quote from: Weatherdemon on December 28, 2012, 03:40:52 PM
The bridge is nice and wide with blue poled bright street lights. Very nice change!
They do need to smooth it out as it is a little wavy. Not Creek Turnpike wavy but wavy all the same. There may be a period of time you need to wait before doing that so I'm not too terribly worried at this point.
I loved driving around downtown with squeaking through the barriers! Speed limit was still 45 on Christmas night but I'm assuming that's to allow people time to get used to the newness and won't last long.
I was wondering about that. It seemed from looking at it while driving by that it looked wavy. Glad to hear it isn't as bad as the Creek, but why can't we seem to build a decent bridge around here?
The beams have a slight arch to them for strength, so the roadway on top does as well. I think it is something that straightens out over time/load but you should probably discuss it with a civil engineer before taking this as fact, or if the rash last longer than 72 hours.
Quote from: sgrizzle on January 01, 2013, 01:24:00 PM
The beams have a slight arch to them for strength, so the roadway on top does as well. I think it is something that straightens out over time/load but you should probably discuss it with a civil engineer before taking this as fact, or if the rash last longer than 72 hours.
You are correct about the arch for strength. I don't think it goes away though. The arch flexes with load but had better come back to the original shape.
The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (at the mouth of the Chesapeake) original bridge spans had too much arch. At 55 mph (speed limit) the arch frequency just matched the suspension frequency of my car. It was a very annoying drive. The car just seemed to float up and down without pitching. A college friend said that a civil engineer friend (I knew the CE but not well.) told him the arch was intentional for the reasons you said. He also said they missed the mark and put in too much arch.
"They" have added parallel spans. I expect they have also resurfaced the original spans as the BBT has been around for quite a while.
http://goo.gl/maps/JW2NA
http://www.cbbt.com/
You could definitely see the arch in the beams as they were constructing it..
I saw that and thought "I hope they fill in the 'valleys' so it's all level and not a rollercoaster..."
Having been across the bridge a few times, it's not too perceptable.
Quote from: BKDotCom on January 01, 2013, 07:38:24 PM
You could definitely see the arch in the beams as they were constructing it..
I saw that and thought "I hope they fill in the 'valleys' so it's all level and not a rollercoaster..."
Having been across the bridge a few times, it's not too perceptable.
Its more perceptible with a hard suspension commercial vehicle but so much better than having to negotiate the divided bridge that scared the bejeezus out of visitors. Actually, just a bit farther south towards 41st the road really has some major dips that will throw you out of an air suspension seat of an 84 passenger bus or a straight truck.
Quote from: AquaMan on January 01, 2013, 08:15:38 PM
Actually, just a bit farther south towards 41st the road really has some major dips that will throw you out of an air suspension seat of an 84 passenger bus or a straight truck.
Seat Belt.
yes, that's all that keeps you tethered to the earth. There is a great youtube vid that shows a bus driver who neglected to belt in and hit one of those dips. He was thrown out of his seat but held onto the steering wheel which swerved the bus into a house.
Its the position of the driver in front of the front axle that creates the lift. If the shocks are bad or the suspension is weak, you get flung up in the air like on the front of a boat.
BTW, I have driven a Prevost like the one that crashed in Oregon this past week. Its amazing how little support there is for the top of the vehicle. The windows basically hold the top on. No roll bars. With no seat belts, once the windows pop and the ceiling caves, you're in big trouble. Passengers were thrown out of the bus. Belted driver survived.
Nowhere near as bad as the Creek Turnpike bridge over the swamp. Not even close.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 01, 2013, 11:13:25 PM
Nowhere near as bad as the Creek Turnpike bridge over the swamp. Not even close.
True. It's a shame local road construction crews cannot even get things like the widening from 4 to 6 lanes on Memorial south of the turnpike to have a truly nice surface. The Germans would label all our new roads as "Strasse Schade". I saw a sign like that on a rural road in Germany that Oklahoma would be proud of. It roughly translates to bad road surface.
There's a section of freeway in Houston known as the Pierce Elevated. This section before reconstruction in the late nineties had the same effect. It undulated for the entire mile I drove it every day to work. It was never serious enough to cause injury even in those who would run it at 65mph (back then the 55mph mandate was still the law of the land). I don't know if the reconstruction corrected that or not.
I haven't driven the new section of the bridge yet, and have barely driven the swamp on the Creek but one time several years ago. Guess I'll have to give that section of road a try this week to see how it compares.
Quote from: Hoss on January 01, 2013, 11:42:10 PM
I haven't driven the new section of the bridge yet, and have barely driven the swamp on the Creek but one time several years ago. Guess I'll have to give that section of road a try this week to see how it compares.
The new I-244 bridge is an order of magnitude better than the Creek over the Swamp. I still expect better of a new road.
I drive the bridge a couple times a day and haven't noticed this issue. The Creek turnpike bridges can't help but be noticed.
New I-244 East Bound Bridge Aheadhttp://kwgs.com/post/new-i-244-east-bound-bridge-ahead (http://kwgs.com/post/new-i-244-east-bound-bridge-ahead)
QuoteTULSA, Okla. (AP) — Oklahoma transportation officials have approved a $41 million contract for a bridge over the Arkansas River at Tulsa.
The bid accepted Monday is for construction of an eastbound Interstate 244 bridge across the Arkansas River. The span will be next to the westbound bridge, which is nearly complete.
The Tulsa World reports the work is to begin within four months and will take just under two years to complete.
The contract was awarded to Manhattan Road and Bridge company, which also worked on the double-deck, multimodal westbound bridge.
I have noticed they are making progress with the pedestrian/bike path under the westbound bridge. I'm still wondering how exactly the existing trails will link up to it. Here is a rendering I found of some of the design elements:
(http://vickiscuri.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tulsa-blog-5.jpg?w=620&h=620)
Quote from: SXSW on September 22, 2013, 05:49:02 PM
I have noticed they are making progress with the pedestrian/bike path under the westbound bridge. I'm still wondering how exactly the existing trails will link up to it. Here is a rendering I found of some of the design elements:
(http://vickiscuri.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tulsa-blog-5.jpg?w=620&h=620)
Given my cynical nature, they won't link up.
I would assume the north terminus will be with the trail near Newblock park. No idea what they would connect to at the south terminus. There's nothing there to connect to, at least as of now.
Quote from: SXSW on September 22, 2013, 05:49:02 PM
(http://vickiscuri.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tulsa-blog-5.jpg?w=620&h=620)
Since LEDs are the dominant light, I wonder why they didnt just go ahead and also use them for the color accents, instead of colored spotlights shining up?
Sometimes it seems that architects dont go much beyond salesmen for their inspiration, but I hope that isnt the case here.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 22, 2013, 11:00:13 PM
Given my cynical nature, they won't link up.
I would assume the north terminus will be with the trail near Newblock park. No idea what they would connect to at the south terminus. There's nothing there to connect to, at least as of now.
Scroll up.
You'll find this
http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf
Quote from: BKDotCom on September 23, 2013, 11:01:05 AM
Scroll up.
You'll find this
http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf
Thanks!
Quote from: BKDotCom on September 23, 2013, 11:01:05 AM
Scroll up.
You'll find this
http://www.riverparks.org/documents/ODOT-244-Proposal.pdf
That shows the eastbound bridge with a trail but the article in yesterdays world says eastbound will not have a walkway.
Unlike the multimodal westbound bridge, the eastbound structure will not have rail lines or a pedestrian walkway, though the Southwest Boulevard bridge east of the eastbound bridge has that feature, Zishka said. http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/I_244_bridge_projects_moving_toward_2015_finish_line/20130922_11_A21_CUTLIN384952
Personally I wish they would've used whatever money they are allocating for these bridge trails to rehabilitate the 11th St bridge for bike/pedestrian traffic, which would solve the problem of connecting to the existing trails. It's a shame that bridge is just sitting there as a relic. I can hope that someday the funds will be there to finally reopen the historic bridge (for bikes/joggers).
Or just have the westbound bridge trail be two-way and connect to the trails via underpasses beneath the SW Blvd, 11th St and eastbound bridges.
Quote from: SXSW on September 23, 2013, 04:31:14 PM
Personally I wish they would've used whatever money they are allocating for these bridge trails to rehabilitate the 11th St bridge for bike/pedestrian traffic, which would solve the problem of connecting to the existing trails. It's a shame that bridge is just sitting there as a relic. I can hope that someday the funds will be there to finally reopen the historic bridge (for bikes/joggers).
Or just have the westbound bridge trail be two-way and connect to the trails via underpasses beneath the SW Blvd, 11th St and eastbound bridges.
That may not be possible since the Rte 66/11th St. bridge is considered unsafe for even pedestrians. I think it was Sgrizzle who posted that some time back.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 23, 2013, 04:33:25 PM
That may not be possible since the Rte 66/11th St. bridge is considered unsafe for even pedestrians. I think it was Sgrizzle who posted that some time back.
Should be fixed for pedestrian....it is a classy look that would be a shame to lose.
The bridge needs to go. I love it, but it is a hodgepodge of construction periods and in danger of collapsing on itself and others. The piers are ok but the rest is done. It's time for rehab, restore or even re-purpose has passed.
Quote from: AquaMan on September 24, 2013, 09:47:58 AM
The bridge needs to go. I love it, but it is a hodgepodge of construction periods and in danger of collapsing on itself and others. The piers are ok but the rest is done. It's time for rehab, restore or even re-purpose has passed.
You sir are correct, but the piers arn't all that great...
Quotein danger of collapsing on itself and others. The piers are ok but the rest is done.
Quotebut the piers arn't all that great...
Unfortunate, but it would seem "we" waited too long or it just exceeded its useful life.
I was told it was protected against demolition (historic item) but the cost to rehab for even pedestrian use is way to high to even realistically consider. Is that correct?
One of the things I have ranted about in the past - how we are in a screaming hurry to spend a bucket full of money on "new and improved", while completely ignoring the maintenance on what we already have. (BOK center versus the Assembly center....and now that we spent that bucket of money, suddenly we CAN afford to do a paint and polish....)
Don't take that wrong - I am glad we got the BOK. Still wish we would have kept up the old one instead of letting it rot to "make a point"....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 24, 2013, 08:31:28 PM
One of the things I have ranted about in the past - how we are in a screaming hurry to spend a bucket full of money on "new and improved", while completely ignoring the maintenance on what we already have. (BOK center versus the Assembly center....and now that we spent that bucket of money, suddenly we CAN afford to do a paint and polish....)
Don't take that wrong - I am glad we got the BOK. Still wish we would have kept up the old one instead of letting it rot to "make a point"....
The 'old one' isn't rotting. We still have it.
http://www.coxcentertulsa.com/
And as someone who spend half his year at hockey games in 'the old one', I'm glad we got the new one AND renovated the old one. Every game it seemed part of the ceiling was falling out in that building. I mean hell, it was only 50 years old. ::)
Quote from: rdj on September 24, 2013, 11:43:01 AM
I was told it was protected against demolition (historic item) but the cost to rehab for even pedestrian use is way to high to even realistically consider. Is that correct?
It was discussed here a few years ago. At that time it said it would cost $15 million to rehab the bridge for pedestrian/bike traffic. How much are they spending on these LED-lit I-244 bridge trails?
I have always been under the impression the multi-modal (pedestrian being one of the modes) aspect of the westbound bridge was why it received TIGER funds.
Quote from: Hoss on September 24, 2013, 11:02:02 PM
The 'old one' isn't rotting. We still have it.
http://www.coxcentertulsa.com/
And as someone who spend half his year at hockey games in 'the old one', I'm glad we got the new one AND renovated the old one. Every game it seemed part of the ceiling was falling out in that building. I mean hell, it was only 50 years old. ::)
That's what I was getting at saying we CAN afford to do a paint and polish...now there is a new one, we fix up the old. After using the bad condition of the old as a point of justification - we need "better" facility...
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 25, 2013, 01:39:33 PM
That's what I was getting at saying we CAN afford to do a paint and polish...now there is a new one, we fix up the old. After using the bad condition of the old as a point of justification - we need "better" facility...
Except that they've already renovated it.
Quote from: Hoss on September 25, 2013, 02:58:43 PM
Except that they've already renovated it.
Yep. That's what I have heard. Still haven't had a chance to go visit yet. Was planning to on Chalk Festival day, but ran out of time after going to the Artist shop....
This reddit comment begs for comment:
http://www.reddit.com/r/oklahoma/comments/24z3s1/what_the_heck_is_this_thing/chc5e72
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 07, 2014, 07:26:30 PM
This reddit comment begs for comment:
http://www.reddit.com/r/oklahoma/comments/24z3s1/what_the_heck_is_this_thing/chc5e72
It's a work of art for OKC. They get all the good stuff! Why didn't we get one?
I think they use it at the boathouse for lifting those rowing shells into the Oklahoma river....some of those get 6 or 8 people in them, so really need some heavy lift capability!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 08, 2014, 10:21:04 AM
It's a work of art for OKC. They get all the good stuff! Why didn't we get one?
I think they use it at the boathouse for lifting those rowing shells into the Oklahoma river....some of those get 6 or 8 people in them, so really need some heavy lift capability!!
Either you're joking or I now have a better understanding of your other comments on here.
Quote from: BKDotCom on May 07, 2014, 07:26:30 PM
This reddit comment begs for comment:
http://www.reddit.com/r/oklahoma/comments/24z3s1/what_the_heck_is_this_thing/chc5e72
"Oklahoma City SkyDance Bridge was built prior to development of the MAPS 3 downtown park to avoid disrupting traffic once the new Interstate 40 opens.
Total cost for the pedestrian bridge is $5.8 million; $3.5 million came from ODOT funds and $2.3 million came from the 2000 and 2007 General Obligation Bond Authorizations."
http://www.okc.gov/skybridge/
Looks like they only managed to build half of it. :P
Quote from: sgrizzle on May 08, 2014, 10:47:07 AM
Either you're joking or I now have a better understanding of your other comments on here.
Either you're joking or I now have a better understanding of your other comments on here....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 08, 2014, 10:21:04 AM
It's a work of art for OKC. They get all the good stuff! Why didn't we get one?
I think they use it at the boathouse for lifting those rowing shells into the Oklahoma river....some of those get 6 or 8 people in them, so really need some heavy lift capability!!
There are no six man rowing shells and with an eight, you just shoulder it and walk it to the water. No big deal.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 08, 2014, 03:05:08 PM
There are no six man rowing shells and with an eight, you just shoulder it and walk it to the water. No big deal.
You guys gotta learn how to read 'inflection' into text...
I have watched them do that a couple of times, so yeah, those things 'look' like they weigh about 40 lbs. It is just more fun to use that big ole crane to do the job...excess!! Isn't that what our society is all about??
This would be an even better idea for a rowing shell crane.....if not quite as artistic!
http://stardate.org/astro-guide/gallery/rube-goldberg-meets-mars
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 08, 2014, 04:22:11 PM
You guys gotta learn how to read 'inflection' into text...
I have watched them do that a couple of times, so yeah, those things 'look' like they weigh about 40 lbs. It is just more fun to use that big ole crane to do the job...excess!! Isn't that what our society is all about??
This would be an even better idea for a rowing shell crane.....if not quite as artistic!
http://stardate.org/astro-guide/gallery/rube-goldberg-meets-mars
An eight weighs quite a bit more than that, but it can be sectioned out into multiple coffee table bases. I almost bought one at a regatta in Austin a few years back. Talk about a conversation piece!
Quote from: Conan71 on May 08, 2014, 04:25:55 PM
An eight weighs quite a bit more than that, but it can be sectioned out into multiple coffee table bases. I almost bought one at a regatta in Austin a few years back. Talk about a conversation piece!
Couple that as coffee table, with the trunk of a 57 Chevy for couch!! Add a small howitzer conversion as beer delivery system in the movie studio wing of the house...!! This could get really cool!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 08, 2014, 04:22:11 PM
This would be an even better idea for a rowing shell crane.....if not quite as artistic!
http://stardate.org/astro-guide/gallery/rube-goldberg-meets-mars
I would watch rowing events..if they involved rockets.
Quote from: nathanm on May 08, 2014, 05:02:21 PM
I would watch rowing events..if they involved rockets.
I had a hard time watching the dragon boats on the Oklahoma River without thinking of Ben Hur.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 08, 2014, 05:44:27 PM
I had a hard time watching the dragon boats on the Oklahoma River without thinking of Ben Hur.
Yeah-huh...
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jdQx0hI9ln0/T9jgAUv3mWI/AAAAAAAAAYE/v0eJdDgreOA/s1600/benhur6.jpg)
New bridge over Arkansas River will open September 10th.
That sounds more like it.
Very topical.. I used that route this morning and noticed that it looked very close. Made a quickly forgotten mental note to check if the opening nigh
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/i--bridge-will-open-to-traffic-next-monday/article_d62ec07b-0c77-511a-b729-998bc1e4eeed.html
I-244 bridge will open to traffic next Monday [Sept 15, 2014]
QuoteOKLAHOMA CITY — The new eastbound I-244 bridge over the Arkansas River will open to vehicular traffic next Monday, according to state transportation officials.
The new bridge has been under construction since the $41 million job was awarded in March 2013 to Manhattan Road and Bridge Co.
The project included the removal of the old bridge.
The contractor will continue to work on the trail systems underneath the bridges and an observation deck that overlooks Tulsa's Cyrus Avery Plaza and the historic 11th Street bridge.
The entire project is expected to be complete by spring 2015, which includes the reopening of westbound I-444 to both northbound and southbound U.S. 75, officials said.
A 10 a.m. ribbon cutting ceremony featuring local, state and federal dignitaries will precede the opening of the bridge.
In other business, the state Transportation Commission Monday approved a new eight-year construction work plan which includes about $6.3 billion for nearly 2,000 highway and bridge projects.
Updated Article. I sure do love how the Tulsa World revises articles during a day, then calls them brand new.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/newshomepage1/i--bridge-over-arkansas-river-will-open-to-traffic/article_d62ec07b-0c77-511a-b729-998bc1e4eeed.html
QuoteOKLAHOMA CITY — The new eastbound Interstate 244 bridge over the Arkansas River will open to traffic Monday, according to state transportation officials.
The new bridge has been under construction since the $41 million job was awarded in March 2013 to Manhattan Road and Bridge Co. The project included the removal of the old bridge.
The contractor will continue to work on the trail systems underneath the bridges and an observation deck that overlooks Tulsa's Cyrus Avery Plaza and the historic 11th Street bridge.
The entire project is expected to be complete by spring 2015. It includes the reopening of westbound I-244 to U.S. 75 northbound and southbound, officials said.
A 10 a.m. ribbon-cutting ceremony featuring local, state and federal dignitaries will precede the opening of the bridge next week.
In other business Monday, the state Transportation Commission approved a new, eight-year construction work plan that includes about $6.3 billion for nearly 2,000 highway and bridge projects.
About half of the construction plan involves bridge projects.
The agency in coming years will continue to be "laser focused" on reducing the number of structurally deficient bridges, Oklahoma Department of Transportation Executive Director Mike Patterson told the commission.
The state agency is still on track toward its goal of reducing the number of structurally deficient bridges to 1 percent of the total 6,800 bridges in the state by the end of the decade, Patterson said.
In 2014, the state expects to reduce the number of structurally deficient bridges from 468 to 400, Patterson said.
"Once we get our bridge problem to a manageable state, then we'll begin to take on the other components of the highway system that need to be brought in to a manageable state," Patterson said.
The eight-year construction work plan, which covers the time period from October 2014 through September 2022, includes seven new bridge rehabilitation projects in Tulsa County scheduled to begin in federal fiscal year 2022.
One of the Tulsa County bridge rehabilitation projects involves $13 million in work on several bridges at the southeast corner of the Inner Dispersal Loop near downtown.
Other new projects slated to begin in federal fiscal year 2022 include:
Widening and resurfacing Oklahoma 66 in Rogers County beginning about 4 miles southwest of the Craig County line and extending 4.3 miles to the northeast at an estimated cost of $10.9 million;
Widening and resurfacing U.S. 59 in Ottawa County from Oklahoma 125 northwest to Interstate 44 at a cost of about $16.5 million;
Widening and resurfacing Oklahoma 10 in Ottawa County from Oklahoma 137 east 5 miles to Oklahoma 10C at a cost of about $9.6 million;
Rehabilitating U.S. 412 bridges in Mayes County over the Grand River at a cost of about $11.2 million.
One of the Tulsa County bridge rehabilitation projects involves $13 million in work on several bridges at the southeast corner of the Inner Dispersal Loop near downtown.
The city street bridges: Boston Ave, Main St and Cheyenne Ave look terrible. I cringe every time I drive under them.
Any word on when the bike trail under the bridge will open? The article just says work is continuing. I'm still wondering how this will connect to the existing trails.
Quote from: SXSW on September 09, 2014, 11:03:44 AM
Any word on when the bike trail under the bridge will open? The article just says work is continuing. I'm still wondering how this will connect to the existing trails.
Spring is what they were saying on the news last night.
Take a look at the concrete work just to the south of the SW Blvd. bridge on both sides of the river. I believe they are going underneath the SWB bridge to link up with the path under the new 244 bridge and to reconnect the Newblock trail on the east bank.
Eastbound I-244 Bridge Opens to Traffic(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kwgs/files/styles/card_280/public/201409/244_bridge.JPG)
http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/eastbound-i-244-bridge-opens-traffic (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/eastbound-i-244-bridge-opens-traffic)
QuoteLocal, state and federal officials celebrate the opening of the eastbound I-244 bridge over the Arkansas River.
"Boy, the truckers really want to see to get us open," Oklahoma Secretary of Transportation Gary Ridley said after being interrupted by a honking semitruck.
Ridley said the last three years and $78 million spent on the eastbound and westbound bridges were a necessary investment.
"If you evaluate a bridge from zero to 100 ... these two were a couple of the worst on the interstate system, and we were seriously thinking that we were going to have to load post these bridges if something hadn't been done," Ridley said.
Work on the eastbound bridge began in June 2013. Since then, all traffic has been on the westbound bridge. Oklahoma Transportation Commissioner Peter Regan said Tulsans have been very patient with the project the last three years.
"This project was — my wife told me not to say this, but real quickly — this project was like a kidney stone," Regan said. "You don't know what — you just got to wait it out, you got to mitigate it, you got to do what you can do, and the public's been so patient with us and we're very, very appreciative."
Some lane and ramp closures could remain for several weeks as the last of the sign work is completed and traffic is shifted.
The final part of the project is linking a pedestrian bridge to trails and a viewing deck. That's expected to be done in the spring.
So.......the new bridge is "technically" open. But it's still the same 2 lanes in all directions. Any idea when we get our actual highway back? Saw them moving around more barriers tonight on the way out of downtown, but it's basically gridlock during peak times. #freethethirdlane
Quote from: Townsend on September 15, 2014, 01:06:44 PM
Eastbound I-244 Bridge Opens to Traffic
(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kwgs/files/styles/card_280/public/201409/244_bridge.JPG)
http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/eastbound-i-244-bridge-opens-traffic (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/eastbound-i-244-bridge-opens-traffic)
Can't Dewey outsource these ribbon cutting events like he does everything else?
Quote from: bacjz00 on September 17, 2014, 09:10:30 PM
So.......the new bridge is "technically" open. But it's still the same 2 lanes in all directions. Any idea when we get our actual highway back? Saw them moving around more barriers tonight on the way out of downtown, but it's basically gridlock during peak times. #freethethirdlane
They say "Spring 2015" as the full completion date of the project on most of the articles I've seen. Also, from the last article posted, it said this -
QuoteSome lane and ramp closures could remain for several weeks as the last of the sign work is completed and traffic is shifted.
New bridge is fully open, along with the US64 eastbound ramp and 7th Street/Downtown ramps (when coming from the South). It'll take some time to open up the rest of the lanes, [especially when you only work some 5 or 6 hours a day, 4-5 days a week. That's also when it's completely sunny outside.(only being semi facetious with the last two statements)]
The motto? Oklahoma Department of Transportation/Manhattan Bridge and Road - Inconveniencing as many people for as long as possible.
This is symptomatic (part of it operating and calling it "open") of the nationwide problem with roads - the turnpike to OKC has just been fully opened up again in the last couple weeks - it was done in stages to get people used to driving through without multiple parking events. Still a very mediocre road; woefully inadequate for the traffic it is expected to handle.
IF we are going to continue to depend on the personal auto and large trucks as the primary means of transportation in this country - continuing to stifle all manner of rail as personal transportation - then we should at least have the intellectual honesty as a society to go all in and fix the road grids. Highways/roads from Interstates to state to local are a disgrace and catastrophically inadequate to the traffic needs we now impose on them. Just looking at the interstates for now - each and every one, ESPECIALLY in Oklahoma - is in such an advanced state of disrepair as to be a traffic hazard in it's own right.
From bridge conditions, to median traffic separation methods (cables?? Really...???), to lane count. We have spent the time since the 50's, 60's, and 70's patting ourselves on the back, telling ourselves "We're Number 1" and have totally lost sight of the big picture - we have let too many other countries go sailing past us on too many fronts! Anyone who has driven more than about 38 feet outside of their neighborhood has experienced the joy of inadequate infrastructure. And the interstate system - well the overcrowding/excess traffic and decay of the roads is appalling and flat out dangerous!
IF we are going to continue down "automobile-lane", then the interstates should already have been on an upgrade program to make the minimum standard 3 lanes across the board. With either wider medians or barriers - better separation between directions. As beginning point, we should ask the question; WWGD? What Would Germany Do? Since we copied their idea for interstates to begin with, that would be a good start to return for ideas.
Make the pavement 24" - maybe more depending on truck traffic we are going to allow - of good concrete versus ANY pavement of assfault. BUILD the road - don't slobber some gravel and oil on the ground just to get by cheap for a while.
Adopt any and all European traffic control ideas that we don't already do.
Or do what the rest of the 'civilized', 'modern' world has started doing - better ways to move both people and goods that allow the possibility of disassociation with "one car/one rider". Not to mention massive increases in efficiency and better use of available resources. One gallon, one ton, 450 miles.
Short sidetrack - just because;
And for those who decry illegal immigration on the one hand, and then use that as the excuse for inaction, mouthing platitudes about how great we are because "everyone wants to come here...". Well, blah blah blah blah blah. Oh,...and did I mention 'blah'?? If other countries were as convenient as a walk, they would (and are in actuality) go there. And how do they explain the "mass exodus" of people renouncing their citizenship??
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 18, 2014, 09:49:01 AM
This is symptomatic (part of it operating and calling it "open") of the nationwide problem with roads - the turnpike to OKC has just been fully opened up again in the last couple weeks - it was done in stages to get people used to driving through without multiple parking events. Still a very mediocre road; woefully inadequate for the traffic it is expected to handle.
IF we are going to continue to depend on the personal auto and large trucks as the primary means of transportation in this country - continuing to stifle all manner of rail as personal transportation - then we should at least have the intellectual honesty as a society to go all in and fix the road grids. Highways/roads from Interstates to state to local are a disgrace and catastrophically inadequate to the traffic needs we now impose on them. Just looking at the interstates for now - each and every one, ESPECIALLY in Oklahoma - is in such an advanced state of disrepair as to be a traffic hazard in it's own right.
From bridge conditions, to median traffic separation methods (cables?? Really...???), to lane count. We have spent the time since the 50's, 60's, and 70's patting ourselves on the back, telling ourselves "We're Number 1" and have totally lost sight of the big picture - we have let too many other countries go sailing past us on too many fronts! Anyone who has driven more than about 38 feet outside of their neighborhood has experienced the joy of inadequate infrastructure. And the interstate system - well the overcrowding/excess traffic and decay of the roads is appalling and flat out dangerous!
IF we are going to continue down "automobile-lane", then the interstates should already have been on an upgrade program to make the minimum standard 3 lanes across the board. With either wider medians or barriers - better separation between directions. As beginning point, we should ask the question; WWGD? What Would Germany Do? Since we copied their idea for interstates to begin with, that would be a good start to return for ideas.
Make the pavement 24" - maybe more depending on truck traffic we are going to allow - of good concrete versus ANY pavement of assfault. BUILD the road - don't slobber some gravel and oil on the ground just to get by cheap for a while.
Adopt any and all European traffic control ideas that we don't already do.
Or do what the rest of the 'civilized', 'modern' world has started doing - better ways to move both people and goods that allow the possibility of disassociation with "one car/one rider". Not to mention massive increases in efficiency and better use of available resources. One gallon, one ton, 450 miles.
Short sidetrack - just because;
And for those who decry illegal immigration on the one hand, and then use that as the excuse for inaction, mouthing platitudes about how great we are because "everyone wants to come here...". Well, blah blah blah blah blah. Oh,...and did I mention 'blah'?? If other countries were as convenient as a walk, they would (and are in actuality) go there. And how do they explain the "mass exodus" of people renouncing their citizenship??
I returned from a cross country trip two weeks ago. Drove from here to Virginia Beach, up to NYC, up through Boston, into Maine, across Maine into New Brunswick, Halifax Nova Scotia, then back through Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, through Niagara Falls, down through Ohio, through Indiana, Missouri and back home. During that entire trip the roads were good from the time we left Oklahoma until we returned back to this state. The only poor roads we ran into was I-70 East of Indianapolis and that waswas being repaired. Even the county roads in backwoods nowhere Maine were better than our highways here.
I think the problem in Oklahoma with our roads is a deadly combination of cronyism and poor construction standards/methods.
Quote from: saintnicster on September 18, 2014, 09:11:53 AM
They say "Spring 2015" as the full completion date of the project on most of the articles I've seen. Also, from the last article posted, it said this -
New bridge is fully open, along with the US64 eastbound ramp and 7th Street/Downtown ramps (when coming from the South). It'll take some time to open up the rest of the lanes, [especially when you only work some 5 or 6 hours a day, 4-5 days a week. That's also when it's completely sunny outside.(only being semi facetious with the last two statements)]
The motto? Oklahoma Department of Transportation/Manhattan Bridge and Road - Inconveniencing as many people for as long as possible.
It's just the pedestrian element that will not be completed until Spring 2015. The rest basically done except eliminating the reroutes on 75 and 51.
Quote from: Ibanez on September 18, 2014, 10:39:36 AM
I think the problem in Oklahoma with our roads is a deadly combination of cronyism and poor construction standards/methods.
When "you" have substandard specs, "you" get substandard products.
When you allow grossly overweight trucks to drive on the highways, they cause damage. When was the last time you saw a weigh station open? Right, as soon as you crossed the border OUT of Oklahoma.
Quote from: TeeDub on September 18, 2014, 02:00:26 PM
When you allow grossly overweight trucks to drive on the highways, they cause damage. When was the last time you saw a weigh station open? Right, as soon as you crossed the border OUT of Oklahoma.
It is a shame we don't have active weigh stations here. Oklahoma is really the only state I have ever noticed them closed permanently in. Illinois and Indiana are quite the opposite of Oklahoma in that they are downright militant about trucks being weighed. I once happened to be behind a tandem trailer truck as it blew by a weigh station in Indiana. The State Police were not amused....
Quote from: Ibanez on September 18, 2014, 10:39:36 AM
I returned from a cross country trip two weeks ago. Drove from here to Virginia Beach, up to NYC, up through Boston, into Maine, across Maine into New Brunswick, Halifax Nova Scotia, then back through Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, through Niagara Falls, down through Ohio, through Indiana, Missouri and back home. During that entire trip the roads were good from the time we left Oklahoma until we returned back to this state. The only poor roads we ran into was I-70 East of Indianapolis and that waswas being repaired. Even the county roads in backwoods nowhere Maine were better than our highways here.
I think the problem in Oklahoma with our roads is a deadly combination of cronyism and poor construction standards/methods.
Maine has some fantastic 2 lane roads, too.
I-40 east through Arkansas has a lot of construction going on. Nashville has just cleared up a lot of their I-40 work since May - went through then and a couple weeks ago. A certain amount of that good versus poor is in relation to how poor OK really is....the others have issues, but they almost pale in comparison to OK.
You don't mention the traffic - the OTHER part of the overall problem. Can't speak to every one, but the ones I travel on a fairly regular basis are insanity cubed for traffic. I's; 40, 30, 20, 10, 70, 75, 35, 39, 94, 64, 49, 25, 17, and 15. 80 and 90 usually are reasonable but sometimes trucks get piled up with a bunch of cars and slows everything down. Plus city loop versions. The only one that is not stupidly overburdened I have been on lately is 840 around Nashville - and it is busier every time I get through there.
Did you get the thrill of I-95 N going east across the bridge (GW)? Don't ya just love the way the trucks have scraped/gouged chunks out of the ceiling where it crosses Manhattan? The footings of the buildings above you....
No, we actually crossed into Manhattan from Hoboken. 78 I believe.
We had gone to Gettysburg and then North from there through Allentown, cause the wife wanted to go through there to see what Billy Joel was singing about.
I really didn't notice 40 being that bad. There were a couple of spots between Little Rock and Memphis where work was going on, but nothing terrible. Traffic wasn't bad at all, there had been an accident East of Knoxville that slowed things down a bit. The worst traffic on the whole trip, Manhattan included, was in Toronto. Good lord that place has traffic issues!
As of this weekend, all of the main exits on the IDL are operational again. There's still some closed/detour signage up (as of Sunday), but you can drive through.
Now to hoping that people remember how to actually navigate the Northwest Corner of the IDL, going westbound on 244.
Quote from: saintnicster on September 29, 2014, 09:07:06 AM
As of this weekend, all of the main exits on the IDL are operational again. There's still some closed/detour signage up (as of Sunday), but you can drive through.
Now to hoping that people remember how to actually navigate the Northwest Corner of the IDL, going westbound on 244.
If people would pay attention to the painted placards on the roadway, it wouldn't be so damned difficult.
It's too bad that we didnt take the opportunity to fix the US75 to I244 interchange at 1st St while we were "re-habbing" the IDL. In all directions there is insufficent merge lane length, the interchange is not intuitive and there are consistant backups especially US75 South to I244 westbound
Quote from: Hoss on September 29, 2014, 09:10:17 AM
If people would pay attention to the painted placards on the roadway, it wouldn't be so damned difficult.
That's difficult to do when talking on the phone, drinking coffee, and adjusting makeup.
Quote from: Hoss on September 29, 2014, 09:10:17 AM
If people would pay attention to the painted placards on the roadway, it wouldn't be so damned difficult.
When I was driving home, it seemed more of a shell shock type of thing.
OH GOD, WHERE ARE THE CONES?! THEY TOLD ME WHERE TO GO! *merges lanes without checking blind spots*
YOU MEAN I CAN STILL GO 65 ON THIS TURN? WHEEEEEEEEEE
Quote from: carltonplace on September 29, 2014, 09:44:33 AM
It's too bad that we didnt take the opportunity to fix the US75 to I244 interchange at 1st St while we were "re-habbing" the IDL. In all directions there is insufficent merge lane length, the interchange is not intuitive and there are consistant backups especially US75 South to I244 westbound
and the signage sucks
no mention of HWY 51 / BA-expressway (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1602774,-95.9837653,3a,75y,88.71h,74.51t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVdfrDtmOypR_2TGaVcXNnw!2e0)
Exit 6B signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1605807,-95.985771,3a,75y,88.71h,74.51t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sksNgd-dqJ9uxuVxn-yX3lQ!2e0)
send HWY-51 traffic on a detour without adequate signage to begin with.
Quote from: BKDotCom on September 29, 2014, 12:32:03 PM
and the signage sucks
no mention of HWY 51 / BA-expressway (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1602774,-95.9837653,3a,75y,88.71h,74.51t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVdfrDtmOypR_2TGaVcXNnw!2e0)
HWY51/BA traffic is directed to go the other way around the IDL, when construction isn't currently happening.
Quote from: sgrizzle on September 29, 2014, 07:33:33 PM
HWY51/BA traffic is directed to go the other way around the IDL, when construction isn't currently happening.
Which assumes 2 things:
a) no construction
b) your not starting downtown and are wanting to bypass downtown
Hypothetical: I'm downtown in the Brady district or Driller's game and would like to get home (41st & Harvard).
There are 6 or 8ish onramps to the IDL from downtown.
- * take 244 E on N Detroit seems the obvious answer.. if I'm a local and know to take the Okmulgee exit (that has "closed" plastered over it)
- * Cincinnati all the way across downtown and either get on from Cincinnati or 8th St (both signs say hwy-51 / BA)
- * The confusing head west 1st street onramp and go counter-clockwise thing
- * Cheyenne to the 13th street onramp (marked as hwy-51 / BA)
- * 13th and Denver (marked as hyw-51 / BA)