The state is getting $465 million for highways. (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090202_11_0_OKLAHO289848%22)
I wonder what specific projects this will cover and how much Tulsa will get?
quote:
OOKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Department of Transportation estimates that the state will receive some $465 million for highway transportation projects once the federal government passes an economic stimulus package, officials said Monday.
The highway improvements package awarded to the state is expected to create about 15,000 private-sector jobs, said Gary Ridley, ODOT director.
Ridley said, however, that the expected package, which Congress is debating this week, was far less than what department officials had wanted.
In recent months, department staff members and engineering consultants identified 180 highway transportation projects across the state. The 180 projects totalled $1.1 billion and were pulled from the transportation department's eight-year plan.
"We were a little disappointed," said Ridley about Oklahoma's expected portion.
Of the expected $465 million the state would receive, about $340 million would likely be set aside for projects on ODOT-maintained roads. The estimated remaining $125 million would fund highway projects for individual cities, counties or municipal groups, such as INCOG.
Ridley said the state also expects an additional $33 million for public transportation projects.
Although the Department of Transportation has yet to select what projects will go forward under money given by the stimulus plan, Ridley said projects could include rehabilitating 53 bridges on Tulsa's Interdispersal Loop alone.
The loop is made up of Interstate 244, Interstate 44 and U.S. Highway 75.
Such transportation projects, as well as similar ones in other states, could provide a boom for steel factories, cement kilns and asphalt mills, some of which are located in Oklahoma and have been struggling financially in recent months.
"The good thing about highway projects is you can't outsource that to another country," Ridley said.
Ridley said ODOT would put the bulk of the money to immediate use by moving on $300 million-worth of projects in March.
The transportation department is able to start so quickly because it began planning for a possible stimulus award several months ago when it hired nine consulting engineering firms to help staff members identify potential projects.
As a result, Ridley said Oklahoma is likely ahead of many states.
"We are extremely pleased that we will be ready for almost any amount of money that might come," he said.
The Oklahoma Transportation Commission will hold a special meeting in late March to further discuss the stimulus award.
Each direction of the IDL that crosses a surface street is two bridges. Then there are the flyover offramps and the numerous bridges for surface streets which cross over the IDL.
While I wouldn't have guessed 53, I would have guessed there were over 35 and am not at all surprised by that number.
IDL has lots of bridges!
(http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2833/clusterfcknc3.jpg)
Hopefully, the Senate will include the provisions passed in the House version of the stimulus bill that requires all employers who receive stimulus money to use the e-verify system for all their employees, so that this bill helps American workers as intended, not illegal aliens.
A story that ran prior to the bill creation was that ODOT's list was pretty heavy towards Tulsa, so this could be good for us.
$465,000,0000 for highways. Good deal.
$300,000,000 for OKC to gold leaf over passes.
$150,000,000 for rural Oklahoma for bridges to be able to support tractors.
$15,000,000 for Tulsa so some of the downtown bridges can be reopened to support pedestrians again.
[;)]
/Will have to wait and see. I hope our contingent gets its act together sooner rather than later.
Looks like the IDL is getting a facelift after all:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090212_16_A1_WASHIN963956
quote:
Federal funding to go to Inner Dispersal Loop
by: JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
Thursday, February 12, 2009
2/12/2009 2:49:39 AM
WASHINGTON — Work on Tulsa's Inner Dispersal Loop, viewed as one of the roughest rides in the city, will be among state road projects funded by a massive economic package in Congress, a state official said Wednesday.
Oklahoma Department of Transportation Director Gary Ridley said the huge project, the price tag for which is around $120 million, was designed so it would not have to be done all at once.
Ridley spoke of adding parts of it to an upcoming state list shortly after learning lawmakers had reached a deal on the economic package.
If the funding in the final package remains close to what is expected, he said, the Tulsa work will be put on his agency's project list for March.
Surrounding the downtown business district, the loop is made up of Interstate 244, U.S. 75 and Interstate 444 and includes about 50 bridges.
"It is very bad,'' Ridley said when asked about its current shape.
Conferees announced Wednesday that an agreement has been reached on the differences between the House and Senate versions of the economic package of spending and tax relief designed to spur the nation's ailing economy.
That agreement reportedly cut the total cost of both versions, but it is possible the transportation funds remained close to the levels passed by both chambers.
Still, ODOT's portion is not expected to come close to funding the roughly $1 billion in state projects that could qualify for the time-sensitive funds.
Ridley said that list was being pared using a process to ensure that the projects are critical and an equitable distribution of funds across the state is achieved.
As lawmakers continued working on the bill Wednesday, President Barack Obama and his administration were putting the big push on transportation and other infrastructure spending in the proposal.
Obama visited a construction site in Fairfax County, Va., just outside Washington.
"We're here today because there's a lot of work that needs to be done on our nation's congested roads and highways, crumbling bridges and levees, and crowded trains and transit systems,'' he said.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood met with Ridley and state transportation from across the nation.
Ridley said he assured LaHood that ODOT is well-positioned to move forward with stimulus funding as soon as Congress passes the bill and Obama signs it into law.
"In addition, we were assured that the Federal Highway Administration will work with states to expedite its processes while following necessary requirements,'' he said.
great news, it needs it. i do hope there is complete redesign of at least 3 of the interchanges instead of just a thin layer of blacktop.
How many of these bridges should be removed without being replaced?
I vote on
- 2nd St Exit (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15256,-95.999168&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - With the BOK center now placed firmly in the middle of 2nd street, 2nd street is no longer an artery. Instead of a big ol exit ramp over the highway and train tracks, just exit onto Nogales / Charles Page Blvd...
- 12th St over US-75 (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144754,-95.994898&spn=0.007719,0.010203&z=17%22) - It's a long 4 lane bridge with squat traffic. Just use 11th or 13th St.
- 3rd Street (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15599,-95.979996&spn=0.007259,0.010579&z=17%22) - Again, not much traffic over here.. Do we really need two bridges a block apart.. With 3rd street being west-only... and already splits over to 4th street @ Owasso Ave... Just use 4th Street (or 6th)
- Ramps from S-bound 444 to E-bound Broken Arrow (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144286,-95.978998&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - This has never made sense to me.. There are 2 long ramps here that merge into one. You can exit left, or exit right...
Sure, there would be expense involved in changing things up, but certainly not the cost of replacing/repairing/maintaining unnecessary bridges.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
How many of these bridges should be removed without being replaced?
I vote on- 2nd St Exit (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15256,-95.999168&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - With the BOK center now placed firmly in the middle of 2nd street, 2nd street is no longer an artery. Instead of a big ol exit ramp over the highway and train tracks, just exit onto Nogales / Charles Page Blvd...
- 12th St over US-75 (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144754,-95.994898&spn=0.007719,0.010203&z=17%22) - It's a long 4 lane bridge with squat traffic. Just use 11th or 13th St.
- 3rd Street (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15599,-95.979996&spn=0.007259,0.010579&z=17%22) - Again, not much traffic over here.. Do we really need two bridges a block apart.. With 3rd street being west-only... and already splits over to 4th street @ Owasso Ave... Just use 4th Street (or 6th)
- Ramps from S-bound 444 to E-bound Broken Arrow (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144286,-95.978998&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - This has never made sense to me.. There are 2 long ramps here that merge into one. You can exit left, or exit right...
Sure, there would be expense involved in changing things up, but certainly not the cost of replacing/repairing/maintaining unnecessary bridges.
The last thing we want to do is make the highway even more of a barrier.
Here's a cost-saving measure...get rid of part of downtown's expressway choke-collar.
There doesn't appear to be any real reason to have Hwy 75 bewteen I-244 and the Broken Arrow Expressway. Anyone who needs to go north can do it in another mile on the west side of town.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/3311980547_272564681d.jpg?v=0)
not a good idea if you want folks from SE Tulsa/BA to go downtown/blue dome/ballpark/brady... replace I-444 with a ground level road with a speed limit of 45-50mph, 4 lanes with a middle turn lane?... call it "Pearl Drive" or "Pearl Parkway" and you got yourselves a deal.....
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
How many of these bridges should be removed without being replaced?
I vote on- 2nd St Exit (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15256,-95.999168&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - With the BOK center now placed firmly in the middle of 2nd street, 2nd street is no longer an artery. Instead of a big ol exit ramp over the highway and train tracks, just exit onto Nogales / Charles Page Blvd...
- 12th St over US-75 (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144754,-95.994898&spn=0.007719,0.010203&z=17%22) - It's a long 4 lane bridge with squat traffic. Just use 11th or 13th St.
- 3rd Street (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.15599,-95.979996&spn=0.007259,0.010579&z=17%22) - Again, not much traffic over here.. Do we really need two bridges a block apart.. With 3rd street being west-only... and already splits over to 4th street @ Owasso Ave... Just use 4th Street (or 6th)
- Ramps from S-bound 444 to E-bound Broken Arrow (//%22http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=62.572465,83.583984&ie=UTF8&ll=36.144286,-95.978998&spn=0.00726,0.010579&z=17%22) - This has never made sense to me.. There are 2 long ramps here that merge into one. You can exit left, or exit right...
Sure, there would be expense involved in changing things up, but certainly not the cost of replacing/repairing/maintaining unnecessary bridges.
The last thing we want to do is make the highway even more of a barrier.
How does the removal of any of those create more of a barrier? Maaaybe the 3rd street one... the ba-exchange one definitely not.. the exit ramp to 2nd street if anything helps the west side... rather than empty into the inside of the IDL, my proposal is to exit on the outside... the 12 street bridge.. sorta runs parallel... it's a waste
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
not a good idea if you want folks from SE Tulsa/BA to go downtown/blue dome/ballpark/brady... replace I-444 with a ground level road with a speed limit of 45-50mph, 4 lanes with a middle turn lane?... call it "Pearl Drive" or "Pearl Parkway" and you got yourselves a deal.....
I go downtown on the BA all the time from my house and go to the Brady and Blue Dome areas. I always take the Detroit exit. I have never once in my life gone on that section of highway. Removing that section would be an incredible idea imo.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
not a good idea if you want folks from SE Tulsa/BA to go downtown/blue dome/ballpark/brady... replace I-444 with a ground level road with a speed limit of 45-50mph, 4 lanes with a middle turn lane?... call it "Pearl Drive" or "Pearl Parkway" and you got yourselves a deal.....
I go downtown on the BA all the time from my house and go to the Brady and Blue Dome areas. I always take the Detroit exit. I have never once in my life gone on that section of highway. Removing that section would be an incredible idea imo.
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
I'm sure there are quite a few people who use that segment of road to get from the BA to US-75, given that I see quite a bit of traffic on it every time I drive that way. (which is rarely, in my case, but I don't work in Bartlesville)
We'd be better off removing the west side of the IDL, but even that would be silly. Sadly, absent major realignment of several roadways, you can't really do a lot to the IDL. It would be nice to cap parts of the road where it makes sense, like they did in Columbus. Basically widen some of the bridges on the major thoroughfares and put buildings on them so as to create the illusion of better connectivity.
Obviously that would only work on the parts where the highway is below grade.
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
not a good idea if you want folks from SE Tulsa/BA to go downtown/blue dome/ballpark/brady... replace I-444 with a ground level road with a speed limit of 45-50mph, 4 lanes with a middle turn lane?... call it "Pearl Drive" or "Pearl Parkway" and you got yourselves a deal.....
I go downtown on the BA all the time from my house and go to the Brady and Blue Dome areas. I always take the Detroit exit. I have never once in my life gone on that section of highway. Removing that section would be an incredible idea imo.
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
I know sometimes you got to do what you got to do, but I am sure Bartlesville wouldn't mind having another resident. Thats not a good commute cost wise, environmentally or time wise. We cant make everyone happy with any change we make, but putting a damper on those types of commute scenarios may be a good thing in disguise.
However, I think its highly unlikely we are going to remove the IDL anyway, so will have to make the best of it. Once the Pearl District and downtown get moving, the IDL in that area wont be that big of a concern. I have seen some ideas for turning the open areas around the IDL into parks of different sorts. Placing some gateway elements, on the 6th street overpass for instance, would be nice. Some artwork in places along it, etc. Instead of just a physical and psychological barrier to certain areas, make it an interesting and entertaining feature. I think I have heard ideas like the one mentioned above, where you can add buildings to either side of a bridge in an area or two, actually being considered. Over time with some creative thinking you can limit the negative impact of the IDL, and turn "lemons into lemonade".
if this is the 'inner loop'
where's the outer one?
quote:
Originally posted by grahambino
if this is the 'inner loop'
where's the outer one?
Its more like an outer dispersal square.
(http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1690/tulsamap02a.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
I'm sure there are quite a few people who use that segment of road to get from the BA to US-75, given that I see quite a bit of traffic on it every time I drive that way. (which is rarely, in my case, but I don't work in Bartlesville)
We'd be better off removing the west side of the IDL, but even that would be silly. Sadly, absent major realignment of several roadways, you can't really do a lot to the IDL. It would be nice to cap parts of the road where it makes sense, like they did in Columbus. Basically widen some of the bridges on the major thoroughfares and put buildings on them so as to create the illusion of better connectivity.
Obviously that would only work on the parts where the highway is below grade.
I think if Tulsa would have been a little more 'forward-thinking', they would have done something like Houston did with its downtown hub. I lived there for almost four years and the Pierce Elevated section of I-45 was one of the most interesting pieces of highway construction I ever saw. It essentially leaves the surface roads intact but puts the freeway up on pillars about 20 feet above grade. In essence, it never made it feel like downtown Houston was cutoff from the surrounding neighborhoods.
Problem with that is it's a maintenance nightmare.
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
Remember: downtown is really only a little more than one mile square.
It's bizarre that someone ever thought highway traffic needed a one-mile "loop" around our downtown. And the devestation that was wrecked on some of our most irreplaceable real estate is one of the tragedies of Tulsa history.
Most "loops" are designed as bypasses...such as I-270 that's about 15-20 miles outside downtown St. Louis, or I-470 around Denver that's about the same distance from the city core.
Eliminating the Hwy 75 leg from the eastern side of the IDL adds, what, 2 miles to the drive of someone going from the BA Expressway to Bartlesville?
Besides, since Hwy 75 comes from Okmulgee, it already merges with I-244 just SW of downtown. Why cross over onto the BA at all? It should just follow I-244 on up the west side until it intersects with 75 north of downtown.
From an aesthetic and emotional perspective, I would much prefer to remove I-244 from the west and north sides of downtown. But I'm not sure how easy that would be. From looking at the map, Hwy 75 on the east of downtown is the most redundant and unneccesary leg of the IDL.
I wish they'd go ahead and mark I-444. It's one of the shortest interstates in existence, and one of the few that are "unmarked".
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I wish they'd go ahead and mark I-444. It's one of the shortest interstates in existence, and one of the few that are "unmarked".
I was told that the Creek is officially an interstate, but one without a number.
quote:
Originally posted by bugo
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I wish they'd go ahead and mark I-444. It's one of the shortest interstates in existence, and one of the few that are "unmarked".
I was told that the Creek is officially an interstate, but one without a number.
A few years ago, there was kind of a theoretical mention that the Creek could become I-644, if it ever became an interstate. And since it's not designated anything, that would be possible. Don't think it's happened yet.
Here's a list of "unsigned interstates". unsigned = without signage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsigned_auxiliary_Interstate_Highways
Don't know how current it is. All 3-digit interstates are "auxiliary".
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
I would think that the people who work in B'Ville (Uncle Frank) and live along the BA as a main transitway to that destination might have something to say about that, since that section of the IDL directly hooks up with US 75.
Remember: downtown is really only a little more than one mile square.
It's bizarre that someone ever thought highway traffic needed a one-mile "loop" around our downtown. And the devestation that was wrecked on some of our most irreplaceable real estate is one of the tragedies of Tulsa history.
If we were building the highways today, I would agree that it probably shouldn't be built the way it is.
However, it's pretty common for downtowns to have a close in ring of highways. Columbus has one (OH-315, I-71/70, and I-670). Their setup is actually very similar to what we have in Tulsa, aside from the one leg on ours petering out a couple miles north. They've been quite successful at revitalization through exactly the efforts being made here in Tulsa. That's why I like them as an example to follow, at least in some ways.
One question, though. At the time the IDL was designed, was downtown just much more congested or what? Otherwise why would access be needed from all sides? Or was it just the "highways = good" mentality causing overbuilding?
Bates had a very good article on highways/streets a couple years ago. It's pretty much dead-on.
http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A18221
Lack of radial streets, that's probably the biggest historic planning deficiency for Tulsa. Couple that with historically available highway funds, Tulsa's highways became what they are today.
I've felt for a long time, if you could demo the eastern or southern leg of the IDL, the "city" would come back to "downtown". A lot of the surface parking would dry up.