What good is I-244 in West Tulsa?

[YoungTulsan]

Yes, Tulsa needs I-244 to help move traffic across town.  The Crosstown expressway handles a lot of traffic every day.  But the leg in West Tulsa seems like it could be done away with.  West Tulsa is cut to pieces by highways and thus cannot get any growth momentum going.  I-44, US-75 are bad enough.  But the leg of I-244 that goes from 75 to 44 is just redundant.   It needlessly cuts off neighborhoods and takes up a ton of space that would be valueable if a big highway was not there.

When I think about it, why do we have I-244 in the first place?  Every stretch of it aside from this redundant leg in West Tulsa, is already another highway.  US 412, then US 75, then the 2 mile stretch in question is the only standalone part.

So the only purpose of 244 is that we get federal monies to maintain what would have been 412 and 75?

So maybe if we tore down that leg of 244, we could add lanes to 44 and 75 for the 2 miles or so that would be taking on that little bit of extra traffic, and calling it "244" once it breaks off of 44, keeping the federal money.

If we got rid of I-244 altogether, would we be able to re-allocate 244's money into 44, or would we just lose it altogether (Which may be an incentive to keep 244 even if it means nothing).

The reason I'm jumping to such crazy questions is that I think there is great development potential where the highway currently sits.  If you got rid of it, you would free up a bunch of land.  You could re-do Southwest Boulevard into a nice roadway with lots of development potential.  41st street could be re-done into a major thoroughfare from Brookside to Prattville.  Right now the 41st street bridge idea is hampered by the clusterf*** that consists of I-244, Southwest Boulevard, 25th West Avenue, 41st street, and train tracks all intersecting at one insane spot.

In other words, I think getting rid of that highway leg could do more for West Tulsa than anything short of tearing down the refineries and building a Riverside West.  It would join the existing neighborhoods in addition to allowing for SW Blvd development and 41st street expansion.

Here is a giant image (sorry for the size but I liked this zoom level)

[Rico]

Here is a small item you might wish to pencil in on your map....


The local expressway system plan was originally developed in the 1950s. While it was designed as a
regional network, the City later annexed most of the area it served. The plan shows 107 miles of
expressways inside the city limits and/or annexation fence line. To date, 94 miles have been constructed.
Two segments of the expressway system remain incomplete. The Tisdale Parkway from 36th to 66th
Streets North and the Gilcrease expressway extending from Lewis Avenue west and south to I-44
(approximately 51st Street). The Gilcrease project has been defined in segments: Gilcrease North - U.S.
75 west to the Tisdale Parkway, Gilcrease West - Edison Street to I-44, and Gilcrease Northwest - Tisdale
Parkway to Edison Street. Right-of-way acquisition and utility relocation are complete for Gilcrease North
and construction is continuing. Gilcrease West has been approved for funding of engineering and a
portion of the right-of-way acquisition. The environmental clearance has been granted for that segment
extending south of Edison Street to I-44. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued in
October of 2005 for the Gilcrease Northwest segment. The City of Tulsa is working with the Oklahoma
Department of Transportation on the selection of a consultant for the design of this segment.

[Conan71]

YT- do you live or work in the area?

I take Hwy 75 S. to the West 41st St. Exit every day.  The 244 loop takes pressure off the 75 & 44 interchange, which IMO, is a fairly dangerous merge from the exit ramp to service road along I-44, and during rush hour the cloverleaf from 44 onto 75 N. is fairly dicey.

It's almost like saying the Creek Turnpike is worthless.  It serves a good purpose, though they aren't as heavily traveled as other roads.

[YoungTulsan]

Whats your point?  The Gilcrease starts at the very edge of my map at the lower left corner.  An incomplete 1 mile section of it runs from 51st to 41st just west of 49th W Ave. which is off the map I put up.

If the Gilcrease loop was completed it would just make that leg of 244 even more useless.

[YoungTulsan]

Conan, I have worked in the area.  I do agree that the cloverleaf doesnt flow as smoothly.  How much traffic actually uses 244 tho?   The only place I could see a potential bottleneck would be Eastbound 44 trying to go north on 75 (which requires a 270 degree loop) - But does that particular ramp get backed up as it is?  I mainly see problems with Westbound 44 trying to get on Southbound 75.  Southbound 75 to Westbound 44 isn't a hard turn to make so that wouldnt be an issue.

I'd also like to see SW Blvd turned into a street more local traffic would use instead of avoiding West Tulsa by riding the highways.

How does what I said equate to calling the Creek Turnpike worthless?  It was built mainly through uninhabited countryland.  244 dissects some old communities.

Of course I just think about this stuff when I'm bored.  I'm not saying I'm an expert and the masses should rally to make it happen

[Conan71]

That was the cry for a long time about the Creek Turnpike- no one would use it.  For the first few years, it really was under-utilized.  It's still nowhere near capacity but it serves a purpose and does bisect some existing and lots of future development.

I think 244 serves a better use than the Tisdale at least.  That merge onto the I-44 service road heading west off 75 S scares the bejeezus out of me.  I think there would be some back-ups at the 44 interchange w/o the 244 loop.  I'm sure the ODOT does periodic traffic surveys in the area if you want to look up the numbers.

I'd kind of like to hear what RWarn and TulsaMini think about it since they are residents, in re: development in place of the highway.

[YoungTulsan]

The merge you are talking about could be solved by a little bit of design change there tho.  Lengthen or widen the lane, maybe move the 51st/Union access a little further down than where it is now (Waco).  There are quite a few death traps along that stretch of 44.  But 44 will always be there.  I wonder if they have plans for West Tulsa after widening to the river?

[dbacks fan]

YT, this will help explain some of the reasons for I-244

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

[YoungTulsan]

Now why did you have to go and link me to wikipedia?  I keep clicking on more stuff and suddenly 2 hours have passed

Now I'm reading about the NAFTA superhighway.  Crazy stuff.

[sgrizzle]

I would almost like to see more traffic sent down 244 to 75. I-44 and 75 won't be upgraded until about the time I retire.

[RLitterell]

I always thought it was redundant as well, however it does serve the folks in the Carbondale/Chrystal city area. When I was a young boy my father had to sell 1/2 of our backyard for it's construction. We lived on the bluff behind Chrystal City. There was a Creek down there and the area was wooded, I used to love to play down in that Creek.

[grahambino]

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/aadtcnt/

oklahoma traffic counts.

[rwarn17588]

It's an interesting question that Young Tulsa brings up, and it was one I didn't dismiss entirely -- at first.

However, the recent announcement of Lookout Mountain Estates signals to me that Red Fork and the surrounding area are going to become hotter properties, and removing I-244 would dampen such development, not help it.

Having studied Route 66's history for years, I can tell you that economic development springs up where good, fast roads exist, not where good, fast roads are removed. If there are exceptions, I'd like to hear them.

Sure, it'd be nice to have Southwest Boulevard improved. But other than resurfacing, what else would you do? It's already a four-lane road with a center turn lane.

And, as others have mentioned, U.S. 75 is busy enough without factoring in the removal of an adjacent interstate. According to traffic counts, U.S. 75 gets 50,000 vehicles a day. Removing I-244 would add many thousands more to an already-clogged artery that almost certainly will become busier in the coming years (Tulsa Hills, anyone?). And do you really want all those big trucks coming and going from the refineries added to U.S. 75?

Removing I-244 sounds good in theory, but I'm almost certain it would spell failure for the surrounding community and add a lot of heartache for travelers on 75.

[Conan71]

Ladies & Gentlemen, the King Of Redfork has spoken. []

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588


And, as others have mentioned, U.S. 75 is busy enough without factoring in the removal of an adjacent interstate. According to traffic counts, U.S. 75 gets 50,000 vehicles a day. Removing I-244 would add many thousands more to an already-clogged artery that almost certainly will become busier in the coming years (Tulsa Hills, anyone?). And do you really want all those big trucks coming and going from the refineries added to U.S. 75?

Rwarn, just checking two things. I've looked at google maps and I75 is two or three lanes in both directions. Is this right?

I was also wondering where you got the average daily traffic counts from. Is it avaliable online, I really wouldn't mind having a look at the flows.

If the road was two lanes had 50,000 daily trips it would be operating at 133% of its capacity and thats using standards that the ODOT would find conservative. Thats a lot of trips to be diverted onto other roads.

Having said that I think Young Tulsan has a point. I think that the over supply of roads can hold an area back. They do cause huge amounts of division within an area.