Author Topic: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)  (Read 12064 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Last Login:November 11, 2024, 12:50:03 pm
  • I like C++
Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« on: November 19, 2020, 04:09:01 pm »
Norman Spur Turnpike and Stillwater Connection are made-up names that IIRC came from a hobbyist site back in the day.

https://www.pikepass.com/about/FAQs.aspx
Looks like, more properly, HEBaiTpkSprNor / H.E. Bailey Turnpike Spur (Norman) and CimTpkSprSti / Cimarron Turnpike Spur (Stillwater) are better names.

Any objections or comments before I make the change? (I'll use AltLabels of course, so no .lists will be broken.)
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3301
  • Last Login:Today at 07:09:34 am
Re: OK turnpike route names
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2021, 12:43:15 pm »
I am in agreement with these changes.

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1018
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 08:57:54 pm
Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2021, 07:14:22 pm »
Somewhat in line with usanyp and usakyp, Oklahoma Turnpikes represent a coherent system that contains enough distinct routes to be worth calling out categorically.

This would be a relatively low lift as most of what would need to be included is already mapped one way or another. Easy list to be found here, though it doesn't call out the two spurs independently, nor does it call out the fact that three of those turnpikes each exist in two separate sections.

Looks like we would have:
- 5 routes that are 1:1 with existing mapped routes (all can just be moved from usasf)
- 10 routes that are part of existing mapped routes (4 as parts of I-44, 2 as parts of US 412, 2 as parts of OK 351, 2 as parts of OK 364)
- 1 route that would need to be newly mapped (Chickasaw Turnpike)


I'm willing to go ahead and do this, though yakra has right of first refusal since OK is currently his.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2021, 07:30:43 pm by Duke87 »

Online Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2856
  • Last Login:Today at 06:01:16 pm
Re: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2021, 08:21:11 pm »
I generally like things that reduce the size of/need for our grab bag systems, which this would do, but I really don't have a strong preference one way or the other on this idea.

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Last Login:November 11, 2024, 12:50:03 pm
  • I like C++
Re: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2021, 01:37:43 am »
Somewhat in line with usanyp and usakyp, Oklahoma Turnpikes represent a coherent system that contains enough distinct routes to be worth calling out categorically.
Such was the argument when usakyp was created.

- 1 route that would need to be newly mapped (Chickasaw Turnpike)
I liked that it would allow ChiTpk to be included, even if such is (a bit circularly) only justified as part of usaokt.

I generally like things that reduce the size of/need for our grab bag systems, which this would do, but I really don't have a strong preference one way or the other on this idea.
I interpret this as meaning usaokt would be a non-grab-bag system reducing the size of usasf.
I'm in favor -- just never felt strongly enough in favor to ever go ahead and do it.

- 10 routes that are part of existing mapped routes (4 as parts of I-44, 2 as parts of US 412, 2 as parts of OK 351, 2 as parts of OK 364)
Having parent routes in the HB would relieve (somewhat) the awkwardness of having HEBaiTpkSprNor and CimTpkSprSti (topic merged; see above) in the HB without plain HEBaiTpk and CimTpk (more clearly in line with the manual) to justify them.

This highlights 2 manual items in need of clarification:
Abbreviating Route names in CSVs the same way waypoint labels are abbreviated, which has been SOP since CHM.
Labels that match a .list entry name or name_no_abbrev that otherwise run afoul of truncation rules.

Elsewhere, I started taking a look at using exit numbers on US 64 & 412, and kept `em no-build after going down a rabbit-hole.

This leads to a couple more gray areas:
• With other toll freeways in the HB, we can sidestep the multiple exit sequences + intersections issue, with less pressure to name a waypoint after an intersecting US route only.
• We'll still have to resolve the Exit numbers from NAMED concurrent route issue though.
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca



Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Last Login:November 11, 2024, 12:50:03 pm
  • I like C++
Re: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2021, 02:01:27 pm »
Does this include duplication of those covered by Interstates (like Turner, Bailey and Will Rogers) and US Routes?
The intent there was just to list all the gifs at that one page for reference purposes...
Nailing down termini, and making sense of mileage figures listed here (@Q#5) when subtracting out mileage for free segments.

Yes, routes that would be duplicated (including the 3 you cited) are in that list, and covered in Reply #2 (what I consider to be "the real OP" in this thread).

Started drafting another longer response to this thread, and when looking at it & putting the info together, it caused me to sour on this system a bit.

What sets it apart from usanyp & usakyp is that those systems largely don't duplicate other active/preview systems; they're their own things, helping us include routes that wouldn't otherwise be included.
usanyp gets us a handful of routes that didn't make the cut for usasf.
usakyp got us the Hal Rogers Parkway, which came without the burden of duplicating a lot of routes already in the system.
This system does come with that complication though.
I was willing to overlook a few duplications at first, but digging more into it...
Splitting up into 2 segments for the H.E. Bailey & Muskogee gets a bit ugly IMO, starting to tip the scales over into too-much-clutter territory.
Plus I see some potential for confusion -- "Why does this route X? Why doesn't this route Y?", etc.

It could be that the clutter and duplication outweigh the small benefit of being able to add in the Chickasaw Turnpike.

Thoughts?
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Last Login:November 11, 2024, 12:50:03 pm
  • I like C++
Re: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #8 on: May 05, 2021, 02:03:40 pm »
Easy list to be found here, though it doesn't call out the two spurs independently
https://www.pikepass.com/about/FAQs.aspx
Click on 5. How many turnpikes are on the turnpike system?
This lists the 2 spurs, and also an additional pike not on the Toll Rates list: the Gilcrease Expressway. So that's OTA jurisdiction, is it? Righto.
https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/ota/documents/other/5%20Year%20Capital%20Plan.pdf has 19 occurrences of "Gilcrease".

Some of the descriptions & mileages need a little unraveling...

Quote
Turner Turnpike, 86.0 miles in length, connecting Oklahoma City with Tulsa.
If I divide WPTedit's 87.80 mi at (@ 221) by the CHM fudge factor of 1.02112, I get 85.98 mi. OK, sounds like 86.0 to me! Moving on...
221 looks like the right endpoint per the map linked above. It's also where OSM shows the changeover to Skelly Bypass.

Quote
Will Rogers Turnpike, 88.5 miles in length, extends from Tulsa to the Oklahoma-Missouri state line.
Within range of the fudge factor. Looks good.
Oddly, this section of I-44 has ONE EXIT not fitting the I-44 mileposts for whatever reason (Thanks, Oklahoma), labeled 35(WRT).
So I guess that would mean WillRogTpk having one exit 35, with everything else switching to 248(44) format. ::)
This route passes through craIG county some 35-36 mi away. Just sayin'.

Quote
H.E. Bailey Turnpike, 86.4 miles in length on main route, extending from Oklahoma City just north of the Texas state line, and 8.2 miles on a spur connecting the main route to S.H.9.
Emphasis on just north of. The map shows a transition to free I-44 at Exit 5, where US 277 & 281 leave the Interstate.
A south end here gives us 102.4 mi in the HB. Subtract out the 16 mi for the free Pioneer Expy, exits 30 to 46, and we get 86.4 mi. Woot!

nor does it call out the fact that three of those turnpikes each exist in two separate sections.
OK, I see what you mean now. Here's one of them.

Here's where I start to have misgivings about usaokt. There's already a lot of duplication of active routes. Having multiple segments of a single named turnpike, both already concurrent with the same "parent" active route, adds another later to it. Ugly, clutter. And some users might find it confusing.

Indian Nation Turnpike, 105.2 miles in length, connects Henryetta at I-40 to U.S. 70 near Hugo.
Within range of the fudge factor. Looks good.

Quote
Muskogee Turnpike, 53.1 miles in length, connecting Webbers Falls at I-40 with Tulsa.
OK351 is 55.3 mi after accounting for $CHMFUDGE. Too Long.
How about ending at the beginning of OK165, where the free segment and unnumbered exits begin?
56.43 - 4.1 mi (per wptedit) = 52.3. Too short.
How about the US62 interchange? 56.43 - π mi (per wptedit) for 53.29? That's within $CHMFUDGE.
FWIW, OSM labels "Muskogee Turnpike" this far south, ending at the US62 interchange, resuming south of OK165.
Why here?
Worth noting that before MusTpk became an AltRouteName for OK351, it was all in the HB as one continuous route. Is it one route? Checking Wiki[citation needed]pedia, the implication looks like one continuous route, with an OK165 overlap.
This is starting to look like enough of an indeterminus...

Here again we have the multiple-segments-on-the-same-active-route mess, now compounded by where exactly it should be split, or if we even should at all.

Quote
Cimarron Turnpike, 59.2 miles in length on main route, extending from I-35/ U.S. 64 east of Enid to Tulsa,
within $CHMFUDGE
Quote
and 8.5 miles on a spur connecting the main route with Stillwater and Oklahoma State University.
Maybe OTA includes more of the length of the ramps that don't get reflected in the HB, which shows 7.55 mi.

Quote
John Kilpatrick Turnpike, 25.3 miles in length, extending from the Oklahoma City interchange of the Turner Turnpike and I-35 to I-40 between Mustang and Sara Road.
Within $CHMFUDGE of the old route before the extension.
Quote
In January 2020 the JKT Extension, 5 miles, between I-40 and State Highway 152/Airport Road opened.
C'mon guys. If you're gonna update your page, update your page. :P

Quote
Cherokee Turnpike, 32.8 miles in length, extends eastward from U.S. 412 at Locust Grove to U.S. 412 west of West Siloam Springs.
32.70 mi per wptedit. OK sure.

Quote
Creek Turnpike, 34.4 miles in length, connecting the Turner Turnpike to the Will Rogers Turnpike.
Google shows 33.8 mi for OK364, if I include the ramp at the SW end.
This would suggest there's no mileage subtracted out for the free US64/169 concurrency.
Though signage at Memorial points only west (maybe call it an aid to help drivers realize this segment is free?), this should at least put us back in "implied concurrency" territory. Just one Creek Turnpike segment.

Quote
Chickasaw Turnpike, 13.3 miles in length, extends southward from S.H. 3 near Ada to S.H. 7 immediately west of Sulphur.
They mean S.H. 1 near Ada. Another "is it updated or not?" entry -- it originally ended at S.H. 7 immediately west of Sulphur; later, the section W of US177 was transferred to OK7SprSul, and is no longer signed as Chickasaw Turnpike. 13.3 mi matches the truncation to US177. Or maybe it's just another "minus the free bits" figure...

Quote
Kickapoo Turnpike, 18.5 miles, links I-40 and I-44 (Turner Turnpike) in Eastern Oklahoma County. The northern section of the Kickapoo Turnpike, from I-44/Turner Turnpike to NE 23rd/SH62, is open for travel. The southern section of the Kickapoo Turnpike, from NE 23rd/SH62 to I-40, will open in early 2021.
They mean US62. Mileage within $CHMFUDGE for entire route, I-40 to I-44.

Quote
Gilcrease Expressway, 5.7 miles, connects L.L. Tisdale to I-44 and completes the Western loop around the Tulsa metro area. Scheduled to open mid 2022.
Not to be confused with Gilcrease Expressway, 8.13 miles, connects L.L. Tisdale to I-244 and completes the Northeastern loop around the Tulsa metro area. In the HB since CHM.
5.7 mi gets us a tiny bit more than the SW quadrant from I-44/244 to US64/412 shown under construction in OSM & ESRI, but falls plenty short of it getting us to the Tisdale.
And on that note...
Once the NW quadrant is completed, it will beg for the other 2 segments to be connected. And we don't need another Palisades Interstate Parkway vs. usanyp scenario.
The existing segment is free, and doesn't belong in usaokt.
If usaokt doesn't exist, then the Gilcrease would all clearly belong in usasf, no problem! ;)

This fact puts me just over the edge into no longer favoring usaokt. :(
« Last Edit: May 05, 2021, 02:08:10 pm by yakra »
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1018
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 08:57:54 pm
Re: Suggestion: create Oklahoma Turnpikes system (usaokt)
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2021, 10:38:28 pm »
Quote
Muskogee Turnpike, 53.1 miles in length, connecting Webbers Falls at I-40 with Tulsa.
OK351 is 55.3 mi after accounting for $CHMFUDGE. Too Long.
How about ending at the beginning of OK165, where the free segment and unnumbered exits begin?

Worth noting that old signage clearly showed the Muskogee Turnpike ending here (and beginning again at the southern OK 165 interchange), but new signage has scrapped having a Muskogee Turnpike shield in favor of simply signing OK 351. For the quite logical reason of having a single shield to follow the whole way.

I think it's pretty unambiguous that this is where the Muskogee Turnpike begins and ends. It leaves us 0.8 miles short of the official figure but, well, fudge factors are imperfect.

Quote
FWIW, OSM labels "Muskogee Turnpike" this far south, ending at the US62 interchange, resuming south of OK165.
Why here?

Because OSM is just as much [citation needed] as Wikipedia is. ;)

Quote
Gilcrease Expressway

Okay yeah this is hairy. Does seem to point towards a future where a single continuous road with this name will have an OTA-portion and a non-OTA portion... maybe, sorta, eventually. The theoretical NW portion would be on Osage Nation land, so thus may or may not ever get built and if it is may or may not be built to freeway standards.

Quote
This fact puts me just over the edge into no longer favoring usaokt.

Honestly, I can see why, and I'm not about to push back too hard against this.

That danged Chickasaw Turnpike though... it's worth including and there's not a clean alternative way of doing so.

One possible solution might be to give it the Soldiers Field Road treatment and map only the freeway portion in usasf. This would be as suboptimal here as it is there, but better than nothing.