The Oklahoma Turnpike Authority is continuing a planned turnpike without two interchanges after Norman City Council rejected a resolution in support.
The two interchanges were part of the South Extension Turnpike proposed by the OTA for Alameda Drive and Tecumseh Road. On Aug. 25, Norman City Council voted 5-4 against a resolution supporting the Alameda Drive, Tecumseh Road and Etowah Road interchanges.
Four Norman council members voted against the interchanges, including Ward 5 Councilmember Trey Kirby, who was excited about the decision to remove the interchanges.
“I think it was a fantastic win for the people of Ward 5 and East Norman by rejecting the interchanges at Etowah, Alameda, and Tecumseh,” said Kirby. “We will continue fighting to try to stop the North South Extension as a whole.”
Ward 6 Councilmember Kyle Steele wrote in a message to the OU Daily that he was glad the interchanges won’t be included in turnpike plans, citing public safety and the impact on residents.
“These interchanges would have negatively impacted public safety in Ward 6 and compounded the tragedy that the turnpike is doing to our friends and neighbors in rural East Norman,” Steele wrote. “I am glad that they have been removed, but this was just one conversation about the turnpike and it will come up again.”
Mayor Stephen Tyler Holman also voted against the proposed interchanges, saying in the last council meeting that if the interchanges become a necessity, future leaders can ask for them.
“There would be ample opportunity in the future, when the time comes, should it be constructed, that future leaders of Norman could then request interchanges,” Holman said.
Nonprofit organization Pike Off OTA wrote in an email to the OU Daily they were thrilled with the OTA’s change in plans.
“Norman said no, and we are very pleased that the OTA will not move forward with them,” Pike Off OTA wrote. “Our watershed and rural communities should not be sacrificed to create new development opportunities along a turnpike corridor. This is a win for Norman residents who have been fighting to protect East Norman for years.”
Councilmembers in support of the proposed turnpike cited safety benefits, access, and emergency response time as their main reasons.
Ward 4 Councilmember Helen Grant voted for the proposed interchanges, writing in an email to the OU Daily they believe a larger interchange will be in the works in light of the council’s rejection.
“I don’t foresee this Council revisiting interchanges and I understand the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority will likely engineer a larger interchange off HWY9 to compensate,” Grant wrote. “I do not think the issue of First Responder access is going away therefore I think a Resolution for Gated Access for First Responders will likely advance forward. We cannot ignore the reality of hazardous material spills, fires, medical emergencies, and other incidents that will require fast response.”
Ward 3 Councilmember Robert Bruce, who voted in support, pointed to safety benefits and difficulty of access to the planned turnpike if the interchanges weren’t present.
“I’ve lived next to a turnpike for many years without an exit. I’ve seen those accidents where there wasn’t an exit. So I’m thinking, ‘What’s the benefit besides the safety aspect?’” Bruce said at the council meeting. “To me, living next to a turnpike, not having access to get on the turnpike for several miles, it’s like, I’m driving out of my way seven miles to ten miles to get on a turnpike one way or another.”
Ward 1 Councilmember David Gandesbery also mentioned safety at the council meeting, saying he would listen to local public safety officials on how the interchanges would improve safety as he trusts their judgment on risk analysis.
“There’s a couple people in this room that I do trust and every citizen in Norman trusts them everyday with their lives,” Gandesbery said. “And that’s our chief of the fire department, our major of the police department, and our chief of the police department. I trust them with my life everyday.”
In August, OU President Joseph Harroz Jr. said he and the university supported the proposed interchanges. OU Marketing and Communications wrote in an email to the OU Daily that the university still supports the interchanges after the rejected proposal.
“The university continues to believe the proposed Tecumseh Road and Alameda Street interchanges would provide meaningful long-term benefits for Norman and the university,” OU Marketing and Communications wrote.
Norman Chamber of Commerce President Scott Martin also supports the interchanges, writing to the OU Daily in a Thursday email that the planned $70 million investment by the state for Norman transportation infrastructure would be a remarkable investment.
“One thing is clear: the proposed interchanges at Alameda Street and Tecumseh Road represent transformational opportunities for Norman,” Martin wrote. “Reasonable people can disagree about the alignment of the Southern Extension Turnpike itself. However, regardless of where those discussions ultimately land, the need for modern access at Alameda and Tecumseh deserve serious consideration on their own merits.”
The OTA discussed in their Sep. 1 board meeting expanding their plans on a Highway 9 interchange due to the rejection of the other Norman interchanges, but that it will take months to finalize those plans.
OTA Executive Director Joe Echelle said at the meeting the OTA is open to working with Norman City Council on future partnerships despite the interchange proposal not passing.
This story was edited by Spencer Windholz. Larkin Bock copy edited this story.
