I live in North East Oklahoma and the state and city leaders keep saying that spending money to preserve or promote Route 66 will help our economy .
There is not that much of the original road left and what is US 66 looks nothing like it did years ago. In Tulsa they keep saying people want to drive 66 through town. One section is now 4 lanes instead of the original 2. Also you will drive by an unsightly area with lots of used car lots that look like junk yards , run down old motels that the Vice Detectives monitor and small convenience stores that just look like places a person should avoid.
In Miami , OK the city wants to replace a worn out section of 66 that is only 9 feet wide with a new safer road and people say it is a tourist attraction.
I just think that the recent 2 million dollar grant could be better spent . Rant over .
You undoubtedly know more on this topic than those of us who live in other states, but I have to say that a $2 million grant for road construction is not very much. That amount would likely be enough for only a mile or two of secondary highway construction.
The 2 Million is for refurbishment of a run down train station that hasnât been used in years and a old water tower that was replaced years ago and most people in that town near Oklahoma City just want them gone. The road in Miami is nto part of that grant and was part of a bond issue passed last year.
Route 66 is overblown, in my opinion. Only when you get into northern Arizona and some of New Mexico is the scenery worth the drive. Historically important? Yes, but I donât âget my kicksâ on the flatlands of Texas and Oklahoma.
A good example is Arizona SR 89A from Flagstaf to Sedona. As for Texas I tell people they should drive through Bend National Park just to see how tough the people who settled were.
I drove from Clovis to Santa rosa. Hwy 60. You pic up 66 in Santa rosa. along with I-40. Not really the same. Clovis to Albuquerque is an interesting drive.
A few years back, the city spent $500,000 to put in a 1/2 mile bike lane through a shopping area. Totally messed up the traffic flow (lost 1 lane) and removed parking spots; lots of reflector poles, signs, street painting, looked terrible and youâd rarely see a rider because it was crazy dangerous.
What finally killed it was snow removal. The plow trucks couldnât plow curb to curb so a lot of it had to be removed by hand/snowblowers. The first year, we didnât have a lot of snow and the removal bill was $50,000! Theyâve since torn it all out and put it back the way it was.
Iâm fully in favor of funding road improvements to make bicycling safer, but in this case common sense says to just place signs redirecting bicyclists to nearby neighborhood low-traffic parallel streets. I guess the problem is that the business folks would complain that would be moving bicycle traffic away from their businesses. The local politicians would worry there would be a hit to their campaign funds if the bicyclists were redirected around the shopping area. Câest la vie.