A virtual open house to explore options for the historic Bird Creek Bridge on northbound Route 66 near Catoosa, Oklahoma, runs through June 27, and the state Department of Transportation wants your input.
Replacement of the 1956 bridge is being considered about a decade after the 1936 southbound bridge was replaced. That area, just north of the Blue Whale landmark near Catoosa, once was known as the Twin Bridges.
Large pieces of the 1936 bridge ended up at a nearby park and the entrance to Molly’s Landing restaurant in Catoosa.
According to project information provided by CPY Engineering, the bridge is listed as in poor condition and is too narrow and too low to meet modern standards.
Here are four alternatives for the bridge:
Alternative 1: Do Nothing
- This alternative would include only continued maintenance of the bridge and nothing more. It does not meet the purpose and need for the project.
Alternative 2: Rehabilitation of the existing bridge
- 2(a): Rehabilitate and widen the bridge to 38 feet width. Bridge would remain fracture critical (would not meet purpose and need)
- 2(b): Rehabilitate without widening bridge. The bridge would remain fracture critical (would not meet purpose and need)
Alternative 3: Options to construct a new bridge on a new alignment, leaving the existing bridge in place, either as a non-functional “monument” or as a non-vehicular pedestrian or bicycle facility
- Due to the level of service of SH-66 in the area, as well as the proximity to bridges that would prohibit use by pedestrians or cyclists, converting the existing bridge to a pedestrian and/or bicycle facility was not evaluated as an alternative.
- Six different offset alignments were evaluated in Spring 2011, with two of the offset alignment options being removed almost immediately from further consideration for the current project (see 3(b) and 3(d) below). All of the alternatives meet the purpose and need. However, removing vehicle traffic from the historic bridge may result in an adverse effect to the bridge, nearby Rogers Point Park, or both.
- 3(a): Construct a new bridge on an offset 70 feet east of the existing northbound bridge
- 3(b): Construct a new bridge on an offset 120 feet east of the existing northbound bridge. It was determined that such a significant offset is below standard and would result in an unsafe alignment; therefore, this alternative was removed from further consideration.
- 3(c): Construct a new bridge on an offset of 70 feet west of the existing southbound bridge. Northbound traffic would be re-routed to the current southbound bridge and the southbound traffic would be re-routed to the newly constructed bridge.
- 3(d): This alternative involved construction of a new 4-lane structure and is no longer applicable. This alternative was therefore removed from further consideration.
- 3(e): Construct a new bridge on an offset of 120 feet west of the existing southbound bridge. Northbound traffic would be re-routed to the current southbound bridge and the southbound traffic would be re-routed to the newly constructed bridge.
- 3(f): Construct a new bridge on an offset 50 feet west of the current southbound bridge. Northbound traffic would be re-routed to the current southbound bridge and the southbound traffic would be re-routed to the newly constructed bridge.
Alternative 4: Replace the existing bridge on the existing alignment
- Replacement of the bridge on existing alignment would include construction of a new 38-foot wide bridge with approach roadway with two 12-foot driving lanes, 10-foot-wide paved outside shoulder, and four-foot inside shoulder similar to the structure constructed on the SB lanes in 2012. The new structure would be constructed within existing right-of-way, which would eliminate impacts to another protected resource – Rogers Point Park. This alternative meets the purpose and need of the project by providing a long-term solution to the transportation challenge and fracture-critical bridge at this crossing. It will address a bridge that is in poor condition and provide a crossing that provides all drivers a greater comfort level on the facility. While this alternative would meet the purpose and need of the project, it would also result in an adverse effect to the historic bridge and a Section 4(f) use of the structure. Because the remaining alternatives presented in the Design Analysis report do not effectively address the purpose and need of the project or do not address purpose and need at all, ODOT’s preferred alternative is Alternative 4. This alternative must be approved by FHWA as part of the Section 4(f) process.
The plan noted because of the bridge’s historical significance, additional consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office will be required as the project proceeds.
I asked Route 66 bridge expert Jim Ross by email what his thoughts are on the options:
Realistically, Alternatives 1 and 2 will never be seriously considered, so they could have skipped those.
I would favor Alternative 3 — c, e, or f. The bridge would be more accessible if the replacement bridge was west of the existing SB bridge, and not sandwiched between the two that carry traffic.
Those who wish to submit a comment about the options can do so with this online form. Comments must be submitted on or before June 27.
(Excerpted image from Google Street View of the northbound Bird Creek Bridge in April 2022 near Catoosa, Oklahoma)