Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Stephane Dumas]

I spotted a interesting map showing a proposed routing of a I-74 extension in Cincinnati http://www.urbancincy.com/2011/01/809m-identified-for-long-planned-i-74-extension-through-hamilton-county/

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

So that's what Jake Mecklenburg has migrated to in the last 5 years or so.

[national highway 1]

Somehow, it mentions 'US 32' in Ohio... What?! US 32 hasn't existed since 1931 and it only went as far east as Illinois!

[hbelkins]

Somehow, it mentions 'US 32' in Ohio... What?! US 32 hasn't existed since 1931 and it only went as far east as Illinois!

Probably OH 32, a/k/a Appalachian Corridor D.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Spoke to Sherman Cahal about the blog post and he said it's BS. IOW, No I-74 shields coming east of I-75 in Cincy.

[Steve]

Spoke to Sherman Cahal about the blog post and he said it's BS. IOW, No I-74 shields coming east of I-75 in Cincy.

Raises the question - why not extend it east to I-71 now?

[hbelkins]

Spoke to Sherman Cahal about the blog post and he said it's BS. IOW, No I-74 shields coming east of I-75 in Cincy.

Raises the question - why not extend it east to I-71 now?

Do you mean concurrently with I-75 south to the river (useless redundant concurrency) or with I-75 north across the Norwood Lateral?

I can't speak to how well the Norwood Lateral conforms to interstate criteria.

[jjakucyk]

The Norwood lateral is hopelessly below interstate standards.  The western mile between I-75 and Reading Road was built in 1958 concurrently with I-75.  The rest was built in the early 1970s along with I-71, but to the same standards and geometry of the 1958 section (probably using 1950s-era drawings).  There's some some poor visibility around curves and some steep grades where it climbs onto and off of the viaduct over the former B&O railroad between Reading Road and Section Avenue.  Ramp merges are a bit short, but they seem fixable.  Overall though it's a pretty tight highway. 

The more logical thing to do if OH-32 was ever upgraded to interstate standards to become I-74 would be to re-sign I-74 around the top of I-275.  There's already a few miles of concurrency near Miamitown anyway.  Then the existing I-74 between I-275 and I-75 could be renamed I-674 or something. 

[jjakucyk]

I also noticed driving along the Lateral the other day that the shoulders are very narrow.  I didn't think they were all that bad, but along much of the way it looks like the shoulders are at best 8 feet wide, but in many places they look closer to 6 feet. 

[Henry]

The Norwood lateral is hopelessly below interstate standards.  The western mile between I-75 and Reading Road was built in 1958 concurrently with I-75.  The rest was built in the early 1970s along with I-71, but to the same standards and geometry of the 1958 section (probably using 1950s-era drawings).  There's some some poor visibility around curves and some steep grades where it climbs onto and off of the viaduct over the former B&O railroad between Reading Road and Section Avenue.  Ramp merges are a bit short, but they seem fixable.  Overall though it's a pretty tight highway. 

The more logical thing to do if OH-32 was ever upgraded to interstate standards to become I-74 would be to re-sign I-74 around the top of I-275.  There's already a few miles of concurrency near Miamitown anyway.  Then the existing I-74 between I-275 and I-75 could be renamed I-674 or something. 

Exactly! Seeing that the areas in eastern Cincinnati are built up, I don't see any possible scenario of I-74 continuing across that part of town.

[Sherman Cahal]

The Norwood Lateral is not interstate standard, as it consists of ramps that have far too short acceleration/deceleration lanes, horizontal curvature issues, and some tight shoulders in a few situations. Some of these issues can be grandfathered in, but the ramp spacing issue can be mitigated with some shared acceleration/deceleration lanes - which is needed anyways. The ramps at Interstate 75 will be replaced at any rate, which should solve the deficiencies with the interchange when the Mill Creek project is done.

[sr641]

The Norwood lateral is hopelessly below interstate standards.  The western mile between I-75 and Reading Road was built in 1958 concurrently with I-75.  The rest was built in the early 1970s along with I-71, but to the same standards and geometry of the 1958 section (probably using 1950s-era drawings).  There's some some poor visibility around curves and some steep grades where it climbs onto and off of the viaduct over the former B&O railroad between Reading Road and Section Avenue.  Ramp merges are a bit short, but they seem fixable.  Overall though it's a pretty tight highway. 

The more logical thing to do if OH-32 was ever upgraded to interstate standards to become I-74 would be to re-sign I-74 around the top of I-275.  There's already a few miles of concurrency near Miamitown anyway.  Then the existing I-74 between I-275 and I-75 could be renamed I-674 or something. 

Exactly! Seeing that the areas in eastern Cincinnati are built up, I don't see any possible scenario of I-74 continuing across that part of town.

They could take 74 south on 75, then 74 coul go east on 71, then 74 can go south on 471, 74 could then take the 275 bypass to ohio 32.

[Mike_OH]

Perhaps the biggest problem with that plan isn't the Norwood Lateral, but the Red Bank Road corridor.  With all of the businesses there, and more on the way, it would be nearly impossible to turn that into an expressway.

[jjakucyk]

Perhaps the biggest problem with that plan isn't the Norwood Lateral, but the Red Bank Road corridor.  With all of the businesses there, and more on the way, it would be nearly impossible to turn that into an expressway.

ODOT certainly seems willing to try though, because if there's anything the state likes to do it's crap on Cincinnati every chance they get. 

[Henry]

Well, with the US 52 corridor in WV not becoming an Interstate corridor anytime soon, I guess it's safe to say that the connection to NC is dead?

[WrkHrse]

Well, with the US 52 corridor in WV not becoming an Interstate corridor anytime soon, I guess it's safe to say that the connection to NC is dead?

I was under the impression that I-74 would most likely follow I-77 up through Charleston, WV to I-64 and use US-35 to connect in Ohio. This would certainly minimize new construction, save for the gap in the US-35 expressway.

Given the uncertainty over many of the connecting routes, I think it would be safe to say that I-74 will not leave NC. Especially since VA's part would follow existing interstate and would receive little benefit from such a designation. OH and KY can't decide who will get the highway (If it is ever built) and I don't see WV making a move until they know where it's going.

[hbelkins]

There is no need for it in Kentucky. The AA Highway sufficiently handles traffic between Cincinnati and the Ashland-Huntington area.

West Virginia has signs up on US 52 at Kenova (and at one point, there was one near Bluefield as well) identifying it as the "I-73/I-74 corridor" but all improvements are being built as surface routes, not interstate-quality freeways. In fact, a new school has already been built along the new US 52 segment in Mingo County.

The two sections of I-74 (Iowa to Ohio and North Carolina) will never be connected.

[amroad17]

The only way to connect the two I-74s would be to bring I-74 around Cincinnati (north) or through it (to Kentucky and back into Ohio) along existing routes, upgrade OH 32 to either US 23 or US 35, somehow get into WVA to Charleston, and then use I-77 to Mt. Airy, NC.  This is ridiculous.  Traffic counts do not warrant an upgrade in OH and the overlap with I-77 would be redundant.  The existing routes to go from Cincinnati to the Piedmont Triad are fine.  Besides, I-74 in NC should be renumbered to I-34.  This would get rid of having I-74 and US 74 on the same road.

[WrkHrse]

There is no need for it in Kentucky. The AA Highway sufficiently handles traffic between Cincinnati and the Ashland-Huntington area.

I'm not sure where I read it, but at one point KY was considering upgrades to the AA highway. One option (though unpopular) was a full interstate-style freeway, potentially I-74.

The two sections of I-74 (Iowa to Ohio and North Carolina) will never be connected.

Given the changes in WV and US-52, I believe that to be true. I-74 is dead.

[WrkHrse]

...the overlap with I-77 would be redundant.  The existing routes to go from Cincinnati to the Piedmont Triad are fine. 

No argument there, I may have misread something. Although, as far as I understand, I-77 and I-74 are slated to run concurrently in VA. I don't see any reason that would warrant a new interstate being built when existing routes (save for a small part of US-35) are sufficient. WVDOT seems to think so as well.

Besides, I-74 in NC should be renumbered to I-34.  This would get rid of having I-74 and US 74 on the same road.

That would have been a better idea. Politics are making things weird, especially when you consider I-73 is supposed to (some day) make it into MI! (That's another story.) Given that the two segments will likely never connect, it is foolish to have this overlap.