AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Great Lakes and Ohio Valley => Topic started by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 29, 2015, 08:18:14 PM

Title: Ohio
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 29, 2015, 08:18:14 PM
Surprisingly a general thread for Ohio-related news hasn't been started, so here it is.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Pages/I-71-MLK-Interchange-Project-Info.aspx
The official MLK Drive Project page from ODOT has a nice timeline for progress on the interchange. I couldn't find any newer information about the project. Anyone have new information on the project's progress?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on September 05, 2015, 10:19:57 AM
They are really behind on highway mowing this year because of all that rain in the spring and early summer. Grass and weeds got 4-5 feet tall in some places. Routine mowing is turning into grubbing projects.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 05, 2015, 08:41:48 PM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know. I had intended to start a thread for each half, one in each forum, with a map in the first post showing how the state is divided, but I've been too busy.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on September 05, 2015, 09:28:42 PM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know. I had intended to start a thread for each half, one in each forum, with a map in the first post showing how the state is divided, but I've been too busy.
I guess we can make this just be for the Ohio Valley Section of Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on September 05, 2015, 10:48:41 PM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know.

My recollection of the placement of the watershed signs would indicate that it's more like 2/3rds Ohio Valley and 1/3rd Great Lakes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 06, 2015, 04:20:25 AM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know.

My recollection of the placement of the watershed signs would indicate that it's more like 2/3rds Ohio Valley and 1/3rd Great Lakes.

Watersheds would be more relevant if this were a form about canoeing or riverain biology. I proposed dividing the state along DOT district boundaries, and observed some agreement.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tidecat on September 06, 2015, 10:22:37 AM
I would suggest I-70 as the dividing line.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on September 06, 2015, 07:21:43 PM

They are really behind on highway mowing this year because of all that rain in the spring and early summer. Grass and weeds got 4-5 feet tall in some places. Routine mowing is turning into grubbing projects.
If I did that, code enforcement would crawl up my ass.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on September 06, 2015, 07:23:20 PM

I would suggest I-70 as the dividing line.
That divides Columbus, where a fair chunk of posters live, in half. For the record, most of us consider Columbus to be in the Great Lakes area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: andy on September 06, 2015, 09:43:10 PM

I would suggest I-70 as the dividing line.
That divides Columbus, where a fair chunk of posters live, in half. For the record, most of us consider Columbus to be in the Great Lakes area.
Indiana has the same problem (I70 through Indy), and most of the generic Indiana stuff seems to float up to the Great Lakes.  I've just gotten used to it. And, yes, I do find stuff from as far south as Evansville up there.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on September 06, 2015, 10:11:58 PM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know.

My recollection of the placement of the watershed signs would indicate that it's more like 2/3rds Ohio Valley and 1/3rd Great Lakes.

Watersheds would be more relevant if this were a form about canoeing or riverain biology. I proposed dividing the state along DOT district boundaries, and observed some agreement.

Not if you want to be technically correct.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: andy on September 06, 2015, 11:17:42 PM
Is this thread supposed to cover all of Ohio, or just the portion covered by the "Ohio Valley" forum? Half the state belongs in the "Great Lakes" forum, you know.

My recollection of the placement of the watershed signs would indicate that it's more like 2/3rds Ohio Valley and 1/3rd Great Lakes.

Watersheds would be more relevant if this were a form about canoeing or riverain biology. I proposed dividing the state along DOT district boundaries, and observed some agreement.

Not if you want to be technically correct.
True, but ....
The Ohio River watershed for which this thread's parent is named (to state the obvious), for Indiana, Ohio and Illinois really would leave only a sliver along the shoreline of the lakes for the Great Lakes region.

Also, it seems I've seen this discussion before. :-/

It just gives me twice the postings to look over.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on September 07, 2015, 10:28:07 AM
Glaciated Ohio vs. Unglaciated Ohio is my vote on the matter.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 08, 2015, 04:45:26 AM
Glaciated Ohio vs. Unglaciated Ohio is my vote on the matter.

I think there's a noticeable cultural division that roughly follows that line of glacial extent, as well. Hunters on one side, farmers on the other…
Title: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 09, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
This is the thread for miscellaneous Ohio things in the Midwest - Great Lakes forum, so it covers Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12.  Why?  Because I said so, and nobody seemed to object (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10379.msg2028723#msg2028723).

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/ohio-split.png8.png)

For Districts 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 see Ohio Valley forum counterpart (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16332.0).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 09, 2015, 01:36:21 PM
So I went and made a map:

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/ohio-split.png8.png)

Regarding why I split the state the way I did, I first proposed this split in this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10379.msg2028723#msg2028723), and nobody objected at the time.  Since this is a roadgeek forum and we talk mostly about stuff the DOT does, it makes sense to me to divide along DOT district boundaries if we have to divide the state at all.  Within that constraint, I attempted to follow the cultural division, between association with the hills, hunting, and the Ohio River, versus association with farming, the Midwest, and Lake Erie.  I can say that in flat central Ohio, even though our drainage flows south, we tend to associate culturally more with the Midwest and/or the Great Lakes region, compared to the Ohio River Valley.  So here we are.

And I made another thread in the Midwest - Great Lakes forum (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16419.0).

Ballastic, if you don't mind, I think it would be helpful if you edited the first post of this thread to include a clarification that this thread is for the Ohio Valley forum section of the state, and include my map and a link to the other thread.  Just a suggestion.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on September 09, 2015, 09:22:13 PM
Also, I saw some maps showing Appalachian Ohio counties covered by the Appalachian range where the Ohio river drains with the exception of Hamilton county.
http://www.firstohio.com/images/countymap2.gif
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Ohio#/media/File:Appalachian_Ohio_Counties.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluegrass_region#/media/File:Geographic_regions_ohio.svg
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: andy on September 10, 2015, 01:51:25 PM
Also, I saw some maps showing Appalachian Ohio counties covered by the Appalachian range where the Ohio river drains with the exception of Hamilton county.
http://www.firstohio.com/images/countymap2.gif
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Ohio#/media/File:Appalachian_Ohio_Counties.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluegrass_region#/media/File:Geographic_regions_ohio.svg

Interesting, but not complete.  Much of the remainder of the state enters the Ohio River through Indiana.  For example, the Wabash River of Indiana fame begins north of I70 in Ohio and trails across Indiana to the south west corner.

Edit: just looked; "exception of Hamilton County" cuts off the Miami River which is a major water shed (barely going to Indiana).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 20, 2015, 01:21:50 AM
US 23 resurfacing in Pike County is almost complete. That's been annoying, with the lane closures. I suppose all that's left is to carve rumble strips.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on September 20, 2015, 08:23:04 AM
In my opinion, and I know I've mentioned this before in one of the general forums, it was a mistake for this forum to divide states between regions.  There is a lot of information that applies statewide  and would be best if Ohio remained in one region and not split in two.

Ditto for IN, IL and PA which is split with the Northeast region.

But as the forum has now existed for a number of years, it would be difficult to reorganize all of the old threads to fit in a new nomenclature, so the divisions that exist will remain.

My division would be:

New England
Mid-Atlantic: NY, NJ, PA
DelMarVa: DE,MD,VA,WV,DC
Southeast: NC,SC,GA,FL,AL,MS,TN,KY
Mid-south: AR,LA,OK,TX
Midwest: OH,IN,IL,MI,WI
Plains: ND,SD,NE,KS, MO, IA, MN
Mountain West: ID,MT,WY,UT,CO,AZ,NM,NV
Pac Coast: AK,HI,WA,OR,CA

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 22, 2015, 06:47:22 PM
Draft access management study for US 42 between London and Delaware: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/Documents/US42AMStudy_ReportOnly_DraftAug2015.pdf

The interesting bits start around page 60 or so. Basically, recommendations include minor driveway changes, a couple of new signals, turn lanes (including miles of TWLTL), possibly one or two roundabouts in Plain City, a longer five-lane section near US 33, and eventually frontage/backage roads.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on September 28, 2015, 03:37:11 PM
In my opinion, and I know I've mentioned this before in one of the general forums, it was a mistake for this forum to divide states between regions.  There is a lot of information that applies statewide  and would be best if Ohio remained in one region and not split in two.

Ditto for IN, IL and PA which is split with the Northeast region.

But as the forum has now existed for a number of years, it would be difficult to reorganize all of the old threads to fit in a new nomenclature, so the divisions that exist will remain.

My division would be:

New England
Mid-Atlantic: NY, NJ, PA
DelMarVa: DE,MD,VA,WV,DC
Southeast: NC,SC,GA,FL,AL,MS,TN,KY
Mid-south: AR,LA,OK,TX
Midwest: OH,IN,IL,MI,WI
Plains: ND,SD,NE,KS, MO, IA, MN
Mountain West: ID,MT,WY,UT,CO,AZ,NM,NV
Pac Coast: AK,HI,WA,OR,CA

"Mid-Atlantic" is a weird thing as well because that is dependent on who you ask. As far as the general definition goes, the heart of the Mid-Atlantic region is Maryland. While we hate Boston, New England issues are more relevant to New York and separating New York from Connecticut would likely result in some of the thread issues we see today over in Ohio and the like, probably more so because you'd be cutting through the immediate New York metro area. I'd combine your mid-Atlantic category with New England under the current "Northeast", but include all of Pennsylvania. Otherwise, I like it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on October 07, 2015, 12:06:42 AM

From 1963, The Ohio Highway Patrol made a safety film and it is a TREASURE TROVE of old stuff - increment panel signs, cut out US 250, OH 89 shields, among others. It's kind of tacky, but it is still neat from an old sign perspective, and the point it tries to drive home is valid.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on October 09, 2015, 03:06:03 PM
In my opinion, and I know I've mentioned this before in one of the general forums, it was a mistake for this forum to divide states between regions.  There is a lot of information that applies statewide  and would be best if Ohio remained in one region and not split in two.

Ditto for IN, IL and PA which is split with the Northeast region.

But as the forum has now existed for a number of years, it would be difficult to reorganize all of the old threads to fit in a new nomenclature, so the divisions that exist will remain.

My division would be:

New England
Mid-Atlantic: NY, NJ, PA
DelMarVa: DE,MD,VA,WV,DC
Southeast: NC,SC,GA,FL,AL,MS,TN,KY
Mid-south: AR,LA,OK,TX
Midwest: OH,IN,IL,MI,WI
Plains: ND,SD,NE,KS, MO, IA, MN
Mountain West: ID,MT,WY,UT,CO,AZ,NM,NV
Pac Coast: AK,HI,WA,OR,CA

"Mid-Atlantic" is a weird thing as well because that is dependent on who you ask. As far as the general definition goes, the heart of the Mid-Atlantic region is Maryland. While we hate Boston, New England issues are more relevant to New York and separating New York from Connecticut would likely result in some of the thread issues we see today over in Ohio and the like, probably more so because you'd be cutting through the immediate New York metro area. I'd combine your mid-Atlantic category with New England under the current "Northeast", but include all of Pennsylvania. Otherwise, I like it.

My main reasoning for splitting NY, NJ, and PA from New England is to keep the number of threads in any one forum about equal.  With the two forums combined, there would be a lot of posts in the Northeast forum (just as there is now). 

Under my scheme the following large metro areas may be divided into more than one forum:

NYC (CT suburbs in New England forum)
Philly (some consider Wilmington DE to be in Greater Philly)
Memphis (AR suburbs are in mid-south)
Louisville (IN is in Midwest)
Cincinnatti (KY is in southeast)
Duluth, MN is in a separate region from Superior, WI
St. Louis (MO is in Plains, IL is in Midwest)

Yet despite these divisions, I still believe it is better to avoid splitting states into two regions.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: civeng on October 09, 2015, 03:42:03 PM
Is there a way for each state's general discussion to appear in each region?  One discussion accessible from multiple regions?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on October 09, 2015, 11:04:40 PM
Here's a definition of the Midwest I proposed a few years ago that made it onto Andrew Sullivan's blog:

Germans: On this map of ethnic ancestry from the 2000 census, there’s a broad swath of German-plurality counties starting from central New York, through Pennsylvania stretching westward to the Rockies and beyond. Germans help define the southern border of the Midwest (though stray Finnish, Dutch and African-American counties are certainly Midwestern as well). Germans heavily influenced Midwestern architecture, food, religion, and its devotion to public education.  The “American” cultures of Kentucky and southern Missouri are southern – the accents change, Baptists predominate, and so does the food (it gets better down South, but that’s not Paula Deen’s doing). But not all German areas are Midwestern, so a limit to this is:

Grids. A central man-made feature of the Midwest is its grid pattern, which, thanks to the Land Ordinance of 1785 and Glaciation, stretches from south of Cleveland toward Cincinnati, and then west to the Rockies, defining the eastern and southern borders of the region. There are a few pockets where “queer” roads must follow the hills, such as around Bloomington, Indiana, or Athens, Ohio, or in the Ozarks. Those areas are on the fringes of the Midwest. Driving a Detroit-made sedan or pick-up truck down a straight state highway is a Midwestern rite of passage. So straight roads and flatlands (not Appalachian or Ozark zomias) help define the Midwest. This grid was made possible in part by Glaciation, which covered the land with very fertile soil. So the last characteristic is:

Gardens. (I couldn’t find a better synonym for farms that maintained the alliteration.) Anywhere that farming occurs on a wide scale and without irrigation is Midwestern, which defines the western border from about Joplin, Missouri, northward to Topeka, Lincoln continuing to just west of Fargo. Northern Michigan and Wisconsin are also peripherally Midwestern, and I suspect residents of those regions agree, though I can’t speak to northern Minnesota.

Putting this all together, Germans, Grids and Gardens means the Midwest begins in Downtown Cleveland, south to about Athens, Ohio, then west about Cape Girardeau, Missouri, with a bump up I-55 to St. Louis, and back down I-44 to Joplin, then north to Topeka, Lincoln, west of Fargo, to Canada.

The links are available here:
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/07/24/where-is-the-midwest-ctd-2/
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on October 09, 2015, 11:07:05 PM
For the purposes of this discussion, though I would make it easy: Anything south of I-70 is Ohio Valley; Anything north is Midwest. I think that's how the two sections are divided when it comes to posts about Indiana.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on October 13, 2015, 06:00:54 AM
While I advocated for a different regional split, I understand that it would be difficult for the moderators to go back and reclassify thousands of old posts into different regions.  (And I don't have the time to volunteer for that job).  But this thread leads to the conclusion that the two midwest regions (Great Lakes + Ohio Valley) should probably be combined into one as IL, IN, and OH should probably all be within one region.  PA is in three regions!

If the two regions would be combined, we'd have approx. 24,000 posts in the combined group.  That's still less than the approx. 27,000 posts in Northeast region.  We'd still have states that are split, but it would make things a lot easier.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 13, 2015, 11:25:38 AM
Could we instead have this discussion in another thread, such as this one (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10379.0)?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on October 15, 2015, 05:18:20 PM
I-480 eastbound closed in Cleveland due to a car chase / police shooting incident.

http://fox8.com/2015/10/15/i-480-eastbound-closed-between-state-and-ridge-road-after-police-involved-incident/


I happened to get caught up in the traffic, while on my way from dropping off someone at the airport and eating lunch in Independence. All eastbound traffic on 480 was being forced to exit onto Ridge Rd, and I must have gotten to the area fairly soon after it happened as I encountered stopped traffic just before the 1/4 mile BGS for that exit. Took maybe 20 minutes to get off the intersatte, and I ended up taking Ridge Rd to Snow/Rockside to get where I was going.

On the way back, about an hour later, 480 westbound had a rubbernecking slowdown leading up to the incident site (just east of State Rd) and then was fine after that. By this time traffic on EB 480 had backed up from Ridge Rd almost all the way to 71, and the police had closed the on ramps to 480 east from 71 and the interchanges east of it. Once I got west of 71 I saw that they were forcing all 480 eastbound traffic onto the 71 entrance ramp.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Purgatory On Wheels on October 15, 2015, 08:16:38 PM
With Ohio adding exit numbers and tabs to many non-interstates recently, it seems that the (mostly-) freeway from I-270 to Newark could benefit from some.  But since it's made up of 3 different state routes (161, 37, and 16), how would exits be numbered?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 15, 2015, 11:35:44 PM
With Ohio adding exit numbers and tabs to many non-interstates recently, it seems that the (mostly-) freeway from I-270 to Newark could benefit from some.  But since it's made up of 3 different state routes (161, 37, and 16), how would exits be numbered?

They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Purgatory On Wheels on October 17, 2015, 11:52:16 PM
They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.

How hard would it be to give the entire corridor a single number? It couldn't all be 16, since that belongs on Broad St, but they could extend 161 out to Newcomerstown and truncate 16 in Granville. Or give it a completely new number.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 18, 2015, 12:53:25 AM
They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.

How hard would it be to give the entire corridor a single number? It couldn't all be 16, since that belongs on Broad St, but they could extend 161 out to Newcomerstown and truncate 16 in Granville. Or give it a completely new number.

There's no reason 16 has to run down Broad St. From Granville, the best connection to Columbus is now via New Albany, and I would be completely in favor of rerouting 16 accordingly.

The question of "how hard is it" depends on perspective.  I think it would be very hard for a few roadgeeks to convince multiple ODOT districts to persue the change. From ODOT's perspective, it might not be too hard to ram the change through the public information process, but there's a question of motivation.  There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent, so I'm not optimistic this corridor will see any numbering changes in the forseeable future.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on October 18, 2015, 05:21:36 PM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on November 02, 2015, 04:50:33 PM
What are the highway configurations at Cleveland's public square? I heard they removed some streets recently.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 10, 2015, 10:23:58 PM
They just demo'ed the pedestrian walkway over the freeway section of OH-104 between US-23 and Lockbourne Rd. in Columbus. I wasn't expecting it. Does anybody know what this walkway served, such as a school? Far as I can tell it was built in 1987 when 104 was extended from US-23 to US-33 to replace Refugee Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 11, 2015, 04:03:24 AM
They just demo'ed the pedestrian walkway over the freeway section of OH-104 between US-23 and Lockbourne Rd. in Columbus. I wasn't expecting it. Does anybody know what this walkway served, such as a school? Far as I can tell it was built in 1987 when 104 was extended from US-23 to US-33 to replace Refugee Rd.

Yeah, apparently that's why 104 was closed Saturday night into Sunday between those exits.

Given the mix of industrial and low-income residential landuses in the area, I would guess walking to work was common in that neighborhood when the freeway was built, so the pedestrian bridge was included so as not to disrupt that.  Just a year or two ago I recall some work was done on that bridge; I think they were rehabilitating the concrete on the stair structures, or something.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on November 11, 2015, 08:06:55 PM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....

I don't think anyone is confused by the OH15-US23 configuration between Upper Sandusky and Findlay, and the BGSs make it clear that 15 will take you to I-75, but the routing of US23 is a bit strange there. I'm pretty sure it's because of Fostoria, which has really suffered not having connections to an interstate, wanting to maintain a connection to a national highway, but eventually I think US 23 should just continue to I-75 in Findlay up to Perrysburg.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 11, 2015, 10:08:01 PM
Hey, it's you!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on November 12, 2015, 10:28:58 AM
Hey, it's you!

Yes, they finally let me in. I think I'm just about the only NW Ohio resident on any of these boards.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JCinSummerfield on November 13, 2015, 01:23:02 PM
Hey, it's you!

Yes, they finally let me in. I think I'm just about the only NW Ohio resident on any of these boards.

You're not the only one.  There's someone from Toledo here, but I can't recall his handle right now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 15, 2015, 03:31:47 AM
Since we don't have a thread for I-70 in the M/GL region that I'm aware of, and I don't feel like starting one at the moment, I'll note this here.

Construction has started on I-70 to add a lane in each direction between Hilliard–Rome Rd and I-270 on the west side of Columbus. ODOT hasn't made any renderings or schematics conveniently available to the public, so I'm not sure exactly what the final configuration will look like.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on November 15, 2015, 10:40:04 AM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....

I don't think anyone is confused by the OH15-US23 configuration between Upper Sandusky and Findlay, and the BGSs make it clear that 15 will take you to I-75, but the routing of US23 is a bit strange there. I'm pretty sure it's because of Fostoria, which has really suffered not having connections to an interstate, wanting to maintain a connection to a national highway, but eventually I think US 23 should just continue to I-75 in Findlay up to Perrysburg.

Or at least revert US-23 back to it's original alignment along modern-day OH-199 to Perrysburg.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 15, 2015, 08:19:24 PM
Update on the Ironton-Russell bridge:

Title: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 17, 2015, 06:40:19 PM
Since we don't have a thread for I-70 in the M/GL region that I'm aware of, and I don't feel like starting one at the moment, I'll note this here.

Construction has started on I-70 to add a lane in each direction between Hilliard–Rome Rd and I-270 on the west side of Columbus. ODOT hasn't made any renderings or schematics conveniently available to the public, so I'm not sure exactly what the final configuration will look like.

I'm not going through 900 pages of PDFs to get specifics, but here are the plans: ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/Districts/D06/download/FRA-70-3.41%20(PID%2025594)/FRA-70-0341%20PDF_8-4-2015.pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 19, 2015, 12:05:37 AM
I'm not going through 900 pages of PDFs to get specifics, but here are the plans: ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/Districts/D06/download/FRA-70-3.41%20(PID%2025594)/FRA-70-0341%20PDF_8-4-2015.pdf

Okay, I skimmed the whole thing. Thanks for the link.

Some specifics:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 19, 2015, 11:56:59 AM
So you won't be able to get on eastbound 70 from Wilson rd. at all? Or is it one of those deals where if you screw up and accidentally exit 70 onto Wilson you will have to turn around at a McDonald's or something?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 19, 2015, 04:28:13 PM
I think he means the right lane between 270 and Wilson will be exit only, dropping from five lanes to four after that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 20, 2015, 10:28:28 AM
ah, 10-4
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dave19 on November 20, 2015, 11:25:54 AM
The Wheels of Tragedy video posted upthread reminds me of the time in driver ed class (which would have been around 1973 or '74) when the teacher showed us Signal 30, which also featured the OHP. Signal 30 predated WoT by 4 years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on November 20, 2015, 12:16:57 PM
The only reason for posting the Wheels of Tragedy video was just for the purposes of old signs - I had never seen them (the films) before and was just impressed with the old cutouts and old shields contained. I think my school system deemed them too graphic though to be shown.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 20, 2015, 04:17:49 PM
On the subject of the I-70 widening, I've noticed the portable message signs approaching the work zone showing the traffic speed. I'd not noticed that elsewhere and it seems like a nice touch, if not terribly accurate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 20, 2015, 01:33:48 PM
Another new traffic light coming to US 23 in Delaware

http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/delaware/news/2015/12/18/intersections-upgrade-will-give-drivers-more-options.html

This is a downgrade of the northern Sandusky Street half-interchange.  Apparently the southbound exit ramp will be converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street, which will meet US 23 at a traffic light.  The northbound entrance ramp will remain.

This just adds to the case for a proper new-alignment freeway route through Delaware County that the powers that be aren't even considering.  See also fictional I-171 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4801.0).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 28, 2015, 07:45:50 PM
^ Well that's just great. And it's far enough north that it also affects those that choose to take 37/36 over to 71.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on December 29, 2015, 04:50:40 PM
Is anyone else using these bike route signs? Saw this in Newark a couple days ago.

(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/29/9e73cb606f77c3f3510ea8d7179f6d4f.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on December 30, 2015, 01:24:45 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on December 30, 2015, 01:39:16 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

aren't these basically stitched together county and state roads across the country?  Not many are separated from traffic from what I've seen.  Indiana hasn't signed any of their proposed routes (35, 50, 20, and a few more) yet
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 30, 2015, 02:11:33 PM
^ a lot of them will probably be on streets, though they will follow bike trails where applicable. For example I know that most of the North Coast Inland Trail in north central Ohio will become part of the US bike route 30
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on December 30, 2015, 03:21:13 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

aren't these basically stitched together county and state roads across the country?  Not many are separated from traffic from what I've seen.  Indiana hasn't signed any of their proposed routes (35, 50, 20, and a few more) yet

Absolutely.  Not separated from traffic; just routes on roads. 

The 76 route I posted had something to do with the Bicentennial, even.  Bizarre.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on December 30, 2015, 11:49:14 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

The first two national bike routes were USBR 1 and USBR 76. There are a few old white-on-green unnumbered Bike Route signs left in Kentucky, but District 12 (including Pike, Floyd and Knott counties) is the only place I know of in Kentucky where USBR 76 is fully signed. It's certainly not signed in my district.

As for the choice of routes, they've tried to keep the bike route off major highways. It comes into Kentucky on KY 80. It does use a portion of US 23, but for the most part it stays on lesser routes. If I'm not mistaken, I drove across KY 1091 as a cut-across between KY 122 and KY 7. It's a pretty steep mountain crossing, but I'll bet the ADT on that route is minuscule. There really was no other good way to get from one valley to the other without going up 122 all the way to 80 and then back over to 7, or else staying on 197 to Jenkins and then using 805 and a couple of other routes to connect to 7 in Letcher County.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 01, 2016, 12:40:07 PM
Saw something a bit odd yesterday on one of the many "To Ohio Turnpike" signs in Northern Ohio....the ones at the US 20/OH 51 intersection near Elmore now have a yellow "TOLL" banner between the "TO" banner and the turnpike shield.

First time I've see that. Thought it seemed kind of redundant, as "Ohio Turnpike" seems pretty self explanatory.

Anyone else seen that setup elsewhere? It'll be interesting to see if more of them turn up.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 04, 2016, 01:18:49 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

The first two national bike routes were USBR 1 and USBR 76. There are a few old white-on-green unnumbered Bike Route signs left in Kentucky, but District 12 (including Pike, Floyd and Knott counties) is the only place I know of in Kentucky where USBR 76 is fully signed. It's certainly not signed in my district.

As for the choice of routes, they've tried to keep the bike route off major highways. It comes into Kentucky on KY 80. It does use a portion of US 23, but for the most part it stays on lesser routes. If I'm not mistaken, I drove across KY 1091 as a cut-across between KY 122 and KY 7. It's a pretty steep mountain crossing, but I'll bet the ADT on that route is minuscule. There really was no other good way to get from one valley to the other without going up 122 all the way to 80 and then back over to 7, or else staying on 197 to Jenkins and then using 805 and a couple of other routes to connect to 7 in Letcher County.

As I've said before, my grandparents lived on KY 122 in Wheelwright; I visited them frequently.  Never saw a bicycle on KY 122 in all my time spent in Floyd County. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: abefroman329 on January 05, 2016, 12:18:00 PM
Thought it seemed kind of redundant, as "Ohio Turnpike" seems pretty self explanatory.

Not necessarily.  There are numerous roads in the DC area called turnpikes that do not charge a toll.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on January 05, 2016, 11:39:31 PM
Yes, but they probably used to. Most roads with the word "pike" in them charged tolls at one time.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 06, 2016, 01:10:35 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 06, 2016, 04:04:16 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…

Huh, not too familiar with that part, only been on it once. Though I have diven under it at Marion-Melmore Rd a bunch of times and just figured the high profile in that area was due to crossing multiple roads in that immediate area

On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on January 06, 2016, 04:11:28 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…

Huh, not too familiar with that part, only been on it once. Though I have diven under it at Marion-Melmore Rd a bunch of times and just figured the high profile in that area was due to crossing multiple roads in that immediate area

On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

It is indeed 70 now all the way from the Indiana line to Mansfield, except for the overlap with US 23's Upper Sandusky bypass, which is still 65.  It is a boon for trucks who originally were limited to 55 on that road to have gone to 65 and now 70 on the toll-free roads, especially with 30 being not a bad shunpike.

It is somewhat odd that Ohio has become so much more liberal with speed limits than Indiana.  Roads like US 30 from Paulding to Richland Counties that have 70 MPH limits in Ohio top out at 60 in Indiana, and Indiana still has the split limit for trucks.  Somehow never thought that Ohio would be so much more liberal with speed limits.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cjw2001 on January 08, 2016, 09:59:10 PM
On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

There are two categories that display as Orange on Google Maps, Expressway and Freeway.

Freeways cannot have any at grade intersections, only interchanges.

Expressways can be a mix of at grade intersections and interchanges.

The full definition can be found here (https://support.google.com/mapmaker/answer/1098056).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 19, 2016, 07:30:42 PM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit. Perhaps no one has tried upgrading it?

As for the US 24 example mentioned above, I can see that one now. The Napoleon-Defiance section does have a much higher frequency of at grades than Defiance-Indiana.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 19, 2016, 11:46:21 PM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit.

As far as I'm concerned, US 23 is an expressway from the Delaware – Marion County line to where it exits itself at Carey.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 20, 2016, 11:15:29 AM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit.

As far as I'm concerned, US 23 is an expressway from the Delaware – Marion County line to where it exits itself at Carey.

I would tend to agree, but since the google definition says that "(at grade) intersections should be relatively rare and widely spaced" I didn't include the OH 231 to OH 199 section because it has 7 at grade intersections in a 7 mile stretch, including one with a state route.

I just now submitted an upgrade in map maker for the section from the first at grade intersection north of 231 to the Delaware County line, so I guess we'll see how that goes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on January 20, 2016, 11:25:07 AM
are there any real plans to upgrade us 23 to toledo to an interstate standard road?  Kind of weird that there isn't a freeway link there already. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 20, 2016, 11:38:15 AM
are there any real plans to upgrade us 23 to toledo to an interstate standard road?  Kind of weird that there isn't a freeway link there already.

Not much reason to do 23 from Carey to Toledo, as that traffic already uses OH 15 to I-75, and there are plans to redo the 75/15 interchange and widen 75 from there all the way to Toledo (the widening from the north side of Findlay to Perrysburg is already under construction)

The real problem in the Toledo-Columbus corridor is Delaware County, where US 23 is highly developed and the only good workarounds involve cutting over to I-71 on either 2 lane roads or an also well developed 36-37 corridor that you must first traverse Delaware city streets to get to.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 21, 2016, 05:30:19 PM
Well, this is kinda odd. My submission to upgrade the northbound carriageway of 23 to expressway in Marion County went through almost immediately. But the submission for the southbound carriageway is still pending.

So right now if you zoom in close enough on the map, 23 north is orange while 23 south is still yellow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on January 22, 2016, 11:41:15 AM
Well, this is kinda odd. My submission to upgrade the northbound carriageway of 23 to expressway in Marion County went through almost immediately. But the submission for the southbound carriageway is still pending.

So right now if you zoom in close enough on the map, 23 north is orange while 23 south is still yellow.

That is pretty odd. Who knows what goes through their minds at Google. Also, what is the deal with US 20?  There are freeway/expressway portions in and around Norwalk and Fremont, but not according to Google.....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 22, 2016, 09:57:16 PM
Also, what is the deal with US 20?  There are freeway/expressway portions in and around Norwalk and Fremont, but not according to Google.....

Yeah, I might try editting those as well sometime.

anyway, here's an update on the SPUI being built at I-457 and US 20 (Central Ave) in Sylvania

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on January 22, 2016, 10:24:27 PM
I must have missed the I-57 extension from the south side of Chicago eastward across Indiana and over to Toledo. :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 23, 2016, 02:56:59 PM
Buck87, of course, meant the construction of a SPUI Interchange on Interstate 475 in Sylvania.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on January 27, 2016, 11:32:05 AM
On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

There are two categories that display as Orange on Google Maps, Expressway and Freeway.

Freeways cannot have any at grade intersections, only interchanges.

Expressways can be a mix of at grade intersections and interchanges.

The full definition can be found here (https://support.google.com/mapmaker/answer/1098056).

I wish that Google Maps used a different color to denote toll route (like green).  On the existing maps it looks too close to free routes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 30, 2016, 10:19:55 PM
Noticed today that southbound lanes portion of my US 23 edit went through, so that awkward bicolor setup didn't last too long.

So now I've submitted several new edits to upgrade various Ohio roads to either expressways or freeways. They include the US 20 bypasses of Norwalk and Fremont, US 30 and OH 83 in Wooster, US 23 south of US 30 to just past OH 199, US 52 from Sciotoville to Hanging Rock, US 35 from OH 279 to Henderson, WV and US 23 from US 35 to just past OH 104. It'll be interesting to see how many of those go through, and whether or not any of them will have the same issue of the carriageways being different colors for a while.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on January 30, 2016, 11:18:48 PM
I just noticed that the Cedar Point Causeway seems so quaint and low traffic.

This video shows it during the summer season of 2013.



The strange thing is that there's only four lanes, and there's not enough room to widen the road. This would be a problem when everyone comes and goes, is there any plans in widening the causeway? Also, signing is totally desolate, all you get is a VMS near the park entrance.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 11:34:20 PM
At one time (I don't know if they still do) they would have a contraflow lane in which they would add a 3rd lane by sticking plastic cones/sticks in holes in the road to allow better flow in the morning and evening "rush hours".

And they also have the 2-lane Cedar Point Chaussee on the east side (aka the original entrance to CP), but that was always is maintained as a 2-way traffic road due to residential properties and houses along that road.

I have had issues getting out at the end of the night on occasion, but once you are out of the parking areas, the drive along the causeway or chaussee is usually a steady flow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 30, 2016, 11:54:17 PM
Also, signing is totally desolate, all you get is a VMS near the park entrance.

Do you mean entrance signage? There are two big ones on the mainland side (that the people who took the video had already passed before filming)

This is what you see just before you start onto the causeway itself:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sandusky,+OH/@41.4510803,-82.6741655,3a,66.8y,36.31h,88.84t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9NYjWDMOi7vI7lDWv7pX9A!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a4160ab1e4547:0xff2a84906612320f

and there's also this one at the corner of US 6 and Cedar Point Dr a little bit before that:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sandusky,+OH/@41.4417574,-82.6809863,3a,18.7y,53.15h,88.46t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sLo7vL3ZBu_E87uU1BAHOUg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a4160ab1e4547:0xff2a84906612320f

Also, I'm pretty sure the causeway itself is owned by the park. Not sure if they have any plans to expand it. Though traffic has been an issue at times on high volume nights, one time it was so bad that it became a news story because people had to wait for hours to get out:
 http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-erie/hundreds-of-people-were-stuck-in-the-cedar-point-parking-lot-saturday-night-after-halloweekends
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on January 31, 2016, 12:16:18 AM
It could be maintained by the DOT, note the gantry. Excuse the blurriness, that's US 250.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4515384,-82.6740471,3a,75y,244.11h,79.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOR2VPQDrKZqJtKR4Y2mrQA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2016, 11:11:28 PM
I just noticed that the Cedar Point Causeway seems so quaint and low traffic.

I found it a pleasant drive when I was there in 2011.  Drove up to the entrance for early entry from one of their hotel properties.  Much better than the drive to Six Flags New England, for example. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 11, 2016, 10:27:11 PM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on February 12, 2016, 01:16:37 AM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1


Also noted as a related article, the "new" Shoot The Rapids log flume ride is being torn down after only 6 years.

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Business/2016/02/11/Shoot-The-Rapids-coming-down
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on February 12, 2016, 07:54:00 AM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1


Also noted as a related article, the "new" Shoot The Rapids log flume ride is being torn down after only 6 years.

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Business/2016/02/11/Shoot-The-Rapids-coming-down

Makes me wonder about the boondoggle that is Mean Streak.  The ride was jolting people around too much (to the point of injury) when it first opened, so they rehabbed some of the track.  I rode it during the 2011 season after one of the rehabs and then they rehabbed it again after that.  All I know is that if I were managing the place, I'd be facedesking and considering the thing a money pit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 12, 2016, 03:38:45 PM
How is the conversion of the SR 2 section of the Cleveland Memorial Shoreway into a parkway going? Don't ask me why, but I seem very interested in that project.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 15, 2016, 09:50:04 AM
Another new traffic light coming to US 23 in Delaware

http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/delaware/news/2015/12/18/intersections-upgrade-will-give-drivers-more-options.html

This is a downgrade of the northern Sandusky Street half-interchange.  Apparently the southbound exit ramp will be converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street, which will meet US 23 at a traffic light.  The northbound entrance ramp will remain.

This just adds to the case for a proper new-alignment freeway route through Delaware County that the powers that be aren't even considering.  See also fictional I-171 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4801.0).

Drove through there on Wednesday and noticed construction has started on this. Looked like the exit ramp from southbound 23 has already been removed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 26, 2016, 04:17:23 PM
Out with the old, in with the new...

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/64da9254f93483f1ba8fe870ea635a2d.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/c3f1766f7231ac85ee22dae082b75bf9.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 26, 2016, 05:47:19 PM
Did the old sign not have an exit marker?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on April 26, 2016, 05:57:41 PM
If my recollection is correct, that is at the southeastern interchange between US 33 and I-270 in Columbus. Are they adding exit numbers along that stretch of road now or is this just in one place?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 26, 2016, 06:57:18 PM
There is a large scale sign replacement going on in Franklin County, and they're adding exit numbers anywhere they aren't currently posted.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 26, 2016, 08:34:41 PM
^ so I wonder if some of the ancient ones at the southern I-270/US 23 interchange will be (or have been) repalced
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 26, 2016, 10:48:00 PM
Nice catch 6a, I saw them doing something there and was wondering what was going on. Are they dumping control cities with all these sign replacements?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 27, 2016, 11:33:21 PM
Nice catch 6a, I saw them doing something there and was wondering what was going on. Are they dumping control cities with all these sign replacements?

I believe so, at least as it relates to I-270.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on April 28, 2016, 12:18:22 PM
Out with the old, in with the new...

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/64da9254f93483f1ba8fe870ea635a2d.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/c3f1766f7231ac85ee22dae082b75bf9.jpg)

This is a perfect example of how ODOT wastes money on signage &/or construction "upgrade" projects.  That Cincinnati Sign does not look to me more than 10 years old, and yet elsewhere on I-270, you have button-copy signs that are still standing at 30+ years old.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on April 28, 2016, 03:49:24 PM
This is a perfect example of how ODOT wastes money on signage &/or construction "upgrade" projects.  That Cincinnati Sign does not look to me more than 10 years old, and yet elsewhere on I-270, you have button-copy signs that are still standing at 30+ years old.

Button copy signage could be cleaned and refurbished and basically last indefinitely. Newer signs lose retroreflectivity over time, so they have to be replaced periodically.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: halork on May 04, 2016, 02:46:43 AM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on May 04, 2016, 10:02:22 AM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

Pennsylvania has Breezewood. Ohio has Beaverdam. The indirect connection probably has something to do with I-75 running right next to the railroad tracks.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on May 04, 2016, 12:29:20 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

I asked ODOT when they built the new US 30 freeway. They said there was insufficient traffic traveling between the two routes to justify the cost of building a new interchange.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on May 04, 2016, 04:13:08 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

I asked ODOT when they built the new US 30 freeway. They said there was insufficient traffic traveling between the two routes to justify the cost of building a new interchange.

I go through that area about 4 or 5 times a year and I have never seen much traffic making the transition.

As noted the railroad tracks running adjacent to 75 combined with the angle of intersection make for a difficult direct interchange.  I believe this is one of the oldest sections of 75 in Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 04, 2016, 07:55:51 PM
South of old US 30, they both turn a bit. With the tracks, it would just be way too expensive and the interchange would be very 'tight' with another interchange for both of them to the old US30 and the gas stations and truck stops located right there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Fox 11 News on May 11, 2016, 09:19:46 AM
random news release we got today:

BEAVERCREEK, Ohio (May 11, 2016) — Woolpert has been contracted by the city of Beavercreek to realign Shakertown Road in Beavercreek and eliminate its intersection with U.S. 35. The revised Shakertown will connect to Factory Road to the east, in a four-way intersection with Yellow Brick Road, south of U.S. 35.

This project is part of the Ohio Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) ongoing efforts to improve the safety of U.S. 35 through Beavercreek, primarily between Factory and Orchard Lane.

ODOT is moving toward more interchanges and fewer intersections along this section, and has been seeking public input.

Nathan Fischer, Woolpert project manager, said the intersection of Shakertown and U.S. 35 is a dangerous one, with 32 reported crashes at that site in the last three years and 20 percent of those incurring injury.

“We’re going to fix a safety concern that’s been in the area for a while,” Fischer said. “It also affects us on a personal level, since the intersection is 4 miles from our headquarters. A lot of our staff drives through the intersection.”

This project also will involve a slight realignment of Alpha-Bellbrook Road, which currently is part of an offset intersection with Yellow Brick. Alpha-Bellbrook will be diverted into a T-intersection with Shakertown, west of Factory.

The project is in the design phase, and likely will start construction in 2020.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on May 11, 2016, 10:21:35 AM
random news release we got today:

BEAVERCREEK, Ohio (May 11, 2016) — Woolpert has been contracted by the city of Beavercreek to realign Shakertown Road in Beavercreek and eliminate its intersection with U.S. 35. The revised Shakertown will connect to Factory Road to the east, in a four-way intersection with Yellow Brick Road, south of U.S. 35.

This project is part of the Ohio Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) ongoing efforts to improve the safety of U.S. 35 through Beavercreek, primarily between Factory and Orchard Lane.

ODOT is moving toward more interchanges and fewer intersections along this section, and has been seeking public input.

Nathan Fischer, Woolpert project manager, said the intersection of Shakertown and U.S. 35 is a dangerous one, with 32 reported crashes at that site in the last three years and 20 percent of those incurring injury.

“We’re going to fix a safety concern that’s been in the area for a while,” Fischer said. “It also affects us on a personal level, since the intersection is 4 miles from our headquarters. A lot of our staff drives through the intersection.”

This project also will involve a slight realignment of Alpha-Bellbrook Road, which currently is part of an offset intersection with Yellow Brick. Alpha-Bellbrook will be diverted into a T-intersection with Shakertown, west of Factory.

The project is in the design phase, and likely will start construction in 2020.

Beavercreek is to Dayton, OH what Howard is to Green Bay, WI and US 35 is very analogous to WI 29 in the Green Bay and central Wisconsin area, except that this part of US 35 here is more of a 'street' than WI 29 is in the Howard area.  This news item refers to a short section of major suburban non-freeway surface street (it looks a lot like a cross between Ashland Ave, Lombardi Ave and Military Ave in the Green Bay area) between US 35's part of the Dayton freeway system and the start of the more rural 'almost interstate' US 35 at Xenia, OH and on across the far southern part of Ohio towards Charleston, WV.

This is a badly needed upgrade

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 12, 2016, 09:28:53 PM
That last little stretch of US35 to complete the freeway to I-75 has been badly needed. I've been on that stretch a few times and hated it. Freeway-level traffic on a four-lane with lights. No wonder it's dangerous. Reminds me of US71 south of Kansas City. Just completely needs to be freewaytized.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: triplemultiplex on May 12, 2016, 11:06:56 PM
Reminds me of US71 south of Kansas City. Just completely needs to be freewaytized.

(http://williamthecoroner.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/istock_can-of-worms.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 18, 2016, 07:09:32 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

Pennsylvania has Breezewood. Ohio has Beaverdam. The indirect connection probably has something to do with I-75 running right next to the railroad tracks.

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on May 19, 2016, 07:42:21 AM

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.

That reminds me of some interchange ideas I saw on Fictionnal highways section.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3618.msg113621#msg113621
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n208/triplemultiplex/Interchanges/75-30all.png?t=1314385866
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 22, 2016, 10:58:33 PM

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.

That reminds me of some interchange ideas I saw on Fictionnal highways section.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3618.msg113621#msg113621
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n208/triplemultiplex/Interchanges/75-30all.png?t=1314385866

It describes that as economical, but the US 30 and I-75 roadbeds are at significantly different elevations where they cross (as US 30 also passes over the railroad), so I-75 couldn't take over US 30's ROW without being lowered significantly or I-75 being boosted, either of them in place so a detour alignment would have to be constructed, requiring additional right of way temporarily. There are so many loops, and the braided ramps seem tight.  The existing condition is good enough given the current traffic--I have never encountered anything that would require a total redo like this.  Taking the additional property would add to the cost as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on June 26, 2016, 12:25:16 AM
Further evidence that ODOT's freeway sign replacement program is completely random…

All the guide signs on I-670 between I-70 and SR 315 — all good-condition button copy that was put up in 2001 or 2002 — has been recently replaced.  The new signs look good, even in Clearview, but there was nothing wrong with the old signage.

Meanwhile, signs at entrances to I-270 from US 23 and Alum Creek Dr date to (I'm guessing) the early 80's at best, the background colors in the Interstate shields are fading, and in some cases pieces of the sign have fallen off.  Maybe they'll be replaced next week, or maybe they'll still be standing in a decade. It's a crapshoot.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on June 30, 2016, 11:08:54 PM
Further evidence that ODOT's freeway sign replacement program is completely random…

All the guide signs on I-670 between I-70 and SR 315 — all good-condition button copy that was put up in 2001 or 2002 — has been recently replaced.  The new signs look good, even in Clearview, but there was nothing wrong with the old signage.

Meanwhile, signs at entrances to I-270 from US 23 and Alum Creek Dr date to (I'm guessing) the early 80's at best, the background colors in the Interstate shields are fading, and in some cases pieces of the sign have fallen off.  Maybe they'll be replaced next week, or maybe they'll still be standing in a decade. It's a crapshoot.

I found it especially sad when they replaced signage on I-70 between 270 on the west side and just west of 315 in 2003 with reflective lettering signage, replacing button copy that was only two years old!  The Exit 96 signs for 670 had "Airport" legend in button copy covered with an orange plaque reading "Open to 315" and the signs were replaced before the plaque was even removed when 670 opened up through the trench.  Two years of service for the signs while on 315 there were signs from the 70s (at best) still there until a year or two ago?  Bonkers.

Figures that they were replaced with Clearview.....the damned Clearview signs will probably still be there in 50 years!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 13, 2016, 07:31:47 PM
Oh great....we have yet another new traffic light on US 23 in Delaware County

(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14322739_1110188002364226_4259575413175991660_n.jpg?oh=fadc6b4e861d02e0c9c2221609c6a307&oe=586F28E8)

photo caption:
Quote
New roadway, Meeker Way, opens in Delaware County on Thursday. After Meeker Road is open, Stratford Road closes for up to a month.

Clarification: When the project is complete in October, US 23 north and south traffic will be able to access Stratford Road. However, traffic coming from Stratford Road will only be able to turn right onto US 23 north. For access to US 23 south, drivers will use Meeker Way.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 14, 2016, 08:52:21 AM
Oh great....we have yet another new traffic light on US 23 in Delaware County

(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14322739_1110188002364226_4259575413175991660_n.jpg?oh=fadc6b4e861d02e0c9c2221609c6a307&oe=586F28E8)

photo caption:
Quote
New roadway, Meeker Way, opens in Delaware County on Thursday. After Meeker Road is open, Stratford Road closes for up to a month.

Clarification: When the project is complete in October, US 23 north and south traffic will be able to access Stratford Road. However, traffic coming from Stratford Road will only be able to turn right onto US 23 north. For access to US 23 south, drivers will use Meeker Way.

They're also taking out the light at Stratford, so that's a net no new traffic signals.  On the other hand, the 315 and Stratford lights were synced for 23 through traffic, and the Meeker light probably won't be synced.  On the other other hand, traffic on the Meeker approach will probably be so light that signal won't have to stop 23 often.

I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 14, 2016, 12:02:05 PM

They're also taking out the light at Stratford, so that's a net no new traffic signals.  On the other hand, the 315 and Stratford lights were synced for 23 through traffic, and the Meeker light probably won't be synced.  On the other other hand, traffic on the Meeker approach will probably be so light that signal won't have to stop 23 often.

Yeah, so while it's not a net gain of signals, it's still a net gain of possible places of having to stop (however unlikely that might end up being.)

Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on September 14, 2016, 05:45:57 PM
us 23 needs to be upgraded to interstate standards one day.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 14, 2016, 09:01:06 PM
Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?

Nearing completion. When I drove through on Friday night, they were applying the permanent lane markings on 23. I couldn't see if signals were hung or the status of the Sandusky St extension, but I imagine they're close to wrapping that project up, except possibly for landscaping which might be finished in the spring.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 17, 2016, 07:43:02 AM
Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?

Nearing completion. When I drove through on Friday night, they were applying the permanent lane markings on 23. I couldn't see if signals were hung or the status of the Sandusky St extension, but I imagine they're close to wrapping that project up, except possibly for landscaping which might be finished in the spring.

Update: as of yesterday, Sandusky St extension open, operating as RIRO at US 23. Left turn lane from NB 23 to (SB) Sandusky closed. Sandusky St ends with right turn only to 23 SB, and this is apparently final configuration. Signal mast arms in place, with no signals on them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: alecscradle on September 21, 2016, 02:06:05 AM
At this point it's almost easier to take Sawmill or Liberty to Delaware.  I've driven up both those routes, and while Sawmill south of Powell rd sucks, both roads are a relative ease to take.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 21, 2016, 08:53:39 AM
At this point it's almost easier to take Sawmill or Liberty to Delaware.  I've driven up both those routes, and while Sawmill south of Powell rd sucks, both roads are a relative ease to take.

Sawmill will be open to US 42 soon, which will help that alternative.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on September 29, 2016, 09:37:58 AM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 29, 2016, 10:18:56 AM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.

My guess is, in the very recent past, revenues were coming up short of projections, so some larger impending projects were delayed, freeing up some money for immediate use; and now, revenues are exceeding projections, so some smaller projects are being moved up.  Assuming competence on the part of ODOT, it looks like the goal to spend as much of the cash they expect to have in any given year, and changing cash flow expectations result in reshuffled project timelines.  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on September 29, 2016, 12:15:07 PM
Could it have been from issuing more bonds?  That's happening quite a bit now in NYSDOT's program.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on September 29, 2016, 02:26:12 PM
Could it have been from issuing more bonds?  That's happening quite a bit now in NYSDOT's program.

(personal opinion emphasized)

that might actually be true, the same thing has happened in indiana before due to this
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on September 29, 2016, 08:45:53 PM
  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

I'm still wondering if design-build has to do with it as well. Meaning design-build leads to a lot less long-term planning. The idea will be put out there at some point, but nothing will be truly planned long term in a specific time frame. Like, "ehhhh, sometime before 2027."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on September 30, 2016, 10:07:27 AM
  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

I'm still wondering if design-build has to do with it as well. Meaning design-build leads to a lot less long-term planning. The idea will be put out there at some point, but nothing will be truly planned long term in a specific time frame. Like, "ehhhh, sometime before 2027."

Hm.  At least here in NY, design-build only pertains to detailed design (final design report to PS&E) and construction phases of the project.  Typically treat the proposals due date as the equivalent to a traditional letting date for the project and for incorporation into NYSDOT's capital program database.  Not sure how that would translate into less long-term planning overall, since they get thrown into the mix anyway somewhere along the line.

Then again, NY tends to treat any "plan" beyond whatever is considered the current program as fluff anyway and even within the current program, anything beyond the first couple of years is considered tentative (i.e., most likely going to move later).

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on October 04, 2016, 03:28:04 PM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.

My guess is, in the very recent past, revenues were coming up short of projections, so some larger impending projects were delayed, freeing up some money for immediate use; and now, revenues are exceeding projections, so some smaller projects are being moved up.  Assuming competence on the part of ODOT, it looks like the goal to spend as much of the cash they expect to have in any given year, and changing cash flow expectations result in reshuffled project timelines.  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

Oh, how I want to be cynical, but you're probably right. It just seemed like someone opened a magic can of money and poof! all the projects got bumped up.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 03:25:31 PM
I don't know if Ohio has any APLs yet, but District 6 is getting rid of the dancing arrows and throwing in an APL along US 33: https://www.facebook.com/ODOTColumbusDistrict6/photos/a.253516568031378.57989.240292776020424/1154169991299360/?type=3&theater
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 03, 2016, 04:06:01 PM
I'm pretty sure there have been APLs installed in Ohio before those on US 33.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 03, 2016, 06:31:55 PM
Why not just do that for both directions lol I love you ODOT. Never change.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 25, 2016, 01:06:14 AM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: delstein on November 26, 2016, 12:24:42 PM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 29, 2016, 11:07:05 AM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 

That's not the end, actually.  It's supposed to curve west and end at Section Line Rd.  I very recently noticed Google has imagery from this fall of the Columbus area, and it looks like the Sawmill Pkwy construction ends about halfway between US 42 and Section Line Rd, leaving a short stretch to be completed in the future.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on November 29, 2016, 09:25:59 PM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 

My parents live off of Sawmill Parkway in Powell.  It seemed to be a nice alternative to US 23 (the PARKWAY, that is), until you hit the Sawmill ROAD segment going into Franklin County.  Then, like US-23, you have poor infrastructure planning from synching of traffic lights to failure to limit the number of driveway access points.  Delaware County, you've done good!!!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 02, 2016, 04:41:55 PM
I hope this link works,

http://contracts.dot.state.oh.us/common/pageIterator.do?addTo=&forward=searchResultsCondensedJSP&iteratorKey=search.page.iterator&page=next&from=topNav

PID number 89303 is a signing contract in which US 23 and 33, along with OH 104 and 315 will continue to get mileage based exit numbers. It's 665 pages in length and I thought I would pass it along. :)  It looks to me like any and all remaining button copy is getting ready to be replaced. Plans seem to be in FHWA and not clearview.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 02, 2016, 05:55:51 PM
Naturally, the above link does not work. I am trying to plug in the PIN number to find a combination that works. Sorry folks.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 03, 2016, 02:37:52 AM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 05, 2016, 03:30:08 PM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.

Excellent point! According to the plans, it is just the south end of 315 (I did not see any of I-270/315/23 signage - unless that is a separate contract altogether, which would not surprise me). 104's exit numbers were thorough :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on December 05, 2016, 03:57:14 PM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.

Excellent point! According to the plans, it is just the south end of 315 (I did not see any of I-270/315/23 signage - unless that is a separate contract altogether, which would not surprise me). 104's exit numbers were thorough :)

The north outerbelt is almost certainly its own contract. It would make the most sense just to throw that in with the reconstruction and its sign replacements.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: epzik8 on December 08, 2016, 06:40:58 PM
Good God! Youngstown, Ohio is the very definition of "desolate"! You'll know what I'm talking about if you've ever been on U.S. 62 just off I-680 like I was today.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on December 08, 2016, 08:36:10 PM
You don't have to stop for red lights at night if no one is coming in Youngstown. At least it was like that in the 2000s.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 09, 2016, 04:59:32 PM
What could possibly be done to revitalize Youngstown? I doubt the answer has anything to do with its roads, though.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on December 09, 2016, 06:43:58 PM
What could possibly be done to revitalize Youngstown? I doubt the answer has anything to do with its roads, though.

It's all Eds and Meds these days. Our capitalist system can only thrive by cannibalizing what used to be services.

Investing a few billion in Youngstown State University, making it Ohio's second flagship university, for example, or consolidating Mayo clinics in the eastern third of the country in the city might push it back. Manufacturing is largely automated, and Youngstown has no natural advantages in distribution or services; it needs an institutional anchor.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on December 09, 2016, 06:57:30 PM
i think this article poses an interesting idea: http://www.vox.com/new-money/2016/12/9/13881712/move-government-to-midwest
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 13, 2016, 07:47:58 PM
The new Ironton-Russell Bridge is open now. Drove across it yesterday. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 14, 2016, 10:45:22 AM
I hope this link works,

http://contracts.dot.state.oh.us/common/pageIterator.do?addTo=&forward=searchResultsCondensedJSP&iteratorKey=search.page.iterator&page=next&from=topNav

PID number 89303 is a signing contract in which US 23 and 33, along with OH 104 and 315 will continue to get mileage based exit numbers. It's 665 pages in length and I thought I would pass it along. :)  It looks to me like any and all remaining button copy is getting ready to be replaced. Plans seem to be in FHWA and not clearview.

I've got it. At the top of the page, click on documents; then in the PID blank type 89303 and then the project comes up and you can download at the far right.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: BrianP on December 15, 2016, 05:01:48 PM
I noticed the name of the new bridge on google maps:
Oakley Clark Collins Bridge opens to public today in Ironton and Russell (http://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/ohio_news/oakley-clark-collins-bridge-opens-to-public-today-in-ironton/article_b71a1b9f-d1ba-5ace-b06f-f57b176c1f76.html) (Nov 23rd)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 20, 2016, 10:50:31 AM
"No documents found" it says.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 20, 2016, 02:30:52 PM
well crap!  :banghead:    trying again.  PID is correct - just trying something else to get access.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 01, 2017, 10:14:51 AM
A fairly new sign has turned up near me that I find kinda funny. Thanks to ODOT's abbreviation of "Islands" to "Is"....there is now a sign on OH 2 before the OH 4 exit that lists 3 different things, but can be read together as a complete sentence that says:

"Lake Erie Is Cedar Point Ferry Service"

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4001029,-82.7108622,3a,36.5y,294.22h,89.63t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sy4LZF7KOqRfmzXvpHUkf2w!2e0
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on January 03, 2017, 01:16:30 AM
My wife and I decided to head to Jeffersonville, OH to shop at the Tanger Outlets yesterday.  After finishing, I decided to drive along US 35 east to the Frankfort exit, turn around, then drive back to I-675 near Dayton with a small side trip along "Old 35" from Jamestown through Xenia.

Some observations...

     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

     - A glaring inaccuracy on a mileage sign at the "Old 35" exit (Exit 62) west of Jamestown.  Washington C.H. is shown as being 36 miles away at this point (and Dayton 25).  At the OH 72 exit two miles east, Washington C.H. is shown at the correct mileage of 19 (with Dayton also correct at 27 miles).  Six miles west of the "Old 35" exit, Washington C.H. is shown as being 29 miles away.  That 36 should be a 21 or 22.  This is what I do not like much on highways--as mentioned in another thread.

     - The westbound Xenia mileages are wrong--they all are around 4 miles less than what they supposed to be.  From OH 753 to the other side of I-71, Xenia should be listed at 32, 26, and 16 instead of 27, 22, and 12.

     - As usual, a pleasant drive.  Too bad the day looked as if I was in Seattle.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on January 03, 2017, 08:54:37 PM
I-71 north and southbound have both been on their new decks of the Jeremiah Morrow Bridge for a couple weeks now.

Took this from the Little Miami River trail below (the terrain made it pretty much impossible to get a picture of the whole thing):
(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15740911_319934355072726_5815984719463956291_n.jpg?oh=0984e994f74127413954b96bfd1b2ddd&oe=58DA51F6)

And a lovely reassurance marker at the northbound rest area:
(https://i.imgur.com/Mx9VSzh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on January 03, 2017, 09:10:19 PM
     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

The sign job at 35 and 675 made nightly news at the time. The contractor screwed up the BGSs on the 675 SB C/D road so that Dayton was the control city on both 35 East and West. They came back and crossed it out on 35 East with what looked like green duct tape, then came back a few months later and put on a Xenia patch that IIRC looks small compared to the rest of the sign.

The other weird thing with that whole sign job is that they made liberal use of "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at the exit gores, even though 80-90% of the exits along that part of 35 just have deceleration lanes (and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before).

Maybe it's just coincidence, but it seems like there is a correlation between Ohio's Clearview era and generally sloppy quality control.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 04, 2017, 12:36:21 PM
Nice vantage point!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 04, 2017, 12:40:34 PM
     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

The sign job at 35 and 675 made nightly news at the time. The contractor screwed up the BGSs on the 675 SB C/D road so that Dayton was the control city on both 35 East and West. They came back and crossed it out on 35 East with what looked like green duct tape, then came back a few months later and put on a Xenia patch that IIRC looks small compared to the rest of the sign.

The other weird thing with that whole sign job is that they made liberal use of "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at the exit gores, even though 80-90% of the exits along that part of 35 just have deceleration lanes (and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before).

Maybe it's just coincidence, but it seems like there is a correlation between Ohio's Clearview era and generally sloppy quality control.

Ohio has been adding "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at exit gores on many roads that just have deceleration lanes, and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before.   I have seen a lot of people bail out of the right lane, because they erroneously thought it was an exit-only lane.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 1 on January 04, 2017, 12:56:00 PM
We have two threads with the exact same name, and it might be hard to keep track of which is which. Merge?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on January 04, 2017, 01:31:26 PM
We have two threads with the exact same name, and it might be hard to keep track of which is which. Merge?

There's an Ohio thread in Great Lakes (northern Ohio) and Ohio Valley (southern Ohio). The official definition of the split is on the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16419.0 ), though the threads seem to be getting crossed, and there is some contestability about that map, like lumping Dayton into northern Ohio when it's 50 miles from Cincinnati. Maybe a mod could rename the threads Northern Ohio and Southern Ohio?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on January 04, 2017, 01:51:28 PM
We have two threads with the exact same name, and it might be hard to keep track of which is which. Merge?

There's an Ohio thread in Great Lakes (northern Ohio) and Ohio Valley (southern Ohio). The official definition of the split is on the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16419.0 ), though the threads seem to be getting crossed, and there is some contestability about that map, like lumping Dayton into northern Ohio when it's 50 miles from Cincinnati. Maybe a mod could rename the threads Northern Ohio and Southern Ohio?

Personally, I think the divide should be the geographical divide between where waters flow into the Ohio River vs. where they flow into the Great Lakes. I posted something about Columbus in the Ohio Valley board and was told by someone it should have been posted in the Great Lakes board -- never mind the fact that the Scioto River flows into the Ohio River and not Lake Erie.  :banghead:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on January 04, 2017, 08:45:05 PM
We have two threads with the exact same name, and it might be hard to keep track of which is which. Merge?

There's an Ohio thread in Great Lakes (northern Ohio) and Ohio Valley (southern Ohio). The official definition of the split is on the other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16419.0 ), though the threads seem to be getting crossed, and there is some contestability about that map, like lumping Dayton into northern Ohio when it's 50 miles from Cincinnati. Maybe a mod could rename the threads Northern Ohio and Southern Ohio?

Personally, I think the divide should be the geographical divide between where waters flow into the Ohio River vs. where they flow into the Great Lakes. I posted something about Columbus in the Ohio Valley board and was told by someone it should have been posted in the Great Lakes board -- never mind the fact that the Scioto River flows into the Ohio River and not Lake Erie.  :banghead:

If you did that, Akron would be in the Southern Ohio board which makes no logical sense.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 05, 2017, 10:23:35 AM
I have a couple ideas, neither of which is perfect.

1.  Divide by area code -- N (419 567 216 440 234 330) & S (937 513 220 380 614 740) - that would cause Marion County to be in the south, though.

2.  South would include the counties that I-70 runs through, plus all counties south of those.  North would be everything else.   - the only problem with that is that Delaware and Franklin Counties, which are closely linked highway-wise, would be in different zones.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 05, 2017, 04:15:20 PM

Personally, I think the divide should be the geographical divide between where waters flow into the Ohio River vs. where they flow into the Great Lakes. I posted something about Columbus in the Ohio Valley board and was told by someone it should have been posted in the Great Lakes board -- never mind the fact that the Scioto River flows into the Ohio River and not Lake Erie.  :banghead:

That would look like this...

(http://watercraft.ohiodnr.gov/portals/watercraft/images/maps/divide.png)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: civeng on January 06, 2017, 09:18:37 AM
Merge threads and access it from both regional boards?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 16, 2017, 10:36:44 PM
I just passed the OH 164 interchange on OH 11 northbound at Columbiana and saw what may be LED reflectors on the exit ramps. They seemed to be on the outsides of the stripes. The colour was distinctive - a blue/white 8,000 Kelvin 3-LED setup per unit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 17, 2017, 03:07:24 PM
Surprisingly a general thread for Ohio-related news hasn't been started, so here it is.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Pages/I-71-MLK-Interchange-Project-Info.aspx
The official MLK Drive Project page from ODOT has a nice timeline for progress on the interchange. I couldn't find any newer information about the project. Anyone have new information on the project's progress?

The timeline here has not been updated in a couple years, but I think it is mostly still accurate - they do periodically add notifications when there are lane closings (as of today, the latest one is dated 12/19/16.)

My personal observations are that the ramp from MLK to northbound 71 is very close to opening.   I understand that when it is opened, the McMillan on-ramp is going to be shut down for a time for re-vamping.  I would expect this in the March-April 17 time frame.  It would also appear that the Taft Rd exit will have to be closed at least for a weekend if not longer when the new southbound exit ramps for MLK and Taft have the final touches put on them.  They may choose to do this when UC is not in session.   I would assume that the onramp from MLK to southbound 71 would open around the same time.   I don't know if the plan is to open all the ramps simultaneously or not.

I assume that MLK will be Exit 4 - can anyone confirm that?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 17, 2017, 03:21:45 PM
Merge threads and access it from both regional boards?

Certainly. There really is no clear dividing point. I spent a few years in Columbus and, depending on who you talk to, it's either with the Ohio Valley or the Great Lakes. Culturally, it's more with the Ohio Valley.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 17, 2017, 04:15:51 PM
Merge threads and access it from both regional boards?

If possible that would probably be the best way to do it. Though that would only resolve the issue of the general thread for little stuff....the debate about the split would still be there for projects that get their own threads.

And really, there's apparently not that much demand for a southern Ohio general thread. 75% of the posts in this relatively short thread have been about how the state should be divided, not actual road related topics. Meanwhile the general Ohio thread in the Midwest-Great Lakes forum is up to 6 pages covering all sorts of on topic stuff, including the Columbus and Dayton areas.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 17, 2017, 04:33:14 PM
Which is precisely why we should merge the threads.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 18, 2017, 10:20:23 AM
My wife and I decided to head to Jeffersonville, OH to shop at the Tanger Outlets yesterday. 

Tanger Outlets is in (or, at least, adjacent to) Octa. Jeffersonville is the next exit up on I-71, and it has a much crappier outlet mall.

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/sm-octa-jville-dim-m.png8.png)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Henry on January 18, 2017, 10:22:11 AM

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/sm-octa-jville-dim-m.png8.png)

Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: civeng on January 18, 2017, 11:36:14 AM

If possible that would probably be the best way to do it. Though that would only resolve the issue of the general thread for little stuff....the debate about the split would still be there for projects that get their own threads.

Couldn't projects be done the same way, one thread accessible from multiple boards?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 18, 2017, 12:01:46 PM
Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D

That was my creation.  I suggested this to ODOT District 6 via Facebook. The reply was basically "we don't think these are warranted, but we appreciate the initiative".
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 18, 2017, 12:18:04 PM
If possible that would probably be the best way to do it. Though that would only resolve the issue of the general thread for little stuff....the debate about the split would still be there for projects that get their own threads.

Couldn't projects be done the same way, one thread accessible from multiple boards?

I suppose, but only for ones that could go either way. No reason to have a Toledo thread accessible from Ohio Valley or a Cincinnati thread in Midwest-Great Lakes.



Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 18, 2017, 12:23:32 PM
Ha, there could be similar signs for

"You are in Ontario, not Mansfield"
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 18, 2017, 12:30:28 PM
The outlet malls at both exit 65 and exit 65 have a mailing address of Jeffersonville (43128).  The one at 69 is also within the village limits of Jeffersonville, the one at 65 is in unincorporated Jefferson Township just outside the village limits of Octa.

I see no problem with referring to the location of the Tanger Outlet Mall as Jeffersonville.

FWIW, the mall at exit 69 is also in the Jeffersonville rate center, but the one at exit 65 is in the Milledgeville rate center.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 74/171FAN on January 18, 2017, 04:45:01 PM
I was actually about to post to the staff forum about this and then saw that it has already been noticed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on January 18, 2017, 09:00:30 PM
I like them separated.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 19, 2017, 12:19:56 AM
The Speedway across 435 from Tanger Outlets identifies its location as Octa on its receipts, and the weather forecast displayed at the fuel pumps is for Octa, OH.

If Jeffersonville were big enough to be conveniently accessed from both exits, then I'd be fine with calling the whole vicinity Jeffersonville, but that's not the case.  On the other hand, the old town of Octa isn't particularly close either, and if it hadn't technically grown to the interchange by annexation, I might be arguing to call the junction West Lancaster.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 19, 2017, 12:24:49 AM
If it's technically possible, I would prefer the threads merged and available from both forums.  Failing that, I still assert that dividing the state along DOT district lines and paying attention to culture makes more sense than basing the decision on hydrology basins, the literal name of one forum, and half the literal name of the other forum.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 19, 2017, 09:59:14 AM
The Speedway is actually within the village limits of Octa, despite having a Jeffersonville mailing address.  So, I think they are OK using either Octa or Jeffersonville on their receipts.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Henry on January 19, 2017, 10:10:02 AM
Ha, there could be similar signs for

"You are in Ontario, not Mansfield"
Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D
Still, I got a big laugh out of it! :rofl:

That was my creation.  I suggested this to ODOT District 6 via Facebook. The reply was basically "we don't think these are warranted, but we appreciate the initiative".
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on January 19, 2017, 07:31:03 PM
That was funny (even at my expense).  I just say Jeffersonville because it is a bigger town than Octa.  People around Cincinnati really wouldn't know where Octa is--even though I do know as I have visited the TA across OH 435 from the outlet mall.  Receipts do use Octa on them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on January 19, 2017, 08:00:24 PM
Use I-70 as the dividing line between the two Ohio threads.  North of I-70--Midwest/Great Lakes, south of I-70, Ohio Valley.  As far as Columbus is concerned, I would put any item relating to Columbus in Ohio Valley.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 19, 2017, 08:04:19 PM
Use I-70 as the dividing line between the two Ohio threads.  North of I-70--Midwest/Great Lakes, south of I-70, Ohio Valley.  As far as Columbus is concerned, I would put any item relating to Columbus in Ohio Valley.

I agree. Culturally, Columbus is more like the Ohio Valley than the industrial Great Lakes region.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 19, 2017, 09:27:33 PM
As far as the cultural divide goes, I agree with those who have stated earlier that it falls more or less along the lines of glaciated vs non glaciated Ohio. Basically, where the corn fields give way to foothills, and Columbus is north of that divide.

And it should be noted, when it comes to the history of AAroads, the vast majority of Columbus related topics have been posted in the Midwest Great-Lakes forum, not here in Ohio Valley.

 

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 20, 2017, 12:12:32 AM
Use I-70 as the dividing line between the two Ohio threads.  North of I-70--Midwest/Great Lakes, south of I-70, Ohio Valley.  As far as Columbus is concerned, I would put any item relating to Columbus in Ohio Valley.

I agree. Culturally, Columbus is more like the Ohio Valley than the industrial Great Lakes region.

This Columbusite identifies more with the corn-growing Midwest than the deer-hunting Ohio Valley.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on January 21, 2017, 10:35:58 PM
Use I-70 as the dividing line between the two Ohio threads.  North of I-70--Midwest/Great Lakes, south of I-70, Ohio Valley.  As far as Columbus is concerned, I would put any item relating to Columbus in Ohio Valley.

I agree. Culturally, Columbus is more like the Ohio Valley than the industrial Great Lakes region.

This Columbusite identifies more with the corn-growing Midwest than the deer-hunting Ohio Valley.

Each of the three C's is a border town - CLE and COLS between the Midwest and Appalachia, CIN between the Midwest and the (Upper) South.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on January 22, 2017, 03:21:21 PM
Use I-70 as the dividing line between the two Ohio threads.  North of I-70--Midwest/Great Lakes, south of I-70, Ohio Valley.  As far as Columbus is concerned, I would put any item relating to Columbus in Ohio Valley.

I agree. Culturally, Columbus is more like the Ohio Valley than the industrial Great Lakes region.

This Columbusite identifies more with the corn-growing Midwest than the deer-hunting Ohio Valley.

Each of the three C's is a border town - CLE and COLS between the Midwest and Appalachia, CIN between the Midwest and the (Upper) South.
That's not how I would define it. I don't consider that start of Appalachia Cleveland it doesn't start until more like Youngstown. Same goes for Columbus I would say it starts more like Zanesville about 50 miles east and I certainly don't consider Cincinnati to be the beginning of the south. I would consider the beginning of the south heading down on I-75 to be Berea KY just south of Lexington. So Lexington is the border town not Cincinnati.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 23, 2017, 09:03:32 AM
Pfft.  My cousins in Winchester, KY have the drawl, therefore Lexington is in the South.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2017, 12:51:58 PM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)
- all signalized intersections now have street name signage (many of which are private drives into parking lots, such as N. and S. Meijer Drive)
- most of these intersections now have "<- west US 250 east ->" signage (an idea I like, but brings up a separate beef of mine that US 250 should be signed as North/South from Sandusky to at least Ashland)
- and my favorite new addition, the turn lane signage approaching the OH 2 interchange includes OH 2 east/west shields to let you know which lane is for which (can be seen in GSV here: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4025426,-82.6582092,3a,66.8y,196.44h,86.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sAX0y6ALoHm3lkpMW3caAcw!2e0 )
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on January 23, 2017, 01:14:38 PM
Pfft.  My cousins in Winchester, KY have the drawl, therefore Lexington is in the South.
It's a border town some southern accents but not exclusively. North of there is the midwest south of there is the south. My grandparents lived in Virginia another border state like Kentucky  and they didn't have a southern accent. Some southern accents but not everyone That's why a border state is called a border state. It's a little of both.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 23, 2017, 01:20:53 PM
I agree that a lot of people in Virginia don't have the drawl.  However, in my experience, even north of Lexington along I-75, you have the drawl being dominant.  Border states are border states because of the history leading up to the Civil War; Kentucky was technically a Southern state that aligned itself with the North (although, in reality, it was probably more of a brother-against-brother state than anywhere else).

I stick by the placement of Kentucky in the South, just like the Census Bureau (East South Central region).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 23, 2017, 02:09:54 PM
I found that the drawl in Virginia really depends on location. DC metro and along the I-95 corridor doesn't have it as much as the I-81 corridor. When going to the Birmingham meet, everybody had it as far north as Harrisonburg.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: AlexandriaVA on January 23, 2017, 03:04:56 PM
A good barometer is to see how much of a county has a high % of multigenerational family members, specifically those hailing from the Scot-Irish settlers. DC won't have the accept because of the homogenization of the local dialect due to recurring inflow of people from outside the region (white people at least...local black residents have more of a common linguistic heritage).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on January 23, 2017, 05:00:48 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2017, 06:37:51 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )

Agreed, the Appalachian accent is definitely different than the deep south accent, and it extends into parts of Ohio as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on January 23, 2017, 08:46:42 PM
If you've got an unskilled labor job in Columbus, you'd better learn how to understand the Appalachian accent very quickly. The reason I say "learn to understand" is that I have worked with people whose accent was so thick that I couldn't understand some things they said initially (even though my mother is from Appalachian Ohio)... and that can be dangerous in that sort of environment. Wherever they were from, it was all the way up the 'holler. These folks have been in Columbus a long time too. You aren't going to lose your Appalachian accent living and working on the South Side. There's a big difference between the way people talk in Monroe County and the Northern Panhandle of WV as compared to SW WV or SE KY. Also you can hear much more Southern influence in the speech patterns of people from East Tennessee.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on January 23, 2017, 09:01:22 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Revive 755 on January 23, 2017, 09:25:50 PM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)

From all of the doghouses, I take it Ohio is not a fan of flashing yellow arrows?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on January 24, 2017, 09:19:33 AM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)

From all of the doghouses, I take it Ohio is not a fan of flashing yellow arrows?

The flashing yellow arrow is not used in this part of Ohio. Not sure about other areas....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 24, 2017, 10:04:07 AM
I have not seen a flashing yellow arrow anywhere in Ohio - but there are some right across the river in Northern Kentucky (specifically at Dixie Highway (25/42/127) at I-71/75.)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 24, 2017, 12:18:21 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )

Agreed, the Appalachian accent is definitely different than the deep south accent, and it extends into parts of Ohio as well.
Thirded.


Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: busman_49 on January 24, 2017, 01:39:06 PM
I have not seen a flashing yellow arrow anywhere in Ohio - but there are some right across the river in Northern Kentucky (specifically at Dixie Highway (25/42/127) at I-71/75.)

Dayton at Dixie Drive & Wagner Ford Rd.; West Chester at Tylersville Rd & Kingsridge Dr, and OH 741 at Bethany Rd. are three that I know of.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on January 24, 2017, 01:48:49 PM
If you've got an unskilled labor job in Columbus, you'd better learn how to understand the Appalachian accent very quickly. The reason I say "learn to understand" is that I have worked with people whose accent was so thick that I couldn't understand some things they said initially (even though my mother is from Appalachian Ohio)... and that can be dangerous in that sort of environment. Wherever they were from, it was all the way up the 'holler. These folks have been in Columbus a long time too. You aren't going to lose your Appalachian accent living and working on the South Side. There's a big difference between the way people talk in Monroe County and the Northern Panhandle of WV as compared to SW WV or SE KY. Also you can hear much more Southern influence in the speech patterns of people from East Tennessee.

My wife (native of the Dayton, Ohio area; although her parents were both from our hometown) and I both laugh whenever we're watching "Moonshiners" and see the subtitles. We understand what they're saying perfectly, even ol' Jim Tom.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 24, 2017, 02:35:09 PM
Major change coming to Reagan/Montgomery exit (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/local/montgomery/2016/10/17/montgomery-gets-grant-roundabout/92305918/)
Map: http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=39.22265,-84.35809&z=16&t=H

The stub end of OH 126 in Montgomery, once part of a freeway that was to extend further east, will be reconfigured into a roundabout. It will serve as an entrance to a major new development near downtown.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 24, 2017, 04:25:45 PM
Major change coming to Reagan/Montgomery exit (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/local/montgomery/2016/10/17/montgomery-gets-grant-roundabout/92305918/)
Map: http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=39.22265,-84.35809&z=16&t=H

The stub end of OH 126 in Montgomery, once part of a freeway that was to extend further east, will be reconfigured into a roundabout. It will serve as an entrance to a major new development near downtown.

I saw this a couple weeks ago....I'll be curious to see how traffic will be maintained during construction.  It's an unusual change is it's going from grade-separated to at-grade.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 24, 2017, 04:35:05 PM
What's traffic typically like through there? I've been through that interchange a few times as a passenger while visiting a friend who was living in Remington at the time, though that's been nearly 10 years ago and I don't remember much about the traffic flow. I do recall thinking that was a weird place for the Ronald Reagan to come to an abrupt end....too bad they were never able to finish it all the way east to I-275. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 24, 2017, 04:44:13 PM
Never got finished because of NIMBYism.....the area it would have gone through is very exclusive (one of the highest income ZIP codes in the state).   I always thought that they could have made a nice parkway (no trucks) to extend the highway to Wards Corner Rd, but I do not know if that option was ever on the table.

As far as traffic, I do not go through there often, and when I do, it's not usually rush hour.  Traffic on Montgomery Road just north of this interchange gets bad during both AM and PM rushes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 24, 2017, 04:59:34 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.

I can remember it being 2 lane as well, that section was widened to its current 5 lane configuration in 2002.

I don't remember the Blue Hole signs, as it was sadly closed to the public when I was 3. Though on a side note, while that Blue Hole is closed, there is another nearby blue hole that can be visited by the general public at the Castalia State Fish Hatchery (not nearly as built up though, it just has one little railing-less dock you can view it from)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 26, 2017, 10:58:02 PM
A few weeks ago, I was northbound on I-71 coming out of Cincinnati towards the end of the evening rush.  I stopped at the Arby's on Montgomery Rd, and while I was in there, there must have been some kind of accident on 71.  Traffic on the freeway was completely stopped, and a police car blocked the northbound entrance ramp.  So I took Montgomery Rd to the Reagan back to 71.  Traffic on this alternate route was moving along just fine, somehow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 26, 2017, 11:00:46 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.

I can remember it being 2 lane as well, that section was widened to its current 5 lane configuration in 2002.

I don't remember the Blue Hole signs, as it was sadly closed to the public when I was 3. Though on a side note, while that Blue Hole is closed, there is another nearby blue hole that can be visited by the general public at the Castalia State Fish Hatchery (not nearly as built up though, it just has one little railing-less dock you can view it from)

How about "The Earth Crack" at Seneca Caverns? I've never been, but since we're talking about holes in the ground…
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JMoses24 on January 27, 2017, 12:36:12 AM
Surprisingly a general thread for Ohio-related news hasn't been started, so here it is.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Pages/I-71-MLK-Interchange-Project-Info.aspx
The official MLK Drive Project page from ODOT has a nice timeline for progress on the interchange. I couldn't find any newer information about the project. Anyone have new information on the project's progress?

The timeline here has not been updated in a couple years, but I think it is mostly still accurate - they do periodically add notifications when there are lane closings (as of today, the latest one is dated 12/19/16.)

My personal observations are that the ramp from MLK to northbound 71 is very close to opening.   I understand that when it is opened, the McMillan on-ramp is going to be shut down for a time for re-vamping.  I would expect this in the March-April 17 time frame.  It would also appear that the Taft Rd exit will have to be closed at least for a weekend if not longer when the new southbound exit ramps for MLK and Taft have the final touches put on them.  They may choose to do this when UC is not in session.   I would assume that the onramp from MLK to southbound 71 would open around the same time.   I don't know if the plan is to open all the ramps simultaneously or not.

I assume that MLK will be Exit 4 - can anyone confirm that?

FWIW, UC's Spring Break is March 13-19. If they're going to time it to coincide with UC being off, that's when.

That, or after final exams April 22-27.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 27, 2017, 10:07:47 AM
How about "The Earth Crack" at Seneca Caverns? I've never been, but since we're talking about holes in the ground…

It's a very unique cave, in that it formed due to a subsurface collapse rather than being slowly carved out by water like most caves. It's also left really close to its natural state, so there's not the typical concrete path with railings everywhere, but rather natural surface floors and rocks used as steps with a lot of climbing involved. The cave is made up of a series of levels stacked on top of each other, and how deep you can go on the tour depends on the water table, which fluctuates all year long based on rainfall, with the deepest you can get on a tour being 110 feet when the 7th level is dry. One thing this cave does not have much of is formations, just a few tiny stalactites.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2017, 05:26:04 PM
There is an Ohio thread in both the Midwest/Great Lakes and the Ohio Valley Regional Boards. Could the two be merged, or differentiated from one another?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 27, 2017, 06:45:45 PM
<sigh>

Can we not do this in this thread? The Ohio thread in the Ohio Valley forum has already been dominated by discussion about how Ohio should be divided/what to do with these threads , and it would suck to see that happen to this thread too.

Perhaps a new thread about this subject in the Suggestions and Questions forum would be a better place to hash this stuff out and bring it to the attention of the admins.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on January 28, 2017, 07:09:37 PM
Not sure where to put this, but figured this would be as good of a place as any. Don't think this qualifies as 'fictional roads' since we're discussing a real road.

Someone on another board (non-road related, and I won't give out the URL) has gotten the bright idea that Canton would be so much better if I-77 were boulevardized essentially the entire length of the US62 multiplex. That being either just north of Fulton Rd to US30, or including what would be US62 as an 'intersection' north of Fulton Rd.

Their argument being that it there isn't much traffic on it (it averages 86k per day along that stretch), it cut off two neighborhoods from eachother (it didn't, but they think it did), it won't cost much (?), and that safety isn't a pressing concern.

So, I've spewed some facts at them, and like a duck, they wash right off. So, I'd like a little better argument. Since I-77 is elevated between US62 and south of Fulton Rd, and then sunken from south of Fulton Rd through past Lincolnway, how much would it cost over that 2.8 mile stretch to raise/lower the road accordingly. Including demolishing bridges. Simply for argument sake.

Their next response, was that they could sink all of I-77 and cover it to 'connect the two neighborhoods'(sic). Which, as I pointed out with Woodall Rodgers Freeway in Dallas, was $51 million for 0.2 miles, and 2.8 miles would mean, just the cost of covering it at $714 million. Not including the cost of grading I-77 to be low enough to match the surrounding landscape.

And lastly, if anyone has the precise calculations on how much added time travel would take between those two points. They feel 'a minute or two' extra is all it will take. I've argued that the road averages 60 vehicles per minute throughout an entire 24 hour period, which means even if light are times perfectly, there will be monumental stagnation approaching any light from any direction, even if left turns were restricted and it was simply two phases for the main line.

So, what would be the actual expectation of time to work through that type of bottleneck. Including the reduced speed limit that would come with the intersection-infested area. I've pointed out US71 in Kansas City regarding safety aspects, but they feel that isn't what would happen in Canton. But, rather since it's cheaper and 'connects the neighborhoods' the safety aspects and 'reduced cost' somehow are worth it. Though, they've yet to explain how 'connecting the neighborhoods' works when nobody would have the testicular fortitude to try and cross such a highway with regularity.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on January 28, 2017, 07:14:35 PM
Just tell them that they're an idiot for wanting to remove a freeway, especially part of a multi-state high-speed thoroughfare, and leave it at that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on January 28, 2017, 07:55:32 PM
Just tell them that they're an idiot for wanting to remove a freeway, especially part of a multi-state high-speed thoroughfare, and leave it at that.

I've tried leaving it at that from the beginning. The problem is they've started to attract other idiots who also see merit in it. Most, though, understand the idiocy of it, but simply saying 'you're an idiot' is galvanizing others to their cause.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 30, 2017, 01:17:29 PM
I spotted this a few weeks ago but finally got photos of the LED reflector testing along OH 11 at the OH 164 interchange in Columbiana. There are three LED lights per unit and they are flush with the asphalt.

(http://i.imgur.com/kIbbiGR.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/d6K2Tz0.jpg)

My preferences:

1. Recessed reflectors, such as what Kentucky now uses. A diamond grinder goes into newly laid asphalt or concrete and carves out a little bit of space where two reflector units are glued in place. The recessed units are not hit by snowplows. The visibility is great, even in wet weather.

2. Regular reflectors, as what most states uses. I think ODOT said there was a loss of 30% of reflectors in a given year due to snowplows. They are also replaced every few years or when a road is repaved, so there will be gaps in visibility.

3. LED reflectors. These just were not that bright and I think that if brighter units were used, it would have been a tremendous improvement. There was also not a lost LED unit despite some good snowfalls.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 30, 2017, 01:20:15 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 30, 2017, 02:10:31 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Could have sworn they have been using them on I-91 far longer than just a few years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 30, 2017, 03:48:52 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Could have sworn they have been using them on I-91 far longer than just a few years.

"Few years" is relative. They switched some time between the early 2000s and 2011.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JREwing78 on January 30, 2017, 09:55:05 PM
It looks like there's a few of the LED reflectors in use on I-39/90 a few miles south of the Wisconsin line near Rockford, IL. It's kind of hard to tell for sure at highway speeds; they seemed to be tiny beams of light compared to normal reflectors.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 01, 2017, 04:44:08 PM
note: this quote is from another thread about stub ramps, though I'm responding to it here as it pertains to general Ohio discussion:
This is the northeast end of the Norwalk (OH) bypass. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norwalk,+OH/@41.2481038,-82.5741857,571m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a12e5240c76c9:0x6278f31e62fad3ac

This would have brought US-250 from just south of Norwalk to just south of Milan.  Had it ever come to fruition, the bypass (currently used as-is by US-20 and OH-18)  probably would have had OH-61 rerouted along the bypass as well, while OH-13 would have probably remained running thru town as-is, and would remain duplexed with US-250 on either side of the bypass.

It's a shame that it never got completed, at least extended to OH-61 on the east side, although you could still technically bypass downtown north-south by using the Bypass to US-20 East to OH-601 North in Milan to get back to US-250/OH-13.  The majority of the proposed route still looks like forest and farmland, so technically it is still possible to build it without knocking down too many houses.

Regarding the possibility of this originally envisioned bypass extension for 250 ever being completed, from what I've heard from a Huron County public official, this idea is completely dead. Supposedly the current plan is to wait until the existing bridge (that carries US 20 west over itself after the loop ramp) reaches the end of its useful life and then tear it down and make the entire intersection at-grade.

This would have been a great bypass for Cedar Point/Lake Erie traffic. Too bad they weren't able to complete this back when the existing bypass was built. Could have been done before the Milan Rd segment of 250 in Norwalk had built into a main commercial strip (where I would imagine a lot of the opposition to the bypass comes from, along with landowners in the potential path) and perhaps the Walmart, chains etc. would have been built at exits off the bypass instead.
 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 28, 2017, 11:39:48 AM
The past couple of times I've driven through Circleville I've noticed major earthwork going on in the field east of US 23 and south of Pittsburgh Rd and wondered what was going on. After looking into it I've found that there is a new plant being built by an Italian toilet paper/facial tissue/paper towels company on a 280 acre plot: http://www.sofidel.com/en/news-items/groundbreaking-of-the-new-plant-in-circleville

Hopefully the entrance(s) to this plant will connect to Pittsburgh Rd and not directly to US 23, which would make the most sense as Pittsburgh Rd already serves as the connection to 23 for several other plants and has a traffic light.

And as a side note, there is also a new Love's truck stop going up in the immediate SE corner of 23 & Pittsburgh Rd, across from the existing Pilot.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 01, 2017, 04:17:14 PM
One Ohio project that has interested me has been the Opportunity Corridor off the end of Interstate 490 in Cleveland. Would anyone like to comment on that project?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 02, 2017, 12:08:31 PM
One Ohio project that has interested me has been the Opportunity Corridor off the end of Interstate 490 in Cleveland. Would anyone like to comment on that project?

There is a thread for it here in the Midwest Great Lakes forum (although it hasn't been commented on since 2014):
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12544.msg303570#msg303570
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 02, 2017, 03:13:59 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
It all varies where you are. I do associate SE Kentucky with the south no question it's culturally southern but the areas near Louisville and Cincinnati are different they are more connected with the midwest.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on March 02, 2017, 03:35:10 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
It all varies where you are. I do associate SE Kentucky with the south no question it's culturally southern but the areas near Louisville and Cincinnati are different they are more connected with the midwest.

Yet I get the impression that those in Boone, Kenton and Campbell counties have the attitude of, "You're in the south now!"

Or "Y'all are in the south, now," if you prefer.  :-D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 02, 2017, 05:05:50 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
It all varies where you are. I do associate SE Kentucky with the south no question it's culturally southern but the areas near Louisville and Cincinnati are different they are more connected with the midwest.

Yet I get the impression that those in Boone, Kenton and Campbell counties have the attitude of, "You're in the south now!"

Or "Y'all are in the south, now," if you prefer.  :-D
I just think northern Kentucky is still too far north to be considered the south. Let's face it Ohio is just to the north which borders Lake Erie which also borders Canada. Even southern Kentucky feels northern when your coming up from Florida/Georgia although I will still say it's southern.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on March 04, 2017, 02:54:10 AM
Having traveled OH 32 east-to-west, my impression was that east of US 23 the overall "feel" of both the area and the people residing in that area was a virtual western extension of West Virginia.  Once past US 23, it had more of the "classic Midwest" vibe -- particularly from about Peebles west into metro Cincinnati.  As an aside, the northern Kentucky 'burbs of Cincinnati share that same Midwestern feel as does Cincinnati itself; I can't say the same for the remainder of the state, which "leans" South but, on the other hand, always seems to want to assert some sense of independence or "uniqueness". 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 07, 2017, 09:19:54 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
It all varies where you are. I do associate SE Kentucky with the south no question it's culturally southern but the areas near Louisville and Cincinnati are different they are more connected with the midwest.

Yet I get the impression that those in Boone, Kenton and Campbell counties have the attitude of, "You're in the south now!"

Or "Y'all are in the south, now," if you prefer.  :-D


Florence, Y'all
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on March 08, 2017, 12:26:12 AM
Having traveled OH 32 east-to-west, my impression was that east of US 23 the overall "feel" of both the area and the people residing in that area was a virtual western extension of West Virginia.  Once past US 23, it had more of the "classic Midwest" vibe -- particularly from about Peebles west into metro Cincinnati.  As an aside, the northern Kentucky 'burbs of Cincinnati share that same Midwestern feel as does Cincinnati itself; I can't say the same for the remainder of the state, which "leans" South but, on the other hand, always seems to want to assert some sense of independence or "uniqueness".
I agree with your assertion of OH 32.  Once past Peebles, more specifically once past OH 73 six miles east of Peebles, the vibe/feel does change--as well as the terrain.  East past OH 73, one is starting to encounter the Appalachian foothills (especially the hill climb and descent at the Adams/Pike County line) and there is obviously an even more of a rural "feel" from there all the way to Belpre.

Since I live in the "Kentucky 'burbs of Cincinnati" and am not a "born Kentuckian", I can say that a majority of the people that live here lean more "South" than "Midwest".  Northern Kentucky does have a very suburban Cincinnati look, but these folks would rather associate with those from Lexington or Louisville than those from Cincinnati--even though many people (including me) live in Northern Kentucky and work in the Cincinnati area of Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 08, 2017, 11:10:48 AM
Since I live in the "Kentucky 'burbs of Cincinnati" and am not a "born Kentuckian", I can say that a majority of the people that live here lean more "South" than "Midwest".  Northern Kentucky does have a very suburban Cincinnati look, but these folks would rather associate with those from Lexington or Louisville than those from Cincinnati--even though many people (including me) live in Northern Kentucky and work in the Cincinnati area of Ohio.

That's the same vibe I get when stopping in that area...you definitely know you're in Kentucky. Although I should point out, where I typically stop is along the stretch between 275 and the 71/75 split, so I can't speak much for the Newport/Covington/Bellevue area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 08, 2017, 02:34:33 PM
Everyone can have their own opinion. It's just how I would define it everything north of I-64 is the midwest. South of there about 30 or 40 miles or so is the transition zone. And south of there is where the real south begins. Berea KY is the place I would consider to be the gateway to the south if your on I-75.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on March 08, 2017, 05:01:39 PM
Everyone can have their own opinion. It's just how I would define it everything north of I-64 is the midwest. South of there about 30 or 40 miles or so is the transition zone. And south of there is where the real south begins. Berea KY is the place I would consider to be the gateway to the south if your on I-75.

The few times I've been to Lexington I've come away with the impression of a college town "grown up" into a full-fledged city -- not Midwest, not South -- maybe because a lot of the folks there (including several personal friends) weren't KY natives but ended up there because of the ambience and the more collegiate "feel" to the town.  Having a lot of "startup" businesses with Lexington-area HQ's adds to that impression.  This is in comparison to Louisville, which always seemed more "southern" to me although on the same basic latitude as Lexington. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on March 09, 2017, 10:20:43 AM
I've never thought of Lexington as a college town even though UK is there. Lexington, for this area of the state, has always been two things. One is the major shopping/entertainment/medical hub for the reason. Two is the home of the snobby NIMBY horse farm owners. Take away UK and Lexington is still going to be what it is.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on March 10, 2017, 09:14:33 AM
I actually think removing UK from Lexington would be a big hit to it.  It would still be there, but it wouldn't be the size that it is today.  UK's a huge employer.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 20, 2017, 08:43:19 PM
From District 3's latest weekly construction update:
Quote
Interstate 90 ***NEW***
I-90, at its bridges over West River Road and over SR 57, will have nightly lane closures as crews begin work for the bridge replacements. The project is expected to be complete in May 2019.

The new bridges will almost certainly be built wide enough to accommodate 3 lanes, as was the case with several other new bridges recently built on the same section of I-90 (over the Black River, Ford Rd, Lake Ave and a north/south rail line.) Once the OH 57 and West River Rd bridges are done, there will only be one pair of bridges left that aren't wide enough for 3 lanes (which are over a rail line just west of OH 611)

No idea when ODOT plans to 6 lane I-90 from OH 611 to the OH 2 split, but they are clearly making sure the bridges will be ready for it when the time comes. 



Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 20, 2017, 10:21:32 PM
I remember 15-20 years ago when they were quickly widening I-90 from SR-252/Columbia Road down to SR-611/Colorado Avenue and thought they'd have it done to the Turnpike in no time.  Then things came to a grinding halt. Then all the attention turned to widening/rebuilding I-90 east of Cleveland.

At least in the time since the last widening project on the west side, they have slowly rebuilt many mainline bridges (mentioned above) and the SR-57 interchange in advance of the impending widening & rebuild.

Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 21, 2017, 10:07:11 AM
Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.

They did just replace the first two bridges on OH 2 west of the I-90 split, so knowing whether or not those new bridges were built wide enough for 3 lanes would go a long way to answering that. I was actually just through there last week, but unfortunately wasn't paying attention to this detail. Anyone know if they were built wide enough for 3 lanes? 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 28, 2017, 08:37:54 PM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mvak36 on March 29, 2017, 12:11:07 AM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)


I just scanned the map quickly but one of the things that caught my eye was seeing that a few more segments of the Columbus project will be under construction (Phases 2E,3B,4R) or in ROW acquisition (Phases 3,4B,5,6). It's good to see that starting up again.

Also, the 70, 71, and 270 widenings will be good once they're done.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 30, 2017, 12:37:19 PM
I remember 15-20 years ago when they were quickly widening I-90 from SR-252/Columbia Road down to SR-611/Colorado Avenue and thought they'd have it done to the Turnpike in no time.  Then things came to a grinding halt. Then all the attention turned to widening/rebuilding I-90 east of Cleveland.

At least in the time since the last widening project on the west side, they have slowly rebuilt many mainline bridges (mentioned above) and the SR-57 interchange in advance of the impending widening & rebuild.

Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.
They did a nice job cleaning up OH-57 around the Midway Mall area. The way it used to be was just insane.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on April 01, 2017, 03:54:50 AM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)


Sweet, I think I can make that open house
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on April 15, 2017, 06:33:38 PM
The traffic light on US 23 in front of Malwart on the south end of Waverly has been improperly configured since the repaving last year. This signal has "prepare to stop when flashing" advance warning signs, but they don't start flashing until a fraction of a second after the signal itself turns yellow. A driver can pass the advance sign when it's not flashing, assume the light will stay green, and then be surprised when it turns red in front of em.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 16, 2017, 11:22:40 PM
http://www.columbusunderground.com/bridge-work-to-shut-down-stretch-of-indianola-avenue-for-six-months-bw1
For the two or three of you traveling around Columbus, bypassing High St in Clintonville will be a little harder to do this summer.

Bridge in question, from 14 years ago.
http://www.roadfan.com/clinton3.html#echo (http://www.roadfan.com/clinton3.html#echo)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 20, 2017, 09:50:19 PM
ODOT having more discussions concerning the "new" I-71/US 36-Oh 37 interchange (for the outlet mall)
http://www.thisweeknews.com/news/20170413/berkshire-township-more-interchange-meetings-planned (http://www.thisweeknews.com/news/20170413/berkshire-township-more-interchange-meetings-planned)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on April 20, 2017, 11:47:33 PM
I don't think I've seen this posted before.

Stumbled across this Youngstown Vindicator story from August 2016 about the 40 year anniversary of the completion of I-680.

Interesting story on the history of the road and a pdf that includes original blueprints of the road.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/ (http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/)

I remember to opening of the full highway, made my commute to YSU for four years starting Fall 1977 a lot easier. 

I also remember the explosion during the construction.  I've tried to find more information about it, but haven't had much luck.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 23, 2017, 04:04:46 PM
Down goes the Jeremiah Morrow Bridge:

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 07, 2017, 09:36:47 PM
One of the biggest things that bugs me about living around Youngstown today is that I-680 does not connect with OH 11 southwest of town. The only easy way is to head north on I-680 to the I-80/OH-11 interchange. You can take US224 if you feel like taking forever through Boardman, or you can run through US62 if you feel like driving city streets for a while. Or, you can take OH 165 from the Western Reserve Rd exit through North Lima, and then cut at an angle to OH11, which conveniently does not interchange with the most likely road to complete such an angle. Instead, you have to then cut up on OH14 to OH11.

Continuing I-680 south/southwest around North Lima and ending at OH11 near Columbiana would have been a perfect route for traffic between Youngstown and points south. And with the addition of OH-711, the shorter 'through route' while the current OH-11 west of town acting as an easy bypass for points north or traffic to/from I-80.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: alecscradle on May 08, 2017, 08:09:47 AM
Is there a lot of need to get on OH 11 S from the Boardman area?  I've only been on 11 in that area only a couple of times and it's seemed very sparse on traffic each time.  If there were any improvements that needed to be made, I could see them adding an interchange to OH 11 and Western Reserve Rd.  But that would probably only happen if there were significant growth in the Boardman/Canfield area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 08, 2017, 02:41:53 PM
One of the biggest things that bugs me about living around Youngstown today is that I-680 does not connect with OH 11 southwest of town. The only easy way is to head north on I-680 to the I-80/OH-11 interchange. You can take US224 if you feel like taking forever through Boardman, or you can run through US62 if you feel like driving city streets for a while. Or, you can take OH 165 from the Western Reserve Rd exit through North Lima, and then cut at an angle to OH11, which conveniently does not interchange with the most likely road to complete such an angle. Instead, you have to then cut up on OH14 to OH11.

Continuing I-680 south/southwest around North Lima and ending at OH111 near Columbiana would have been a perfect route for traffic between Youngstown and points south. And with the addition of OH-711, the shorter 'through route' while the current OH-11 west of town acting as an easy bypass for points north or traffic to/from I-80.

It's possible that the lack of a southwesterly extension of I-680 past the Ohio Turnpike to intersect with OH-11 was a result of long-ago "future plans" (described below) which never came to fruition.

Specifically, I'm referring to the freeway/expressway portion of Route 62, coming from Canton, which goes north of Alliance and ends abruptly at OH-225.  That 4-lane divided section was intended to continue eastward towards Salem.  There is a portion of that 4-lane freeway that was built north of Salem, between OH-14 and the 2-lane US-62--Youngstown-Salem Road (which is basically running north and south at that point).

That 4-lane expressway section was also intended to continue further eastward, with plans to intersect with OH-11 with an apparent full-cloverleaf interchange.  Go to Google Maps (or Earth) and you will see the clear outlines of that proposed cloverleaf, due west of OH-46 and south of W. Garfield Rd., just a bit northwest of Columbiana.  Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9116346,-80.7182689,979m/data=!3m1!1e3

I recall seeing some maps in the late 60's or early 70's that showed that "proposed" east-west expressway section continuing east past the "proposed" interchange at OH-11, and now carrying OH-14, north of the current 2-lane OH-14 alignment, and perhaps continuing all the way to the Pennsylvania line, connecting up with the 4-lane PA-51.

That final eastward stretch would have accepted a southward extension of OH-680, likely east of Pine Lake, which would have allowed OH-680 South traffic to move to OH-14 West and then to OH-11 South.

It would appear that those plans, long dormant as they've been, are unlikely to ever become reality.  But that's very possibly why an OH-680 to OH-11 South connection was never made.

EDIT:  Also see this thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5212.msg2071152#msg2071152

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 08, 2017, 10:11:56 PM
I don't think I've seen this posted before.

Stumbled across this Youngstown Vindicator story from August 2016 about the 40 year anniversary of the completion of I-680.

Interesting story on the history of the road and a pdf that includes original blueprints of the road.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/ (http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/)

I remember to opening of the full highway, made my commute to YSU for four years starting Fall 1977 a lot easier. 

I also remember the explosion during the construction.  I've tried to find more information about it, but haven't had much luck.

Here's a detailed report from the Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission regarding the accident/explosion you are referring to.

http://www.oshrc.gov/decisions/html_1974/2684_2716.html
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on May 10, 2017, 11:03:14 PM
I recall seeing the same Mahoning County map that showed an extension of 680 south to that relocated 62 expressway.  I know that I have an old Columbiana County map that showed 62 going all the way to the Pennsylania line, presumably going to connect with what is now I-376 near Chippewa. 

I believe I made a post a few years back about the Columbiana County map and described the route.  Now that I have a scanner, I will try to dig that map out and see if I can scan the appropriate sections - although its going to be awhile until I can. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on May 11, 2017, 09:47:45 AM
Are there still any plans to complete that US 62 expressway? It seems like that would be ideal to have cross SR 11, curve around the south and east of North Lima, and connect to 680.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 11, 2017, 10:32:17 AM
No. It's not in any long range plans that I have come across from ODOT. The traffic just isn't there.

There was a proposal at one time to four-lane US 62 between Alliance and Salem, with ODOT acquiring ROW east of Alliance towards Damascus. The widening never occurred.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 11, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on May 11, 2017, 02:47:27 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 11, 2017, 03:03:25 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike

Yes, the long-planned "Hubbard Expressway", intended to carry either and/or both OH-7 and US-62, from the stub freeway end at Albert Street, continuing northeast through the east side of Youngstown, then connecting with I-80 in Hubbard Township.

This project has been dormant for some time; certain officials have attempted to "revive" it a few times over the past 30 years, but as I recall, at some point about 10 years ago, ODOT officially withdrew their support....meaning it will likely never get built.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 11, 2017, 06:44:36 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike

Yes, the long-planned "Hubbard Expressway", intended to carry either and/or both OH-7 and US-62, from the stub freeway end at Albert Street, continuing northeast through the east side of Youngstown, then connecting with I-80 in Hubbard Township.

This project has been dormant for some time; certain officials have attempted to "revive" it a few times over the past 30 years, but as I recall, at some point about 10 years ago, ODOT officially withdrew their support....meaning it will likely never get built.

Somewhere just a year or two ago about reviving it. Mostly for the argument that gets used a lot: industrial development. Build a freeway there, and you can bring business there. With 711 built, it's not as necessary. But with the new Chill-Can area being built at the end of the US422 freeway and the Himrod interchange from US622, there may be some truth to that. Those two freeways easily accessing that property made it quite attractive to the develpers (it was their family's original location for Star Bottling, so it had some sentimental value, but easy access to the east side of Youngstown made it stick).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on May 12, 2017, 10:11:18 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf

Huh, I wonder what PennDOT had planned to connect to it. It couldn't have been more US 62 since by the state line, current US 62 is already way up in the Sharon-Hermitage area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 12, 2017, 11:10:17 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf

Huh, I wonder what PennDOT had planned to connect to it. It couldn't have been more US 62 since by the state line, current US 62 is already way up in the Sharon-Hermitage area.

Had that proposed east-west freeway/expressway been built, it's likely that US-62 would have proceeded in a northerly direction via the cloverleaf at OH-11, multiplexing with OH-11 to US-224 in Canfield, then up South Raccoon Road to the Shields Rd./Canfield Rd. intersection, where US-62 currently continues northeasterly along Canfield Road.

OH-14 would have multiplexed on this proposed east-west freeway, beginning northwest of Salem (in fact, that short 4-lane portion north of Salem that was built was, or has been signed as "14T"), with OH-14 continuing on this route eastward past OH-11 towards Pennsylvania, to connect with PA-51, northeast of East Palestine, where the current two-lane OH-14 meets PA-51 at the Ohio-Pennsylvania border.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 17, 2017, 10:14:06 PM
Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.

They did just replace the first two bridges on OH 2 west of the I-90 split, so knowing whether or not those new bridges were built wide enough for 3 lanes would go a long way to answering that. I was actually just through there last week, but unfortunately wasn't paying attention to this detail. Anyone know if they were built wide enough for 3 lanes?

I was through there yesterday and the OH 2 bridges west of the I-90 split were NOT built wide enough for 3 lanes.

Also, work has started in the medians on either side of the I-90/OH2 bridges that are about to be replaced at the OH 57 interchange, and that construction zone has the first variable speed limit signs I've seen in Ohio. When I went through eastbound around 2pm the speed limit was 60, and when I came back westbound around 11pm it was 50. (the regular speed limit there is 65)

And in other news on this corridor, there hasn't been any progress on adding exit numbers to OH 2 in over a year. The exit numbering, (which also includes median mile markers every 0.2 miles) still stops at OH 61, with only the westbound set of BGS for that exit having exit number tabs. The rest of the exits in Erie County around Huron and Sandusky remain unnumbered, however, once you cross into Ottawa County (which is also crossing into a different ODOT district) there are exit numbers in place for remainder of the freeway, although without median mile markers.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 25, 2017, 10:08:29 PM
Ironton-Russell Bridge demolition:

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 03, 2017, 10:25:23 PM
More roadwork coming to Columbus
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/pinball-ramp-to-be-removed-from-route-315-to-north-broadway (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/pinball-ramp-to-be-removed-from-route-315-to-north-broadway)

And some wishful thinking
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/widening-route-161-west-of-worthington-on-table-again (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/widening-route-161-west-of-worthington-on-table-again)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on June 13, 2017, 12:31:30 AM
Sure, blame a long straight ramp for drivers' bad behavior. How is this different from any straight rural highway entering a small town? Park a police car at the east end of the bridge over the Olentangy, issue hundreds of speeding tickets, problem solved.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 05, 2017, 09:44:14 AM
Seeing more of these "toll" banners added to Ohio Turnpike signage in district 2. This set of signs is at the OH 53 north exit off the US 20/US 6 bypass in Fremont

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170705/ebb55ac6dffcc9cfdee210da363688c5.jpg)

VS986

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:13:12 PM
^ This is actually a good thing.  I see nothing wrong with it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on July 06, 2017, 08:08:56 AM
illinois does it
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 06, 2017, 08:34:40 AM
Doesn't the MUTCD require this anyways? The signage for the Ohio Turnpike varied greatly and it wasn't always obvious that the highway you were turning onto was a toll road.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on July 10, 2017, 09:04:03 AM
I see nothing wrong with adding these "TOLL" signs. However, I thought it was pretty self-explanatory that if you were getting onto the "Turnpike" you knew you were going to pay a toll. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on July 10, 2017, 04:19:14 PM
I see nothing wrong with adding these "TOLL" signs. However, I thought it was pretty self-explanatory that if you were getting onto the "Turnpike" you knew you were going to pay a toll. :D

Not necessarily. Parts of the Pennsylvania Turnpike are free, for example.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 05:07:54 PM
And there are a lot of roads with the name "Turnpike" in them that are not toll. Folks from other countries (or even different regions of the states) may not know what Turnpike even is.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on July 10, 2017, 09:25:19 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on July 10, 2017, 09:44:25 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

Why 'turnpike'?  In the early years, the toll taker would go out and manually 'turn the pike' to let the traveler pass once his or her toll was paid.

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 09:53:16 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

But the Connecticut Turnpike and most of the Delaware Turnpike don't have tolls. Yes a turnpike "should" be tolled, but clearly not all are, so a road having "Turnpike" in the name isn't enough of an indication to drivers that a road is tolled. Not to mention the numerous toll roads not named "XYZ Turnpike" that need some standardized toll indicator.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 10:46:20 PM
And in other countries (notably Mexico and Canada), Turnpike is not used in any sense of a toll road. With the examples above, there are many local roads that have "Turnpike" in the name but have not collected tolls in over one-hundred years.

There is a legal and logical rationale to providing TOLL banners when a road is tolled. It's clear, concise and to the point, unlike tiny logos for roads that do not imply if it's tolled or not. Can you tell, at 65 MPH, if the New York Thruway logo is a toll road or not (where Thruway is not a clear indicator of a tolled facility)? The New Jersey Turnpike logo (where Turnpike is in very tiny lettering)? Pennsylvania Turnpike? Chicago Skyway?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GeekJedi on July 11, 2017, 07:46:47 AM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

However, someone who (for example) lives in Wisconsin and has never heard of a turnpike would likely not know of the type of road, nor the definition of "turnpike", regardless of the literal definition. It's one of those words that would literally never come up in everyday conversation. However, "toll" is a pretty universal word used in many different contexts, but always means a fee.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on July 11, 2017, 06:56:24 PM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2017, 08:24:34 AM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.
...or even "shunpikes."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on July 13, 2017, 07:52:58 AM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.

Cool, I never knew the etymology of that road. However, it seems that in the early 20th century every road in Madison County was of the form "___ Pike"; roughly half of them have now taken the suffix Road instead.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: plain on July 13, 2017, 11:22:05 AM
There are several "turnpikes" I can think of, especially in Connecticut and Virginia, that are not only toll-free but aren't even freeway.

I definitely like the idea of the MUTCD guidelines requiring the yellow TOLL banners. Pennsylvania is doing it now too and Virginia has them at at least two slip ramp entrances to VA 195. But judging by what I've seen on Street View, the state of Oklahoma needs to get with the program like right nooooowwww
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on July 13, 2017, 01:10:38 PM
A lot of old turnpikes that are now free once had tolls a very long time ago.

It was also not unheard of for a resident along a road to set up their own makeshift toll booths in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on July 14, 2017, 06:04:07 PM
There was also 'free' Pikes. Notable around Pittsburgh, as the Steubenville Pike (US22) and Washington Pike (US19) were still well known as the actual name of stretches of the road. The Freeway US22 bypassed the old two-lane Steubenville Pike (now called Old Steubenville Pike), and the current freeway is quite regularly referred to as the Steubenville Pike though it's actual name I'm not certain.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 28, 2017, 11:13:47 PM
On the topic of these toll banners, so far I've only seen 2 locations that have them, both along US 20 in district 2. So far none have turned up at the turnpike signs I see frequently in district 3, also on US 20. Anyone noticing them popping up anywhere else?

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 7/8 on July 28, 2017, 11:23:24 PM
On the topic of these toll banners, so far I've only seen 2 locations that have them, both along US 20 in district 2. So far none have turned up at the turnpike signs I see frequently in district 3, also on US 20. Anyone noticing them popping up anywhere else?

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

Here's a few photos I took in the Toledo area on July 2nd. I'm not sure how long these have been around.

On I-475 NB
(http://i.imgur.com/bz8VHUI.jpg)

On I-75 NB near the southern end of I-475
(http://i.imgur.com/wQDfBwO.jpg)

Also, this was taken on I-75 in Findlay
(http://i.imgur.com/2C5FxJW.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on July 29, 2017, 06:01:46 AM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on July 29, 2017, 11:51:22 AM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 02, 2017, 10:06:11 PM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.

Add I-270 SB between US 62/I-670 and 317 and I-71 NB between OH 303 and I-80
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 02, 2017, 11:40:48 PM
That mileage sign above--did it replace the one that displayed the following...

     I-475      4
     Toledo   14         

Judging by the mileages, that seems to be around the 188 milemarker, just north of Exit 187 Luckey interchange.

Checking googlemaps, I see there was extensive roadwork done on that section of I-75 (Nov 2016) and Ohio DOT probably changed the sign with different points on it.  It does seem a bit strange that US 20 and Detroit was displayed instead of I-475 and Toledo unless a nearby VMS sign displays the distance and time to I-475 and Toledo on it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on August 04, 2017, 09:59:53 PM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.

Add I-270 SB between US 62/I-670 and 317 and I-71 NB between OH 303 and I-80



Also a project on I-675 at I-70
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 23, 2017, 11:02:47 AM
Widening Oh 161 (Dublin-Granville Rd) through Linworth (NW Columbus) has been talked about for decades, but the locals living along the road had resisted. Now there are more commercial interests than homeowners along this stretch of road, so the sentiments towards widening have changed. Maybe this will get done in time for the crush of humanity that will be Solar Eclipse 2024.
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170823/adding-center-turn-lane-on-route-161-on-northwest-side-has-support?rssfeed=true (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170823/adding-center-turn-lane-on-route-161-on-northwest-side-has-support?rssfeed=true)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on August 25, 2017, 01:36:16 AM
Just a center turn lane? That barely counts as a widening!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 07, 2017, 11:58:26 AM
ODOT/City of Columbus appear to be going through another round of sign replacements. Exit tabs have been added to Oh 104, between US 33 & I-71 (and a button copy sign at High St appears to be on the chopping block).
315 is getting new overhead signs, with exit tabs, to replace older signs. That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 19, 2017, 12:22:49 AM
That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).

Considering Town/Rich is exit 1A, I think the ramps at the southern terminus are going to remain unnumbered. I do think it's strange that the ramps to 33 and 670 are in the 1* range instead of the 2* range. But I still can't figure out how they get all the way up to 1F without skipping some letters, unless the four ramps to 670 get four distinct designations, which is a dumb idea.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 19, 2017, 01:09:16 AM
That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).

Considering Town/Rich is exit 1A, I think the ramps at the southern terminus are going to remain unnumbered. I do think it's strange that the ramps to 33 and 670 are in the 1* range instead of the 2* range. But I still can't figure out how they get all the way up to 1F without skipping some letters, unless the four ramps to 670 get four distinct designations, which is a dumb idea.

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 19, 2017, 06:49:58 PM

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)

South end of Ohio 8 got an exit 0?!? That would be a first for Ohio. Even the I-71/75/US 50 alphabet soup in Cincy is an exit 1.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2017, 08:06:01 PM

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)

South end of Ohio 8 got an exit 0?!? That would be a first for Ohio. Even the I-71/75/US 50 alphabet soup in Cincy is an exit 1.

I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 19, 2017, 10:54:13 PM
I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.


I guess the unwritten rule of thumb is that if a routed freeway ("A") ends at another routed freeway ("B"), and you wind up on route "B" no matter which exit you take, there is no need to number those exits/ramps.  This means that I-271 especially should have no exit number at I-71 as there is only one option / ramp and that is to I-71 South.

However, if highway "A" ends at an interchange where you can wind up on highway "B" or highway "C", "D", etc... then there should be an exit number associated with the possible ramps/exits at the intersection (as in the case of SR-8 in Akron @ the Central Interchange / I-76 & I-77).

Now the remaining question is:  Should this terminus for highway "A" be labeled Exit 0 (A/B,...) or Exit 1 (A/B,...)? 

In the case of the Central Interchange in Akron?  Yes, Exit 0x is suitable as Route 8 ends there.  In the case of the interchange at the north end of the Brent Spence in Cincinnati?  No, Exit 1x is more suitable as all 3 highways continue there AND the exit numbers are simply resetting at the state line. As a bonus:  I-270 is right to have an Exit 1 vs an Exit 0 at I-71 as the route continues and starts counting down the miles again for another lap around Columbus.

The only other example of numbered highways in Ohio that could fit the "should it be Exit 0 or Exit 1" scenario that I know of is Southbound I-280 at the Ohio Turnpike in Toledo.  I would rename that as an Exit 0 for the Turnpike I-80/90 and the continuing of the expressway onto OH-420 would not be numbered.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 19, 2017, 11:33:39 PM
I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.


I guess the unwritten rule of thumb is that if a routed freeway ("A") ends at another routed freeway ("B"), and you wind up on route "B" no matter which exit you take, there is no need to number those exits/ramps.  This means that I-271 especially should have no exit number at I-71 as there is only one option / ramp and that is to I-71 South.

However, if highway "A" ends at an interchange where you can wind up on highway "B" or highway "C", "D", etc... then there should be an exit number associated with the possible ramps/exits at the intersection (as in the case of SR-8 in Akron @ the Central Interchange / I-76 & I-77).

Now the remaining question is:  Should this terminus for highway "A" be labeled Exit 0 (A/B,...) or Exit 1 (A/B,...)? 

In the case of the Central Interchange in Akron?  Yes, Exit 0x is suitable as Route 8 ends there.  In the case of the interchange at the north end of the Brent Spence in Cincinnati?  No, Exit 1x is more suitable as all 3 highways continue there AND the exit numbers are simply resetting at the state line. As a bonus:  I-270 is right to have an Exit 1 vs an Exit 0 at I-71 as the route continues and starts counting down the miles again for another lap around Columbus.

The only other example of numbered highways in Ohio that could fit the "should it be Exit 0 or Exit 1" scenario that I know of is Southbound I-280 at the Ohio Turnpike in Toledo.  I would rename that as an Exit 0 for the Turnpike I-80/90 and the continuing of the expressway onto OH-420 would not be numbered.


The Exit 1 for 71 from 271 has been there for so long that they probably wouldn't change it if they ever did decide on a mass implementation of Exit 0; even the old button copy signs with lighting had Exit 1 tabs.  There is never a gore sign saying Exit 1, though.

I-490 should use Exit 0 at 90/71/176.  It uses Exit 1 with letters. At the other end, it lacks numbers for 77, which it should have.

I-280 should indeed also use Exit 0 for current Exit 1A for its parent I-80; that would allow current Exit 1B about a mile away to just be Exit 1.

I think the end of I-675 should have numbers, preferably Exit 0A-B as well since there is a choice, not just defaulting onto 75 SB.  If there were ramps for NB and SB elsewhere, they would get A-B suffixes, so why not here too.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2017, 11:48:36 PM
How could  there be a gore sign for I-271 Exit 1? The first Exit 1 advance is well after the last gore point on the road. First time through there as an 8 year old, I thought the road continued with that sign. Nope. That thing shouldn't have any number, period.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 20, 2017, 01:04:02 AM
How could  there be a gore sign for I-271 Exit 1? The first Exit 1 advance is well after the last gore point on the road. First time through there as an 8 year old, I thought the road continued with that sign. Nope. That thing shouldn't have any number, period.

Exactly.  Although there is a gore sign at the end of the US 3 expressway in Mass, albeit at what would have been an actual gore point if the road had continued.  It isn't unprecedented to have a gore-like sign for a default movement like 271 to 71.  Indeed it shouldn't have an exit number, but if it has to, I wish it were Exit 0.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 20, 2017, 07:00:25 AM
(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.

Technically, 315 northbound begins from I-70 eastbound and descends the loop ramp. Southbound 315 is not technically defined, but to me the logical inference from what northbound 315 does is that southbound 315 takes the ramp to 70 westbound and terminates where it meets the latter. So the connection to 71 southbound and the ramp to 70/71 eastbound would be left exits, while the ramp to 70 westbound is not an exit at all. Not that I'm advocating it should be signed that way.

If it were up to me:
1A: [SB only 70/71 E]
1B: [SB only 71 S]
1C: [SB only 70 W]
1D: 62 / 3 / Rich / Town / [SB only Sullivant (future)]
1E: [SB only Broad]
2A: 670 W / [NB only 33 / Dublin / Long]
2B: 670 E
2C: Goodale

But ODOT didn't ask me. And even if they did, they probably would have modified my plan so the northbound exit to Rich / Town is simply exit 1, rather than exit 1D.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 20, 2017, 09:40:50 AM
The Exit 1 for 71 from 271 has been there for so long that they probably wouldn't change it if they ever did decide on a mass implementation of Exit 0; even the old button copy signs with lighting had Exit 1 tabs.  There is never a gore sign saying Exit 1, though.

The reason why they probably numbered I-271 / I-71 Exit 1 was there were 2 ideas being kicked around over the decades that never came to fruition:

1) Creating a Western Cleveland beltway that would have linked I-90 to I-71, and I-271 would have been extended from it's current terminus.  I think it was mentioned only once or twice in the area papers.

2) This was the more realistic possibility:  Creating a northern bypass of Medina, where SR-18 would have gone up one exit on I-71 then head west on a freeway/express bypass at I-271 rejoining the current alignment of SR-18 somewhere near Mallet Creek / SR-252.  The bypass would have roughly followed the high-tension power lines between said two points.  This proposal was shot down by the NIMBY's (as was a second proposal to build a southern bypass near/along SR-162). 

Had either of these ideas came to fruition, the I-271/I-71 exit would have been completely revamped and an Exit 1 (or Exit 0), or a new renumbering (if I-271 was extended) would have made sense.


I forgot about I-490 -- that western end should have been numbered Exit 0 A/B as well.  With the new Opportunity Parkway / SR-10 extension in the works, the eastern terminus may still get assigned an exit number yet when it is opened and new signs are needed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: doglover44 on December 11, 2017, 12:27:15 AM
Anything on I 75
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 02:53:34 PM
ODOT plans to add a "smart lane" to Eastbound I-670 from Fourth Street to I-270. This will be a left side shoulder that opens up as an extra lane to traffic during peak times.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/SmartLane/Pages/default.aspx
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 03:31:20 PM
The OH 2 west to OH 269 north ramp has been closed since the end of November because of this:

(https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/fancy_images/OHDOT/2017/12/1679624/1645064/11292017-slide-repair-sr-2-to-sr-269_crop.jpg)

ODOT estimates it will be closed until August of 2018, and OH 2 westbound though the area will be reduced to one lane. Luckily the OH 53 exit comes very soon after that spot and provides an alternative to access the Marblehead Peninsula that only adds a few miles to the trip.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D02/newsreleases/Pages/Update-WB-SR-2-to-NB-SR-269-.aspx
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 23, 2018, 12:00:47 AM
Forgot that this project was a thing.
https://www.10tv.com/article/concerns-over-i-270i-70-interchange-southeast-franklin-county (https://www.10tv.com/article/concerns-over-i-270i-70-interchange-southeast-franklin-county)
P.S. Here's what ODOT is proposing to do to I-270/I-70/Brice Rd (no mention of I-70-Hamilton Rd interchange).
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: triplemultiplex on January 23, 2018, 10:33:27 AM
P.S. Here's what ODOT is proposing to do to I-270/I-70/Brice Rd (no mention of I-70-Hamilton Rd interchange).
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf)

Looking good!  The WB -> SB ramp in particular strikes me as something that should've been there originally given the southern part of 270's utility as a bypass for thru traffic.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2018, 12:09:30 PM
The 270 SB to 70 EB ramp is listed under Tier 2 without funding on the current TRAC 2018-2021 project draft list.

Though on the topic of TRAC, they are scheduled to vote on the final list tomorrow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 25, 2018, 10:32:04 PM
ODOT's allotment of money for road construction over the next 4 years...
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2018.01.24_FINAL_MN_CONSTRUCTION_PROGRAM.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2018.01.24_FINAL_MN_CONSTRUCTION_PROGRAM.pdf)

And their corresponding press release
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/news/Pages/TRACapproves2018List.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/news/Pages/TRACapproves2018List.aspx)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 26, 2018, 07:14:56 AM
Looks like SR 32, at some point, will receive interchanges at Glen Este-Withamsville Road and Bach Buxton Road, with an overpass at Old SR 74 to the east of that. Clepper Lane east of Glen Estate-Withamsville Road will be extended east to Bach Buxton Road, and SR 32 will be widened to six lanes throughout - to I guess at Olive Branch-Stonelick Road.

Unspecified improvements will happen at SR/32Mt. Carmel-Tobasco Road/Bell Lane and the continuation of work at the SR 32/I-275, and work from US 50 (I guess in Newtown?) towards Eastgate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 26, 2018, 09:41:43 PM
Looks like SR 32, at some point, will receive interchanges at Glen Este-Withamsville Road and Bach Buxton Road, with an overpass at Old SR 74 to the east of that. Clepper Lane east of Glen Estate-Withamsville Road will be extended east to Bach Buxton Road, and SR 32 will be widened to six lanes throughout - to I guess at Olive Branch-Stonelick Road.

Unspecified improvements will happen at SR/32Mt. Carmel-Tobasco Road/Bell Lane and the continuation of work at the SR 32/I-275, and work from US 50 (I guess in Newtown?) towards Eastgate.

Yeah, see the Oh 32/I-74 thread over on the Ohio Valley board.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21895.0
Someone posted an article specifically concerning TRAC funding for this project there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 30, 2018, 02:39:58 PM
I was in a craft store last week and while walking down the scrapbook background page aisle I noticed one that was a road map. So being a roadgeek I naturally picked it up to get a better look to see if I could figure out where it was...and it took all of about 2 seconds to realize this was a map of southern Ohio.

After looking at it a little closer it was obvious to see that whoever made this has taken a Rand McNally image and made some changes to it to make it seem generic, like changing I-71 to I-11 and leaving off some recognizable names such a Xenia, Chillicothe and just the "Court  House" part from Washington Court House. Looks most of the other route numbers and place names were left alone.

I thought this was interesting and figured it was worth sharing here. Anyone notice any other things wrong or changed on this map?



(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180130/b35b56b32e56d0442b71c7b6e023a660.jpg)

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 30, 2018, 04:05:26 PM
This map predates, what, 1995? OH 32 hasn't been finished near Piketon and US 23. And a good chunk of US 35 on both sides of I-71 have not been converted into an expressway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on January 30, 2018, 05:40:04 PM
Looks like a misprint here: an I-11 shield on I-71 at the north edge of the map segment shown.  And the above post was right about OH 32 in the Scioto Valley; that wasn't done, IIRC, until 1996 or 1997. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on February 02, 2018, 12:44:05 AM
Xenia was wiped off the map...Kinda like how Xenia was pretty much wiped off the map in the 1974 Tornado.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: triplemultiplex on February 02, 2018, 09:13:58 AM
Xenia was wiped off the map...Kinda like how Xenia was pretty much wiped off the map in the 1974 Tornado.
So the map is from 1975 then?  :poke:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 02, 2018, 09:54:57 AM
And the above post was right about OH 32 in the Scioto Valley; that wasn't done, IIRC, until 1996 or 1997.

Sounds about right, as I can vaguely remember that section of 32 being 2 lanes when I was a young kid. I want to say that the current diamond interchange with US 23 was already there when it was still 2 lanes, anyone know when it was built?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: BrianP on February 02, 2018, 11:51:59 AM
And the above post was right about OH 32 in the Scioto Valley; that wasn't done, IIRC, until 1996 or 1997.

Sounds about right, as I can vaguely remember that section of 32 being 2 lanes when I was a young kid. I want to say that the current diamond interchange with US 23 was already there when it was still 2 lanes, anyone know when it was built?
Historical Aerials says the interchange was there in 1960.  While the 1959 topo map doesn't show either road. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_State_Route_124
Says:
Quote
1997 – Jasper to Givens upgraded to divided highway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on February 02, 2018, 12:19:26 PM
The interchange was moved north when OH 32 was widened in 1997 from Jasper east to Givens, completing the last gap for that corridor. US 23 was widened to four lanes through the area in 1960 and an interchange was added for OH 124.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 03, 2018, 10:50:33 PM


The interchange was moved north when OH 32 was widened in 1997 from Jasper east to Givens, completing the last gap for that corridor. US 23 was widened to four lanes through the area in 1960 and an interchange was added for OH 124.

Thanks, I actually drove through there today on 23, and having read your post before leaving I knew to look for signs of this and noticed the old location of 124 which is now part of a local road and still goes under 23 under the original bridge.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 25, 2018, 11:38:20 PM
OH 113 has an interesting history. At its longest point it went from the Indiana border to Rocky River, but after part of it got rerouted onto the Fremont bypass it had a really long section of concurrencies from Fostoria to Bellevue, so in 1970 it was truncated at Bellevue and the part west of Fostoria came OH 613.

Now you would think it would make the most sense to have 113 end right at US 20/OH 18 on the east side of Bellevue... however, on paper the official designation of 113 continues for 0.9 miles along US 20/OH 18 to the Huron/Sandusky County Line right in the center of Bellevue. I can only assume it officially ends there  because that's the border between ODOT districts 3 and 2 (and also used to be the intersection with OH 269)

However, never in my life have I seen any mention of OH 113 over that 0.9 mile concurrency on any of the signage.....that is until now. Very recently an "End OH 113" sign has turned up at the county line in downtown Bellevue. However, that is the only new sign that has gone up, there is still no mention of 113 anywhere else in either direction between the county line and the 113/20 intersection (where the end sign should have been put in the first place.) So as it stands, 113 has the interesting distinction if having pointless concurrencies with US 20 at both ends.

Here are a couple pics of the new sign, with the purpose of the 2nd one being to include the county line sign.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180226/1442826cfea32e48e8aaf357bdbeca02.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180226/f1c8c349e9c48144f57f8ae4deaec48d.jpg)


Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 13, 2018, 09:02:34 PM
Be careful out there, people!  :pan:
https://www.10tv.com/article/about-70-vehicles-involved-crashes-i-71-closed-east-mount-gilead
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on March 20, 2018, 08:21:21 AM
Yeah, and grading for the old ramps in the south half of the old interchange is still visible in-person.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 21, 2018, 07:22:11 PM
I contend that Kentuckians have more of an Appalachian accent than a southern accent. There is a difference. Of course, I think my voice sounds normal, but I'm struck by the accent whenever I hear a referee announce a penalty while watching an SEC football fame (or talk with Cody G.  :-D )
It all varies where you are. I do associate SE Kentucky with the south no question it's culturally southern but the areas near Louisville and Cincinnati are different they are more connected with the midwest.

Yet I get the impression that those in Boone, Kenton and Campbell counties have the attitude of, "You're in the south now!"

Or "Y'all are in the south, now," if you prefer.  :-D


Florence, Y'all
That is a misspelling it supposed to say Florence Mall.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 21, 2018, 08:07:12 PM
Florence, Y'all
That is a misspelling it supposed to say Florence Mall.

Not a misspelling, but rather a deliberate change. Florence was told that their water tower advertisement for the mall was too high to comply with state law, so they made the minor changes to convert "MALL" to "Y'ALL" because it was cheaper than painting over the whole word. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on March 22, 2018, 11:02:43 AM
Florence, Y'all
That is a misspelling it supposed to say Florence Mall.

Not a misspelling, but rather a deliberate change. Florence was told that their water tower advertisement for the mall was too high to comply with state law, so they made the minor changes to convert "MALL" to "Y'ALL" because it was cheaper than painting over the whole word.

No, not really. The Florence Mall water tower predated the mall by many years. The reason they changed it from Mall to Y'all was because they were told they could not advertise something that wasn't in existence yet. I remember when the tower said "Mall" and I remember the story when it changed to "Y'all."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ftballfan on April 26, 2018, 12:11:31 PM
The last few weeks, I've been in Ohio three separate times, and here are some of my thoughts:
1. I-75 between Dayton and Cincinnati should be 70 mph. On a related note, that 55 stretch in Dayton is way too long (most of that could be 65 or even 70)
2. Many state highways (including US-250 between Ashland and Norwalk) have little to no shoulders. At least US-68 between Springfield and Findlay does have decent shoulders.
3. There are A LOT of concurrencies, especially in/near cities.
4. OH 15 between Findlay and Carey should be US-23.
5. Many county roads are barely wide enough for two cars to pass each other. I noticed that when I had to detour around a US-68 closure south of Bellefontaine.
6. Whether a non-Interstate has exit numbers depends on the area of the state.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on April 28, 2018, 11:15:36 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus? 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on April 29, 2018, 01:28:40 AM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus? 

You mean US33 or US23/OH15?

US 33 is probably a non-starter. The talk was always completing 23, but there's so many places to do major work it just won't happen.

It would be nice if US33 had at least a Super 2 connection to avoid some of the traffic right by I-75.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: LM117 on April 29, 2018, 02:01:44 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on April 29, 2018, 08:44:09 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.

Part of the problem with this routing was that in the late '90's planners originally wanted to plant a corridor up either the US 23 or OH 199 corridors and connect that route with I-280 (which would presumably be replaced).  Since it would have required the taking of valuable farmland, residents and interests in the Fostoria area let ODOT know in uncertain terms that such an Interstate-grade facility would face serious political opposition.  That, and a lack of consensus regarding plans to effect an interchange with I-71 north of Columbus, effectively doomed this corridor, despite much of the alignment already deployed as expressway.  ODOT lost interest in such a project back in the early 2000's and it's likely not to be revived -- even with a revised alignment along OH 15 and a multiplex with I-75 north of Findlay -- any time soon.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 29, 2018, 10:05:25 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.

Part of the problem with this routing was that in the late '90's planners originally wanted to plant a corridor up either the US 23 or OH 199 corridors and connect that route with I-280 (which would presumably be replaced).  Since it would have required the taking of valuable farmland, residents and interests in the Fostoria area let ODOT know in uncertain terms that such an Interstate-grade facility would face serious political opposition.  That, and a lack of consensus regarding plans to effect an interchange with I-71 north of Columbus, effectively doomed this corridor, despite much of the alignment already deployed as expressway.  ODOT lost interest in such a project back in the early 2000's and it's likely not to be revived -- even with a revised alignment along OH 15 and a multiplex with I-75 north of Findlay -- any time soon.

ODOT, sitting funding issues, kicked I-73 to the Turnpike Commission in the early 90s. Otherwise, everyone thought it was great idea, long as someone other them, had to sacrifice for I-73
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on April 30, 2018, 08:58:47 AM
And the improvements of US 23 north of I-270 renders it effectively dead as an interstate connection until well further north towards Delaware.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on May 12, 2018, 12:36:46 AM
I've never understood the term "valuable farmland". There's millions of acres of it. We're using less of it than we were a century ago. And low-density developments cost far more farmland than new highways statewide.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 12, 2018, 01:02:09 AM
Not all farmland is the same. A lot of the farmland in Ohio is glaciated and ones that are have a high lime content are very valuable and irreplaceable. For that reason, many states and regions have farmland or land trusts so that it's protected from development (e.g. purchase of development right programs). And while highways don't consume that much land, they enable the type of developments that can consume farmland further away from the city.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 16, 2018, 08:49:48 AM
Some welcome changes have been made to the speed limit on US 20 in a couple north central Ohio towns, and I've heard it was the state overriding what the municipalities had set.

In Clyde, US 20 used to have a ridiculous 35 mph zone in a grass median section on the east side of town from OH 101 out to CR 260. I always thought it should at least 45 through there, so I'm pretty pleased to see that it is now 50 mph. Also, the rest of the 35 mph zone through town, which I thought was perfectly acceptable, has been somewhat surprisingly bumped up to 40 mph. So now the speed limit sequence for through traffic going through Clyde is 60-50-40-50-60, which is pretty nice.

In Monroeville, which is known for being a speed trap, the sequence used to be 60-50-35-25-35-50-60. However, the former 50 mph zone west of OH 99 has been changed to 55, and the area between the Huron River and the east edge of town that used to have a short 35 mph zone followed by a short 50 mph has been combined to form one 45 mph zone, with eastbound traffic jumping up to 60 a few tenths of a mile sooner than before. So now W-E it's 60-55-35-25-45-60.

So far no changes have been made in Bellevue, though the Clyde and Monroeville changes happened months apart, so perhaps Bellevue could be next. The thing I expect to see changed is the 60 mph zone dropping directly to 35 on the east side of town, which occurs about halfway between OH 113 and Prairie Rd. I think there should be a 45 mph buffer zone in there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on July 10, 2018, 11:34:41 AM
I-680 northbound through Youngstown closed for bridge rehabilitation.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2018/jul/09/no-major-problems-reported-first-part-i-680-projec/

This is the oldest section of 680 in Youngstown.  It is also the section that is the easiest to close due to the detour options available.  To me the detour is East River Crossing to Madison Avenue Expressway to West River Crossing.  :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on August 06, 2018, 05:07:52 PM
The crew working on SR 309 in Marion made an interesting find:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180806/76f6f61377ab52bf3f50e79b90eba3d1.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 11, 2018, 02:22:50 PM
Was it just buried in the dirt??
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 11, 2018, 09:52:07 PM
Was it just buried in the dirt??
From ODOT District's tweet (on the find)...
Quote
Marion Co: You never know what you will find. The contractor on the 309 project found this old sign buried under the road. We're guessing since Rt. 309 used to be Route 30 back in the day, that sign has been there for decades.
So your guess is good as mine.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 16, 2018, 09:39:01 PM
Yes, OH 309 was US 30S until November 1973.  I wonder if there are any more "lost" signs?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 29, 2018, 09:23:39 AM
Had to go to Cleveland over the weekend and was able to see significant progress with the express lanes being added along I-271 between Northfield and Bedford Heights. The new ramps at the south junction of I-271/480 seem to be well underway, and the new concrete express lanes are being poured. I-271 between the two legs of I-480 is being widened to six lanes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 29, 2018, 09:07:12 PM
As one of the stops for NE Ohio Roadmeet (in 30 days!)
I get to attempt to have everyone imagine a new bridge over the Grand River for Vrooman Rd
http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20180828/vrooman-road-bridge-work-to-begin-in-september (http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20180828/vrooman-road-bridge-work-to-begin-in-september)
ODOT Page - http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Deputy%20Director/News/Pages/Construction-Begins-on-Vrooman-Road-Bridge.aspx

We will see the "shrunken" truss bridge, and hopefully enough foliage will be down to easily locate the retaining wall for (now "old") Vrooman Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on September 05, 2018, 02:47:54 PM
ODOT has blocked crossover traffic on two Wyandot County roads across US 23/30 outside of Upper Sandusky.

The story indicates they are studying complete elimination of access for these roads.

As of now you can make right turns off of and on to 23/30.

I drove through this past weekend and right now there are orange barrels on the crossovers and in the left turn lanes leading to them.

There were the only two crossovers on the section of road where 23 and 30 run concurrently around Upper.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on September 05, 2018, 09:44:53 PM
ODOT has blocked crossover traffic on two Wyandot County roads across US 23/30 outside of Upper Sandusky.

The story indicates they are studying complete elimination of access for these roads.

As of now you can make right turns off of and on to 23/30.

I drove through this past weekend and right now there are orange barrels on the crossovers and in the left turn lanes leading to them.

There were the only two crossovers on the section of road where 23 and 30 run concurrently around Upper.

ODOT has really been slow to control access around the Upper Sandusky bypass. It took them a long time to build a complete interchange at SR 53 and to close the adjacent old SR 67 intersection. The other intersections have decent access nearby interchange and should be RIRO if not outright eliminated.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 25, 2018, 09:38:44 PM
Roads & Bridges (trade) magazine let ODOT describe their new variable speed limit system that will be in use on I-90 in Lake County.
https://www.roadsbridges.com/lake-effect

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 25, 2018, 10:04:40 PM
Earlier in September, MORPC released their list of the top 100 "high crash" intersections from 2015-2017.
Top 10 for just Franklin Co - https://www.10tv.com/article/morpc-releases-top-100-high-crash-intersections-central-ohio
MORPC's map showing the locations of their top 100 - https://apps.morpc.org/safety/
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 09:33:10 AM
I noticed this route marker for OH-177 along OH-73 the other day, with a larger font used for the numbers.  I'll show another photo below to show the font size usually used on Ohio state route markers.  Do people prefer this larger font size?  Do you think it would be better?  Why doesn't ODOT use larger numbers like this as a general rule?

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1934/43431632020_c7f077b5af_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/29aUt4J)
OH-073-177E (https://flic.kr/p/29aUt4J) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1913/31370740678_4f7f7b259a_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PN8fgh)
OH-130-US27ER (https://flic.kr/p/PN8fgh) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on October 11, 2018, 02:44:11 PM
I live in Toledo, and it seems like this summer, a very significant number of state and US routes in the area were repaved. Someone mentioned that Toledo has seen more road construction in the last three years than in the past thirty. 

Nearly all of the downtown routes, part of the Anthony Wayne Trail (SR 25); Central Avenue (US 20/Ohio 120). Within the last year or so, work was also completed on parts of Detroit Avenue; I-75 and 475 on the northside; I75 between Perrysburg and to around Findlay.

Does anyone know if this paving wave is part of the Ohio Turnpike bond, and whether other areas along the turnpike are seeing this kind of investment?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 11, 2018, 04:48:15 PM
According to Spectrum Cable, ODOT has extended I-670 east to Mt. Vernon or Coshocton (or wherever it can meet US 36).
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1942/45200904932_8945b3879f.jpg)

Or maybe there is a I-670 in Denver I wasn't aware of.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on December 23, 2018, 01:03:31 AM
ODOT is FINALLY widening the last remaining stretch of four lanes on I-70 between Columbus and Dayton to six lanes... it looks like they are going to be rebuilding the bridges along that stretch... I thought that it was weird for me to go from six to four lanes and back to six lanes in about five miles, and I knew that ODOT would do it in a couple years... :clap: :clap:

Here's a video update taken by someone back in Nov 2018...

Once this construction project is finished, it will be six lanes between Dayton and Columbus!!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on December 23, 2018, 05:59:52 AM
After that there should be a at least six lanes of freeway connecting Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland. And including the Ohio Turnpike there will be six lanes connecting from Cleveland west to Toledo and east to near Youngstown.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on December 24, 2018, 09:12:36 AM
It's eight lanes between I-275 in Cincinnati and just south of I-675 in Dayton; six-lanes between Columbus and Cleveland; and four- and six-lanes between I-275 in Cincinnati and I-270 in Columbus. There was a long-term plan of widening I-71 to six-lanes between Cincinnati and Columbus, but other than the small segment in the center by US 35, and the recent widening just south of I-270, there are no active programmed planning or construction projects. Traffic just hasn't increased to the point where it's necessary.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 24, 2018, 04:26:14 PM
ODOT is FINALLY widening the last remaining stretch of four lanes on I-70 between Columbus and Dayton to six lanes... it looks like they are going to be rebuilding the bridges along that stretch... I thought that it was weird for me to go from six to four lanes and back to six lanes in about five miles, and I knew that ODOT would do it in a couple years...

Nice! I'm not that familiar with that part of I-70, so when I saw this relatively short distance project on the TRAC list last year I assumed it was just adding a little more capacity between 2 busy interchanges or something. I didn't realize until now that this 3.5 mile segment was the only gap left in 6 laning the entire Dayton-Columbus section.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on December 30, 2018, 04:36:51 PM
ODOT is FINALLY widening the last remaining stretch of four lanes on I-70 between Columbus and Dayton to six lanes... it looks like they are going to be rebuilding the bridges along that stretch... I thought that it was weird for me to go from six to four lanes and back to six lanes in about five miles, and I knew that ODOT would do it in a couple years...

Nice! I'm not that familiar with that part of I-70, so when I saw this relatively short distance project on the TRAC list last year I assumed it was just adding a little more capacity between 2 busy interchanges or something. I didn't realize until now that this 3.5 mile segment was the only gap left in 6 laning the entire Dayton-Columbus section.

I believe the bridge over 68 was the only reason that particular part hasn’t been widened. At any rate, it’ll be a welcome relief.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Truvelo on December 30, 2018, 05:05:16 PM
I've been going to Springfield annually since 2006 and have noticed an increase in the amount of six lanes each time I go. Unfortunately it will almost certainly mean the death of the remaining button copy BGS's.

I have a question about the US 68 bridges. At present they each provide three lanes and a shoulder because of the weaving section. How is the widening here going to be achieved? I assume the existing bridges will be rebuilt to each take four lanes and a shoulder and retaining the weaving section as I've never experienced major weaving issues here. However I would consider a different approach. Keep the existing bridges as they are and build new bridges alongside them as part of C/D roads. This would move the weaving section from the main I-70 lanes and would be a better long term prospect should turning movements at this junction increase in the future.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on December 31, 2018, 01:29:04 PM
I've been going to Springfield annually since 2006 and have noticed an increase in the amount of six lanes each time I go. Unfortunately it will almost certainly mean the death of the remaining button copy BGS's.

I have a question about the US 68 bridges. At present they each provide three lanes and a shoulder because of the weaving section. How is the widening here going to be achieved? I assume the existing bridges will be rebuilt to each take four lanes and a shoulder and retaining the weaving section as I've never experienced major weaving issues here. However I would consider a different approach. Keep the existing bridges as they are and build new bridges alongside them as part of C/D roads. This would move the weaving section from the main I-70 lanes and would be a better long term prospect should turning movements at this junction increase in the future.

My guess is ODOT will just widen the existing bridges in the median. Reconfiguring the interchange would normally be done as part of its own separate project. Just building C-D lanes here would be problematic since it would reduce the radius of the loop ramps.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 06, 2019, 10:31:25 AM
The new I-90/OH 2 bridges from OH 57 west to the 90/2 split are now done and open. Now they're working on the flyover bridge at the split itself.



VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 14, 2019, 12:05:53 PM
Don't get your hopes up too high...
https://www.delgazette.com/news/74471/studying-u-s-23-corridor
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 20, 2019, 03:34:26 PM
ODOT all of sudden looks like PennDOT, when it comes to funding.
https://www.10tv.com/article/gov-dewine-announce-proposed-gas-tax-increase
(bottom half of article has nothing to do with roads & funding)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 30, 2019, 09:27:53 PM
And in other news on this corridor, there hasn't been any progress on adding exit numbers to OH 2 in over a year. The exit numbering, (which also includes median mile markers every 0.2 miles) still stops at OH 61, with only the westbound set of BGS for that exit having exit number tabs. The rest of the exits in Erie County around Huron and Sandusky remain unnumbered, however, once you cross into Ottawa County (which is also crossing into a different ODOT district) there are exit numbers in place for remainder of the freeway, although without median mile markers.

Update on OH 2 exit numbers in Erie County:

US 250 is now exit 138 and OH 4 is now exit 134.

There are new numbered exit signs at the gores, and what I think are just new exit tabs added to the existings big green signs. There are currently no median mile markers. Those were the only 2 exits I saw today, so I'm not sure if the rest of the previously unnumbered exits in Erie County have been updated as well, but I'd be surprised if the ones around Huron haven't, since the progress on this has moved east to west in the past.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GreenLanternCorps on April 03, 2019, 03:12:39 PM
Ohio is getting rid of front license plates and passed an 11.5 cent gas tax increase:

https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/local/more-front-license-plate-ohio-lawmakers-reach-deal-drop-requirement/2IEbegbFrI7XwKgpL4CS8L/


https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/02/ohio-lawmakers-vote-gas-tax-hike/3312585002/
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 18, 2019, 11:12:23 PM
ODOT needs to recheck all their bridge clearances.
https://www.10tv.com/article/us-33-reopened-watkins-road-bridge-remains-closed-indefinitely-southeast-columbus-2019-apr
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: webny99 on May 14, 2019, 01:44:27 PM
I'm curious about the history of the Breezewood of sorts that exists at I-71 and US 35 in Ohio.
I didn't realize how glaring it was until I went through there last Friday, I know it's not an interstate > interstate junction but still a pretty annoying non-connection.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 14, 2019, 04:03:59 PM
I'm curious about the history of the Breezewood of sorts that exists at I-71 and US 35 in Ohio.
I didn't realize how glaring it was until I went through there last Friday, I know it's not an interstate > interstate junction but still a pretty annoying non-connection.

The expressway-grade US 35 is a much more recent construction.  The outlet mall and other services at the existing exit were in the way and it was easier to make a tie-in to the existing road on either side.

A fun thing is the sign for "Old 35" on the west side which you can giggle at if you remember an old Godfather's Pizza ad (the one with a family reunion where an old fella gives directions involving a convoluted route; it involves "Old 35"; "No way; Old 35's bridge went out with the tornado of '83!")
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on May 23, 2019, 06:33:48 PM
I'm curious about the history of the Breezewood of sorts that exists at I-71 and US 35 in Ohio.
I didn't realize how glaring it was until I went through there last Friday, I know it's not an interstate > interstate junction but still a pretty annoying non-connection.

A similar disconnect happens at US 30/I-75 north of Lima. Maybe it's Ohio's version of the disconnects at Breezewood and Bedford.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: lepidopteran on May 24, 2019, 06:53:55 PM
A similar disconnect happens at US 30/I-75 north of Lima. Maybe it's Ohio's version of the disconnects at Breezewood and Bedford.
That one is there because of a railroad that closely parallels I-75 between Beaverdam and Lima, rendering a freeway-to-freeway interchange cost-prohibitive.  Note also that US-30 is not full freeway; it's kind of a mixture of overpasses and at-grade intersections in that region.  The NB->EB movement might be doable at that point, but would the traffic count justify direct connections for any of them?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on May 30, 2019, 01:14:11 PM
One for the odd use of guide signs file: The I-75 exit for Bellefontaine St, Wapakoneta has been re-signed "First on the Moon, Wapakoneta"

(https://d31029zd06w0t6.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2019/05/web1_ODOT-003.jpg)
Source: https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379 (https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379)

I can't find any information on where the change originated (statehouse, local, etc.), or whether the street has been officially been renamed "First on the Moon." The guide signs on the ramps have been changed to:

First on the Moon
<-- Bellefontaine St
<-- Wapakoneta

In keeping with ODOT's post-Clearview BGSs, the sign seems a bit cramped.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 30, 2019, 10:14:48 PM
The prior sign was not Clearview but did have the previous layout exit tab (slightly smaller) and the arrow in the green field so the EXIT ONLY field was not as tall, so the layout did change, but they may have wanted to keep the panel the same size so it crowded the edges a little.  It does seem to crowd the edges more than the previous sign.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on June 03, 2019, 12:51:30 PM
One for the odd use of guide signs file: The I-75 exit for Bellefontaine St, Wapakoneta has been re-signed "First on the Moon, Wapakoneta"

(https://d31029zd06w0t6.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2019/05/web1_ODOT-003.jpg)
Source: https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379 (https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379)

I can't find any information on where the change originated (statehouse, local, etc.), or whether the street has been officially been renamed "First on the Moon." The guide signs on the ramps have been changed to:

First on the Moon
<-- Bellefontaine St
<-- Wapakoneta

In keeping with ODOT's post-Clearview BGSs, the sign seems a bit cramped.

I drove through there last weekend, and was surprised to see this.  I thought the law required any text on a primary BGS to be a street/road name or an incorporated municipality.   

This may be temporary as I know Wapakoneta has a lot of 50th anniversary events planned for this summer.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on June 04, 2019, 09:57:50 PM
I've done some traveling through southern and central/SW Ohio over the past month and noticed that ODOT has started adding additional signal heads mounted on the near-side right pole at a number of intersections (such as on US 23 through Lucasville and US 52 around South Point). At first I thought it was maybe just a District 9 thing but I also saw it around District 8 territory. Is this something new statewide?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 04, 2019, 10:57:41 PM
I've done some traveling through southern and central/SW Ohio over the past month and noticed that ODOT has started adding additional signal heads mounted on the near-side right pole at a number of intersections (such as on US 23 through Lucasville and US 52 around South Point). At first I thought it was maybe just a District 9 thing but I also saw it around District 8 territory. Is this something new statewide?

Statewide.
I know several intersections along US 23, between I-270 & Delaware got this treatment leading up to the I-270-23/315 reconstruction 5-6 years ago.
US 20 @ Oh 306, in Mentor, also got the same treatment (as I had to travel through this intersection a handful of times last week)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on June 22, 2019, 12:30:03 AM
One for the odd use of guide signs file: The I-75 exit for Bellefontaine St, Wapakoneta has been re-signed "First on the Moon, Wapakoneta"

(https://d31029zd06w0t6.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2019/05/web1_ODOT-003.jpg)
Source: https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379 (https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/143379)

I can't find any information on where the change originated (statehouse, local, etc.), or whether the street has been officially been renamed "First on the Moon." The guide signs on the ramps have been changed to:

First on the Moon
<-- Bellefontaine St
<-- Wapakoneta

In keeping with ODOT's post-Clearview BGSs, the sign seems a bit cramped.

I drove through there last weekend, and was surprised to see this.  I thought the law required any text on a primary BGS to be a street/road name or an incorporated municipality.   

This may be temporary as I know Wapakoneta has a lot of 50th anniversary events planned for this summer.
Maybe this is what the Neil Armstrong Museum is going to be called (hopefully temporarily).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on June 23, 2019, 11:12:08 AM
I've done some traveling through southern and central/SW Ohio over the past month and noticed that ODOT has started adding additional signal heads mounted on the near-side right pole at a number of intersections (such as on US 23 through Lucasville and US 52 around South Point). At first I thought it was maybe just a District 9 thing but I also saw it around District 8 territory. Is this something new statewide?

Statewide.
I know several intersections along US 23, between I-270 & Delaware got this treatment leading up to the I-270-23/315 reconstruction 5-6 years ago.
US 20 @ Oh 306, in Mentor, also got the same treatment (as I had to travel through this intersection a handful of times last week)

I wonder if it's because now there are so many semis on the roads that sometimes it's difficult to see the overhead signals.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ftballfan on July 02, 2019, 10:32:49 PM
Has anyone ever noticed that the quickest way from Grand Rapids to Cincinnati involves two county roads near Van Wert, OH?:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Grand+Rapids/Cincinnati/@41.4830035,-85.821194,8.24z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x88185460bb502815:0xa593aacb1bd3a8d0!2m2!1d-85.6680863!2d42.9633599!1m5!1m1!1s0x884051b1de3821f9:0x69fb7e8be4c09317!2m2!1d-84.5120196!2d39.1031182?hl=en
Liberty-Union Rd and Wren-Landeck Rd are also on the quickest way between the following major cities:
Kalamazoo-Cincinnati
Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo-Dayton

Speaking of quickest ways between two large cities using county roads, the quickest way from Fort Wayne to both Cincinnati and Dayton involves a county road that crosses the IN/OH line!:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Dayton,+OH/@40.7918263,-84.7297642,10.12z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x884080d5aedd1403:0xa640e392f20e4ce4!2m2!1d-84.1916069!2d39.7589478?hl=en

Fort Wayne to Columbus also uses a county road: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Columbus,+OH/@40.7111371,-84.1859042,9.33z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x883889c1b990de71:0xe43266f8cfb1b533!2m2!1d-82.9987942!2d39.9611755?hl=en
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on July 02, 2019, 10:47:17 PM
Fort Wayne to Columbus also uses a county road: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Columbus,+OH/@40.7111371,-84.1859042,9.33z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x883889c1b990de71:0xe43266f8cfb1b533!2m2!1d-82.9987942!2d39.9611755?hl=en

I don't know about the other ones, but the Fort Wayne to Columbus route avoids Lima which is a terribly slow city to drive through and  also maximizes the use of the US 30 expressway and the entirety of the US 33 freeway, both of which have faster speed limits.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on July 03, 2019, 12:42:34 PM
Fort Wayne to Columbus also uses a county road: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Columbus,+OH/@40.7111371,-84.1859042,9.33z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x883889c1b990de71:0xe43266f8cfb1b533!2m2!1d-82.9987942!2d39.9611755?hl=en

I don't know about the other ones, but the Fort Wayne to Columbus route avoids Lima which is a terribly slow city to drive through and  also maximizes the use of the US 30 expressway and the entirety of the US 33 freeway, both of which have faster speed limits.

That county road on the Fort Wayne-Columbus route would be Thayer Road, which I have taken a couple times. It has stop signs almost every mile but is still faster than going directly through Lima on OH SR 117 & 309. There is also an overpass for P&G plant traffic over Thayer Road. https://goo.gl/maps/T3tpPap6kz1AZn1J7 (https://goo.gl/maps/T3tpPap6kz1AZn1J7)

Google also routes traffic on Thayer Road on the route between north Columbus and Chicago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 03, 2019, 05:13:47 PM
These routings might be due to local detours due to road construction or weather hazards.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 03, 2019, 05:34:49 PM
Speaking of weather hazards. After alot of rain overnight, one of our local bridges appears to be in trouble.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48191054932_d8d44035d5_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48191001976_498daaa33e_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48191001001_b7ca9430fe_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48191000031_4ffe530c46_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48190997766_bc950b0769_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on July 03, 2019, 06:49:23 PM
Fort Wayne to Columbus also uses a county road: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Columbus,+OH/@40.7111371,-84.1859042,9.33z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x883889c1b990de71:0xe43266f8cfb1b533!2m2!1d-82.9987942!2d39.9611755?hl=en

I don't know about the other ones, but the Fort Wayne to Columbus route avoids Lima which is a terribly slow city to drive through and  also maximizes the use of the US 30 expressway and the entirety of the US 33 freeway, both of which have faster speed limits.

That county road on the Fort Wayne-Columbus route would be Thayer Road, which I have taken a couple times. It has stop signs almost every mile but is still faster than going directly through Lima on OH SR 117 & 309. There is also an overpass for P&G plant traffic over Thayer Road. https://goo.gl/maps/T3tpPap6kz1AZn1J7 (https://goo.gl/maps/T3tpPap6kz1AZn1J7)

Google also routes traffic on Thayer Road on the route between north Columbus and Chicago.

Just staying on 33 to 465 isn't horrendous, IMO. But yes, there are a couple of slow spots, particularly Russells Point - New Hampshire.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on July 04, 2019, 01:25:34 PM
Has anyone ever noticed that the quickest way from Grand Rapids to Cincinnati involves two county roads near Van Wert, OH?:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Grand+Rapids/Cincinnati/@41.4830035,-85.821194,8.24z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x88185460bb502815:0xa593aacb1bd3a8d0!2m2!1d-85.6680863!2d42.9633599!1m5!1m1!1s0x884051b1de3821f9:0x69fb7e8be4c09317!2m2!1d-84.5120196!2d39.1031182?hl=en
Liberty-Union Rd and Wren-Landeck Rd are also on the quickest way between the following major cities:
Kalamazoo-Cincinnati
Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo-Dayton

Speaking of quickest ways between two large cities using county roads, the quickest way from Fort Wayne to both Cincinnati and Dayton involves a county road that crosses the IN/OH line!:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Dayton,+OH/@40.7918263,-84.7297642,10.12z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x884080d5aedd1403:0xa640e392f20e4ce4!2m2!1d-84.1916069!2d39.7589478?hl=en

Fort Wayne to Columbus also uses a county road: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fort+Wayne,+IN/Columbus,+OH/@40.7111371,-84.1859042,9.33z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x8815e4ddff22814b:0x80077b147642f793!2m2!1d-85.1393513!2d41.079273!1m5!1m1!1s0x883889c1b990de71:0xe43266f8cfb1b533!2m2!1d-82.9987942!2d39.9611755?hl=en

Yup, my girlfriend is from Fort Wayne - every time we go up there we end up on county roads for a good portion of the trip. Not only is there less traffic, it’s a nice scenic drive, to boot.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on July 09, 2019, 07:37:51 PM
The Transportation Research Center (http://www.trcpg.com/) in East Liberty has developed a “high speed intersection” for testing of autonomous vehicles. What I find interesting is the signals being used. I suppose it makes sense for a driverless vehicle to not have to deal with a doghouse. It just piqued my curiosity upon seeing the pictures.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190709/65d065d165850fd8f3b32efe2e0d27cc.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190709/3ee827591f85a075cdbfe61539a1bd7e.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190709/6912b7439c7d29fb9704811b54c91e3c.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2019, 06:20:03 PM
The Transportation Research Center (http://www.trcpg.com/) in East Liberty has developed a “high speed intersection” for testing of autonomous vehicles. What I find interesting is the signals being used. I suppose it makes sense for a driverless vehicle to not have to deal with a doghouse. It just piqued my curiosity upon seeing the pictures.



I believe that it is far easier to get to fully automated vehicle use in a situation where traffic signals provide exclusive protected control.  If there are separate signals for straight, right, and left at high speed intersections, and turns are only allowed if fully protected, and all vehicles and pedestrians must abide by their unique signals - then it is a relatively simple manner to direct automatic cars to simple stay in their lane and follow the signals.

It would be far harder to deal with peds or traffic that can come and go at any time.  Also it would probably be hard for an automatic car to "judge" a safe permissive left turn or a safe right turn on red.  It is far easier for an automatic car to avoid stationary hazards than moving hazards.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on October 09, 2019, 06:23:34 AM
ODOT was testing the I-670 smartlane signs last night.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191009/057a41416693b52f1d37f667a338bbab.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191009/eba8914cebebc9318735f8dc9c5adc1f.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191009/fd62c49c62a01467f8478842e4dedf72.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on October 17, 2019, 05:34:47 PM
I-670 Smartlane opens next Wednesday:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191017/82eea02ac9f2424dfdda2602753828dd.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on October 21, 2019, 09:40:45 AM
The opening of the reconfigured exit ramps at I-670 & I-270 has brought about some exit numbering changes:

10A: I-270 N
10B: SR 161/Easton Way
10C: US 62 E
10D: I-270 S

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191021/b2096f2bbe20adac0dc2843f6121ba86.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on October 21, 2019, 11:30:12 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191021/b2096f2bbe20adac0dc2843f6121ba86.jpg)

 :hmmm:

Can someone at FHWA explain how that gantry is more readable than dancing arrows when aligned over the lanes properly?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on October 21, 2019, 12:04:08 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191021/b2096f2bbe20adac0dc2843f6121ba86.jpg)

 :hmmm:

Can someone at FHWA explain how that gantry is more readable than dancing arrows when aligned over the lanes properly?

This has indeed been discussed at TRB. The MUTCD restricting APLs to a single option lane and banning dancing arrows has led to this, which is the only way to indicate multiple option lanes.

Paging Alps or mtantillo: has NCUTCD discussed this at all?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 07, 2019, 07:18:14 PM
Now that ODOT believes it has money again, it is plotting out future construction again.
https://radio.wosu.org/post/gas-tax-hike-lets-odot-green-light-nearly-400-million-road-projects#stream/0 (https://radio.wosu.org/post/gas-tax-hike-lets-odot-green-light-nearly-400-million-road-projects#stream/0)
Quote
$38 million for widening of I-75 (Phase 8 of Through the Valley) in Hamilton County
$79 million for widening of I-475 and construction of a new interchange at U.S. 20A in Lucas County
$38 million for intersection and interchange improvements along SR-32 (Eastern Corridor Segment 4A) in Clermont County
$10 million for construction of northbound express lanes on I-71 between Stringtown Road and I-270 in Franklin County
$65 million for widening and interchange improvements along I-77 from Arlington Road to I-77, I-277, and U.S. 224 in Summit County
$8 million for interchange improvements to U.S. 40 and Dayton International Airport Access Road in Montgomery County
$73 million for interchange improvements at I-270 and I-70 (Phase 1 of the Far East Freeway) in Franklin County
$18 million for widening of SR-18 between the City of Medina and I-71 in Medina County
$8 million for improvements to the U.S. 36 and SR-37 intersection and associated railroad bridge replacement in Delaware County
$4.3 million for improvements to the U.S. 33 and SR-161 Interchange in Union County, bringing TRAC’s total to commitment for construction of this project to $11.3 million
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on November 07, 2019, 08:18:42 PM
- Eastern Corridor Segment 4A involves improvements to Old SR 74 in the vicinity of Glen Este-Withamsville Road.

Going by http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/FINAL_20_23_MN_CONSTRUCTION_PROGRAM_LIST.pdf

- The SR 7 Chesapeake bypass receives funding in 2021 for ROW. This should finally kickstart the completion of a super-two from Chesapeake to Proctorville.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 08, 2019, 09:01:36 AM
$10 million for construction of northbound express lanes on I-71 between Stringtown Road and I-270 in Franklin County

So is that part of the "South Side Mega Fix" or in addition to it?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 09, 2019, 09:54:11 PM
$10 million for construction of northbound express lanes on I-71 between Stringtown Road and I-270 in Franklin County

So is that part of the "South Side Mega Fix" or in addition to it?
In addition to it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 16, 2019, 10:00:26 AM
Noticed a new mileage sign on OH 4 just north of the OH 162 intersection, which had the mileage to both Sandusky and to the Turnpike, but signed it with an I-80 shield, an I-90 shield and a yellow toll banner, instead of saying "Ohio Turnpike" as I have seen on other milage signs.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on November 18, 2019, 08:48:15 AM
I was in NW Ohio yesterday and noticed that ODOT is using 5-light inline tower signals for right turns with their advance signals. I found this example at the intersection of SR 53 and SR 163 east of Port Clinton: https://goo.gl/maps/H1moydGHZ5JAsHEh8
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: King O Frod on November 19, 2019, 02:22:33 PM
I was in NW Ohio yesterday and noticed that ODOT is using 5-light inline tower signals for right turns with their advance signals. I found this example at the intersection of SR 53 and SR 163 east of Port Clinton: https://goo.gl/maps/H1moydGHZ5JAsHEh8

Looks less likely than a doghouse signal to get clipped by a truck's side mirror.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 19, 2019, 08:09:02 PM
I was in NW Ohio yesterday and noticed that ODOT is using 5-light inline tower signals for right turns with their advance signals. I found this example at the intersection of SR 53 and SR 163 east of Port Clinton: https://goo.gl/maps/H1moydGHZ5JAsHEh8

I thought it was just a Toledo thing.
(US 20 @ Oh 2, back in September)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48724662827_9dd8305de6_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 19, 2019, 08:18:29 PM
Some more Columbus.
ODOT/City of Columbus has finished work on the exit for West North Broadway (St)/Olentangy River Rd & Oh 315.
(https://forum.urbanohio.com/uploads/monthly_2019_11/image.thumb.png.3a6a00dac6f6e4226e3e180178e415ec.png)

(To help orient viewers; Riverside Hospital would be to your right (out of the picture), Olentangy River is hiding in the trees to your left, and Downtown Columbus is on the horizon in the upper right corner of the photo)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on November 20, 2019, 12:23:29 PM
Some more Columbus.
ODOT/City of Columbus has finished work on the exit for West North Broadway (St)/Olentangy River Rd & Oh 315.
(https://forum.urbanohio.com/uploads/monthly_2019_11/image.thumb.png.3a6a00dac6f6e4226e3e180178e415ec.png)

(To help orient viewers; Riverside Hospital would be to your right (out of the picture), Olentangy River is hiding in the trees to your left, and Downtown Columbus is on the horizon in the upper right corner of the photo)

The ramp from Olentangy River Road to 315 South (on the bottom right corner of the aerial view) is still closed, but looks like it will reopen soon.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on November 20, 2019, 12:31:23 PM
Noticed a new mileage sign on OH 4 just north of the OH 162 intersection, which had the mileage to both Sandusky and to the Turnpike, but signed it with an I-80 shield, an I-90 shield and a yellow toll banner, instead of saying "Ohio Turnpike" as I have seen on other milage signs.


Back on October 5, I noticed several new distance signs in Seneca County with mixed case letters and route shields. I believe ODOT District 2 is the first to do this, as I have not noticed this anywhere else yet.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 20, 2019, 09:44:12 PM
Noticed a new mileage sign on OH 4 just north of the OH 162 intersection, which had the mileage to both Sandusky and to the Turnpike, but signed it with an I-80 shield, an I-90 shield and a yellow toll banner, instead of saying "Ohio Turnpike" as I have seen on other milage signs.


Back on October 5, I noticed several new distance signs in Seneca County with mixed case letters and route shields. I believe ODOT District 2 is the first to do this, as I have not noticed this anywhere else yet.

Like this?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48580931287_4c9b5cc37f_z.jpg)
(From July of this year)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 01, 2019, 03:44:01 PM
Was on the Portsmouth bypass yesterday, which reminded me that it has that type of mileage sign as well. ODOT seems to be doing a lot of mileage sign improvements, at least in this area. Just noticed new ones on OH 67 with Bellevue and Republic on them that were never there before that I can recall.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on December 02, 2019, 03:34:14 PM
A newly-constructed interchange is now open in southern Mahoning County, at I-680 and OH-164, just north of the Ohio Turnpike.  The project also included building a roundabout just to the west at the intersection of OH-164 and OH-626.  The pic in the link below is oriented with the north on the right and west at the top.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D04/mah/I680SR164-Project/PublishingImages/2019-I-680andSR164.png

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on December 02, 2019, 06:55:22 PM
A newly-constructed interchange is now open in southern Mahoning County, at I-680 and OH-164, just north of the Ohio Turnpike.  The project also included building a roundabout just to the west at the intersection of OH-164 and OH-626.  The pic in the link below is oriented with the north on the right and west at the top.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D04/mah/I680SR164-Project/PublishingImages/2019-I-680andSR164.png



Here is a story from the Tribune/Vindicator on the opening of the interchange

https://www.vindy.com/news/local-news/2019/11/beaver-twp-interchange-opens-to-i-680/

I drove down 680 to the next exit last week - definitely different after more than 40 years of having to get off at Western Reserve Road or end up well in to Pennsylvania. 

My son took a picture for me, but it looks just like the picture in the article.

This will help ease some of the congestion at the 680-Western Reserve - South Avenue exit.  Traffic heading to North Lima and Columbiana County will use the new exit.

The roundabout has been open for a few months.  First time I drove a truck started to take the wrong roundabout exit and we all sat there while he backed up and ran over the center circle.

The best improvement was the widening of the South Avenue (164) bridge over the turnpike - providing a left turn lane for 626.

I'm skeptical of how much economic development comes from the new exit.  I hope I'm wrong on that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on December 02, 2019, 08:09:20 PM
I agree that development may be limited around the new exit, but that's gonna be a busy exit for those wishing to shunpike the steep tolls on the Penna Turnpike between the Ohio line and I-79 going to Pittsburgh. 

Using the OH-164/626/165 combo to reach OH-14/PA-51 will avoid all tolls in the Keystone state, as PA-51 dumps you right at the Return of Free I-376 at Chippewa.

Of course, for now, going west from Pittsburgh to Youngstown is still the bargain as you only pay the Ohio tolls if you come from I-79.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 03, 2019, 01:51:57 PM
There is yet another new traffic light going in on US 23 in Delaware County. This one is just south of the Delaware Walmart/Kroger complex at a road serving a housing development, and just north of the light that was added at Meeker Way not too long ago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on December 03, 2019, 10:43:34 PM
There is yet another new traffic light going in on US 23 in Delaware County. This one is just south of the Delaware Walmart/Kroger complex at a road serving a housing development, and just north of the light that was added at Meeker Way not too long ago.

It's only the 8th traffic light added to US 23, between Oh 315 and US 42. (less than 2 miles between the points)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 09, 2019, 04:47:59 PM
Last night I saw, what I think is a new mileage sign on I-280 that also had shields on it. It had US 20 and I-80/I-90/Ohio Turnpike shield (as opposed to the yellow "Toll" banner on the mileage sign I mentioned above on OH 4)

Also, I suppose I-280 in Toledo is the only place where one would see Cleveland (Ohio) as the control city for the southbound direction.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 02, 2020, 10:30:43 AM
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/maps/2019MapFiles/2019StateMap-Map.pdf

Looking at the latest ODOT Map that came out sometime in 2019, and I see they've made some changes to the style for the first time in over 20 years

- fonts are all different
- new style US and Interstate shields
- state route and local road lines are much narrower
- separate shade of yellow for villages that's really light
- new symbols for colleges, amtrak stations, nature preserves, state parks with and without camping, VA medical centers
- new color and more detail for out of state areas

- on one hand, the US 23 corridor is very specific about which sections are freeway vs divided highway and divided highway vs. paved two or more lane
- on the other hand, the US 20 Norwalk bypass is no longer shown as a freeway even though it clearly is one, while there's a stretch of US 20 between Clyde and Fremont that is now shown as a freeway even though it clearly is not one
- OH 309 incorrectly shown as a freeway in Ontario
- congrats to New Boston on now being the county seat of Scioto County
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 02, 2020, 04:29:01 PM
I spot some other errors, such as US 52 not being shown as a freeway in parts whereas it is.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 02, 2020, 04:44:31 PM
I've noticed another mistake that's really egregious, a 2 lane section of US 250 that forms the northern part of the Ashland, OH bypass between OH 60 and US 42 is shown as a full freeway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on January 02, 2020, 04:53:33 PM
I got an Ohio map not too long ago and noticed another big "error." On the Columbus inset on the back, Ohio State University is not spelled with a "the." On the other hand, that's great restraint on the part of ODOT.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 03, 2020, 07:00:59 AM
My biggest complaint is that the two-or-more-lanes line (a thin black line) makes even major roads look like minor highways, such as US 23 north of Columbus. It's four-lane divided with a center turn lane, not a minor two-lane road, but the line doesn't differentiate between that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 03, 2020, 01:18:52 PM
Another glaring mistake I just noticed the OH 10/US 20 freeway from I-480 to Oberlin is no longer shown as a freeway, despite being correctly show as such on previous maps
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 01:20:01 PM
Along with an Ohio 20 shield, west of Painesville and the Oh 19/100 overlap being mistakingly extended to the Crawford/Seneca County line.

The ODOT 2019 edition is the sloppiest roadmap they've put out in the GIS era (and that goes back to 1993)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 01:25:38 PM
My biggest complaint is that the two-or-more-lanes line (a thin black line) makes even major roads look like minor highways, such as US 23 north of Columbus. It's four-lane divided with a center turn lane, not a minor two-lane road, but the line doesn't differentiate between that.

ODOT has always shown the two sections of 5 laned (undivided with the turn lane) US 23 in Delaware County as a "two lane" road on their maps over the decades.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 07, 2020, 03:58:50 PM
^ and they are now showing the same simple line for other 4 lane sections of 23 that lack a grass median, such as between Chillicothe and Waverly, and some very specific on and off portions in Scioto County. Though at least this version of the map has Lucasville in the correct place, unlike some previous versions.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 10, 2020, 11:11:59 PM
Speaking of traffic lights along US 23, between I-270 and Delaware; Delaware County & City have taken another study on US 23.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/81227/council-hears-us-23-corridor-study
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 18, 2020, 02:06:30 PM
The rest area on US 33 westbound between Pomeroy and Darwin now has modern restroom facilities. I remember it being primitive not too long ago.

It's the smallest restroom I've seen for a modern Ohio rest area (1 stall, 1 urinal in the men's, and I assume 2 stalls for the women) but it's better than what it had before. Not quite sure, but they may have installed these flush toilets in the same building that housed the primitive ones.

And for whatever reason the little kiosk shack has a map of Meigs County and an Ohio map with the city inset side showing....but no full Ohio road map on display. Though at least there are folded maps available in a brochure holder.



VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 21, 2020, 09:26:03 AM
Speaking of traffic lights along US 23, between I-270 and Delaware; Delaware County & City have taken another study on US 23.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/81227/council-hears-us-23-corridor-study

Hmm. While I guess it mentions traffic improvements a bit, this seems all about developing the remaining land along the corridor and deciding what mode of development is best, which will likely lead to more traffic lights either way. From the wording of the article they seem to focus on the corridor's role in a Delaware County centric view rather than as a key link in the statewide/regional transportation system. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 21, 2020, 05:58:19 PM
How many traffic lights are there currently on US 23 in Ohio? Like from Portsmouth to Columbus, and Columbus to Toledo? I'd think a corridor like US 23 though Ohio should minimize the number of traffic lights encountered throughout the state (excluding through the city of Columbus, where such a policy would be impossible to implement).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 21, 2020, 10:31:46 PM
From counting on Google Earth.
Between the Ohio River & Chillicothe,  22 traffic lights
Between Chillicothe & Circleville, 5 traffic lights
Between Circleville & I-270 (South), 9 traffic lights
Between I-270 (North) & US 42 (southside of Delaware), 31 traffic lights
Between Northside of Delaware & Waldo, 7 traffic lights.
Between Waldo and Carey, 0 traffic lights
Between Carey & US 20, 18 traffic lights
On the overlap with US 20 to I-75, 7 traffic lights

A total of 99 traffic lights along US 23 in Ohio
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 22, 2020, 09:50:24 AM
How many traffic lights are there currently on US 23 in Ohio? Like from Portsmouth to Columbus, and Columbus to Toledo? I'd think a corridor like US 23 though Ohio should minimize the number of traffic lights encountered throughout the state (excluding through the city of Columbus, where such a policy would be impossible to implement).

Right, with the reason being that there are freeways in place to bypass all those lights. So it should also be noted that some of the lights in Hot Rod's list above are similarly bypassed:

Ohio River to Lucasville - bypassed by the newly completed OH 823. That leaves roughly 8 traffic lights left between Portsmouth and Chillicothe, all in Waverly.
Carey to Toledo - bypassed by OH 15 and I-75, which is clearly intended to handle Toledo-Columbus traffic, and includes a recent upgrade to 6 lanes on 75 between Findlay and Toledo and a currently underway upgrade to the OH 15/I-75 interchange.

Removing those from the equation, that brings the list to 60 traffic lights that are the problem, with half of those coming in one 12 mile stretch between US 42 and I-270, and can be expanded to say that 38 of them are in one 24 mile stretch between I-270 and OH 229 near Waldo.
 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 22, 2020, 10:41:10 AM
To note, those traffic lights between I-270 and OH 823 are spaced over a roughly 2.5-hour drive. The majority are in Circleville and Waverly.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 22, 2020, 12:49:31 PM
Has there been any serious talk of an upgraded connection along the US 36 corridor to bypass the Columbus-Delaware mess? I remember that one of the rough proposals for I-73 had that breaking off of 71 north of US 36 and hitting US 23 around Delaware Lake, but that obviously never got off the ground.

Related topic: South Bloomfield. Any updates on that bypass, or has it turned into a Breezewood situation stopped by politics?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 22, 2020, 01:30:48 PM
There is an active proposal for a S. Bloomfield bypass but it's just not in the active six-year plan. I had found plans a few years back while stalking around on their site that showed a freeway bypass to the east of the village.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2020, 10:50:53 AM
There is an active proposal for a S. Bloomfield bypass but it's just not in the active six-year plan. I had found plans a few years back while stalking around on their site that showed a freeway bypass to the east of the village.

Do you remember what site you were on? Was it ODOT, or something like MORC?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: renegade on January 23, 2020, 10:59:45 AM
From counting on Google Earth.

...

Between I-270 (North) & US 42 (southside of Delaware), 31 traffic lights

...


I went through that stretch once on my motorcycle.  Because of all the reds, it took me longer to get from Delaware to I-270 than it did to get from Carey to Delaware.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 23, 2020, 11:06:12 AM
There is an active proposal for a S. Bloomfield bypass but it's just not in the active six-year plan. I had found plans a few years back while stalking around on their site that showed a freeway bypass to the east of the village.

Do you remember what site you were on? Was it ODOT, or something like MORC?

ODOT, but I can't find the page now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2020, 11:27:38 AM
Has there been any serious talk of an upgraded connection along the US 36 corridor to bypass the Columbus-Delaware mess? I remember that one of the rough proposals for I-73 had that breaking off of 71 north of US 36 and hitting US 23 around Delaware Lake, but that obviously never got off the ground.

Not really. There's a project planned to add an interchange and parkway just south of the US 36/OH 37 interchange at I-71, but that has more to do with adding capacity for local commuter traffic and access to the developments at that interchange than anything to do with US 23 corridor traffic (though it will help bypass a few lights.) Using 36/37 as a bypass still involves a section of Delaware city streets and several traffic lights on the 4 lane section, though at least there is a project planned to improve the intersection of 36 and 37 and the adjacent railroad bridge.

On a somewhat related note, last weekend I stopped at the northbound I-71 rest area between Polaris and 36/37, and noticed some yellow highlighter on a particular corridor on the Ohio map displayed in the lobby area. The corridor highlighted was OH 229/OH 61 between US 23 and I-71. Seems someone is suggesting, "Hey, looking for a way to bypass Delaware? Maybe try this route you may not have thought of." In hindsight I wish I'd have taken a pic of that.

ODOT, but I can't find the page now.

Thanks
 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 23, 2020, 11:49:32 AM
Looking further, ODOT conducted a study in 2007. From this planning study (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/SPR/Pic-East-West/Documents/Planning%20Documentation/Rickenbacker%20Area%20Road%20Network%20Assessment.pdf):

* US 23 upgraded to a freeway from Duvall Road to I-270, with interchanges at SR 317, Ashville Pike Extension, and Duvall Road (SR 317 Access Management Study recommendation).
* Upgrading of US 23 to a six-lane facility within the study area.
* There is a study for a S. Bloomfield bypass underway.

From this archived white paper (https://web.archive.org/web/20160319110710/https://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/InnovativeDelivery/20140516RFCResponses/PBP_WhitePaper_RFC.pdf):
"Besides the Portsmouth Bypass Project, there are two other projects in Ohio which may be eligible to use ARC funding, Waverly Bypass and South Bloomfield Bypass. These projects are not in ODOT’s current 20 year construction program and there are currently no plans to advance these projects at any time in the foreseeable future."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on January 23, 2020, 04:44:56 PM
There is an active proposal for a S. Bloomfield bypass but it's just not in the active six-year plan. I had found plans a few years back while stalking around on their site that showed a freeway bypass to the east of the village.

Do you remember what site you were on? Was it ODOT, or something like MORC?
I ran across it on the FTP site, but that was a few years ago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 23, 2020, 05:08:34 PM
Has there been any serious talk of an upgraded connection along the US 36 corridor to bypass the Columbus-Delaware mess? I remember that one of the rough proposals for I-73 had that breaking off of 71 north of US 36 and hitting US 23 around Delaware Lake, but that obviously never got off the ground.

There hasn't been anything serious about upgrading US 36 between I-71 & Delaware since you were born.
With proposed business parks, between Alum Creek & Delaware, and whatever they are proposing for Northstar/Tanger, between I-71 and Sunbury; using US 36/Oh 37 as part of "I-73" will become moot shortly.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sbeaver44 on January 25, 2020, 03:58:56 PM
I was looking back over photos of a Cleveland trip in 2014.  This was in Public Square, heading SE on Ontario.  Any idea what the upper left route might have been at one point?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200125/adb31246c5020e4eea0cd04f784e04ee.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 25, 2020, 04:04:14 PM
^ Probably OH 87

And I like that old S-EAST banner on OH 14
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on January 26, 2020, 09:51:45 AM
I was looking back over photos of a Cleveland trip in 2014.  This was in Public Square, heading SE on Ontario.  Any idea what the upper left route might have been at one point?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200125/adb31246c5020e4eea0cd04f784e04ee.jpg)
 

What is covered up is SOUTH US-21.  What's odd is that US-21 was almost certainly truncated and downgraded to OH-21 about 8 miles south along I-77 around the time  that this assembly went up in the early 80s.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on January 31, 2020, 09:54:23 AM
The new Waterville bridge over the Maumee River opens today

https://www.toledoblade.com/local/transportation/2020/01/27/new-waterville-bridge-scheduled-to-open-following-ceremony-friday/stories/20200127104
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: catch22 on February 01, 2020, 09:53:56 PM
The new Waterville bridge over the Maumee River opens today

https://www.toledoblade.com/local/transportation/2020/01/27/new-waterville-bridge-scheduled-to-open-following-ceremony-friday/stories/20200127104

ODOT posted this video on Twitter showing the new bridge open to traffic.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 16, 2020, 09:09:02 PM
The actual owner of Roadfan.com emailed me last week that WEWS in Cleveland did a story on the guy who does the roadmaps for ODOT.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 21, 2020, 09:23:08 PM
I guess ODOT and the City of Delaware will be working on the US 23 bypass this year.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/82050/city-gateway-to-receive-facelift
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 22, 2020, 09:24:16 AM
I guess ODOT and the City of Delaware will be working on the US 23 bypass this year.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/82050/city-gateway-to-receive-facelift

Was taking a look at this area and noticed something.......didn't there used to be a one way street along the river that connected the end of the US 23 exit ramp at William St to the start of the US 23 entrance ramp on Central Ave, or am I mis-remembering that? Currently there's just a multi use trail in that 2 block corridor.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 23, 2020, 10:12:54 PM
I guess ODOT and the City of Delaware will be working on the US 23 bypass this year.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/82050/city-gateway-to-receive-facelift

Was taking a look at this area and noticed something.......didn't there used to be a one way street along the river that connected the end of the US 23 exit ramp at William St to the start of the US 23 entrance ramp on Central Ave, or am I mis-remembering that? Currently there's just a multi use trail in that 2 block corridor.
Just a bike trail for the last decade or two.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 06, 2020, 10:54:19 PM
More news from a Delaware near me.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/82372/oh-sheetz-popular-chain-eyes-delaware
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 08, 2020, 10:28:06 PM
More news from a Delaware near me.
https://www.delgazette.com/news/82372/oh-sheetz-popular-chain-eyes-delaware

Nice. Looks like this will be the farthest to the west Sheetz has expanded.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on March 16, 2020, 12:02:51 PM
Franklin County went old school when replacing this pair of blades. I haven’t seen the ampersand used for this road since I was a kid. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200316/3621dd9f382bec308454330841f6cb3e.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on March 16, 2020, 12:32:10 PM
Isn't that technically the wrong name. The hyphen in the name that is typically used doesn't necessarily mean "and."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on March 16, 2020, 01:50:15 PM
Isn't that technically the wrong name. The hyphen in the name that is typically used doesn't necessarily mean "and."

I would agree - its called Hilliard Rome Road, not Hilliard and Rome Rd.

Although often written Hilliard-Rome Rd, both Google Maps and the USPS call it Hilliard Rome Rd (with no puncuation).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on March 16, 2020, 03:19:36 PM
Isn't that technically the wrong name. The hyphen in the name that is typically used doesn't necessarily mean "and."
The actual name is Hilliard & Rome, but for quite some time the & has been substituted by a hyphen on signage.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 19, 2020, 08:28:27 PM
At least it doesn't say "Hillards"
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on March 24, 2020, 08:47:56 PM
Over in the General Highway Talk forum, there is an active thread titled "3di Poll".  Buck87 posted regarding I-280 near Toledo, which caused me to visit Google Maps to reacquaint myself with that section of roadway, including the southern extension (OH 420) below the Turnpike.

Somebody help me out here.  The southern termination of OH 420 at US 20/US 23 utilizes a traditional trumpet, but has an "extra" ramp from EB 20/23 that follows outside of the main trumpet, appearing to duplicate the exact same movement, but apparently there to avoid, for EB 20/23 travelers needing to exit at Pemberville Road, a very quick and short weave with the almost immediate loop exit coming off the trumpet. 

Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on March 24, 2020, 09:45:57 PM
Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?

That interchange, the ramp, and the interchange at Pemberville Road were all constructed at the same time and opened in 2006. You are correct that the ramp is to eliminate the weaving due to the close proximity of the interchanges.

Before that, OH 420 met US 20-23 at an at-grade divided pseudo-interchange with US 20-23 having the right-of-way. I believe that dates back to the construction of the expressway from the Turnpike to US 20-23, and certainly pre-1980.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 24, 2020, 10:36:02 PM
Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?

That interchange, the ramp, and the interchange at Pemberville Road were all constructed at the same time and opened in 2006. You are correct that the ramp is to eliminate the weaving due to the close proximity of the interchanges.

Before that, OH 420 met US 20-23 at an at-grade divided pseudo-interchange with US 20-23 having the right-of-way. I believe that dates back to the construction of the expressway from the Turnpike to US 20-23, and certainly pre-1980.

According to Historic Aerials, the "at-grade divided pseudo-interchange" goes as far back as 1963.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 25, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
Looking at it closer I see that ramp is the only way to get to Pemberville Rd from 20/23 east. Never really noticed that before.

I don't really have any memory of what the 420-20/23 intersection looked like before the rebuild. When you say " at-grade divided pseudo-interchange" do you mean something kinda like this?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5065382,-82.8308716,558m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on March 25, 2020, 06:01:06 PM
Looking at it closer I see that ramp is the only way to get to Pemberville Rd from 20/23 east. Never really noticed that before.

I don't really have any memory of what the 420-20/23 intersection looked like before the rebuild. When you say " at-grade divided pseudo-interchange" do you mean something kinda like this?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5065382,-82.8308716,558m/data=!3m1!1e3

It looked quite a bit like that route 269 interchange to which you linked.

Here's an aerial pic of the 420-20-23 intersection as it looked like before the interchange was constructed:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49698245243_72f40bdec5_c.jpg)



Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 11, 2020, 07:59:44 PM
Drove through Ashland for the first time in a while and noticed that the southern US 250 / US 42 intersection is now at grade. The old configuration had US 42 crossing US 250 on a bridge, with a 2 lane access road connecting them in the southwest corner, in kind of a quasi interchange. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 11, 2020, 11:09:46 PM
Drove through Ashland for the first time in a while and noticed that the southern US 250 / US 42 intersection is now at grade. The old configuration had US 42 crossing US 250 on a bridge, with a 2 lane access road connecting them in the southwest corner, in kind of a quasi interchange. 
According to Google Earth, the interchange was torn down by 2015.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on May 11, 2020, 11:20:51 PM
Drove through Ashland for the first time in a while and noticed that the southern US 250 / US 42 intersection is now at grade. The old configuration had US 42 crossing US 250 on a bridge, with a 2 lane access road connecting them in the southwest corner, in kind of a quasi interchange. 

There also was a similar, tighter connector road on the Northeast side as well, as seen by this overhead view:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ashland,+OH+44805/@40.8632241,-82.2903499,584m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x8839fb4c7c45928f:0xec32ce48c044248f!8m2!3d40.8686675!4d-82.3182178


Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on May 12, 2020, 09:12:51 AM
Drove through Ashland for the first time in a while and noticed that the southern US 250 / US 42 intersection is now at grade. The old configuration had US 42 crossing US 250 on a bridge, with a 2 lane access road connecting them in the southwest corner, in kind of a quasi interchange. 

There also was a similar, tighter connector road on the Northeast side as well, as seen by this overhead view:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ashland,+OH+44805/@40.8632241,-82.2903499,584m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x8839fb4c7c45928f:0xec32ce48c044248f!8m2!3d40.8686675!4d-82.3182178

The connector road on the northeast side was built first with the US 42 bypass (when US 250 still went through downtown Ashland) and managed all movements. In the early 90s when they built the US 250 bypass north of town and multiplexed it with US 42 back to its original alignment, they built the connector road in the southwest quadrant. Both then functioned as quasi RIRO "exits" from the US 42 mainline to/from US 250/SR 96.

I assume when the original overpass reached the end of its life, ODOT thought a conventional intersection would handle the traffic better than the substandard interchange and would save money on maintenance versus replacing the bridge.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 16, 2020, 09:53:36 PM
After partaking in a quarantine roadtrip in Western Ohio today I can tell everyone that it appears ODOT is replacing all the roadside signs along OH 15/US 23 in Hancock & Wyandot Counties (ODOT district 1). Along with the interchange between I-75 & US 68/Oh 15 still being worked on, ODOT is also replacing the bridge deck on US 68 over Oh 15 (SE corner of Findlay). Finally, ODOT has blocked the medium for two minor roads that cross OH 15 between US 68 & Oh 37.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on May 18, 2020, 01:58:24 PM
After partaking in a quarantine roadtrip in Western Ohio today I can tell everyone that it appears ODOT is replacing all the roadside signs along OH 15/US 23 in Hancock & Wyandot Counties (ODOT district 1).

Wonder if the new signs will include the addition of exit numbers on OH 15 & US 23.
Title: Ohio
Post by: 6a on May 19, 2020, 05:09:34 PM
I-71 is underwater south of downtown Columbus. They’ve also closed the floodgates at Frank and Harmon Roads.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200519/16f4db070f35fe2b3f5f7792435ee456.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on May 19, 2020, 09:17:03 PM
I-71 is underwater south of downtown Columbus. They’ve also closed the floodgates at Frank and Harmon Roads.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200519/16f4db070f35fe2b3f5f7792435ee456.jpg)

And HOW many years did it take ODOT to assign a control city to SR-315???
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 20, 2020, 11:10:27 AM
I-71 is underwater south of downtown Columbus. They’ve also closed the floodgates at Frank and Harmon Roads.


And HOW many years did it take ODOT to assign a control city to SR-315???

20 years
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 20, 2020, 04:11:06 PM
A couple of the signs on 71 NB approaching 70 and 315 actually had Worthington shown long enough to have the lighting on the signs and a center tab for the 315 exit; I think I recall them being there in about 2009 and they may actually go back a few years before that (especially given the lighting being installed).  Why it wasn't included on similar signs of more recent vintage (like eastbound on 70 where it was Cleveland, Wheeling, nothing, and Cincinnati going across the 4 signs) is weird.  I like parallel structure...it doesn't matter if the others are regional and 315 gets a local control city; it looks wrong.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 20, 2020, 07:23:34 PM
A couple of the signs on 71 NB approaching 70 and 315 actually had Worthington shown long enough to have the lighting on the signs and a center tab for the 315 exit; I think I recall them being there in about 2009 and they may actually go back a few years before that (especially given the lighting being installed).  Why it wasn't included on similar signs of more recent vintage (like eastbound on 70 where it was Cleveland, Wheeling, nothing, and Cincinnati going across the 4 signs) is weird.  I like parallel structure...it doesn't matter if the others are regional and 315 gets a local control city; it looks wrong.
ODOT has never used a control city for 315 in either direction along I-70. Back in the "old days" (opening of the outerbelt through 2000), I-270 used "Olentangy River Rd" North & South as the control city for 315 from I-270.
I do recall ODOT changing the overhead signs for 315, around OSU campus in 2001 (while I was a student there) and added Worthington for 315 NB & Columbus for 315 SB. I do believe around this same time, ODOT, gave 315 SB the control city of Columbus up at I-270.
On the other hand, when work was finally completed on Spring-Sandusky (I-670/US33/Oh 315) in 2004, all the overhead signs for 315, along I-670 just gave directions (North & South), no cities.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on May 20, 2020, 07:48:27 PM
I-71 is underwater south of downtown Columbus. They’ve also closed the floodgates at Frank and Harmon Roads.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200519/16f4db070f35fe2b3f5f7792435ee456.jpg)

Wow -- that looks like CA 99 near Tulare during the 1997 floods -- every low spot inundated.   
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 20, 2020, 10:49:28 PM
Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?

That interchange, the ramp, and the interchange at Pemberville Road were all constructed at the same time and opened in 2006. You are correct that the ramp is to eliminate the weaving due to the close proximity of the interchanges.


What I find bizarre about the US-20/23 and OH-420 interchange is the narrowness of the US-20/23 corridor in a rural location.  No left shoulders, and the OH-420 and Pemberville Road bridges have vertical abutment walls.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on May 21, 2020, 10:47:34 AM
Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?

That interchange, the ramp, and the interchange at Pemberville Road were all constructed at the same time and opened in 2006. You are correct that the ramp is to eliminate the weaving due to the close proximity of the interchanges.


What I find bizarre about the US-20/23 and OH-420 interchange is the narrowness of the US-20/23 corridor in a rural location.  No left shoulders, and the OH-420 and Pemberville Road bridges have vertical abutment walls.


Never understood why ODOT never widened the US-20/US-23 overlap from Woodville to near Perrysburg into a 4-lane divided expressway after all these decades as it has been a heavy truck route (even after the I-75/Ohio Turnpike connection was completed in the late 80s).

Yeah, you COULD argue that SR-795 was built instead for the truck traffic, but that is too far north of a jog and the lack of traffic proves it.

All the times I used to use US-20 from Norwalk to Toledo to get to and from college.  It was easier (and cheaper) to shunpike and US-20 was pleasant to drive on -- 4-lanes, even through the smaller towns -- UNTIL you hit Woodville when the road went to 2-lanes all the way to I-75.  It was damn near impossible to pass slower traffic back then, and I assume it hasn't come close to improving since.

In fact, getting anywhere from the Southeast Toledo Metro area to the Northwestern I-475/US-23 corridor has always been convoluted with finding the right combination of thoroughfares.   Either you have to take an interstate combo that takes you out of your way for a spell, or a combination of surface streets in order to cross the Maumee River, which is the main roadblock in that town.   The least they could've done is to complete the US-20 expressway through Wood County.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 21, 2020, 12:39:51 PM
Would I be correct in thinking that's the reason for the additional ramp?  And was it always there, or was it a "safety correction" some years after the original construction?

That interchange, the ramp, and the interchange at Pemberville Road were all constructed at the same time and opened in 2006. You are correct that the ramp is to eliminate the weaving due to the close proximity of the interchanges.


What I find bizarre about the US-20/23 and OH-420 interchange is the narrowness of the US-20/23 corridor in a rural location.  No left shoulders, and the OH-420 and Pemberville Road bridges have vertical abutment walls.


Never understood why ODOT never widened the US-20/US-23 overlap from Woodville to near Perrysburg into a 4-lane divided expressway after all these decades as it has been a heavy truck route (even after the I-75/Ohio Turnpike connection was completed in the late 80s).

Yeah, you COULD argue that SR-795 was built instead for the truck traffic, but that is too far north of a jog and the lack of traffic proves it.

All the times I used to use US-20 from Norwalk to Toledo to get to and from college.  It was easier (and cheaper) to shunpike and US-20 was pleasant to drive on -- 4-lanes, even through the smaller towns -- UNTIL you hit Woodville when the road went to 2-lanes all the way to I-75.  It was damn near impossible to pass slower traffic back then, and I assume it hasn't come close to improving since.

It actually has, somewhat.  US-20 is now five lanes (undivided) between Woodville and OH-420.  That helps service the traffic to/from I-280 and points north.  I don't know when the widening was done, but I'm thinking it's been at least a dozen years.

But US-20/23 is still two lanes between OH-420 and I-75.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on May 21, 2020, 12:43:54 PM
Quote
It actually has, somewhat.  US-20 is now five lanes (undivided) between Woodville and OH-420.  That helps service the traffic to/from I-280 and points north.  I don't know when the widening was done, but I'm thinking it's been at least a dozen years.

But US-20/23 is still two lanes between OH-420 and I-75.

It looks like (https://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2008/07/05/U-S-20-widening-at-Woodville-nears-end/stories/) it was completed in 2008. I remember driving it on one of my trips back to northern Ohio a decade ago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on May 21, 2020, 02:59:14 PM
Quote
It actually has, somewhat.  US-20 is now five lanes (undivided) between Woodville and OH-420.  That helps service the traffic to/from I-280 and points north.  I don't know when the widening was done, but I'm thinking it's been at least a dozen years.

But US-20/23 is still two lanes between OH-420 and I-75.

It looks like (https://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2008/07/05/U-S-20-widening-at-Woodville-nears-end/stories/) it was completed in 2008. I remember driving it on one of my trips back to northern Ohio a decade ago.

Good to know.  My last time down that segment of US-20 was before then.  I bailed out and took SR-51 into Toledo in 2016.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 22, 2020, 08:36:39 PM
They even made the 5 lane portion 60 mph, which I was pleasantly surprised by since it doesn't have a median
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 24, 2020, 12:00:22 PM
They even made the 5 lane portion 60 mph, which I was pleasantly surprised by since it doesn't have a median

That continuous center left turn lane is likely used very rarely (all intersections are with minor township roads at obtuse angles); ODOT apparently decided that was sufficient separation of thru lanes to allow a higher speed limit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: roadwaywiz95 on May 27, 2020, 05:17:22 PM
With this weekend being a Cincinnati-themed one in the Road Meet department, we'll have a special Cincinnati-themed live event for folks to enjoy this Saturday (5/30) starting at 3 PM ET. It'll feature contributions from members across the road enthusiast community, including members of this forum, and we hope you can join us for what's sure to be an awesome event!

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on June 06, 2020, 05:40:09 PM
I see ODOT has a new website layout. Gonna take some getting used to.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 06, 2020, 08:54:21 PM
I see ODOT has a new website layout. Gonna take some getting used to.



Experienced it the other night. Unless you want travel data, or want to know ODOT is doing right now, it sucks.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on June 07, 2020, 01:16:54 PM
I see ODOT has a new website layout. Gonna take some getting used to.

Experienced it the other night. Unless you want travel data, or want to know ODOT is doing right now, it sucks.

Indeed, I prefer the old look. For some nostalgia, here what OH DOT looked back in time.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160616204052/http://www.dot.state.oh.us/pages/home.aspx
https://web.archive.org/web/20090228142321/http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Pages/Home.aspx

And speaking of old memories, I founded by luck this old proposal for I-90 and I-271 who's now stored in the mothballs. Surprising to see they didn't deleted it yet.  https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/otps/110721/sec3.cfm
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on June 07, 2020, 04:54:04 PM
I see ODOT has a new website layout. Gonna take some getting used to.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/home/sitemap (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/home/sitemap) This helps some.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 12, 2020, 09:29:16 PM
Delaware County is rebranding US 23
https://www.delgazette.com/news/84370/us-23-corridorin-county-hasnew-name-logo

And the Ohio State Patrol & ODOT are making a 'Safety Corridor' along I-71 between US 36 and Oh 95
(so no more texting, or photographing me, when you drive by my house along I-71)
https://www.delgazette.com/news/84329/safety-corridor-targets-distracted-drivers
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on June 29, 2020, 08:29:50 PM
Location: https://goo.gl/maps/MWATiEVo76H7utAU7

SR 32/Brooks Malott Road interchange construction (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/110478?fbclid=IwAR0Vrp3l_iNqKyf5x_kWboQmqc-0gA3Fqy0GDuTiBWVmBhbB3N7pB0B7Dyo)

The proposed project will replace the existing at-grade intersection at state Route 32 and Brooks Malott Road in Mount Orab with a full interchange and provide additional safety upgrades at State Route 32 and Bodman Rd.

--

What's the purpose of building a new interchange but then making Brooks Malott Road and Bodman Road right-in intersections? Why not close both intersections?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on June 30, 2020, 10:55:07 PM
Location: https://goo.gl/maps/MWATiEVo76H7utAU7

SR 32/Brooks Malott Road interchange construction (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/110478?fbclid=IwAR0Vrp3l_iNqKyf5x_kWboQmqc-0gA3Fqy0GDuTiBWVmBhbB3N7pB0B7Dyo)

The proposed project will replace the existing at-grade intersection at state Route 32 and Brooks Malott Road in Mount Orab with a full interchange and provide additional safety upgrades at State Route 32 and Bodman Rd.

--

What's the purpose of building a new interchange but then making Brooks Malott Road and Bodman Road right-in intersections? Why not close both intersections?

Looks like they're trying to avoid making people back-track. I tend to agree, though, if you've got a full interchange nearby and especially if you've restricted access to that extent, just close the intersections.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 03, 2020, 10:55:13 PM
Those of you who attended the NE Ohio Roadmeet, back in September 2018, might remember our visit to Vrooman Road and the old bridge, over the Grand River, outside of Painesville, there. Work had just started on the new bridge over the ravine when we visited.
Almost two years later, work on Vrooman Road has progressed that Lake County & ODOT has allowed traffic to use the new bridge, going south, from OH 84 to I-90.
County Engineer webpage for bridge - https://www.lakecountyohio.gov/engineerdept/Projects/VROOMAN-ROAD-BRIDGE
Workzone camera (which has images going back to 2018) for bridge - https://public.workzonecam.com/projects/lakecounty/vroomanroad1/lookingnorthcamera/archive?archiveId=home
Lake County newspaper report on the bridge (from 2 weeks ago) - https://www.news-herald.com/news/vrooman-road-opening-to-southbound-traffic-starting-june-22/article_2dc1f592-b1a4-11ea-9059-87799e60f2a3.html
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 09, 2020, 09:14:43 PM
That Mercy Health building at the corner has an ER. I bet that's why.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 24, 2020, 05:19:35 PM
(I might cross-post this over in the planning forum)
Quote
Recognizing that highways reward some areas and penalize others, the [NE Ohio] region’s top transportation planning agency is drafting a policy to quantify whether adding new interchanges to the system would exacerbate historical patterns of inequity.
https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/07/noaca-policy-on-interchanges-will-address-economic-inequities-in-regional-development-caused-by-interstate-highways.html?fbclid=IwAR06TfQnh9_6Hukfy80riKG-mRpIkrnGBIdv_YDhX1Z1mOHQhVYSyu5LH0k
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 24, 2020, 05:25:03 PM
ODOT has discovered (gasp!) the Michigan left.
US 23, between Marion & Upper Sandusky - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/109362?fbclid=IwAR0anx4zgrIZXr3uwotaRBj_D5wnHUGy9pRwsxi2pjSoUNlAiHzwBOB1e8w

US 35, between Xenia & I-675 - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/102421?fbclid=IwAR1f5eCd9OgaTImTlE1asIw98HJJDeuxMCBmG25NgSyI0n3LO8QZglWPPus

US 36/Oh 37, between Delaware & I-71 - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/107214

(Just a reminder, in regards to the projects on US 23 & US 36, ODOT doesn't care(!) about your I-73 fantasies. Just sayin.')
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on July 25, 2020, 02:16:03 AM
ODOT has discovered (gasp!) the Michigan left.
US 23, between Marion & Upper Sandusky - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/109362?fbclid=IwAR0anx4zgrIZXr3uwotaRBj_D5wnHUGy9pRwsxi2pjSoUNlAiHzwBOB1e8w

US 35, between Xenia & I-675 - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/102421?fbclid=IwAR1f5eCd9OgaTImTlE1asIw98HJJDeuxMCBmG25NgSyI0n3LO8QZglWPPus

US 36/Oh 37, between Delaware & I-71 - https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/107214

(Just a reminder, in regards to the projects on US 23 & US 36, ODOT doesn't care(!) about your I-73 fantasies. Just sayin.')

That's OK; those engaging in such fantasies will say that the section of I-73 in that area would probably be on new terrain alignment anyway -- and that what's depicted for the existing facility would make a dandy biz route!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 31, 2020, 07:48:45 AM
So I see they changed the control cities for entering US 30 from OH 696 at Beaverdam to Upper Sandusky and Delphos. It used to be Mansfield and Fort Wayne, which to me made a lot more sense for an intersection transferring traffic to US 30 from I-75, but whatever ODOT, you do you.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 31, 2020, 09:36:48 PM
So I see they changed the control cities for entering US 30 from OH 696 at Beaverdam to Upper Sandusky and Delphos. It used to be Mansfield and Fort Wayne, which to me made a lot more sense for an intersection transferring traffic to US 30 from I-75, but whatever ODOT, you do you.

VS988

They have?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49718928242_d020d5cffb_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iKuvbJ)
Taken back on March 22, this year.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 31, 2020, 09:55:02 PM
Yes. That sign was gone today.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 02, 2020, 07:17:44 AM
Van Wert, instead of Delphos, may have been more appropriate since it is used on mileage signs as far back as Wooster.  However, I am like Buck87--I prefer Ft. Wayne and Mansfield.

The two control points used on the mileage sign as one drives on the NB 135 ramp from I-75 are Delphos (21) and Upper Sandusky (36)--probably the reason those are used on the new sign, although it should have been Ft. Wayne and Mansfield when the section of US 30 was finished east of Beaverdam.

Are the post interchange and interchange mileage signs going to changed to reflect these new control points?  I do know that the first WB mileage sign lists Delphos (19) and Van Wert (32), however, around 2014, Ohio DOT erected two new interchange mileage signs at OH 65 and OH 115 for Ft. Wayne (60/58) and Mansfield (90/92).  The old one on OH 115 had Delphos (10) and Cairo (3); the old one on OH 65 had Delphos (13) and Beaverdam (8).  If the DOT is spending money and resources erecting those new mileage signs, why would the DOT change the control points at the most important interchange between Ft. Wayne and Mansfield?

The one thing the DOT needs to do is correct the mileages of Ft. Wayne and Mansfield at each interchange--they are mostly wrong.  The two cities are approximately 150 miles apart, not 145, not 136, not 135.  It should be (Ft. Wayne first) 67/83 at OH 696, 74/76 at OH 235, 83/67 at US 68, 90/60 at OH 37, and 99/51 at CR 330/Lincoln Hwy.  However, the DOT could erect new signage using Delphos and Upper Sandusky (maybe without mileages) instead, making my above point moot.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on August 07, 2020, 04:04:44 PM
Are Fort Wayne and Mansfield still used at OH 235 entering US 30?  (With the Fort Wayne westbound signage in button copy?  The 1999-era button copy got missed by the sign replacement that went from the state line to the county line just west of there, and there are reflective signs on the 2007-era highway to the east, leaving a couple miles of button copy as of February, the last time I drove through.  Would have made several trips by since if not for COVID.)  If Fort Wayne and Mansfield are OK on OH 235, why not off I-75? 

The party is finally just about over for those backlit signs around that interchange.  The one on the eastbound side of 30 for the 696 left exit (which read only 75) left long ago.  Is the one on westbound Lincoln Highway still there?  Never quite understood why that one had to be there, although before 2007 when I was driving out 30 when I knew I was going to stop at the Speedway station or something, I'd stay on the old road versus turning onto the new one only to have to exit and turn left off the exit, and enough others did the same, so there was some traffic that saw it.  Nowadays I'd be surprised to see it replaced in kind versus just taken down.

From fall 2015, a pic of mine out of a rental car sunroof of the sign, with a little less wear.  Lately it was really starting to show wear.
(https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/12186453_10105672693683318_4525754640966621093_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=05277f&_nc_ohc=nim-K046NlYAX_d3JcU&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=63b0d1fbe14e59d06facb25a01b16cc0&oe=5F54A47A)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on August 19, 2020, 04:03:52 PM
Is there any rationale behind exit numbering on non-interstate freeways? In district 6 things are numbered by the total state mileage. In at least Clark County (district 7) things are numbered by in-county mileage. What gives?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 19, 2020, 11:20:40 PM
Is there any rationale behind exit numbering on non-interstate freeways? In district 6 things are numbered by the total state mileage. In at least Clark County (district 7) things are numbered by in-county mileage. What gives?


Way back when, only interstates in Ohio had exit numbers, and originally they were sequential.  In addition, only the mile markers on interstates were not reset at the county lines.

Sometime in the 70's, exit numbers switched to mileage based.

Traditionally, all non interstate routes in Ohio had mile markers that reflected mileage only within the specific county they traveled thru.

When they first began adding mile markers to exits on the non I- freeways, they used the county mileage.  Then ODOT decided to number the exits based on total state mileage.

Fine and dandy, but on routes that are not totally limited access roads from end to end, you go from resetting county mileages to cumulative milege, and vice versa.

Ohio and ODOT should just once and fornall and go all-in on system-wide mile markers that are based on their points of origin rather than their county mileage -- and use traditional white-on-green mile marker signs like many other states do!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on August 20, 2020, 10:37:27 AM
Is there any rationale behind exit numbering on non-interstate freeways? In district 6 things are numbered by the total state mileage. In at least Clark County (district 7) things are numbered by in-county mileage. What gives?


Way back when, only interstates in Ohio had exit numbers, and originally they were sequential.  In addition, only the mile markers on interstates were not reset at the county lines.

Sometime in the 70's, exit numbers switched to mileage based.

Traditionally, all non interstate routes in Ohio had mile markers that reflected mileage only within the specific county they traveled thru.

When they first began adding mile markers to exits on the non I- freeways, they used the county mileage.  Then ODOT decided to number the exits based on total state mileage.

Fine and dandy, but on routes that are not totally limited access roads from end to end, you go from resetting county mileages to cumulative milege, and vice versa.

Ohio and ODOT should just once and fornall and go all-in on system-wide mile markers that are based on their points of origin rather than their county mileage -- and use traditional white-on-green mile marker signs like many other states do!

For exit numbers on non-Interstates, ODOT is adding or changing to signs based on statewide mileage when sign replacement projects occur. An example of a county-to-state conversion occurred around Athens last year. (Athens still has the oddity of US 33 westbound leaving US 50/SR 32 eastbound being signed as the exit with an exit number, even thought the numbers are based on US 33's mileage.)

I doubt ODOT will go to signing state-wide mileage on mile markers system-wide. The white markers are used internally for maintenance and for accident reporting; they're not really intended for public consumption anyway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on August 20, 2020, 07:53:04 PM
The reason it popped into my head is Clark County only just recently had exits numbered. That they were done with in-county mileage as opposed to other areas that were numbered earlier seemed weird.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: I-55 on August 21, 2020, 09:13:36 PM
Is there any rationale behind exit numbering on non-interstate freeways? In district 6 things are numbered by the total state mileage. In at least Clark County (district 7) things are numbered by in-county mileage. What gives?


Way back when, only interstates in Ohio had exit numbers, and originally they were sequential.  In addition, only the mile markers on interstates were not reset at the county lines.

Sometime in the 70's, exit numbers switched to mileage based.

Traditionally, all non interstate routes in Ohio had mile markers that reflected mileage only within the specific county they traveled thru.

When they first began adding mile markers to exits on the non I- freeways, they used the county mileage.  Then ODOT decided to number the exits based on total state mileage.

Fine and dandy, but on routes that are not totally limited access roads from end to end, you go from resetting county mileages to cumulative milege, and vice versa.

Ohio and ODOT should just once and fornall and go all-in on system-wide mile markers that are based on their points of origin rather than their county mileage -- and use traditional white-on-green mile marker signs like many other states do!

For exit numbers on non-Interstates, ODOT is adding or changing to signs based on statewide mileage when sign replacement projects occur. An example of a county-to-state conversion occurred around Athens last year. (Athens still has the oddity of US 33 westbound leaving US 50/SR 32 eastbound being signed as the exit with an exit number, even thought the numbers are based on US 33's mileage.)

I doubt ODOT will go to signing state-wide mileage on mile markers system-wide. The white markers are used internally for maintenance and for accident reporting; they're not really intended for public consumption anyway.

For reference, the US-35 freeway in Dayton has had state based mile markers and exit numbers for as long as I can remember (probably back all the way to '08 roughly). The exit numbers have since been extended to the Ross/Fayette county line but past Xenia I think the mile markers are still based by county.

US-24 is on state based mileage from Indiana to I-475 (including exit numbers).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 22, 2020, 11:40:59 AM
Is there any rationale behind exit numbering on non-interstate freeways? In district 6 things are numbered by the total state mileage. In at least Clark County (district 7) things are numbered by in-county mileage. What gives?


Way back when, only interstates in Ohio had exit numbers, and originally they were sequential.  In addition, only the mile markers on interstates were not reset at the county lines.

Sometime in the 70's, exit numbers switched to mileage based.

Traditionally, all non interstate routes in Ohio had mile markers that reflected mileage only within the specific county they traveled thru.

When they first began adding mile markers to exits on the non I- freeways, they used the county mileage.  Then ODOT decided to number the exits based on total state mileage.

Fine and dandy, but on routes that are not totally limited access roads from end to end, you go from resetting county mileages to cumulative milege, and vice versa.

Ohio and ODOT should just once and fornall and go all-in on system-wide mile markers that are based on their points of origin rather than their county mileage -- and use traditional white-on-green mile marker signs like many other states do!

For exit numbers on non-Interstates, ODOT is adding or changing to signs based on statewide mileage when sign replacement projects occur. An example of a county-to-state conversion occurred around Athens last year. (Athens still has the oddity of US 33 westbound leaving US 50/SR 32 eastbound being signed as the exit with an exit number, even thought the numbers are based on US 33's mileage.)

I doubt ODOT will go to signing state-wide mileage on mile markers system-wide. The white markers are used internally for maintenance and for accident reporting; they're not really intended for public consumption anyway.



I'd be fine with keeping the white county mile markers if they went back to the original design which also had the 3-letter county abbreviation and the route number along the top.  They phased those out in the 80s in favor of the generic markers used today. 

Plus, in most states that use state-wide mileage and traditional white-on-green (or blue) mile markers, the signs are larger and more likely to be visible to drivers (should they need to report their location to 911) as well as being more likely the be maintained/replaced when missing.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 25, 2020, 07:07:43 PM
Does anyone know if Exit 244 on Interstate 71 in Cleveland was to have led to an unbuilt freeway? It certainly seems like it was designed that way.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 25, 2020, 09:27:05 PM
Does anyone know if Exit 244 on Interstate 71 in Cleveland was to have led to an unbuilt freeway? It certainly seems like it was designed that way.

Yes, it was for the mostly unbuilt Airport Freeway: https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/2549
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 25, 2020, 11:34:44 PM
Does anyone know if Exit 244 on Interstate 71 in Cleveland was to have led to an unbuilt freeway? It certainly seems like it was designed that way.

Yes, it was for the mostly unbuilt Airport Parma Freeway: https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/2549

Fixed.

Got the freeway names mixed up. The only section Of the Parma Freeway that came to fruition is that long ramp from I-71 to Denison Ave.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 26, 2020, 08:44:47 AM
It has Airport Freeway labeled below with three alternatives displayed, with Alternative 3 following the unbuilt alignment along West 65th on the map from 1957. The name is confirmed in an earlier map from 1955 (https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/1741/rec/2). I-71 takes the route of the Airport Freeway through Brooklyn and Linndale, and the Medina Freeway east and north towards downtown.

By 1962, the Airport Freeway was mostly replaced by a rerouted Medina Freeway; the Parma Freeway was then proposed generally along the same alignment as the Medina Freeway to Parma: https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/2273

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Skye on August 27, 2020, 04:51:54 PM
Back to the subject of exit numbers on non-interstates in Ohio, one interesting expressway numbering system is Cincinnati's Norwood Lateral (OH 562) which has a sequential numbering system.  US 42/Reading Rd (Exit 2) is located near MM1, while US 22/Montogmery Rd (Exit 3) is located near MM2.

I also have a question regarding this subject.  Does Cincinnati's Ronald Reagan Hwy exit to Blue Rock Rd have an exit number, and if so what is the number? From Colerain Ave eastward the exits are numbered based on the mileage of OH 126 which joins the expressway at Colerain Ave.  West of Colerain, the expressway is simply known as Ronald Reagan Hwy.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on August 28, 2020, 09:23:48 AM
Back to the subject of exit numbers on non-interstates in Ohio, one interesting expressway numbering system is Cincinnati's Norwood Lateral (OH 562) which has a sequential numbering system.  US 42/Reading Rd (Exit 2) is located near MM1, while US 22/Montogmery Rd (Exit 3) is located near MM2.

I also have a question regarding this subject.  Does Cincinnati's Ronald Reagan Hwy exit to Blue Rock Rd have an exit number, and if so what is the number? From Colerain Ave eastward the exits are numbered based on the mileage of OH 126 which joins the expressway at Colerain Ave.  West of Colerain, the expressway is simply known as Ronald Reagan Hwy.

I think on the Norwood Lateral, it was convenience and custom, that dictated the sequential numbering.   If MMs were to be taken literally, you would either have Exit 0, Exit 1, and Exit 2; or, since Ohio normally does not use  Exit 0, you'd have Exit 1A, Exit 1B, and Exit 2.   Although I am usually a stickler for these things, I'll give them a pass on the way they numbered it.

As far as RR Hiway, there are no exit numbers west of US-27 (Colerain Ave).  The Blue mile markers in the median jump from, I believe 3.2 to 20.0 when you cross 27 going east, so if Blue Rock were to have an exit number it would probably be 1.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on August 28, 2020, 03:09:18 PM
It has Airport Freeway labeled below with three alternatives displayed, with Alternative 3 following the unbuilt alignment along West 65th on the map from 1957. The name is confirmed in an earlier map from 1955 (https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/1741/rec/2). I-71 takes the route of the Airport Freeway through Brooklyn and Linndale, and the Medina Freeway east and north towards downtown.

By 1962, the Airport Freeway was mostly replaced by a rerouted Medina Freeway; the Parma Freeway was then proposed generally along the same alignment as the Medina Freeway to Parma: https://clevelandmemory.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/urbanohio/id/2273

The two studies you have linked are fascinating reading/viewing for us road geeks.  This one below appears to be a slightly different and/or advanced study:


http://www.clevelandmemory.org/freeways/


From the website:

The freeway revolts were a phenomenon that took place across the nation during the 1960’s and 1970’s. The revolts were in response to the many freeway routes that were proposed without due consideration for the neighborhoods that would be demolished, or the people who would be displaced.

In Cleveland, the battle centered around the proposed Clark, Lee, and Heights Freeways. The proposed routes would have partitioned Shaker Heights and Cleveland Heights, costing houses and businesses and affecting a nature preserve, the Shaker Lakes.  The residents of these suburbs banded together, and fought the proposed freeways and the county engineer Albert S. Porter, and Governor James Rhodes to a standstill.

Today, instead of an interchange of two freeways, the Nature Center at Shaker Lakes is used by the residents of both Shaker Heights and Cleveland Heights, to teach environmental education.

We present 17 route location studies, including the proposed routes for the Clark, Lee and Heights freeways that were never built, as well as the original study that started it all in 1955.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 28, 2020, 05:06:25 PM
You can easily find those proposed stubs everywhere - along I-90, I-71 (to the unbuilt Airport/Parma/Willow freeways), I-490, OH 2, I-480. Many of those stubs have simply been erased over the decades but if you use Historicaerials.com, you can find more of those remnants.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: jt4 on September 02, 2020, 09:33:47 AM
As far as RR Hiway, there are no exit numbers west of US-27 (Colerain Ave).  The Blue mile markers in the median jump from, I believe 3.2 to 20.0 when you cross 27 going east, so if Blue Rock were to have an exit number it would probably be 1.

It shouldn't have exit numbers because it appears ODOT does not assign numbers to non-numbered highways. The mile markers for most of the Ronald Reagan are for OH-126, which "exits" the Ronald Reagan at Colerain Avenue.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 08, 2020, 08:47:07 PM
I see that next year the US 20/OH 601 intersection will be getting a roundabout. This is on the 2 lane portion of US 20 a couple miles east east of where its Norwalk bypass ends.

601/Milan Greenwich Townline Rd has become a popular north/south bypass of Norwalk for US 250 traffic. In fact, NASA's Orion spacecraft took that route last fall while being trucked from Mansfield's airport up to Plum Brook Station for vacuum chamber testing.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 09, 2020, 01:06:18 AM
I see that next year the US 20/OH 601 intersection will be getting a roundabout. This is on the 2 lane portion of US 20 a couple miles east east of where its Norwalk bypass ends.

601/Milan Greenwich Townline Rd has become a popular north/south bypass of Norwalk for US 250 traffic. In fact, NASA's Orion spacecraft took that route last fall while being trucked from Mansfield's airport up to Plum Brook Station for vacuum chamber testing.

Plus one of the nation's biggest dragstrips sits at that intersection as well -- Norwalk Raceway Park. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on September 09, 2020, 04:49:31 PM
I see that next year the US 20/OH 601 intersection will be getting a roundabout. This is on the 2 lane portion of US 20 a couple miles east east of where its Norwalk bypass ends.

601/Milan Greenwich Townline Rd has become a popular north/south bypass of Norwalk for US 250 traffic. In fact, NASA's Orion spacecraft took that route last fall while being trucked from Mansfield's airport up to Plum Brook Station for vacuum chamber testing.

Plus one of the nation's biggest dragstrips sits at that intersection as well -- Norwalk Raceway Park.

I grew up not far from there and commuted daily through that intersection for years. We even lost one of my high school classmates due to an accident there. I don't know that the roundabout will fix things, and with heavy trucks going all four directions through that roundabout, it seems like that will be functionally worse.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 10, 2020, 10:00:26 AM

Plus one of the nation's biggest dragstrips sits at that intersection as well -- Norwalk Raceway Park. 


Which is now called Summit Motorsports Park. That's actually at the intersection of OH 18 and OH 601, but a lot of traffic to it uses the 20/601 intersection. There's also an R&L Carriers distribution center across from the dragstrip that generates a lot of truck traffic on 601.


I grew up not far from there and commuted daily through that intersection for years. We even lost one of my high school classmates due to an accident there. I don't know that the roundabout will fix things, and with heavy trucks going all four directions through that roundabout, it seems like that will be functionally worse.

Since you're familiar with the area, I'll mention that the bar on the corner, the Gulf Inn, will be bought by the state an torn down as part of this project. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 10, 2020, 10:33:05 PM

Plus one of the nation's biggest dragstrips sits at that intersection as well -- Norwalk Raceway Park. 


Which is now called Summit Motorsports Park. That's actually at the intersection of OH 18 and OH 601, but a lot of traffic to it uses the 20/601 intersection. There's also an R&L Carriers distribution center across from the dragstrip that generates a lot of truck traffic on 601.

I don't know why I was thinking OH-18 and not US-20.  Going to or from Norwalk from the east, 90% of the time it was via OH-18 to Medina.  I guess I could see a roundabout make sense there as well. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 26, 2020, 08:46:53 AM
ODOT has plans to widen the last 4 lane segment of I-77 between Cleveland and Akron to 6 lanes. It's a 9.2 mile section between Ghent Rd near Fairlawn and the Ohio Turnpike, and would cost $125M. This article though focuses mainly on those opposed to the idea:

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2020/09/odots-125-million-plans-to-add-lanes-to-i-77-could-be-better-spent-in-akron-area-could-worsen-storm-runoff-local-officials-say.html
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 26, 2020, 11:10:14 AM
ODOT has plans to widen the last 4 lane segment of I-77 between Cleveland and Akron to 6 lanes. It's a 9.2 mile section between Ghent Rd near Fairlawn and the Ohio Turnpike, and would cost $125M. This article though focuses mainly on those opposed to the idea:

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2020/09/odots-125-million-plans-to-add-lanes-to-i-77-could-be-better-spent-in-akron-area-could-worsen-storm-runoff-local-officials-say.html


I am surprised that it's taking so painfully long to complete the three-laning through there and there is still opposition.  Most of the bridges on that highway stretch have been rebuilt for a future 3rd lane for nearly 20 years, so it's not a secret that it would eventually happen. 

I-77 is a important travel corridor between Cleveland, Akron and Canton, and it always seemed like this stretch (which is quietly co-signed with OH-21) has been treated as if it was only OH-21 using this freeway, just like it's solo stretch between Montrose and Massillon.  And if you've ever driven down the OH-21-only stretch, it's always been treated as the red-headed step-child.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on September 27, 2020, 10:47:42 AM
I-77 is a important travel corridor between Cleveland, Akron and Canton, and it always seemed like this stretch (which is quietly co-signed with OH-21) has been treated as if it was only OH-21 using this freeway, just like it's solo stretch between Montrose and Massillon.  And if you've ever driven down the OH-21-only stretch, it's always been treated as the red-headed step-child.

Much of the reason for that is home rule. Municipalities are in charge of state routes, even if they are freeways like SR 21 through Norton. That means you end up with a very subpar experience compared to if ODOT was in control of the road.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: carbaugh2 on November 02, 2020, 10:44:55 AM
Here's an update from ODOT District 6 regarding the South Side Mega Fix. It looks like the end may finally be in sight.

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHDOT/bulletins/2a771bd
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 28, 2020, 07:28:07 PM
On Wednesday I entered I-70 from US 127 heading west toward Indianapolis and noticed a portable VMS that stated the miles and minutes to I-465, which seemed a bit odd. There were at least 2 more of them in Ohio, and then they continued in Indiana, where there was one every 2-5 miles, counting down the miles and minutes to I-465 all the way there (which was convenient.)

The Indiana portion of I-70 was one long ass construction zone, where the work looked to be pretty much done, and had pretty much only included repaving the inside shoulders. I'm guessing traffic was bad enough during the project to warrant to VMS setups to give real time travel info for those going to Indy.

What I'm curious about is:
How far east into Ohio did these VMS boards counting down to I-465 go?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on November 28, 2020, 09:08:26 PM
What I'm curious about is:
How far east into Ohio did these VMS boards counting down to I-465 go?

I assume they would go to just the Ohio state line, I don't think there's much reason for it to head past the line. While the westbound signs gave the time and distance to I-465 the eastbound signs did the same for Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 28, 2020, 10:03:07 PM
I'm asking how far east in Ohio on westbound I-70 can you find a VMS counting down to I-465. The first one I saw was right after I got on I-70 at the US 127 interchange in Ohio, 10 miles from the Indiana border, so I don't know how many if any there were further east of that spot. 

Also, since it clearly seems to be an Indiana project, I'd be interesting to know how the collaboration went with ODOT to put some up in Ohio. Are the ones in Ohio ODOT equipment put up by ODOT? Are they INDOT equipment put up by ODOT? Are they INDOT equipment put up by INDOT?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on November 28, 2020, 11:03:01 PM
I'm asking how far east in Ohio on westbound I-70 can you find a VMS counting down to I-465. The first one I saw was right after I got on I-70 at the US 127 interchange in Ohio, 10 miles from the Indiana border, so I don't know how many if any there were further east of that spot. 

Also, since it clearly seems to be an Indiana project, I'd be interesting to know how the collaboration went with ODOT to put some up in Ohio. Are the ones in Ohio ODOT equipment put up by ODOT? Are they INDOT equipment put up by ODOT? Are they INDOT equipment put up by INDOT?

If they're related to an INDOT project, I would assume they're put they're by INDOT or its contractor. It's not uncommon to see construction signage installed in other states like that, and in every case I've seen, it's been handled by the contractor or DOT who owns the construction project.
Title: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 29, 2020, 02:48:25 PM
On Wednesday I entered I-70 from US 127 heading west toward Indianapolis and noticed a portable VMS that stated the miles and minutes to I-465, which seemed a bit odd. There were at least 2 more of them in Ohio, and then they continued in Indiana, where there was one every 2-5 miles, counting down the miles and minutes to I-465 all the way there (which was convenient.)

The Indiana portion of I-70 was one long ass construction zone, where the work looked to be pretty much done, and had pretty much only included repaving the inside shoulders. I'm guessing traffic was bad enough during the project to warrant to VMS setups to give real time travel info for those going to Indy.

What I'm curious about is:
How far east into Ohio did these VMS boards counting down to I-465 go?
I just had to go to Richmond and noticed them. I wasn’t aware of your question at the time, so I wasn’t paying close attention, but they seemed to be placed every mile  for at least five miles into Ohio. This is very out of character for ODOT so I have to believe it’s Indiana’s doing, with Ohio’s permission.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Dougtone on November 29, 2020, 07:04:03 PM
The Harpersfield Covered Bridge is Ohio's third longest covered bridge and is one of 19 covered bridges located within Northeast Ohio's Ashtabula County. OH 534 was routed through the covered bridge until 1962.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/11/harpersfield-covered-bridge-ohio.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/11/harpersfield-covered-bridge-ohio.html)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 30, 2020, 12:14:40 PM
On Wednesday I entered I-70 from US 127 heading west toward Indianapolis and noticed a portable VMS that stated the miles and minutes to I-465, which seemed a bit odd. There were at least 2 more of them in Ohio, and then they continued in Indiana, where there was one every 2-5 miles, counting down the miles and minutes to I-465 all the way there (which was convenient.)

The Indiana portion of I-70 was one long ass construction zone, where the work looked to be pretty much done, and had pretty much only included repaving the inside shoulders. I'm guessing traffic was bad enough during the project to warrant to VMS setups to give real time travel info for those going to Indy.

What I'm curious about is:
How far east into Ohio did these VMS boards counting down to I-465 go?
I just had to go to Richmond and noticed them. I wasn’t aware of your question at the time, so I wasn’t paying close attention, but they seemed to be placed every mile  for at least five miles into Ohio. This is very out of character for ODOT so I have to believe it’s Indiana’s doing, with Ohio’s permission.

This summer, IDOT was repaving I-70 from (essentially) the Ohio border to I-465 (east). When I drove out to the EauClare roadmeet in August, those VMSes started (on I-70 WB) around the Lewisburg (Oh) exit. I-70 around Richmond was a mess and I found that it didn't get much better till I reached Greenfield (Ind).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 30, 2020, 12:16:48 PM
The Harpersfield Covered Bridge is Ohio's third longest covered bridge and is one of 19 covered bridges located within Northeast Ohio's Ashtabula County. OH 534 was routed through the covered bridge until 1962.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/11/harpersfield-covered-bridge-ohio.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/11/harpersfield-covered-bridge-ohio.html)

Thanks for the link
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on December 16, 2020, 11:09:07 PM
Took a picture of this at the I-71/MLK interchange a few months ago. Normally, ODOT markes freeway entrances with a BGS instead of a standalone shield, so it's weird seeing this Caltrans style sign, with the angled down arrow and direction tab below the interstate shield. Are there any more examples of this in the state, or is this just a one-off?
(https://i.imgur.com/w6uD1Ka.jpg?3)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 17, 2020, 09:25:32 AM
The entrance to US 20 East from OH 53 in Fremont has signs like that with down angled arrows on either side of the ramp entrance. This is in addition to a BGS (the BGS lists US 20, US 6 and OH 19 which are concurrent on the Fremont bypass, while the ground level shields are just US 20)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on December 17, 2020, 10:18:13 PM
Cleveland Ave/Oh 710 to I-270 WB, Westerville-NE Columbus
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on December 17, 2020, 10:53:42 PM
The entrance to US 20 East from OH 53 in Fremont has signs like that with down angled arrows on either side of the ramp entrance. This is in addition to a BGS (the BGS lists US 20, US 6 and OH 19 which are concurrent on the Fremont bypass, while the ground level shields are just US 20)

US 20 @ US 6 (heading east to Sandusky) as well
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50731130303_fea7ff1142_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on December 17, 2020, 11:31:38 PM
Now all the state needs are the "freeway entrance" signs to make the setup complete ;)
the closest we got are the blue
Ramp
Insert Road Name Here
To
W 438
type of signs
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on December 23, 2020, 12:16:58 PM
Took a picture of this at the I-71/MLK interchange a few months ago. Normally, ODOT markes freeway entrances with a BGS instead of a standalone shield, so it's weird seeing this Caltrans style sign, with the angled down arrow and direction tab below the interstate shield. Are there any more examples of this in the state, or is this just a one-off?
(https://i.imgur.com/w6uD1Ka.jpg?3)

They are starting to be more common around Ohio.  In addition to the one in Fremont mentioned elsewhere, they are on the entrance to eastbound OH-126 (Ronald Reagan Hwy) from US-27 (Colerain Ave) in the Cincinnati suburbs.

The place that really could use them is the westbound entrance ramp to I-74 at Colerain/Beekman in Cincinnati.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on December 23, 2020, 09:58:36 PM
I don't use anything on Reagan Highway as a yardstick for anything "normal" even on the sections that opened in the '90s or later though.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 04, 2021, 01:06:43 PM
I just noticed another one, on North Bend Rd at the entrance to eastbound I-74 just west of Cincinnati.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on January 09, 2021, 10:09:50 PM
Anyone missing a big ole "Keep Right" sign? Or at least part of one? Spotted in a Queensgate scrapyard back in October.
(https://i.imgur.com/pGOP6xXh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on January 14, 2021, 11:36:19 PM
I'm pretty new to the state signage conventions, so please don't crucify me for this likely-dumb question:
Around the I-471 area, why is I-275 signed as "To Columbus" as opposed to "To I-71/75N"?  I suppose most through traffic from the 471 area would likely be using it as a 71 bypass as opposed to a 75 bypass, but the way it is currently signed might make first-timers think that it continues all the way to Columbus.  It's one of those little things that has bugged me for years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: I-55 on January 15, 2021, 12:19:58 AM
I'm pretty new to the state signage conventions, so please don't crucify me for this likely-dumb question:
Around the I-471 area, why is I-275 signed as "To Columbus" as opposed to "To I-71/75N"?  I suppose most through traffic from the 471 area would likely be using it as a 71 bypass as opposed to a 75 bypass, but the way it is currently signed might make first-timers think that it continues all the way to Columbus.  It's one of those little things that has bugged me for years.

There are a few reasons for this, some of which have been discussed on this forum so I don't expect you to have heard before.

1) Almost a universal stance around here, I-275 is not a good bypass for I-71 or I-75. It goes too far out of the way to be realistically functional for either. Most people traveling thru on 71 or 75 just take it right through downtown. It also is faster to take 471 from 275 than it is to stay on 275 all the way to 71. Now if you're going from 74 to 75, or OH-32 to I-71, then 275 is actually functional.

2) Control cities are aimed at providing a route to a destination. My wording is not the best so maybe this example will clear it up. At the north end of I-459, where it meets I-59, if you are traveling south on I-59 you'll see I-59 signed for Birmingham and I-459 signed for Montgomery and Tuscaloosa. Why? Because those are destinations, and ALDOT wants people going to those destinations to use I-459 over I-59. If you put "TO I-59 SOUTH" people might just take I-59 there because it already is I-59 south. Also, I-59 isn't a destination itself, it is a way to a destination but people aren't looking to find a way to the way to the place they're going, they just need directions to where they want to go. DOTs use control cities to influence travel routes.

3) In the case of I-275, the area of concern is much closer to the southern junction with I-71/75 than the northern junction, which is the one you are referring to (I assume). This can lead to confusion as the junction where the two are multiplexed is the southern one, and the northern ones are both 15+ miles further away and in a different state from where the sign would be. Columbus makes more sense as it is a destination and is less confusing. And again, I-471 is the faster route to I-71 and is shorter distance and time wise compared to 275.

4) The northern junction between I-75 and I-275 uses both route numbers and cities. This is likely because both Columbus and Indianapolis (the two cities on the signs) are both controls at the I-70 junction on the north side of Dayton, maybe to avoid deja vu for the motorist. Also, I-71 and I-74 are relatively close to I-75 at the northern junction, so there is less confusion as to what interchange is being referenced.

I hope I was helpful and clear in my response. I don't usually type this much in a post.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on January 15, 2021, 12:33:37 AM
I'm pretty new to the state signage conventions, so please don't crucify me for this likely-dumb question:
Around the I-471 area, why is I-275 signed as "To Columbus" as opposed to "To I-71/75N"?  I suppose most through traffic from the 471 area would likely be using it as a 71 bypass as opposed to a 75 bypass, but the way it is currently signed might make first-timers think that it continues all the way to Columbus.  It's one of those little things that has bugged me for years.

There are a few reasons for this, some of which have been discussed on this forum so I don't expect you to have heard before.

1) Almost a universal stance around here, I-275 is not a good bypass for I-71 or I-75. It goes too far out of the way to be realistically functional for either. Most people traveling thru on 71 or 75 just take it right through downtown. It also is faster to take 471 from 275 than it is to stay on 275 all the way to 71. Now if you're going from 74 to 75, or OH-32 to I-71, then 275 is actually functional.

2) Control cities are aimed at providing a route to a destination. My wording is not the best so maybe this example will clear it up. At the north end of I-459, where it meets I-59, if you are traveling south on I-59 you'll see I-59 signed for Birmingham and I-459 signed for Montgomery and Tuscaloosa. Why? Because those are destinations, and ALDOT wants people going to those destinations to use I-459 over I-59. If you put "TO I-59 SOUTH" people might just take I-59 there because it already is I-59 south. Also, I-59 isn't a destination itself, it is a way to a destination but people aren't looking to find a way to the way to the place they're going, they just need directions to where they want to go. DOTs use control cities to influence travel routes.

3) In the case of I-275, the area of concern is much closer to the southern junction with I-71/75 than the northern junction, which is the one you are referring to (I assume). This can lead to confusion as the junction where the two are multiplexed is the southern one, and the northern ones are both 15+ miles further away and in a different state from where the sign would be. Columbus makes more sense as it is a destination and is less confusing. And again, I-471 is the faster route to I-71 and is shorter distance and time wise compared to 275.

4) The northern junction between I-75 and I-275 uses both route numbers and cities. This is likely because both Columbus and Indianapolis (the two cities on the signs) are both controls at the I-70 junction on the north side of Dayton, maybe to avoid deja vu for the motorist. Also, I-71 and I-74 are relatively close to I-75 at the northern junction, so there is less confusion as to what interchange is being referenced.

I hope I was helpful and clear in my response. I don't usually type this much in a post.
Slight correction: I-275 is not a good bypass for I-75 at all, but for I-71, there is a niche use as a bypass. I have used the east loop of I-275 when traffic on I-71 gets ugly a couple of times before.

And then for control cities on I-275. In that area you specified (I-275/I-471 interchange), imo they should've just left it blank, like with I-275 East at the I-71/I-75 interchange about 10 miles west. They could use Milford, which is a well-known suburb of Cincinnati to locals, but not so much for out of towners. "Ohio" is another option, since I-275 across the bridge has "Kentucky" as a WB control on a couple of signs, but you can reach Ohio from I-471 at that point too. Issue with Columbus has already been said: I-471 to I-71 is faster than I-275 most of the time. My personal preference is the TO [route number] as controls only, which Ohio does on their section on I-275. For example, on the I-275 interchange at I-71, the controls are "TO I-75" for I-275 West, and "TO OH 32" for I-275 East, with all the route numbers in route shields.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 15, 2021, 05:27:48 PM
Most recent guidance by FHWA on destinations for circumferential highways is to simply not have them. For I-275 that would make the most sense anyway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on January 17, 2021, 05:58:54 PM
I was able to drive around today (in not so great weather for videotaping on the road) for a bit, and got a couple of pics of a newly completed section of I-75 between MM 13-15. Not sure when it was finished (that's why I called it "new"), since last time I drove on I-75 was back in July of last year, and construction was still under full swing then.

- Shepherd Lane (Exit 13) BGS (https://imgur.com/ObP6NFR)
- Glendale-Milford Rd (Exit 14) BGS (https://imgur.com/iRyVpoN)
- Glendale-Milford Rd Overpass (love the design) (https://imgur.com/hp5BDiD)

Also the Cincinnati area's first DDI, at Union Centre Blvd. Think it was opened back in September of last year.

- Union Centre Blvd (Exit 19) BGS. (Side note: Those Exit Only arrows looks hideous compared to what normally is used.) (https://imgur.com/ydfz3qL)
- Union Centre Blvd Ramp (https://imgur.com/1vz8sa2)
- Union Centre Blvd Overpass (https://imgur.com/pnn9Dvj)
- Union Centre Blvd Approach to I-75 (https://imgur.com/QdCYkm6)

I'm personally a fan of Ohio's newest BGS installs; back to Highway Gothic and with larger exit tabs. Reminds me of what Minnesota and Missouri have.

Edit: Just realized I posted this on the wrong Ohio thread  :banghead:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: lepidopteran on January 26, 2021, 10:03:00 PM
Is anyone familiar with ODOT's weekly YouTube series, "The Loop (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0SPTxSVmT4ivxV3mCKgA-jD16UpBP9X3)"?  Going back to 2016, it has a lot of info about construction projects and other things road-related.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on January 26, 2021, 10:13:33 PM
Is anyone familiar with ODOT's weekly YouTube series, "The Loop (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0SPTxSVmT4ivxV3mCKgA-jD16UpBP9X3)"?  Going back to 2016, it has a lot of info about construction projects and other things road-related.
I didn't know about it before, but thanks for sharing it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on January 27, 2021, 01:52:43 PM
I was able to drive around today (in not so great weather for videotaping on the road) for a bit, and got a couple of pics of a newly completed section of I-75 between MM 13-15. Not sure when it was finished (that's why I called it "new"), since last time I drove on I-75 was back in July of last year, and construction was still under full swing then.

- Shepherd Lane (Exit 13) BGS (https://imgur.com/ObP6NFR)
- Glendale-Milford Rd (Exit 14) BGS (https://imgur.com/iRyVpoN)
- Glendale-Milford Rd Overpass (love the design) (https://imgur.com/hp5BDiD)

Also the Cincinnati area's first DDI, at Union Centre Blvd. Think it was opened back in September of last year.

- Union Centre Blvd (Exit 19) BGS. (Side note: Those Exit Only arrows looks hideous compared to what normally is used.) (https://imgur.com/ydfz3qL)
- Union Centre Blvd Ramp (https://imgur.com/1vz8sa2)
- Union Centre Blvd Overpass (https://imgur.com/pnn9Dvj)
- Union Centre Blvd Approach to I-75 (https://imgur.com/QdCYkm6)

I'm personally a fan of Ohio's newest BGS installs; back to Highway Gothic and with larger exit tabs. Reminds me of what Minnesota and Missouri have.

Edit: Just realized I posted this on the wrong Ohio thread  :banghead:

Interesting that the EAST and WEST do not have the larger first letter on the Exit 14 sign and Exit 14 sign.  Not a big deal though. 

Using the down arrows turned upward for an exit is not unheard of but used to be the thing to do more with demountable ones or button copy (https://goo.gl/maps/ve1ajeyK9mGtR1Bz8).  Most recent ODOT signs don't seem to be demountable copy so such a thing would be just a screwup if by design. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on February 01, 2021, 02:46:36 AM
Thanks for the replies regarding 275 a few posts ago.  Lots of factors that I hadn't previously considered regarding control cities and such.

Another quick question...does anyone happen to know when exactly the "Traffic Alert When Flashing" signs on 471/275 became disused? Or when they were installed in the first place? The last time I saw one active was when the NB sign near Fort Thomas on 471 was stuck on a few years ago. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on February 03, 2021, 01:54:59 AM
Thanks for the replies regarding 275 a few posts ago.  Lots of factors that I hadn't previously considered regarding control cities and such.

Another quick question...does anyone happen to know when exactly the "Traffic Alert When Flashing" signs on 471/275 became disused? Or when they were installed in the first place? The last time I saw one active was when the NB sign near Fort Thomas on 471 was stuck on a few years ago.
Since this is "close enough" to Ohio, I will give a response.  Most of the "Traffic Alert When Flashing" signs in the Cincinnati area were erected in the late 1990's, I believe to supplement the ARTIMIS program.  They were in use for about 10 years until the overhead variable message signs were installed.  Now, any of the traffic alert signs are mostly unused (no more flashing lights above the sign for some) and just stand along the freeways of the Cincinnati area.

Here is the one you mentioned...
https://goo.gl/maps/R77hvDzmXgX6FrTA6

Here is another on I-275 East west of the Taylor Mill interchange...
https://goo.gl/maps/sDdXjNYe9JkBGuJv5

Mainly, these signs have been replaced by these...
https://goo.gl/maps/9GA5GZT8VStvatbX6
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tq-07fan on February 04, 2021, 11:21:53 PM
^^^^^^
There were even a couple around the Cincinnati area that said Traffic Alert When Flashing but never had any lights installed.

Jim
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 09, 2021, 10:56:22 AM
Only one I know of with lights on in the Ohio side is at SB I-71 between the US 22 and OH 126 exits (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2135493,-84.3702067,3a,24.7y,218.38h,91.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srQxQ1Ga0tid-CONh8VrI0g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I've never seen it flash at all; traffic alerts mostly go on the overhead electronic message boards now, along with distances to notable highways and (sometimes funny) jokes ODOT comes up with.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on February 17, 2021, 03:51:37 AM
^ When these signs were first installed, the lights did flash when there was a traffic issue near where the signs were installed.  These signs became obsolete when the overhead VMS's were erected.

Another topic, will Ohio DOT ever come around to adding exit numbers to US 35 between Washington CH and Gallipolis?  US 33 has recently had the ones around Athens renumbered to reflect the total mileage in the state--just wondering if US 35 will ever receive the same treatment.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on February 17, 2021, 09:44:19 AM
^ When these signs were first installed, the lights did flash when there was a traffic issue near where the signs were installed.  These signs became obsolete when the overhead VMS's were erected.

Another topic, will Ohio DOT ever come around to adding exit numbers to US 35 between Washington CH and Gallipolis?  US 33 has recently had the ones around Athens renumbered to reflect the total mileage in the state--just wondering if US 35 will ever receive the same treatment.

Exit numbers are generally being handled as part of larger sign replacement projects. There are exit numbers on US 35 west of Washington Court House. I can't imagine a reason why they wouldn't be added east of there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 17, 2021, 12:05:14 PM
Speaking of sign replacements, Ohio really have a variety of BGS styles from all the replacements they done in the past 10 years.

- Highway Gothic font with small square exit tabs. Sometimes button copy. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1632783,-84.4343101,3a,75y,67.07h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slEMRm8A3RD2JiVn5lyw3tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

- Switch to Clearview on both exit number and the main BGS, kept the small exit tabs (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.037265,-82.9026189,3a,75y,351.34h,99.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svRAK1mN0-8vERQvMXC01gg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

- Larger slightly rounded corner exit tabs, both still in Clearview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1118892,-83.0465707,3a,75y,81.64h,88.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si7oBAvUy9_B6_jdwmmWJ8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). This was widely installed in the middle of the last decade, at around 2014-2017.

- Full switch back to Highway Gothic, along with the larger rounded exit tabs. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1196639,-84.4989124,3a,75y,197.01h,92.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s50goFQ2UVmKOUNXXg2h5Qg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) The most recent style, starting installation at around 2018. Easily my favorite of the styles here; looks similar to and as clean as Minnesota and Missouri's BGS.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on February 20, 2021, 12:25:34 AM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 01:04:54 AM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Think it’s to reduce weaving and merging on I-270 between I-670 and OH 161. It’s the busiest interstate section in the state, according to a recent thread in the general highways section of this forum. The thread had an AADT value of 160k with 2019 data, but it’s gotten above 200k in past years before that. Also, the NB C/D lanes to Easton/161 got extended to I-670 recently. It’s not updated on GSV yet, but that should help filter the 670-161 traffic from the 270 mainline. Easton to 270 NB traffic is much less than 670-161, that’s why it has the single lane onto 270 NB.
As for access to Morse from Easton and 161, there’s no reason if you’re coming in from Easton to use I-270 to get to Morse. The mall have direct entrances from Morse, and there’s also Stelzer Rd. Between 161 and Morse, my guess is that Sunbury Rd and OH 3 provides that access.

Edit: Found the new signage on I-670 from earlier in this thread. Can the state please use APL signage for places like this next time? Whatever this is looks awful.
The opening of the reconfigured exit ramps at I-670 & I-270 has brought about some exit numbering changes:

10A: I-270 N
10B: SR 161/Easton Way
10C: US 62 E
10D: I-270 S

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191021/b2096f2bbe20adac0dc2843f6121ba86.jpg)

EDIT: APL concept I have for the I-670/I-270 sign in the 'Redesign This' thread
If dancing arrows are still allowed, Ohio definitely would've used that way instead. I have an APL idea that theoretically could work, though I don't know how well it would turn out. Could attempt a sketch of it on paper first. This would use 2 APL signs

| Exit 10A |       | Exit 10B |                                      | Exit 10C |             | Exit 10D |   
|  I-270 North   |         OH 161/Easton Way       |       |  US 62 E   |       I-270 South  |
| LEFT       LEFT/SLIGHT LEFT       SLIGHT LEFT |       | STRAIGHT/RIGHT       RIGHT |       
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on February 20, 2021, 12:03:10 PM
Yep, Morse and Easton are too close together for that kind of volume. The private sector paid for a significant portion of the construction costs if I remember right. Or at least pledged to.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 20, 2021, 09:37:05 PM
Yep, Morse and Easton are too close together for that kind of volume. The private sector paid for a significant portion of the construction costs if I remember right. Or at least pledged to.
I think pledged, or if paid, it wasn't directly into the project. This was part of Les Wexner's Easton/New New Albany development. ODOT ended up changing their process of ranking highway projects after Mr. Wexner got his way.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 20, 2021, 10:05:38 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on February 25, 2021, 04:02:28 PM

It’s the busiest interstate section in the state, according to a recent thread in the general highways section of this forum. The thread had an AADT value of 160k with 2019 data, but it’s gotten above 200k in past years before that. Also, the NB C/D lanes to Easton/161 got extended to I-670 recently.


Is that the widest road in Ohio now? By my count it’s 14 lanes and I can’t think of anything else wider than that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 26, 2021, 12:57:47 PM

It’s the busiest interstate section in the state, according to a recent thread in the general highways section of this forum. The thread had an AADT value of 160k with 2019 data, but it’s gotten above 200k in past years before that. Also, the NB C/D lanes to Easton/161 got extended to I-670 recently.


Is that the widest road in Ohio now? By my count it’s 14 lanes and I can’t think of anything else wider than that.
Yes. The only other contestant I can think of is I-271 in Cleveland, but that is only 12 lanes at its widest point (4 local and 2 express lanes per direction). And the I-480 Cuyahoga River bridge project (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/90591) will be 12 lanes after completion too. I can't think of any example in Cincinnati with more than 10 lanes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on February 27, 2021, 01:29:51 PM

It’s the busiest interstate section in the state, according to a recent thread in the general highways section of this forum. The thread had an AADT value of 160k with 2019 data, but it’s gotten above 200k in past years before that. Also, the NB C/D lanes to Easton/161 got extended to I-670 recently.


Is that the widest road in Ohio now? By my count it’s 14 lanes and I can’t think of anything else wider than that.
Yes. The only other contestant I can think of is I-271 in Cleveland, but that is only 12 lanes at its widest point (4 local and 2 express lanes per direction). And the I-480 Cuyahoga River bridge project (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/90591) will be 12 lanes after completion too. I can't think of any example in Cincinnati with more than 10 lanes.
Now that I think about it, I-270 between 71 and 23 is 12 lanes as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on February 27, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 27, 2021, 02:56:54 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
How would using Stelzer be some sort of inconvenience? Easton Way is a pretty short road, primarily to serve the mall. The mall has direct access to/from Morse anyways, and for the other businesses on Easton Way, you’re actually going out of your way to use I-270 if that’s an option instead of using Stelzer. Also, both Steltzer Rd and Morse Crossing (the 2 roads that border the mall on the east and west) are divided 4 lane arterials between Easton Way and Morse Rd. Not worth adding more weaving on a short freeway section just for some people to skip 3 sets of traffic signals imo.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on February 27, 2021, 03:29:28 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
How would using Stelzer be some sort of inconvenience? Easton Way is a pretty short road, primarily to serve the mall. The mall has direct access to/from Morse anyways, and for the other businesses on Easton Way, you’re actually going out of your way to use I-270 if that’s an option instead of using Stelzer. Also, both Steltzer Rd and Morse Crossing (the 2 roads that border the mall on the east and west) are divided 4 lane arterials between Easton Way and Morse Rd. Not worth adding more weaving on a short freeway section just for some people to skip 3 sets of traffic signals imo.
I'm referring to the "exclusivity" of New Albany, which by limiting access to/from Morse Road is supposed to accomplish that. Except, the Easton Way exit is close enough to Morse Road that one could easily use a road bordering the mall to reach Morse, defeating the point making New Albany an "exclusive" suburb.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 27, 2021, 08:13:18 PM
I'm referring to the "exclusivity" of New Albany, which by limiting access to/from Morse Road is supposed to accomplish that. Except, the Easton Way exit is close enough to Morse Road that one could easily use a road bordering the mall to reach Morse, defeating the point making New Albany an "exclusive" suburb.
I've never heard of anything about the "exclusivity" of New Albany before (someone more well-versed in that area can correct me), but the OH 161 freeway cuts through the middle of New Albany with 3 exits, which is a better way to reach most of the suburb than Morse.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on February 28, 2021, 07:45:34 AM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
How would using Stelzer be some sort of inconvenience? Easton Way is a pretty short road, primarily to serve the mall. The mall has direct access to/from Morse anyways, and for the other businesses on Easton Way, you’re actually going out of your way to use I-270 if that’s an option instead of using Stelzer. Also, both Steltzer Rd and Morse Crossing (the 2 roads that border the mall on the east and west) are divided 4 lane arterials between Easton Way and Morse Rd. Not worth adding more weaving on a short freeway section just for some people to skip 3 sets of traffic signals imo.
I'm referring to the "exclusivity" of New Albany, which by limiting access to/from Morse Road is supposed to accomplish that. Except, the Easton Way exit is close enough to Morse Road that one could easily use a road bordering the mall to reach Morse, defeating the point making New Albany an "exclusive" suburb.
That’s not why they built it that way. When Easton was built, the 270/161 interchange was a full cloverleaf, not what it is today. Morse Road already had ridiculous traffic counts (I think it’s approaching 70,000 now). Having the new Easton exit in such close proximity to the 670, Morse, and 161 exits would have caused a traffic nightmare. As it stands now, the SB c/d section of 270 exiting to Easton backs up for a mile in the morning. The c/d was built solely to ease potential congestion from these exits being so close together.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on February 28, 2021, 12:13:23 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
How would using Stelzer be some sort of inconvenience? Easton Way is a pretty short road, primarily to serve the mall. The mall has direct access to/from Morse anyways, and for the other businesses on Easton Way, you’re actually going out of your way to use I-270 if that’s an option instead of using Stelzer. Also, both Steltzer Rd and Morse Crossing (the 2 roads that border the mall on the east and west) are divided 4 lane arterials between Easton Way and Morse Rd. Not worth adding more weaving on a short freeway section just for some people to skip 3 sets of traffic signals imo.
I'm referring to the "exclusivity" of New Albany, which by limiting access to/from Morse Road is supposed to accomplish that. Except, the Easton Way exit is close enough to Morse Road that one could easily use a road bordering the mall to reach Morse, defeating the point making New Albany an "exclusive" suburb.
That’s not why they built it that way. When Easton was built, the 270/161 interchange was a full cloverleaf, not what it is today. Morse Road already had ridiculous traffic counts (I think it’s approaching 70,000 now). Having the new Easton exit in such close proximity to the 670, Morse, and 161 exits would have caused a traffic nightmare. As it stands now, the SB c/d section of 270 exiting to Easton backs up for a mile in the morning. The c/d was built solely to ease potential congestion from these exits being so close together.

As far as I can tell, that is correct.

A popular urban legend in Columbus is that the C/D roads were built to give rich people in New Albany a way to Easton from 161 without mingling with other 270 traffic. 32 and 33 would have required braiding anyway and someone had the foresight to realize that, with gore points for 30 and 32 roughly a mile apart, it made sense to just throw in a full C/D system. The consequence of the chosen design, of course, is that there is no direct connection between Morse and 161, but this can be made via Sunbury Road or Exit 33.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 28, 2021, 12:22:51 PM
I haven’t been to the Easton area since 2019 and GSV haven’t updated that area yet, but are the NB C/D lanes on I-270 to Easton/161 between I-670 and Easton separated from the mainline 270 traffic? I’ve seen some not-so-clear diagrams of that redesigned section online, and it seems like they aren’t separated. If that’s really the case, seems like a missed opportunity and sort of defeats the point of having earlier ramps from both 270 and 670.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on February 28, 2021, 06:35:32 PM
Any reasons why the Morse Road exit off I-270 is segregated from the C/D lanes?

My initial thought was that the C/D lanes are for traffic to prepare to exit for the OH 161 freeway, but wait - there's no way to exit at Morse Road. So now I'm stumped - there's no reason to start filtering traffic three miles in advance, and if I-270 has access to an exit then the C/D lanes should have access. As it stands, exiting at Easton Way requires going onto the C/D lanes, but exiting at Morse requires you stay on I-270. To add to the confusion, the onramps at Easton (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0480382,-82.9017823,3a,75y,89.04h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYVabC0cNolcw8SEaM5MH2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) do not filter into the I-270 main lanes - they dump you into the C/D road. While I don't know if most traffic from Easton wants to stay on I-270, it's inconvenient to funnel all that traffic into a one lane ramp with a merge. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.081102,-82.9068812,3a,75y,2.4h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sneWolzsaE4SYLyU5dPf0Ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The c/d lanes along I-270, between I-670 & Oh 161, were constructed specifically for the Easton development project (primarily the southwest corner of I-270 & Morse Rd). The lack of access to Morse Rd, from these c/d lanes was done on purpose by Les Wexner & John Kessler as they, literally, redevloped New Albany from a sleepy little town in the NE corner of Franklin Co, that only had 400 people in 1980 to 1600 in 1990, then 3700 in 2000 to nearly 11,000 (projected) in 2020. Along with that population increase was the creation of exclusivity for New Albany that had previously been *held* previously by the suburbs of Dublin, Upper Arlington, and Bexley (over the previous century).
I don't doubt that this is the truth, but it seems very...petty? Looking at it from a map, reaching Easton Way from Morse Road and vice versa requires driving half a mile down Stelzer or Sunbury Road. It comes off as more of an inconvenience than any sort of exclusivity.
How would using Stelzer be some sort of inconvenience? Easton Way is a pretty short road, primarily to serve the mall. The mall has direct access to/from Morse anyways, and for the other businesses on Easton Way, you’re actually going out of your way to use I-270 if that’s an option instead of using Stelzer. Also, both Steltzer Rd and Morse Crossing (the 2 roads that border the mall on the east and west) are divided 4 lane arterials between Easton Way and Morse Rd. Not worth adding more weaving on a short freeway section just for some people to skip 3 sets of traffic signals imo.
I'm referring to the "exclusivity" of New Albany, which by limiting access to/from Morse Road is supposed to accomplish that. Except, the Easton Way exit is close enough to Morse Road that one could easily use a road bordering the mall to reach Morse, defeating the point making New Albany an "exclusive" suburb.
That’s not why they built it that way. When Easton was built, the 270/161 interchange was a full cloverleaf, not what it is today. Morse Road already had ridiculous traffic counts (I think it’s approaching 70,000 now). Having the new Easton exit in such close proximity to the 670, Morse, and 161 exits would have caused a traffic nightmare. As it stands now, the SB c/d section of 270 exiting to Easton backs up for a mile in the morning. The c/d was built solely to ease potential congestion from these exits being so close together.

As far as I can tell, that is correct.

A popular urban legend in Columbus is that the C/D roads were built to give rich people in New Albany a way to Easton from 161 without mingling with other 270 traffic. 32 and 33 would have required braiding anyway and someone had the foresight to realize that, with gore points for 30 and 32 roughly a mile apart, it made sense to just throw in a full C/D system. The consequence of the chosen design, of course, is that there is no direct connection between Morse and 161, but this can be made via Sunbury Road or Exit 33.

Aw, they're just too close together. Even when all this was being proposed in the mid-'90s the counts on 270 and Morse were nuts. The average person knows nothing about road and traffic engineering so that's why they say stuff like that urban legend. Back then the local economy was far more balanced rather than being split between Cool and Uncool Crescents. It wasn't so lopsided as it is today where most of the money, white-collar jobs and retail are in the Cool Crescent which is basically everything north of I-70 west of Downtown, everything north of 670 east of Downtown plus German Village but minus Linden. Places like the West and East Sides still had white-collar jobs and adequate retail. So if you were going to build a development that you felt would pull more of the jobs and retail into your orbit (which it certainly did) you were going to need more capacity.

The real problem arises when all that capacity is built and never lives up to the traffic promises (*cough* low-population growth areas *cough*). It happens often but did not happen with Easton.
Title: Ohio
Post by: 6a on March 01, 2021, 04:59:05 PM
I haven’t been to the Easton area since 2019 and GSV haven’t updated that area yet, but are the NB C/D lanes on I-270 to Easton/161 between I-670 and Easton separated from the mainline 270 traffic? I’ve seen some not-so-clear diagrams of that redesigned section online, and it seems like they aren’t separated. If that’s really the case, seems like a missed opportunity and sort of defeats the point of having earlier ramps from both 270 and 670.
They are not separated; it’s just 8 lanes now. The way the exits from 670 are configured puts you in the correct set of lanes for your destination.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 01, 2021, 05:14:40 PM
I haven’t been to the Easton area since 2019 and GSV haven’t updated that area yet, but are the NB C/D lanes on I-270 to Easton/161 between I-670 and Easton separated from the mainline 270 traffic? I’ve seen some not-so-clear diagrams of that redesigned section online, and it seems like they aren’t separated. If that’s really the case, seems like a missed opportunity and sort of defeats the point of having earlier ramps from both 270 and 670.
They are not separated; it’s just 8 lanes now. The way the exits from 670 are configured puts you in the correct set of lanes for your destination.
I’m guessing the configuration is like US 33 WB between I-270 and Avery-Muirfield in that if you take the wrong ramp to US 33 W or Avery-Muirfield from I-270 W, you can still change lanes because of the dashed lane marking. Unless the I-270 one between I-670 and Easton have a solid white line separating the through lanes and exit lanes instead of a dashed one.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on March 01, 2021, 06:23:19 PM
I haven’t been to the Easton area since 2019 and GSV haven’t updated that area yet, but are the NB C/D lanes on I-270 to Easton/161 between I-670 and Easton separated from the mainline 270 traffic? I’ve seen some not-so-clear diagrams of that redesigned section online, and it seems like they aren’t separated. If that’s really the case, seems like a missed opportunity and sort of defeats the point of having earlier ramps from both 270 and 670.
They are not separated; it’s just 8 lanes now. The way the exits from 670 are configured puts you in the correct set of lanes for your destination.
I’m guessing the configuration is like US 33 WB between I-270 and Avery-Muirfield in that if you take the wrong ramp to US 33 W or Avery-Muirfield from I-270 W, you can still change lanes because of the dashed lane marking. Unless the I-270 one between I-670 and Easton have a solid white line separating the through lanes and exit lanes instead of a dashed one.

Yes, it is similar to the setup on US 33 WB. These pictures show how it now looks on 270 NB between 670 & the Easton/161 C/D roadway. These were all taken within a couple minutes of each other; there was an accident which blocked the right lanes between the first & second pictures.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49184306656_ff7063cea9_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hWfqPb)DSC03317 (https://flic.kr/p/2hWfqPb) by Eric Stuve (https://www.flickr.com/photos/okroads/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49183809463_c08561e3aa_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hWcT1T)DSC03318 (https://flic.kr/p/2hWcT1T) by Eric Stuve (https://www.flickr.com/photos/okroads/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49183809008_2ac612a20b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hWcST3)DSC03319 (https://flic.kr/p/2hWcST3) by Eric Stuve (https://www.flickr.com/photos/okroads/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 03, 2021, 02:56:41 PM
Couple US 20 notes:

There are now blue mile marker signs in the median of the Fremont bypass every 2 tenths of a mile, with green ones for the whole numbers on the side of the road.

The CR 175 intersection east of Clyde received a traffic light fairly recently (past 2-3 years.) It is already being upgraded to include doghouse left turn arrows, with a whole set of new signals mounted on mast arms. The previous lights did not have left turn arrows and were wire mounted. Not sure why they didn't just do it this way from the start.

LM-Q620

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 03, 2021, 05:48:10 PM
Speaking of the enhanced mile markers, I'll paste over a conversation from another thread
* Proposed requirement to have all enhanced mile markers be green

If the proposed new MUTCD is adopted as is, then those states (and others) will have to change their blue markers to green, the proposed new MUTCD removes the option of having those markers in blue.
Ohio's going to have a fun time with that. They recently replaced a lot of the thinner older style mile markers with abbreviated cardinal direction (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.218046,-84.3689792,3a,15y,334.6h,88.45t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGvsQyNa8AMzLpY_iuOlcg!2e0!5s20160701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) to the full sized ones (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2180604,-84.3690275,3a,15y,341.97h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-XAXfTCq2mZQg1YSm9GQEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), both in blue. The state will probably find a way around it, considering Ohio still have a good amount of dancing arrow signage up despite dancing arrows getting disallowed in the 2009 MUTCD. I prefer enhanced mile markers in blue over green, though a lot of people will disagree with me.

Afaik for states that uses blue, KY, IN and TN has been mentioned already, OH just mentioned, and there's also KS and WI.
It is interesting that ODOT went through a phase of the whole number markers being green (https://goo.gl/maps/p3YGVaZ67Fi1rvp48) and the others blue (https://goo.gl/maps/KY9HGfL89jCG9Zzr8).  Those were put up at the same time, and interestingly, the values changed by 6/10 mile when they did.  (If you move back in time, you can see 22.6 where 22.0 now is.  Also, the old 22.6 was an interesting one with a W direction but both 76 and 77 shields; they all had that along the duplex.)
I think the whole number green enhanced markers might be exclusive to Akron (or ODOT district 4), as I don't see them anywhere else in the state. Also interesting is that the .0 is omitted on the Akron ones you linked. Normally, the state keeps the .0 on whole miles; this one-off in Toledo (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6850843,-83.5682444,3a,20.7y,185.42h,89.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD-Iu_zLM2izyQGw5dPz4mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) was the only one I knew about that omitted the .0 before seeing the Akron ones. The other cities (well, Cincy, Columbus, Dayton and Cleveland at least) have the standard vertical number green mile marker on the right side of the road for whole miles in addition to the blue mile marker in the median.

Some of the newest .0 ones show .0; it seems that it is flavor of the month with them.  The recently-completed project on 76/77 includes a new 22.0 marker with Mile 22 traditional markers on the roadside; other whole numbers nearby are missing and possibly because of the 6/10 shift (which itself is odd).  It is almost like they are seeing how many permutations they can come up with.  It was never this way when they were all the old design.
Akron area freeways has always had anomalies, with some ground‐mounted signage looking slightly different...Especially on the older freeway segments that were later rebuilt.   

I would hazard a guess that those simpler replacement signs (Non-overhead BGS) were made by the City of Akron's sign department for quite a few decades.  That might explain the green fractional mile‐markers. 

Another reason why I suspect the city of Akron is that once you are outside of their city limits, the signage looks more uniform.

Couple US 20 notes:

There are now blue mile marker signs in the median of the Fremont bypass every 2 tenths of a mile, with green ones for the whole numbers on the side of the road.
Normally, ODOT doesn't place enhanced mile markers in bypasses of small cities or towns. I mostly only see them in medium-large metro areas, in intervals of 0.2 (0.1 in Cincy). Besides Fremont, the only exception I can think of atm is US 35 in Xenia. So the ones on the Fremont bypass for US 20 is sort of a new concept. Wondering if the state will place enhanced mile markers on other rural bypasses, or just rural freeways in general, after the MUTCD disallows blue enhanced markers. I still doubt Ohio will go out and replace all the current blue ones still. It may take longer to adjust to than the dancing arrows ban.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: I-55 on March 04, 2021, 01:41:50 PM
Speaking of the enhanced mile markers, I'll paste over a conversation from another thread
* Proposed requirement to have all enhanced mile markers be green

If the proposed new MUTCD is adopted as is, then those states (and others) will have to change their blue markers to green, the proposed new MUTCD removes the option of having those markers in blue.
Ohio's going to have a fun time with that. They recently replaced a lot of the thinner older style mile markers with abbreviated cardinal direction (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.218046,-84.3689792,3a,15y,334.6h,88.45t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNGvsQyNa8AMzLpY_iuOlcg!2e0!5s20160701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) to the full sized ones (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2180604,-84.3690275,3a,15y,341.97h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-XAXfTCq2mZQg1YSm9GQEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), both in blue. The state will probably find a way around it, considering Ohio still have a good amount of dancing arrow signage up despite dancing arrows getting disallowed in the 2009 MUTCD. I prefer enhanced mile markers in blue over green, though a lot of people will disagree with me.

Afaik for states that uses blue, KY, IN and TN has been mentioned already, OH just mentioned, and there's also KS and WI.
It is interesting that ODOT went through a phase of the whole number markers being green (https://goo.gl/maps/p3YGVaZ67Fi1rvp48) and the others blue (https://goo.gl/maps/KY9HGfL89jCG9Zzr8).  Those were put up at the same time, and interestingly, the values changed by 6/10 mile when they did.  (If you move back in time, you can see 22.6 where 22.0 now is.  Also, the old 22.6 was an interesting one with a W direction but both 76 and 77 shields; they all had that along the duplex.)
I think the whole number green enhanced markers might be exclusive to Akron (or ODOT district 4), as I don't see them anywhere else in the state. Also interesting is that the .0 is omitted on the Akron ones you linked. Normally, the state keeps the .0 on whole miles; this one-off in Toledo (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6850843,-83.5682444,3a,20.7y,185.42h,89.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD-Iu_zLM2izyQGw5dPz4mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) was the only one I knew about that omitted the .0 before seeing the Akron ones. The other cities (well, Cincy, Columbus, Dayton and Cleveland at least) have the standard vertical number green mile marker on the right side of the road for whole miles in addition to the blue mile marker in the median.

Some of the newest .0 ones show .0; it seems that it is flavor of the month with them.  The recently-completed project on 76/77 includes a new 22.0 marker with Mile 22 traditional markers on the roadside; other whole numbers nearby are missing and possibly because of the 6/10 shift (which itself is odd).  It is almost like they are seeing how many permutations they can come up with.  It was never this way when they were all the old design.
Akron area freeways has always had anomalies, with some ground‐mounted signage looking slightly different...Especially on the older freeway segments that were later rebuilt.   

I would hazard a guess that those simpler replacement signs (Non-overhead BGS) were made by the City of Akron's sign department for quite a few decades.  That might explain the green fractional mile‐markers. 

Another reason why I suspect the city of Akron is that once you are outside of their city limits, the signage looks more uniform.

Couple US 20 notes:

There are now blue mile marker signs in the median of the Fremont bypass every 2 tenths of a mile, with green ones for the whole numbers on the side of the road.
Normally, ODOT doesn't place enhanced mile markers in bypasses of small cities or towns. I mostly only see them in medium-large metro areas, in intervals of 0.2 (0.1 in Cincy). Besides Fremont, the only exception I can think of atm is US 35 in Xenia. So the ones on the Fremont bypass for US 20 is sort of a new concept. Wondering if the state will place enhanced mile markers on other rural bypasses, or just rural freeways in general, after the MUTCD disallows blue enhanced markers. I still doubt Ohio will go out and replace all the current blue ones still. It may take longer to adjust to than the dancing arrows ban.

US-35 is the only at grade road (near the car dealerships) that I've ever seen with the blue enhanced markers. My guess is that ODOT wanted to have them on 35 for all of the Dayton-Xenia metro, and a one mile gap would've seemed out of place perhaps. I have to wonder if there are any other at grade enhanced markers around the country.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on March 04, 2021, 04:22:46 PM
I have to wonder if there are any other at grade enhanced markers around the country.

Plenty. See: almost every state-maintained road in New Jersey.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on March 06, 2021, 08:05:53 AM
I have to wonder if there are any other at grade enhanced markers around the country.

US-33 where it makes its turn at College & Livingston in Columbus
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on March 08, 2021, 08:12:45 PM
Major rehabilitation project to shut down part of State Route 7 (https://www.wsaz.com/2021/03/08/major-rehabilitation-project-to-shut-down-part-of-state-route-7/)

"A major rehabilitation project will close part of State Route 7 at Crown City. The project is set to start on March 22.

[...]

ODOT says the concrete pavement in this section was constructed in 1947 and repaired in 1994 and 2013. Part of the project includes removing the concrete and replacing it will full-depth asphalt pavement. There will also be new culverts, catch basins, new guardrail, new signing and rumble strips."

--

I wouldn't have guessed this pavement was 74 years old! Google streetview: https://goo.gl/maps/88WB1LSyCLPw3F74A
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on March 15, 2021, 12:56:56 AM
There used to be green enhanced mile markers on I-75 in Lexington, KY: https://goo.gl/maps/2WjsAV43RmvgQKVk8 (2007 view)
By 2013, they were replaced by blue ones: https://goo.gl/maps/ruj9FfnsV4gra67r7
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 24, 2021, 12:59:53 PM
Found some rural and green ones on OH 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3979471,-82.3818297,3a,15y,242.04h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sulxTMbdHo--umcF9pFhh0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

I have to wonder if there are any other at grade enhanced markers around the country.

US-33 where it makes its turn at College & Livingston in Columbus
Seems like the College Ave section (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9453686,-82.935239,3a,27.4y,332.76h,86.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRCkpWEPXffyhl7ksGPc4QA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) of US 33 in general have them
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 01, 2021, 12:11:15 PM
I mentioned the I-670 SmartLane in another thread, but that reminded me of another proposed SmartLane project in the state, this time on part of the northern loop of I-275 (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/94256). The timeline is to have construction start in Winter 2021. The area getting the SmartLane is between US 42 (exit 46) and OH 28 (exit 57), but I think it should be extended westward to at least the OH 4 exit (exit 41), as traffic exiting from I-75 towards some of the northwestern suburbs like Fairfield and Hamilton uses that stretch of I-275.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 01, 2021, 12:58:27 PM
Things do get jammed up good through there, much in the same way they did on 670 before the SmartLane. TV news said the SmartLane made a huge difference on 670 though I haven't been on 670 at peak since it was installed. They are fairly similar stretches.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 01, 2021, 05:46:02 PM
Things do get jammed up good through there, much in the same way they did on 670 before the SmartLane. TV news said the SmartLane made a huge difference on 670 though I haven't been on 670 at peak since it was installed. They are fairly similar stretches.
It made a tremendous difference, but hasn’t been used since COVID hit. I think reconfiguring the 670/270 interchange helped quite a bit as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 04, 2021, 11:37:35 PM
Things do get jammed up good through there, much in the same way they did on 670 before the SmartLane.
Part of the issue I see with WB I-275 is in its interchange with I-71. Between the I-71 S exit loop ramp and the entrance ramps from I-71, it narrows down to 2 lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2731065,-84.3536719,307m/data=!3m1!1e3). Besides adding a SmartLane, it would be nice to add a third through lane in that section, like what the rest of I-275 in that stretch have.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Dustin DeWinn on April 18, 2021, 01:25:13 PM
Since Ohio has, or will be eliminating the rear plate plate, for the inspection/registration stickers, is it still just 1 sticker on the front plate, and that's just it?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tigerwings on April 18, 2021, 02:40:33 PM
Front plate no longer required as of 7/1/2020. Single tab on the rear plate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 18, 2021, 09:16:24 PM
I drove on about 15 miles of I-71 today, and here's some construction updates I noticed:

- Contraflow lane between exits 8 and 11 removed. Currently in the process of repaving the road to what it normally would be like. Though there's a new lane area on the right side of the current lanes on the NB direction between exits 8 and 9. It may be an auxiliary lane for the Red Bank Rd exit (exit 9), as I doubt that I-71 will get expanded to 8 through lanes in this section.
- NB exit 8C (Ridge Ave North) ramp closing later this month. My guess for this is that it'll get removed and replaced with a ramp to Kennedy Rd, as what the ODOT site for this project suggests.
- Not on I-71, but the OH 126 and US 22 roundabout project is in the third phase for temporary traffic flow now. There's cameras set up around the construction area on the project site (https://www.montgomeryohio.org/downtown-montgomery-roundabout-information/) for those interested in looking at it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 18, 2021, 09:43:56 PM
Since Ohio has, or will be eliminating the rear plate plate, for the inspection/registration stickers, is it still just 1 sticker on the front plate, and that's just it?

Front plate is gone, the rear stickers have gone back to full county names in the center as seen before the Bicentennial plates kicked in in 2003. No more small numerical county code stickers on the left side. Registration month/year sticker stays the same. County stickers are printed on site rather than each BMV keeping an inventory of every county's sticker around. Always wondered how many Ashtabula County stickers the Proctorville BMV went through.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 18, 2021, 09:50:32 PM
Also I suspect the reason the front plate went away in Ohio despite howls from the State Highway Patrol (the most powerful lobby in the state) and local police departments/sheriffs is that cars are going to have a lot more sensors and cameras on the front of them in the near future for driver aids. The automaker lobby in Ohio is more powerful than people think and all surrounding states including Michigan (where the automaker lobby is most powerful) already didn't have the front plate. Watch for this to come to your state if it still has front plates.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on April 18, 2021, 10:44:04 PM
Also I suspect the reason the front plate went away in Ohio despite howls from the State Highway Patrol (the most powerful lobby in the state) and local police departments/sheriffs is that cars are going to have a lot more sensors and cameras on the front of them in the near future for driver aids. The automaker lobby in Ohio is more powerful than people think and all surrounding states including Michigan (where the automaker lobby is most powerful) already didn't have the front plate. Watch for this to come to your state if it still has front plates.
So far in NY, no one is screaming to lose the front plate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on April 19, 2021, 01:43:21 AM
Also I suspect the reason the front plate went away in Ohio despite howls from the State Highway Patrol (the most powerful lobby in the state) and local police departments/sheriffs is that cars are going to have a lot more sensors and cameras on the front of them in the near future for driver aids. The automaker lobby in Ohio is more powerful than people think and all surrounding states including Michigan (where the automaker lobby is most powerful) already didn't have the front plate. Watch for this to come to your state if it still has front plates.
So far in NY, no one is screaming to lose the front plate.
Same in California.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 19, 2021, 10:46:44 AM
Here it didn't really come as a result of a really big push from the public -- it was more along the lines of a slow simmer for 20 years from budget hounds. I don't think anyone was really expecting it to happen at all. A behind-the-scenes push or maybe even just a heads-up from automakers could have done it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: renegade on April 19, 2021, 04:00:33 PM
Also I suspect the reason the front plate went away in Ohio despite howls from the State Highway Patrol (the most powerful lobby in the state) and local police departments/sheriffs is that cars are going to have a lot more sensors and cameras on the front of them in the near future for driver aids. The automaker lobby in Ohio is more powerful than people think and all surrounding states including Michigan (where the automaker lobby is most powerful) already didn't have the front plate. Watch for this to come to your state if it still has front plates.
Don't forget, the police killed a guy in Cincinnati a few years ago after pulling him over for not having a front plate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 19, 2021, 09:33:46 PM
Oh yeah, Samuel DuBose. That might be a big factor too. It also resulted in UC Police ceasing off-campus driving-related stops.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 22, 2021, 05:04:42 PM
I wonder if the fact that all 5 of our bordering states are single plate had any effect as well

LM-Q620

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on April 22, 2021, 06:12:43 PM
I wonder if the fact that all 5 of our bordering states are single plate had any effect as well

I seem to recall that being mentioned in the news when the change was announced a couple years ago. I think it's likely that was included in supporting information given by proponents of the law in the state house.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 22, 2021, 06:24:25 PM
I actually didn't know they had a front plate requirement that was dropped in 2020, until a couple of weeks ago. My parents bought a Highlander back in 2013 at a Northern KY Toyota dealer, and they opted out of a front plate. Kind of can't believe they got away without having it for 7 years, considering that this car did get pulled over by a cop in Ohio once.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 26, 2021, 07:06:22 PM
Crossposted from the Ranking State Border Crossings thread. Either ODOT made an error below, or Wintersville/Steubenville really is a much larger city than I initially thought.
I'm not sure about using volume data to rank the crossings. It makes sense to a certain extent, but then you have cases like NY 303 at the NJ line being almost twice as busy as I-86 at the PA line. Yet no one would argue that NY 303 is the more important crossing.
The numbers I got for Ohio are mostly reasonable, so I went with it. Most used crossings at major metro areas like Cincinnati and Toledo. Most interstates are above 4 lane US routes. The only one that's puzzling to me is US 22's 32k AADT at the WV border. US 22 is a freeway at that point, but Steubenville isn't that large of a city, and the 4 lane section dead ends at Cadiz on the Ohio side, though continues all the way as a 4 lane to I-376 on the east. The AADT number would've made more sense to me if it connected to I-70 at Cambridge as a freeway, as that would make a neat Columbus-Pittsburgh freeway corridor, except it doesn't.

2019 AADT of US 22 from Cambridge to WV Border
East of I-77 junction - 5.8k
Concurrency with OH 800 - 2.8k
West of US 250 junctions - 3k
Concurrency with US 250 - 8.5k
East of US 250 junctions - 8.7k
Concurrency with OH 151 - 10.5k
East of OH 151 eastern junction - 11.4k
East of OH 152 junction - 10k
West of OH 43 junction - 10.2k
East of OH 43 junction - 15.8k
West of John Scott Hwy junction - 18k
Between John Scott Hwy and OH 7 - 29k
Concurrency with OH 7 - 33.8k
WV Border - 32k

Actually, a lot of the local roads numbers near Steubenville seem high too, even with 2020 numbers. Especially the 20k on OH 43. Most of the busiest arterials in Cincinnati and Columbus don't even reach that high.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xzx9lZE.png?1)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 08, 2021, 08:31:42 PM
At that point of count, US Route 22 is multiplexed with OH Route 7. It's a busy area for north-south and a commuter route to and from Pittsburgh.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on May 09, 2021, 11:40:29 AM
Crossposted from the Ranking State Border Crossings thread. Either ODOT made an error below, or Wintersville/Steubenville really is a much larger city than I initially thought.
I'm not sure about using volume data to rank the crossings. It makes sense to a certain extent, but then you have cases like NY 303 at the NJ line being almost twice as busy as I-86 at the PA line. Yet no one would argue that NY 303 is the more important crossing.
The numbers I got for Ohio are mostly reasonable, so I went with it. Most used crossings at major metro areas like Cincinnati and Toledo. Most interstates are above 4 lane US routes. The only one that's puzzling to me is US 22's 32k AADT at the WV border. US 22 is a freeway at that point, but Steubenville isn't that large of a city, and the 4 lane section dead ends at Cadiz on the Ohio side, though continues all the way as a 4 lane to I-376 on the east. The AADT number would've made more sense to me if it connected to I-70 at Cambridge as a freeway, as that would make a neat Columbus-Pittsburgh freeway corridor, except it doesn't.

2019 AADT of US 22 from Cambridge to WV Border
East of I-77 junction - 5.8k
Concurrency with OH 800 - 2.8k
West of US 250 junctions - 3k
Concurrency with US 250 - 8.5k
East of US 250 junctions - 8.7k
Concurrency with OH 151 - 10.5k
East of OH 151 eastern junction - 11.4k
East of OH 152 junction - 10k
West of OH 43 junction - 10.2k
East of OH 43 junction - 15.8k
West of John Scott Hwy junction - 18k
Between John Scott Hwy and OH 7 - 29k
Concurrency with OH 7 - 33.8k
WV Border - 32k

Actually, a lot of the local roads numbers near Steubenville seem high too, even with 2020 numbers. Especially the 20k on OH 43. Most of the busiest arterials in Cincinnati and Columbus don't even reach that high.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xzx9lZE.png?1)

The numbers look reasonable to me.

Steubenville-Wintersville-Weirton is a decent size area (125k population) and the terrain of the area means there aren't many corridors. If you're driving west to east, you're either taking US 22 or SR 43 because those are the only roads that go east-west through here. Where I live in Morgantown, West Virginia, we have similar geographic constraints. We have several arterials in the 20,000 AADT range and one major corridor pushing 40K.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 17, 2021, 08:11:45 PM
Couple of I-71 Cincinnati construction updates
- NB exit 8C (Ridge north), and Kennedy to NB 71 ramps have been closed, and pavement ripped out.
- ODOT lists the Ridge North detour on their site by using the Ridge South ramp, which makes sense, as left turn lanes exist on the Ridge south ramp. But when I used 71 yesterday, they had a different, and much indirect route for the detour, as seen in the (terrible quality) dashcam pic below. And the left turn lanes are still open, so it doesn't take that much thought that using Exit 8A is a better option than whatever BS detour ODOT actually signed.
(https://i.imgur.com/uacrXns.jpg?2)
BGS would very likely be replaced when the project finishes, which means that another button copy installation will be gone.

- North of the 562/Ridge/Kennedy complex, it seems like that a 4th lane is getting added on the right of the current lanes, along with a sound barrier. This may be the exit only lane for Red Bank, which is probably why a BGS with an "EXIT ONLY" panel (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1708621,-84.4035854,3a,75y,72.76h,89.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxlGb45J108xDAWyxPrQKQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) was installed in the sign replacements not that long ago, even though there currently isn't an exit only lane.
(https://i.imgur.com/kJTOxcU.jpg?1)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 18, 2021, 09:45:21 PM
Looks like the Lick Run Greenway (https://www.local12.com/news/local/city-leaders-open-the-lick-run-greenway) on the west side of Cincy opened today. Means construction on Queen City Ave, which felt like it lasted forever and one of the worst roads to drive on in the area imo, is finally finished.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on May 19, 2021, 02:38:37 PM
Looks like the Lick Run Greenway (https://www.local12.com/news/local/city-leaders-open-the-lick-run-greenway) on the west side of Cincy opened today. Means construction on Queen City Ave, which felt like it lasted forever and one of the worst roads to drive on in the area imo, is finally finished.

They have not paved Queen City yet.  I heard yesterday that it won't be until later in the summer.  I look forward to that with mixed emotions - since I travel a short stretch of Queen City every morning.  Looking forward to smooth pavement but not the inevitable lane closures while it's happening.

Westwood Ave has been repaved since last fall, and has become a speedway. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 20, 2021, 09:16:35 AM
Anyone know what these blue mile markers on the WB US 50 trumpet ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2852104,-81.6471237,3a,26.3y,16.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4SO3zH3n85eaOwIfxgDC8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) off the Ohio River bridge onto the concurrency with OH 7/32 is for? It's in the Mile 5 range, which is strange as I'm pretty sure that US 50 is in the MM 200s at that point. Also it's posted every 0.1 mile on a ramp; ODOT normally does neither of those things with the blue mile markers, with the exception of 0.1 intervals in the Cincinnati area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on May 20, 2021, 12:04:59 PM
Anyone know what these blue mile markers on the WB US 50 trumpet ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2852104,-81.6471237,3a,26.3y,16.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4SO3zH3n85eaOwIfxgDC8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) off the Ohio River bridge onto the concurrency with OH 7/32 is for? It's in the Mile 5 range, which is strange as I'm pretty sure that US 50 is in the MM 200s at that point. Also it's posted every 0.1 mile on a ramp; ODOT normally does neither of those things with the blue mile markers, with the exception of 0.1 intervals in the Cincinnati area.

That is based off of US 50's mileage in Washington County only instead of the entire state.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on May 20, 2021, 12:14:12 PM
Like the old white square signs you used to see on state routes. Used to use those to count down how long it would take to get somewhere when I was bored in the car as a kid.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 21, 2021, 01:02:50 AM
So, ODOT has put up an online survey concerning traveling US 23 in Delaware County.
https://publicinput.com/23connect?fbclid=IwAR2hTcA41UnsdrJwHo5bWofS0LvRI40WEmvuJFxAZb4f66Zg2C_iNeiRG7k
Be honest, or skew the results (surfing isn't getting enough love from ODOT).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 21, 2021, 01:24:10 AM
I'm not sure how seriously ODOT takes the agrees on the comments, but this one worded my suggestion pretty well.
(https://i.imgur.com/lW0JB96.png)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: chaparral on May 21, 2021, 04:25:59 PM
Are there any plans to improve the Toledo to Columbus route? I 75 - US 68/OH 15 - US 23 works well until about Waldo, and then it all goes straight down the drain. A Super-2 from Waldo to a new I 71 exit at OH 521 would definitely improve matters, but for long-distance travelers it would be even better to run it through New Albany to I-70 or even all the way down to US 33 at Canal Winchester.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 21, 2021, 04:35:12 PM
Are there any plans to improve the Toledo to Columbus route? I 75 - US 68/OH 15 - US 23 works well until about Waldo, and then it all goes straight down the drain. A Super-2 from Waldo to a new I 71 exit at OH 521 would definitely improve matters, but for long-distance travelers it would be even better to run it through New Albany to I-70 or even all the way down to US 33 at Canal Winchester.
That is what the survey linked above is about.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tigerwings on May 21, 2021, 05:21:35 PM
built this

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4801.0
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on May 22, 2021, 12:38:28 AM
Anyone know what these blue mile markers on the WB US 50 trumpet ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2852104,-81.6471237,3a,26.3y,16.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4SO3zH3n85eaOwIfxgDC8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) off the Ohio River bridge onto the concurrency with OH 7/32 is for? It's in the Mile 5 range, which is strange as I'm pretty sure that US 50 is in the MM 200s at that point. Also it's posted every 0.1 mile on a ramp; ODOT normally does neither of those things with the blue mile markers, with the exception of 0.1 intervals in the Cincinnati area.

That is based off of US 50's mileage in Washington County only instead of the entire state.
Considering that those are the new mile markers with the wider width, and full cardinal direction name instead of an abbreviation, installed sometime in the last 8 years, kind of surprising that they still went with county based mile markers at that point. When OH 126 got its mile markers replaced, it switched from county mile markers starting at the Butler-Hamilton line to the state line at IN.

EDIT: Actually, OH 126's mile markers history is interesting.
- Old style mile marker (2015), MM 19 (County-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252641,-84.3797001,3a,15.8y,242.14h,86.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6qSGSVC_ubQXULEgwc5RpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
- New style mile marker (2016), MM 19 (County-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252664,-84.3797003,3a,16.1y,242.24h,85.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYMLB1HXIOUR2GaMVTm1uqg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
- New style mile marker (2017), MM 32 (State-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252666,-84.3797155,3a,15y,242.01h,88.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVxteqjeQWrL7958AkLQvwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
So the second one lasted for less than a year, before it was replaced by a similar one with mileage from the state line.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on May 22, 2021, 12:33:48 PM
Anyone know what these blue mile markers on the WB US 50 trumpet ramp (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2852104,-81.6471237,3a,26.3y,16.7h,88.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4SO3zH3n85eaOwIfxgDC8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) off the Ohio River bridge onto the concurrency with OH 7/32 is for? It's in the Mile 5 range, which is strange as I'm pretty sure that US 50 is in the MM 200s at that point. Also it's posted every 0.1 mile on a ramp; ODOT normally does neither of those things with the blue mile markers, with the exception of 0.1 intervals in the Cincinnati area.

That is based off of US 50's mileage in Washington County only instead of the entire state.
Considering that those are the new mile markers with the wider width, and full cardinal direction name instead of an abbreviation, installed sometime in the last 8 years, kind of surprising that they still went with county based mile markers at that point. When OH 126 got its mile markers replaced, it switched from county mile markers starting at the Butler-Hamilton line to the state line at IN.

EDIT: Actually, OH 126's mile markers history is interesting.
- Old style mile marker (2015), MM 19 (County-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252641,-84.3797001,3a,15.8y,242.14h,86.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6qSGSVC_ubQXULEgwc5RpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
- New style mile marker (2016), MM 19 (County-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252664,-84.3797003,3a,16.1y,242.24h,85.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYMLB1HXIOUR2GaMVTm1uqg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
- New style mile marker (2017), MM 32 (State-based) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2252666,-84.3797155,3a,15y,242.01h,88.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVxteqjeQWrL7958AkLQvwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
So the second one lasted for less than a year, before it was replaced by a similar one with mileage from the state line.

It is surprising considering recent trends but there is another similar situation. US 68 in Clark County (near Springfield) had exit numbers added last year, but the numbers were based on the county's mileage instead of US 68's overall Ohio mileage.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on May 24, 2021, 05:09:51 PM
Mile markers start counting from the southern or western terminus of a road. At least when it comes to the interstate markers, a more valuable number would be something telling you how many more miles you have to go to the eastern or northern terminus. Maybe the top can say Mile X and the bottom miles to the other terminus number can show a negative number or an omega symbol or something like that.

When I'm driving, I always like to know how much longer I have until I get to the next state and I can only do that going westbound or southbound.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on May 24, 2021, 05:12:38 PM
Crossposted from the Ranking State Border Crossings thread. Either ODOT made an error below, or Wintersville/Steubenville really is a much larger city than I initially thought.
I'm not sure about using volume data to rank the crossings. It makes sense to a certain extent, but then you have cases like NY 303 at the NJ line being almost twice as busy as I-86 at the PA line. Yet no one would argue that NY 303 is the more important crossing.
The numbers I got for Ohio are mostly reasonable, so I went with it. Most used crossings at major metro areas like Cincinnati and Toledo. Most interstates are above 4 lane US routes. The only one that's puzzling to me is US 22's 32k AADT at the WV border. US 22 is a freeway at that point, but Steubenville isn't that large of a city, and the 4 lane section dead ends at Cadiz on the Ohio side, though continues all the way as a 4 lane to I-376 on the east. The AADT number would've made more sense to me if it connected to I-70 at Cambridge as a freeway, as that would make a neat Columbus-Pittsburgh freeway corridor, except it doesn't.

2019 AADT of US 22 from Cambridge to WV Border
East of I-77 junction - 5.8k
Concurrency with OH 800 - 2.8k
West of US 250 junctions - 3k
Concurrency with US 250 - 8.5k
East of US 250 junctions - 8.7k
Concurrency with OH 151 - 10.5k
East of OH 151 eastern junction - 11.4k
East of OH 152 junction - 10k
West of OH 43 junction - 10.2k
East of OH 43 junction - 15.8k
West of John Scott Hwy junction - 18k
Between John Scott Hwy and OH 7 - 29k
Concurrency with OH 7 - 33.8k
WV Border - 32k

Actually, a lot of the local roads numbers near Steubenville seem high too, even with 2020 numbers. Especially the 20k on OH 43. Most of the busiest arterials in Cincinnati and Columbus don't even reach that high.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xzx9lZE.png?1)

So roughly 150,000 cars a day cross state borders in that part of the state. That's a lot.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on May 31, 2021, 01:19:30 PM
Mile markers start counting from the southern or western terminus of a road. At least when it comes to the interstate markers, a more valuable number would be something telling you how many more miles you have to go to the eastern or northern terminus. Maybe the top can say Mile X and the bottom miles to the other terminus number can show a negative number or an omega symbol or something like that.

When I'm driving, I always like to know how much longer I have until I get to the next state and I can only do that going westbound or southbound.

Your preference is from your personal driving situation. When I lived in St Louis, I did know how many more miles I needed to get home as I crossed Illinois on I-55, I-64, and I-70. Mile markers from the other direction may matter to you but that's more a function of your location than anything. XY coordinates traditionally start in the lower left or southwest corner. Unless you learned to draw coordinates in junior high using graph paper different from the rest of us.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on May 31, 2021, 07:21:11 PM
Mile markers start counting from the southern or western terminus of a road. At least when it comes to the interstate markers, a more valuable number would be something telling you how many more miles you have to go to the eastern or northern terminus. Maybe the top can say Mile X and the bottom miles to the other terminus number can show a negative number or an omega symbol or something like that.

US-491 in Utah bucks that trend (despite listing it as a N/S route), but at least US-491 in Colorado follows the proper mileage markings.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 31, 2021, 10:48:31 PM
US-491 in Utah bucks that trend (despite listing it as a N/S route), but at least US-491 in Colorado follows the proper mileage markings.

Is that from its origin as US 666?  Utah did have 491 posted east-west but changed it to north-south like the rest of the route in other states.  The western end became the northern end (so in theory all the mile markers would have to be moved so 0 is at the Colorado line instead of at the US 191 intersection).

In Ohio, I-680 is a notable route that has mileage increasing as you go south; it was done so that Mile 0 was at I-80, its parent.  As you go south away from I-80, the mile markers increase--an exception but reasonable.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on June 01, 2021, 12:51:58 AM

Your preference is from your personal driving situation. When I lived in St Louis, I did know how many more miles I needed to get home as I crossed Illinois on I-55, I-64, and I-70. Mile markers from the other direction may matter to you but that's more a function of your location than anything. XY coordinates traditionally start in the lower left or southwest corner. Unless you learned to draw coordinates in junior high using graph paper different from the rest of us.

In other words, even though they could be useful in the opposite direction (when they currently aren't) you don't to change them for no reason other than to be a jerk? Great reason.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on June 01, 2021, 10:12:37 AM

Your preference is from your personal driving situation. When I lived in St Louis, I did know how many more miles I needed to get home as I crossed Illinois on I-55, I-64, and I-70. Mile markers from the other direction may matter to you but that's more a function of your location than anything. XY coordinates traditionally start in the lower left or southwest corner. Unless you learned to draw coordinates in junior high using graph paper different from the rest of us.

In other words, even though they could be useful in the opposite direction (when they currently aren't) you don't to change them for no reason other than to be a jerk? Great reason.

No. It's about standardization. States only want one set of mile markers and the standard location for the starting point is the lower left or SW corner. That it's inconvenient for you personally is just a function of the system. I had the same issue as you on Missouri interstates when I was driving across Missouri back to St Louis. It's immature to call someone a jerk just for explaining the system and you not liking the answer.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on June 01, 2021, 06:31:13 PM
I've noticed that Scioto County has gone to the standard blue pentagon for their county route signs. Gone are the unique orange, black and white county outline signs that I really liked. 

LM-Q620

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on June 01, 2021, 09:14:22 PM
I'm sure this has been covered before, but why are county roads in some counties all named (such as in Franklin and Pickaway Counties) with possibly a county road number added to the end of the name blade but other counties e.g. in Appalachian Ohio only given numbers and get only numbered County Road/Route signs. In addition, county roads in these areas are given "secret names" that aren't much of a secret to locals. And if they do get official names they have both the first and last names of the person (especially present in District 9). It would make more sense if this was all the same at the state level like in WV... well sort of, since WV has state split routes rather than county roads. I know that some ODOT districts do things differently than others but these are county things. Is it just traditional/vernacular?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on June 06, 2021, 11:33:03 AM
I'm sure this has been covered before, but why are county roads in some counties all named (such as in Franklin and Pickaway Counties) with possibly a county road number added to the end of the name blade but other counties e.g. in Appalachian Ohio only given numbers and get only numbered County Road/Route signs. In addition, county roads in these areas are given "secret names" that aren't much of a secret to locals. And if they do get official names they have both the first and last names of the person (especially present in District 9). It would make more sense if this was all the same at the state level like in WV... well sort of, since WV has state split routes rather than county roads. I know that some ODOT districts do things differently than others but these are county things. Is it just traditional/vernacular?

There are two things in play here - whether the road has a name or just a number, and how they are signed. My experience has been that in NW Ohio, many counties have just numbers. (Some, like Seneca, had names previously but ditched them in favor of numbers.) In the most of the rest of the state, including Appalachia, there are normally names and numbers. This is a county-level decision.

Different counties have their own styles for signing their road names and numbers, both in terms of shields and blades, on their own signage. Stark County, until about a decade ago, only signed names. Since then, they've started adding some blue pentagon shields at intersections.  Some poorer area, like Monroe County, historically only used shields even though their routes had numbers, but with the advent of E911, you generally see road name blades as well.

ODOT's own signage practices for intersections along 4-lane divided highways tends to vary. Historically, they would just say County Road XX or Township Road XX. In the last 20 years, it's tended to flip more towards Road Name or Road Name XX on signage, but that's not entirely consistent. It seems to vary on age of signage and district.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on June 06, 2021, 09:17:21 PM

Different counties have their own styles for signing their road names and numbers, both in terms of shields and blades, on their own signage. Stark County, until about a decade ago, only signed names. Since then, they've started adding some blue pentagon shields at intersections.  Some poorer area, like Monroe County, historically only used shields even though their routes had numbers, but with the advent of E911, you generally see road name blades as well.


Monroe County is another one of those where on older maps and signs there was just a route number that the locals seldom used since they knew the "secret name" of the road. So when sign blades were added and address numbers given (instead of RR#2 or whatever, that was my grandparents' old address before 911) the names the locals used were put on the blades. Even though 911 happened around the late '80s there, it would take some time before all the named sign blades were in place... late '90s or even later. Like for example, I never knew Pfalzgraf Ridge Road (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Township+Hwy+156,+Adams+Township,+OH/@39.7593671,-81.002311,16z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88361ad094d16e07:0xf9a5295a1e8389a3!8m2!3d39.7614249!4d-80.995745 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Township+Hwy+156,+Adams+Township,+OH/@39.7593671,-81.002311,16z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88361ad094d16e07:0xf9a5295a1e8389a3!8m2!3d39.7614249!4d-80.995745)) was called that until a visit in 2007 since it just had a route number before that. You can't enter the name in to Google maps. You have to use the Township Highway number (156) but Maps will display the name on the map. That's my middle name so of course I found it interesting. It was certainly named after a relative.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on June 11, 2021, 11:42:07 PM
It appears that, back when Marge Schott roamed the earth, these signs near Cincinnati's Western Hills Viaduct had some extra shields that were removed over time.  Anyone happen to know what they were?
(https://i.imgur.com/GLrcBtUh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/1NFGGhgh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Cy5MWndh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on June 12, 2021, 07:38:49 AM
Those look old enough that it was probably there when US 25 existed in Ohio. Though US 25 was mostly concurrent with US 42 up to Sharonville, where it split on the left to continue on Reading Rd, eventually becoming Cincinnati-Dayton Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 12, 2021, 11:30:26 AM
It appears that, back when Marge Schott roamed the earth, these signs near Cincinnati's Western Hills Viaduct had some extra shields that were removed over time.  Anyone happen to know what they were?

Oh 4, US 52, US 27, or US 127 (babe!). All of them are (were) routed near I-75 in that area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on June 12, 2021, 11:59:54 PM
It appears that, back when Marge Schott roamed the earth, these signs near Cincinnati's Western Hills Viaduct had some extra shields that were removed over time.  Anyone happen to know what they were?
(https://i.imgur.com/GLrcBtUh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/1NFGGhgh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Cy5MWndh.jpg)

There are similar-era signs in West Toledo, with the shields removed, where US 23, 24 and 25 converged then branched off into Michigan.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on June 14, 2021, 01:32:22 PM
It appears that, back when Marge Schott roamed the earth, these signs near Cincinnati's Western Hills Viaduct had some extra shields that were removed over time.  Anyone happen to know what they were?
(https://i.imgur.com/GLrcBtUh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/1NFGGhgh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Cy5MWndh.jpg)

There are similar-era signs in West Toledo, with the shields removed, where US 23, 24 and 25 converged then branched off into Michigan.

The Harrison Ave sign (a similar one is still there, BTW) would have said US-52 WEST.  Not sure exactly where the other two were located, but the routing of US-52 through Cincinnati has changed a couple of times over the last 50 years, so that could be what was covered up.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 23, 2021, 01:59:20 PM
C-bus TV piece concerning ODOT District 6 asking us what should be done about US 23
https://www.10tv.com/article/traffic/odot-what-improvements-can-be-made-on-us-23-between-waldo-and-i-270/530-fe0c844d-2bf6-410f-9ee0-6d0441249632

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 23, 2021, 03:53:25 PM
More about US 23 in Worthington & Delaware County
https://www.delgazette.com/news/90883/odot-wraps-up-lane-configuration-signage-project-on-us-23
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 24, 2021, 02:27:39 PM
Any chance of a freeway conversion along US 23 from Columbus to Waldo, or a full freeway conversion (remove all at-grade intersections) of 23 between Waldo and Upper Sandusky? Maybe a 23/15 freeway conversion from Upper Sandusky to Interstate 75 near Findlay?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on June 24, 2021, 02:32:46 PM
Any chance of a freeway conversion along US 23 from Columbus to Waldo, or a full freeway conversion (remove all at-grade intersections) of 23 between Waldo and Upper Sandusky? Maybe a 23/15 freeway conversion from Upper Sandusky to Interstate 75 near Findlay?
I doubt US 23 between I-270 and Waldo would become a freeway. Especially the section between Columbus and Delaware, it's too developed. The best case scenario with current conditions is a spur of I-71 (doesn't have to be an interstate) from a point just north of the US 36 interchange to US 23 just north of Waldo.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on June 24, 2021, 03:40:36 PM
Any chance of a freeway conversion along US 23 from Columbus to Waldo, or a full freeway conversion (remove all at-grade intersections) of 23 between Waldo and Upper Sandusky? Maybe a 23/15 freeway conversion from Upper Sandusky to Interstate 75 near Findlay?

I'm going to guess that US 23 will be an expressway at best, not a full freeway, much like US 24 and US 30 in northern Ohio. Several segments of US 23/SR 15 between Delaware and Findlay are low traffic with at-grade crossings that are unlikely to go away anytime soon. ODOT is making some marginal improvements closer to Marion that mimic changes that InDOT is making to US 31 north of Indianapolis, another good comparison to what US 23 will eventually become.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on June 24, 2021, 08:31:38 PM
Any chance of a freeway conversion along US 23 from Columbus to Waldo, or a full freeway conversion (remove all at-grade intersections) of 23 between Waldo and Upper Sandusky? Maybe a 23/15 freeway conversion from Upper Sandusky to Interstate 75 near Findlay?
I doubt US 23 between I-270 and Waldo would become a freeway. Especially the section between Columbus and Delaware, it's too developed. The best case scenario with current conditions is a spur of I-71 (doesn't have to be an interstate) from a point just north of the US 36 interchange to US 23 just north of Waldo.

Yeah would have had to do that in the 20th century. There are a whole lot of businesses that would close if access was limited.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on June 29, 2021, 11:29:21 AM
It appears that, back when Marge Schott roamed the earth, these signs near Cincinnati's Western Hills Viaduct had some extra shields that were removed over time.  Anyone happen to know what they were?
(https://i.imgur.com/GLrcBtUh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/1NFGGhgh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Cy5MWndh.jpg)

There are similar-era signs in West Toledo, with the shields removed, where US 23, 24 and 25 converged then branched off into Michigan.

The Harrison Ave sign (a similar one is still there, BTW) would have said US-52 WEST.  Not sure exactly where the other two were located, but the routing of US-52 through Cincinnati has changed a couple of times over the last 50 years, so that could be what was covered up.

I actually drove under those signs the other day - they are still up.   I'm sure that the Harrison Ave sign originally said US-52 WEST and that the Central Parkway sign would have said US-52 EAST
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: MASTERNC on June 30, 2021, 08:10:50 PM
Interesting observation from a trucker who broadcasts his trips on YouTube: the new Ohio Turnpike main line toll plaza west of Toledo has an exit number tab on the BGS for the cash lanes right at the gore point.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on June 30, 2021, 08:24:56 PM
Interesting observation from a trucker who broadcasts his trips on YouTube: the new Ohio Turnpike main line toll plaza west of Toledo has an exit number tab on the BGS for the cash lanes right at the gore point.
Do you have a link to that video or stream?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on June 30, 2021, 08:35:01 PM
Interesting observation from a trucker who broadcasts his trips on YouTube: the new Ohio Turnpike main line toll plaza west of Toledo has an exit number tab on the BGS for the cash lanes right at the gore point.
Do you have a link to that video or stream?

Big Rig Steve's current trip.  He went through there a couple of hours ago as of this typing.

Is the section between there and the Indiana state line going to be a freeway instead?

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on July 01, 2021, 12:24:04 AM
Interesting observation from a trucker who broadcasts his trips on YouTube: the new Ohio Turnpike main line toll plaza west of Toledo has an exit number tab on the BGS for the cash lanes right at the gore point.
Do you have a link to that video or stream?

Big Rig Steve's current trip.  He went through there a couple of hours ago as of this typing.

Is the section between there and the Indiana state line going to be a freeway instead?

Mike

Yes, but there will still be a toll plaza at MM 4 (Westgate). Between MM 4 and MM 49, the toll plazas at exits 13, 25, 34, and 39 will be demolished sometime in 2023. The same thing will happen east of MM 211 to MM 239 (Eastgate) WB/PA Turnpike's Gateway Toll Plaza EB with the toll plazas at 215/216, 218, 232, and 234 will also get demolished sometime in 2023.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on July 01, 2021, 12:35:07 AM
Interesting observation from a trucker who broadcasts his trips on YouTube: the new Ohio Turnpike main line toll plaza west of Toledo has an exit number tab on the BGS for the cash lanes right at the gore point.


Do you have a link to that video or stream?

Big Rig Steve's current trip.  He went through there a couple of hours ago as of this typing.

Is the section between there and the Indiana state line going to be a freeway instead?

Mike

The apparent signs are at 1:09:14 ( .

It is a good thing that the "usual" stuff in Chicago that I would drive to from NE Ohio was cancelled for the second year in a row, because the Turnpike looks miserable right now--not that it may be in better shape by a year from now.  The slowdown approaching the existing Westgate, 1 lane each way, is rotten.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 02, 2021, 02:59:53 PM
A photo of the OH 126 and US 22/3 roundabout project from their construction cameras online (facing north). It's starting to look like a roundabout! Also, signage choice on the bottom right is interesting, with an APL. Normally for roundabouts, I would've expected a diagrammatic.
(https://i.imgur.com/2i87oXN.png)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 02, 2021, 09:31:59 PM
Isn't that smack dab in the middle of Historic Montgomery? Or was it relocated?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 02, 2021, 09:41:36 PM
Isn't that smack dab in the middle of Historic Montgomery? Or was it relocated?
A bit south of downtown Montgomery. It's in the same location as the old trumpet between those two roads. The roundabout also opens up the area east of the junction for future development.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 03, 2021, 12:12:37 AM
Isn't that smack dab in the middle of Historic Montgomery? Or was it relocated?
Isn't that smack dab in the middle of Historic Montgomery? Or was it relocated?
A bit south of downtown Montgomery. It's in the same location as the old trumpet between those two roads. The roundabout also opens up the area east of the junction for future development.

East end of Cross-County Highway, I believe.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 03, 2021, 10:53:41 AM
Oh I've got it now, I was at their north intersection since they are multiplexed for a bit. Looks like the site of the old Marge Schott Oldsmobile.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on July 04, 2021, 02:28:48 AM
Pet Peeve:

Ohio always botches signs. They can't seem to keep the US and Ohio route shields straight! Do other states also botch their signs as much as Ohio does?

Two pics: U.S. 36 in Mount Vernon and in Nellie. The US 62 shield is also botched southbound going into New Albany, and I see a botched Ohio 161 shield (upgraded to U.S. 161) off of Hamilton Road. I see this a lot!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o898F3CHDz0OEi9tkcm-3tOtplsGJZ3l/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o898F3CHDz0OEi9tkcm-3tOtplsGJZ3l/view?usp=sharing)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on July 04, 2021, 02:48:18 AM
A photo of the OH 126 and US 22/3 roundabout project from their construction cameras online (facing north). It's starting to look like a roundabout! Also, signage choice on the bottom right is interesting, with an APL. Normally for roundabouts, I would've expected a diagrammatic.
(https://i.imgur.com/2i87oXN.png)

Not a fan of roundabouts at busy intersections. US 33/Ohio 161 is very difficult to navigate. They should either leave the traffic lights alone or use roundabouts with traffic lights.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 04, 2021, 09:02:14 AM
Pet Peeve:

Ohio always botches signs. They can't seem to keep the US and Ohio route shields straight! Do other states also botch their signs as much as Ohio does?

Two pics: U.S. 36 in Mount Vernon and in Nellie. The US 62 shield is also botched southbound going into New Albany, and I see a botched Ohio 161 shield (upgraded to U.S. 161) off of Hamilton Road. I see this a lot!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o898F3CHDz0OEi9tkcm-3tOtplsGJZ3l/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o898F3CHDz0OEi9tkcm-3tOtplsGJZ3l/view?usp=sharing)
There’s a reason why there’s so many Ohio examples in the “US/State routes mixup” thread.  :-D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 04, 2021, 09:43:09 PM
OH-674 magically became U.S. 674 at the U.S. 33 off-ramp in Canal Winchester.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 04, 2021, 09:57:08 PM
OH-674 magically became U.S. 674 at the U.S. 33 off-ramp in Canal Winchester.
North Carolina would appreciate that US route number there  :bigass:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 04, 2021, 10:02:31 PM
A photo of the OH 126 and US 22/3 roundabout project from their construction cameras online (facing north). It's starting to look like a roundabout! Also, signage choice on the bottom right is interesting, with an APL. Normally for roundabouts, I would've expected a diagrammatic.
(https://i.imgur.com/2i87oXN.png)

Not a fan of roundabouts at busy intersections. US 33/Ohio 161 is very difficult to navigate. They should either leave the traffic lights alone or use roundabouts with traffic lights.
Correction: original crossing between the two roads was a trumpet interchange.

As for the roundabout itself, the traffic count isn’t too high, as most EB 126 traffic exits to I-71 a mile west, and traffic on Montgomery Rd is already pretty slow as it’s next to the downtown area. Quoted directly from the project page:
Quote
The purpose of the roundabout project is to improve traffic patterns at the existing interchange of US 22 (Montgomery Road) and SR 126 (Ronald Reagan Cross County Highway) and along US 22 north of the interchange.

The City of Montgomery plans to redevelop the currently vacant area with office, retail, hotel, and residential uses that will require multiple access points along US 22 north of the interchange. The project will extend downtown Montgomery to the new intersection by providing a pedestrian-friendly environment.
Considering the planned mixed use development on the currently vacant east side of the junction, I think the roundabout is appropriate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 07, 2021, 08:26:24 PM
The trumpet interchange was also "temporary" in that the cross-county freeway was never completed through Indian Hills and out toward US 50. It wasn't all that pedestrian-friendly in an area that is rapidly densifying next to downtown. They had plans years ago for developments just to the north of the interchange at the old dealership but the redevelopment of the interchange and the additional acreage sealed the deal.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 07, 2021, 09:54:54 PM
Right, back then Glendale-Milford Road was OH-126 (instead of Cross County) and the idea was to run Cross County/Reagan all the way to US-50 so that the current 2-lane section of OH-126 would travel on the all-new 4-lane alignment and what is still non-Reagan 126 today would be downgraded to local control. But Indian Hill probably wouldn't want anything like that and possibly Milford as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on July 09, 2021, 12:58:18 PM
Pet Peeve:

Ohio always botches signs. They can't seem to keep the US and Ohio route shields straight! Do other states also botch their signs as much as Ohio does?

Ohio is by far the worst at that.  The most egregious one was when the sign for I-71 SOUTH at Williams Ave (Smith/Edwards interchange) was labeled as OH-71.  It lasted a good 2-3 years before it was corrected.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 19, 2021, 04:06:10 PM
I sent an email to ODOT about 2 weeks ago asking why three numbering designations (OH 161/37/16) is needed for the (mostly freeway) I-270 to Coshocton corridor. This is how they responded:
Quote
If there is an intersection of two like routes (e.g. two state routes) and one of the routes end at that intersection, then the lowered number route is continued and the higher numbered route ends.  In this instance, where SR 161 and SR 37 intersect; SR 161 “ends” since SR 37 is a higher priority route (i.e. the number is lower).
I didn't know about that rule. This may work better in states that reserves 2 digit routes for longer/more important routes (like Indiana, Florida, etc), but Ohio isn't one of them, and we have "major" state routes like OH 5 with countless 3 digit state routes that are longer than it. Also, my idea of putting OH 161 on a concurrency with OH 37 so it can end at OH 16 (therefore only needing two continuous numbering designations for the freeway corridor) isn't something new to the state either. See OH 32/125. If it went by the "lower numbered route have continuation at a terminus of one of the two routes" rule the state uses, that means OH 125 should be ending at the trumpet interchange where it intersects OH 32, and OH 32 should be the sole route continuing west to US 50.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on July 19, 2021, 09:24:22 PM
Move SR 16 off of Broad St and onto the New Albany – Granville freeway, and then you'd have just one number for the freeway, and the lower-numbered route on the more major highway link to Columbus
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 19, 2021, 09:41:45 PM
Move SR 16 off of Broad St and onto the New Albany – Granville freeway, and then you'd have just one number for the freeway, and the lower-numbered route on the more major highway link to Columbus
I suggested swapping 16 and 161 west of Granville so 16 is the single number designation on the freeway in fictional highways a couple of times, and in that email too. The person that responded to my email didn't respond to my swap idea, so I guess that renumbering state routes is more tedious nowadays compared to 50 years ago? Not sure if it's better for me to reply to the email with that and some other related questions, or just leave it there.

If "lower numbered route gets continuation at a terminus" is really that big of an issue, truncate this fictional 16 at OH 4, and have whatever is left of OH 161 west of there be OH 461 or OH 861.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 19, 2021, 10:11:59 PM
I doubt ODOT wants to hear about Fictional.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 19, 2021, 11:23:53 PM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on July 27, 2021, 10:14:42 PM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on July 28, 2021, 09:43:37 AM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
There's not. It's basically just a rebuild of the existing bridges and pavement, which is unfortunate. I hope they at least extend some of the acceleration lanes to allow for smoother merges.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 09:51:17 AM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
There's not. It's basically just a rebuild of the existing bridges and pavement, which is unfortunate. I hope they at least extend some of the acceleration lanes to allow for smoother merges.
Honestly, I’m not surprised that it’ll take 6 years to just rebuild overpasses and add new pavement, considering it took ODOT 3 years to finish just the I-71 overpass over Stewart Rd in Cincy.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on July 28, 2021, 11:38:12 AM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
There's not. It's basically just a rebuild of the existing bridges and pavement, which is unfortunate. I hope they at least extend some of the acceleration lanes to allow for smoother merges.

If it's made it this long there probably won't be any of that. It's bad form to demo much in historic downtowns these days. Zanesville is like a mini-Cumberland MD.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: I-55 on July 28, 2021, 10:17:52 PM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
There's not. It's basically just a rebuild of the existing bridges and pavement, which is unfortunate. I hope they at least extend some of the acceleration lanes to allow for smoother merges.
Honestly, I’m not surprised that it’ll take 6 years to just rebuild overpasses and add new pavement, considering it took ODOT 3 years to finish just the I-71 overpass over Stewart Rd in Cincy.

It took them almost my entire life to redo I-75 in Dayton. I've not been through there since 2019 so there may be more work underway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on July 29, 2021, 01:09:53 PM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
I'm not seeing anything about widening I-70 through there.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
There's not. It's basically just a rebuild of the existing bridges and pavement, which is unfortunate. I hope they at least extend some of the acceleration lanes to allow for smoother merges.
Honestly, I’m not surprised that it’ll take 6 years to just rebuild overpasses and add new pavement, considering it took ODOT 3 years to finish just the I-71 overpass over Stewart Rd in Cincy.

It took them almost my entire life to redo I-75 in Dayton. I've not been through there since 2019 so there may be more work underway.

There is - on the south side.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on August 02, 2021, 03:25:30 PM

Here's a video on the US 30 Corridor study from the state line to east of the city of Van Wert.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: lepidopteran on August 03, 2021, 01:26:37 AM
ODOT is getting ready to work on I-70 through Zanesville for most of the decade.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/93006
Looks like they're eliminating a bridge over an abandoned railroad at the far eastern end of the project.  Historically, there were two railroads there, but I think only one remained by the time the Interstate was built.  Even then, it looks like that was just a spur to serve a now-demolished factory located between Ceramic Rd. and Harris Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Alex on August 03, 2021, 10:11:44 AM
The new dogbone interchange joining I-475/U.S. 23 with Dorr Street in Springfield Township opened yesterday.

Dorr Street, I-475 interchange opening for traffic (https://nbc24.com/news/local/dorr-street-i-475-interchange-opening-for-traffic)

Quote
After nearly two years of construction, the Dorr Street interchange at Interstate Highway 475 is opening to the public.

Quote
The $46.7 million project began in November 2019 and added a third lane of travel in both north and southbound lanes for two miles of the I-475/U.S. 23 corridor in addition to the new interchange that has multiple roundabouts on Dorr Street, something leaders say will be safer for drivers as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JCinSummerfield on August 04, 2021, 01:47:56 PM
The new dogbone interchange joining I-475/U.S. 23 with Dorr Street in Springfield Township opened yesterday.

Dorr Street, I-475 interchange opening for traffic (https://nbc24.com/news/local/dorr-street-i-475-interchange-opening-for-traffic)

Quote
After nearly two years of construction, the Dorr Street interchange at Interstate Highway 475 is opening to the public.

I drove through there on Sunday, and was disappointed they weren't open yet.  My son will be using it daily to get to his job.  I know he's been looking forward to it opening.

Quote
The $46.7 million project began in November 2019 and added a third lane of travel in both north and southbound lanes for two miles of the I-475/U.S. 23 corridor in addition to the new interchange that has multiple roundabouts on Dorr Street, something leaders say will be safer for drivers as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on August 11, 2021, 12:59:33 AM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....

I was just learning about the Avenue of the Saints, the route from St. Louis to St. Paul. I have driven much of it before, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be a highway to connect the two cities. Because of the mishmash of numbers it carried (US 218 and US 18 among others), Iowa gave it a consistent number, Iowa 27. It is also known as Missouri 27 for much of the road in that state.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on August 11, 2021, 01:07:54 AM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....

I was just learning about the Avenue of the Saints, the route from St. Louis to St. Paul. I have driven much of it before, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be a highway to connect the two cities. Because of the mishmash of numbers it carried (US 218 and US 18 among others), Iowa gave it a consistent number, Iowa 27. It is also known as Missouri 27 for much of the road in that state.
There's also the CKC with MO/IL 110, except the Illinois section is more of providing a N-S expressway for the western part of the state than be the fastest route from Chicago to Kansas City. From the Circle Interchange in Chicago to the I-72/I-172 interchange, the CKC (IL 110) is 310 miles, while I-55/I-72 is 290 miles, not to mention that it's toll free, as IL 110 runs concurrently with the tolled I-88 for some portion.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on August 11, 2021, 09:27:47 AM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....

I was just learning about the Avenue of the Saints, the route from St. Louis to St. Paul. I have driven much of it before, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be a highway to connect the two cities. Because of the mishmash of numbers it carried (US 218 and US 18 among others), Iowa gave it a consistent number, Iowa 27. It is also known as Missouri 27 for much of the road in that state.

ODOT gave SR 32 its number to bring consistency to the corridor. Originally, it was SR 32 (SR 74 prior to Interstate renumbering), briefly SR 772 (?), then SR 124, SR 346, and US 50 to the West Virginia line. The SR 32 designation was eventually extended east overlapping SR 124 and replacing SR 346, and then later SR 32 was also multiplexed with US 50 east of Athens to provide a consistent designation for the corridor.

I agree that the numbering on the Columbus-to-Newark corridor is confusing. At the very least, ODOT should extend SR 161 east to meet SR 16. I could see maybe replacing SR 16 with SR 161 east to Coshocton but I don't know there is an appetite for that renumbering. You still have the corridor east of there continuing as US 36, US 250, and US 22 over to Steubenville, and I don't see a state route getting extended over that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SEWIGuy on August 11, 2021, 09:33:30 AM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....

I was just learning about the Avenue of the Saints, the route from St. Louis to St. Paul. I have driven much of it before, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be a highway to connect the two cities. Because of the mishmash of numbers it carried (US 218 and US 18 among others), Iowa gave it a consistent number, Iowa 27. It is also known as Missouri 27 for much of the road in that state.




The Avenue of the Saints was just a marketing gimmick to attract more road funding to the states in question.  There really wasn't a glaring need to have a dedicated corridor between the two cities, just like there wasn't one between Chicago and Kansas City.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on August 11, 2021, 04:45:37 PM
Franklin County & Pataskala (in Licking Co) are not going to give up any state mileage to sort out a numbering issue out near Granville.
Unless someone(s) want to payoff ODOT....

I was just learning about the Avenue of the Saints, the route from St. Louis to St. Paul. I have driven much of it before, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be a highway to connect the two cities. Because of the mishmash of numbers it carried (US 218 and US 18 among others), Iowa gave it a consistent number, Iowa 27. It is also known as Missouri 27 for much of the road in that state.




The Avenue of the Saints was just a marketing gimmick to attract more road funding to the states in question.  There really wasn't a glaring need to have a dedicated corridor between the two cities, just like there wasn't one between Chicago and Kansas City.

The Avenue of the Saints is a marketing gimmick (https://www.modot.org/us-route-61avenue-saints), granted. But as someone who lived in St Louis for about three decades, I disagree about the need. MSP and STL are the two largest metro areas between Chicago and Denver. I have a brother in Mpls and I noticed traffic increasing over the years which merited the improvement of the corridor to a non-stop four-lane highway. It's a lot different that the KC-Chicago corridor which was already well served with I-35/ US 36/ I-55 not to mention I-70/ 270/ 55 between the two cities. The Avenue of the Saints reduces the best four-lane routing from the I-55/39/90/94 corridor's 620 miles to 559 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Minneapolis,+MN/St.+Louis,+MO/@41.7173466,-95.6519779,6z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x52b333909377bbbd:0x939fc9842f7aee07!2m2!1d-93.2650108!2d44.977753!1m5!1m1!1s0x87d8b4a9faed8ef9:0xbe39eaca22bbe05b!2m2!1d-90.1994042!2d38.6270025?hl=en).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on August 14, 2021, 01:46:59 AM
Found this when browsing a list of ODOT Cincinnati area projects: A proposal for a potential new interchange at I-75 and Milliken Rd (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113647) (MM 26, between OH 129 and OH 63 interchanges).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on August 19, 2021, 01:49:09 PM

The Avenue of the Saints is a marketing gimmick (https://www.modot.org/us-route-61avenue-saints), granted. But as someone who lived in St Louis for about three decades, I disagree about the need. MSP and STL are the two largest metro areas between Chicago and Denver. I have a brother in Mpls and I noticed traffic increasing over the years which merited the improvement of the corridor to a non-stop four-lane highway. It's a lot different that the KC-Chicago corridor which was already well served with I-35/ US 36/ I-55 not to mention I-70/ 270/ 55 between the two cities. The Avenue of the Saints reduces the best four-lane routing from the I-55/39/90/94 corridor's 620 miles to 559 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Minneapolis,+MN/St.+Louis,+MO/@41.7173466,-95.6519779,6z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x52b333909377bbbd:0x939fc9842f7aee07!2m2!1d-93.2650108!2d44.977753!1m5!1m1!1s0x87d8b4a9faed8ef9:0xbe39eaca22bbe05b!2m2!1d-90.1994042!2d38.6270025?hl=en).

More important than any connection to St. Paul, it gives Quincy, IL and Hannibal, MO highway access and a more direct route to St. Louis, Des Moines & Ames (via US-34, US-63 and Iowa 163), Iowa City. Waterloo, Dubuque and Cedar Rapids. These are pretty relevant cities in the region that you would want to get to.

The wife is from Sioux Falls so I make the trip between Columbus and Sioux Falls every so often by car, with various detours to explore some of these towns. She has no patience for this so she flies.

Did I mention how much I hate all these inconsistent road numbers?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on August 25, 2021, 06:43:56 PM
Found these at a bar in Cincinnati.  The "exit 13" sign must be an I-75 relic but I'm unsure on where the others came from.

(https://i.imgur.com/bykgACKh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/8BHXNzRh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 25, 2021, 07:11:44 PM
These signs are mostly from Interstate 75's Exit 13 which is for Shepherd Lane in Lincoln Heights. Work wrapped up... this year? The generic exit signs could have been from the Newmann Way split or from any of the slip ramps in that area (https://goo.gl/maps/bk4qatcAApZqWapn9).

What bar was that? Northside Yacht Club?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on August 25, 2021, 08:40:39 PM
What bar was that? Northside Yacht Club?
That's the one.  Not going to ask how those signs found their way there...
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on August 25, 2021, 08:47:39 PM
Wherever (and whenever) ODOT sells old signs, let me know. I would want one for myself :sombrero:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 25, 2021, 09:13:52 PM
What bar was that? Northside Yacht Club?
That's the one.  Not going to ask how those signs found their way there...

Could have been discarded by the wayside but they are very heavy and larger than most would expect. I know folks have asked for signs before and received them at scrap value.

That bar was my old stomping grounds (under a different name). Lived right up the street - recognized the scenes!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on August 25, 2021, 09:50:03 PM
Are they aluminum?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 26, 2021, 10:05:20 AM
I would suspect so.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 07, 2021, 08:26:18 PM
On I-90/OH 2 in Sheffield there is a pair of bridges over a railroad track being worked on between OH 611 and OH 254. These will be the last pair of bridges to be redone between OH 611 and the I-90/OH 2 split in Elyria. All the others were made wide enough to be able to accommodate 3 lanes (and are currently carrying 2), so I would assume this pair will as well.
 
Now that the final pair of bridges are being made wide enough, I wonder how long it will be before the 6 laning of I-90 is extended further west from where it currently ends at OH 611 to the OH 2 split.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on September 14, 2021, 12:54:42 AM

ODOT gave SR 32 its number to bring consistency to the corridor. Originally, it was SR 32 (SR 74 prior to Interstate renumbering), briefly SR 772 (?), then SR 124, SR 346, and US 50 to the West Virginia line. The SR 32 designation was eventually extended east overlapping SR 124 and replacing SR 346, and then later SR 32 was also multiplexed with US 50 east of Athens to provide a consistent designation for the corridor.

I agree that the numbering on the Columbus-to-Newark corridor is confusing. At the very least, ODOT should extend SR 161 east to meet SR 16. I could see maybe replacing SR 16 with SR 161 east to Coshocton but I don't know there is an appetite for that renumbering. You still have the corridor east of there continuing as US 36, US 250, and US 22 over to Steubenville, and I don't see a state route getting extended over that.

Numbered routes don't have a lot of relevance through big cities these days along surface roads. They are only relevant to and from those cities and on highways. 161 should terminate at I-270 and the road that continues should be called Ohio 16 until it hits U.S. 36 at Coshocton or maybe even multiplex it with U.S. 36 until it hits I-77. Now that's a route worthy of having such a prime number as 16. Besides, aren't people trying to make this into an alternate route into Pittsburgh? I can see Ohio 16 all the way to Steubenville.

Who cares what Broad Street is called. Call it 16S or 816 until it hits Granville.

Since we are renumbering everything, US-33 is also irrelevant inside I-270. It should be routed along 315, 104 and 270 between the Southeast side and Dublin, but multiplexed because within the city having the different numbers (104 and 315) helps you figure out where there are traffic tie-ups.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 14, 2021, 01:05:41 AM
^ Columbus could pull an Indianapolis and route every number that's not I-70 and I-71 around I-270 if they wanted to  :spin:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on September 14, 2021, 01:17:44 AM
^ Columbus could pull an Indianapolis and route every number that's not I-70 and I-71 around I-270 if they wanted to  :spin:

Exactly what I was thinking, except they'd have to leave the freeways alone (US 33, Ohio 104, Ohio 161, Ohio 315). Just get rid of numbers on surface roads or give them some irrelevant number like Ohio 816 for Ohio 16). Just put up a US Shield around I-270 that says "ALL" and then the specific route number where you have to exit. I don't think it works with Ohio routes, but the US Routes could be simplified in this way.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 16, 2021, 02:14:02 AM
^ Columbus could pull an Indianapolis and route every number that's not I-70 and I-71 around I-270 if they wanted to  :spin:

Exactly what I was thinking, except they'd have to leave the freeways alone (US 33, Ohio 104, Ohio 161, Ohio 315). Just get rid of numbers on surface roads or give them some irrelevant number like Ohio 816 for Ohio 16). Just put up a US Shield around I-270 that says "ALL" and then the specific route number where you have to exit. I don't think it works with Ohio routes, but the US Routes could be simplified in this way.

Won't happen. ODOT funds the various cities for road care on the numbered routes. Those numbers mean the local officials can shift blame for any problem with them to the state.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on September 16, 2021, 02:21:30 PM
^ Columbus could pull an Indianapolis and route every number that's not I-70 and I-71 around I-270 if they wanted to  :spin:

Exactly what I was thinking, except they'd have to leave the freeways alone (US 33, Ohio 104, Ohio 161, Ohio 315). Just get rid of numbers on surface roads or give them some irrelevant number like Ohio 816 for Ohio 16). Just put up a US Shield around I-270 that says "ALL" and then the specific route number where you have to exit. I don't think it works with Ohio routes, but the US Routes could be simplified in this way.

Won't happen. ODOT funds the various cities for road care on the numbered routes. Those numbers mean the local officials can shift blame for any problem with them to the state.

Could be worse. I live in California where there may be a highway on the map but signs that you are on the highway are nonexistent within any incorporated community.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on September 16, 2021, 09:13:21 PM
^ Columbus could pull an Indianapolis and route every number that's not I-70 and I-71 around I-270 if they wanted to  :spin:

Exactly what I was thinking, except they'd have to leave the freeways alone (US 33, Ohio 104, Ohio 161, Ohio 315). Just get rid of numbers on surface roads or give them some irrelevant number like Ohio 816 for Ohio 16). Just put up a US Shield around I-270 that says "ALL" and then the specific route number where you have to exit. I don't think it works with Ohio routes, but the US Routes could be simplified in this way.

Won't happen. ODOT funds the various cities for road care on the numbered routes. Those numbers mean the local officials can shift blame for any problem with them to the state.

Some of these small towns couldn't afford to maintain their through streets without the state funds. If you see a state route end at the edge of a town there's your answer. There's no real reason other than that for OH-316 to enter Ashville on West Main St., hang a left on Long St. then end at OH-752 on the north edge of town.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on September 17, 2021, 04:43:10 PM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on September 17, 2021, 07:06:21 PM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road

For non-Interstates, originally numbered them based on county mileage rather than statewide.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on September 18, 2021, 04:48:21 AM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road

For non-Interstates, originally numbered them based on county mileage rather than statewide.
I’ve asked this same question. Elsewhere, the exit numbers match up with the mileage within the state. Here, it’s only within the county.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on September 18, 2021, 11:52:08 AM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road

For non-Interstates, originally numbered them based on county mileage rather than statewide.
I’ve asked this same question. Elsewhere, the exit numbers match up with the mileage within the state. Here, it’s only within the county.
Newer projects number things statewide. County-based numbers are generally getting replaced with state-based ones as part of larger sign replacement projects.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 18, 2021, 11:59:30 AM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road

For non-Interstates, originally numbered them based on county mileage rather than statewide.
I’ve asked this same question. Elsewhere, the exit numbers match up with the mileage within the state. Here, it’s only within the county.
Newer projects number things statewide. County-based numbers are generally getting replaced with state-based ones as part of larger sign replacement projects.
US 68's exit numbers in Springfield are new. The August 2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9213698,-83.8548939,3a,39.9y,345.8h,92.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swBbCV3AsV7waCNbr5tATQw!2e0!5s20190801T000000!7i16384!8i8192) GSV doesn't have exit numbers on US 68, while the August 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9213526,-83.8549367,3a,45.3y,351.34h,94.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKz9krLoYMnSgyQ2gnAZqbA!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192) GSV does. This is why some of us are questioning the use of county based exit numbers here, as recent non-interstate expressways and freeways had state based exit numbers added on.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on September 18, 2021, 03:05:27 PM
Can someone explain to me the exit numbers on US 68 from I-70 to the County Line Road? I thought that they were doing exit numbers from the mile marker.

Here are the exit numbers from south to north:
Exit 5A-B: I-70 (Columbus, Dayton)
Exit 7A-B: US 40/OH State Route 4 (Springfield, Dayton)
Exit 8: OH State Route 41 (Troy, Springfield)
Exit 12: OH State Route 334 East (River Road, Springfield)
Exit 15: County Line Road

For non-Interstates, originally numbered them based on county mileage rather than statewide.
I’ve asked this same question. Elsewhere, the exit numbers match up with the mileage within the state. Here, it’s only within the county.
Newer projects number things statewide. County-based numbers are generally getting replaced with state-based ones as part of larger sign replacement projects.
US 68's exit numbers in Springfield are new. The August 2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9213698,-83.8548939,3a,39.9y,345.8h,92.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swBbCV3AsV7waCNbr5tATQw!2e0!5s20190801T000000!7i16384!8i8192) GSV doesn't have exit numbers on US 68, while the August 2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9213526,-83.8549367,3a,45.3y,351.34h,94.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKz9krLoYMnSgyQ2gnAZqbA!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192) GSV does. This is why some of us are questioning the use of county based exit numbers here, as recent non-interstate expressways and freeways had state based exit numbers added on.
Oh, and OH State Route 4 also has new exit numbers west of Springfield... https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8960537,-83.9321776,3a,75y,226.15h,81.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQzbnFbuIHjIjl7UB37uJcg!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9071633,-83.9094401,3a,75y,44.49h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKbaW1M1LqP005Yzu8mlI-w!2e0!5s20210801T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 18, 2021, 03:11:52 PM
Probably a quirk with District 7 then. Note that both OH 4 and US 35 in Dayton doesn't have exit numbers yet, while if it was in literally any other ODOT district, it would've got exit numbers by now. Wouldn't be surprised to see county based mileage ones go up in the next few months for those two freeways too.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 19, 2021, 12:44:16 AM
I was digging through some ODOT files today, and found that there was a recent (from a year ago) alternative study for the NB I-75 alignment between the OH 126 (exit 10) and Shepherd (exit 13) interchanges. This alternative study would relocate NB I-75 to where the current SB alignment is, and remove the existing NB alignment, while still widening both directions to 4 lanes each. It would also include a new NB exit as a split diamond to Lock Street and Wyoming Ave. The SB side may also have this split diamond, though it’s more difficult with development nearby, and a new interchange to Millsdale to the south of the current interchange may be considered instead. Regardless, the current substandard SB interchange to Cooper Ave is planned to be removed. The decision on whether to use this alternative alignment or keep the current alignment with the split will be made in November of this year. Apparently, it's cheaper than keeping NB I-75 where it currently is, and widening it, and will make the geometry of the planned WB 126 to NB 75 ramp more smooth.

Link the the study: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/I-75%20Thru%20the%20Valley%20-%20Alternate%20Feasibility%20Report%20(July%202020).pdf
Small update from the above: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/I-75%20Thru%20the%20Valley%20-%20Study%20Update%20(April%202021).pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on September 20, 2021, 09:29:13 AM
Interesting. Now that the abandoned Stearns & Foster factory (which was located alongside the canal that later became southbound I-75) is demolished, it should make that project far easier.

I never realized that the transmission towers along northbound I-75 were a major reason as to why that alignment may not be considered as part of the Thru the Valley project. Relocating the lines would require a lot of demolitions and two years - at a large expense.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: josh79905 on September 21, 2021, 07:05:50 PM
Probably a quirk with District 7 then. Note that both OH 4 and US 35 in Dayton doesn't have exit numbers yet, while if it was in literally any other ODOT district, it would've got exit numbers by now. Wouldn't be surprised to see county based mileage ones go up in the next few months for those two freeways too.

It's not just District 7.  SR 11's exit numbering ends at the Columbiana/Mahoning County line, which are in different districts.  I actually asked someone at ODOT District 11 (where Columbiana county is in) about that a few years ago and they said it would change when the signs get replaced.  Well, the signs were replaced, but still no exit numbers. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 21, 2021, 10:24:51 PM
Interesting. Now that the abandoned Stearns & Foster factory (which was located alongside the canal that later became southbound I-75) is demolished, it should make that project far easier.

I never realized that the transmission towers along northbound I-75 were a major reason as to why that alignment may not be considered as part of the Thru the Valley project. Relocating the lines would require a lot of demolitions and two years - at a large expense.
Not sure if it was mentioned in that pdf, but that section with the transmission towers nearby is also on a viaduct, which obviously is more difficult to widen than a highway at ground level. Looking at GSV, yea, this is not a good place to widen a highway
(https://i.imgur.com/CkHsF8L.png)

I would definitely prefer the alternative of moving the NB lanes to the SB side over keeping it as is based on the conditions, but a side of me is sad to potentially see one of the widest medians in a urban area be gone. Now we'll wait for the decision...
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on September 22, 2021, 12:07:27 PM
Interesting. Now that the abandoned Stearns & Foster factory (which was located alongside the canal that later became southbound I-75) is demolished, it should make that project far easier.

I never realized that the transmission towers along northbound I-75 were a major reason as to why that alignment may not be considered as part of the Thru the Valley project. Relocating the lines would require a lot of demolitions and two years - at a large expense.
Not sure if it was mentioned in that pdf, but that section with the transmission towers nearby is also on a viaduct, which obviously is more difficult to widen than a highway at ground level. Looking at GSV, yea, this is not a good place to widen a highway

I would definitely prefer the alternative of moving the NB lanes to the SB side over keeping it as is based on the conditions, but a side of me is sad to potentially see one of the widest medians in a urban area be gone. Now we'll wait for the decision...

I went and looked at the plans after seeing the reference above, and I agree that moving the NB lanes back next to the SB lanes seems like the best alternative.   Part of me will be sad when the current NB lanes are removed, as my Dad and I would frequently go to Lockland/Reading to watch them get built.  IIRC, it took about 2 years (65-67) and I remember being surprised how quickly they opened after the work began.   Of course, I was only 11 so my understanding of project timelines was little to none!  This will be the second construction project I remember watching with my Dad that will be destroyed (the first was a medical arts building).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 28, 2021, 12:56:14 AM
An article out of C-bus that is not paywalled...
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/09/24/future-central-ohio-highway-projects.html
(list of projects that ODOT has promised money for, around Central Ohio, for the next couple of years)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on September 28, 2021, 01:48:32 AM
^ Nice to see that the I-71 and Big Walnut Rd interchange is pretty much confirmed now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 06, 2021, 05:12:40 AM
It's paywalled for me… :confused:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on October 07, 2021, 09:32:59 AM
^ yeah, same here

On a related note, here's the full TRAC list for 2022-25 (pdf)

https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/wcm/connect/gov/91bff71c-76cd-40d2-a740-c7952d5bf865/TRAC+Final+List-kg.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CONVERT_TO=url&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE.Z18_M1HGGIK0N0JO00QO9DDDDM3000-91bff71c-76cd-40d2-a740-c7952d5bf865-nMjyvx3
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on October 18, 2021, 10:58:01 AM
It is maddening that there are districts that are putting up new exit numbers that are county mileage.  It should be a statewide uniform thing at this point.
The newly rebuilt WB side of US 30 in Mansfield has mileage exit numbers that thankfully are the mileage to the Indiana line, as they should be.
https://goo.gl/maps/PHw4X4hoy3BkgWq76
I wonder if they will add numbers to the many exits east and west of there over time; there is no reason not to at least over time.  They would have to make sure to do them uniformly with the whole state mileage, not county mileage, though.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: I-55 on October 20, 2021, 12:03:56 AM
It is maddening that there are districts that are putting up new exit numbers that are county mileage.  It should be a statewide uniform thing at this point.
The newly rebuilt WB side of US 30 in Mansfield has mileage exit numbers that thankfully are the mileage to the Indiana line, as they should be.
https://goo.gl/maps/PHw4X4hoy3BkgWq76
I wonder if they will add numbers to the many exits east and west of there over time; there is no reason not to at least over time.  They would have to make sure to do them uniformly with the whole state mileage, not county mileage, though.

What's even worse is that some roads (notably the Appalachian Hwy) have both state based exits AND county based exits along the route. You can look at OH-32 at the Wellston exit for county mileage while in Athens it's state mileage (granted it's US-33's mileage).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: okroads on October 20, 2021, 04:17:16 PM
It is maddening that there are districts that are putting up new exit numbers that are county mileage.  It should be a statewide uniform thing at this point.
The newly rebuilt WB side of US 30 in Mansfield has mileage exit numbers that thankfully are the mileage to the Indiana line, as they should be.
https://goo.gl/maps/PHw4X4hoy3BkgWq76
I wonder if they will add numbers to the many exits east and west of there over time; there is no reason not to at least over time.  They would have to make sure to do them uniformly with the whole state mileage, not county mileage, though.

What's even worse is that some roads (notably the Appalachian Hwy) have both state based exits AND county based exits along the route. You can look at OH-32 at the Wellston exit for county mileage while in Athens it's state mileage (granted it's US-33's mileage).

Athens exit numbers were county mile marker based until 2019, when signs were replaced and exit numbers updated to reflect state mileage.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: roadman65 on November 10, 2021, 09:56:26 AM
Was I-75 originally four lanes where the Arlington Heights  neighborhood sits in the middle of the split freeway?  I was often wondering why the freeway splits there like I-24 in Monteagle Grade.  However that was done later as the WB freeway there was built from expansion of a four lane US 41 & 64 with EB being built for trucker safety years later.

I assume one carriage way predates the other one and no ROW to expand.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on November 10, 2021, 10:15:12 AM
Was I-75 originally four lanes where the Arlington Heights  neighborhood sits in the middle of the split freeway?  I was often wondering why the freeway splits there like I-24 in Monteagle Grade.  However that was done later as the WB freeway there was built from expansion of a four lane US 41 & 64 with EB being built for trucker safety years later.

I assume one carriage way predates the other one and no ROW to expand.
There is a plan to remove that split. I mentioned it 2 months ago in the other Ohio thread:
I was digging through some ODOT files today, and found that there was a recent (from a year ago) alternative study for the NB I-75 alignment between the OH 126 (exit 10) and Shepherd (exit 13) interchanges. This alternative study would relocate NB I-75 to where the current SB alignment is, and remove the existing NB alignment, while still widening both directions to 4 lanes each. It would also include a new NB exit as a split diamond to Lock Street and Wyoming Ave. The SB side may also have this split diamond, though it’s more difficult with development nearby, and a new interchange to Millsdale to the south of the current interchange may be considered instead. Regardless, the current substandard SB interchange to Cooper Ave is planned to be removed. The decision on whether to use this alternative alignment or keep the current alignment with the split will be made in November of this year. Apparently, it's cheaper than keeping NB I-75 where it currently is, and widening it, and will make the geometry of the planned WB 126 to NB 75 ramp more smooth.

Link the the study: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/I-75%20Thru%20the%20Valley%20-%20Alternate%20Feasibility%20Report%20(July%202020).pdf
Small update from the above: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/I-75%20Thru%20the%20Valley%20-%20Study%20Update%20(April%202021).pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on November 10, 2021, 03:34:41 PM
Was I-75 originally four lanes where the Arlington Heights  neighborhood sits in the middle of the split freeway?  I was often wondering why the freeway splits there like I-24 in Monteagle Grade.  However that was done later as the WB freeway there was built from expansion of a four lane US 41 & 64 with EB being built for trucker safety years later.

I assume one carriage way predates the other one and no ROW to expand.

That is correct.  What today are three southbound lanes, used to be two southbound and two northbound lanes, dating  back to the late 1940s or early 50s.  When lanes were added in 1967, the current northbound lanes were built where they are due to ROW availability.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 11, 2021, 09:31:46 AM

Plus one of the nation's biggest dragstrips sits at that intersection as well -- Norwalk Raceway Park. 


Which is now called Summit Motorsports Park. That's actually at the intersection of OH 18 and OH 601, but a lot of traffic to it uses the 20/601 intersection. There's also an R&L Carriers distribution center across from the dragstrip that generates a lot of truck traffic on 601.


I grew up not far from there and commuted daily through that intersection for years. We even lost one of my high school classmates due to an accident there. I don't know that the roundabout will fix things, and with heavy trucks going all four directions through that roundabout, it seems like that will be functionally worse.

Since you're familiar with the area, I'll mention that the bar on the corner, the Gulf Inn, will be bought by the state an torn down as part of this project.

So I just heard the other day that the Gulf Inn (NE corner of the intersection) is actually not being torn down, and that they found a way to install the roundabout while leaving it intact. The intersection has been closed for the construction for over a month now and should be open soon. It'll be interesting to see how they fit it in (maybe shifted it to the west a bit?)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: zzcarp on November 13, 2021, 12:59:25 AM
So I just heard the other day that the Gulf Inn (NE corner of the intersection) is actually not being torn down, and that they found a way to install the roundabout while leaving it intact. The intersection has been closed for the construction for over a month now and should be open soon. It'll be interesting to see how they fit it in (maybe shifted it to the west a bit?)

Interestingly enough, a friend shared a local's public Facebook post (https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10227364681641081&set=pcb.10227364687841236) with six pictures of the paving of the new roundabout. I've managed to embed them here.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51692014273_e9358c195f_c.jpg)
This is looking west across the roundabout. The West US 20 and North and South OH 601 directional signs are clearly visible. The Gulf Inn is in the lower right. It appears they relocated the powerlines nearly directly over the eaves of the building.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51692633265_70d1900c0c_c.jpg)
This picture looks north with NB OH 601 on the left. The Gulf Inn appears to have access from a new paved frontage road to the east and a gravel driveway to OH 601 on the west. Again, the north-south powerlines also cross the eaves of the bar.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51690945987_d52beb9574_c.jpg)
Looking west with the west half of the roundabout. It also appears the bridge over the creek was either expanded or totally reconstructed to accommodate the widening.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51690946077_f137b6e223_c.jpg)
A top-down picture of the roundabout with north to the top. Apparently only the northbound OH 601 movement through the roundabout gets the additional concrete berming for trucks that cannot make the turning radius. The other radii must be sufficient to keep the truck's wheels on the asphalt pavement.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51692633315_f0716eb98c_c.jpg)
A closer look at the paving on the east side of the roundabout. EB US 20 is to the right.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51690946052_022068a42e_c.jpg)
Looking east on US 20, and the new frontage road servicing the Gulf Inn is on the left and rejoins 20 near where the concrete median ends.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 14, 2021, 10:13:26 AM
Thanks for the pics!

This roundabout is now open, I actually drove through it last night, though it was after dark so I didn't get the best view.

OH 601 is part of the route NASA uses to transport test articles from Mansfield Lahm Airport to Plum Brook Station Neil A. Armstrong Test Facility south of Sandusky. That is presumably the reason why this roundabout's center has an extra wide concrete berm for the 601 north movement.

Here's an example of what needs to be able to navigate across there:
(this is the Orion space capsule, which did testing in Ohio 2 years ago, and is slated to launch around the Moon on the un-crewed Artemis I mission in February)

(https://media.wkyc.com/assets/WKYC/images/bb0e8b2d-bf0d-4791-a3c4-6a5c122f489e/bb0e8b2d-bf0d-4791-a3c4-6a5c122f489e_1140x641.png)

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on November 14, 2021, 02:21:18 PM
OH 601 is part of the route NASA uses to transport test articles from Mansfield Lahm Airport to Plum Brook Station Neil A. Armstrong Test Facility south of Sandusky. That is presumably the reason why this roundabout's center has an extra wide concrete berm for the 601 north movement.

That's very interesting - I was wondering why the roundabout was designed that way. Thank you for sharing!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 14, 2021, 07:40:23 PM
"See, the humans' circle monolith's unusual design is due to its proximity to a facility of their space program" - Martians
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 15, 2021, 12:03:28 PM
Is Ohio taking a leaf from Wisconsin's book and embarking on a similar roundabout-building binge?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on November 15, 2021, 01:59:41 PM
Is Ohio taking a leaf from Wisconsin's book and embarking on a similar roundabout-building binge?
Seems like it. See US 22/3 and OH 126, trumpet interchange recently converted into a roundabout.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on November 15, 2021, 03:52:54 PM
Is Ohio taking a leaf from Wisconsin's book and embarking on a similar roundabout-building binge?
Seems like it. See US 22/3 and OH 126, trumpet interchange recently converted into a roundabout.

Blue Ash already has a couple - and they are building 2 more on Hunt Road, one at Plainfield, and one in front of Kroger.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on November 15, 2021, 04:07:56 PM
I'm pretty sure this one at US 20 and OH 601 is the first roundabout in Huron County.

As for others in this area:

Erie County has one at the intersection of Bogart Rd and Campbell St in Perkins Township.
Sandusky County has one on US 6/OH 53 at the entrance to Terra State Community College on the west side of Fremont.

and there are a couple proposed on OH 53 in Ottawa County:
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/110859
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on November 15, 2021, 05:53:22 PM
Is Ohio taking a leaf from Wisconsin's book and embarking on a similar roundabout-building binge?
Seems like it. See US 22/3 and OH 126, trumpet interchange recently converted into a roundabout.

Blue Ash already has a couple - and they are building 2 more on Hunt Road, one at Plainfield, and one in front of Kroger.
Looking at the rendering of the Hunt-Plainfield roundabout, I'm not sure if turning one of the busiest intersections in Blue Ash to a roundabout would be a good idea. Start off by making the left turn green from NB Plainfield to WB Hunt longer. Every time I've driven in this intersection, I had to wait 2 cycles of green arrows before making my turn (for how short each one is, only allowing 3 cars or so to turn).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 15, 2021, 09:03:34 PM
Is Ohio taking a leaf from Wisconsin's book and embarking on a similar roundabout-building binge?
I thought it was a national trend, over the last decade.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on November 16, 2021, 10:14:18 AM
A new roundabout will be built soon at the foot of the westbound ramps for US 52 and OH 93 in Ironton. It has a high crash rate and will be part of improvements to make the interchange more pedestrian friendly.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on November 18, 2021, 03:01:36 PM
Looks like I-71 exit 19 (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/104844) is under construction again... Kind of wondering how they'll even fit a direct SB Mason Montgomery to SB 71 ramp, as there's too many businesses in the area where it would go.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: paulthemapguy on November 19, 2021, 09:16:26 AM
A new roundabout will be built soon at the foot of the westbound ramps for US 52 and OH 93 in Ironton. It has a high crash rate and will be part of improvements to make the interchange more pedestrian friendly.

Here's a map of the interchange: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5388416,-82.6769382,15.5z

The westbound ramps are both the cloverleaf-like arching ramps that meet at a surface intersection along Ohio 93.
I'm surprised they're putting a roundabout here, instead of converting one of the ramps to a diamond-type ramp, so you get half of a folded diamond on the north side of US52.  That's what they ACTUALLY need to do there.  The current configuration puts a weaving problem on the overpass, as offramp traffic crosses the same space as the onramp traffic.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on November 19, 2021, 02:41:33 PM
Looks like I-71 exit 19 (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/104844) is under construction again... Kind of wondering how they'll even fit a direct SB Mason Montgomery to SB 71 ramp, as there's too many businesses in the area where it would go.

I could not figure out how that picture relates to I-71 at Fields Ertel.   I think it is actually a picture of I-270 looking westbound at US-23 in Worthington.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 19, 2021, 04:35:27 PM
^It is, and it is old.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on November 25, 2021, 01:51:55 PM
I don't know if this photo is going to come through because it's on facebook, but this might be a good idea for ODOT to employ like in situations like Ohio 15 where it really should be numbered US 23 but can't be because US 23 goes off into a different direction.

"US 23A LINK" would be a good solution.

https://facebook.com/photo.php/?fbid=10227622680896644

(https://facebook.com/photo.php/?fbid=10227622680896644)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Molandfreak on November 25, 2021, 06:29:05 PM
I don't know if this photo is going to come through because it's on facebook, but this might be a good idea for ODOT to employ like in situations like Ohio 15 where it really should be numbered US 23 but can't be because US 23 goes off into a different direction.

"US 23A LINK" would be a good solution.

https://facebook.com/photo.php/?fbid=10227622680896644

(https://facebook.com/photo.php/?fbid=10227622680896644)
Just move US 23 there, then US 223 is right there to take over the old route.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on February 14, 2022, 09:49:53 PM
h/t Mark Phillips for the link

Chesapeake Bypass Phase 2 Virtual Public Open House (https://www.publicinput.com/N4602?fbclid=IwAR29kQTsvIwvsr-OvGW-mMskkVgqfGC_46sMdE36-wS4w09owBsJyzNDyfI)

Map: https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/3a17350a-b6a4-4349-86ea-668529c3673b

The Chesapeake Bypass project has been ongoing for twenty years. The ultimate plan for the Chesapeake Bypass project is a 4-lane, limited access highway between SR 527/SR 7 in Chesapeake and existing SR 7 in Rome Township. Right-of-way (R/W) plans have been completed and property acquisition is underway. Due to limited funding,  construction is being completed in phases:

- Phase 1: This phase included construction of a new 4.7-mile, 2-lane limited access highway from SR 775 in Proctorville to existing SR 7 in Rome Township, as well as a connection between the 31st Street Bridge (East Huntington Bridge) and existing 775 in Proctorville.

- Phase 2: This phase involves construction of the western half of the Chesapeake Bypass, which extends 5.2 miles between the SR 527/SR 7 interchange in Chesapeake east to SR 775 in Proctorville. Phase 2 includes construction of a 2-lane, limited access highway, with some 4-lane sections and truck climbing lanes. In addition, a full interchange will be constructed at SR 775. Once funding becomes available, Phase 2 will be constructed in two subphases:

- Phase 2A: This phase includes tree clearing, and construction of earthwork and drainage. This phase is scheduled to begin in 2024 and end in 2025, dependent on funding.

- Phase 2B: This phase includes construction of bridges and roadway pavement. This phase is scheduled to begin in 2028 and end in 2030, dependent on funding. There will be at least 3 years between Phases 2A and 2B to allow for soil settlement.

The construction of the remaining portions of the 4-lane Chesapeake Bypass will occur in phases:

- Phase 3: This phase includes construction of the remaining westbound lanes and completion of the 4-lane highway between the SR 527/SR 7 interchange in Chesapeake east to SR 775 in Proctorville.

- Phase 4: This phase includes construction of two westbound lanes for the length of Phase 1B between SR 775 in Proctorville east to existing SR 7 in Rome Township.
Funding has not been committed for Phases 3 & 4.

--

"There will be at least 3 years between Phases 2A and 2B to allow for soil settlement."

- This is interesting. It will be different than the fast-tracked Portsmouth bypass which has experienced a lot of settling issues throughout its entire length, and much of US 35 through West Virginia, which is nicknamed the "Bump and Dip Freeway" for obvious reasons. I know that I-69 has surcharge dumped on settling segments, and I assume the same will be done for SR 7.

- I didn't anticipate on so many hills requiring truck climbing lanes on the two-lane segments, but it's good that it's being built on it considering that it could be another 20-30 years before the entire route is four-laned.

- The roundabout at SR 243 looks to be temporary. When it's four-laned, I wonder if it will just be a t-intersection?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on February 21, 2022, 07:02:13 AM
Story on Columbus’s massive growth.

https://www.governing.com/community/america-discovers-columbus-ohio
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 21, 2022, 10:12:20 AM
Story on Columbus’s massive growth.

https://www.governing.com/community/america-discovers-columbus-ohio
Written by Aaron Renn. Maybe the second most famous alum from MTR, after Steve Anderson.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on February 21, 2022, 10:22:46 AM
Story on Columbus’s massive growth.

https://www.governing.com/community/america-discovers-columbus-ohio
Written by Aaron Renn. Maybe the second most famous alum from MTR, after Steve Anderson.
*considers how post m.t.r. fame would be measured*
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on February 21, 2022, 10:48:51 AM
An article out of C-bus that is not paywalled...
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/09/24/future-central-ohio-highway-projects.html
(list of projects that ODOT has promised money for, around Central Ohio, for the next couple of years)

I have no adblocker yet it keeps saying I do. So a little hacking around with coding and I got the list:

- A $38.4 million overhaul at Brice Road and I-270. The project would reconfigure the north half of the Brice Road interchange, construct westbound ramps to I-270 and build the south half of the Brice Road interchange.

- A $14 million update to U.S. Route 23 at the I-270 interchange at Rathmell Road, which will remove two cloverleaf ramps, construct two new signalized ramps and add a third lane to the northbound portion of U.S. Route 23.

(I think this keeps the free-flowing components for US 23 from the south, so you shouldn't encounter a traffic signal. This is in line with the eventual conversation of US 23 south of I-270 into a freeway.

- An $11.4 million update to U.S. Route 33 and Pickerington Road in Fairfield County.

(Not an interchange?)

- A $6 million project to address congestion and safety on I-71 between I-270 and I-670.

- A $5 million interchange improvement at state Route 256 and Taylor Road in Fairfield County.

- A $4.9 million widening of Alum Creek Drive near state Route 317, which will add a third through lane in each direction to the current road, a sidewalk on one side of the road and a shared-use path on the other.

- A $3 million new interchange at Big Walnut Road in Delaware County to "link the primary local east-west road corridor in the area" to I-71, according to ODOT's website.

- A $2 million corridor study of state Route 23 to identify the best way to improve the link between Toledo and Columbus in Delaware County
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on February 21, 2022, 08:33:46 PM
Story on Columbus’s massive growth.

https://www.governing.com/community/america-discovers-columbus-ohio
Written by Aaron Renn. Maybe the second most famous alum from MTR, after Steve Anderson.

He is a user on like every urbanist and infrastructure forum/blog.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on February 21, 2022, 09:00:46 PM


- An $11.4 million update to U.S. Route 33 and Pickerington Road in Fairfield County.

(Not an interchange?)



Alternative #2 was chosen by ODOT but its price tag is $40 million (edit: now it's up to $50 million). So I don't know where the other $39 million is coming from or what happened there.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15117.msg2563210#msg2563210 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=15117.msg2563210#msg2563210)

Alternatives that were under consideration including the winner:

https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/b9a3f7e6-2cc1-4029-b3a3-2d50d6da8d53 (https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/b9a3f7e6-2cc1-4029-b3a3-2d50d6da8d53)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on February 22, 2022, 09:32:50 AM
Could be right-of-way purchases. That's a lot of land needed for that setup.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Tom958 on February 22, 2022, 07:40:55 PM
(https://www.publicinput.com/img/oslsns2rcjb1ie9ohfxb_1552_1200.JPG)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on February 28, 2022, 12:52:31 PM
- A $14 million update to U.S. Route 23 at the I-270 interchange at Rathmell Road, which will remove two cloverleaf ramps, construct two new signalized ramps and add a third lane to the northbound portion of U.S. Route 23.

(I think this keeps the free-flowing components for US 23 from the south, so you shouldn't encounter a traffic signal. This is in line with the eventual conversation of US 23 south of I-270 into a freeway.


I think they're eliminating the EB→NB and WB→SB loops and replacing those with left turns at signals. But the conversion of 23 to a freeway there is still probably a decade or two off at least, so there won't be much of a case for maintaining a free-flowing WB→SB connection in the near future. Plus, eliminating that loop will allow 3 WB through lanes on 270 without widening the bridge and I'd be surprised if ODOT doesn't do that. My biggest lament about this project is that the current WB→NB ramp is surrounded by thick vegetation, giving it a charming aspect that isn't found on roads of lesser age and will surely be lost in the interchange reconfiguration.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 28, 2022, 05:04:33 PM
Ultimately, US 23 should be completely freeway both north and south of Columbus, even if it is never becomes part of the Interstate System.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on February 28, 2022, 05:33:46 PM
Ultimately, US 23 should be completely freeway both north and south of Columbus, even if it is never becomes part of the Interstate System.

never heard anyone talking about 23 freeway south of 270. where would it end?  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on February 28, 2022, 05:41:37 PM
Ultimately, US 23 should be completely freeway both north and south of Columbus, even if it is never becomes part of the Interstate System.

never heard anyone talking about 23 freeway south of 270. where would it end?  :hmmm:
US 35 in Chillicothe would be a good southern end point for a future new freeway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 28, 2022, 05:43:12 PM
Likely at the northern terminus of OH 823, but if traffic demands don't warrant it, I could regulate the portion of US 23 south of Columbus to Fictional Highways.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on February 28, 2022, 07:10:23 PM
Ultimately, US 23 should be completely freeway both north and south of Columbus, even if it is never becomes part of the Interstate System.

never heard anyone talking about 23 freeway south of 270. where would it end?  :hmmm:

There are a few interchanges planned south of I-270 toward South Bloomfield, and some time back, I found plans online for the east-side South Bloomfield bypass that would be entirely controlled access through a few interchanges. There is nothing planned south of there, although the route could really benefit from additional driveway closures and shoulder additions.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on March 04, 2022, 03:59:26 AM
- A $14 million update to U.S. Route 23 at the I-270 interchange at Rathmell Road, which will remove two cloverleaf ramps, construct two new signalized ramps and add a third lane to the northbound portion of U.S. Route 23.

(I think this keeps the free-flowing components for US 23 from the south, so you shouldn't encounter a traffic signal. This is in line with the eventual conversation of US 23 south of I-270 into a freeway.


I think they're eliminating the EB→NB and WB→SB loops and replacing those with left turns at signals. But the conversion of 23 to a freeway there is still probably a decade or two off at least, so there won't be much of a case for maintaining a free-flowing WB→SB connection in the near future. Plus, eliminating that loop will allow 3 WB through lanes on 270 without widening the bridge and I'd be surprised if ODOT doesn't do that. My biggest lament about this project is that the current WB→NB ramp is surrounded by thick vegetation, giving it a charming aspect that isn't found on roads of lesser age and will surely be lost in the interchange reconfiguration.
Those are the two ramps that frequently flood, as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on March 06, 2022, 11:34:32 AM
Ultimately, US 23 should be completely freeway both north and south of Columbus, even if it is never becomes part of the Interstate System.

never heard anyone talking about 23 freeway south of 270. where would it end?  :hmmm:

The freeway upgrade is in MORPC's long-term transportation plan from I-270 to the FRA–PIC border (which is also the MPO's southern boundary). I don't regularly follow the MPOs south of here, but I imagine they aspire to eventually achieve full freeway conditions down to Chillicothe. South of there, the consensus seems to be current conditions are and will remain adequate for the foreseeable future, aside from the occasional Waverly bypass proposal that doesn't get far.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 06, 2022, 10:01:13 PM
Between the New Boston coke plant and Ashland AK Steel closures, the Piketon A-Plant cutbacks and the two steel mills on US-52 east of Portsmouth that never materialized, interest in Ohio US-23 upgrades seen in the past dried up significantly -- especially south of Circleville.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 06, 2022, 10:21:54 PM
Between the New Boston coke plant and Ashland AK Steel closures, the Piketon A-Plant cutbacks and the two steel mills on US-52 east of Portsmouth that never materialized, interest in Ohio US-23 upgrades seen in the past dried up significantly -- especially south of Circleville.
And looking at AADT data, it seems like that the most usage for US 23 south of Columbus is to connect to US 35 (for points southeast) at Chillicothe. So I don't really see a need to upgrade US 23 south of Chillicothe anyways.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on March 07, 2022, 03:39:38 AM
And looking at AADT data, it seems like that the most usage for US 23 south of Columbus is to connect to US 35 (for points southeast) at Chillicothe. So I don't really see a need to upgrade US 23 south of Chillicothe anyways.

You guys here are in love with US 35, and I admit, that's a nice drive. But there is nothing along there. Absolutely nothing. You are capturing a lot more population, not to mention commerce, if you use the original route. US 35 makes sense if you're only concerned about Columbus traffic. But if you want to pick up and serve traffic along the way, the original route is more practical.

The original route picks up Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton and Huntington and all the business and traffic generated along that route. I think that's a fairly significant reason to go with the original plan. Plus, if the idea is to extend I-74, you lose too much mileage going backward if you have to go back up to us 35 to go south.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 07, 2022, 11:17:25 AM
I think the increased interest in US-35 was after the 4-lane upgrades that took place in the 2000s which made it more attractive for those driving to Charleston and points further south like Charlotte. Before a lot of that work was done more people were taking I-70 to I-77 then going south from there so that they didn't have to do a bunch of 2-lane on such a long trip even if it still took less time.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on March 07, 2022, 12:14:10 PM
And looking at AADT data, it seems like that the most usage for US 23 south of Columbus is to connect to US 35 (for points southeast) at Chillicothe. So I don't really see a need to upgrade US 23 south of Chillicothe anyways.

You guys here are in love with US 35, and I admit, that's a nice drive. But there is nothing along there. Absolutely nothing. You are capturing a lot more population, not to mention commerce, if you use the original route. US 35 makes sense if you're only concerned about Columbus traffic. But if you want to pick up and serve traffic along the way, the original route is more practical.

The original route picks up Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton and Huntington and all the business and traffic generated along that route. I think that's a fairly significant reason to go with the original plan. Plus, if the idea is to extend I-74, you lose too much mileage going backward if you have to go back up to us 35 to go south.

Traffic splits fairly evenly heading south/east from Chillicothe on US 23 versus US 35.

Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton, and Huntington already have a four-lane route to Columbus (US 23) that adequate serves its traffic. There's probably a justification to be made for a Waverly bypass, but with traffic counts in the 13K-21K range south of Chillicothe, there's no need for a full freeway in that section.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 07, 2022, 12:29:01 PM
And looking at AADT data, it seems like that the most usage for US 23 south of Columbus is to connect to US 35 (for points southeast) at Chillicothe. So I don't really see a need to upgrade US 23 south of Chillicothe anyways.

You guys here are in love with US 35, and I admit, that's a nice drive. But there is nothing along there. Absolutely nothing. You are capturing a lot more population, not to mention commerce, if you use the original route. US 35 makes sense if you're only concerned about Columbus traffic. But if you want to pick up and serve traffic along the way, the original route is more practical.

The original route picks up Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton and Huntington and all the business and traffic generated along that route. I think that's a fairly significant reason to go with the original plan. Plus, if the idea is to extend I-74, you lose too much mileage going backward if you have to go back up to us 35 to go south.
US 35 picks up traffic from Dayton, Cincinnati and Columbus to WV, southern VA and the Carolinas. Dayton is directly on US 35, Columbus via US 23, and Cincinnati via either I-71 (from northern suburbs) or OH 32 (from downtown or eastern suburbs). Not to mention that it's part of the fastest route from other parts of the Midwest to the Carolinas too, like form Detroit (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Detroit,+MI/Charlotte,+NC/@39.3855216,-84.4988407,7.08z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x8824ca0110cb1d75:0x5776864e35b9c4d2!2m2!1d-83.0457538!2d42.331427!1m5!1m1!1s0x88541fc4fc381a81:0x884650e6bf43d164!2m2!1d-80.8431267!2d35.2270869!3e0), Chicago (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chicago,+IL/Charlotte,+NC/@39.3436589,-84.1579133,7.72z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x880e2c3cd0f4cbed:0xafe0a6ad09c0c000!2m2!1d-87.6297982!2d41.8781136!1m5!1m1!1s0x88541fc4fc381a81:0x884650e6bf43d164!2m2!1d-80.8431267!2d35.2270869!3e0) or Minneapolis (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Minneapolis,+MN/Charlotte,+NC/@39.1667702,-83.881231,7.63z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x52b333909377bbbd:0x939fc9842f7aee07!2m2!1d-93.2650108!2d44.977753!1m5!1m1!1s0x88541fc4fc381a81:0x884650e6bf43d164!2m2!1d-80.8431267!2d35.2270869!3e0) for example. And it's an even better route now that WV finished the last 4 lane section a few months ago. This is why I'm more interested in it for long-distance traffic than a route that goes out of the way through small cities in southern Ohio and western WV.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 07, 2022, 03:40:22 PM
I've been looking at the STIP for the first time in a while and noticed this:

SAN US 20 20.80 roundabout
Termini: the easterly interchange (US-20/State St.) on the Fremont By-Pass
Description: A safety funded project to reconfigure the easterly interchange (US-20/State St.) on the Fremont By-Pass to a roundabout. The
intersection of CR 198 & CR 199 with US 20 will also be closed.

Did some searching and found this video from 2019 which shows the diagrams of the proposals at time:
https://www.wtol.com/article/news/local/us-20-safety-alternatives/512-1e9bf01a-d3fa-48e6-a440-2a1aabb3f987

...so damn, if the roundabout is really what they are going with, eastbound US 20 will have to go through a roundabout right after the speed limit drops from 65 to 60 (westbound gets lanes to bypass the roundabout)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on March 07, 2022, 07:44:11 PM
How is there that many accidents for that interchange set up? The west end - with an intersection thrown into the middle of it, looks more suspect. I don't mind roundabouts, either, but from a 65 MPH freeway? That seems like what is proposed for the Chesapeake bypass - a limited access 55 MPH expressway with a roundabout dead center.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 07, 2022, 08:01:56 PM
The accidents occur at the CR 229/198 intersection on US 20 just north of the interchange. Since there is no eastbound State St to westbound US 20 movement, traffic that wants to go that direction must use CR 198/229 and turn left onto 20 (there are trailblazers directing this move.) This project would eliminate that intersection altogether and make it possible to turn left at grade from State to US 20.

Going eastbound on US 20, the speed limit drops from 65 to 60 between the OH 412 exit and the CR 229/198 intersection, as that intersection marks the end of the full freeway portion of the bypass. I wonder if they will move that drop farther back and/or decrease the speed limit to 55 for the stretch approaching the roundabout.

For the record I think this roundabout is a crazy stupid idea.

Edit to add, based on the funding listed in the STIP, this is planned to be a 2024 project.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on March 07, 2022, 10:19:10 PM
How is there that many accidents for that interchange set up? The west end - with an intersection thrown into the middle of it, looks more suspect. I don't mind roundabouts, either, but from a 65 MPH freeway? That seems like what is proposed for the Chesapeake bypass - a limited access 55 MPH expressway with a roundabout dead center.

How is that really any different from the current traffic signal another 1/2 mile farther along (at Shock Road/OH-19) from a 65 mph freeway?

Separate note:  The bridge carrying the westbound US-20 exit to State Street over the eastbound lanes looks fairly new.  That's a big waste of money and material.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 08, 2022, 12:00:15 PM
The roundabouts at US-33 and OH-664 in Logan seem to be working out fine.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on March 08, 2022, 12:04:38 PM
How is there that many accidents for that interchange set up? The west end - with an intersection thrown into the middle of it, looks more suspect. I don't mind roundabouts, either, but from a 65 MPH freeway? That seems like what is proposed for the Chesapeake bypass - a limited access 55 MPH expressway with a roundabout dead center.

How is that really any different from the current traffic signal another 1/2 mile farther along (at Shock Road/OH-19) from a 65 mph freeway?
The problem is with EB drivers going from the bypass directly into the roundabout
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on March 08, 2022, 01:29:45 PM
The roundabouts at US-33 and OH-664 in Logan seem to be working out fine.

Those are on ramps.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on March 08, 2022, 02:11:48 PM
How is there that many accidents for that interchange set up? The west end - with an intersection thrown into the middle of it, looks more suspect. I don't mind roundabouts, either, but from a 65 MPH freeway? That seems like what is proposed for the Chesapeake bypass - a limited access 55 MPH expressway with a roundabout dead center.

How is that really any different from the current traffic signal another 1/2 mile farther along (at Shock Road/OH-19) from a 65 mph freeway?
The problem is with EB drivers going from the bypass directly into the roundabout

I understand what you are saying.  My point is that EB drivers currently go from the bypass directly into a traffic signal.  I don't think adding a roundabout only 1/2 mile before the signal adds any additional hazard.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on March 08, 2022, 04:56:27 PM

Traffic splits fairly evenly heading south/east from Chillicothe on US 23 versus US 35.

Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton, and Huntington already have a four-lane route to Columbus (US 23) that adequate serves its traffic. There's probably a justification to be made for a Waverly bypass, but with traffic counts in the 13K-21K range south of Chillicothe, there's no need for a full freeway in that section.

If need along any given point is your metric, then you could disqualify any project from being a freeway. The object is connectivity. Where does Columbus and Dayton want to connect in the long run? The several hundred thousand people along the river or Bob Evans in Gallipolis?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on March 08, 2022, 06:13:59 PM

Traffic splits fairly evenly heading south/east from Chillicothe on US 23 versus US 35.

Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton, and Huntington already have a four-lane route to Columbus (US 23) that adequate serves its traffic. There's probably a justification to be made for a Waverly bypass, but with traffic counts in the 13K-21K range south of Chillicothe, there's no need for a full freeway in that section.

If need along any given point is your metric, then you could disqualify any project from being a freeway. The object is connectivity. Where does Columbus and Dayton want to connect in the long run? The several hundred thousand people along the river or Bob Evans in Gallipolis?

Need, largely determined by traffic demand, is how road construction gets prioritized. 4-lane expressways like the existing US 23 and US 52 provide a high level of connectivity. If you're going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a new facility, you'd better have a pretty good reason why the current one is inadequate.

Considering that Portsmouth, Ironton, Ashland, and Huntington are depopulating and in economic decline, I doubt that freeway access to them is really all that high on the priority list for Dayton or Columbus.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 08, 2022, 06:37:22 PM

Traffic splits fairly evenly heading south/east from Chillicothe on US 23 versus US 35.

Portsmouth, Ashland, Ironton, and Huntington already have a four-lane route to Columbus (US 23) that adequate serves its traffic. There's probably a justification to be made for a Waverly bypass, but with traffic counts in the 13K-21K range south of Chillicothe, there's no need for a full freeway in that section.

If need along any given point is your metric, then you could disqualify any project from being a freeway. The object is connectivity. Where does Columbus and Dayton want to connect in the long run? The several hundred thousand people along the river or Bob Evans in Gallipolis?
This may sound new to you, but drivers can change from one highway number to another using these things called interchanges, connecting them to places on another highway.

Look at the cities beyond US 35 for why it got upgraded to 4 lanes, not just what’s on it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 08, 2022, 06:44:41 PM
On the topic of roundabouts, there are a lot of them in the works in Ohio. I did a ctrl+F for "roundabout" in the STIP document and thought my laptop was going to crash for a second while the search loaded.

Some noteworthy ones planned for the next 1-3 years in northern Ohio that caught my eye:

OH 18 and OH 601 east of Norwalk. This is right next to Summit Motorsports park and an R&L Trucking distribution center and is just down the road from the previously discussed roundabout at US 20 and OH 601 that opened last year.

US 250 and OH 60 on the north side of Ashland. This is at the northwest end of Ashland's 2 lane bypass. There's also a couple planned on US 42 further northeast of Ashland at OH 89 and OH 302.

US 6 at Cedar Point Dr in Sandusky. This one will be interesting as it butts right up against Pipe Creek/Castaway Bay as well as some local business parking lots including the Thirsty Pony/Cedar Lanes complex. This intersection handles the vast majority of traffic going to and from Cedar Point. 

OH 4 and OH 99 about a mile north of the Ohio Turnpike. OH 4 gets very busy in the summer with Cedar Point and general Shores and Islands area traffic.

OH 18 and OH 511 in the unincorporated village of Brighton. Two churches are there across road from each other, but sit far enough back that it shouldn't be a problem. 

OH 163 and North Shore Blvd/Englebeck Rd west of Marblehead. North Shore is the main road going back into Lakeside.

OH 113 and Baumhart Rd, 1 mile south of Baumhart's Ohio Turnpike exit.

SR 83 and Chestnut Ridge Rd in North Ridgeville. There's a nice bar there called 83 and Chestnut that I hope survives.

US 224 and OH 587 between Tiffin and Findlay.

OH 98 and OH 597 north of Waldo.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on March 08, 2022, 09:57:46 PM

Look at the cities beyond US 35 for why it got upgraded to 4 lanes, not just what’s on it.

And that's exactly my point. Connecting Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati to Huntington/Ashland/Ironton seems like it wouldn't be a bad idea. US 35 is a good road to Charleston, but you have to backtrack to get to Huntington.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on March 08, 2022, 10:18:20 PM
There just isn't demand. OH 7 south of Gallipolis drops to under 2,300 VPD, and the initial phases of the Chesapeake-Proctorville bypass are being built to two-lane limited-access standards with the ultimate goal of building out to four lanes with interchanges - but that's mostly because the area is a bedroom community for Huntington.

On the West Virginia side, WV 2 drops to around 3,500 to 4,500, depending on how close to Huntington or Point Pleasant you are. The new Nucor plant will add some traffic but not enough to warrant four lanes. There are long-range "plans" to widen all of Route 2 to four lanes but that's gotten nowhere except for at its northern reaches. Parts of the route in Cabell County are built on a four-lane right-of-way but that's about it.

I live in the Tri-State area and frequently go to Columbus. US 23 is the preferred route and it takes about 2.25 hours via US 23 and OH 823. With the Portsmouth bypass in place, there is no need to traverse steep and winding two-lane roads. If I'm going to Dayton, I take US 23 and US 35 as those are essentially all freeways or expressways. Cincinnati? US 23 to the AA Highway (2 hours) or US 23 to OH 73-32 (2.25 hours) or OH 32 (2.5 hours).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sprjus4 on March 09, 2022, 12:03:43 AM

Look at the cities beyond US 35 for why it got upgraded to 4 lanes, not just what’s on it.

And that's exactly my point. Connecting Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati to Huntington/Ashland/Ironton seems like it wouldn't be a bad idea. US 35 is a good road to Charleston, but you have to backtrack to get to Huntington.
US-23 is just as adequate of a route as US-35 is. Why wouldn't one just take that?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on March 09, 2022, 11:22:53 AM
How is there that many accidents for that interchange set up? The west end - with an intersection thrown into the middle of it, looks more suspect. I don't mind roundabouts, either, but from a 65 MPH freeway? That seems like what is proposed for the Chesapeake bypass - a limited access 55 MPH expressway with a roundabout dead center.

How is that really any different from the current traffic signal another 1/2 mile farther along (at Shock Road/OH-19) from a 65 mph freeway?
The problem is with EB drivers going from the bypass directly into the roundabout

I understand what you are saying.  My point is that EB drivers currently go from the bypass directly into a traffic signal.  I don't think adding a roundabout only 1/2 mile before the signal adds any additional hazard.
I know there's a light not far beyond the proposed roundabout EB. However, a stop light may force a driver to slow down. A roundabout forces a driver to slow down. Not a big deal for drivers in cars. But for trucks, it's a big deal. It's not a problem for EB trucks as there is a bypass for the roundabout for drivers bypassing Fremont.

Also, the speed limit is 65 mph EB going into the roundabout. It's 60 mph WB (and that's after the stoplight and only for drivers entering Fremont). Not much difference, but every little bit helps. Especially as Ohio drivers are likely to know 65 is the typical expressway speed and any lower speed could mean obstacles like stop lights.

I agree that it's not much distinction. I've dealt with roundabouts  (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3140852,-88.0959939,3a,75y,179.72h,76.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sd4BFRQUWsDcQmIserV417A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)in the middle of nowhere (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2118853,-88.1542823,3a,75y,357.19h,80.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_URjyszU010Wf0_USSCyLg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) when I've gone back to visit relatives in Wisconsin. I didn't like them either. And I usually like roundabouts.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sprjus4 on March 09, 2022, 12:03:26 PM
^ Except for highways in the eastern part of the state, which may be wide open expressways with little obstacles easily traversable at 70+ mph, however are all capped at 60 mph simply due to low traffic at-grade crossings.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on March 09, 2022, 01:50:50 PM

OH 163 and North Shore Blvd/Englebeck Rd west of Marblehead. North Shore is the main road going back into Lakeside.


I'm glad to see they are finally doing something for that intersection.  I personally had been thinking a  signal and dedicated turn lanes, but I think a roundabout will work well there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 10, 2022, 10:15:11 AM
On the topic of roundabouts, there are a lot of them in the works in Ohio. I did a ctrl+F for "roundabout" in the STIP document and thought my laptop was going to crash for a second while the search loaded.

Some noteworthy ones planned for the next 1-3 years in northern Ohio that caught my eye:

OH 98 and OH 597 north of Waldo.

OH 98 & Oh 529 or Oh 98 & Oh 598? There is no 597.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 10, 2022, 12:33:26 PM

OH 98 and OH 597 north of Waldo.

OH 98 & Oh 529 or Oh 98 & Oh 598? There is no 597.

529. That was a pretty bad typo.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on March 10, 2022, 09:52:57 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tolbs17 on March 10, 2022, 10:03:33 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on March 10, 2022, 10:06:51 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6
And another excuse for you to post an unrelated NC GSV link...
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on March 10, 2022, 10:09:26 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6

If it's "relatively quiet" then maybe it's not worth the money to replace structures supporting high traffic volumes that don't exist.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 11, 2022, 12:33:18 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6

Is this near Kitty Hawk?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tolbs17 on March 11, 2022, 01:55:34 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6

Is this near Kitty Hawk?
No. Between Rocky Mount and Battleboro.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 11, 2022, 10:25:36 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

Wow, I had no idea. Been a while since I've driven that way.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on March 11, 2022, 10:28:28 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA
Definitely a downgrade. I have a feeling something like that could happen here as well. Used to serve I-95 traffic but its relatively quiet here now.

4299 N U.S. 301
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HHkG7PoQ2mKrFsvq6
And another excuse for you to post an unrelated NC GSV link...
Yes, but he does have a point. His example is another interchange (the NC example is a partial interchange) that will probably not be retained when the life of the bridge is ending. I could show a similar example (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.4362204,-88.0590114,1231m/data=!3m1!1e3) in my old home town where a partial was built that is no longer needed. I can easily imagine a roundabout here knowing WISDOT's penchant for building them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on March 11, 2022, 05:00:44 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 11, 2022, 06:20:02 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.

The OTC was starting to redesign and replace some of the trumpet interchanges as early as the mid 90s, when the original pre-I-71 Exit 10 trumpet interchange at US-42/Pearl Road was turned into a signalized "T" Intersection.  You can still make out the original footprint  in this GSV.:

Strongsville
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Gr8mmftxvt9Tomh68
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on March 11, 2022, 08:11:21 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.

Yikes. That entire pier was cracked and splitting.

New York has a number of ramps that have been removed, notably because they didn't serve that much of a purpose on lower volume roads, and because longer-term plans to convert roadways to free-flowing highways were canceled.

https://goo.gl/maps/j7RwVdZc9YSF1qc58
https://goo.gl/maps/Fj1nmPTJ5gxYtnAE6
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on March 11, 2022, 08:21:17 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.

Yikes. That entire pier was cracked and splitting.

New York has a number of ramps that have been removed, notably because they didn't serve that much of a purpose on lower volume roads, and because longer-term plans to convert roadways to free-flowing highways were canceled.

https://goo.gl/maps/j7RwVdZc9YSF1qc58
https://goo.gl/maps/Fj1nmPTJ5gxYtnAE6

Maine Turnpike had gone a step further, the former trumpet interchange on Maine Turnpike(I-95) with US-202 was replaced with a parclo A4. You can still see some of the old grading of the former ramps on this satellite shot. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8821964,-70.3338813,807m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tolbs17 on March 11, 2022, 10:40:27 PM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.  I'm guessing the bridge was in need of replacement and it was decided to eliminate it instead, but with a roundabout instead of a signalized T-intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.

Yikes. That entire pier was cracked and splitting.

New York has a number of ramps that have been removed, notably because they didn't serve that much of a purpose on lower volume roads, and because longer-term plans to convert roadways to free-flowing highways were canceled.

https://goo.gl/maps/j7RwVdZc9YSF1qc58
https://goo.gl/maps/Fj1nmPTJ5gxYtnAE6

Maine Turnpike had gone a step further, the former trumpet interchange on Maine Turnpike(I-95) with US-202 was replaced with a parclo A4. You can still see some of the old grading of the former ramps on this satellite shot. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8821964,-70.3338813,807m/data=!3m1!1e3
I think it's time for NJTA and MassTA to invest in converting the interchanges on the NJ turnpike and the Mass turnpike to those.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: lepidopteran on March 14, 2022, 01:37:43 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.
https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.
New York has a number of ramps that have been removed, notably because they didn't serve that much of a purpose on lower volume roads, and because longer-term plans to convert roadways to free-flowing highways were canceled.

https://goo.gl/maps/j7RwVdZc9YSF1qc58
https://goo.gl/maps/Fj1nmPTJ5gxYtnAE6

Maine Turnpike had gone a step further, the former trumpet interchange on Maine Turnpike(I-95) with US-202 was replaced with a parclo A4. You can still see some of the old grading of the former ramps on this satellite shot. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8821964,-70.3338813,807m/data=!3m1!1e3
I've often said that, in the heyday of turnpike/toll-road construction in the 50s, there was a tendency to connect the surface road with a trumpet interchange by default, even if it was really not needed.  Hence, these and others have been replaced with signalized intersections.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on March 14, 2022, 09:56:54 AM
A roundabout was just completed end of last year at the Ohio Turnpike's exit 91, replacing the trumpet interchange at OH-53.
https://goo.gl/maps/HEWuzRYPdPbhFQZCA

By checking the more recent streetview, https://goo.gl/maps/ZF7buCN2n5Xznqpu5  the shape of that overpass speaks for itself and why they replaced it with a roundabout.
New York has a number of ramps that have been removed, notably because they didn't serve that much of a purpose on lower volume roads, and because longer-term plans to convert roadways to free-flowing highways were canceled.

https://goo.gl/maps/j7RwVdZc9YSF1qc58
https://goo.gl/maps/Fj1nmPTJ5gxYtnAE6

Maine Turnpike had gone a step further, the former trumpet interchange on Maine Turnpike(I-95) with US-202 was replaced with a parclo A4. You can still see some of the old grading of the former ramps on this satellite shot. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8821964,-70.3338813,807m/data=!3m1!1e3
I've often said that, in the heyday of turnpike/toll-road construction in the 50s, there was a tendency to connect the surface road with a trumpet interchange by default, even if it was really not needed.  Hence, these and others have been replaced with signalized intersections.

Not all of them get a trumpet-to-trumpet connection right from the start. Exit 8A in the NJ Turkpike (I-95) was a trumpet-to-T intersection who was replaced by a trumpet later when the trafic levels raised. http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=40.35127,-74.47228&z=15&t=U
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 14, 2022, 02:49:53 PM
Why were so many toll road interchanges built as trumpet interchanges on both ends? Wouldn't standard diamond interchanges have sufficed? Seems like a waste of land to me.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on March 14, 2022, 02:55:20 PM
A trumpet interchange allowed consolidating the toll gates into one point at each interchange.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: plain on March 14, 2022, 03:07:39 PM
A trumpet interchange allowed consolidating the toll gates into one point at each interchange.

Exactly. On a ticket system this is the most cost-effective way of handling things.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 14, 2022, 07:48:20 PM
A trumpet interchange allowed consolidating the toll gates into one point at each interchange.

Exactly. On a ticket system this is the most cost-effective way of handling things.

Not to mention it was the best way to prevent most "illegal" mainline U-turns
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 14, 2022, 09:34:16 PM
Regarding this new roundabout on 53, it's worth noting that 53 was a 4 lane road through the trumpet but narrowed down to 2 lanes immediately north of it.

I haven't seen the new configuration yet, but I'm guessing they didn't do a 2 lane roundabout and instead dropped 53 from 4 lanes to 2 lanes somewhere between Schwartz Dr. and this new roundabout. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 02:39:15 AM
Why were so many toll road interchanges built as trumpet interchanges on both ends? Wouldn't standard diamond interchanges have sufficed? Seems like a waste of land to me.
Agreed. Time to fix the old substandard turnpike highways with all those trumpet interchanges.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on March 16, 2022, 09:55:31 AM
Why were so many toll road interchanges built as trumpet interchanges on both ends? Wouldn't standard diamond interchanges have sufficed? Seems like a waste of land to me.
Agreed. Time to fix the old substandard turnpike highways with all those trumpet interchanges.

There's nothing inherently substandard or wrong about a trumpet interchange. If it ain't broke, don't waste tollpayer money fixing it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2022, 12:20:12 PM
Why were so many toll road interchanges built as trumpet interchanges on both ends? Wouldn't standard diamond interchanges have sufficed? Seems like a waste of land to me.
Agreed. Time to fix the old substandard turnpike highways with all those trumpet interchanges.

Trumpet interchanges like that actually may have benefits beyond the toll booth itself. By consolidating traffic to only one intersection, it can reduce congestion on the cross street caused by two signals being too close to each other. It also makes finding the on ramp easier, since there's only one and then you can decide which way.

I've built a handful of these on Cities: Skylines for this reason, and also since nowadays toll booths are available in game.  :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 16, 2022, 12:59:09 PM
And remember, everything "old" is fine if the volume is low enough.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on March 24, 2022, 12:18:17 PM
The more recent Turnpike interchanges in western Ohio were built from scratch with intersections instead of trumpets like they would have been if they were original to the road, probably because of the low-enough volume and it being cheaper.  I always found interesting that the signs at the intersection (both directing traffic to the Turnpike as well as the directional signs at the intersection for exiting traffic) were button copy which was not the Turnpike's thing.  They must have had ODOT do those signs as they were on an ODOT road (just as on freeways the exit signs for the Turnpike exit are regular ODOT signs, with Turnpike-designed signs not appearing until on their property). Some of the latest button copy installed in Ohio still remains in locations like that (e.g., the OH 66 interchange opened in 1998 and has button copy signs at the intersection) and they still look good even at night. 

Until the bridges serving trumpets on low-volume interchanges reach the end of their service life, it doesn't make sense to replace them just because they are there "needlessly".  Building them originally was good future-proofing and when they run out of life, then alternatives make sense to consider.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 24, 2022, 03:43:30 PM
It wasn't until I lived in Toledo in my college years that I discovered that there was one original turnpike exit on the Ohio Turnpike that did NOT have a trumpet interchange beyond the toll booth...Exit 34/Old Exit 3 in Wauseon, which was more or less a T intersection with SR-108.

And then I was surprised when I saw T-intersections at some of the New York Thruway exits, I guess I thought all Toll Roads were required to have Trumpet interchanges when I was a kid.
 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 24, 2022, 09:12:04 PM
Just goes to show how few exits the Turnpike had initially that Exit 34 was old Exit 3. That is a very long way between exits for Ohio. There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 25, 2022, 10:35:39 AM
Just goes to show how few exits the Turnpike had initially that Exit 34 was old Exit 3. That is a very long way between exits for Ohio. There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

Originally it was only 16 exits, now it's up to 30.

Note: may have been a few more than 16 originally, I'm not quite sure if the partial exits for I-90, I-480 and I-680 with old numbers 8A, 9A and 16A were original exits that were given letters because they were partial exits, or if they came latter like all the other A and B exits that were added between the original construction and the switch to mileage based exit numbers.   
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on March 25, 2022, 11:32:47 AM
Just goes to show how few exits the Turnpike had initially that Exit 34 was old Exit 3. That is a very long way between exits for Ohio. There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

Originally it was only 16 exits, now it's up to 30.

Note: may have been a few more than 16 originally, I'm not quite sure if the partial exits for I-90, I-480 and I-680 with old numbers 8A, 9A and 16A were original exits that were given letters because they were partial exits, or if they came latter like all the other A and B exits that were added between the original construction and the switch to mileage based exit numbers.   

The Turnpike was built in the mid-1950s. Those partial exits were later additions.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Ted$8roadFan on March 25, 2022, 01:11:47 PM
Just goes to show how few exits the Turnpike had initially that Exit 34 was old Exit 3. That is a very long way between exits for Ohio. There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

Originally it was only 16 exits, now it's up to 30

Note: may have been a few more than 16 originally, I'm not quite sure if the partial exits for I-90, I-480 and I-680 with old numbers 8A, 9A and 16A were original exits that were given letters because they were partial exits, or if they came latter like all the other A and B exits that were added between the original construction and the switch to mileage based exit numbers.   

IIRC, the addition of new exits was a key reason why the Turnpike switched to mileage-based exit numbers in the late 90s/early 00s.

The Turnpike was built in the mid-1950s. Those partial exits were later additions.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 25, 2022, 08:13:11 PM
Just goes to show how few exits the Turnpike had initially that Exit 34 was old Exit 3. That is a very long way between exits for Ohio. There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

Originally it was only 16 exits, now it's up to 30

Note: may have been a few more than 16 originally, I'm not quite sure if the partial exits for I-90, I-480 and I-680 with old numbers 8A, 9A and 16A were original exits that were given letters because they were partial exits, or if they came latter like all the other A and B exits that were added between the original construction and the switch to mileage based exit numbers.   

IIRC, the addition of new exits was a key reason why the Turnpike switched to mileage-based exit numbers in the late 90s/early 00s.

The Turnpike was built in the mid-1950s. Those partial exits were later additions.

I want to say the first "new" exit that was built was a little over 20 years after the Turnpike opened -- and IIRC, it was Exit 8-A, the connector to SR-2 (and later I-90 once it was fully completed into downtown Cleveland).  I-680 and the I-480 partial exits came soon after.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on March 26, 2022, 12:50:40 PM
As time passes, those older interchanges that had trumpet ramps and single ticket/cash tollgates for traffic getting on and off of the highway can be replaced with more conventional diamond, par-clo and other needed connections with transponder gantries, including at newly added local access interchanges, as needed.

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on March 27, 2022, 09:17:25 AM
There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

And yet there's no such warning for the 14 mile gap on I-71 between SR 95 and SR 97
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 27, 2022, 02:35:24 PM
Different District?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 27, 2022, 03:23:54 PM
Different District?

Yes.

The Zanesville area example is entirely in District 5

The OH 95 end of I-71's 14 mile stretch is in District 6, while the OH 97 end is in District 3.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on March 27, 2022, 08:57:20 PM
I couldn't figure out how to get Google Maps to show counties today.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 27, 2022, 11:48:02 PM
There's a sign on I-70 west near Zanesville that warns you that it is a whole nine miles to the next exit.

And yet there's no such warning for the 14 mile gap on I-71 between SR 95 and SR 97

Much less the 12 miles between I-270 & 36/37 back in the day (Pre Polaris)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on March 28, 2022, 12:13:24 AM
I couldn't figure out how to get Google Maps to show counties today.
It doesn't.  Third parties have added the layer (e.g. at mob-rule.com).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on March 28, 2022, 10:51:50 AM
I couldn't figure out how to get Google Maps to show counties today.
It doesn't.  Third parties have added the layer (e.g. at mob-rule.com).

If you search for a specific county, it will outline that county but the outline goes away as you zoom in close.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on March 28, 2022, 10:54:05 AM
I couldn't figure out how to get Google Maps to show counties today.
It doesn't.  Third parties have added the layer (e.g. at mob-rule.com).

If you search for a specific county, it will outline that county but the outline goes away as you zoom in close.
Ah, true.  It's functionality is so limited, I dismissed it out of hand.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: lepidopteran on March 28, 2022, 10:43:20 PM
The more recent Turnpike interchanges in western Ohio were built from scratch with intersections instead of trumpets like they would have been if they were original to the road, probably because of the low-enough volume and it being cheaper.
One of the most welcome new interchanges was Exit 52, for SR-2 and the Toledo Express Airport (TOL).  It was built with an intersection, complete with a 4th movement leading right into the airport.  Now if it were a major airport, an overpass and interchange with SR-2 would be a given.  But TOL is currently served by only TWO airlines, having long since been eclipsed by Detroit Metro (DTW), which the construction of I-275 made it easier for Toledoans to get to.  Even with the Turnpike exit, access to TOL is still a little roundabout; see this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20879.msg2253410;topicseen#msg2253410) for details.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 29, 2022, 05:07:31 PM
I was in Fremont today so I took a slight detour north to check out the new roundabout at OH 53 and the Turnpike.

As you approach it on 4 lane 53 going northbound, the left lane is signed for the Turnpike and the right lane is signed for 53 north. Both lanes enter the roundabout, which has two lanes just on that side until the right lane splits off to 53 north. The rest of the roundabout is one lane. 

Whatever paint they used for the white lines is already really badly faded and needs redone. Not sure what the deal is there, it was just installed sometime last year.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 01, 2022, 01:38:46 PM
A DDI was the popular option at an ODOT public meeting about possible changes to the I-75/US 20/US 23 interchange in Perrysburg:

https://www.sent-trib.com/news/diverging-diamond-favored-to-handle-perrysburg-traffic/article_23299018-b1d9-11ec-a9eb-03c6290598ff.html

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on April 01, 2022, 02:25:42 PM
Too bad it wasnt so built up against the current interchange ‐‐ a DDI SPUI would be the best option if there was room.

The US-20/23, I‐75 Perrysburg area reminds me a lot of the US-30, I-65, Merrilville IN mess with a major, truck-heavy US highway from the east having to traverse several miles of heavy traffic, signals and retail before being able to reach the freeway.



Mea Culpa...meant to originally say a SPUI would be a better option in Perrysburg if the space was there and they were willing to rebuild the I-75 mainline bridges there at the same time to accomodate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on April 01, 2022, 05:06:59 PM
Too bad it wasnt so built up against the current interchange ‐‐ a DDI would be the best option if there was room.

It looks like the only property obstacle is the Burger King. Am I missing something? It's not like a DDI needs a huge ROW as shown here  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7148511,-90.4473972,756a,35y,90h/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)or here (http://www.exit16ddi.vtransprojects.vermont.gov/).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tigerwings on April 01, 2022, 05:50:50 PM
The BK would need to go for the DDI.

The Harley shop west side may need to go also. It would be a tight turn for trucks.

Also:

Too bad they didn't make the I-475 to NB I-75 exit a fly over instead of dumping into the left hand lane went to changed this years ago. Traffic needs to cut across 2 lanes quick to get off at US-20. Add to it the weaving from 475 to SB 75 with traffic from Dixie Hwy, ODOT needs to try again on this interchange
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sprjus4 on April 01, 2022, 11:11:51 PM
The BK would need to go for the DDI.

The Harley shop west side may need to go also. It would be a tight turn for trucks.
I fail to see how either of these facilities would need to be moved.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on April 01, 2022, 11:15:56 PM
The US-20/23, I‐75 Perrysburg area reminds me a lot of the US-30, I-65, Merrilville IN mess with a major, truck-heavy US highway from the east having to traverse several miles of heavy traffic, signals and retail before being able to reach the freeway.
Reminds me of OH 32 for the first few miles east of I-275 as well. Good thing that the remaining signals between 275 and Batavia are planned to be removed at some point.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on April 02, 2022, 12:11:53 AM
Too bad they didn't make the I-475 to NB I-75 exit a fly over instead of dumping into the left hand lane went to changed this years ago. Traffic needs to cut across 2 lanes quick to get off at US-20. Add to it the weaving from 475 to SB 75 with traffic from Dixie Hwy, ODOT needs to try again on this interchange

Possibly, and I would definitely agree if the interchange were being built from scratch now.  But how much traffic is actually making that maneuver?  That's part of what goes into the decision of whether the cost to modify the existing interchange is justified.  That it's the routing of sbd US-23 isn't enough on its own.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 15, 2022, 11:37:09 AM
I went to a zoning meeting in Pickaway County this week and the township Zoning Director said that ODOT told him that the U.S. 23/OH-762 interchange is project is two years away from construction and that a much-needed roundabout at OH-762 and Ashville Pike/Duvall Road is one year away.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 16, 2022, 08:47:20 AM
I went to a zoning meeting in Pickaway County this week and the township Zoning Director said that ODOT told him that the U.S. 23/OH-762 interchange is project is two years away from construction and that a much-needed roundabout at OH-762 and Ashville Pike/Duvall Road is one year away.

Nice. I suppose these are both being done due to truck traffic going to and from the NS Rickenbacker intermodal terminal and other industries in that area. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
Yes, for current and future growth. There are a lot of projects in the design and construction phases in the vicinity.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on April 17, 2022, 12:05:29 PM
Some more information: https://www.morpc.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PIC_Pickaway_County_Transportation_Improvements.pdf (from 2017) and what the
interchange could look like: https://ashvilleohio.gov/images/wastewater-facility-expansion/appendix%20f.pdf

I still wish I could find the plans for the South Bloomfield bypass online.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on May 03, 2022, 09:22:41 PM
Two interesting finds in a Cincinnati city storage lot this evening:

A very recent-looking Cincinnati Gardens sign from SR-562...
(https://i.imgur.com/e8CVq38h.jpg)

...and a cache of Cincinnati's well-known yellow lamps, which have only gotten more scarce over the past decade or so.
(https://i.imgur.com/8UFgvbnh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 04, 2022, 10:48:00 AM
I was in Fremont today so I took a slight detour north to check out the new roundabout at OH 53 and the Turnpike.

As you approach it on 4 lane 53 going northbound, the left lane is signed for the Turnpike and the right lane is signed for 53 north. Both lanes enter the roundabout, which has two lanes just on that side until the right lane splits off to 53 north. The rest of the roundabout is one lane. 

Whatever paint they used for the white lines is already really badly faded and needs redone. Not sure what the deal is there, it was just installed sometime last year.

(1)  The first paint application seems to never stick very well to new pavement, anywhere.

(2)  Same issue as with any roundabout I've driven, or any curve for that matter:  Idiot drivers can't stay between the lines, thus wearing down the paint.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JoePCool14 on May 04, 2022, 12:16:42 PM
I was in Fremont today so I took a slight detour north to check out the new roundabout at OH 53 and the Turnpike.

As you approach it on 4 lane 53 going northbound, the left lane is signed for the Turnpike and the right lane is signed for 53 north. Both lanes enter the roundabout, which has two lanes just on that side until the right lane splits off to 53 north. The rest of the roundabout is one lane. 

Whatever paint they used for the white lines is already really badly faded and needs redone. Not sure what the deal is there, it was just installed sometime last year.

(1)  The first paint application seems to never stick very well to new pavement, anywhere.

(2)  Same issue as with any roundabout I've driven, or any curve for that matter:  Idiot drivers can't stay between the lines, thus wearing down the paint.

Makes me wonder why a second application of paint isn't done a bit after initial application. I understand it adds labor and material costs, but maybe it offers better value in the long-term.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 06, 2022, 09:53:04 AM
ODOT is adding exit numbers to US 52. I spotted a "Exit 152" exit panel for the Jesse Stuart Bridge exit near Franklin Furnace, but no exit tabs on the signs yet.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: countysigns on May 22, 2022, 11:02:11 AM
ODOT studying revamp of Airport Highway interchange

From the Toledo Blade, another diverging diamond may be in the works for an I-475/US-23 interchange.
https://www.toledoblade.com/local/transportation/2022/05/21/odot-studying-revamp-of-airport-highway-interchange-transportation-springfield-township/stories/20220520252
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tigerwings on May 22, 2022, 01:21:53 PM
Toledo Blade paywall alert
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2022, 07:20:11 PM
The US 30 freeway extension in Canton may be a go, or it may be in trouble: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-route-30-project-facing-important-deadline/ar-AAXJ6Xn?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=225ac65fd7c74dc6b35160a80e0b7272. Which do all of you think is more likely?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: plain on May 25, 2022, 09:17:32 PM
Hopefully it'll get the funds in time. I'm familiar with that area and I agree with anyone who says it's needed. It will also further solidify US 30 as a good alternative to the Turnpike.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 26, 2022, 11:23:28 AM
The US 30 freeway extension in Canton may be a go, or it may be in trouble: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-route-30-project-facing-important-deadline/ar-AAXJ6Xn?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=225ac65fd7c74dc6b35160a80e0b7272. Which do all of you think is more likely?

It will go the way of I-73 in Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on May 26, 2022, 03:06:43 PM
The US 30 freeway extension in Canton may be a go, or it may be in trouble: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-route-30-project-facing-important-deadline/ar-AAXJ6Xn?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=225ac65fd7c74dc6b35160a80e0b7272. Which do all of you think is more likely?

It will go the way of I-73 in Ohio.

I figure the extension to SR 44 will happen. It eliminates the largest traffic bottleneck along the corridor and the turns through East Canton, which are problematic for trucks. IMHO, they should just have the end of the freeway tie directly in to existing US 30 rather than ending at an interchange as planned since it's unlikely anything will extend beyond that. After that, re-route US 30 onto SR 154 and SR 11 east of Lisbon and call it a day.

There are some locations that could benefit from turn lanes or spot improvements. Two-lane bypasses of Lisbon and Minerva would be nice, but there's not really enough traffic along the corridor to necessitate them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: countysigns on May 26, 2022, 06:47:10 PM
Toledo Blade paywall alert
Toledo Blade paywall alert
Forgot about the paywall...here's the article:

Diverging diamonds evidently are becoming a traffic engineer’s best friend.

The Ohio Department of Transportation has set up an online open house as it contemplates altering Airport Highway’s interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Springfield Township with an eye toward reducing crashes and congestion there.

But its district planners in Bowling Green have already stated what their preference is for such a project: crossing Airport’s lanes over to the left in the same sort of diverging-diamond interchange layout ODOT contractors built several years ago at the same freeway’s State Rt. 25 interchange in Perrysburg.

According to a summary of the “virtual open house” that began Monday, Airport Highway — which carries State Rt. 2 through the area — had 576 crashes between McCord and Holland-Sylvania roads between 2017 and 2019. That ranked it No. 1 on ODOT’s Highway Safety Improvement Improvement Program list of “suburban nonfreeway segments,” with two-thirds of the crashes rear-enders and 30 percent causing injuries.

Materials are available to view on the feasibility study’s web page, accessible under “Featured Projects” on the ODOT District 2 website . The formal public comment period ends June 16.

No construction funding has been allocated for the interchange, and alternative designs remain on the table. The earliest possible year for construction is 2026, according to ODOT’s online materials.

“The goal of the feasibility study is to identify a preferred alternative which will improve safety and reduce congestion at the interchange,” said Kelsie Hoagland, a spokesman at the Bowling Green office. “...Once a preferred alternative is identified, we will pursue applying for funding.”

ODOT is holding only a virtual open-house for this proposal, she said, because none of the options studied for the Airport interchange would require condemning any land, whereas the Perrysburg interchange designs include some land acquisition.

The existing Airport interchange has ample land to accommodate any of the alternatives considered in a preliminary feasibility study, she said. Construction of a multi-use path 10 feet wide along Airport Highway’s north side would require some temporary right-of-way.

Along with revising the interchange and creating the path, ODOT intends to reconfigure traffic on Spring Meadows Drive to create two left-turn lanes, which will allow more vehicles headed to I-475 to exit the Spring Meadows Place shopping area during each green light. The current right-turn lane would become marked for straight-across traffic as well.

A separate ODOT plan to place a median divider on McCord just north of its intersection with Airport — intended to reduce congestion and crashes associated with left turns at Centers and Spring Valley drives and a Buckeye Broadband driveway just north of Airport — has been delayed after nobody bid on a construction contract advertised this spring, said Kacey Young, ODOT’s district capital programs administrator.

 The McCord work “is going to be packaged with another project, and will likely occur in 2023,” Ms. Young said. “The goal is to have the work occur while school is out during summer 2023.”

Nearby merchants have protested that shutting off left turns onto Spring Valley, in particular, would discourage customers by forcing them to take longer routes and add traffic in front of Springfield High School.

Airport in the Spring Meadows area has long been one of metro Toledo’s busiest roadways and congestion hot spots.

Construction of its median between I-475 and Holloway Road two decades ago eliminated crashes and delays related to shoppers turning left into and out of commercial driveways but was similarly controversial among some merchants. At that time, the ramp from southbound I-475/U.S. 23 to westbound Airport was modified to replace its high-speed merge onto Airport with a traffic light.

The newly proposed interchange designs realign all of the ramps there and eliminate two cloverleaves.

Besides examining a diverging diamond, ODOT planners looked at two other options for the Airport Highway ramp intersections: a “tight urban diamond” that is more traditional and a double-roundabout layout similar to one completed last year at a new I-475/U.S. 23 interchange for Dorr Street several miles to the north. But according to the state’s online presentation, they are disfavored because they provide “minimal safety improvements” and the roundabout option would also have “failing operations.”

The multi-use path will be built along Airport’s north side between West Mall Drive and Holland-Sylvania regardless of which ramp layout is ultimately chosen, ODOT said.

Construction of metro Toledo’s second diverging diamond is slated to begin later this year on U.S. 20A as part of an expansion of I-475’s Salisbury/Dussel interchange, and a proposal for a third at the U.S. 20/23 interchange on I-75 in Perrysburg was introduced to the public in late March during a live open-house meeting at Perrysburg Junior High School.

A diverging diamond layout works by crossing opposing traffic from the standard right-hand side of the roadway to the left at a freeway interchange between the ramp intersections on either side of the freeway. Doing that allows left turns to and from the freeway ramps to be made without crossing opposing traffic lanes, which reduces both the number of potential “conflict points” at the interchange and the number of traffic-signal phases required to handle all traffic movements.

Although the left-hand running discomforts some drivers, the diverging diamond on Route 25 has been generally well-received since its completion several years ago.

Less popular has been the “single-point urban interchange” design ODOT used when it recently rebuilt the Central Avenue interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Sylvania Township, but ODOT did not even consider that design for the Airport interchange.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on May 26, 2022, 06:59:52 PM
(Rest of article deleted)

Less popular has been the “single-point urban interchange” design ODOT used when it recently rebuilt the Central Avenue interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Sylvania Township, but ODOT did not even consider that design for the Airport interchange.

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone not like SPUIs. Is there some reason locals don't like this SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6749041,-83.6937504,470m/data=!3m1!1e3)? I can understand not liking the 100 ft hitch to the south, but the exit itself looks quite nice.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 26, 2022, 07:19:12 PM
ODOT studying revamp of Airport Highway interchange

From the Toledo Blade, another diverging diamond may be in the works for an I-475/US-23 interchange.
https://www.toledoblade.com/local/transportation/2022/05/21/odot-studying-revamp-of-airport-highway-interchange-transportation-springfield-township/stories/20220520252

Given the very nearby traffic signals on both sides of this interchange, I do not understand how a DDI would do anything to relieve congestion.

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone not like SPUIs. Is there some reason locals don't like this SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6749041,-83.6937504,470m/data=!3m1!1e3)? I can understand not liking the 100 ft hitch to the south, but the exit itself looks quite nice.

SPUIs have three-phase signals; DDIs have two-phase signals.  I would think the former leads to more congestion than the latter.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on May 26, 2022, 09:44:32 PM
^That's something I noticed right away the first time I used a DDI. Cuts way down on backups both on the cross street and the ramps.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Mr_Northside on May 30, 2022, 02:00:59 PM
Quote
Less popular has been the “single-point urban interchange” design ODOT used when it recently rebuilt the Central Avenue interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Sylvania Township, but ODOT did not even consider that design for the Airport interchange.
This is the first time I've ever heard anyone not like SPUIs. Is there some reason locals don't like this SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6749041,-83.6937504,470m/data=!3m1!1e3)? I can understand not liking the 100 ft hitch to the south, but the exit itself looks quite nice.

I can't vouch for local sentiment at that particular interchange, but I didn't read that to mean people didn't like it, just that SPUI's have become a less popular option for ODOT (and, I think probably a lot of DOT's).   I don't think (and am just guessing) it's anything against the operational nature of them, just that they seem like they are not as cost-effective (usually requiring more overpass/underpass space to accomodate the ramps) as a DDI.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: skluth on May 30, 2022, 03:25:59 PM
Quote
Less popular has been the “single-point urban interchange” design ODOT used when it recently rebuilt the Central Avenue interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Sylvania Township, but ODOT did not even consider that design for the Airport interchange.
This is the first time I've ever heard anyone not like SPUIs. Is there some reason locals don't like this SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6749041,-83.6937504,470m/data=!3m1!1e3)? I can understand not liking the 100 ft hitch to the south, but the exit itself looks quite nice.

I can't vouch for local sentiment at that particular interchange, but I didn't read that to mean people didn't like it, just that SPUI's have become a less popular option for ODOT (and, I think probably a lot of DOT's).   I don't think (and am just guessing) it's anything against the operational nature of them, just that they seem like they are not as cost-effective (usually requiring more overpass/underpass space to accommodate the ramps) as a DDI.

Cost is definitely an issue with SPUI's with their longer/wider viaducts. Budget issues favor DDIs and diamonds over SPUIs and anything with flyovers. I think the DDI will become more popular as it's especially useful where almost all traffic is entering and exiting the freeway and little is going from one side to the other, especially in commuter suburbs. But I still prefer SPUIs more often than any other interchange with lights.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on May 30, 2022, 03:51:23 PM
The issue with SPUIs is cost. They virtually always require a new bridge and said bridge needs to be significantly longer/wider than what it is replacing. Despite this, they are often the most efficient option for an interchange with a large amount of through traffic on the surface road.

DDIs are becoming more popular due to cost. They fit within the footprint of the existing interchange, can use existing bridges, and only require two signal phases. But they are only particularly effective if the majority of traffic on the surface road is entering/exiting the freeway. Get a lot of through traffic and it can become interesting. See the 7-lane bridge at the NY 17/NY 32 DDI in Orange County, NY. Still cheaper than a SPUI and nothing else would have fit there, but that reeks of "this is the cheapest option that worked, not matter how crazy it is".

Edit: add state
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: roadman65 on May 31, 2022, 11:41:01 AM
Right DDI can still use the center bridge piers in which a SPUI must be open in the middle.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: countysigns on May 31, 2022, 03:37:47 PM
(Rest of article deleted)

Less popular has been the “single-point urban interchange” design ODOT used when it recently rebuilt the Central Avenue interchange on I-475/U.S. 23 in Sylvania Township, but ODOT did not even consider that design for the Airport interchange.

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone not like SPUIs. Is there some reason locals don't like this SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6749041,-83.6937504,470m/data=!3m1!1e3)? I can understand not liking the 100 ft hitch to the south, but the exit itself looks quite nice.

The locals do not like the SPUI because they are afraid of crashing into each other on the turns, especially during winter when the lane lines are not visible.  Another issue, I guess, is visibility.  The bridge has a hump in the middle, making visibility an issue (albeit minor IMO) and the locals are afraid of crashing into each other on the left turns.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: roadman65 on May 31, 2022, 04:49:32 PM
Why does US 40 briefly become a two way street between two one way couplets in Springfield?  I think that is unusual considering no rail or rivers in between.
https://goo.gl/maps/gRWdv84o7MW229cX7
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 31, 2022, 05:15:05 PM
It wasn't like that originally. The construction of the Mercy Health medical campus led to this decision. They wanted to have the busy roadway routed slightly to the south to remove through traffic that close to the hospital and to reduce noise impacts.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on May 31, 2022, 09:05:39 PM
And as you can see by clicking around on the westbound lanes or switching to 2007, they wiped out a whole neighborhood of houses to do it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: roadman65 on June 01, 2022, 09:27:40 AM
I see. Displaced a lot of folks to build that hospital. Talk about freeways destroying neighborhoods.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on June 01, 2022, 11:59:17 AM
Oh, hospitals do wat dey want! People don't like it? Doesn't matter



(https://media0.giphy.com/media/26gIOEsGb5mcTiQEw/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on June 13, 2022, 10:04:37 AM
Why does US 40 briefly become a two way street between two one way couplets in Springfield?  I think that is unusual considering no rail or rivers in between.
https://goo.gl/maps/gRWdv84o7MW229cX7

Because I-70 is just a mile or two to the South and nobody really cares about US 40 anymore. In fact, US 40 is a two-lane road from Richmond Indiana for a long way into Ohio, I think it's two-lane almost all the way to Springfield.

Now the real question is why is US 40 so ugly looking between Indianapolis and Richmond?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: epzik8 on June 14, 2022, 07:20:31 PM
The newest item on my roadgeek bucket list is to get all of 50 between Cincinnati and DC
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on June 27, 2022, 02:05:00 PM
Back to OH-53 interchange with Ohio turnpike, Google Streetview posted an updated view from Nov. 2021 where the roundabout begins to take shape.
https://goo.gl/maps/EuxJsPmMTV98Cb7K6
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on June 29, 2022, 09:45:33 PM
https://nbc24.com/newsletter-daily/odot-breaks-ground-on-diverging-diamond-site-at-i-475-us-20a

ODOT has broken ground on the new Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) on I-475 at US 20A in Maumee. Included in this project is widening five miles of I-475 to three lanes each way between Airport Highway and US 24, replacing the bridges over Moclova Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and three miles of resurfacing on US 24 between I-475 and Waterville-Monclova Road interchanges.

"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

Construction is going to start in July, and the completion date of this $102 million project is expected to be complete by late 2024.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on June 29, 2022, 10:06:44 PM
https://nbc24.com/newsletter-daily/odot-breaks-ground-on-diverging-diamond-site-at-i-475-us-20a

ODOT has broken ground on the new Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) on I-475 at US 20A in Maumee. Included in this project is widening five miles of I-475 to three lanes each way between Airport Highway and US 24, replacing the bridges over Moclova Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and three miles of resurfacing on US 24 between I-475 and Waterville-Monclova Road interchanges.

"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

Construction is going to start in July, and the completion date of this $102 million project is expected to be complete by late 2024.

That area consistently backs up with traffic - the widening and new interchange will be good for the area, home to two of the metro's Fortune 500 companies.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 01, 2022, 01:23:43 PM
Let's hope this thread doesn't go off the rails like the "I-475/US23 projects in Toledo" thread did. It was this very project that did that one in.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on July 02, 2022, 12:55:16 AM
"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

I think that quote could have used some copy editing. I had to read it a few times to get what the person was trying to say.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on July 06, 2022, 03:01:34 PM
"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

I think that quote could have used some copy editing. I had to read it a few times to get what the person was trying to say.

It's messy but what she's saying from a very specific location-perspective is that the improvements to I-75 and I-475 to the north of the current construction in South Toledo and Rossford will seem impossible to live without once complete. But it's also something that really doesn't need to be said, and like you mentioned, could be said better.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: SkyPesos on July 07, 2022, 06:51:58 PM
Found a white LED VMS, with green LEDs for the minutes (probably red when traffic gets bad, idk for sure) when driving on NB I-75 today. Thought this was unique considering the other VMS uses standard orange LEDs. Anywhere else in the state with a VMS like this?

(https://i.imgur.com/ZASWVYj.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on July 07, 2022, 08:56:06 PM
Found a white LED VMS, with green LEDs for the minutes (probably red when traffic gets bad, idk for sure) when driving on NB I-75 today. Thought this was unique considering the other VMS uses standard orange LEDs. Anywhere else in the state with a VMS like this?

(https://i.imgur.com/ZASWVYj.jpg)


Columbus got them in past year. I think the color of the minutes part changes depending on speed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 07, 2022, 09:35:32 PM
I prefer VMSs like this one in Madison and elsewhere in Wisconsin: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0434615,-89.3655112,3a,75y,109.64h,85.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG1dvOwp_pmd9K85ZTUrFcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on July 11, 2022, 04:37:37 AM
Found a white LED VMS, with green LEDs for the minutes (probably red when traffic gets bad, idk for sure) when driving on NB I-75 today. Thought this was unique considering the other VMS uses standard orange LEDs. Anywhere else in the state with a VMS like this?

(https://i.imgur.com/ZASWVYj.jpg)


Columbus got them in past year. I think the color of the minutes part changes depending on speed.

I like them. Very readable. They look good.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wanderer2575 on July 25, 2022, 11:58:07 AM
https://nbc24.com/newsletter-daily/odot-breaks-ground-on-diverging-diamond-site-at-i-475-us-20a

ODOT has broken ground on the new Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) on I-475 at US 20A in Maumee. Included in this project is widening five miles of I-475 to three lanes each way between Airport Highway and US 24, replacing the bridges over Moclova Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and three miles of resurfacing on US 24 between I-475 and Waterville-Monclova Road interchanges.

"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

Construction is going to start in July, and the completion date of this $102 million project is expected to be complete by late 2024.

ODOT already widened the I-475 bridges over the Ohio Turnpike/Swan Creek/Manley Road several years ago, so this must have been in the works (or at least on a wish list) for awhile.
https://goo.gl/maps/guoG5MWiTcxvPvYc8
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on July 25, 2022, 08:26:05 PM
https://nbc24.com/newsletter-daily/odot-breaks-ground-on-diverging-diamond-site-at-i-475-us-20a

ODOT has broken ground on the new Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) on I-475 at US 20A in Maumee. Included in this project is widening five miles of I-475 to three lanes each way between Airport Highway and US 24, replacing the bridges over Moclova Road and the Norfolk Southern Railroad, and three miles of resurfacing on US 24 between I-475 and Waterville-Monclova Road interchanges.

"Once it's done, just like I-75, just like 475 to the north and many other interstate projects around the state and the nation, once it's done, it's hard to imagine a road without those improvements so we're really trying to set this area up for success for generations to come," said Pat McColley, ODOT District 2 deputy director.

Construction is going to start in July, and the completion date of this $102 million project is expected to be complete by late 2024.

ODOT already widened the I-475 bridges over the Ohio Turnpike/Swan Creek/Manley Road several years ago, so this must have been in the works (or at least on a wish list) for awhile.
https://goo.gl/maps/guoG5MWiTcxvPvYc8


I didn't realize that they re-designed the Dussell/Salisbury exit from the original diamond interchange just to the south.  When did they do that?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: BrianP on July 26, 2022, 10:28:49 AM
Depending in where you look in the vicinity, streetview shows it under construction and also complete in 2011.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: TempoNick on August 19, 2022, 09:10:14 PM
This article is relevant to the US-23 discussion. The US-23 (and US-35 in Beavercreek) problems could be solved quickly and cheaply if they do here like they do in Texas.

I hope someone from ODOT pays attention.

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Tex-Arcana-Why-do-Texas-freeways-have-frontage-1836385.php?fbclid=IwAR0d-gkbPjI-kjgX9afAVltL2_v_gA6TA9LDnv1TztAY_Z2gPH7yNi0H6hU
https://www.facebook.com/aaroads/posts/pfbid02iFgb5RTvM27jLhgL23YRfa7umijYmLkaWHnVYmFdjH5DfNjHWfNKfApRLXKHC139l

(https://scontent.fcmh1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/300103647_10160406834872948_5344029425713521060_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=L8g7sqS0SbgAX-Sn4Ji&_nc_ht=scontent.fcmh1-1.fna&oh=00_AT9q42cU2HDkmjEFCaMunXlD54eLaLMLYeNml0xugeDIZg&oe=63061C44)

Quote
Tex-Arcana: Why do Texas freeways have frontage roads?
MARK BABINECK

Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
Sep. 30, 2007

They go by many names depending on where you are. Officially they're called frontage roads, and they're a way of life along major highways across Texas, which stands alone in its steadfast devotion to them.

"That is definitely a Texas thing, and more common in Houston than anywhere else," said Ron Jackson of TexasFreeway.com, a site dedicated to the state's massive ribbons of urban pavement.

In Houston, they're best known simply as feeders. Other Texans prefer to call them access roads or service roads, but they all mean the same thing: Streets alongside freeways and highways that act as corridors of commerce and connect thoroughfares to cross streets.

Some other states utilize them regularly in heavily populated areas. Texas goes further with a network of more than 6,500 miles that extends well into the countryside, according to the state comptroller's office.

Frontage roads were the vision of Dewitt Greer, the state's chief highway engineer from 1940 to 1968. He initially wanted to cut right-of-way acquisition costs by providing landowners affected by highway expansion with access to the new road, which lowered the price.

The first freeway in Texas, the Gulf Freeway in southeast Houston, was accompanied by the first frontage roads.

Developers fell in line, realizing the value of roadside property, and the concept became the norm.

There were drawbacks, though. Frontage roads have caused many urban freeways to become signage-strewn eyesores, and some of the roads themselves became ceaselessly jammed partly because of the very development they fostered.

In June 2001, the Texas Transportation Commission decided to limit construction of new frontage roads, sparking a withering blast of criticism. Dallas' mayor at the time, Ron Kirk, called frontage roads "critical in opening up the southern part of the city to commercial development."

A year later, the commission relented and a Texas tradition — whatever you might call it — remained intact.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tsmatt13 on August 23, 2022, 05:07:55 PM
Something interesting I found: a few exits in the US-20 and OH-2 concurrency near Cleveland were initially unnumbered, then temporarily numbered 191 and 193 in the mid-2010s, then the numbers were removed from the signs again. I wonder why they did this??

Sep 2011: There is a BGS, and the "Lake Ave / West Blvd" exit is unnumbered.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Aug 2014: There is now an "Exit 191" tab on the sign.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Oct 2015: The exit sign and tab was removed during construction.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Sep 2021: The entire BGS setup is removed and now there are no signs left.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 23, 2022, 11:14:53 PM
Something interesting I found: a few exits in the US-20 and OH-2 concurrency near Cleveland were initially unnumbered, then temporarily numbered 191 and 193 in the mid-2010s, then the numbers were removed from the signs again. I wonder why they did this??

Sep 2011: There is a BGS, and the "Lake Ave / West Blvd" exit is unnumbered.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Aug 2014: There is now an "Exit 191" tab on the sign.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Oct 2015: The exit sign and tab was removed during construction.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Sep 2021: The entire BGS setup is removed and now there are no signs left.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)

Visiting Cleveland from Colorado and LITERALLY drove that stretch today!!

When they downgraded much of the 55 MPH West Shoreway into the 35 MPH Edgewater Boulevard (as a former Clevelander, I have a bone to pick about this "downgrade" -- people still drive it as if it was still a freeway) it looks like ODOT pretty much turned over all control to the City of Cleveland.

The city, trying to "fool" the public that it is a boulevard and not a freeway (it still looks like the old freeway) eliminated all gantries (and exit numbers) from W. 25th/28th west to Clifton Blvd.

There are still exit numbers on what's left of the "official" West Shoreway between the Main Avenue Bridge and I-90 at Dead Man's Curve.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on August 24, 2022, 11:16:27 AM
Something interesting I found: a few exits in the US-20 and OH-2 concurrency near Cleveland were initially unnumbered, then temporarily numbered 191 and 193 in the mid-2010s, then the numbers were removed from the signs again. I wonder why they did this??

Sep 2011: There is a BGS, and the "Lake Ave / West Blvd" exit is unnumbered.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Aug 2014: There is now an "Exit 191" tab on the sign.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Oct 2015: The exit sign and tab was removed during construction.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Sep 2021: The entire BGS setup is removed and now there are no signs left.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)

Visiting Cleveland from Colorado and LITERALLY drove that stretch today!!

When they downgraded much of the 55 MPH West Shoreway into the 35 MPH Edgewater Boulevard (as a former Clevelander, I have a bone to pick about this "downgrade" -- people still drive it as if it was still a freeway) it looks like ODOT pretty much turned over all control to the City of Cleveland.

The city, trying to "fool" the public that it is a boulevard and not a freeway (it still looks like the old freeway) eliminated all gantries (and exit numbers) from W. 25th/28th west to Clifton Blvd.

There are still exit numbers on what's left of the "official" West Shoreway between the Main Avenue Bridge and I-90 at Dead Man's Curve.

They pleasantly surprisingly left one button copy BGS; its not being an exit sign probably saved it.
https://goo.gl/maps/2YC9ngFgpim73fnL6

The signage along there now is really substandard even if the speed limit is 35. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 24, 2022, 03:51:05 PM
Something interesting I found: a few exits in the US-20 and OH-2 concurrency near Cleveland were initially unnumbered, then temporarily numbered 191 and 193 in the mid-2010s, then the numbers were removed from the signs again. I wonder why they did this??

Sep 2011: There is a BGS, and the "Lake Ave / West Blvd" exit is unnumbered.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858223,-81.7444922,3a,65.1y,230.47h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEk3OHUSCqQXmSWijpPbHwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Aug 2014: There is now an "Exit 191" tab on the sign.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858082,-81.7443903,3a,46.9y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbGG9j0uW51OYTPjbpZa76Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Oct 2015: The exit sign and tab was removed during construction.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4857823,-81.7443959,3a,75y,253.35h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVVTU_88-lqTY6Cx_KQ-IA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Sep 2021: The entire BGS setup is removed and now there are no signs left.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4858537,-81.7444571,3a,63.6y,260.96h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sczks84cE8tlFAebTHT6WEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)

Visiting Cleveland from Colorado and LITERALLY drove that stretch today!!

When they downgraded much of the 55 MPH West Shoreway into the 35 MPH Edgewater Boulevard (as a former Clevelander, I have a bone to pick about this "downgrade" -- people still drive it as if it was still a freeway) it looks like ODOT pretty much turned over all control to the City of Cleveland.

The city, trying to "fool" the public that it is a boulevard and not a freeway (it still looks like the old freeway) eliminated all gantries (and exit numbers) from W. 25th/28th west to Clifton Blvd.

There are still exit numbers on what's left of the "official" West Shoreway between the Main Avenue Bridge and I-90 at Dead Man's Curve.

They pleasantly surprisingly left one button copy BGS; its not being an exit sign probably saved it.
https://goo.gl/maps/2YC9ngFgpim73fnL6

The signage along there now is really substandard even if the speed limit is 35. 

A lot of similarities between the Opportunity Corridor and Edgewater Parkway, except Opportunity is loaded with traffic lights.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on August 28, 2022, 01:23:50 AM
I have traveled this part of I-71 in downtown Cincinnati more times than I can count, and this sign has always bugged me.  Never took a picture until now.  What is blanked out on the lower part of this sign for I-471?

(https://i.imgur.com/jt9PHLJh.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: plain on August 28, 2022, 04:03:49 PM
I have traveled this part of I-71 in downtown Cincinnati more times than I can count, and this sign has always bugged me.  Never took a picture until now.  What is blanked out on the lower part of this sign for I-471?

(https://i.imgur.com/jt9PHLJh.jpg)

Looks kinda slim to be another control city. Maybe EXIT ONLY or something?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: wriddle082 on August 28, 2022, 04:40:15 PM
I have traveled this part of I-71 in downtown Cincinnati more times than I can count, and this sign has always bugged me.  Never took a picture until now.  What is blanked out on the lower part of this sign for I-471?

(https://i.imgur.com/jt9PHLJh.jpg)

Looks kinda slim to be another control city. Maybe EXIT ONLY or something?

Might be something along the lines of “TRUCKS MUST EXIT” to keep trucks off of Ft. Washington Way or the Brent Spence Bridge during times of construction or “distress” on either.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 28, 2022, 04:43:07 PM
I think it was "Exit Only". I vaguely remember seeing that uncovered for a brief period.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on August 28, 2022, 08:50:20 PM
I think it was "Exit Only". I vaguely remember seeing that uncovered for a brief period.

With the darker green square on the lower left, it could be covering up a downward arrow and perhaps some unusual information (Alt Route, Trucks this lane only, etc...)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 28, 2022, 10:11:42 PM
The wording underneath the greenout is Eggleston Ave.  There was a temporary exit built for Eggleston so drivers could reach the downtown area when the Third Street tube of the Lytle Tunnel was closed and being rehabbed back around 2005 (yes, the sign is that old).  The ramp went through what is now Fido Field (a small dog park).  Here is a 2009 GSV of where the ramp was located: https://goo.gl/maps/Wrcgv9aEDiT3cSzv6

If you notice in the photo, the darker green section of the greenout is covering the two lower case g's.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Harvestman on August 28, 2022, 10:44:29 PM
The wording underneath the greenout is Eggleston Ave.  There was a temporary exit built for Eggleston so drivers could reach the downtown area when the Third Street tube of the Lytle Tunnel was closed and being rehabbed back around 2005 (yes, the sign is that old).  The ramp went through what is now Fido Field (a small dog park).  Here is a 2009 GSV of where the ramp was located: https://goo.gl/maps/Wrcgv9aEDiT3cSzv6

If you notice in the photo, the darker green section of the greenout is covering the two lower case g's.

Very interesting! Thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 29, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
Thank you!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 20, 2022, 10:15:32 AM
I heard a radio commercial for some beer store in the Marblehead/Catawba area that said something like "Roundabout construction woes have you feeling down, well we're still open..."

So I take the new roundabout for OH 163/North Shore Blvd/Englebeck Rd is underway.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on September 20, 2022, 04:26:08 PM
I heard a radio commercial for some beer store in the Marblehead/Catawba area that said something like "Roundabout construction woes have you feeling down, well we're still open..."

So I take the new roundabout for OH 163/North Shore Blvd/Englebeck Rd is underway.

When I was up there over Labor Day, signs indicated construction would begin Sept. 12, so I guess it did.  Hopefully, it will be completed before Memorial Day.  I'll be up there again in October, so I'll be interested to see how much has been accomplished.