News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

US 33 Upgrades in Ohio

Started by Buck87, March 25, 2015, 11:36:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

TempoNick

10TV:  ODOT to launch $40,000 drone to cover a section of US 33

ODOT announced plans for the $40,000 drone on Thursday, though they have not yet said when it will be flying.

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/ohio/odot-to-launch-drone-on-us-route-33/530-1485ea6d-e289-403f-86ed-dc418c306fd8


Plutonic Panda

That's a drop in the bucket compared to their budget but wow that price seems pretty high but I don't know much about drones.

GCrites

A lot of it might be the camera.

TempoNick

Quote from: GCrites80s on March 03, 2024, 08:52:12 PM
A lot of it might be the camera.

I wonder what the range is for these things. I wonder how long it can stay up in the air with battery power.

seicer

I assume they are under a "buy American" only policy, which excludes cheaper (and IMO better) alternatives from DJI because they are Chinese-owned. Any agency working with federal dollars has to abide by that restriction, but I don't think this project has any federal funding. It could be a state mandate.

The range wouldn't be the biggest hurdle, as even my DJI Mavic 3 Pro can go 44 minutes in the air on a single battery. Even with my drone, you can go a mile or so and have ample signal from the transmitter if you don't have any interference. For the casual pilot, they would need to abide by a Visual Line of Sight. You can use spotters to work around this with an Enhanced Visual Line of Sight. Then, there are Beyond Visual Line of Sight operations, but this requires FAA approval. None of this requires a $40,000+ drone.

What ODOT purchased is a Censys Sentaero with a 40 mile range and a 1 hour flight life. It has a cellular link so interference shouldn't be an issue.

What ODOT purchased is a drone for traffic management and emergency operations and they will be working with Beyond Visual Line of Sight operations, requiring FAA approval which was granted. And it's only to be used for a four mile stretch of US 33. I am assuming this is a test so they can launch this drone in many more places - because this in itself isn't cost-effective.

But... can you imagine OHP licking their lips at the thought of traffic enforcement with a drone? Speed monitoring with an eye in the sky would be far cheaper than hiring a pilot to fly along an interstate.

6a

Quote from: seicer on March 04, 2024, 04:21:47 PM
But... can you imagine OHP licking their lips at the thought of traffic enforcement with a drone? Speed monitoring with an eye in the sky would be far cheaper than hiring a pilot to fly along an interstate.

I'm imagining small speed trap towns using excess ticket revenue for "public safety".

GCrites

I remember Car and Driver took a trip to US-23 between South Bloomfield and Circleville to investigate the whole airplane speed enforcement thing about 20 years ago. There were special lines painted on the pavement to tell the plane passenger when to start and stop timing. So it took two people in the air plus at least one trooper on the ground (I think there may have been two or three) to do since you shouldn't be doing that while flying the plane.

TempoNick

I got an answer from ODOT regarding my question about what is going to happen on the West Virginia side. I asked if there were any plans to build a new bridge and connect directly to I-77.

"Response: Thank you for your comment. We are currently working on selecting a consultant to conduct a study for the Ravenswood Bridge/West Virginia side."

Interesting that ODOT appears to be paying to study the West Virginia side. Since there is only a stub in West Virginia, if this thing ever gets built, could ODOT be paying the bulk of the cost not picked up by the Feds?

Could this have anything to do with Intel? Seems like a little bit of a low priority project to me compared to some other things that need to get done unless Intel has something to do with it. Maybe they need to connect up with I-77 to get to North Carolina where there is a lot of tech. But that's okay, finishing off US 33 in that direction is okay by me.

Bitmapped

Quote from: TempoNick on March 07, 2024, 03:16:39 AM
I got an answer from ODOT regarding my question about what is going to happen on the West Virginia side. I asked if there were any plans to build a new bridge and connect directly to I-77.

"Response: Thank you for your comment. We are currently working on selecting a consultant to conduct a study for the Ravenswood Bridge/West Virginia side."

Interesting that ODOT appears to be paying to study the West Virginia side. Since there is only a stub in West Virginia, if this thing ever gets built, could ODOT be paying the bulk of the cost not picked up by the Feds?

It's common for one state to manage projects that involve spanning state lines, with the other state picking up part of the tab. For example, West Virginia was responsible for managing the new Wellsburg Bridge over the Ohio River. ODOT contributed a share of the cost for the Ohio approach to the bridge.

States will sometime manage construction projects in other states. Recently, Maryland replaced their bridges on I-81 over the Potomac River with wider structures. MDSHA managed widening I-81 to 6 lanes to the first interchange on both sides of the bridge. West Virginia paid Maryland the cost of the West Virginia widening and for their expenses in managing the project.

A better corollary for this US 33 project is when WVDOH was constructing Corridor G north of Williamson. It was advantageous for West Virginia to have US 119 to cross back into Kentucky in two places rather than trying to shoehorn the road on the West Virginia side. West Virginia built and continues to maintain the portions in Kentucky because they were constructed for West Virginia's benefit. I would expect the same to happen here. The existing bridge and routing are adequate for the traffic volume. Any proposed widening is in service of Ohio's widening project. I would expect Ohio to be responsible for funding most or all of the cost since they are the ones who stand to benefit from the work.

TempoNick

Quote from: Bitmapped on March 07, 2024, 07:51:31 AM
Quote from: TempoNick on March 07, 2024, 03:16:39 AM
I got an answer from ODOT regarding my question about what is going to happen on the West Virginia side. I asked if there were any plans to build a new bridge and connect directly to I-77.

"Response: Thank you for your comment. We are currently working on selecting a consultant to conduct a study for the Ravenswood Bridge/West Virginia side."

Interesting that ODOT appears to be paying to study the West Virginia side. Since there is only a stub in West Virginia, if this thing ever gets built, could ODOT be paying the bulk of the cost not picked up by the Feds?

It's common for one state to manage projects that involve spanning state lines, with the other state picking up part of the tab. For example, West Virginia was responsible for managing the new Wellsburg Bridge over the Ohio River. ODOT contributed a share of the cost for the Ohio approach to the bridge.

States will sometime manage construction projects in other states. Recently, Maryland replaced their bridges on I-81 over the Potomac River with wider structures. MDSHA managed widening I-81 to 6 lanes to the first interchange on both sides of the bridge. West Virginia paid Maryland the cost of the West Virginia widening and for their expenses in managing the project.

A better corollary for this US 33 project is when WVDOH was constructing Corridor G north of Williamson. It was advantageous for West Virginia to have US 119 to cross back into Kentucky in two places rather than trying to shoehorn the road on the West Virginia side. West Virginia built and continues to maintain the portions in Kentucky because they were constructed for West Virginia's benefit. I would expect the same to happen here. The existing bridge and routing are adequate for the traffic volume. Any proposed widening is in service of Ohio's widening project. I would expect Ohio to be responsible for funding most or all of the cost since they are the ones who stand to benefit from the work.

Yes, ODOT manages the traffic flow and virtual sign boards in Northern Kentucky (Metro Cincinnati), but I didn't realize that it would also go into another state and construct a highway.

I'm still curious why all of a sudden this became a priority. Maybe a bunch of infrastructure money is about to be dumped on Ohio. It seems like fixing US 23 or US 35 through Beavercreek would be a higher priority than twinning a road that's basically in the middle of nowhere.

seicer

Both sections are typical rural highways that are system linkages, with the two-lane section between Athens and Pomeroy approaching a poor level of service because of the amount of traffic it handles, with trucks making up an increasing percentage of traffic.

TempoNick

Quote from: seicer on March 07, 2024, 12:44:30 PM
Both sections are typical rural highways that are system linkages, with the two-lane section between Athens and Pomeroy approaching a poor level of service because of the amount of traffic it handles, with trucks making up an increasing percentage of traffic.

But still, is it a higher priority than US 23 (both north and south of Columbus) or a permanent fix for US 35?

JREwing78

Quote from: TempoNick on March 07, 2024, 01:36:50 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 07, 2024, 12:44:30 PM
Both sections are typical rural highways that are system linkages, with the two-lane section between Athens and Pomeroy approaching a poor level of service because of the amount of traffic it handles, with trucks making up an increasing percentage of traffic.

But still, is it a higher priority than US 23 (both north and south of Columbus) or a permanent fix for US 35?


Probably not. But it wouldn't be the first time an easier-to-execute project took precedence over projects mired in red tape.

seicer

It depends on TRAC's priorities. There is no formal project for upgrading anything US 23 south of Columbus outside of some bandaid improvements - like with the Interstate 270 junction revision. An S. Bloomfield bypass was proposed with an alignment selected, but I've not seen anything move on that in some 20 years. (Gcrites might know more about this.)

I suspect some of this is political will, but maybe also a factor of what is "shovel ready." Anything with the US 23 corridor south of Columbus will take many years of planning efforts in conjunction with the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), although there is some movement toward building an interchange at OH 762. Projects in the Columbus (and Dayton) area also have to compete with other higher-priority projects in those planning regions. US 33's upgrades in southeast Ohio do not.

TempoNick

Quote from: seicer on March 07, 2024, 04:32:08 PM
It depends on TRAC's priorities. There is no formal project for upgrading anything US 23 south of Columbus outside of some bandaid improvements - like with the Interstate 270 junction revision. An S. Bloomfield bypass was proposed with an alignment selected, but I've not seen anything move on that in some 20 years. (Gcrites might know more about this.)

I suspect some of this is political will, but maybe also a factor of what is "shovel ready." Anything with the US 23 corridor south of Columbus will take many years of planning efforts in conjunction with the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), although there is some movement toward building an interchange at OH 762. Projects in the Columbus (and Dayton) area also have to compete with other higher-priority projects in those planning regions. US 33's upgrades in southeast Ohio do not.

I think the other thing also is that people in Southeast Ohio welcome any investment in the area, whereas more prosperous/populated parts of the state are full of NIMBYs. I doubt there is too much resistance to twinning US 33. I'm very concerned about US 23 North of Columbus to Waldo getting some kind of a fix before it is too late to do anything.

KelleyCook

Quote from: TempoNick on March 07, 2024, 11:50:08 AM
I'm still curious why all of a sudden this became a priority. Maybe a bunch of infrastructure money is about to be dumped on Ohio. It seems like fixing US 23 or US 35 through Beavercreek would be a higher priority than twinning a road that's basically in the middle of nowhere.

Someone with clout wants to be able to get to their condo in Myrtle Beach quicker ?

GCrites

Quote from: seicer on March 07, 2024, 04:32:08 PM
It depends on TRAC's priorities. There is no formal project for upgrading anything US 23 south of Columbus outside of some bandaid improvements - like with the Interstate 270 junction revision. An S. Bloomfield bypass was proposed with an alignment selected, but I've not seen anything move on that in some 20 years. (Gcrites might know more about this.)

I know a little more but most of that consists of knowing lots of locals want something done about it since that's where I went to high school. And I'd imagine a lot of non-local frequent users that aren't on this forum want something done as well. I'm starting to see more nasty rear-enders happen. One of my best friends was sitting at a light on the Ashville Road side when two cars collided hard in the intersection with one landing on his hood. The part that pissed him off the most that it wasn't enough to total his car with it being a car he hated in general and had belonged to his ex-wife.

GCrites

Quote from: TempoNick on March 07, 2024, 05:08:24 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 07, 2024, 04:32:08 PM
It depends on TRAC's priorities. There is no formal project for upgrading anything US 23 south of Columbus outside of some bandaid improvements - like with the Interstate 270 junction revision. An S. Bloomfield bypass was proposed with an alignment selected, but I've not seen anything move on that in some 20 years. (Gcrites might know more about this.)

I suspect some of this is political will, but maybe also a factor of what is "shovel ready." Anything with the US 23 corridor south of Columbus will take many years of planning efforts in conjunction with the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), although there is some movement toward building an interchange at OH 762. Projects in the Columbus (and Dayton) area also have to compete with other higher-priority projects in those planning regions. US 33's upgrades in southeast Ohio do not.

I think the other thing also is that people in Southeast Ohio welcome any investment in the area, whereas more prosperous/populated parts of the state are full of NIMBYs. I doubt there is too much resistance to twinning US 33. I'm very concerned about US 23 North of Columbus to Waldo getting some kind of a fix before it is too late to do anything.

They were even talking about this on WOSU on Monday I think. Basically they were saying something should have been done long ago and now it sucks to try and maintain those businesses.

TempoNick

Quote from: GCrites80s on March 07, 2024, 08:54:59 PM

They were even talking about this on WOSU on Monday I think. Basically they were saying something should have been done long ago and now it sucks to try and maintain those businesses.

I don't think there's any way they could run an expressway through US 23. The only thing they can do is bypass Delaware and time is getting short for the ability to do that, too. They really need to get on this before it's too late.

carbaugh2

The other thing to remember is that 33 was always intended to become a 4 lane highway when the original Super 2 sections were constructed 20 years ago, and preliminary planning is already complete. It's just a matter of updating the original plans.

I don't think this is specifically related to Intel, but I think that Intel's imminent arrival has brought more urgency to improving the capacity problems going east and southeast of Columbus.

TempoNick

Quote from: carbaugh2 on March 08, 2024, 12:31:08 PM
The other thing to remember is that 33 was always intended to become a 4 lane highway when the original Super 2 sections were constructed 20 years ago, and preliminary planning is already complete. It's just a matter of updating the original plans.

I don't think this is specifically related to Intel, but I think that Intel's imminent arrival has brought more urgency to improving the capacity problems going east and southeast of Columbus.

I hope not, but Metro Columbus may be on pace to grow to be as large as Atlanta or at least Minneapolis-St. Paul. If they don't have the money to build the roads, at the very least they should acquire the right of way so that it doesn't become too expensive to build something in the future.

carbaugh2

Quote from: carbaugh2 on February 15, 2024, 04:47:16 PM
Quote from: seicer on February 15, 2024, 01:22:24 PM
It would be nice to see more intersections closed, especially north of Logan - and the right-in/right-out at that rest area modified into ramps.

They received a $1 million grant for a feasibility study covering Sugar Grove to 180 back in November 2022. Hopefully we see the results soon.

https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/OHIOGOVERNOR/2022/11/03/file_attachments/2319081/2022%20Safety%20Projects.pdf

It turns out ODOT had a meeting about the Lancaster to Logan section earlier this week, but it is still open to public comment. You can find the page at https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/115635. All 4 alternatives are for modifying the Rockbridge intersections (CR 10 & 374) into an interchange, which is long overdue. It also includes building frontage roads to restrict 33 access that would look a lot like 161/37 between New Albany and Granville. The plan also includes modifying the 33 WB/180 intersection to a roundabout, which makes sense due to the nearby elementary school.

After a quick look, I'm not a fan of Alternative 4, which relocates 33 slightly south; it's too much earth moving and takes the rest areas out of play, which always seem to have a lot of use when I drive through and is especially useful for semis coming from 77. Alternative 2 feels a lot like the Carrol interchange and feels overdone. I like the overall concept of Alternative 1, but only if 374 is extended on the frontage road to the interchange to ease tourist confusion. The other issue is getting the traffic from the intersection to the flea market, which has become a big draw in a similar manner to the markets in Berlin in Amish Country. I think I would like alternative 3 the most if they adjusted the track of 374 to meet up with the connector road. Overall, I am excited to see ODOT moving so quickly on design plans to improve 33 to a freeway from Columbus through Athens.

TempoNick

Quote from: carbaugh2 on March 16, 2024, 07:19:24 AM
The plan also includes modifying the 33 WB/180 intersection to a roundabout, which makes sense due to the nearby elementary school.


I hope you're not trying to imply that the roundabout will be directly on US 33. If that's what they're planning, that's nuts.

GCrites

The drawings illustrate that the northern side of the off-ramp junction gets a roundabout.

TempoNick

Quote from: GCrites80s on March 16, 2024, 10:47:44 PM
The drawings illustrate that the northern side of the off-ramp junction gets a roundabout.

Okay, that's were I thought they would be putting the roundabout. Relief.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.