Print

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

[iBallasticwolf2]

Why does this have to be a freeway?

[vtk]

Why does this have to be a freeway?

Technically it doesn't. However, projected traffic volume, Appalacian Development Corridor design standards, and functional preservation suggest it should at least be a four lane expressway. Given the hilly terrain and low number of existing roads crossing the route, full grade separation is added value at low marginal cost.

[6a]

In just about every highway project in Kentucky that requires substantial tree-cutting, most of it is required to be done during winter months. I'm not sure what the environmental concern is for that. I suspect it has to do with animal habitat. I also hardly ever see any timber being harvested by the state. Some locals will get some of the easy pickins for firewood, but most of the wood is piled up and burned.

So it's possible that what's depicted in that photo is normal clearing and grubbing.

Long assed time between Q and A here, but it's the Indiana bat.

[iBallasticwolf2]

I would think a four lane divided expressway with interchanges only at major roads would work just fine

[6a]

I would think a four lane divided expressway with interchanges only at major roads would work just fine

That's what is being discussed here, thanks for your input.

[iBallasticwolf2]

There is a difference between a four-lane divided highway with at-grade intersections and a full-blown freeway

[seicer]

It IS a freeway. Nothing else has been discussed. I suspect one of the reasons for the limited access with no intersections is the eventual goal of upgrading US 23-52 into an interstate corridor. The South Bloomfield project further north is fully limited access with no intersections as well.

[GCrites80s]

^Wait what? South Bloomfield interchange? I haven't heard anything new about that one. Googling only produces an UrbanOhio post made by you in 2007.

[vtk]

The bypass will run high through the hills. There are few existing roads crossing the route, and where there is an existing road to cross, it's probably easier to build a bridge than to have the roads meet at the same level.

[seicer]

^Wait what? South Bloomfield interchange? I haven't heard anything new about that one. Googling only produces an UrbanOhio post made by you in 2007.

I need to find the ODOT drawing, but it shows a sweeping bypass of South Bloomfield that's entirely limited access. It would cut to the east of the village.

[Buck87]

I suspect one of the reasons for the limited access with no intersections is the eventual goal of upgrading US 23-52 into an interstate corridor.

While pretty much everything I've read on here suggests I-73/I-74 in Ohio is dead, a Portsmouth bypass was going to be one of the key elements of making that happen. So yeah, I can see that as a possible reason to make this a freeway now, so that it's ready just in case the interstate idea ever comes back to life years from now.

The bypass will run high through the hills. There are few existing roads crossing the route, and where there is an existing road to cross, it's probably easier to build a bridge than to have the roads meet at the same level.

Exactly, there's only like 12-15 roads that cross the route, and most of them would probably have to have their own route significantly altered just to meet this thing at grade. Most of the roads in that area are in valleys and it looks like this thing sticks to the hilltops and ridges.

[vtk]

^Wait what? South Bloomfield interchange? I haven't heard anything new about that one. Googling only produces an UrbanOhio post made by you in 2007.

I need to find the ODOT drawing, but it shows a sweeping bypass of South Bloomfield that's entirely limited access. It would cut to the east of the village.

I believe I saw that drawing too.  It was more then ten years ago, and I hadn't heard anything more about it until you mentioned it.  District 6 doesn't have a project / study page abut South Bloomfield, as of the last time I checked.  It may be a long-term intention, but I'm not aware of any current movement.  Is there any funding for this in the current or next budget cycle?  Please don't mistake my cynicism for hostility; I would actually be glad to see this move forward, but I don't think it's happening anytime soon.

[seicer]

Right, it is a long term project, but it is out there and designed. I am assuming that it is funding that is the holdup; it's nowhere on the TARC list for 2015-18 (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/FINAL_2015-2018_MAJOR_NEW_PROGRAM_LIST_2.26.15.pdf).

[mvak36]

Ran across this today. I guess it got announced two weeks ago.
http://www.portsmouth-dailytimes.com/news/news/152860472/Highway-Ready-for-construction

[vtk]

Ran across this today. I guess it got announced two weeks ago.
http://www.portsmouth-dailytimes.com/news/news/152860472/Highway-Ready-for-construction

the new highway will complete the Appalachian Development Highway System in Ohio

No, I'm pretty sure the feds still consider Corridor C incomplete at Waverly and South Bloomfield.

[exit10]

Columbus Dispatch: State’s share of Portsmouth bypass rises to $1.2 billion over 35 years

[The Ghostbuster]

Will the bypass ever become part of US 23 or US 52? Or will it permanently remain State Route 823?

[Buck87]

Will the bypass ever become part of US 23 or US 52?

I've never seen such a thing mentioned anywhere.

Wouldn't work well for 52 as the Lucasville end of the bypass would take it way north of its route closely hugging the Ohio River.
Although it would be easy to reroute 23 to the bypass by using the Greenup Dam Bridge (OH 253/KY10) and a short concurrency with 52.

[hbelkins]

Probably should be signed as Bypass US 23, or Truck US 23.

[iBallasticwolf2]

Will the bypass ever become part of US 23 or US 52?

I've never seen such a thing mentioned anywhere.

Wouldn't work well for 52 as the Lucasville end of the bypass would take it way north of its route closely hugging the Ohio River.
Although it would be easy to reroute 23 to the bypass by using the Greenup Dam Bridge (OH 253/KY10) and a short concurrency with 52.

If you did that then you could extend KY 8 along the current US 23 until the current KY 10 and US 23 intersection.

[vtk]

Will the bypass ever become part of US 23 or US 52? Or will it permanently remain State Route 823?

It will be the mainline route of whichever Appalacian Development Highway System corridor mostly follows US 23, but neither Ohio nor Kentucky sign those designations (which is why I can never remember which letter corridor this is).

[GCrites80s]

I've never heard an (non-roadgeek) Ohioan refer to any road in the state as "Corridor __".

[hbelkins]

Will the bypass ever become part of US 23 or US 52? Or will it permanently remain State Route 823?

It will be the mainline route of whichever Appalachian Development Highway System corridor mostly follows US 23, but neither Ohio nor Kentucky sign those designations (which is why I can never remember which letter corridor this is).

Corridor B. And the Greenup Dam segment to reconnect with 23 north of Portsmouth is B-1.

And I fixed your spelling of Appalachian. Did you at one time work in an ODOT sign shop?  Because there used to be a bunch of signs along OH 32's eastern portion that spelled it "Appalacian Highway."

[Buck87]

The official groundbreaking ceremony took place on June 24 in Minford

http://www.wsaz.com/home/headlines/209M-in-Federal-Funding-for-Portsmouth-Bypass-Project-297516381.html

[vtk]

I've heard from a railroad employee that some serious excavation has been ongoing along the bypass route near Minford for a couple of months now, but I haven't yet gone to see it in person. I did, however, see today some activity starting on the west side of US 23 within the trumpet interchange footprint at Lucasville. I have photos, but I can't conveniently share them until I get home.