Ohio is in the slow process of converting US 33 to a full freeway from I-70 to the Lancaster bypass, a process consisting of several different projects that are in various stages of planning and funding. Some of this has been discussed previously in threads about other topics, so I'm starting this thread to keep future updates about this stretch of road under one roof. Here are some of the projects:
Carroll Interchange
This is the one project that is currently underway: http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/local/2015/03/07/carroll-interchange-construction/24568129/
Design map (pdf) (https://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D05/MajorProjects/CarrollInterchange/Documents/Revised%20ODOT%20Preferred%20Alternative%20(Alternative%203).pdf) - this will eliminate 2 at grade intersections and 1 traffic light, and build a new spread out interchange with new surface streets to access it.
Bixby Rd Interchange - Listed as TRAC tier 3, no funding yet, I haven't seen any drawings
Petzinger Rd Interchange - Several concepts drawn up as part of the larger Far East Freeway Study (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/October%202013%20Public%20Meeting/fareastfreeway10242013stakeholderpresentation.pdf), haven't seen anything beyond that
Pickerington Rd Interchange - latest I saw on this was an article from 2013 (http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/canalwinchester/news/2013/07/29/route-33-pickerington-road-officials-want-odot-to-reconsider-interchange.html) that said Pickerington wants ODOT to build an interchange at Allen Rd instead
High St/Bowen Rd Overpass - I've seen it listed in some studies and articles, but not much other than that
Any further info or updates on any of these or any other potential work on this corridor?
The Carroll work caught me by surprise. This stretch is part of my daily (well 4 days a week) so I try to stay on top of things.
Over the past couple weeks I've noticed survey work, and now staking in the area of 33 and 270/Hamilton. The staking is in the median up to about a half mile north of 270, and is especially evident around Hamilton. I've seen stakes on the exits to Hamilton as well, and the former golf range place had a building demolished. What's up here?
Quote from: 6a on March 26, 2015, 07:34:58 PM
Over the past couple weeks I've noticed survey work, and now staking in the area of 33 and 270/Hamilton. The staking is in the median up to about a half mile north of 270, and is especially evident around Hamilton. I've seen stakes on the exits to Hamilton as well, and the former golf range place had a building demolished. What's up here?
Paving The Way's 2015 Glovebox Guide, just out this week, doesn't list any projects at that location, so it's certainly something minor. Maybe it's related to those sign replacement plans you posted in the other thread?
Quote from: 6a on March 26, 2015, 07:34:58 PM
Over the past couple weeks I've noticed survey work, and now staking in the area of 33 and 270/Hamilton. The staking is in the median up to about a half mile north of 270, and is especially evident around Hamilton. I've seen stakes on the exits to Hamilton as well, and the former golf range place had a building demolished. What's up here?
Yeah that's been some serious survey work going on at 33 and 270. I see those guys a lot on my way to work. What I think goes on is that there's a lot of crashes involving the heavy 270E to 33E merge. The Armco in the 33 median has been replaced several times in the past year after suffering heavy damage.
The demo at the mini golf place is the old batting cages. It's been sitting like that for a long time. I don't think the guy who owns the place wants to pay to have the material hauled away is all.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 26, 2015, 10:19:56 PMWhat I think goes on is that there's a lot of crashes involving the heavy 270N to 33E merge.
Fixed for you. (The "corner" of I-270 is at Alum Creek Dr.)
Oh, I always screw that up.
Yeah, the only obvious corner is at 33/161 in Dublin.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 25, 2015, 12:32:57 PM
The Carroll work caught me by surprise. This stretch is part of my daily (well 4 days a week) so I try to stay on top of things.
That whole thing is an interesting design. I'm sure there will be some locals not thrilled at having to go so far to get to the other side of 33, though it looks like this was the best way of building an interchange without having to tear down a bunch of stuff.
It reminds me of the SR 16/Cherry Valley design in some ways.
Quote from: Buck87 on March 29, 2015, 04:52:23 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 25, 2015, 12:32:57 PM
The Carroll work caught me by surprise. This stretch is part of my daily (well 4 days a week) so I try to stay on top of things.
That whole thing is an interesting design. I'm sure there will be some locals not thrilled at having to go so far to get to the other side of 33, though it looks like this was the best way of building an interchange without having to tear down a bunch of stuff.
Yeah, the lack of a "Carrol Southern Connector" strikes me as odd and potentially inconvenient for a lot of local trips. I suppose it's not out of the question for Fairfield County to build it themselves at some point, as it wouldn't have to intersect US 33 or its ramps directly. I imagine such a road might start at Carroll Southern Road about ¼ mile south of the I&O tracks, proceed east, northeast, and north, to end at Plum Road east of Bloom Carroll High School. It would go over both the railroad and US 33. But that's just my amateur opinion.
How long before they extend the freeway all the way to Athens? In between there and Lancaster, lots of at-grade intersections still exist.
Petzinger Rd will likely stay partially at-grade, especially if the current plans are what is used.
The Carroll interchange is needed, but I don't like the lack of access. I'm surprised they didn't elevate or depress US 33 for a stretch to improve access for cross traffic.
Bixby Rd has been on the plans for years and I've seen all sorts of proposed configurations on various online mapping services.
At this point, it's pretty much expressway grade from I-70 to US 50 and mostly "restricted access" through I-77. Hey, they may as well dualize the super 2 section and call it I-73 :-D
Quote from: cl94 on March 30, 2015, 01:17:16 PM
Petzinger Rd will likely stay partially at-grade, especially if the current plans are what is used.
Which are what? Just curious since I can't find anything about this project more recent than the multiple concept link from 2013 I posted above (other than this article (http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/canalwinchester/news/2015/02/24/odot-outlines-plan-for-future-construction.html) which seams to be referencing the same thing)
Quote from: Buck87 on March 30, 2015, 01:45:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 30, 2015, 01:17:16 PM
Petzinger Rd will likely stay partially at-grade, especially if the current plans are what is used.
Which are what? Just curious since I can't find anything about this project more recent than the multiple concept link from 2013 I posted above (other than this article (http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/canalwinchester/news/2015/02/24/odot-outlines-plan-for-future-construction.html) which seams to be referencing the same thing)
The plans from District 6's Far East Freeway Study page
Ah, I see what you mean. They have the Option 4 plan from the 2013 far east study listed as the preferred alternative.
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger%20Option%204.pdf
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_1.jpg
The only part of that plan that's still at grade at Petzinger is traffic coming from the already arterial portion of 33 north of 70, which is no big deal IMO. The main movements of 70 to 33 and 33 to 70 are what get the upgrade. Looks like one little issue with that plan is that traffic coming off Petzinger to 33 west will no longer be able to access the loop ramp to 70 west, but at least that traffic can use the College Ave to Livingston portion of 33 to get on 70 at exit 103.
From the 315 thread:
Quote from: 6a on March 29, 2015, 02:21:03 PM(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F15%2F03%2F29%2Fc12f0b8a7dd3400125642386bc616e79.jpg&hash=b50ecf92c0a8d6906e5f64cd88b2025951324947)
What the heck is there to do on 33 between Dublin and Bexley? Possibly answering my own question, last night I saw enhanced mile markers at the intersection of Livingston & College, which is just weird.
Also: is the ramp from SB OH 257 to EB US 33 going to be called exit 0?
Looks like just work around the Twin Rivers area from what I can tell.
Yeah, those enhanced mile markers go all the way down College - I imagine it's a super-reassurance thing. Or a test. Either way, it's weird to just have them there and nowhere else on the U.S./ State Route system, especially if they're going balls out on numbering exits.
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 06, 2015, 12:09:02 AM
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Yes but I'm pretty sure putting them on conventional surface streets is new.
Quote from: vtk on April 06, 2015, 05:06:37 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 06, 2015, 12:09:02 AM
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Yes but I'm pretty sure putting them on conventional surface streets is new.
Yeah, this is the one vtk's referring to - they go down College as well, joining up with the freeway portion. I've not seen them in that setting anywhere else.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F15%2F04%2F06%2F7d498b29ec95d278786ddae589e25cd3.jpg&hash=ae631ae753da8d58fa3e7797342cace97dc46665)
How very Massachusetts of them. Mass has been putting 2/10 mile markers on surface state routes for a while as well as limited access ones. Seems like overkill maybe, but they must have their reasons.
I could see a rule that if some part of the route is limited access, the whole route gets the markers. Otherwise it's on and off and on.
Evansville, Indiana has mile markers along surface streets as well, but I've never seen them in Ohio. I've driven that stretch of 33 a few times from Columbus to Lancaster before. I suppose there hasn't been anything about actual exit numbers along that highway down past Logan, Nelsonville and Athens has there? I know there are exit numbers in Nelsonville BTW.
Quote from: 6a on April 06, 2015, 04:47:23 PM
Quote from: vtk on April 06, 2015, 05:06:37 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 06, 2015, 12:09:02 AM
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Yes but I'm pretty sure putting them on conventional surface streets is new.
Yeah, this is the one vtk's referring to - they go down College as well, joining up with the freeway portion. I've not seen them in that setting anywhere else.
[image removeed]
I didn't know that stretch was even state-maintained. Thought Livingston, Main, and Broad were entirely local maintenance.
Quote from: cl94 on April 06, 2015, 10:50:52 PM
Quote from: 6a on April 06, 2015, 04:47:23 PM
Quote from: vtk on April 06, 2015, 05:06:37 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 06, 2015, 12:09:02 AM
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Yes but I'm pretty sure putting them on conventional surface streets is new.
Yeah, this is the one vtk's referring to - they go down College as well, joining up with the freeway portion. I've not seen them in that setting anywhere else.
[image removeed]
I didn't know that stretch was even state-maintained. Thought Livingston, Main, and Broad were entirely local maintenance.
As I understand it, that should be local maintenance. But that doesn't mean ODOT can't erect signs in cooperation with the local jurisdictions.
Wish Indiana could do that.
Quote from: vtk on April 07, 2015, 01:36:26 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 06, 2015, 10:50:52 PM
Quote from: 6a on April 06, 2015, 04:47:23 PM
Quote from: vtk on April 06, 2015, 05:06:37 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 06, 2015, 12:09:02 AM
By enhanced mile markers, do we mean the blue ones with shield and 2/10 mileage? If so, they are out there in Ohio in many places on US and state routes and have been for a while. I've seen them on US 35, OH 8, US 422, OH 315 to name a few. (315 even has a few odd-tenth ones.) These predated exit numbering even.
Yes but I'm pretty sure putting them on conventional surface streets is new.
Yeah, this is the one vtk's referring to - they go down College as well, joining up with the freeway portion. I've not seen them in that setting anywhere else.
[image removeed]
I didn't know that stretch was even state-maintained. Thought Livingston, Main, and Broad were entirely local maintenance.
As I understand it, that should be local maintenance. But that doesn't mean ODOT can't erect signs in cooperation with the local jurisdictions.
ODOT in Region 4 did go on a kick a couple years ago placing the small white mile markers that reset at county lines on non-state-maintained sections of numbered routes. All the routes (18, 261, 59, 91, 241, etc.) passing through Akron, Fairlawn, Cuyahoga Falls, etc. got them. (Some nearly instantly became bases for other signs--for example, AKTE right away used the u-channel post for OH 18 mile marker 6 to attach another sign post to so now the mile marker isn't visible correctly in both directions.
Now indeed, I wonder why INDOT can't be allowed to reach some understanding where state route numbers can be blazed over city streets with city maintenance. It would beat the crap with routes like 25 and 26 randomly starting and ending. (Although the reaction of some to the West Lafayette State Street stuff included comments like "now that we're free of the state on this, we can do what we want at last!" makes me think that maybe enough people don't WANT the routes continuous...)
Any update on the Carroll interchange? I can't seem to find much about what progress has been made since the project got underway in the spring.
I don't go that way for work as frequently as I used to, but as of the fall, it looked like the work was progressing steadily.
Yes, steady progress. It's still in the grading phase; no bridge beams down yet.
Just noticed you can see the Carroll project underway in the current Google maps aerial and street view pics.
District 5 is not good about posting updates to the project page or even on Facebook
Quote from: Buck87 on June 08, 2016, 09:14:57 AM
Just noticed you can see the Carroll project underway in the current Google maps aerial and street view pics.
District 5 is not good about posting updates to the project page or even on Facebook
Now, to properly redo that part between I-70 and I-270 (southeast) . . . .
(yea, we can all dream :spin: )
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on June 08, 2016, 10:29:32 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on June 08, 2016, 09:14:57 AM
Just noticed you can see the Carroll project underway in the current Google maps aerial and street view pics.
District 5 is not good about posting updates to the project page or even on Facebook
Now, to properly redo that part between I-70 and I-270 (southeast) . . . .
(yea, we can all dream :spin: )
Mike
Not gonna happen. Rebuild plans have them keeping the signal.
Quote from: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 11:26:50 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on June 08, 2016, 10:29:32 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on June 08, 2016, 09:14:57 AM
Just noticed you can see the Carroll project underway in the current Google maps aerial and street view pics.
District 5 is not good about posting updates to the project page or even on Facebook
Now, to properly redo that part between I-70 and I-270 (southeast) . . . .
(yea, we can all dream :spin: )
Mike
Not gonna happen. Rebuild plans have them keeping the signal.
That section is within the scope of a study covering a portion of I-70. Last I saw alternatives for that one, there was one which was very impressive. While still technically retaining the Petzinger Rd signal on US 33, the ramps between I-70 towards Downtown and US-33 towards Lancaster would fly over that intersection in that alternative.
Quote from: vtk on June 08, 2016, 12:15:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 11:26:50 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on June 08, 2016, 10:29:32 AM
Quote from: Buck87 on June 08, 2016, 09:14:57 AM
Just noticed you can see the Carroll project underway in the current Google maps aerial and street view pics.
District 5 is not good about posting updates to the project page or even on Facebook
Now, to properly redo that part between I-70 and I-270 (southeast) . . . .
(yea, we can all dream :spin: )
Mike
Not gonna happen. Rebuild plans have them keeping the signal.
That section is within the scope of a study covering a portion of I-70. Last I saw alternatives for that one, there was one which was very impressive. While still technically retaining the Petzinger Rd signal on US 33, the ramps between I-70 towards Downtown and US-33 towards Lancaster would fly over that intersection in that alternative.
That was my point. I actually like that alternative, as it preserves the freeway-freeway connection. Actually, I like ODOT's plans for I-70 between downtown and SR 204. It'll do a lot to solve the issues in that area.
Quote from: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 12:32:34 PM
That was my point. I actually like that alternative, as it preserves the freeway-freeway connection. Actually, I like ODOT's plans for I-70 between downtown and SR 204. It'll do a lot to solve the issues in that area.
I guess ODOT might be inspired by the freeway-freeway connection of I-680 and US-6/West Dodge Road at Omaha. http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=41.26479,-96.08275&z=15&t=S
District 5 has been posting some pics of the Carroll project lately on facebook, here's the most recent post: https://www.facebook.com/ODOTD5/posts/1177470612294077
That picture is at least a month old since the beams on the other side of the overpass are now down. The approach on the right is much further along as well.
The McDonalds at the new interchange has rage-closed. Looking like a month or two until project completion.
It's a shame my job doesn't take me this way anymore...
So apparently traffic has been using the new interchange at Carroll since the middle of November. Anyone been through there yet?
Yes, I'm through there 5 days a week. It took me until Friday to actually use the interchange though. Barriers on 33 still need finished and I imagine 33 through there will be repaved once the asphalt plants re-open for the year. The asphalt has that awkward look and feel of having a project done on it without any more work done on the surface itself. Also, more lighting is yet to be installed. I think all the signage has been installed except for little stuff like mileage markers and cryptic inventory stuff.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on June 08, 2016, 04:31:48 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 08, 2016, 12:32:34 PM
That was my point. I actually like that alternative, as it preserves the freeway-freeway connection. Actually, I like ODOT's plans for I-70 between downtown and SR 204. It'll do a lot to solve the issues in that area.
I guess ODOT might be inspired by the freeway-freeway connection of I-680 and US-6/West Dodge Road at Omaha. http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=41.26479,-96.08275&z=15&t=S
I'd love to see a map of this proposal.
:nod:
Mike
There are now 3D renderings of the proposed US 33/Petzinger Rd interchange/intersection:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_1.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_6.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_7b.jpg
and here's the above view: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger%20Option%204.pdf
Quote from: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 03:15:55 PM
There are now 3D renderings of the proposed US 33/Petzinger Rd interchange/intersection:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_1.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_6.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_7b.jpg
and here's the above view: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger%20Option%204.pdf
Interesting solution for that part of that area. The only change that I would make would be to extend a conventional sidewalk to the northwest on the southwest side of US 33.
Elsewhere in that area, I would redo the I-70/James Rd interchange to eliminate the westbound 'par-clo' ramps on I-70, replacing them with diamond ramps (eastbound to remain), replacing the signalized ramp intersections with roundabouts and extending Petzinger Rd eastward to the roundabout that would be built at the EB ramp intersection, giving that area along Petzinger a useful 'second way out' (could Petzinger Rd to the east be reconnected with James Rd, too?). I would also rebuild James Rd in that area to urban standards with curbs, sidewalks, streetlights, etc.
The US 33/OH 104/Refugee Rd/James Rd/Winchester Pike (et al) part will be an interesting challenge to update, especially to restore local non-motorized connectivity and integrate the area into a cohesive urban network, too.
Mike
I find it odd that they've gone to such lengths to grade-separate traffic in the area, and then only provide one lane coming off of EBD I-70 to EBD US-33. I would think that would be a major enough movement to justify 2 EBD lanes.
Quote from: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 03:15:55 PM
There are now 3D renderings of the proposed US 33/Petzinger Rd interchange/intersection:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_1.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_6.jpg
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger_Cam_7b.jpg
and here's the above view: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/Petzinger%20Option%204.pdf
I don't think these are new, but those renderings are very nice looking. Detailed models of existing buildings, bounce lighting, realistic terrain elevation, realistic terrain texture (though I'm a bit surprised they didn't model lush grass where earth is moved or pavement is removed), subtle depth-of-field simulation... these must have been expensive.
Quote from: JREwing78 on December 13, 2017, 10:23:48 PM
I find it odd that they've gone to such lengths to grade-separate traffic in the area, and then only provide one lane coming off of EBD I-70 to EBD US-33. I would think that would be a major enough movement to justify 2 EBD lanes.
It's one lane already. Sure, it backs up a bit in the afternoons, but I think bypassing the light at Petzinger could plausibly fix that. Increasing the through-width of that movement to two non-stop lanes would require expanding the scope to include rebuilding the railroad bridge to accommodate a wider roadway beneath, and modifications to the James Rd / Refugee Rd / 104 interchange – or eliminating access from Petzinger Rd to 33 EB.
Here's a project currently underway to winden US 33 between for just over a mile between the I-270 and OH 317 (Hamilton Rd) interchanges
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/Documents/US%2033%20Widening%20Fact%20Sheet%202018.pdf
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2020, 12:29:34 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
It's actually the
only one left between I-270 and WV
Though it is one of the 2 left between
I-70 and WV, with the other being Petzinger Rd, of which there are renderings for the planned interchange a few posts upthread (but no funding yet that I know of)
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 12:50:44 PM
It's actually the only one left between I-270 and WV
Though it is one of the 2 left between I-70 and WV, with the other being Petzinger Rd, of which there are renderings for the planned interchange a few posts upthread (but no funding yet that I know of)
There is one south of Lancaster (https://goo.gl/maps/ZF58ZbwgwyoN6yzC8).
Indeed. I stand corrected.
I may have been conflating something I read about the number of traffic lights left between Columbus and Lancaster, in reference to the Carroll project.
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2020, 12:29:34 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
Only because there is a stop sign where US 33 exits itself at OH 7, outside of Pomeroy.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 01:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2020, 12:29:34 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
Only because there is a stop sign where US 33 exits itself at OH 7, outside of Pomeroy.
Where is this stop sign?
Quote from: NE2 on January 07, 2020, 01:50:12 PM
Where is this stop sign?
Through movements on 7 and 33 are unobstructed. Almost everything else gets a stop sign.
Quote from: NE2 on January 07, 2020, 01:50:12 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 01:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2020, 12:29:34 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
Only because there is a stop sign where US 33 exits itself at OH 7, outside of Pomeroy.
Where is this stop sign?
I forgot that ODOT built that 1/2 mile loop for US 33 south at Oh 7.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 03:12:00 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 07, 2020, 01:50:12 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 07, 2020, 01:32:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 05, 2020, 12:29:34 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on January 05, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
https://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/story/news/2019/10/23/odot-conducting-feasibility-study-pickerington-road-interchange/4065738002/
ODOT is conducting a feasibility study for a potential interchange on US 33 at Pickerington Rd
Needs it, IMO. That's one of the 2 lights left between I-270 and West Virginia. Everything else has been bypassed or grade separated.
Only because there is a stop sign where US 33 exits itself at OH 7, outside of Pomeroy.
Where is this stop sign?
I forgot that ODOT built that 1/2 mile loop for US 33 south at Oh 7.
Yeah, first time I came across it, I was like, "huh? What's the purpose for this? Wrecks from people trying to stay on 33 pulling out in front of northbound traffic on 7?
https://goo.gl/maps/yYjVF6bFkFdyd6Jk9
When was that loop built?
I've never been around it, but then again, I just realized that every time I've used US 33 in that area it was in the WB direction
Quote from: Buck87 on January 07, 2020, 04:08:51 PM
When was that loop built?
I've never been around it, but then again, I just realized that every time I've used US 33 in that area it was in the WB direction
According to Google Earth, 2007/8.
These questions don't pertain to the subject thread, but does ODOT have any plans to either four-lane or extend the existing US 33 freeway beyond its existing northwestern terminus at Huntsville? Or are there any plans to upgrade any portion of US 33 southeast of Lancaster to freeway standards?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 09, 2020, 05:56:34 PM
These questions don't pertain to the subject thread, but does ODOT have any plans to either four-lane or extend the existing US 33 freeway beyond its existing northwestern terminus at Huntsville? Or are there any plans to upgrade any portion of US 33 southeast of Lancaster to freeway standards?
No
edit: nevermind, answer was upthread
Quote from: Buck87 on July 02, 2018, 09:27:00 PM
Here's a project currently underway to winden US 33 between for just over a mile between the I-270 and OH 317 (Hamilton Rd) interchanges
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/Documents/US%2033%20Widening%20Fact%20Sheet%202018.pdf
This was finished by October of last year.
Quote from: GCrites80s on January 12, 2020, 08:31:30 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on July 02, 2018, 09:27:00 PM
Here's a project currently underway to winden US 33 between for just over a mile between the I-270 and OH 317 (Hamilton Rd) interchanges
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/Documents/US%2033%20Widening%20Fact%20Sheet%202018.pdf
This was finished by October of last year.
Drove through there yesterday, looks nice. The new lanes were added to the outside edge of the freeway, as mile long exit only lanes that extend as a continuation of one interchange's entrance ramp to the next interchange's exit ramp and are separated from the through lanes with short dotted lines for the entire length.
On another note, man that Petzinger Rd traffic light seems out of place when traveling westbound on 33, since with the way they have things signed it falls right between the exit for I-70 east and the exit for I-70 west. I wish they could get to that one sooner than later, but understand why the focus seems to be on the section outside of I-270 for now.
So apparently Petzinger Rd is going to be made into an RCUT intersection in 2023 (not shown in the renderings), with the full overpass/interchange configuration (in the renderings) still being planned for the future but currently unfunded
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113744
Quote from: Buck87 on September 08, 2020, 08:27:57 PM
So apparently Petzinger Rd is going to be made into an RCUT intersection in 2023 (not shown in the renderings), with the full overpass/interchange configuration (in the renderings) still being planned for the future but currently unfunded
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113744
Realigning US 33 at James Road is the part I'm more interested in. The weave there now to go from I-70 WB to SR 104 SB is bad. This first phase of work will get rid of that.
About flipping time we see some work here. This area has been a mess...damn, since I briefly lived in the area ~15 years ago. Shame it won't begin until 2023, but a RCUT (or "superstreet") is long overdue.
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 09, 2020, 05:09:16 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on September 08, 2020, 08:27:57 PM
So apparently Petzinger Rd is going to be made into an RCUT intersection in 2023 (not shown in the renderings), with the full overpass/interchange configuration (in the renderings) still being planned for the future but currently unfunded
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113744
Realigning US 33 at James Road is the part I'm more interested in. The weave there now to go from I-70 WB to SR 104 SB is bad. This first phase of work will get rid of that.
Thank god for that; I've been in so many near misses in that section.
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 09, 2020, 05:09:16 PM
Realigning US 33 at James Road is the part I'm more interested in. The weave there now to go from I-70 WB to SR 104 SB is bad. This first phase of work will get rid of that.
Just drove through there today, which was the first time I done it in the southeast direction in a long time, so I hadn't really noticed that weave before. Sure enough, today I saw a semi come across from James Rd to 104 south, though luckily it was a few lengths ahead of me and I didnt need to brake.
On another US 33 note, not sure why the section from the end of the Nelsonville bypass to the Athens city limit can't be 60 mph. I can see why they want the part through town and the US50/OH 32 interchanges to be 55 mph, but the rest of it out to Nelsonville is very similar to other sections of divided highway in the state that got the bump to 60.
VS988
Quote from: Buck87 on September 15, 2020, 07:52:05 PM
On another US 33 note, not sure why the section from the end of the Nelsonville bypass to the Athens city limit can't be 60 mph. I can see why they want the part through town and the US50/OH 32 interchanges to be 55 mph, but the rest of it out to Nelsonville is very similar to other sections of divided highway in the state that got the bump to 60.
My understanding is that stretch of US 33 has relatively high accident rates, especially at the intersections.
Quote from: Buck87 on September 08, 2020, 08:27:57 PM
So apparently Petzinger Rd is going to be made into an RCUT intersection in 2023 (not shown in the renderings), with the full overpass/interchange configuration (in the renderings) still being planned for the future but currently unfunded
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113744
The RCUT can make a dent in the backups onto 70E I suppose if the lights have different timing that says "Sorry folks leaving the Water's Edge apartments and going straight through or wanting to go west on 33, you're going to have to wait."
In other 33 news, the section from the Diley Rd. interchange near Canal Winchester to where the Lancaster Bypass begins has been designated a "Distracted Driving and Speeding Enforcement Corridor" including a factory-like "XX Number of Days Since Last Serious Accident" sign.
Quote from: GCrites80s on September 15, 2020, 10:55:20 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on September 08, 2020, 08:27:57 PM
So apparently Petzinger Rd is going to be made into an RCUT intersection in 2023 (not shown in the renderings), with the full overpass/interchange configuration (in the renderings) still being planned for the future but currently unfunded
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/odot/projects/projects/113744
The RCUT can make a dent in the backups onto 70E I suppose if the lights have different timing that says "Sorry folks leaving the Water's Edge apartments and going straight through or wanting to go west on 33, you're going to have to wait."
Wait, will the RCUT even be signalized at all? I was driving through this one today and thought that might be a possibility.
Gristly crossover crash on this stretch today: https://www.10tv.com/article/traffic/us-33-crash-sep-25/530-9209500c-0652-441e-aba0-577392ad546f
I wonder if this will lead to the installation of cable median barriers. While they may not have stopped a fully loaded dump truck, they can lower the number of crossover crashes and it would stop the illegal and dangerous "Michigan Lefts" people try to make at the next intersection to the west -- which is a RIRO that people try to cheat. This phenomenon was outlined starting in the sixth post on this page: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14486.25
Here is information, including design alternative maps and a virtual meeting video for the Pickerington Rd. interchange:
https://www.publicinput.com/F4382 (https://www.publicinput.com/F4382)
Quote from: GCrites80s on October 08, 2020, 07:47:12 PM
Here is information, including design alternative maps and a virtual meeting video for the Pickerington Rd. interchange:
https://www.publicinput.com/F4382 (https://www.publicinput.com/F4382)
Thanks for that. Of the 4 proposed alternatives still in the running (https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/b9a3f7e6-2cc1-4029-b3a3-2d50d6da8d53), I like Alternative #2 the best. Also, #9 is kind of interesting, in that it would have somewhat similar wonkiness as the next exit down in Carroll.
5 Alternatives have been eliminated from consideration: https://www.publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/b7600959-cf0d-4acf-83ca-3921d958a8df
On those I se that #3 is basically the same thing as #4 from the still in the running list, but with smooth curves for through movements on Pickerington Rd instead of a bunch of turns. I guess it must cost too much to do it that way.
All 9 alternatives eliminate 4 total at grade intersections: Pickerington Rd, Columbus Lancaster Rd, and Allen Rd x2. The also all have a pair of concrete elevated ramps for the movements to and from US 33 eastbound that are tightly squeezed into the available space between 33 and the parallel railroad line.
Seems like from the feedback that a lot of people like #9. The commenters I heard actually were pretty sharp, it's wasn't a bunch of "grrr, this is going to make a bunch of people move here" stuff. They did not like parclos; several people mentioned that.
Hard to tell from the map, but #3 would have taken out 7-10 houses.
It's going to be tough to get that overpass in there if they do it right at the Pickerington Rd. junction. It's going to be double height too for the double stacked rail cars (that don't run through here currently due to track degradation). I almost think 33 will have to move a bit to the north for it.
Whichever alternative they choose, I hope the exit is numbered from the get-go. Alt. 2 would probably be numbered 140, while the rest would likely be numbered 141.
What is the proposed 33-70 connector that's mentioned? First I've heard of such a thing.
^I think that's the "whole idea" of the freeway conversion in general, including the Petzinger interchange. Maybe in some people's minds it includes the Lancaster and Nelsonville Bypasses and even the past Athens County work.
Quote from: 6a on October 10, 2020, 10:19:23 AM
What is the proposed 33-70 connector that's mentioned? First I've heard of such a thing.
I think that's a local north-south arterial proposed for the area by planners in Pickerington. Intended to run from US 33 at/near Allen Rd to I-70 at/near Mink St, or something like that.
Oh ew, I don't like the sound of that if that's what it is. Sounds unnecessary even with warehouse growth at 310.
Quote from: vtk on October 22, 2020, 09:17:35 PM
Quote from: 6a on October 10, 2020, 10:19:23 AM
What is the proposed 33-70 connector that's mentioned? First I've heard of such a thing.
I think that's a local north-south arterial proposed for the area by planners in Pickerington. Intended to run from US 33 at/near Allen Rd to I-70 at/near Mink St, or something like that.
Oh wow. I had never heard of this
I do remember an article from several years back that stated Pickerington preferred Allen Rd over Pickerington Rd for some reason for the location of a future interchange, so that planned connector must have been why?
Quote from: 6a on October 23, 2020, 05:12:12 PM
Quote from: vtk on October 22, 2020, 09:17:35 PM
Quote from: 6a on October 10, 2020, 10:19:23 AM
What is the proposed 33-70 connector that's mentioned? First I've heard of such a thing.
I think that's a local north-south arterial proposed for the area by planners in Pickerington. Intended to run from US 33 at/near Allen Rd to I-70 at/near Mink St, or something like that.
Oh wow. I had never heard of this
I had never heard anything of it, either, but I was able to find this document through MORPC. The concept makes a lot of sense given that Etna is well on its way to become the next distribution hub in central Ohio. Besides, there is no freely flowing north-south connection between I-70 and US 33 from Ohio 37 to I-270. While I hate the thought of losing more quality farmland in the area, I think that this road would be very beneficial to area residents as well as the distribution centers.
http://www.morpc.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/FAI_I-70_to_US_33_Connector.pdf
That long of an all-new alignment though? That's going to be incredibly expensive today. We haven't seen something that long all new that I can think of nearby since 35 from Xenia to Washington C.H. and Chillicothe to Richmond Dale 20 years ago. Maybe OH-16 east of Newark around the same time. Sounds like another free gift to Amazon.
I certainly agree that it will be very costly. Where I do disagree, though, is that it is just a gift to Amazon. Between Amazon, Prologis Park 70, the Etna Corporate Park and the Pataskala Corporate Park, Etna has become a distribution hub in the Midwest. Amazon's first building is just what you see from I-70 right now, but that is changing. Development (Etna Park 70 and The Cubes at Etna 70) is taking place on the south side of the 310 interchange, including a new Kohl's distribution center. Ashley Furniture just announced last week that it will be moving into Etna when its new distribution center opens in 2021. Amazon recently broke ground on its 2nd building in the area as well, bringing the company's total occupancy in Etna to between 2-2.25 million square feet. Etna already has somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 million square feet of distribution center and light manufacturing space, and it seems like the Newark Advocate reports on a new ground breaking ceremony in Etna or Pataskala on a weekly or biweekly basis. I would imagine that Fairfield County and MORPC see this connector as a way to enhance and expand the investment opportunities in this area of central Ohio.
It will probably be built in segments over a period of more than a decade, like Dublin's Emerald Parkway, Grove City's Buckeye Parkway, or Delaware County's Sawmill Parkway.
Some of the people that were calling in to the virtual meeting were complaining about "Amazon trucks" traveling on Allen Road (a two lane "country road" for sure). I thought they just meant the standard Ram delivery vans -- no, they were talking about full semis. I see these semis pull off of Allen Road onto 33 now. Obviously this is a bit of a spectacle seeing them make a right angle turn uphill onto a freeway that has just come down from 70mph to 60.
ODOT District 5 announced today that it has chosen Alternative 2 for the Pickerington Rd/Allen Rd area (https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHDOT/bulletins/2b98396). As a refresher, this creates a parclo interchange at Pickerington Rd and turns both intersections with Allen Rd into cul de sacs. With the ~$40 million price tag, I wonder if this will have to go through TRAC or if it will be able to funded differently like the Northeast and Southside Mega Fixes. The alternatives may still be viewed at http://www.publicinput.com/F4382?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery.
Saw some drilling going on at the SW corner of 33 and Pickerington Rd. today. Core samples?
The Distracted Driving and Speeding Enforcement Corridor signs have all been removed including the "XX Number of Days Since Last Serious Accident" ones. So that lasted 11 months. The sign posts remain. Perhaps they are going to try another concept.
Those were so silly
Saw some of those "distracted driving corridor" signs on I-71 and I-77 in the northeast part of the state about a month ago, and I had no clue what the real point of those signs are for. It's not like that you'll get more people to drive at the speed limit when traffic is flowing at 10 mph above.
Today the posts were gone as well.
ODOT & OHP are still keeping their distracted driving corridor signs along I-71, up by my house (Delaware/Morrow Counties).
I can get behind target enforcement on distracted and drunk driving, as those cause problems regardless of what the rest of traffic is doing, but speed (especially on freeways) causes problems when compared to the rest of traffic. I'm not going to follow an artificial speed cap delegated by a sign when I have multi-ton hunks of metal motoring around me at body-temperature speeds.
What's ironic is that the amount of patrols tanked while the signs were up due to COVID and speeds reached higher. There are a few stretches north of Lancaster where a lot of people won't reach the speed limit, especially the commercial traffic. This of course leads to platooning. Due to this rampant unwillingness and platooning, I feel that the speed limit should be reduced to 65 from 70 between Allen Rd. and the Lancaster Bypass. Too much weaving in that stretch as well.
Was in Nelsonville Monday and the Distracted Driving and Speeding Enforcement Corridor signs are still in force on 33 from Nelsonville to 17 miles to the east of there.
Quote from: GCrites80s on September 22, 2021, 09:06:42 PM
Was in Nelsonville Monday and the Distracted Driving and Speeding Enforcement Corridor signs are still in force on 33 from Nelsonville to 17 miles to the east of there.
How far south of Athens?
I didn't see the end. There was a sign at Nelsonville saying the Corridor was for the next 17 miles.
Saw the Pickerington Rd interchange on the TRAC draft listed at $47M for construction in 2025
Project page says construction begins in Summer 2024 and ends Fall 2026:
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/77555
(https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/wps/wcm/connect/gov/09cf6e12-4e91-44cb-9089-73c18f3c6047/1/77555+preferred+alt.PNG?MOD=AJPERES)
I didn't want to start a new thread, but it looks like US 33 is going to get four laned from Athens to the Ohio River.
https://www.wtap.com/2023/04/03/us-33-widening-included-ohio-transportation-budget/?outputType=amp
Edit: Looks like they've only approved engineering work so far. The article is an error. Fake news.
There are already a few grade-separations and jug-handle ramps along the two-lane portions of US 33 between Athens and the West Virginia State Line. I suppose four-laning the corridor wouldn't be as huge of an undertaking as building a four-lane highway from scratch would be.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 04, 2023, 06:58:14 PM
There are already a few grade-separations and jug-handle ramps along the two-lane portions of US 33 between Athens and the West Virginia State Line. I suppose four-laning the corridor wouldn't be as huge of an undertaking as building a four-lane highway from scratch would be.
It was built with the intent of allowing 4-lane widening in the future. 4-lane ROW was acquired and I think at least some grading was done. The project wasn't built as four lanes originally to save money and because traffic counts didn't justify it. (They still don't, especially east of Pomeroy.)
Quote from: TempoNick on April 03, 2023, 06:28:54 PM
I didn't want to start a new thread...
That's fine, this thread can be the catch all for any US 33 upgrades in Ohio. The main reason I focused on the Columbus to Lancaster portion originally was because I started this thread in the Midwest-Great Lakes forum long before the merge with Ohio Valley. I think I'll change the title now.
Quote from: TempoNick on April 03, 2023, 06:28:54 PM
...but it looks like US 33 is going to get four laned from Athens to the Ohio River.
https://www.wtap.com/2023/04/03/us-33-widening-included-ohio-transportation-budget/?outputType=amp
Edit: Looks like they've only approved engineering work so far. The article is an error. Fake news.
If they ever do extend the 4 laning, I hope the do the Athens to Darwin section first. That way all the county seats along the southeast US 33 corridor would have a 4 lane connection all the way to Columbus.
What happens when they get to the river? I wonder if a bridge replacement is in the offing.
Quote from: TempoNick on April 05, 2023, 01:55:43 PM
What happens when they get to the river? I wonder if a bridge replacement is in the offing.
LOL, no. West Virginia owns the bridge and they have zero plans to twin or replace it. It's not warranted.
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 05, 2023, 08:26:11 PM
LOL, no. West Virginia owns the bridge and they have zero plans to twin or replace it. It's not warranted.
If four-laning US 33 is warranted, a new bridge is also wanted. It doesn't make sense for there to be a bottleneck at the bridge when everything else is going to be four lanes. And hopefully they'll get rid of that stupid curve you have to follow to get to West Virginia Route 2 and then back on US-33.
Remember, West Virginia pushed more for that road than Ohio did. That was supposed to be the quickest connection between Charleston, West Virginia and Columbus, Ohio. Yes, US 35 is an alternate, but US 33 is the better way, IMO.
The Ravenswood Bridge has only existed since 1981. Unless it collapses into the Ohio River, it should have plenty of life left. In a few decades, when it does need to be replaced, the new bridge should have wider shoulders.
Quote from: TempoNick on April 05, 2023, 09:33:17 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 05, 2023, 08:26:11 PM
LOL, no. West Virginia owns the bridge and they have zero plans to twin or replace it. It's not warranted.
If four-laning US 33 is warranted, a new bridge is also wanted. It doesn't make sense for there to be a bottleneck at the bridge when everything else is going to be four lanes. And hopefully they'll get rid of that stupid curve you have to follow to get to West Virginia Route 2 and then back on US-33.
Remember, West Virginia pushed more for that road than Ohio did. That was supposed to be the quickest connection between Charleston, West Virginia and Columbus, Ohio. Yes, US 35 is an alternate, but US 33 is the better way, IMO.
Building the new US 33 was part of Ohio's corridor completion plans since the 1970s. West Virginia benefited from replacing the existing US 33 in West Virginia, but it already contributed its part of this corridor when it built the Ravenswood Bridge and connection to I-77 forty years ago.
Four-laning US 33 isn't really warranted at 5000 vehicles per day. WVDOH isn't going to build a new bridge here for that sort of traffic count when it has several two-lane Ohio River bridges with traffic counts more than double that. If Ohio wants to pay for twinning the bridge or building a direct access to the four-lane part of US 33, I'm sure West Virginia would be open to discussing it but West Virginia has a lot more useful projects to fund on its own.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2023, 09:37:04 PM
The Ravenswood Bridge has only existed since 1981. Unless it collapses into the Ohio River, it should have plenty of life left. In a few decades, when it does need to be replaced, the new bridge should have wider shoulders.
You can always build two more lanes right next to it.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2023, 09:37:04 PM
The Ravenswood Bridge has only existed since 1981. Unless it collapses into the Ohio River, it should have plenty of life left. In a few decades, when it does need to be replaced, the new bridge should have wider shoulders.
A few decades? Bridges of that era will need major work at the minimum in the 2030s.
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 05, 2023, 10:08:30 PM
Four-laning US 33 isn't really warranted at 5000 vehicles per day.
It's an important enough route that four-laning it isn't the worst thing in the world. It's a better route for most of Columbus to I-77 than US-35, unless you live on the south side. If you live in north or east Columbus, you can just get on I-70 and drive down to US-33. There are just too many obstacles to get to US-35.
Quote from: Rothman on April 06, 2023, 07:06:54 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2023, 09:37:04 PM
The Ravenswood Bridge has only existed since 1981. Unless it collapses into the Ohio River, it should have plenty of life left. In a few decades, when it does need to be replaced, the new bridge should have wider shoulders.
A few decades? Bridges of that era will need major work at the minimum in the 2030s.
Maybe rehabilitation around the 2040s. Then again, a 1960s-era truss is in worse condition structurally than its partner 1930s-era truss near Evansville, IN, with the older truss set to receive structural work to make the bridge last into the 2150s!
That bridge is the definition of everything wrong w/ competing state highway priorities. Until the Super-2 US33 was constructed this bridge was massively underutilized for close to 25 years. On the Ohio side it was literally connected to a county road which wound its way along the river at some points meandering towards Racine and eventually Pomeroy. It even predated the Ravenswood connector.
So, given its bizarre origins, it's no wonder it just dumps itself onto what was a Ravenswood street - 33 went a different direction out of Ripley. At the very least, WV should put in a light at the terminus.
Quote from: Black-Man on April 11, 2023, 10:26:07 PM
That bridge is the definition of everything wrong w/ competing state highway priorities. Until the Super-2 US33 was constructed this bridge was massively underutilized for close to 25 years. On the Ohio side it was literally connected to a county road which wound its way along the river at some points meandering towards Racine and eventually Pomeroy. It even predated the Ravenswood connector.
The Ohio side connected to SR 338.
Quote from: Black-Man on April 11, 2023, 10:26:07 PM
So, given its bizarre origins, it's no wonder it just dumps itself onto what was a Ravenswood street - 33 went a different direction out of Ripley. At the very least, WV should put in a light at the terminus.
The West Virginia side was WV 2 when the bridge was being planned. It is now WV 68.
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
Quote from: Black-Man on April 11, 2023, 10:26:07 PM
So, given its bizarre origins, it's no wonder it just dumps itself onto what was a Ravenswood street - 33 went a different direction out of Ripley. At the very least, WV should put in a light at the terminus.
The West Virginia side was WV 2 when the bridge was being planned. It is now WV 68.
I'm thinking it's one of those Breezewood, PA situations now. You have no other reason to go into that town unless you're forced to go there. Then you might pick up something at the Wendy's a little north of there.
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
The Ohio side connected to SR 338.
Technically correct, however this road ran along the river and you would be back-tracking to Racine versus cutting across the bend in the river on a road which might have been designated a state highway but in reality was more of a local county road. It was bad. The 4-lane section from Pomeroy to Darwin was actually complete at this time.
Wikipedia says the West Virginia side was actually WV 824 - not WV 2.
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
The Ohio side connected to SR 338.
Quote from: Black-Man on April 28, 2023, 09:00:03 PM
Technically correct, however this road ran along the river and you would be back-tracking to Racine versus cutting across the bend in the river on a road which might have been designated a state highway but in reality was more of a local county road. It was bad. The 4-lane section from Pomeroy to Darwin was actually complete at this time.
Wikipedia says the West Virginia side was actually WV 824 - not WV 2.
I think you've both got these backwards. The Ohio side was SR-814 and the West Virginia side was WV-338 prior to the rerouting of US-33. And the Ravenswood Bridge never actually connected to WV-2; that was rerouted onto (previously) WV-56 a few years before completion of the bridge, which then connected to WV-68 (formerly WV-2).
Quote from: Dirt Roads on April 28, 2023, 09:33:23 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
The Ohio side connected to SR 338.
Quote from: Black-Man on April 28, 2023, 09:00:03 PM
Technically correct, however this road ran along the river and you would be back-tracking to Racine versus cutting across the bend in the river on a road which might have been designated a state highway but in reality was more of a local county road. It was bad. The 4-lane section from Pomeroy to Darwin was actually complete at this time.
Wikipedia says the West Virginia side was actually WV 824 - not WV 2.
I think you've both got these backwards. The Ohio side was SR-814 and the West Virginia side was WV-338 prior to the rerouting of US-33. And the Ravenswood Bridge never actually connected to WV-2; that was rerouted onto (previously) WV-56 a few years before completion of the bridge, which then connected to WV-68 (formerly WV-2).
According to ODOT's public documents (i.e. 1982 roadmap), Bitmapped is correct. 338 for Ohio, 2 for WV.
https://www.dot.state.oh.us/maps/archivedmaps/1982.pdf
Quote from: Bitmapped on April 12, 2023, 01:55:07 PM
The Ohio side connected to SR 338.
Quote from: Black-Man on April 28, 2023, 09:00:03 PM
Technically correct, however this road ran along the river and you would be back-tracking to Racine versus cutting across the bend in the river on a road which might have been designated a state highway but in reality was more of a local county road. It was bad. The 4-lane section from Pomeroy to Darwin was actually complete at this time.
Wikipedia says the West Virginia side was actually WV 824 - not WV 2.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on April 28, 2023, 09:33:23 PM
I think you've both got these backwards. The Ohio side was SR-824 and the West Virginia side was WV-338 prior to the rerouting of US-33. And the Ravenswood Bridge never actually connected to WV-2; that was rerouted onto (previously) WV-56 a few years before completion of the bridge, which then connected to WV-68 (formerly WV-2).
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 28, 2023, 09:52:39 PM
According to ODOT's public documents (i.e. 1982 roadmap), Bitmapped is correct. 338 for Ohio, 2 for WV.
https://www.dot.state.oh.us/maps/archivedmaps/1982.pdf
It is reasonable to say that the Ravenswood Bridge connected to SR-338 on the Ohio side, since the western approach to the bridge was SR-824. On the West Virginia side, the eastern approach was WV-338 and you had to turn south onto WV-68 (former WV-2) to get over to the rerouted WV-2.
We remember this well, as Jay Rockefeller ran for governor in 1976 on a platform that included making WV-2 four lanes between Ravenswood -and- Parkersburg. After he got elected, the DOH announced that WV-56 was being four-laned and afterwards WV-2 would be routed along I-77 to get to Parkersburg. It left a bad taste with locals all up-and-down the Ohio Valley. To be honest, it helped Ravenswood out tremendously and allowed both Ohio and West Virginia to plan a better routing for US-33.
[I'm having problems zooming in on the 1982 Ohio official state map]. OK, I could zoom in after closing down everything else (including my browser). ODOT messed up on the West Virginia side, showing the west approach of the bridge connecting straight up to an intersection in Ravenswood. ODOT still showed WV-2 on the old route and incorrectly showed WV-68 where WV-56 used to run. Essentially, that map incorrectly showed the Ravenswood bridge running between SR-338 and WV-2, continuing eastward as WV-68. Neither SR-824 nor WV-338 were shown on the map, but I don't remember them being well-posted in the field either.
[Corrected the references to Ohio SR-824].
OH 824 connected OH 124 to the Ravenswood Br initially. See https://vintageaerial.com/scanned_maps/OH-Meigs-84-01
later OH 124 was rerouted and OH 338 was extended. See https://vintageaerial.com/scanned_maps/A-OH-Meigs-92-01
WV side was always WV 338 to WV 68 - https://vintageaerial.com/scanned_maps/C-WV-Jackson-86-02
Quote from: Black-Man on April 11, 2023, 10:26:07 PM
... given its bizarre origins, it's no wonder it just dumps itself onto what was a Ravenswood street - 33 went a different direction out of Ripley. At the very least, WV should put in a light at the terminus.
I'm not sure what's here that would preclude twinning the Ravenswood Bridge. It needs an overpass for Hartley Dr and Sandy Creek, and ramps to connect US-33 to WV 2/68, plus re-aligning WV-2/68 back to its original alignment. That's all relatively minor construction compared to the bridge itself.
Both Allen Road intersections (known colloquially but not officially as Allen Rd. #1 and Allen Rd. #2) with US-33 in Fairfield County are getting RIRO'ed next week: https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/about-us/news/district-5/odot-improving-safety-at-us33-intersection (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/about-us/news/district-5/odot-improving-safety-at-us33-intersection)
Impatient drivers currently lose their minds when forced to slow down for eastbound left-turning drivers and spin into road rage when now the right lane is going faster than them.
Which is #1 and which is #2?
The median crossings are already closed, as of this morning. The one closer to Columbus has already had some pavement removed.
#1 is to the NW and #2 is SE if I remember right from the online town hall meetings. Of course it used to be all one road before the section SW of the freeway was abandoned and turned into farm access. Not sure when that was -- maybe when 33 was dualized around 1955.
I made a trip to Athens last weekend and noticed that signs were replaced between the Lancaster and Nelsonville bypasses. The county and township roads were changed from numbers to the given names. In addition, mileage tabs have been added to the interchanges.
Ohio 180- 166
Ohio 664- 170
Ohio 93- 172
Ohio 328- 174
Ohio 595- 177
Do all the exits along the US 33 corridor now have exit numbers? Or are there still some exits that are still unnumbered?
Quote from: carbaugh2 on June 21, 2023, 12:04:36 PM
I made a trip to Athens last weekend and noticed that signs were replaced between the Lancaster and Nelsonville bypasses. The county and township roads were changed from numbers to the given names. In addition, mileage tabs have been added to the interchanges.
Ohio 180- 166
Ohio 664- 170
Ohio 93- 172
Ohio 328- 174
Ohio 595- 177
I'm sure there's places in Ohio where locals use township and county road numbers instead of names in speech but I haven't heard of it personally.
Do I remember seeing new Distracted Driving Corridor signs up just east of the Rockbridge rest area? Trying to remember if it was there or right before the OH 277 exit on US 23 north of Chillicothe. Maybe both.
Quote from: GCrites80s on June 21, 2023, 09:00:40 PM
Quote from: carbaugh2 on June 21, 2023, 12:04:36 PM
I made a trip to Athens last weekend and noticed that signs were replaced between the Lancaster and Nelsonville bypasses. The county and township roads were changed from numbers to the given names. In addition, mileage tabs have been added to the interchanges.
Ohio 180- 166
Ohio 664- 170
Ohio 93- 172
Ohio 328- 174
Ohio 595- 177
I'm sure there's places in Ohio where locals use township and county road numbers instead of names in speech but I haven't heard of it personally.
Come visit me in Morrow County then.
Rather than quote twice, I'll just post responses to the last few posts.
My experience is that using county/township highway numbers is more prevalent in the northwest quadrant of the state. Then Holmes County jumped to the front of my mind. :)
The distracted driving corridor (referenced twice now) begins where the Nelsonville bypass reconnects to the divided 33 south of town. Based on the 17 mile length, that would put the other end of the corridor by the Darwin rest area.
I knew about the Nelsonville one. In the past 6 weeks I saw a new one (to me at least) but can't remember where. It could have even been on I-70 west of Zanesville -- I was just through there on Sunday for the first time in years.
There's one on 161/37/16 in Licking County
Last did that one about 4 years ago. I don't think there was one there then.
I was right, there is a Distracted Driving Corridor just north of Chillicothe on US 23. It's only a mile or two long though. The signs are much smaller. They're about the size of a standard speed limit sign.
I was kind of hoping the crap signs on wood posts (something this district loves to use) would have been for truck parking in the abandoned weigh stations. An exit is planned at the location of the closed weigh stations but no date has been programmed for construction.
Regarding the corridor, ODOT has gotten aggressive in closing intersections and making intersection modifications north of Chillicothe towards Columbus for a while now. There is too much high speed traffic on a four-lane with lots of cross traffic.
They are paving the southbound truck parking now.
Please tell me this is off to the side somewhere and not actually how they decided to blend US 33 and US 50 in Athens. A roundabout in the middle of two limited access highways?
"Construction on U.S. 50 to U.S. 33 roundabout nears completion"
https://www.wtap.com/2023/08/01/construction-us-50-us-33-roundabout-nears-completion/?outputType=amp
No, it looks like the roundabout is with the ramps from Stimson Avenue onto US 33/50. The article doesn't even mention that because it's terribly written. Not to mention the mentions of "Interstate 33" and "Interstate 50."
Correct. Nothing on the mainline: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/ATH-33-50-Stimson%20Signing%20and%20Roundabout%20(High%20Resolution).pdf
This was always a disaster of an interchange. Also - what mile markers do the exit tabs correspond to along US 50 and OH 32? My assumption is US 50.
-
Side note: I just drove much of US 33 south of Columbus a few weeks back. Exit numbers are now up and corresponding to the state mile markers. And at least on the two-lane US 33 segments south of Athens, there are now standard mileposts that correspond to the overall mileage within the state, with the smaller county mile markers still in place. Exit signs at the actual exit are a hit or miss still.
Quote from: seicer on August 02, 2023, 10:38:59 AM
Side note: I just drove much of US 33 south of Columbus a few weeks back. Exit numbers are now up and corresponding to the state mile markers. And at least on the two-lane US 33 segments south of Athens, there are now standard mileposts that correspond to the overall mileage within the state, with the smaller county mile markers still in place. Exit signs at the actual exit are a hit or miss still.
(Going futher off topic)
I saw that ODOT got around to adding exit numbers to US 23 in Marion County (for at least 2 of every 3 signs leading up to an exit)
I saw that too. It's not all consistent like on US 33, either. The blue/brown signs often don't have exit numbers and will still say things like "SECOND EXIT" or "NEXT RIGHT". I'm still waiting for US 52 to get exit numbers in Lawrence County... and for this sign to be rectified after several decades of being incorrect: https://goo.gl/maps/k7oJCzeXn199bnNp6
Quote from: seicer on August 02, 2023, 10:38:59 AM
Correct. Nothing on the mainline: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/ATH-33-50-Stimson%20Signing%20and%20Roundabout%20(High%20Resolution).pdf
This was always a disaster of an interchange. Also - what mile markers do the exit tabs correspond to along US 50 and OH 32? My assumption is US 50.
US 50 mileage is being used.
Quote from: Bitmapped on August 02, 2023, 06:21:10 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 02, 2023, 10:38:59 AM
Correct. Nothing on the mainline: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/ATH-33-50-Stimson%20Signing%20and%20Roundabout%20(High%20Resolution).pdf
This was always a disaster of an interchange. Also - what mile markers do the exit tabs correspond to along US 50 and OH 32? My assumption is US 50.
US 50 mileage is being used.
Not that this matters, but I wonder why US 33 mileage isn't used. It seems to me that US 33 is the more important highway through Ohio. US 50 is kind of overlooked. Just curious whether they have some kind of protocol they use for deciding what the mileage markers say.
Quote from: TempoNick on August 02, 2023, 06:27:41 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on August 02, 2023, 06:21:10 PM
Quote from: seicer on August 02, 2023, 10:38:59 AM
Correct. Nothing on the mainline: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/ATH-33-50-Stimson%20Signing%20and%20Roundabout%20(High%20Resolution).pdf
This was always a disaster of an interchange. Also - what mile markers do the exit tabs correspond to along US 50 and OH 32? My assumption is US 50.
US 50 mileage is being used.
Not that this matters, but I wonder why US 33 mileage isn't used. It seems to me that US 33 is the more important highway through Ohio. US 50 is kind of overlooked. Just curious whether they have some kind of protocol they use for deciding what the mileage markers say.
US 33's mileage is used over US-50 and OH-32's on the multiplex.
In this case, too, US 50 trumps OH 32 even though OH 32 is the primary route between Belpre and Cincinnati, not US 50.
While researching completion dates for the completion of the original Super 2 from Athens to Darwin and Pomeroy to Ravenswood, I came across this Athens Messenger article stating that District plans to begin widening 33 in 2025. That is much sooner than I had hoped or anticipated.
https://www.athensmessenger.com/news/odot-looking-to-widen-25-miles-of-u-s-33-in-2025/article_4eecef78-dace-11ed-9229-4bc41e34fc25.html
The article also references improvements to the 33/682 interchange in The Plains (not the OU interchange in Athens), where more roundabouts will be constructed at the ramp intersections. I'm all for the roundabouts if it means ODOT will finally close the at grade intersection just west of this interchange. I had never understood why they kept it open until reading the explanation in this article.
Quote from: carbaugh2 on September 09, 2023, 08:01:33 AM
While researching completion dates for the completion of the original Super 2 from Athens to Darwin and Pomeroy to Ravenswood, I came across this Athens Messenger article stating that District plans to begin widening 33 in 2025. That is much sooner than I had hoped or anticipated.
https://www.athensmessenger.com/news/odot-looking-to-widen-25-miles-of-u-s-33-in-2025/article_4eecef78-dace-11ed-9229-4bc41e34fc25.html
That timeline seems unlikely. There's no funding programmed for construction, only for engineering and design.
Pardon my ignorance but does US-33 connect with SH-33 in Oklahoma?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 11, 2023, 08:38:36 PM
Pardon my ignorance but does US-33 connect with SH-33 in Oklahoma?
Via I-33 through Memphis.
Can anybody estimate a timetable on this? If the engineering work is being done, I'm guessing there is money in the pipeline. Is West Virginia on board with this? Is this going to involve another bridge?
Quote from: TempoNick on September 19, 2023, 05:17:48 PM
Can anybody estimate a timetable on this? If the engineering work is being done, I'm guessing there is money in the pipeline. Is West Virginia on board with this? Is this going to involve another bridge?
There's not construction money allocated at this time. They have to come back to TRAC again for that.
West Virginia isn't doing anything. This is an Ohio-only project.
Quote from: Bitmapped on September 19, 2023, 05:37:55 PM
Quote from: TempoNick on September 19, 2023, 05:17:48 PM
Can anybody estimate a timetable on this? If the engineering work is being done, I'm guessing there is money in the pipeline. Is West Virginia on board with this? Is this going to involve another bridge?
There's not construction money allocated at this time. They have to come back to TRAC again for that.
West Virginia isn't doing anything. This is an Ohio-only project.
So four lanes are going to dead end at the river? Are you sure there isn't money coming through that infrastructure bill? It doesn't seem like you would do the engineering work if construction isn't imminent.
There is nothing programmed either in a study or something more tangible. Four lanes will become two for a 45 MPH bridge that loops into Ravenswood. The bridge is 40 or so years old and still has a good 40 years or more of life left. It's not going anywhere.
As a comparison, the US 52 bridge in West Huntington, WV connects two four-lane highways and has worked just fine for 55 years.
I agree with everyone that there is nothing on the ODOT website indicating there is funding for 2025 construction. However, the reporter had quotes from an Athens County Commissioner and the District 10 public information officer. That date isn't making the article without one of those two people sharing that information and giving the go ahead to share it.
I forget how much the contract was, but you just don't spend 30 million dollars on plans to build something just to sit on the Shelf so you can use them 50 years from now..
I know a lot of big projects in Ohio have switched to Design-Build but clearly not all.
"The council approved $6.04 million for preliminary engineering and detailed designed activities to widen U.S. 33 in Athens and Meigs counties.
According to the application, ODOT will convert 25.57 miles from a two-lane highway to a four-lane, divided highway.
...
The project's construction total estimated cost is $191.73 million.
ODOT expects to start construction in 2025."
https://www.athensmessenger.com/news/odot-looking-to-widen-25-miles-of-u-s-33-in-2025/article_4eecef78-dace-11ed-9229-4bc41e34fc25.html
Quote from: TempoNick on September 20, 2023, 09:34:55 PM
I forget how much the contract was, but you just don't spend 30 million dollars on plans to build something just to sit on the Shelf so you can use them 50 years from now..
Yes we do (in Ohio)
http://www.roadfan.com/i73ohio.html
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 20, 2023, 11:11:13 PM
Yes we do (in Ohio)
http://www.roadfan.com/i73ohio.html
I don't think they actually had any detailed engineering drawings for I-73 though. But that begs another question. I think four-laning US 33 is the right move, but it seems like US 23 should be the one getting all the love. US 23 should be a much higher priority, shouldn't it? Or is this one of those Appalachian corridor things?
For that matter, you would think six laning I-71 between Mount Sterling and Jeffersonville would also be higher priority than a US 33 fix.
I think US 33 is on the fast track because it is much closer to being shovel ready. All of the ROW was purchased 20 years ago when the Super-2 was built. While I think there are spots where ODOT should be doing piecemeal upgrades to 23 (South Bloomfield and the 665/317 intersection for starters), there are projects now in the pipeline (Ohio 762 and Rathmell) that indicate ODOT is trying to free up 23's flow south of Columbus. As we have exhaustively discussed in other threads, the Worthington to Waldo segment of 23 is a herculean task.
With regards to finishing the 6-lane expansion of I-71 across the state, it appears that ODOT has its own separate funding bucket (federal monies, maybe?) for that work as it has been slowly expanding 71 from Cleveland and Cincinnati towards Columbus over the last 20 years. My guess is that ODOT will continue making/expanding its way down 71 to Jeffersonville once the current construction project is complete because that has become the established precedent. I can't wait for those funds to be freed up so they can begin doing the same thing to I-70.
ODOT never produced detailed plans for I-73 in Ohio and it was never offered up as a serious consideration because of political and funding constraints. It has never been on any long-range plans by ODOT, nor has it been on any TRAC list. The I-73 project is mere fantasy. ODOT has committed to several US 23 upgrades, including a bypass of South Bloomfield (which later got shelved), an interchange at OH 762, a slight revamp of the I-270 south interchange (removing two loop ramps), and now piecemeal upgrades north of I-270. (A brochure and a self-referenced paper does not count; the rest of that site is unreadable with that background image.)
Widening 25 miles of US 33, on the other hand, has actual commitments. It's on TRAC's Tier II list for planning/development. https://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/2022TRACApplications/D10_01_ATH_MEG_33_TRAC_APP.pdf
Quote from: seicer on October 01, 2023, 11:46:41 AM
ODOT never produced detailed plans for I-73 in Ohio and it was never offered up as a serious consideration because of political and funding constraints. It has never been on any long-range plans by ODOT, nor has it been on any TRAC list.
Correct.
I-73 was put under the auspices of the Ohio Turnpike Commission by then Gov. Voinovich.
https://cml.bibliocommons.com/v2/record/S105C1011734
I mean, it wasn't complete fantasy. Ohioans (or maybe just turnpike users) paid for these maps:
http://www.roadfan.com/i73awf5.html (I see OH 823 on here)
http://www.roadfan.com/i73awf4.html
http://www.roadfan.com/i73awf3.html (the Central Ohio section that has flummoxed everyone for 30 years now)
http://www.roadfan.com/i73awf2.html
http://www.roadfan.com/i73awf1.html
Not a complete fantasy, but a project that never gathered traction for a lot of reasons. ODOT began prioritizing improving its existing network rather than building out new terrain alignments. As an example you listed, the OH 823 bypass could have been part of I-73 but ODOT saw it more as a bypass of Portsmouth rather than as a component of I-73. It has one-lane ramps at its terminuses and if this were to ever become part of an interstate, those would need to be rebuilt. Given how difficult it was just to get the bypass built in the first place, and its modest traffic counts, that doesn't seem like it will ever be a priority. The bypass serves its original purpose quite well: removing through traffic from Portsmouth and New Boston.
And for US 23 south of Columbus, improving the highway towards Chillicothe would be a decent investment. Heck, just getting shoulders added would be huge, as would removing driveways and rebuilding the awful roadway base. But so little is programmed that the highway seems to be a forgotten stepchild.
We also have to consider that the project is dead in the water in both West Virginia and Michigan. The West Virginia segments are not being built to interstate standards and include intersections. The segments north of Bluefield are also two-lane on a four-lane right of way. Those "I-73/I-74 High Priority Corridor" signs are pretty much meaningless.
Quote from: seicer on October 01, 2023, 12:56:24 PM
We also have to consider that the project is dead in the water in both West Virginia and Michigan. The West Virginia segments are not being built to interstate standards and include intersections. The segments north of Bluefield are also two-lane on a four-lane right of way. Those "I-73/I-74 High Priority Corridor" signs are pretty much meaningless.
My understanding is that it's only dead in Michigan because it's dead in Ohio. No need to build an I-73 that goes to nowhere. If Ohio ever resurrects it, Michigan they say will do the same. I don't think Michigan has a lot of work to do. Most of that route seems to be in place.
Quote from: TempoNick on October 01, 2023, 01:05:06 PM
I don't think Michigan has a lot of work to do. Most of that route seems to be in place.
US 223 isn't a freeway.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 01, 2023, 01:38:18 PM
Quote from: TempoNick on October 01, 2023, 01:05:06 PM
I don't think Michigan has a lot of work to do. Most of that route seems to be in place.
US 223 isn't a freeway.
Not that there would be a point, but just to play devil's advocate, Michigan could just put I-73 on US 23 and I-94 or I-96 to US 127.
Quote from: seicer on October 01, 2023, 11:46:41 AM
ODOT has committed to several US 23 upgrades, including a bypass of South Bloomfield (which later got shelved), *snip*
Did this ever get engineered or is it just an idea? A lot of people in the vicinity are curious. A middle turn lane through town and right turn lanes onto OH-316 would make a significant difference if it doesn't happen.
I distinctly recall seeing plans that showed a northerly and southerly interchange to tie onto old US 23 and an interchange at OH 752 and OH 316 on the east side of town. It seemed to be ODOT's preferred alignment.
I've seen that somewhere too. I suppose I meant fully engineered or something close to it. Maybe it was going to be Design-Build anyway.
I'm pretty sure I once saw a graphic about the South Bloomfield bypass in the technical-plot-on-aerial-orthophoto style once. (I wish they'd do that more often for newer projects...) I don't remember interchange details, so either it was an at-grade realignment (which would help a lot, as long as access is controlled on the bypass) or the interchange(s) hadn't been engineered yet.
Edit: Wait, this is the US 33 thread. Why are we talking about South Bloomfield here? We have a thread for US 23 in Ohio; it's called "I-73 updates?"
At least it's not just my memory that's not yet failing 😬
The US 33 / Petzinger Rd intersection was supposed to get an RCUT this year, did that happen?
I'm having trouble finding info as to whether or not that happened. Just reference to the fact that the planned full interchange there is not yet funded and that an RCUT would be installed in 2023 to serve that intersection during the interim period.
No I was through there this week and there is no RCUT. No changes at all in at least 10 years.
Call me crazy, but why are they even fooling around with that when they can just build around it to the west and connect up with US 33, maybe even fixing that interchange with 104 so that it all flows better. Much of that land is landfill land anyway and the Alum Creek Drive area isn't exactly the high rent district.
I always wondered what was back there. I might take a ride on the bike path that goes through that plot of land.
The exit being on an I-70 curve is always going to be problematic. It is always going to gum up traffic. The way I would do it, getting to 33 would be a straightaway.
See: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R4HeaiXINKC9GvLUXvkxEgBktBBVIe-R/view?usp=drivesdk
That area is a disaster as there are several developments that are wholly dependent on access to high speed roadways that were simply grandfathered in and incrementally upgraded over the decades. Another upgrade is coming: https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/113744
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2023, 10:41:10 PM
That area is a disaster as there are several developments that are wholly dependent on access to high speed roadways that were simply grandfathered in and incrementally upgraded over the decades. Another upgrade is coming: https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/113744
That's what I was referring to. Why waste money on something like this, instead of doing more freeway? Leave that stretch as is and build a new alignment.
Quote from: seicer on December 01, 2023, 10:41:10 PM
That area is a disaster as there are several developments that are wholly dependent on access to high speed roadways that were simply grandfathered in and incrementally upgraded over the decades. Another upgrade is coming: https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/113744
That link is the very page I'm talking about. It says at the top that construction begins in spring of 2023, and it states the only things they have funding for now are a signalized RCUT and a reconfiguration to eliminate the James Rd ramp to 104 ramp weave.
It also says that the full interchange version of the project is referred to as "phase 2" and does not currently have funding.
A lot of smaller projects like this RCUT have been pushed back due to a lack of construction capacity with all the large projects currently u/c in the metro.
Wouldn't it make the most sense for US 33 to follow this route through Columbus? Existing surface street sections could become state routes.
Why don't things like this ever get done. It seems like ODOT was a much more dynamic agency back in the 1950s and 1960s.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cNsHCDuUHSoGwwxbimIErQM0a7nHVQl_/view?usp=drivesdk
ODOT doesn't usually relocate a route off of city streets unless there's a new bypass roadway built specifically to carry that route. If you want to discuss various reroutes that ODOT won't consider, I'll happily join you in the fictional board.
aren't state roads and us routes in cities in Ohio not maintained by ODOT?
ODOT maintains a website that answers this question: https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/help-center/common-topics/highway/highway
"The Ohio Department of Transportation constructs and maintains the state transportation system. Generally, we are responsible for interstate routes, as well as state and federal routes outside of municipalities.
The state of Ohio is a "home rule" state, which means that municipalities are responsible for all roadways within their own municipal limits – including roads that are part of the state or federal system. For any concerns regarding roadways within municipalities, please contact the municipality responsible."
Oh really. I used to think some state routes continued through small town limits unnecessarily before ending on the edge of town because the villages needed help with funding. But I had no actual evidence in Ohio.
Quote from: vtk on December 26, 2023, 04:27:53 PM
ODOT doesn't usually relocate a route off of city streets unless there's a new bypass roadway built specifically to carry that route. If you want to discuss various reroutes that ODOT won't consider, I'll happily join you in the fictional board.
It's not fictional, it's something that needs to be done. What's the point of having a major route that is expressway north and south of Columbus, but then meanders along city streets only to become expressway again? The roads are already in place and it's a route that makes too much sense ... four miles of 71, 104, 315 should all be signed as 33. Make the old surface roads Ohio 433 or something like that.
Quote from: TempoNick on December 27, 2023, 12:44:26 AM
Quote from: vtk on December 26, 2023, 04:27:53 PM
ODOT doesn't usually relocate a route off of city streets unless there's a new bypass roadway built specifically to carry that route. If you want to discuss various reroutes that ODOT won't consider, I'll happily join you in the fictional board.
It's not fictional, it's something that needs to be done. What's the point of having a major route that is expressway north and south of Columbus, but then meanders along city streets only to become expressway again? The roads are already in place and it's a route that makes too much sense ... four miles of 71, 104, 315 should all be signed as 33. Make the old surface roads Ohio 433 or something like that.
Something that needs to be done can still be fictional.
this explains why ohio has so many useless state routes in their cities, they are not maintained by odot.
Quote from: silverback1065 on December 27, 2023, 08:14:26 AM
this explains why ohio has so many useless state routes in their cities, they are not maintained by odot.
I think ODOT does pay for repaving, but not ongoing maintenance. This route might also make even more sense from the standpoint of continuity.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1drvMFFwvaj0UdT-v_AvRXgJsCEU92O4W/view?usp=drivesdk
Quote from: TempoNick on December 27, 2023, 08:41:29 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on December 27, 2023, 08:14:26 AM
this explains why ohio has so many useless state routes in their cities, they are not maintained by odot.
I think ODOT does pay for repaving, but not ongoing maintenance. This route might also make even more sense from the standpoint of continuity.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1drvMFFwvaj0UdT-v_AvRXgJsCEU92O4W/view?usp=drivesdk
ODOT has a whole guide sorting out who is responsible for what at as a baseline at https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/programs/maintenance-operations/rimr/rimr-matrices. There are lots of variations because of special maintenance agreements or things specific to a project. In general, ODOT helps out a lot more with things in villages (under 5,000 population) than in cities (over 5,000 population).
ODOT has created a page for the widening of 33 through Athens and Meigs Counties. The 2025 start dates must be closer to reality because they are having open houses for both segments, with the open house for the Five Points to Ravenswood section happening tomorrow evening. While there are references to the original designs from the early 2000s that I am sure need refreshing, I wish they had mentioned where the interchanges are supposed to be placed in the description.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/33-expansion
Is it going to be all freeway or are they going to still maintain some at grade intersections? Is West Virginia planning anything on their side to complete the connection to I-77?
Quote from: carbaugh2 on January 21, 2024, 07:11:05 AM
ODOT has created a page for the widening of 33 through Athens and Meigs Counties. The 2025 start dates must be closer to reality because they are having open houses for both segments, with the open house for the Five Points to Ravenswood section happening tomorrow evening. While there are references to the original designs from the early 2000s that I am sure need refreshing, I wish they had mentioned where the interchanges are supposed to be placed in the description.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/33-expansion
Quote from: TempoNick on January 21, 2024, 04:38:28 PM
Is it going to be all freeway or are they going to still maintain some at grade intersections? Is West Virginia planning anything on their side to complete the connection to I-77?
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/33-expansion
QuoteMeigs: Five Points to Ravenswood
The original roadway plans included the conceptual layout of a future four-lane highway. All intersections will remain at-grade. Right-of-way wide enough to accommodate the future four-lane road was purchased in the early 2000s. The terrain varies between hilly and rolling. Only three bridges are required along the corridor.
Meigs & Athens: Athens to Darwin
The original roadway plans included the conceptual layout of a future four-lane highway that included three proposed interchanges along the corridor. Right-of-way wide enough to accommodate the future four-lane road and interchanges was purchased in the early 2000s. The terrain is very hilly, requiring significant amounts of earthwork and bridge construction to cross it.
It appears the northern 10 miles will be built to full freeway standards. Given there's only three at grade intersections along this segment, and three interchanges proposed, that's where they'll be.
The southern portion will simply be a four lane limited access highway with those very few limited intersections... which means Ohio will probably keep a 60 mph speed limit even though the rest is virtually freeway. Not sure what their "shy away" from 65 mph or 70 mph divided highway speed limits is in the eastern part of the state, but they are very friendly with even 70 mph on non-limited-access divided highway out in the western part.
Quote from: TempoNick on January 21, 2024, 04:38:28 PM
Is it going to be all freeway or are they going to still maintain some at grade intersections? Is West Virginia planning anything on their side to complete the connection to I-77?
No, West Virginia is not building anything. There is already a functional connection to I-77 adequate for traffic on the corridor.
Quote from: sprjus4 on January 21, 2024, 05:25:35 PM
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/33-expansion
QuoteMeigs: Five Points to Ravenswood
The original roadway plans included the conceptual layout of a future four-lane highway. All intersections will remain at-grade. Right-of-way wide enough to accommodate the future four-lane road was purchased in the early 2000s. The terrain varies between hilly and rolling. Only three bridges are required along the corridor.
Meigs & Athens: Athens to Darwin
The original roadway plans included the conceptual layout of a future four-lane highway that included three proposed interchanges along the corridor. Right-of-way wide enough to accommodate the future four-lane road and interchanges was purchased in the early 2000s. The terrain is very hilly, requiring significant amounts of earthwork and bridge construction to cross it.
It appears the northern 10 miles will be built to full freeway standards. Given there's only three at grade intersections along this segment, and three interchanges proposed, that's where they'll be.
I don't see anything here saying they will convert the northern portion to a freeway. It just says original plans, now pushing 30 years old, included interchanges. The side roads that have at-grade access now have very low (low hundreds) traffic counts, so building interchanges seems wasteful. I suspect ODOT will keep at-grade intersections, at least at the southern two. If they do anything, overpasses seem more likely than interchanges.
I expect at some future point the Ravenswood Bridge will be twinned and tied directly into the 4-lane US-33 leading SE from Ravenswood, since it will become the bottleneck. Whoever designed and built the bridge originally never took a connection to I-77 into consideration. At least the future twin should be able to be built without significant disruption to travelers.
I never could find anything about why it was developed the way it was - but an article from 1980 noted that it connected with a "local service road that's crumbling into the river rather than a highway" on the Ohio side. 😒
The bridge plans on the state highway plans viewer are from 1975 (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=914) and 1976 (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=925), and at that time the four-lane connector to Interstate 77 did not exist. It was a bridge connecting WV Route 2 and OH Route 338. A refinement to the plans on the latter of those two links (page two), from 1978, shows the new WV Route 2 connector to Interstate 77.
Although as I'm working through the plans, it's interesting that of the three sites studied, the connector to the interstate was shown as proposed (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=13585). Site B Alternate B-2 and B-3 indicate a direct connection with the connector and WV Route 2, with one being an intersection and the other being an interchange at Hemlock Road. And more interesting is the plans originally included provisions for a toll plaza. It ultimately looks like Site B Alternate B-5 was considered.
That "View on Map" overlay system on the Highway Plans Viewer is sexy.
Quote from: seicer on January 22, 2024, 10:15:37 AM
I never could find anything about why it was developed the way it was - but an article from 1980 noted that it connected with a "local service road that's crumbling into the river rather than a highway" on the Ohio side. 😒
The bridge plans on the state highway plans viewer are from 1975 (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=914) and 1976 (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=925), and at that time the four-lane connector to Interstate 77 did not exist. It was a bridge connecting WV Route 2 and OH Route 338. A refinement to the plans on the latter of those two links (page two), from 1978, shows the new WV Route 2 connector to Interstate 77.
Although as I'm working through the plans, it's interesting that of the three sites studied, the connector to the interstate was shown as proposed (https://mapwv.gov/dotplans/ProjectDetails.php?scanID=13585). Site B Alternate B-2 and B-3 indicate a direct connection with the connector and WV Route 2, with one being an intersection and the other being an interchange at Hemlock Road. And more interesting is the plans originally included provisions for a toll plaza. It ultimately looks like Site B Alternate B-5 was considered.
It seems like it would be easy enough to straighten it out. The guy who owns that house with the red roof might not be very happy about it though.
As much as I would like to see this completed, it still seems like a low priority project compared to some of the other needs in the state. You would think doing something about US 23 or completing US 35 would be a higher priority. Maybe they've got money to spend and nobody down there would complain about it.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ni0QA8StOTXwui1kpdp7sgrJLYmqd6mj/view?usp=drivesdk
Here is the link to the files shared at the public information meetings on the 4 lane expansion in Athens and Meigs Counties.
https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/Forms/pid.aspx?&FilterField1=PID&FilterValue1=33-expansion
^ It appears from these plans that the northern 10 miles from Athens to Darwin will indeed be built to freeway standards, with 3 new interchanges along with modified ramps at the southern part of that section with Route 681.
Project files for the US 33 expansion in Meigs County (Pomeroy-Ravenswood) and Athens and Meigs County (Pomeroy-Athens) are now live: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/Forms/pid.aspx?&FilterField1=PID&FilterValue1=33-expansion
Considering how quickly these plans came together, it makes me wonder if these are the original plans for the Pomeroy-Ravenswood segment from 20 years ago when the expressway was completed. Note that in this segment, all intersections are retained. The expanded right-of-way continues to the Ohio River, but the four-lane expansion begins west of Great Bend.
For the Pomeroy-Athens segment, interchanges are proposed because of the higher traffic counts: https://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/files/U.S.%2033%20Athens%20to%20Darwin%20Public%20Meeting%20Exhibits.pdf
I didn't realize that they had set aside right-of-way for these back then.
Prior to the public meetings, the webpage mentioned that designs were put together back in 2000-2001, so I think these are the same plans that will be tweaked based on public comments. I still remember my normally stoic grandfather telling me about the Super 2 as it cut drive into Athens from southern Alexander Twp by 10-15 minutes. I'm sure he would be just as proud to see the freeway completed.
After looking at what is available, I am curious to see how they execute the eastbound lanes of 33. There is a large drop off from the current 2 lanes (future westbound lanes). My guess is that there will be 2 levels of lanes that come together for the interchanges and overpasses. I am disappointed that the plans never addressed the intersection between 681 and the rest areas. I don't have a preference between cul de sacs, an overpass, or frontage roads, but it needs addressed.
It leaves four at-grade intersections south of the future Darwin interchange, and it doesn't look like any of them were built with future interchanges or overpasses in mind.
On a somewhat related note, it's nice to see those rest areas at Darwin rebuilt. They were basically outhouses+. I wonder if they will affix a "Modern" tab above the rest area signs as they did for the rest area north of Portsmouth on US 23.
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.
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
Quote from: carbaugh2 on February 15, 2024, 12:43:26 PM
Prior to the public meetings, the webpage mentioned that designs were put together back in 2000-2001, so I think these are the same plans that will be tweaked based on public comments. I still remember my normally stoic grandfather telling me about the Super 2 as it cut drive into Athens from southern Alexander Twp by 10-15 minutes. I'm sure he would be just as proud to see the freeway completed.
Athens to the West Virginia line was originally intended to be built as four lanes but was cut to two due to cost constraints. I wouldn't be surprised if they had done at least some level of plans for four lanes previously.
I see the work includes converting the US 33/SR 681 interchange at Darwin to a diamond interchange. This will be third configuration of SR 681's junction with the new US 33. When it was first built, it was an at-grade intersection; turn lanes were the reason why the US 33 bridge is so wide. After a couple years, they shoehorned a new roadway for SR 681 under the bridge and converted it to a RIRO configuration. Now, it'll be changed to a diamond.
Quote from: seicer on February 15, 2024, 01:22:24 PM
On a somewhat related note, it's nice to see those rest areas at Darwin rebuilt. They were basically outhouses+. I wonder if they will affix a "Modern" tab above the rest area signs as they did for the rest area north of Portsmouth on US 23.
These "oldies" are often newer than I thought. One I think is from the early '70s turns out to be from 1985. I'm almost certain they were primitive at some point. In Ohio the tell is the hand-pump water fountain. ODOT even uses an image of the pumps in its literature as a "We've come a long way".
Quote from: seicer on January 22, 2024, 10:15:37 AM
I never could find anything about why it was developed the way it was - but an article from 1980 noted that it connected with a "local service road that's crumbling into the river rather than a highway" on the Ohio side. 😒
That's exactly what it was. I drove down US33 from Cowtown in '79 and deviated across Pomeroy to Racine along the river and over unstriped country roads along the cornfields to get towards Ravenswood. I still remember one of the most bizarre sites I've seen traveling where literally out of the cornfields arose this new 2 lane bridge over the Ohio. Usually WVDOT is 30 years *behind* highway construction (at least in the southern counties) and in this case they were 30 years ahead. Just a shame they've never moved past a stop sign at the foot of the bridge where on any given summer Friday afternoon traffic backs up to the bridge itself. SMH
Which is a better route between Columbus and Charleston: US 33 or US 23/US 35?
Google suggests they are very similar time-wise so I am curious if these projects could tip the scales in favor of US 33.
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2024, 10:15:49 PM
Which is a better route between Columbus and Charleston: US 33 or US 23/US 35?
Google suggests they are very similar time-wise so I am curious if these projects could tip the scales in favor of US 33.
I don't think it's going to appreciably change drive time that much in favor of US 33. West Virginia completing the 4-lane segment of US-35 to I-64 was the great equalizer in that regard.
Probably the biggest choke point for US 33 is the Ohio River crossing in Ravenswood, which forces traffic to navigate two left turns to continue eastbound. This widening doesn't resolve that particular issue, but it sets up a future project to twin the Ravenswood bridge to complete the 4-lane US-33 to I-77. That will ultimately save time and improve safety.
Quote from: Black-Man on February 15, 2024, 10:13:15 PM
Quote from: seicer on January 22, 2024, 10:15:37 AM
I never could find anything about why it was developed the way it was - but an article from 1980 noted that it connected with a "local service road that's crumbling into the river rather than a highway" on the Ohio side. 😒
That's exactly what it was. I drove down US33 from Cowtown in '79 and deviated across Pomeroy to Racine along the river and over unstriped country roads along the cornfields to get towards Ravenswood. I still remember one of the most bizarre sites I've seen traveling where literally out of the cornfields arose this new 2 lane bridge over the Ohio. Usually WVDOT is 30 years *behind* highway construction (at least in the southern counties) and in this case they were 30 years ahead. Just a shame they've never moved past a stop sign at the foot of the bridge where on any given summer Friday afternoon traffic backs up to the bridge itself. SMH
It is quite palatial, even now. With most Ohio River bridges there's at least a moderate level of hubbub surrounding them if not full-on metroplexes. But that bridge stands on its own.
Quote from: JREwing78 on February 15, 2024, 10:40:06 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2024, 10:15:49 PM
Which is a better route between Columbus and Charleston: US 33 or US 23/US 35?
Google suggests they are very similar time-wise so I am curious if these projects could tip the scales in favor of US 33.
I don't think it's going to appreciably change drive time that much in favor of US 33. West Virginia completing the 4-lane segment of US-35 to I-64 was the great equalizer in that regard.
Probably the biggest choke point for US 33 is the Ohio River crossing in Ravenswood, which forces traffic to navigate two left turns to continue eastbound. This widening doesn't resolve that particular issue, but it sets up a future project to twin the Ravenswood bridge to complete the 4-lane US-33 to I-77. That will ultimately save time and improve safety.
If you are coming from East Columbus, 33 is the superior way. From other parts of Columbus, it depends on how much you like or dislike 23 between Columbus and Circleville. It is very dislikable.
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2024, 10:15:49 PM
Which is a better route between Columbus and Charleston: US 33 or US 23/US 35?
Google suggests they are very similar time-wise so I am curious if these projects could tip the scales in favor of US 33.
When I lived in the south, I preferred 23-35, but my folks live in the west part of the county. I'm a big creature of habit, though, so I very rarely explored other options.
Quote from: 6a on February 19, 2024, 08:37:24 PM
Quote from: webny99 on February 15, 2024, 10:15:49 PM
Which is a better route between Columbus and Charleston: US 33 or US 23/US 35?
Google suggests they are very similar time-wise so I am curious if these projects could tip the scales in favor of US 33.
When I lived in the south, I preferred 23-35, but my folks live in the west part of the county. I'm a big creature of habit, though, so I very rarely explored other options.
Playing with the map, in Franklin County and maybe up through Powell, east of US 23, you are better off taking US 33 or or it's roughly the same. West of US 23 you are better off taking US 35.
Weird that the time difference is on the Columbus side.
Quote from: GCrites80s on February 20, 2024, 10:27:29 AM
Weird that the time difference is on the Columbus side.
I think Powell and Worthington were a few miles more going US 33 but roughly same amount of time. West of 23, the difference started getting into the 10 mile range or more. There is still a lot of friction between Columbus and the Pickaway County line though.
(Granted I'm posting at 12:30 at night, but...)
From my house (Delaware/Morrow Co. line) to Charleston it is a dead heat. Both routes (71-33-77 & 71-23-35-64) are the same in mileage and time for me.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on February 24, 2024, 12:34:41 AM
(Granted I'm posting at 12:30 at night, but...)
From my house (Delaware/Morrow Co. line) to Charleston it is a dead heat. Both routes (71-33-77 & 71-23-35-64) are the same in mileage and time for me.
I can't think of any choke points going US 33, but we know that there is the potential for trouble on US 23 until you pass South Bloomfield.
33 and Gender Road gets bad at peak. The Pickerington Rd. light is still there and causes platooning that goes on for miles.
Quote from: GCrites80s on February 24, 2024, 11:19:28 AM
33 and Gender Road gets bad at peak. The Pickerington Rd. light is still there and causes platooning that goes on for miles.
During rush hour, that is true. But any other time of the day, US 33 is an easy ride all the way to 77.
My thought on driving 33 to Charleston versus 23/35 is that 33 is more consistent in drive time since the only lights are at Pickerington Rd and Allen Rd/Sugar Grove (just south of the Lancaster Bypass), and the Pickerington Rd interchange project goes to bid on 5/8/25 (https://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/ContractAdmin/Contracts/Pages/upcoming-projects-overview.aspx). The only other place I've experienced congestion is on the 2-lane section in Meigs County when someone is sticking to the 55 MPH speed limit, which is understandable since I have seen troopers monitoring speeds every time I have driven it. On the other hand, 23 has traffic lights from 270 to South Bloomfield and on the south side of Circleville.
Speaking of bid dates, the same page lists the dates for the sale of various parts of the Super-2 conversion projects. A project to repair the existing concrete pavement in Meigs County goes to bid in early May. Tree clearing in Athens County is set for August, while the same work in Meigs County will be sold in September.
Both sections are being split into two sections. The Five Points-Ravenswood construction projects are scheduled February and March 2025, while the Athens-Darwin projects will be let in April 2025. ODOT has its total construction estimate for the Five Points-Ravenswood project at just over $83 million, while the Athens-Darwin work is estimated at just under $117 million.
Another project that will be bid this year is the interchange reconstruction at 33/682 at The Plains. The ramp intersections are being converted to roundabouts at an estimated cost of $2 million. It has a sale date in October. The public comments indicate area residents are fans of the move. Personally, I think the roundabouts at 664 have been a great improvement to traffic flow and sight lines, so I think this will be just as beneficial.
Quote from: Buck87 on December 01, 2023, 11:43:12 AM
The US 33 / Petzinger Rd intersection was supposed to get an RCUT this year, did that happen?
I'm having trouble finding info as to whether or not that happened. Just reference to the fact that the planned full interchange there is not yet funded and that an RCUT would be installed in 2023 to serve that intersection during the interim period.
I drove through here earlier today. The RCUT is not complete; however, it appears they have recently relocated utility lines, so I'm guessing they will be working on it in the near future.
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
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.
A lot of it might be the camera.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The drawings illustrate that the northern side of the off-ramp junction gets a roundabout.
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.
Alt-3 (tight diamond) and Alt-4 (new terrain/existing) were my favorites. Alt-2 seemed overkill, and Alt-1 would devastate the huge tourist stop at Rockbridge. I would hope that with any of the alternates that a rest area be provided and that the off/on ramps be something more than right-in/right-out but none of the alternatives seem to accomplish that.
Yeah 3 or 4.
Alt 4 sounds like it will never happen. I think I read $300 some million dollars, not including right of way acquisition, versus 80ish million for the other alternatives.
So if I understand this correctly, US 33 is likely to become almost all freeway from Ohio 104 until about 10 mi south of Athens (Darwin) and this isn't pie in the sky. It's going to happen in reasonably short order. It's too bad they don't have such a nice solution for US 23.
From what I'm understanding, this project is not fully upgrading the section from Lancaster to Logan. It's only upgrading the portion in Hocking County. A few at grade intersections will exist south of the Lancaster bypass including the traffic signal at Sugar Grove. Not sure why they wouldn't upgrade that small gap with this project, creating 46 miles of uninterrupted 70 mph freeway between Carroll and Nelsonville.
With the portion between Athens and Darwin being widened to 4 lanes and upgraded to freeway, closing in the remaining gaps between Columbus and Lancaster, the aforementioned portion south of Lancaster, and Nelsonville and Athens would create 84 miles of uninterrupted freeway between Columbus and Athens, with the rest of the route to West Virginia being limited access divided highway with limited at-grade intersections.
It would be a very reasonable project for Ohio to "close in" these at-grade portions over the coming decade or two and finally create an uninterrupted 70 mph freeway connection (112 miles) between I-70 and the West Virginia state line, and work with West Virginia to fill that short gap to I-77.
I see a couple of problems. The newer sections of 33, like the bypass around Lancaster and the newer interchange near Diley Road are nicely laid out. They have nice wide berths and not only look great, but seem very safe and able to handle the traffic volume. Some of the older sections are narrower and look like they were done on the cheap. Maybe design standards were different back then, but hopefully this will be fixed in the future as they upgrade the sections.
I don't know what they were thinking in Carroll. That section right through town is pretty narrow, that cable divider, and that goofy exit into Carroll going westbound really seems half-assed to me. Canal Winchester around Bowen Road also seems like they need some more right of way. I can't believe that Speedway is still in operation.
If they ever get US 23 North of Columbus fixed, US 23 to the north and US 33 to the southeast connecting to I-77 seems like it would be a good route for I-73 at least until the other pieces come together, if they ever come together.
I don't like route numbers that change. I wish Ohio would do things like Iowa does with the Avenue of the Saints being all Iowa 27 regardless of what road you're driving on.
As compared to today's projects, yes the older work was very much "done on the cheap" but not necessarily intentionally since projects were so incredibly cheaper back then even when adjusted for inflation. People just didn't think Lancaster Bypass/Nelsonville Bypass big back then. It wasn't considered necessary and it was much harder to move that amount of earth in those days. Diley Road is really only that tall due to the advent of double-stacked train cars.
For example, let's say the Lancaster Bypass was done in the '70s. It would probably start at about the mall since there weren't any traffic lights between Carroll and the mall until the Meijer opened up in the '90s. None. No houses on W. Fair west of the Campground. It would have hugged the city much more closely and would have re-joined the old road near Memorial Drive and Ford St. where Lancaster Sales used to be.
Quote from: TempoNick on March 18, 2024, 02:36:09 PM
Alt 4 sounds like it will never happen. I think I read $300 some million dollars, not including right of way acquisition, versus 80ish million for the other alternatives.
So if I understand this correctly, US 33 is likely to become almost all freeway from Ohio 104 until about 10 mi south of Athens (Darwin) and this isn't pie in the sky. It's going to happen in reasonably short order. It's too bad they don't have such a nice solution for US 23.
After looking at the packet I am Team 3.
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 18, 2024, 02:56:10 PM
From what I'm understanding, this project is not fully upgrading the section from Lancaster to Logan. It's only upgrading the portion in Hocking County. A few at grade intersections will exist south of the Lancaster bypass including the traffic signal at Sugar Grove. Not sure why they wouldn't upgrade that small gap with this project, creating 46 miles of uninterrupted 70 mph freeway between Carroll and Nelsonville.
This is correct. It appears the traffic study is only focused on Hocking County. The Sugar Grove traffic is beginning to remind me more of Cherry Valley Rd in Newark prior to the Thornwood Crossing/16 interchange. At least the traffic volumes aren't that high yet. I remember rush hour backups going nearly 2 miles at that light before the interchange was finally built. I have a feeling that the Sugar Grove interchange will be next on the list once District 5 gets the Pickerington Rd project construction started next year.
As a reminder, there are numerous at grade intersections between Nelsonville and The Plains including the Movies 10 and the rest area turned Wayne National Forest station. They also need to close off or build a grade separation at the Johnson Rd intersection near 550. ODOT is making great strides, but there is still a lot to be done.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 18, 2024, 07:04:26 PM
As compared to today's projects, yes the older work was very much "done on the cheap" but not necessarily intentionally since projects were so incredibly cheaper back then even when adjusted for inflation. People just didn't think Lancaster Bypass/Nelsonville Bypass big back then. It wasn't considered necessary and it was much harder to move that amount of earth in those days. Diley Road is really only that tall due to the advent of double-stacked train cars.
I really love that bypass visually. It is a nice drive, even though it is a bit short. I realize sooner or later progress will ruin that nice view, but for the time being, they did a very nice job on that section of road.
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 18, 2024, 07:12:36 PM
For example, let's say the Lancaster Bypass was done in the '70s. It would probably start at about the mall since there weren't any traffic lights between Carroll and the mall until the Meijer opened up in the '90s. None. No houses on W. Fair west of the Campground. It would have hugged the city much more closely and would have re-joined the old road near Memorial Drive and Ford St. where Lancaster Sales used to be.
Mind you, Memorial Dr. was the "original" bypass for 33 around Lancaster. Similar in scope to 23 in Delaware and 16 in Newark. All designed in the late 50s/early 60s then built in the mid 60s.
I feel confident I mentioned this project a while back, but ODOT has now posted a webpage for the improvements on the 33/682 interchange at The Plains. ODOT is removing the traffic light and stop sign at the end of the offramps and replacing them with roundabouts much like 664 and 328 around Logan.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/118465
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 19, 2024, 12:23:58 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on March 18, 2024, 07:12:36 PM
For example, let's say the Lancaster Bypass was done in the '70s. It would probably start at about the mall since there weren't any traffic lights between Carroll and the mall until the Meijer opened up in the '90s. None. No houses on W. Fair west of the Campground. It would have hugged the city much more closely and would have re-joined the old road near Memorial Drive and Ford St. where Lancaster Sales used to be.
Mind you, Memorial Dr. was the "original" bypass for 33 around Lancaster. Similar in scope to 23 in Delaware and 16 in Newark. All designed in the late 50s/early 60s then built in the mid 60s.
It just wound up with so many businesses and stoplights on it that I often used Columbus Street (old, old 33) to get through town because it was faster. At least until I hit the interchange with Memorial under the elevated section.
Quote from: carbaugh2 on March 19, 2024, 05:57:25 AM
I feel confident I mentioned this project a while back, but ODOT has now posted a webpage for the improvements on the 33/682 interchange at The Plains. ODOT is removing the traffic light and stop sign at the end of the offramps and replacing them with roundabouts much like 664 and 328 around Logan.
https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/projects/118465
I'm not sure if it made it into the final iteration of the project, but at least earlier versions of this project also included closing the intersection just west on US 33 that is a connector to SR 682.
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 18, 2024, 02:56:10 PM
From what I'm understanding, this project is not fully upgrading the section from Lancaster to Logan. It's only upgrading the portion in Hocking County. A few at grade intersections will exist south of the Lancaster bypass including the traffic signal at Sugar Grove. Not sure why they wouldn't upgrade that small gap with this project, creating 46 miles of uninterrupted 70 mph freeway between Carroll and Nelsonville.
Hocking County is District 10 and Fairfield County is District 5. This sort of project is normally planned at the district level, which is why it doesn't span the full length from Lancaster to Logan.
US 33 Eclipse traffic outbound.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKqwB1IXUAAQwCe?format=jpg&name=large)
I thought I was the one who kept dragging this in a 23 direction :-D
My bad. The headline said 33. I replaced the link in the original post.
And while we're at it. Here's Toledo traffic going back to Michigan.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKqwgEyXMAEfPR9?format=jpg&name=large)
US-23 in Michigan is already borderline overloaded with roughly 50,000 vpd on a 4-lane freeway. The backups were probably just as epic north of the border.
Looks like the Bixby/Rager Rd engineering was TRAC approved as well.
https://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/2022TRACApplications/D06_05_FRA%20US%2033%20CORRIDOR_TRAC_APP.pdf (https://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/2022TRACApplications/D06_05_FRA%20US%2033%20CORRIDOR_TRAC_APP.pdf)
I don't know if they really needed to maintain access for those two roads.
Quote from: GCrites on April 12, 2024, 06:29:40 PMI don't know if they really needed to maintain access for those two roads.
Between Hamilton Road and Gender Road, it seems like adding another exit will just create another choke point. Wouldn't it be better to just build an overpass and use the existing two exits? I'm sure you would need some improvements to surface roads, however. There is also the other issue of Groveport not wanting so much connectivity to what's north of 33.
Three "choke points" working together would be less congested than two handling the same traffic.
I'm also strongly in favor of as much local access across freeways as possible, so the local traffic that just wants to cross doesn't have to use the busy roads with interchanges. I-70 has a problem with that between Hilliard–Rome Rd and Wilson Rd.
Quote from: JREwing78 on April 11, 2024, 05:08:16 PMUS-23 in Michigan is already borderline overloaded with roughly 50,000 vpd on a 4-lane freeway. The backups were probably just as epic north of the border.
Living less than three miles from US-23 in southern Michigan, I can verify that traffic was equally terrible on all side roads as well!