I-70 / I-470 in Wheeling, WV

[shoptb1]

Ok, so I don't know if this question has been posed before (couldn't find it on searches), but was wondering what the group's thoughts are on I-70 & I-470 in the Wheeling, WV area.  Every single time I've been through this town in the past 3 years, I-70 through Wheeling has been closed, detoured, not recommended, etc because of work on the tunnel through Wheeling.  Since I-470 is actually the better route for trucks...why doesn't Ohio and West Virginia just swap the designations on these roadways?  It would seem like just marking the "I-470 bypass" as the main I-70 would just be simpler for everyone.  Any reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea, other than swapping out signs?

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=wheeling,+wv&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=47.167389,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wheeling,+Ohio,+West+Virginia&ll=40.04654,-80.747452&spn=0.179244,0.308647&t=h&z=12

[Truvelo]

This is something I've asked before and the answer seems to be I-70 is the mainline and I-470 is the loop. I agree that the numbers should be swapped as it makes sense to keep traffic on I-470. However, every time I use I-70 instead of I-470 there's no problems and I get a clear run through the tunnel.

[shoptb1]

This is something I've asked before and the answer seems to be I-70 is the mainline and I-470 is the loop. I agree that the numbers should be swapped as it makes sense to keep traffic on I-470. However, every time I use I-70 instead of I-470 there's no problems and I get a clear run through the tunnel.

Yeah, there's all of this conflicting information for travelers too.  The signs all say "I-70 Closed to Through Traffic" with big construction signs, and I-470 is even marked as "Detour I-70" on trailblazers, BUT there's always signs saying "All Wheeling attractions use I-70"....STUPID!

[Chris]

I-470 is even slightly shorter than I-70. About half a mile.

[thenetwork]

Judging by the number repairs on the aging tunnels, and that narrowness of the tunnels (no shoulders), what can WvDOT do to really improve that stretch?  It's not like they can "blow up" the hill nor make a new highway alignment due to I-70's proximity of the tunnel to the Ohio River and it's crossings.  Plus US-40 runs along the top of the hill, over the tunnels, and there is too much business & residential on and around the hill.

I do agree that I-70 should be rerouted along the bypass, and either make the old I-70 Alignment either I-470 or, to be politically correct, an odd 3di spur route (I-370).

[PAHighways]

I do agree that I-70 should be rerouted along the bypass, and either make the old I-70 Alignment either I-470 or, to be politically correct, an odd 3di spur route (I-370).

Or move I-70 onto current I-470 and redesignate the current I-70 as a business loop.

[rickmastfan67]

I do agree that I-70 should be rerouted along the bypass, and either make the old I-70 Alignment either I-470 or, to be politically correct, an odd 3di spur route (I-370).

Or move I-70 onto current I-470 and redesignate the current I-70 as a business loop.

I don't think WV or OH would go for that because they would lose Interstate Mileage...

[shoptb1]

Or move I-70 onto current I-470 and redesignate the current I-70 as a business loop.

I don't think WV or OH would go for that because they would lose Interstate Mileage...

Hence the idea just to swap the designations as both states would retain the same amount of Interstate Mileage. 

[corco]

I don't think WV or OH would go for that because they would lose Interstate Mileage...

I'm not for the idea of a business loop freeway- I'd just keep it as is.

That said, they could pull a Sacramento, swap the designations, and then sign the new I-470 as Business I-70

[TheStranger]

That said, they could pull a Sacramento, swap the designations, and then sign the new I-470 as Business I-70

Re: Business I-80 - I've always wondered why the designation change was necessary in the first place, considering how many older sections of road were grandfathered into the Interstates elsewhere. 

In any case, it ended up being only somewhat like that idea for Wheeling: unsigned I-305 (and signed US 50) represents half (what was built in the 1960s as I-80 or in the early 1950s as US 99W/US 40) of Business 80 (where it meets interstate standards), the other half being unsigned state route 51.

[xonhulu]

Re: Business I-80 - I've always wondered why the designation change was necessary in the first place, considering how many older sections of road were grandfathered into the Interstates elsewhere.

Was it partly to free up the I-880 designation for the Nimitz Freeway?

[TheStranger]

Was it partly to free up the I-880 designation for the Nimitz Freeway?

No - there was a one or two year period (1982-1984) in which California completely lacked an 880 route (with Business 80 existing in Sacramento, and Route 17 still whole north of San Jose).  Today's 880 came about after lobbying from congressman Glenn Anderson (of which I-105/Century Freeway today is named after in Los Angeles).

I know that the City of Sacramento used federal funds for light rail, some of the funding that would have gone to the I-80 upgrade in Arden/North Sacramento...but that by itself doesn't seem to necessitate the designation change I would think.  (Then again, a similar situation played out with what is now Route 470 in metro Denver)

[Alps]

I think Business 80 in Sacramento was to prevent people from using it as a through route like they would if it had an I shield on it.  Given the problems that I-70 has, Business 70 isn't the worst idea.

[shoptb1]

Given the problems that I-70 has, Business 70 isn't the worst idea.

I'm not sure that ODOT or WVDOT would be too happy about the idea of losing interstate mileage.  Plus, I think that Business Interstate Routes are outdated.  When's the last time that a new one was created?

[TheStranger]

Given the problems that I-70 has, Business 70 isn't the worst idea.

I'm not sure that ODOT or WVDOT would be too happy about the idea of losing interstate mileage.  Plus, I think that Business Interstate Routes are outdated.  When's the last time that a new one was created?

Two years ago for Business I-40 in Greensboro (and Business I-85), of which Business I-40 has since been reverted back to mainline I-40.

I think Business 80 in Sacramento was to prevent people from using it as a through route like they would if it had an I shield on it.  Given the problems that I-70 has, Business 70 isn't the worst idea.

I'm reminded of the 495/95 (895) deal in Wilmington for a second here...I wonder if CalTrans would have been better off at the time, switching the 880 and 80 designations around, would that have been enough to encourage through travelers to use the route into Natomas and Del Paso Heights?

[froggie]

Two years ago for Business I-40 in Greensboro (and Business I-85), of which Business I-40 has since been reverted back to mainline I-40.

That particular Business I-85 dates back to early 2004.

[Revive 755]

Last time MoDOT tried to get I-49 signed, there was a business loop proposed with it.

[bugo]

Last time MoDOT tried to get I-49 signed, there was a business loop proposed with it.

Where?

[rickmastfan67]

Last time MoDOT tried to get I-49 signed, there was a business loop proposed with it.

Where?

At the AASHTO website.  Here's the dirrect link to that file: http://cms.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/AM2007_USRN_Report_AR&MO_Interstate49.pdf

[TheStranger]

Last time MoDOT tried to get I-49 signed, there was a business loop proposed with it.

Where?

At the AASHTO website.  Here's the dirrect link to that file: http://cms.transportation.org/sites/route/docs/AM2007_USRN_Report_AR&MO_Interstate49.pdf

That's a pretty fascinating document (and I really want to see it now for other proposals, i.e. Arkansas's newer US routes).  Thanks!

It isn't quite the same thing as the aforementioned segments of I-80 in Sacramento and I-85 in North Carolina though (business loop freeways), but more like a US route business loop on surface streets becoming an Interstate business loop (which happened in San Diego along I-5 at Mission Bay Drive).

[Alps]

Mod note - Extended discussion of US 71/I-49 situation has been moved to the Mid-South board.

[shoptb1]

So I finally got a response from ODOT on my question regarding swapping the designations.  I'm not sure that I agree with anything in here:

The interstate designations are a product of congress and the Federal Highway Administration.  I-70 was the first interstate through this area followed much later by I-470.  The Ohio Department of Transportation, or West Virginia for that matter, cannot initiate the suggested action.  Because I-470 is shorter, swapping the route designations on these two interstates would literally mean changing signage from Utah to Maryland.

[TheStranger]

shoptb1: The ONLY states that would have to have their exit #s changed in that scenario are...Ohio and West Virginia!

Not to mention that DOTs have, and will continue to, request/initiate reroutings and redesignations for interstates (i.e. the decomissioning of I-880 in Sacramento, the recent addition of I-795 in North Carolina). 

[shoptb1]

So in fairness to ODOT, I got this 2nd response after I complained about their first lackluster response:

Your description of the signage changes may be more correct than we stated, however some signage would undoubtedly have to be changed.  The change of a half mile would result in the movement of existing signs by half a mile.  Some of these signs are overhead truss structures which are very expensive.

I looked at the traffic volumes on 70 and 470 east of the 70/470 split in 2008 and found approximately 52% utilized 470 and 48% used 70.  Since these counts may have occurred during one of the recent 70 closures, I reviewed the our counts from 2005.  In 2005 the usage was 46% and 54% for 470 and 70 respectively.  So in round numbers roughly have of the traffic uses both routes currently.  My experience tells me that vehicle traffic patterns follow those roadways that best suit their needs regardless of the roadways name, number or name.

Thank you for the suggestion, however I don't believe that ODOT or WVDOH would be successful in your requested petition, nor do I feel the benefit outweighs the problems or difficulties involved in pursuing your request.

[Revive 755]

^ I don't see how the big sign trusses would need to be moved; the existing interchange signs should be unchanged excluding the exit number tab.  I don't recall any big overhead signs with mileposts on them around Wheeling either.  Worse case they could use the AH (ahead) and BK (back) style milemarkers Iowa uses when they didn't want to change every single milepost on US 218 and US 34 for alignment shifts.

Would be interesting to see what WVDOH says about swapping I-470 and I-70.