AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant  (Read 2551 times)

TempoNick

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 107
  • Location: Blacklick, Ohio
  • Last Login: December 29, 2022, 01:58:09 AM
Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« on: January 22, 2022, 12:49:36 AM »

The newspaper articles I've been reading about the new $20 billion dollar Intel plant coming to New Albany say that the state of Ohio has committed money to expanding Ohio 161. I'm assuming that means additional lanes and/or exits? Anybody have information on this?
Logged

SkyPesos

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4781
  • Age: 19
  • Location: Cincinnati, OH/Lafayette, IN
  • Last Login: Today at 02:28:07 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2022, 01:22:43 AM »

I think OH 161 may be 6 laned deeper into New Albany, as it current narrows to 4 lanes just east of the Hamilton Rd exit (barely entering New Albany). I don't know the exact location of the Intel plant, so not sure if a new exit will be needed or not.
Logged
My Fictional Highways

I-70 doesn't go to Baltimore, and I-80 isn't transcon.

ibagli

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 55
  • Last Login: Today at 06:41:38 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2022, 02:02:54 AM »

The plant is going to be off of Mink Street, which had an exit added in 2017, so I assume it means six lanes at least to there.

I think there would eventually be implications for US-62 between New Albany and Johnstown as well. I'm not sure how literally to take the renderings on this, but they show Green Chapel Road and Mink Street both being six lanes with medians near the site, and I imagine there would be quite a bit of traffic trying to access it from the west.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2022, 02:22:39 AM by ibagli »
Logged

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2601
  • Your roadmeet didn't happen, if I was not there.

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 10:09:15 AM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2022, 12:31:15 PM »

The newspaper articles I've been reading about the new $20 billion dollar Intel plant coming to New Albany say that the state of Ohio has committed money to expanding Ohio 161. I'm assuming that means additional lanes and/or exits? Anybody have information on this?

Beyond ODOT director Jack "I'm a radio DJ on Sundays" Marchbanks stating that Oh 161 would be widen to 6 lanes out to the chip plant, I haven't heard as to any other plans for roads.
Logged
Less important than dead cats.

TempoNick

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 107
  • Location: Blacklick, Ohio
  • Last Login: December 29, 2022, 01:58:09 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2022, 04:27:28 PM »


Beyond ODOT director Jack "I'm a radio DJ on Sundays" Marchbanks stating that Oh 161 would be widen to 6 lanes out to the chip plant, I haven't heard as to any other plans for roads.

I think it needs to be widened a few miles east of there because of the potential bottlenecks created when you go from 3 to 2 lanes.
Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2983
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: January 29, 2023, 12:39:00 PM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2022, 05:46:53 PM »


Beyond ODOT director Jack "I'm a radio DJ on Sundays" Marchbanks stating that Oh 161 would be widen to 6 lanes out to the chip plant, I haven't heard as to any other plans for roads.

I think it needs to be widened a few miles east of there because of the potential bottlenecks created when you go from 3 to 2 lanes.
All that's needed is to replace those stoplights at the end of the Mink Rd ramps with nice modern roundabouts!  :bigass:
Logged

Buck87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1367
  • Aesculus glabra

  • Age: 35
  • Location: Bellevue, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 03:12:34 PM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2022, 03:17:35 PM »

I wonder which way truck traffic from the plant to I-70 east will go and vice versa.

Google likes OH 161 to OH 37 as the fastest route. 161-270 would include some out of the way backtracking but would be on freeways the whole time. OH 310 and/or Mink Rd to US 40 are more direct but aren't the best quality roads and go through more congested areas.

Do big deals like this one ever include stipulations as to which way truck traffic should move in situations like this?

Edit to add, I now notice that there is already an industrial park just to the west of this future plant, so I would imagine that typical traffic patterns for trucks going to and from this area is already well established.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2022, 05:55:32 PM by Buck87 »
Logged

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2601
  • Your roadmeet didn't happen, if I was not there.

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 10:09:15 AM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2022, 03:08:32 AM »


Beyond ODOT director Jack "I'm a radio DJ on Sundays" Marchbanks stating that Oh 161 would be widen to 6 lanes out to the chip plant, I haven't heard as to any other plans for roads.

I think it needs to be widened a few miles east of there because of the potential bottlenecks created when you go from 3 to 2 lanes.
All that's needed is to replace those stoplights at the end of the Mink Rd ramps with nice modern roundabouts!  :bigass:

Those will be coming (within the decade)
Logged
Less important than dead cats.

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2601
  • Your roadmeet didn't happen, if I was not there.

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 10:09:15 AM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2022, 03:21:45 AM »

I wonder which way truck traffic from the plant to I-70 east will go and vice versa.

Google likes OH 161 to OH 37 as the fastest route. 161-270 would include some out of the way backtracking but would be on freeways the whole time. OH 310 and/or Mink Rd to US 40 are more direct but aren't the best quality roads and go through more congested areas.

Do big deals like this one ever include stipulations as to which way truck traffic should move in situations like this?


I'm sure there will be promises made (and maybe contracts drawn) in regards to any truck traffic that could go south through Pataskala. A bypass, or rerouted Oh 310 would be ideal, but Pataskala is so sprawled out, where would ODOT build a road without eating up exaggerated land costs (due to a myriad of housing)
(They wouldn't make the trucks go east to Newark and then follow Oh 79 south to I-70, would they?)
Logged
Less important than dead cats.

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3719
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: January 28, 2023, 08:28:13 PM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2022, 04:13:02 PM »

It's too bad Ohio isn't interested in any new Interstate corridors or the OH 161/37/16 corridor would be an ideal corridor for a 3di. If the at-grades on 16 at Dayton Rd., Marne Rd., and the Marne/Brownsville Rd. SE intersections were eliminated, among other upgrades, would have been sufficient for a Columbus-to-Trinway Interstate corridor.
Logged

SkyPesos

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4781
  • Age: 19
  • Location: Cincinnati, OH/Lafayette, IN
  • Last Login: Today at 02:28:07 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2022, 05:07:00 PM »

It's too bad Ohio isn't interested in any new Interstate corridors or the OH 161/37/16 corridor would be an ideal corridor for a 3di. If the at-grades on 16 at Dayton Rd., Marne Rd., and the Marne/Brownsville Rd. SE intersections were eliminated, among other upgrades, would have been sufficient for a Columbus-to-Trinway Interstate corridor.
I remember reading a while ago that long-term plans are for a 4 lane expressway between Columbus and Pittsburgh along OH 161/OH 16/US 36/US 250/US 22. Not sure if that idea died out or not, but if "I-73" in Ohio gives a clue to anything, I'm guessing so.
Logged
My Fictional Highways

I-70 doesn't go to Baltimore, and I-80 isn't transcon.

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2601
  • Your roadmeet didn't happen, if I was not there.

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 10:09:15 AM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2022, 11:50:55 PM »

It's too bad Ohio isn't interested in any new Interstate corridors or the OH 161/37/16 corridor would be an ideal corridor for a 3di. If the at-grades on 16 at Dayton Rd., Marne Rd., and the Marne/Brownsville Rd. SE intersections were eliminated, among other upgrades, would have been sufficient for a Columbus-to-Trinway Interstate corridor.
I remember reading a while ago that long-term plans are for a 4 lane expressway between Columbus and Pittsburgh along OH 161/OH 16/US 36/US 250/US 22. Not sure if that idea died out or not, but if "I-73" in Ohio gives a clue to anything, I'm guessing so.

And this shocks you?!
http://www.roadfan.com/ohiomaps.html (7 different state maps of highway proposals from 1946-1974 & some 1962 Rand McNally)
Logged
Less important than dead cats.

TempoNick

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 107
  • Location: Blacklick, Ohio
  • Last Login: December 29, 2022, 01:58:09 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2022, 09:40:41 PM »


I remember reading a while ago that long-term plans are for a 4 lane expressway between Columbus and Pittsburgh along OH 161/OH 16/US 36/US 250/US 22. Not sure if that idea died out or not, but if "I-73" in Ohio gives a clue to anything, I'm guessing so.

It doesn't look like such a great route because you have to go North to Coshocton and then you kind of have to go south to Steubenville and Pittsburgh. It would make more sense taking Ohio 16 to US 22 and then US 22 to Pittsburgh, but I doubt such a road is needed.

US 23 being all freeway is definitely needed.
Logged

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 847
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: Today at 06:18:56 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2022, 07:03:28 AM »

Story about Columbus following the Intel announcement.

https://www.governing.com/community/america-discovers-columbus-ohio
Logged

kalvado

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5166
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: Today at 06:36:57 AM
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #14 on: February 21, 2022, 08:37:59 AM »

A bit late for the discussion... A nearby Global Foundries big fab (Fab 8 in Malta NY) is located off I-87. Fab itself is served by 2-lane roads. A few of those were purpose built as the site was a mostly greenfield development, but nothing really major. Interstate didn't get too much extra traffic.
Logged

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2601
  • Your roadmeet didn't happen, if I was not there.

  • Age: 48
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: January 27, 2023, 10:09:15 AM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Ohio 161 Expansion for New Intel Plant
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2023, 11:31:28 PM »

A second outerbelt? Intel growth forcing Ohio transportation execs to think big
NEWARK − The development coming to Licking County has pushed transportation planners into overdrive. The question, though, is which roads should be widened and improved.

Officials can’t wait to see where traffic goes to determine where money should be spent. But they don’t want to guess wrong and not improve roads that need it.

The $20 billion Intel Corporation computer chip manufacturing facility just south of Johnstown has forced planners, consultants, city, township, county and state officials to all look into their crystal ball and predict future transportation needs. It's a challenging and expensive game, and everybody is playing.

The latest long-term discussion has been over the potential need for a second outer belt around Columbus, in addition to Ohio 270. Jim Roberts, chairman of the Grow Licking County infrastructure committee, said a consultant mentioned it at a recent meeting.

“It’s just kind of a vague concept now," Roberts said. "It’s an idea that’s out there.”

Jack Marchbanks, director of the Ohio Department of Transportation, confirmed an outer outer belt has been discussed lately, but it's not a new concept.

“It’s been discussed going all the way back to the 1990s," Marchbanks said. "The idea has come up over and over again. It’s in the exploratory stage. It’s been discussed. There's no official study yet. No decisions have been made.”

Marchbanks said the Columbus metro area kind of extends from Mansfield to Chillicothe and "now it’s actually filling out to those boundaries."

The ODOT boss said the goal is to develop a transportation system that's safe and reliable, helps people get to and from work and works for people in emergencies. He said it's difficult to plan far in advance, but that's ODOT's job.

"It’s our responsibility to be scouts and look at future needs," Marchbanks said. "It has to be fact-based. We know traffic is going to grow. ‘If you build it, they will come’ is not a responsible use of assets.”

Matt Hill, director of the Licking County Area Transportation Study, said the latest talk of the need for another Columbus outer belt is not new.

“This is like the third time I’ve heard it discussed (in the last 20 years),” Hill said. “Somebody out there wants a better connection to I-71 north."

Licking County transportation planning
Bill Lozier, the Licking County Transportation Improvement District projects director, said the TID is reviewing traffic projections from MS Consultants based on land use plans from Monroe, Jersey and St. Albans townships around the Intel development.

“What we want to prepare for is opening day for Intel in 2025," Lozier said. “The raw numbers for the new zoning when it’s fully built out is staggering. It’s truly like dropping a new city out in the cornfields.

“The old rule of thumb was once you get over the threshold of 2,000 cars a day, it kind of becomes a higher-class road you need to treat differently," Lozier said. "That’s an old-school rule of thumb. But now we’re talking on (Intel's) opening day, a lot of these roads are going to be hitting 4,000 or 5,000.”

Lozier said the projections are for 2050, so it's not all happening at once. He said the TID seeks to coordinate with ODOT and combine funding sources to address the massive needs. Lozier said the deadline for Ohio TID grant applications is in March. It received $500,000 last year for design around Intel.


“We don’t have a choice. We’re going to have to pick a couple routes that lead into Intel on the local road network and focus on those," Lozier said. "The rest of them are going to have to evolve over time.”

Licking County Engineer Jared Knerr said Intel has said 90% of the construction traffic will use Ohio 161 to Beech Road to Jug Street and then onto Haul Road, the new Harrison Road-Clover Valley connector.

Soon after the Intel announcement a year ago, ODOT announced plans to widen Ohio 161 in Franklin County, but in September then State Sen. Jay Hottinger said the State Controlling Board approved the distribution of $13 million to expand Ohio 161 from Columbus to Newark.

New Albany, which has annexed much of Jersey Township plans to make improvements to Green Chapel Road and Mink Street.

In April, then State Rep. Mark Fraizer presented roadway plan improvements showing Green Chapel Road, which separates Jersey and Monroe townships, becoming a five-lane highway from Mink Street to Clover Valley Road by December of this year. Mink Street was also slated to become five lanes from Green Chapel Road to Ohio 161 by April 2024.

Knerr said the city of New Albany is responsible for Mink Street from Worthington Road, south of Ohio 161, to Green Chapel, according to road maintenance agreements. New Albany is similarly responsible for Green Chapel, from Mink to Clover Valley Road. Knerr said he’s seen plans for Green Chapel to become five lanes, but also seen plans for it to become three lanes. He could not confirm the construction timelines.


The transportation needs are not confined to the immediate area of Jersey, Monroe and St. Albans townships.

Harrison Township Trustee Mark Van Buren said plans need to be made for the Ohio 158-Interstate 70 interchange and north on Outville Road in the township. He said two half-million square foot warehouses will be built on a 280-acre farm in the area.

“We have a blank canvass," Van Buren said. "I can see all this traffic coming to one spot and 10 years from now, how do we fix it?"

Harrison Township is located immediately east of Pataskala and south of St. Albans Township. The Ohio 158 interchange in Kirkersville is close to the townships of Harrison, Etna and Union, so Van Buren said the TID could get involved in a collaborative effort.

Lozier said the TID continues working with Newark and Heath on the Thornwood corridor, which will take traffic from Thornwood Crossing to Ridgely Tract Road and onto Ohio 79.

Jared Lane, the city of Heath director of building and zoning, said the southern part of Thornwood Drive, around Beaver Run Road, has become a focus.

“We’ve met with three foreign companies wanting to come to that area," Lane said. "There’s a ton of interest in that area.”

Lozier said there may be a need to widen Refugee Road between Ohio 310 and Etna Parkway.

“Congestion is building on 310,” Lozier said. "During the morning peaks, 310 northbound at U.S. 40 is backing up. When traffic finds out it can bypass Pataskala downtown, the concern is it going to go west over to Mink and go north somehow.”

kmallett@newarkadvocate.com
Twitter: @kmallett1958
Logged
Less important than dead cats.

 


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