Today's Akron Beacon Journal reported (http://www.ohio.com/news/local/planning-agency-amats-says-it-s-time-for-state-route-8-to-be-designated-as-interstate-1.458896#.UtQB-I8a7cU.twitter) that the local MPO submitted a formal request for ODOT to start the process toward Interstate designation for Ohio Route 8 between I-271 in Macedonia and I-76/77 in Akron.
Of course, this is no surprise to those who frequent Fictional Highways (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1408) (where I-477 was proposed for this highway, which IMHO is a better number) ...
Any thoughts from the peanut gallery?
Quotethe change would make the roadway eligible for federal funds
Nope, not anymore.
Anyway, the number seems reasonable. Its primary function is connecting I-80 to Akron, hence it's a spur of I-80. Yes, it'll continue north to I-271, but that's sort of a link from I-80 to I-271. Though frankly I-880 would fit better with the current number.
PS: woo federal highway
Given the way the existing network and traffic flow is set up, I'd think an even I-x77 would be more appropriate than an I-x80.
I think I-880 is the best name for it, given its current status as Route 8. I-276 or I-477 would also work, and I-671 (my other end is I-271) would probably be more appropriate than the x80.
Is 8 already built to interstate standards, or would it require any upgrades?
I think it makes more sense as an x77 than an x80. For starters, it's the through movement at the I-77 interchange with I-76 near downtown Akron.
While there may be a small portion of traffic that uses it to connect from I-80 straight to the city of Akron, I think most I-80 corridor traffic would use I-76 if coming from the east and I-77 if coming from the west.
On the map, it appears more to be a I-77 to I-271 shortcut for 77 corridor traffic heading northeast to Erie and upstate New York.
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2014, 03:11:46 PM
I think it makes more sense as an x77 than an x80. For starters, it's the through movement at the I-77 interchange with I-76 near downtown Akron.
How about I-777? It does lead away from I-77 and does not return.
Quote from: Buck87 on January 14, 2014, 02:54:17 PM
Is 8 already built to interstate standards, or would it require any upgrades?
It's at least really close to interstate standard; maybe a little part thru Cuyahoga Falls.
Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2014, 03:16:49 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2014, 03:11:46 PM
I think it makes more sense as an x77 than an x80. For starters, it's the through movement at the I-77 interchange with I-76 near downtown Akron.
How about I-777? It does lead away from I-77 and does not return.
It'll end at I-271, so I think it'd be an even numbered one. Though the 777 would be fun.
Quote from: exit322 on January 14, 2014, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2014, 03:16:49 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2014, 03:11:46 PM
I think it makes more sense as an x77 than an x80. For starters, it's the through movement at the I-77 interchange with I-76 near downtown Akron.
How about I-777? It does lead away from I-77 and does not return.
It'll end at I-271, so I think it'd be an even numbered one. Though the 777 would be fun.
Plenty of interstates have an odd first digit and end at another interstate.
I-196, I-155 (IL), I-355 (IL)
Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2014, 04:12:50 PM
Quote from: exit322 on January 14, 2014, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2014, 03:16:49 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on January 14, 2014, 03:11:46 PM
I think it makes more sense as an x77 than an x80. For starters, it's the through movement at the I-77 interchange with I-76 near downtown Akron.
How about I-777? It does lead away from I-77 and does not return.
It'll end at I-271, so I think it'd be an even numbered one. Though the 777 would be fun.
Plenty of interstates have an odd first digit and end at another interstate.
I-196, I-155 (IL), I-355 (IL)
Yes, but that doesn't mean that it's the "proper" convention.
Doesn't mean it's not proper either. There's no set standard. I have no idea what the first odd 3DI with both ends at another Interstate was, since these are often longer connections that were suffixed in the initial plan, but there are a bunch.
More recently though, hasn't AASHTO been pushing for even 3di's for ones that connect to interstates on both ends? I think of North Carolina and their submission of I-185 for US 52 from I-85 to Winston-Salem that was rejected and later accepted as I-285. Or also in NC, I-495 for US 64 between I-95 and Raleigh.
As a route that parallels I-77, it seems more natural for OH 8 to be an x77. 477, 677, 877; any of those seems to fit better than any x80.
Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2014, 05:47:48 PM
Doesn't mean it's not proper either. There's no set standard. I have no idea what the first odd 3DI with both ends at another Interstate was, since these are often longer connections that were suffixed in the initial plan, but there are a bunch.
A fair point. Also worth considering that Ohio's three other highways that have relatively close to the same type of system (albeit much older) are all even-numbered (as are all of Ohio's) - I'm talking 280, 680, and 670 - the first is a better example given it's always ended at interstates from different route trees (when 680 was considered/planned/thought about being built, its south end would've been I-80S, not I-76). Though nothing would preclude it from getting an odd number, I don't expect one here.
Is anyone else having visions of this:
QuoteAlso: OH 8 = I-380?
Appropriate, since this is relatively near US 224. :-D
O-8 you philistine.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 15, 2014, 11:28:08 AM
Is anyone else having visions of this:
QuoteAlso: OH 8 = I-380?
Appropriate, since this is relatively near US 224. :-D
Yeah, I'm wondering if it'll be dually signed as 224 is, though 224 does share paint with both I-76 and I-277.
That's not what HB was referring to. It's an old "Tom From Ohio" gag from misc.transport.road.
I always took the odd 3di's to have one end at their parent 2di's, and the other at something other than an Interstate (after all, they are spurs off their parent 2di's). At least until I-355 threw that convention right out the window.
As for the 777 thing, I realize this is off-topic, but is gambling even legal in OH (or any of the other four states that I-77 goes through, for that matter)?
Quote from: Henry on January 15, 2014, 02:37:53 PM
I always took the odd 3di's to have one end at their parent 2di's, and the other at something other than an Interstate (after all, they are spurs off their parent 2di's). At least until I-355 threw that convention right out the window.
As for the 777 thing, I realize this is off-topic, but is gambling even legal in OH (or any of the other four states that I-77 goes through, for that matter)?
It is now, yes. And the hypothetical 777 would end near one of the new "racinos" (racetrack casinos) that just opened.
Quote from: Henry on January 15, 2014, 02:37:53 PM
I always took the odd 3di's to have one end at their parent 2di's, and the other at something other than an Interstate (after all, they are spurs off their parent 2di's). At least until I-355 threw that convention right out the window.
I've interpreted it for years to be simply "only one end at parent interstate," at least based on California using I-505 and the original I-580 routings to replace I-5W (with all ends at interstates), though 580 now has a western terminus at a non-Interstate.
Obviously I-520 is the biggest exception to that otherwise general idea.
Quote from: exit322 on January 15, 2014, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 15, 2014, 02:37:53 PM
I always took the odd 3di's to have one end at their parent 2di's, and the other at something other than an Interstate (after all, they are spurs off their parent 2di's). At least until I-355 threw that convention right out the window.
As for the 777 thing, I realize this is off-topic, but is gambling even legal in OH (or any of the other four states that I-77 goes through, for that matter)?
It is now, yes. And the hypothetical 777 would end near one of the new "racinos" (racetrack casinos) that just opened.
West Virginia, too. There's a racino on I-64 at Cross Lanes, west of Charleston.
Quote from: TheStranger on January 15, 2014, 04:15:34 PMI've interpreted it for years to be simply "only one end at parent interstate," at least based on California using I-505 and the original I-580 routings to replace I-5W (with all ends at interstates), though 580 now has a western terminus at a non-Interstate.
Yes - that's something that varies from state to state. And even within states.
And even within cities: I-380 and I-476 in Scranton...
Ends at two different 2dis:
Odd: I-505 (CA), I-135 (KS), I-155 (IL), I-169 (MI), I-595 (VA), I-376 (PA), I-380 (PA), I-395 (CT/MA)
Even: I-210 (CA), I-215 (UT) (meets I-15 twice), I-225 (CO), I-270 (CO), I-240 (OK), I-235 (OK), I-635 (KS), I-470 (MO) (2nd 2di came later), I-480 (NE), I-430 (AR), I-440 (AR), I-220 (MS), I-440 (TN), I-275 (MI), I-696 (MI), I-271 (OH), I-280 (OH), I-490 (OH), I-675 (OH), I-680 (OH), I-295 (VA), I-276 (PA), I-476 (PA), I-287 (NY/NJ) (both ends at I-95), I-280 (NJ), I-684 (NY/CT), I-291 (CT), I-691 (CT), Fut-285 (NC), Fut-495 (NC)
I've ignored incomplete loops where there's obvious incomplete gaps. And ones that link to a 3di.
Routes that were extended after their original creation should be ignored. such as I-520 GA and I-476 PA. (But I-376 still counts - it originally went from I-279 to I-76.)
Quote from: exit322 on January 15, 2014, 03:33:49 PM
It is now, yes. And the hypothetical 777 would end near one of the new "racinos" (racetrack casinos) that just opened.
I thought the Indian casinos were "racinos".
Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2014, 09:00:31 PM
Quote from: exit322 on January 15, 2014, 03:33:49 PM
It is now, yes. And the hypothetical 777 would end near one of the new "racinos" (racetrack casinos) that just opened.
I thought the Indian casinos were "racinos".
"Racino" has always been the term used for West Virginia's facilities, like the greyhound racing track at Cross Lanes that now has slot machines. It's also the term that's tossed around in Kentucky when the legalization of casino gambling is discussed, since the horse industry wants to operate casinos so they can prop up their horse racing operations with gambling revenue.
^^ I think you may have missed that comment there. :confused:
Anyhoo, I still would prefer an I-x77 assignment, but if it is going to be an odd-numbered interstate, then I-380 or I-580 would suffice, since the interstate would be a two-directional spur off of I-80/Turnpike.
...Or they can pull a weird PennDOT/I-376-esque alignment and extend I-277 to begin at the I-77/SR21 interchange, then route I-277 south along SR-21 to I-76/US-224, east back to I-77 (via US-224 and the current I-277 alignment), North on I-77 and onto SR-8 and then north to I-271. <just kidding>.
Quote from: thenetwork on January 16, 2014, 08:07:08 PM
^^ I think you may have missed that comment there. :confused:
Anyhoo, I still would prefer an I-x77 assignment, but if it is going to be an odd-numbered interstate, then I-380 or I-580 would suffice, since the interstate would be a two-directional spur off of I-80/Turnpike.
...Or they can pull a weird PennDOT/I-376-esque alignment and extend I-277 to begin at the I-77/SR21 interchange, then route I-277 south along SR-21 to I-76/US-224, east back to I-77 (via US-224 and the current I-277 alignment), North on I-77 and onto SR-8 and then north to I-271. <just kidding>.
I know you're not being serious, but there is an at-grade intersection on SR 21 between I-77 and I-76.
Quote from: Bitmapped on January 18, 2014, 05:33:32 PM
I know you're not being serious, but there is an at-grade intersection on SR 21 between I-77 and I-76.
True. But it's for a Minor Road. ;)
Quote from: sandwalk on January 20, 2014, 12:42:06 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on January 18, 2014, 05:33:32 PM
I know you're not being serious, but there is an at-grade intersection on SR 21 between I-77 and I-76.
True. But it's for a Minor Road. ;)
He has a point.
Quote from: sandwalk on January 20, 2014, 12:42:06 PM
Quote from: Bitmapped on January 18, 2014, 05:33:32 PM
I know you're not being serious, but there is an at-grade intersection on SR 21 between I-77 and I-76.
True. But it's for a Minor Road. ;)
:-D I got that one instantly!
Here is the latest on the fight to turn SR-8 into I-380 (seems to be the definitive route number choice) between I-76/I-77 and I-271 in the Akron area:
http://www.recordpub.com/news%20local/2014/04/24/officals-make-a-new-plea-for-i-380
Seems that ODOT is the one that doesn't want to add another interstate to their roster.
The biggest pile of BS from ODOT says, "...the change would be too expensive with significant costs to replace signs, additional maintenance personnel, facilities and materials."
- Excuse me, ODOT, but haven't you upgraded many area BGS's at least TWICE in the last 10-15 years? Where did you come up with that money so you could be Clearview happy? :hmmm:
- And you need additional personnel, facilities & materials if you convert SR-8 "Interstate Grade" freeway to a signed Interstate 380? I swear I have seen your yellow & white ODOT trucks plowing, salting and patching that highway well before it was not an interstate grade freeway. What is the big difference?
Anyhoo, I applaud all the area communities and Akron proper in continuing to push the idea down ODOT's throats.
Quote from: thenetwork on April 24, 2014, 04:23:51 PM
Anyhoo, I applaud all the area communities and Akron proper in continuing to push the idea down ODOT's throats.
Except for their choice of number.
An even x77 is more appropriate.
I think they proposed I-380 because they still want some sort of remnant of SR-8 to remain with the highway. (I-380), and for Turnpike travelers who bypass Cleveland proper and use I-271 to I-90 East (or vice-versa), a x80 spur route makes more sense than an x77 number.
I doubt that ODOT would want a SR-8/I-380 multiplex on the same stretch of freeway -- at most, maybe a 1-year overlap to ease the conversion confusion. More likely scenarios:
- <Most Likely> SR-8's southern terminus would be truncated to I-271.
- <Feasible Option> SR-8's alignment from Akron to Cleveland is completely decommissioned and the SR-8 alignment between I-271 and US-422 in Shaker Heights (a.k.a. mostly Northfield Road) reverts to local city control & maintenance. This would give ODOT the "extra funds" to put towards the "additional costs" of maintaining I-380.
- <Slim Chance> SR-8's southern terminus would be truncated to I-80/Ohio Turnpike and I-380's northern terminus would begin there. SR-8 southbound signs above the Turnpike would also include "TO I-380 South". This would be somewhat similar to how I-280 and SR-420 work on both sides of the Turnpike in Toledo.
- <Longshot> SR-8 would still share road with I-380 from I-271 to SR-303, then SR-8 would be rerouted back to it's original Akron-Cleveland Road / State Road / Main Street alignment -- potentially ending at SR-18/West Market Street in Downtown Akron.
- <Extreme Longshot> SR-8 either remains duplexed along I-380, or reverts to it's original alignment, to Perkins Avenue in Downtown Akron, then follows the Akron Innerbelt to I-76/I-77, replacing SR-59 and truncating SR-59's western terminus to I-380 (current SR-8) @ Front Street. Extreme longshot, since some people would think that SR-8 on the Innerbelt is the North Leg of the Akron Expressway system and would wonder what happened to the rest of the freeway when they get to the end of the Innerbelt.
Looks like those Akronites will never give up until ODOT finally gives in...