The Future I-73/I-74 North-South Corridor and the Future I-66 Trans-America Corridors where the biggest example of boondoggle highway projects created by Congress in the 1991 ISTEA. Both were completely motivated by local business interest and local politicians that were the worst highway concepts too expensive to build with neither solving any traffic problem. Future I-73 was the "wish-list" of business and local politicians in Bluefield West Virginia that wanted the U.S. 52 King Coal Highway to become an interstate through Bluefield. Future I-66 was the concept of business interest in Wichita Kansas that wanted to revive the tourism of "Route 66" from Washington D.C. (thus I-66) to Los Angeles California. They tried to convince Congressmen and Senators from across the nation to make their "wish-list" come true, except the majority of state transportation departments new the concepts were unfeasible and had no intention to fund any part of these boondoggles. But Senators like Warner of Virginia and Faircloth of North Carolina created the ridiculous idea of I-73 and extending I-74, both out of place in the Interstate system grid. And now a few State Legislators passed a resolution in 2022 and convinced the Ohio State Legislature in House Bill 54 (https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/136/hb54) to direct the Ohio Department of Transportation to conduct another feasibility study of Future I-73 from Toledo to Chesapeake Ohio, connecting to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia along the Ohio River. The Ohio Department of Transportation already knows from its feasibility study in the 1990's and it's "Route 23 Connect" study the highway is not feasible and that public opposition will be massive in the Columbus area. The Legislators of Southeast Ohio don't care and are funding this SECOND feasibility study of Future I-73. The never learn.
"...SECTION 755.50. The Director of Transportation shall conduct a feasibility study for the creation of an Interstate Route 73 corridor connecting the municipal corporation of Toledo to the municipal corporation of Chesapeake, primarily alongside current United States Route 23. The purpose of the new corridor is to better connect Interstate Route 74, Interstate Route 75, and the states of Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina along one continuous interstate route.
The feasibility study shall examine how to alleviate congestion along United States Route 23, the economic impacts of a new interstate corridor, safety concerns, connectivity issues, and methods for coordinating with the other states and the United States Department of Transportation for the creation of the corridor.
The Director shall complete the feasibility study not later than December 31, 2026..."
This is on top of the Route 23 Connect (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/23-connect) study that ODOT completed to plan upgrading U.S. 23 to a partially controlled access "free-flow" expressway. ODOT investigated the full freeway option for U.S. 23 but was overwhelmed with opposition and backed down to the expressway. However, the State Legislature wants to investigate, either a freeway or toll-road from U.S. 23 to I-71 further north at OH 229.
"SECTION 755.60. (A) The Department of Transportation and the Ohio Turnpike and Infrastructure Commission shall work together to create a joint plan regarding the feasibility of connecting U.S. Route 23 to Interstate Route 71 by doing one of the following:
(1) Expanding State Route 229 in northern Delaware County;
(2) Expanding another similar state route or other highway in northern Delaware County;
(3) Creating a new freeway between U.S. Route 23 and Interstate Route 71 in northern Delaware County;
(4) Creating a toll road between U.S. Route 23 and Interstate Route 71 in northern Delaware County;
(5) Creating a new freeway, which may be a toll road, in the region between State Route 529 and Waldo, Ohio heading eastward toward Interstate Route 71 north of Marengo, Ohio in Marion County and Morrow County.
If U.S. 23 were converted to Future I-73, how much would it cost and how long would it take to build? A route has not been selected, and last time, ODOT proposed to completely bypass Columbus and Delaware along a new terrain route. Opposition exploded from property owners along the bypass, which was the most expensive route to select, and the concept sank like a lead ballon.
The cheapest conceptional route is to upgrade the existing U.S. 23 south of Columbus and U.S. 23 north of Waldo and OH 15 to I-75 with a freeway connector along OH 229 to I-71. However, the language of the law passed by the State Legislature mandates a feasibility study for "...the creation of an Interstate Route 73 corridor connecting the municipal corporation of Toledo to the municipal corporation of Chesapeake, primarily ALONGSIDE (parallel) current United States Route 23", a "new terrain" route separate from U.S. 23. The feasibility study limits Future I-73 to the U.S. 23 corridor not along U.S. 35 or U.S. 33. ODOT only plans to upgrade U.S. 33 to a four-lane divided highway with a few interchanges from Athens to the Ohio River (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/projects/mega-projects/mega-projects/33-expansion) where it will connect to the existing U.S. 33 four-lane in West Virginia that terminates at I-77.
Upgrading the existing U.S 23 and OH 15 from I-75 Findlay to I-64 Huntington would cost $3.2B. This assumes no need to upgrade I-71 and I-270. However, building Future I-73 completely as a "new terrain" route from Toledo OH to Huntington WV and bypassing Columbus again as proposed in the 1990's, the cost increase to $20M per mile (https://compassinternational.net/order-magnitude-road-highway-costs/) making the cost of the "new terrain" Future I-73 between $5B-$6B. Even if the feasibility study is finished in 2026, the mandatory full NEPA environmental studies for this new interstate facility will take another 5-10 years, and construction may wait 20 years waiting for money to become available, so the earliest completion date would be 2050 to 2060. Environmental lawyers that are guaranteed to file lawsuits from opponents will make sure the project follows the full NEPA process of feasibility study, draft environmental study, and final environmental study which is why it will be up to 10 years of studies. The high cost versus traffic benefit may make it unfeasible again if the state's feasibility study shows insufficient traffic between I-90 and I-64. Michigan, under Governor Jennifer Granholm, cancelled the I-73 project in the 1990's, West Virginia has no money for I-73 following U.S. 52 and the Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) (https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/projects/salem-district/i-73/)in 2024 rescinded the 2001 location decision for an I-73 alignment between Roanoke and the North Carolina border and the Henry County Alternative, terminating future planning or funding of Future I-73 in Virginia. The project was never funded to advance to design or construction phases. VDOT has no funding identified to study, design or construct I-73 in Virginia. Because Virginia no longer plans to build Future I-73, the AASHTO should decommission I-73 in North Carolina, leaving only the I-74 designation as established by Congress. The remaining I-73 north of I-74 through Greensboro to U.S. 220 should be designated as I-174.
Quote from: FutureInterstateCorridors on July 13, 2025, 01:48:48 AMVirginia completely cancelled the I-73 project
Why do people continue to believe this? :banghead: VA cancelled the plans to build an eastern bypass of Martinsville for I-73; they did not preclude signing I-73 along the planned Martinsville connector and existing US 220 to the west, though I still wouldn't hold my breath.
Quote from: FutureInterstateCorridors on July 13, 2025, 01:48:48 AMEven if the feasibility study is finished in 2026, the NEPA environmental studies may take another 5-10 years, and construction may take 20 years waiting for money to become available, so the earliest completion date would be 2050.
NEPA starts a 10 year clock to get a project to construction, after which states need to pay back any federal funds that had been spent on a project, so it would not be wise to do NEPA unless they have (or reasonably expect to be able to get) funds for construction. Fortunately, there are types of studies (such as PEL studies) that can get some preliminary work out of the way without starting the 10 year clock.
I-73 plus the beginnings of an outer-outerbelt would be lovely.
Findlay to Sunbury, circle down around Newark, then down to Lancaster to connect to US 33 and then to I-77 would be the cheap way to do it since US 33 doesn't have to have too much upgrading done to it.
I don't have a problem with the original plans to upgrade US 23 and US 52, but it just seems a lot of work needs to be done to get that up to snuff.
I don't know what you do north of Findlay. I'm thinking you wait until Michigan decides what they want to do.
Total waste of money. The only jam points on existing US 23/OH 15 is north of I-270 extending to Delaware, and in the Waverly area south of Chillicothe. The route would no doubt follow the Portsmouth bypass from Lucasville to Wheelersburg, which wasn't built to full modern interstate standards (minimal inside shoulders against the barrier wall).
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2025, 06:14:30 PMTotal waste of money. The only jam points on existing US 23/OH 15 is north of I-270 extending to Delaware, and in the Waverly area south of Chillicothe. The route would no doubt follow the Portsmouth bypass from Lucasville to Wheelersburg, which wasn't built to full modern interstate standards (minimal inside shoulders against the barrier wall).
Greater Columbus will be at 3 million people in 25 years. The roads around here were largely built for an area with 1 million people, not to mention that so much distribution goes in and out of here.
Somebody needs to have a little foresight.
If we could address Columbus' housing shortage more effectively there wouldn't be so many people forced to drive up from Appalachia daily in order to get their housing costs down by 60%.
Quote from: GCrites on July 13, 2025, 08:33:16 PMIf we could address Columbus' housing shortage more effectively there wouldn't be so many people forced to drive up from Appalachia daily in order to get their housing costs down by 60%.
Nevertheless, 3 million people are going to need a road system designed for 3 million people or there are going to be big problems. I was against commuter trains when they were proposed before, but at 2.2 million we may have enough critical mass where it makes sense. I think it would definitely make sense at 3 million. Charlotte has them.
Should Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
I personally don't like when things are done in a half-assed manner. I would like to see an Interstate so that it is done right.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
Why not? Michigan won't give a s*** unless the feds want to fund reconstruction of US-23 north to Flint or building a freeway between Toledo and Jackson on their dime (or 9 cents out of said dime). But I-73's existence in Ohio doesn't need Michigan's involvement.
As long as Ohio has a logical terminus at an Interstate at each end (i-75 in Findlay and I-64 or I-77 in W Virginia), their I-73 can stand alone. It also doesn't necessarily need to encompass all of US-23 - they can shunt over to US-33 south of Columbus or US-35 SE of Chillicothe and have a logical Interstate route.
If and when Kentucky decides to make US-23 an Interstate, simply extend the I-26 routing northward towards Columbus. Extend north or west as desired along US-30, US-33, or US-35 for a logical terminus wherever.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 13, 2025, 05:25:30 PMI-73 plus the beginnings of an outer-outerbelt would be lovely.
Findlay to Sunbury, circle down around Newark, then down to Lancaster to connect to US 33 and then to I-77 would be the cheap way to do it since US 33 doesn't have to have too much upgrading done to it.
I don't have a problem with the original plans to upgrade US 23 and US 52, but it just seems a lot of work needs to be done to get that up to snuff.
As I mentioned in another thread, if ODOT can bring SR-15 to interstate standards along the short multiplex with US-68 near Findlay, Hancock County would be readybfor interstate status.
Wyandot County has a lot of catching up to do with eliminating at-grade intersections in order to get US-23 up to snuff.
And depending if/when/where the new freeway connector to I-71 is completed, there may be little to no additional upgrade work that needs to be done in Marion County.
I 73 74 has never and will never make any sense. The current roads, with some improvements such as stop light removals, are perfectly adequate in Ohio, and the WV and VA situation is not changing.
We just need to accept that the rules of road numbering do not apply to NC, and quit pretending any other state is going to connect up to it. Or go back and renumber in NC
Quote from: SP Cook on July 14, 2025, 11:17:48 AMI 73 74 has never and will never make any sense. The current roads, with some improvements such as stop light removals, are perfectly adequate in Ohio, and the WV and VA situation is not changing.
We just need to accept that the rules of road numbering do not apply to NC, and quit pretending any other state is going to connect up to it. Or go back and renumber in NC
Well, I don't agree that they are perfectly adequate, but they are a good start. But there is another point here that doesn't get hit upon enough. I read somewhere that the big reason I-73 doesn't make a lot of sense is that it is really should be split up into five different projects that should get five different numbers.
Interstate numbers are important to me. That means the road is of a certain quality usually. I also like the control city signing better. A control city of some import is usually listed on interstates. On lesser highways, minor stops along the road are the control cities listed. Major control cities help travelers, minor cities just confuse people from out of the area.
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 13, 2025, 11:48:00 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
Why not? Michigan won't give a s*** unless the feds want to fund reconstruction of US-23 north to Flint or building a freeway between Toledo and Jackson on their dime (or 9 cents out of said dime). But I-73's existence in Ohio doesn't need Michigan's involvement.
As long as Ohio has a logical terminus at an Interstate at each end (i-75 in Findlay and I-64 or I-77 in W Virginia), their I-73 can stand alone. It also doesn't necessarily need to encompass all of US-23 - they can shunt over to US-33 south of Columbus or US-35 SE of Chillicothe and have a logical Interstate route.
If and when Kentucky decides to make US-23 an Interstate, simply extend the I-26 routing northward towards Columbus. Extend north or west as desired along US-30, US-33, or US-35 for a logical terminus wherever.
Another harebrained idea. Besides the stretch through Catlettsburg/Ashland/southern Greenup County, the only problematic stretch of US 23 in Kentucky is the commercial area in northern Pike County (Coal Run Village) and southern Floyd County (Harold/Betsy Layne). An interstate through this area would be prohibitively expensive and not worth it.
What about the segment of US 23 in Virginia? That would be the main obstacle in extending Interstate 26 further north. Would it be difficult to upgrade that portion of US 23 to Interstate Standards? An eastern bypass of Weber City off the end of the existing US 23 alignment south of the Tennessee/Virginia border would have to be constructed. While there are some portions of 23 that are freeway, it looks like it would take a massive undertaking to make all of 23 in Virginia an extension of Interstate 26.
Yeah the bazillion curves and undulations on 23 in VA would have to go. A lot of the exits would be no-goes as well. Probably something about how the NB vs. SB lanes are often so misaligned on the vertical plane as well. It would be a major undertaking.
It has been a while since the last time I came up from South Carolina on I-77, but the last few times I was up through there, I was stuck in traffic jams in Virginia. I don't know if that situation has improved any, but that's what I think about when people talk about I-73. It doesn't seem like a bad thing to me if those traffic jams are still a thing all the way into Wytheville. Or at least add enough Lanes to I-77 to get traffic flowing the way it should.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 14, 2025, 05:02:44 PMIt has been a while since the last time I came up from South Carolina on I-77, but the last few times I was up through there, I was stuck in traffic jams in Virginia. I don't know if that situation has improved any, but that's what I think about when people talk about I-73. It doesn't seem like a bad thing to me if those traffic jams are still a thing all the way into Wytheville. Or at least add enough Lanes to I-77 to get traffic flowing the way it should.
A proposed I-73 has zero to do with traffic along I-77 in Virginia. They serve completely separate corridors ~50 miles apart.
Quote from: Bitmapped on July 14, 2025, 09:17:58 PMQuote from: TempoNick on July 14, 2025, 05:02:44 PMIt has been a while since the last time I came up from South Carolina on I-77, but the last few times I was up through there, I was stuck in traffic jams in Virginia. I don't know if that situation has improved any, but that's what I think about when people talk about I-73. It doesn't seem like a bad thing to me if those traffic jams are still a thing all the way into Wytheville. Or at least add enough Lanes to I-77 to get traffic flowing the way it should.
A proposed I-73 has zero to do with traffic along I-77 in Virginia. They serve completely separate corridors ~50 miles apart.
A completed I-73 between I-95 and I-81 would provide an alternative route for those connecting from I-95 to I-81 and vice versa. So yes, it would take traffic off of I-77.
A good amount of traffic uses I-77 to reach I-81 North, not continuing along I-77 into WV.
In the meantime, since I-73 in VA isn't getting built, what I-77 needs is truck climbing lanes in
several locations.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 13, 2025, 10:45:28 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
I personally don't like when things are done in a half-assed manner. I would like to see an Interstate so that it is done right.
If you think an Interstate can't be half-assed, you clearly haven't visited Oklahoma.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 14, 2025, 09:51:23 PMQuote from: Bitmapped on July 14, 2025, 09:17:58 PMQuote from: TempoNick on July 14, 2025, 05:02:44 PMIt has been a while since the last time I came up from South Carolina on I-77, but the last few times I was up through there, I was stuck in traffic jams in Virginia. I don't know if that situation has improved any, but that's what I think about when people talk about I-73. It doesn't seem like a bad thing to me if those traffic jams are still a thing all the way into Wytheville. Or at least add enough Lanes to I-77 to get traffic flowing the way it should.
A proposed I-73 has zero to do with traffic along I-77 in Virginia. They serve completely separate corridors ~50 miles apart.
A completed I-73 between I-95 and I-81 would provide an alternative route for those connecting from I-95 to I-81 and vice versa. So yes, it would take traffic off of I-77.
A good amount of traffic uses I-77 to reach I-81 North, not continuing along I-77 into WV.
In the meantime, since I-73 in VA isn't getting built, what I-77 needs is truck climbing lanes in several locations.
And then there is the congestion around Charlotte as well. I-77 didn't seem to flow very well through there. I don't think an alternate route back to Ohio is such a bad thing if it ever gets built.
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 13, 2025, 11:48:00 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
Why not? Michigan won't give a s*** unless the feds want to fund reconstruction of US-23 north to Flint or building a freeway between Toledo and Jackson on their dime (or 9 cents out of said dime). But I-73's existence in Ohio doesn't need Michigan's involvement.
As long as Ohio has a logical terminus at an Interstate at each end (i-75 in Findlay and I-64 or I-77 in W Virginia), their I-73 can stand alone. It also doesn't necessarily need to encompass all of US-23 - they can shunt over to US-33 south of Columbus or US-35 SE of Chillicothe and have a logical Interstate route.
If and when Kentucky decides to make US-23 an Interstate, simply extend the I-26 routing northward towards Columbus. Extend north or west as desired along US-30, US-33, or US-35 for a logical terminus wherever.
When most people think of a highway corridor, they only think about local traffic. By that logic, I-75 which followed U.S. 25 through Kentucky and Tennessee would have never been built based on local traffic in Kentucky and Tennessee in the 1950's and it would have been too costly as a new terrain highway that followed the ridgeline of the mountains, with expensive cut and fill and viaducts over the valleys. But the planners of the Interstate system did not construct the system for local traffic, it was built for freight trucking from interstate commerce, not for commuting to work in your car. In the case of U.S. 23, it is a significant traffic corridor from Columbus, through Kentucky to I-26 in South Carolina. What most people miss is that it can become a major freight truck corridor between Ohio and the deep-sea port in Charleston South Carolina if an interstate is built, a major economic development corridor. In addition, it is an alternative traffic corridor to I-75 that avoids Cincinnati. Since Columbus will be an area of high public opposition, it would be better to bypass west of Columbus. This future interstate would follow U.S. 23 from I-26 through Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky, Huntington West Virginia, and Ohio then either following OH 73 to Wilmington Ohio, then U.S. 68 to I-75 Findlay Ohio or following U.S. 23 to U.S. 35 then somewhere between Springfield and Columbus before connecting to I-75 Findlay. Following U.S. 33 or U.S. 30 make sense if Michigan wants the future interstate to U.S. 127 Jackson Michigan or U.S. 131 Grand Rapids Michigan.
How will future interstates be funded? The state transportation departments and groups the Port-to-Plains Alliance along with the Future I-69 and Future I-14 support groups (https://www.portstoplains.com/newsletter/june-2025-vol-23-issue-6/) support groups are lobbying somewhat successfully in convincing Congress to return to the "formula" funding method of guaranteed annually distribution from the Federal-Aid Highway Trust fund in the new surface transportation authorization bill ""America Builds: Highways to Move People and Freight" (https://www.congress.gov/event/119th-congress/house-event/117819)" in 2026. Formula funding was the original method Congress used to fund and build the Interstate System from 1956 to 1996 before the 1991 ISTEA (and other highway bills) started the irregular competitive grant and loan method, which has proved disastrous to highway building. Congress has also returned to Congressionally Directed Funding, better known as "earmarked" funding.
I've seen your maps before. That's a no-go. Greater Columbus is going to be at 3 million people in 25 years (as opposed to 2.2 million people now). It needs more highway infrastructure. They aren't building a new highway through Springfield and Dayton. Your future 63 needs to be closer to Columbus and it should be routed along US 23 south of Columbus.
http://futureinterstatecorridors.com/images/Ohio%20Future%20Interstate%20Corridors.jpg
Quote from: TempoNick on July 15, 2025, 09:07:15 AMI've seen your maps before. That's a no-go. Greater Columbus is going to be at 3 million people in 25 years (as opposed to 2.2 million people now). It needs more highway infrastructure. They aren't building a new highway through Springfield and Dayton. Your future 63 needs to be closer to Columbus and it should be routed along US 23 south of Columbus.
http://futureinterstatecorridors.com/images/Ohio%20Future%20Interstate%20Corridors.jpg
Nobody said ODOT is building any highway between Springfield and Dayton, and the map is only one route concept. The map you referenced actually shows the route of a "new terrain" Future I-73 (or I-63) separate from U.S. 23 passing far west of Columbus between Springfield and Columbus up to U.S. 68 to avoid the guaranteed opposition to building I-73 in or around Columbus. The fact is ODOT does not support building I-73 at all, and only plans to upgrade U.S. 23 to a "free-flow" expressway as studied in "Route 23 Connect" north of Columbus and the "Strategic Transportation & Development Analysis" study south of Columbus released in 2025. This new feasibility study of I-73 is only being pushed by Ohio State Legislators in South Ohio and will never be built once opposition starts and ODOT shows the price is too high. The opposition does not care that the population of Columbus will increase, they only see that Columbus has enough freeways already and building one more interstate directly to Columbus besides I-70 and I-71 will not reduce traffic, in fact it will increase it if I-73 follows I-71. And the opposition outside around Columbus will stop even building any freeway bypass just like the proposed route in the 1990's. My prediction is this new plan will go away like it did in the 1990's as ODOT has the final say of "go of no go".
Couldn't an Interstate 73 follow the US 23 corridor from Portsmouth to Interstate 270 south of Columbus, ride the 270 beltway either east or west of Columbus, and then continue northward on the US 23/OH 15/US 68 corridor to Interstate 75? If 73 is ever built in Ohio (which still seems remote to me), I think that would be the most logical routing for the Interstate.
Any north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.
There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 15, 2025, 05:13:22 PMCouldn't an Interstate 73 follow the US 23 corridor from Portsmouth to Interstate 270 south of Columbus, ride the 270 beltway either east or west of Columbus, and then continue northward on the US 23/OH 15/US 68 corridor to Interstate 75? If 73 is ever built in Ohio (which still seems remote to me), I think that would be the most logical routing for the Interstate.
It could, and would make more sense, except the feasibility study directed by the Ohio Legislature is to investigate a new terrain route parallel to U.S. 23. ODOT already investigated upgrading U.S. 23 north of Columbus to an interstate-standard freeway in the "Route 23 Connect" study and concluded the upgrade was not feasible. The best answer is it depends on exactly what alternative routes ODOT includes in the feasibility study, which has not been established whatsoever, so speculation at this time is useless. You will have time to add your ideas when the public comment meeting are convened, so watch for them on the ODOT website some time in the future. We will know the exactly what alternative routes will proceed to a draft environmental study in two years.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 15, 2025, 06:03:20 PMAny north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.
There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.
The Ohio Legislature is not interested in converting U.S. 35 to Future I-73 and is determined instead that Future I-73 follow U.S. 23 and U.S. 52 to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia. You can submit your input at the public comment meeting that will be part of the feasibility study, so keep an eye on the ODOT website when the public comment meetings are convened, probably in 2026.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 14, 2025, 03:37:50 PMWhat about the segment of US 23 in Virginia? That would be the main obstacle in extending Interstate 26 further north. Would it be difficult to upgrade that portion of US 23 to Interstate Standards? An eastern bypass of Weber City off the end of the existing US 23 alignment south of the Tennessee/Virginia border would have to be constructed. While there are some portions of 23 that are freeway, it looks like it would take a massive undertaking to make all of 23 in Virginia an extension of Interstate 26.
VA US-23 is 61.0 miles long, with 26.3 miles of new location bypasses
US-23 bypasses -- Gate City (8.9), Big Stone Gap-Appalachia (8.8), Norton-Esserville (3.0), Wise (2.9), Pound (2.7) [61.0 mi. total, 26.3 mi. byp. 33.1%]
Only in rare cases do I see the value of replacing or upgrading a high-speed rural four-lane highway with an Interstate highway.
This is not one of them.
Quote from: FutureInterstateCorridors on July 15, 2025, 09:14:18 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 15, 2025, 06:03:20 PMAny north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.
There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.
The Ohio Legislature is not interested in converting U.S. 35 to Future I-73 and is determined instead that Future I-73 follow U.S. 23 and U.S. 52 to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia.
Why?
A routing to I-64 in Charleston, WV is around 25 miles longer following US-23 and US-52 and would require significantly more construction.
30 miles of US-23 south of Chillicothe would be need to be upgraded or relocated, much of that only 5 lanes, and at least two town bypasses around Waverly and Piketon.
The Portsmouth Bypass provides a limited access section but is substandard - although it's no different than the new I-49 in southern Missouri through the mountains with a narrow cross section so we'll assume it's up to interstate standards for the purposes of this.
South of there, US-52 is mostly limited access with long freeway portions. Some overpasses and an interchange or two may need to be built.
Then there's the challenge of crossing the Ohio River and connecting with I-64. The existing route is limited access and 4 lanes through Huntington, but you would need a second parallel Ohio River bridge or an outright 4 lane replacement.
Now, let's look at US-35. 10 miles south of Chillicothe would need upgrading, which appears mostly doable on existing location. The rest of the route? Existing or limited access with some overpasses and interchanges sporadically needed. 4 lane existing bridge over the Ohio River. And it's 25 miles shorter to I-64.
You tell me which is the better route.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 14, 2025, 03:37:50 PMWhat about the segment of US 23 in Virginia? That would be the main obstacle in extending Interstate 26 further north. Would it be difficult to upgrade that portion of US 23 to Interstate Standards? An eastern bypass of Weber City off the end of the existing US 23 alignment south of the Tennessee/Virginia border would have to be constructed. While there are some portions of 23 that are freeway, it looks like it would take a massive undertaking to make all of 23 in Virginia an extension of Interstate 26.
Granted, I only drove on it one time, but US-23 did not appear to carry nearly the level of traffic to warrant a limited access highway. Not to mention, it would be prohibitively expensive. The route exists today as a mostly 60 mph divided rural highway with limited interruption, and as Beltway mentioned above, has a good amount of limited access portions (although nowhere near interstate standards). The light amount of regional and through traffic that does use it is adequately served.
If you're going to spend a billion+ dollars improving north-south travel, widen I-77 to six lanes. Or build I-73 up to Roanoke from NC. US-23 is not anywhere close to a priority or need 50 years from now.
I will say - one area of US-23 could be improved and that's near Weber City. I could see extending I-26 into Virginia up to US-58 to bypass that strip, but US-23 becomes a 60 mph divided highway near Gate City beyond that point with only a few traffic signals the rest of the way to Kentucky.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 14, 2025, 02:05:40 PMQuote from: JREwing78 on July 13, 2025, 11:48:00 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on July 13, 2025, 08:52:16 PMShould Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.
Why not? Michigan won't give a s*** unless the feds want to fund reconstruction of US-23 north to Flint or building a freeway between Toledo and Jackson on their dime (or 9 cents out of said dime). But I-73's existence in Ohio doesn't need Michigan's involvement.
As long as Ohio has a logical terminus at an Interstate at each end (i-75 in Findlay and I-64 or I-77 in W Virginia), their I-73 can stand alone. It also doesn't necessarily need to encompass all of US-23 - they can shunt over to US-33 south of Columbus or US-35 SE of Chillicothe and have a logical Interstate route.
If and when Kentucky decides to make US-23 an Interstate, simply extend the I-26 routing northward towards Columbus. Extend north or west as desired along US-30, US-33, or US-35 for a logical terminus wherever.
Another harebrained idea. Besides the stretch through Catlettsburg/Ashland/southern Greenup County, the only problematic stretch of US 23 in Kentucky is the commercial area in northern Pike County (Coal Run Village) and southern Floyd County (Harold/Betsy Layne). An interstate through this area would be prohibitively expensive and not worth it.
The point of my statement is that Ohio doesn't need US-23 south of Columbus to be an Interstate. ONLY at the point Virginia and Kentucky want to punch I-26 northward should they consider it. (Sometimes, I post the harebraned idea to make the point.)
ODOT would be better served routing this "I-73" south of Columbus along US-33 or US-35 to connect to West Virginia. At that point, it can be like I-86 or I-88 with a state or two separating each I-73 instance. Or, each I-74 instance - because North Carolina's already twinned that designation onto I-77, and that's still the shortest path between NC and Columbus.
What number the Interstate is designated is kind of irrelevant. What's not is the need and viability of a NW to SE Interstate across Ohio linking Toledo to Columbus to Charleston, WV.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 15, 2025, 11:51:51 PMGranted, I only drove on it one time, but US-23 did not appear to carry nearly the level of traffic to warrant a limited access highway. Not to mention, it would be prohibitively expensive. The route exists today as a mostly 60 mph divided rural highway with limited interruption, and as Beltway mentioned above, has a good amount of limited access portions (although nowhere near interstate standards). The light amount of regional and through traffic that does use it is adequately served.
Based on what some states use for Interstate highways, two of the bypasses wouldn't take much to upgrade to Interstate standards -- Big Stone Gap-Appalachia (8.8 mi), Norton-Esserville (3.0 mi), names I used on a spreadsheet for what is actually a continuous bypass, the first being what was called the Powell Valley Relocation when it was being built in the 1980s.
Serious slope collapse problems held up completion for several years and led to building a 590 foot long viaduct near the Powell Valley Overlook.
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 16, 2025, 01:16:46 AMThe point of my statement is that Ohio doesn't need US-23 south of Columbus to be an Interstate. ONLY at the point Virginia and Kentucky want to punch I-26 northward should they consider it. (Sometimes, I post the harebraned idea to make the point.)
ODOT would be better served routing this "I-73" south of Columbus along US-33 or US-35 to connect to West Virginia. At that point, it can be like I-86 or I-88 with a state or two separating each I-73 instance. Or, each I-74 instance - because North Carolina's already twinned that designation onto I-77, and that's still the shortest path between NC and Columbus.
What number the Interstate is designated is kind of irrelevant. What's not is the need and viability of a NW to SE Interstate across Ohio linking Toledo to Columbus to Charleston, WV.
US 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.
I like the idea of scrapping I-73 and treating this as five or six different projects. I would give the Ohio section the I-875/877 number.
I like the way that US 23 and US 30 are intertwined south of Chillicothe and at Upper Sandusky. No goofy configurations like at Beaverdam (I-75/US 30) or Jeffersonville (I-71/US 35).
Quote from: TempoNick on July 16, 2025, 07:49:10 AMUS 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.
If you're following US-35, you don't need to bypass or upgrade Waverly. Most of US-35 southeast of Chillicothe is a 4 lane partially controlled access highway, and freeway or mostly freeway in many section.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 12:05:33 PMQuote from: TempoNick on July 16, 2025, 07:49:10 AMUS 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.
If you're following US-35, you don't need to bypass or upgrade Waverly. Most of US-35 southeast of Chillicothe is a 4 lane partially controlled access highway, and freeway or mostly freeway in many section.
This is a key to why portions of US 23 and US 33 don't live up to the performance of US 30 and US 35: US 30 is free flowing between the IN state line and Riceland, US 35 is free flowing from Xenia to I-64. No traffic signals or stop signs on those routes, and they have the least number of problems.
23 and 33 have stop lights and 23 in particular has too many. Part of why I think sections of 23 and 33 should get freeway upgrades is because there's no other way to get free flowing corridors when intersections hve enough volume to warrant signalization.
To the point of growth: Look at Indianapolis. The most expansive side of the metro is the north side (same as Columbus). Hamilton County IN has growing at 8% annually since 2000, with a 2025 population of 371,645. Delaware County OH has growing at 8.4% annually since 2000, with a 2025 population of 231,636. 15 years ago, US 31, Keystone Pky, and SR 37 were all signalized 4 lane highways like US-23. US-31 was widened to 6 lanes and converted to interstate grade, Keystone Pky was converted to freeway, and SR 37 is in an ongoing process of freeway conversion. The interchange between US 31 and I-465 was rebuilt a decade ago and INDOT is already planning on adding lanes to the ramps. Traffic using Keystone Pky has nearly doubled since 2014. I-465 has one ongoing widening and interchange reconstruction project on the northeast side and another planned for the northwest side.
These are the steps to handling the growth Columbus will be experiencing in the next 25 years. ODOT was ahead of INDOT when it comes to I-270 vs I-465, but INDOT (and the city of Carmel) have demonstrated how these 4 lane signalized corridors should be handled. US 23 has 4 lanes and 40,000+ vpd between I-270 and Gregory. 40-50k is where we start looking to widen INTERSTATES from 4-6 lanes, let alone surface streets.
The Portsmouth bypass is a limited-access freeway but is not interstate compatible. It has one-lane terminuses that cannot be easily widened and a two-lane segment at its southern end. The freeway is pretty new (completed in 2018), so I don't foresee ODOT reconstructing the two terminuses to accommodate two lanes.
The idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it. Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is. If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 14, 2025, 11:42:20 AMWell, I don't agree that they are perfectly adequate,
In what manner? They easily handle the traffic that exists and will do so for generations to come. Some stoplight removals, such as Ohio has done near the end of Corridor D, can be done. Stoplights are a bane on proper highway design on roads such as these.
QuoteBut there is another point here that doesn't get hit upon enough.
Interstate numbers are important to me. That means the road is of a certain quality usually. I also like the control city signing better. A control city of some import is usually listed on interstates. On lesser highways, minor stops along the road are the control cities listed. Major control cities help travelers, minor cities just confuse people from out of the area.
Spending billions of dollars so a road can have a blue and red sign rather than a black and white one is perhaps among the worst ideas.
There are places, many of them, particularly in Appalachia but also everywhere else where a logical routing, even for many 100s of miles, involves roads other than interstates. That's OK.
They don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight.
Quote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 01:20:38 PMThe idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it. Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is. If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.
Quote from: GCrites on July 16, 2025, 01:48:45 PMThey don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight. Quote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 01:20:38 PMThe idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it. Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is. If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.
I am surprised that it is six lanes through the stoplights at Coal Run Village on the north side of the Pikeville area.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 15, 2025, 05:13:22 PMCouldn't an Interstate 73 follow the US 23 corridor ... continue northward on the US 23/OH 15/US 68 corridor to Interstate 75?
The problem with updating the US 23 corridor between I-270 and Waldo is, the current (northern) 23/270 interchange is not freeway-to-freeway. In fact, it was recently
downgraded from a cloverleaf to a parclo. And it would not be a good idea to upgrade the interchange because of its proximity to two other freeway junctions -- I-71 to the east, and SR-315 to the west.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on July 16, 2025, 01:53:57 PMQuote from: GCrites on July 16, 2025, 01:48:45 PMThey don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight.
Quote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 01:20:38 PMThe idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it. Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is. If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.
I am surprised that it is six lanes through the stoplights at Coal Run Village on the north side of the Pikeville area.
Some of the comments being made are by individuals who have never driven through the region. However, that does not automatically render their points invalid. Corridor-level highways are essential for attracting businesses and industries, as well as for improving safety on major routes—especially those with higher-than-average accident rates.
Whether these roads should be built as full freeways or limited-access expressways is open to debate. That said, modern US 23 in Kentucky replaced a network of narrow, winding two-lane roads that passed through numerous small and medium-sized towns. Those routes were shared by passenger vehicles, commercial trucks, and coal haulers, making them among the most dangerous highways in the state. (I researched this while preparing documents for the Appalachian Regional Commission.)
In Coal Run Village, average annual daily traffic (AADT) counts exceed 30,000 vehicles per day in some sections. US 23 is the only major thoroughfare in that area, and it experiences significant congestion due to numerous side street entrances and traffic signals. Corridor-level improvements—such as the construction of frontage or backage roads, consolidation of entrances, installation of restricted crossing U-turns (RCUTs), and construction of interchanges at major junctions—would be beneficial. However, with US 460 currently receiving the bulk of transportation funding in the district, such upgrades are unlikely in the near future.
In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
Quote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
Quote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMHowever, with US 460 currently receiving the bulk of transportation funding in the district, such upgrades are unlikely in the near future.
Same thing with US-460 in Virginia, the last segments of ADHS Corridor Q in each state.
Kentucky: US-23 to Virginia State Line
+ Total Mileage: 16.7 miles
+ Spending to Date: Approximately $700 million
Virginia: State line to existing US-460 near Grundy
+ Total Mileage: 14 miles
+ Spending to Date: Estimated at over $1 billion
Both consuming a huge amount of funding.
Quote from: vdeane on July 13, 2025, 12:17:10 PMQuote from: FutureInterstateCorridors on July 13, 2025, 01:48:48 AMVirginia completely cancelled the I-73 project
Why do people continue to believe this? :banghead: VA cancelled the plans to build an eastern bypass of Martinsville for I-73; they did not preclude signing I-73 along the planned Martinsville connector and existing US 220 to the west, though I still wouldn't hold my breath.
I mean, this is FutureInterstateCorridors you're talking to. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=35575.msg2960128#msg2960128)
I do feel this interstate is not only feasible, but necessary, especially between Columbus and Findlay. I don't know this for a fact as I have not traveled it, but I have heard the route from I-270 to and through Delaware is treacherous. And Columbus has a little over 2 million and Detroit well over 4 million population (I don't have my exact figures offhand) so the demand is indubitably there.
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81? I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.
Quote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 09:46:29 PMQuote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81? I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.
Traffic volumes get down to around 40,000 - 45,000 AADT on a lot of I-81. On an interstate highway with level terrain and low truck volumes, this would suffice. I-64 between Richmond and Staunton is closer to these conditions and similar volumes, and rarely has any congestion issues. I wouldn't say that highway needs widening any time soon. This is a route I have driven semi-frequently, and often the difference between I-81 and I-64 on the days that I-81 gets pretty bad is night and day.
I-81 on the other hand, with similar volumes but varying grades and high truck percentages, warrants widening throughout due to those additional factors.
Quote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 09:46:29 PMQuote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81? I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.
TN I-81 is 75 miles long and has very similar traffic patterns and volumes to the rest of I-81 up to where I-78 branches at West Jonestown PA.
Quote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 01:10:42 PMThe Portsmouth bypass is a limited-access freeway but is not interstate compatible. It has one-lane terminuses that cannot be easily widened and a two-lane segment at its southern end. The freeway is pretty new (completed in 2018), so I don't foresee ODOT reconstructing the two terminuses to accommodate two lanes.
Asides from the one lane endings, the rest of the highway would likely pass.
Missouri recently opened a new segment of I-49 between the Arkansas state line and Pineville, MO and has a very similiar cross section, through similar terrain: Street View (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5084863,-94.387266,3a,40.3y,340.31h,81.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfLcXRVueFzyd6n2Mf5nkhQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D8.839304964197822%26panoid%3DfLcXRVueFzyd6n2Mf5nkhQ%26yaw%3D340.31285387665906!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDcxMy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D)
With that being said, I do not think this should be apart of any major interstate highway corridor as I've mentioned above. But I just wanted to point this out.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 10:00:08 PMQuote from: Rothman on July 16, 2025, 09:46:29 PMQuote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81? I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.
Traffic volumes get down to around 40,000 - 45,000 AADT on a lot of I-81. On an interstate highway with level terrain and low truck volumes, this would suffice. I-64 between Richmond and Staunton is closer to these conditions and similar volumes, and rarely has any congestion issues. I wouldn't say that highway needs widening any time soon. This is a route I have driven semi-frequently, and often the difference between I-81 and I-64 on the days that I-81 gets pretty bad is night and day.
I-81 on the other hand, with similar volumes but varying grades and high truck percentages, warrants widening throughout due to those additional factors.
I posted too quickly. Was thinking about four total lanes rather than four in a single direction.
Maybe I'm posting too quickly again.
I don't care.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 10:00:08 PMTraffic volumes get down to around 40,000 - 45,000 AADT on a lot of I-81. On an interstate highway with level terrain and low truck volumes, this would suffice. I-64 between Richmond and Staunton is closer to these conditions and similar volumes, and rarely has any congestion issues. I wouldn't say that highway needs widening any time soon. This is a route I have driven semi-frequently, and often the difference between I-81 and I-64 on the days that I-81 gets pretty bad is night and day.
I-64 between Staunton and Charlottesville has those volumes and is nearing six-lane warrants, and has the Afton Mountain grades, but I-64 between Charlottesville and Oilville (about 45 miles) is mostly in the low- to mid-30,000s and operates fine with four lanes (two each way). Then a few miles east of Oilville the highway opens up to six lanes (three each way) with that or more the rest of the way to Richmond.
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 10:09:59 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 10:00:08 PMTraffic volumes get down to around 40,000 - 45,000 AADT on a lot of I-81. On an interstate highway with level terrain and low truck volumes, this would suffice. I-64 between Richmond and Staunton is closer to these conditions and similar volumes, and rarely has any congestion issues. I wouldn't say that highway needs widening any time soon. This is a route I have driven semi-frequently, and often the difference between I-81 and I-64 on the days that I-81 gets pretty bad is night and day.
I-64 between Staunton and Charlottesville has those volumes and is nearing six-lane warrants, and has the Afton Mountain grades, but I-64 between Charlottesville and Oilville (about 45 miles) is mostly in the low- to mid-30,000s and operates fine with four lanes (two each way). Then a few miles east of Oilville the highway opens up to six lanes (three each way) with that or more the rest of the way to Richmond.
Afton Mountain definitely needs to at least have climbing lanes for the up-hill portions, and ideally six lanes through the whole thing, but I feel like the rest between Charlottesville and Staunton is okay for a while. With limited budget and priority for I-81 though, we likely won't be seeing much improvements coming to I-64 anytime soon, and it will be fine for a while.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2025, 06:14:30 PMTotal waste of money. The only jam points on existing US 23/OH 15 is north of I-270 extending to Delaware, and in the Waverly area south of Chillicothe. The route would no doubt follow the Portsmouth bypass from Lucasville to Wheelersburg, which wasn't built to full modern interstate standards (minimal inside shoulders against the barrier wall).
The feasibility study is likely to agree with your assessment as ODOT and the Ohio Turnpike Commission concluded in the 1990's. But local politicians in Southeast Ohio are ignoring this history and don't care about the public opposition that will grow as it did back then. All the speculation that ODOT is going to route I-73 along U.S. 35 or U.S. 33 is never going to happen. ODOT is already upgrading U.S. 23 south of Columbus and U.S. 33 to the Ohio River to complete the corridor to I-77, and only want to spend funds on these projects along with the "Route 23 Connect" project north of Columbus. ODOT is only going through the motions to satisfy the State Legislature's direction, and knows full well that the new terrain I-73 will fail the feasibility study because of cost and low traffic counts along U.S. 23 south of Columbus. ODOT also has no intention to shorten the environmental study phase either and is required to conduct a full study with another feasibility study for the FHWA and a draft environmental study and full environmental study as required for a new interstate highway facility under NEPA laws or else open itself and the FWHA to environmental lawsuits for no good reasons. Future I-73 is not the high priority like the I-75 Brent Spence Bridge.
Can Future I-73 be built as envisioned by the Ohio State Legislature? The answer is yes. The legislature simply has to fund the construction 100% from the state budget, all $6B. It can do this anytime it wants, and there is no requirement to follow NEPA studies, just build it as an interstate-standard freeway and request the interstate number I-73 from the AASHTO. It doesn't matter if it's unfeasible and one car drives along the thing every two minutes, the state can spend Ohio taxpayer money on it all it wants, just not the Federal taxpayers of every other state. But it's about getting the Federal government to pay for the internal "wishlist" of a few Ohio Legislators. It is always funny to read all the fantasy "wishlist" routes of Future I-73, not seeming to get the point that the concept of I-73 was always a fantasy waste of time and money.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 12:05:33 PMQuote from: TempoNick on July 16, 2025, 07:49:10 AMUS 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.
If you're following US-35, you don't need to bypass or upgrade Waverly. Most of US-35 southeast of Chillicothe is a 4 lane partially controlled access highway, and freeway or mostly freeway in many section.
I guess what I was trying to say is that if you wanted to use the original proposal, you have a lot of work to do between Chillicothe and the bypass versus US 35 being a pretty nice highway, at least until you get to Jackson.
Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on July 16, 2025, 09:14:22 PMI do feel this interstate is not only feasible, but necessary, especially between Columbus and Findlay. I don't know this for a fact as I have not traveled it, but I have heard the route from I-270 to and through Delaware is treacherous. And Columbus has a little over 2 million and Detroit well over 4 million population (I don't have my exact figures offhand) so the demand is indubitably there.
Metro Columbus is somewhere between 2.2 million and 2.3 million. Credible estimates say that we will be at 3 million in 25 years. And by "credible," I mean that they have been pretty much on the money in the past.
I-875 between Columbus and Findlay; I-677 between Columbus and I-77.
Quote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
I agree. It doesn't always take steep grades to create problems. Interstates 81 and 40 through the Shenandoah Valley, for example, don't have particularly steep climbs, but the long, gradual inclines are enough to slow trucks significantly. When a truck gets caught in the left lane and can't safely merge back over—often because the right lane is already congested—it can lead to substantial backups. It's easy to say that left-lane blockers should be ticketed, but in many of these cases, it's not intentional. The conditions simply don't allow for a safe lane change.
If we look at Rothman's state of New York, we can see similar corridor-level justifications for improvements of highways, too. It's not just a West Virginia or Kentucky or Ohio thing. NY Route 17 has been incrementally upgraded across the Southern Tier and Catskills since the 1940s, from improved two-lane roads that became expressways that became freeways. And it spurred a lot of economic development along its path, cut travel times drastically, and made it easier to be more mobile in a region that had few through routes.
Quote from: seicer on Today at 11:02:06 AMQuote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
I agree. It doesn't always take steep grades to create problems. Interstates 81 and 40 through the Shenandoah Valley, for example, don't have particularly steep climbs, but the long, gradual inclines are enough to slow trucks significantly. When a truck gets caught in the left lane and can't safely merge back over—often because the right lane is already congested—it can lead to substantial backups. It's easy to say that left-lane blockers should be ticketed, but in many of these cases, it's not intentional. The conditions simply don't allow for a safe lane change.
The only real grades on I-81 in Tennessee are near Kingsport at the Holston River crossing.
Virginia handles the grades in the Marion area, which don't seem all that steep but do cause truck slowdowns, by posting regulatory signs saying that trucks operating under the speed limit (used to be 65 mph, but the signs were patched to read 70 mph) must use the right lane. This is a (futile, in my experience) attempt to eliminate micropassing.
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 10:03:50 PMAsides from the one lane endings, the rest of the highway would likely pass.
Quite a few interstates have one lane transitions to another highway so I don't see what the big deal is. OH 823 would be fine as part of an interstate. Might have to be 60 mph, though.
Quote from: TempoNick on Today at 03:10:41 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 10:03:50 PMAsides from the one lane endings, the rest of the highway would likely pass.
Quite a few interstates have one lane transitions to another highway so I don't see what the big deal is.
Well yes, but this wouldn't be a transition to another highway. This would be staying on the same highway, I-73 in this instance.
QuoteMight have to be 60 mph, though.
Why? It's posted at 70 mph today.
Quote from: hbelkins on Today at 03:00:40 PMThe only real grades on I-81 in Tennessee are near Kingsport at the Holston River crossing.
Virginia handles the grades in the Marion area, which don't seem all that steep but do cause truck slowdowns, by posting regulatory signs saying that trucks operating under the speed limit (used to be 65 mph, but the signs were patched to read 70 mph) must use the right lane. This is a (futile, in my experience) attempt to eliminate micropassing.
But at least it tells them to try -- much better than having no such rule.
Even fairly level highways like I-65 Indy-NW Indiana are plagued by not having such a rule.
Indiana also still has split speed limits -- trucks over 26,000 lbs are limited to 65 mph on rural interstates, while passenger vehicles may go up to 70 mph.
Quote from: seicer on Today at 11:02:06 AMQuote from: Beltway on July 16, 2025, 05:58:44 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on July 16, 2025, 05:20:57 PMQuote from: seicer on July 16, 2025, 05:04:19 PMIn other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.
This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.
This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.
I agree. It doesn't always take steep grades to create problems. Interstates 81 and 40 through the Shenandoah Valley, for example, don't have particularly steep climbs, but the long, gradual inclines are enough to slow trucks significantly. When a truck gets caught in the left lane and can't safely merge back over—often because the right lane is already congested—it can lead to substantial backups. It's easy to say that left-lane blockers should be ticketed, but in many of these cases, it's not intentional. The conditions simply don't allow for a safe lane change.
If we look at Rothman's state of New York, we can see similar corridor-level justifications for improvements of highways, too. It's not just a West Virginia or Kentucky or Ohio thing. NY Route 17 has been incrementally upgraded across the Southern Tier and Catskills since the 1940s, from improved two-lane roads that became expressways that became freeways. And it spurred a lot of economic development along its path, cut travel times drastically, and made it easier to be more mobile in a region that had few through routes.
And yet, a former NYSDOT commissioner traveling through Parksville during its construction blurted out rhetorically, "Why are we doing this?"
Took a long time before NYSDOT touched NY 17 again.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Quote from: Beltway on Today at 05:12:03 PMQuote from: hbelkins on Today at 03:00:40 PMThe only real grades on I-81 in Tennessee are near Kingsport at the Holston River crossing.
Virginia handles the grades in the Marion area, which don't seem all that steep but do cause truck slowdowns, by posting regulatory signs saying that trucks operating under the speed limit (used to be 65 mph, but the signs were patched to read 70 mph) must use the right lane. This is a (futile, in my experience) attempt to eliminate micropassing.
But at least it tells them to try -- much better than having no such rule.
Even fairly level highways like I-65 Indy-NW Indiana are plagued by not having such a rule.
Indiana also still has split speed limits -- trucks over 26,000 lbs are limited to 65 mph on rural interstates, while passenger vehicles may go up to 70 mph.
Those signs also exist on basically the entirety of I-77 south of I-81 to the NC border, and they are essentially ignored by truckers.
Between the micropassing truckers (and larger than normal quantities of them as it's the oversized load detour for I-40), aggressive speed enforcement around Hillsville, and often treacherous weather conditions through the Fancy Gap grade, I-77 is often a miserable drive south of I-81 in Virginia. It needs to be either 6-8 lanes in its entirety (down to the I-74 split in NC), or needs a relief route. Like an I-73 or I-74.
Quote from: wriddle082 on Today at 06:06:43 PMQuote from: Beltway on Today at 05:12:03 PMQuote from: hbelkins on Today at 03:00:40 PMThe only real grades on I-81 in Tennessee are near Kingsport at the Holston River crossing.
Virginia handles the grades in the Marion area, which don't seem all that steep but do cause truck slowdowns, by posting regulatory signs saying that trucks operating under the speed limit (used to be 65 mph, but the signs were patched to read 70 mph) must use the right lane. This is a (futile, in my experience) attempt to eliminate micropassing.
But at least it tells them to try -- much better than having no such rule.
Even fairly level highways like I-65 Indy-NW Indiana are plagued by not having such a rule.
Indiana also still has split speed limits -- trucks over 26,000 lbs are limited to 65 mph on rural interstates, while passenger vehicles may go up to 70 mph.
Those signs also exist on basically the entirety of I-77 south of I-81 to the NC border, and they are essentially ignored by truckers.
Between the micropassing truckers (and larger than normal quantities of them as it's the oversized load detour for I-40), aggressive speed enforcement around Hillsville, and often treacherous weather conditions through the Fancy Gap grade, I-77 is often a miserable drive south of I-81 in Virginia. It needs to be either 6-8 lanes in its entirety (down to the I-74 split in NC), or needs a relief route. Like an I-73 or I-74.
At a minimum, it needs climbing lanes throughout in both directions on the uphills. One exists northbound over Fancy Gap, but that's not nearly enough.
The slow moving trucks are frustrating on this stretch, and often quickly backs up traffic and creates a sea of brake lights for miles.
Quote from: sprjus4 on Today at 06:12:51 PMQuote from: wriddle082 on Today at 06:06:43 PMQuote from: Beltway on Today at 05:12:03 PMQuote from: hbelkins on Today at 03:00:40 PMThe only real grades on I-81 in Tennessee are near Kingsport at the Holston River crossing.
Virginia handles the grades in the Marion area, which don't seem all that steep but do cause truck slowdowns, by posting regulatory signs saying that trucks operating under the speed limit (used to be 65 mph, but the signs were patched to read 70 mph) must use the right lane. This is a (futile, in my experience) attempt to eliminate micropassing.
But at least it tells them to try -- much better than having no such rule.
Even fairly level highways like I-65 Indy-NW Indiana are plagued by not having such a rule.
Indiana also still has split speed limits -- trucks over 26,000 lbs are limited to 65 mph on rural interstates, while passenger vehicles may go up to 70 mph.
Those signs also exist on basically the entirety of I-77 south of I-81 to the NC border, and they are essentially ignored by truckers.
Between the micropassing truckers (and larger than normal quantities of them as it's the oversized load detour for I-40), aggressive speed enforcement around Hillsville, and often treacherous weather conditions through the Fancy Gap grade, I-77 is often a miserable drive south of I-81 in Virginia. It needs to be either 6-8 lanes in its entirety (down to the I-74 split in NC), or needs a relief route. Like an I-73 or I-74.
At a minimum, it needs climbing lanes throughout in both directions on the uphills. One exists northbound over Fancy Gap, but that's not nearly enough.
The slow moving trucks are frustrating on this stretch, and often quickly backs up traffic and creates a sea of brake lights for miles.
If only Virginia was as crackdown-vigilant with left-lane slowpokes as it is with (gasp) radar detectors.
Quote from: wriddle082 on Today at 06:06:43 PMQuote from: Beltway on Today at 05:12:03 PMBut at least it tells them to try -- much better than having no such rule.
Even fairly level highways like I-65 Indy-NW Indiana are plagued by not having such a rule.
Indiana also still has split speed limits -- trucks over 26,000 lbs are limited to 65 mph on rural interstates, while passenger vehicles may go up to 70 mph.
Those signs also exist on basically the entirety of I-77 south of I-81 to the NC border, and they are essentially ignored by truckers.
Between the micropassing truckers (and larger than normal quantities of them as it's the oversized load detour for I-40), aggressive speed enforcement around Hillsville, and often treacherous weather conditions through the Fancy Gap grade, I-77 is often a miserable drive south of I-81 in Virginia. It needs to be either 6-8 lanes in its entirety (down to the I-74 split in NC), or needs a relief route. Like an I-73 or I-74.
My experiences have been quite a bit better but . . .
AADT south of I-81 to THS is in the 27,000 to 31,000 range, large truck % in the 25 to 28 range, edging to or near six-lane warrants. The 2002 rebuilt New River Bridge has a future lane on each bridge in addition to the two current lanes.
AADT north of I-81 to WV is in the 38,000 to 43,000 range, large truck % in the 25 to 28 range, definitely six-lane (three each way) warrants.
Not sure how they will handle the two tunnels, though. Probably a pair of new 2-lane tubes for each.