AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Midwest - Great Lakes => Topic started by: vtk on September 09, 2015, 01:22:37 PM

Title: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 09, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
This is the thread for miscellaneous Ohio things in the Midwest - Great Lakes forum, so it covers Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12.  Why?  Because I said so, and nobody seemed to object (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10379.msg2028723#msg2028723).

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/ohio-split.png8.png)

For Districts 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 see Ohio Valley forum counterpart (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16332.0).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 22, 2015, 06:47:22 PM
Draft access management study for US 42 between London and Delaware: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/Documents/US42AMStudy_ReportOnly_DraftAug2015.pdf

The interesting bits start around page 60 or so. Basically, recommendations include minor driveway changes, a couple of new signals, turn lanes (including miles of TWLTL), possibly one or two roundabouts in Plain City, a longer five-lane section near US 33, and eventually frontage/backage roads.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on October 07, 2015, 12:06:42 AM

From 1963, The Ohio Highway Patrol made a safety film and it is a TREASURE TROVE of old stuff - increment panel signs, cut out US 250, OH 89 shields, among others. It's kind of tacky, but it is still neat from an old sign perspective, and the point it tries to drive home is valid.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on October 15, 2015, 05:18:20 PM
I-480 eastbound closed in Cleveland due to a car chase / police shooting incident.

http://fox8.com/2015/10/15/i-480-eastbound-closed-between-state-and-ridge-road-after-police-involved-incident/


I happened to get caught up in the traffic, while on my way from dropping off someone at the airport and eating lunch in Independence. All eastbound traffic on 480 was being forced to exit onto Ridge Rd, and I must have gotten to the area fairly soon after it happened as I encountered stopped traffic just before the 1/4 mile BGS for that exit. Took maybe 20 minutes to get off the intersatte, and I ended up taking Ridge Rd to Snow/Rockside to get where I was going.

On the way back, about an hour later, 480 westbound had a rubbernecking slowdown leading up to the incident site (just east of State Rd) and then was fine after that. By this time traffic on EB 480 had backed up from Ridge Rd almost all the way to 71, and the police had closed the on ramps to 480 east from 71 and the interchanges east of it. Once I got west of 71 I saw that they were forcing all 480 eastbound traffic onto the 71 entrance ramp.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Purgatory On Wheels on October 15, 2015, 08:16:38 PM
With Ohio adding exit numbers and tabs to many non-interstates recently, it seems that the (mostly-) freeway from I-270 to Newark could benefit from some.  But since it's made up of 3 different state routes (161, 37, and 16), how would exits be numbered?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 15, 2015, 11:35:44 PM
With Ohio adding exit numbers and tabs to many non-interstates recently, it seems that the (mostly-) freeway from I-270 to Newark could benefit from some.  But since it's made up of 3 different state routes (161, 37, and 16), how would exits be numbered?

They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Purgatory On Wheels on October 17, 2015, 11:52:16 PM
They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.

How hard would it be to give the entire corridor a single number? It couldn't all be 16, since that belongs on Broad St, but they could extend 161 out to Newcomerstown and truncate 16 in Granville. Or give it a completely new number.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on October 18, 2015, 12:53:25 AM
They could do the sensible thing, and treat the Columbus– Newcomerstown Macro-Corridor as the main route, and number the exits consistently, starting with 1A–D at 270 / Sunbury / Little Turtle. But they won't do that.

I noticed the other day that the New Albany Bypass has its original button copy signage from circa 2000. That will probably be replaced in a few years, and gain exit numbers based on the state mileage of OH 161. This work will likely include only the Hamilton Rd, New Albany Rd, and US 62 exits, because signage east and west of there is newer.

Thinking wishfully, ODOT might come up with a statewide exit numbering plan that makes sense in the big picture before they haphazardly slap exit numbers on 16, 37, 79, and 161 in Licking County.

How hard would it be to give the entire corridor a single number? It couldn't all be 16, since that belongs on Broad St, but they could extend 161 out to Newcomerstown and truncate 16 in Granville. Or give it a completely new number.

There's no reason 16 has to run down Broad St. From Granville, the best connection to Columbus is now via New Albany, and I would be completely in favor of rerouting 16 accordingly.

The question of "how hard is it" depends on perspective.  I think it would be very hard for a few roadgeeks to convince multiple ODOT districts to persue the change. From ODOT's perspective, it might not be too hard to ram the change through the public information process, but there's a question of motivation.  There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent, so I'm not optimistic this corridor will see any numbering changes in the forseeable future.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on October 18, 2015, 05:21:36 PM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on November 02, 2015, 04:50:33 PM
What are the highway configurations at Cleveland's public square? I heard they removed some streets recently.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 10, 2015, 10:23:58 PM
They just demo'ed the pedestrian walkway over the freeway section of OH-104 between US-23 and Lockbourne Rd. in Columbus. I wasn't expecting it. Does anybody know what this walkway served, such as a school? Far as I can tell it was built in 1987 when 104 was extended from US-23 to US-33 to replace Refugee Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 11, 2015, 04:03:24 AM
They just demo'ed the pedestrian walkway over the freeway section of OH-104 between US-23 and Lockbourne Rd. in Columbus. I wasn't expecting it. Does anybody know what this walkway served, such as a school? Far as I can tell it was built in 1987 when 104 was extended from US-23 to US-33 to replace Refugee Rd.

Yeah, apparently that's why 104 was closed Saturday night into Sunday between those exits.

Given the mix of industrial and low-income residential landuses in the area, I would guess walking to work was common in that neighborhood when the freeway was built, so the pedestrian bridge was included so as not to disrupt that.  Just a year or two ago I recall some work was done on that bridge; I think they were rehabilitating the concrete on the stair structures, or something.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on November 11, 2015, 08:06:55 PM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....

I don't think anyone is confused by the OH15-US23 configuration between Upper Sandusky and Findlay, and the BGSs make it clear that 15 will take you to I-75, but the routing of US23 is a bit strange there. I'm pretty sure it's because of Fostoria, which has really suffered not having connections to an interstate, wanting to maintain a connection to a national highway, but eventually I think US 23 should just continue to I-75 in Findlay up to Perrysburg.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 11, 2015, 10:08:01 PM
Hey, it's you!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on November 12, 2015, 10:28:58 AM
Hey, it's you!

Yes, they finally let me in. I think I'm just about the only NW Ohio resident on any of these boards.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JCinSummerfield on November 13, 2015, 01:23:02 PM
Hey, it's you!

Yes, they finally let me in. I think I'm just about the only NW Ohio resident on any of these boards.

You're not the only one.  There's someone from Toledo here, but I can't recall his handle right now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 15, 2015, 03:31:47 AM
Since we don't have a thread for I-70 in the M/GL region that I'm aware of, and I don't feel like starting one at the moment, I'll note this here.

Construction has started on I-70 to add a lane in each direction between Hilliard–Rome Rd and I-270 on the west side of Columbus. ODOT hasn't made any renderings or schematics conveniently available to the public, so I'm not sure exactly what the final configuration will look like.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on November 15, 2015, 10:40:04 AM
There's almost no recent history of changing state routes just to make the system more logical and/or consistent

Very true.  There are a handful of corridors I can think of off the top of my head where this is the case.

*  US-23 / SR-15 expressway set-up in northwest Ohio
    https://goo.gl/eDyrIt

*  US-20 / SR-10 freeway west of I-480 in northeast Ohio
    https://goo.gl/wOYUhf

*  SR-5 / SR-82 / Warren Outer Belt , to a lesser extent
    https://goo.gl/5xWuJJ

Can these corridors have a unifying number? Sure. Do they really need a unifying number? Who knows, but probably not....

I don't think anyone is confused by the OH15-US23 configuration between Upper Sandusky and Findlay, and the BGSs make it clear that 15 will take you to I-75, but the routing of US23 is a bit strange there. I'm pretty sure it's because of Fostoria, which has really suffered not having connections to an interstate, wanting to maintain a connection to a national highway, but eventually I think US 23 should just continue to I-75 in Findlay up to Perrysburg.

Or at least revert US-23 back to it's original alignment along modern-day OH-199 to Perrysburg.
Title: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 17, 2015, 06:40:19 PM
Since we don't have a thread for I-70 in the M/GL region that I'm aware of, and I don't feel like starting one at the moment, I'll note this here.

Construction has started on I-70 to add a lane in each direction between Hilliard–Rome Rd and I-270 on the west side of Columbus. ODOT hasn't made any renderings or schematics conveniently available to the public, so I'm not sure exactly what the final configuration will look like.

I'm not going through 900 pages of PDFs to get specifics, but here are the plans: ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/Districts/D06/download/FRA-70-3.41%20(PID%2025594)/FRA-70-0341%20PDF_8-4-2015.pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 19, 2015, 12:05:37 AM
I'm not going through 900 pages of PDFs to get specifics, but here are the plans: ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/Districts/D06/download/FRA-70-3.41%20(PID%2025594)/FRA-70-0341%20PDF_8-4-2015.pdf

Okay, I skimmed the whole thing. Thanks for the link.

Some specifics:
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 19, 2015, 11:56:59 AM
So you won't be able to get on eastbound 70 from Wilson rd. at all? Or is it one of those deals where if you screw up and accidentally exit 70 onto Wilson you will have to turn around at a McDonald's or something?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 19, 2015, 04:28:13 PM
I think he means the right lane between 270 and Wilson will be exit only, dropping from five lanes to four after that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on November 20, 2015, 10:28:28 AM
ah, 10-4
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dave19 on November 20, 2015, 11:25:54 AM
The Wheels of Tragedy video posted upthread reminds me of the time in driver ed class (which would have been around 1973 or '74) when the teacher showed us Signal 30, which also featured the OHP. Signal 30 predated WoT by 4 years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on November 20, 2015, 12:16:57 PM
The only reason for posting the Wheels of Tragedy video was just for the purposes of old signs - I had never seen them (the films) before and was just impressed with the old cutouts and old shields contained. I think my school system deemed them too graphic though to be shown.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 20, 2015, 04:17:49 PM
On the subject of the I-70 widening, I've noticed the portable message signs approaching the work zone showing the traffic speed. I'd not noticed that elsewhere and it seems like a nice touch, if not terribly accurate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 20, 2015, 01:33:48 PM
Another new traffic light coming to US 23 in Delaware

http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/delaware/news/2015/12/18/intersections-upgrade-will-give-drivers-more-options.html

This is a downgrade of the northern Sandusky Street half-interchange.  Apparently the southbound exit ramp will be converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street, which will meet US 23 at a traffic light.  The northbound entrance ramp will remain.

This just adds to the case for a proper new-alignment freeway route through Delaware County that the powers that be aren't even considering.  See also fictional I-171 (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4801.0).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 28, 2015, 07:45:50 PM
^ Well that's just great. And it's far enough north that it also affects those that choose to take 37/36 over to 71.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on December 29, 2015, 04:50:40 PM
Is anyone else using these bike route signs? Saw this in Newark a couple days ago.

(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/29/9e73cb606f77c3f3510ea8d7179f6d4f.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on December 30, 2015, 01:24:45 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on December 30, 2015, 01:39:16 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

aren't these basically stitched together county and state roads across the country?  Not many are separated from traffic from what I've seen.  Indiana hasn't signed any of their proposed routes (35, 50, 20, and a few more) yet
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 30, 2015, 02:11:33 PM
^ a lot of them will probably be on streets, though they will follow bike trails where applicable. For example I know that most of the North Coast Inland Trail in north central Ohio will become part of the US bike route 30
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on December 30, 2015, 03:21:13 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

aren't these basically stitched together county and state roads across the country?  Not many are separated from traffic from what I've seen.  Indiana hasn't signed any of their proposed routes (35, 50, 20, and a few more) yet

Absolutely.  Not separated from traffic; just routes on roads. 

The 76 route I posted had something to do with the Bicentennial, even.  Bizarre.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on December 30, 2015, 11:49:14 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

The first two national bike routes were USBR 1 and USBR 76. There are a few old white-on-green unnumbered Bike Route signs left in Kentucky, but District 12 (including Pike, Floyd and Knott counties) is the only place I know of in Kentucky where USBR 76 is fully signed. It's certainly not signed in my district.

As for the choice of routes, they've tried to keep the bike route off major highways. It comes into Kentucky on KY 80. It does use a portion of US 23, but for the most part it stays on lesser routes. If I'm not mistaken, I drove across KY 1091 as a cut-across between KY 122 and KY 7. It's a pretty steep mountain crossing, but I'll bet the ADT on that route is minuscule. There really was no other good way to get from one valley to the other without going up 122 all the way to 80 and then back over to 7, or else staying on 197 to Jenkins and then using 805 and a couple of other routes to connect to 7 in Letcher County.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 01, 2016, 12:40:07 PM
Saw something a bit odd yesterday on one of the many "To Ohio Turnpike" signs in Northern Ohio....the ones at the US 20/OH 51 intersection near Elmore now have a yellow "TOLL" banner between the "TO" banner and the turnpike shield.

First time I've see that. Thought it seemed kind of redundant, as "Ohio Turnpike" seems pretty self explanatory.

Anyone else seen that setup elsewhere? It'll be interesting to see if more of them turn up.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 04, 2016, 01:18:49 PM
A variation in KY (I'm still blown away by the fact they put a bike route across KY 1091 and KY 122):

https://goo.gl/maps/WPGPewEgneS2

The first two national bike routes were USBR 1 and USBR 76. There are a few old white-on-green unnumbered Bike Route signs left in Kentucky, but District 12 (including Pike, Floyd and Knott counties) is the only place I know of in Kentucky where USBR 76 is fully signed. It's certainly not signed in my district.

As for the choice of routes, they've tried to keep the bike route off major highways. It comes into Kentucky on KY 80. It does use a portion of US 23, but for the most part it stays on lesser routes. If I'm not mistaken, I drove across KY 1091 as a cut-across between KY 122 and KY 7. It's a pretty steep mountain crossing, but I'll bet the ADT on that route is minuscule. There really was no other good way to get from one valley to the other without going up 122 all the way to 80 and then back over to 7, or else staying on 197 to Jenkins and then using 805 and a couple of other routes to connect to 7 in Letcher County.

As I've said before, my grandparents lived on KY 122 in Wheelwright; I visited them frequently.  Never saw a bicycle on KY 122 in all my time spent in Floyd County. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: abefroman329 on January 05, 2016, 12:18:00 PM
Thought it seemed kind of redundant, as "Ohio Turnpike" seems pretty self explanatory.

Not necessarily.  There are numerous roads in the DC area called turnpikes that do not charge a toll.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on January 05, 2016, 11:39:31 PM
Yes, but they probably used to. Most roads with the word "pike" in them charged tolls at one time.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 06, 2016, 01:10:35 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 06, 2016, 04:04:16 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…

Huh, not too familiar with that part, only been on it once. Though I have diven under it at Marion-Melmore Rd a bunch of times and just figured the high profile in that area was due to crossing multiple roads in that immediate area

On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on January 06, 2016, 04:11:28 PM
Does anyone know why the US 30 expressway between Upper Sandusky and Bucyrus has such an elevated profile? It's bizarre, rising up 40 or more feet above the surrounding farmland, as if to clear a nonexistent railroad, then comes back down to ground level to intersect a county road, then mysteriously up again…

Huh, not too familiar with that part, only been on it once. Though I have diven under it at Marion-Melmore Rd a bunch of times and just figured the high profile in that area was due to crossing multiple roads in that immediate area

On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

It is indeed 70 now all the way from the Indiana line to Mansfield, except for the overlap with US 23's Upper Sandusky bypass, which is still 65.  It is a boon for trucks who originally were limited to 55 on that road to have gone to 65 and now 70 on the toll-free roads, especially with 30 being not a bad shunpike.

It is somewhat odd that Ohio has become so much more liberal with speed limits than Indiana.  Roads like US 30 from Paulding to Richland Counties that have 70 MPH limits in Ohio top out at 60 in Indiana, and Indiana still has the split limit for trucks.  Somehow never thought that Ohio would be so much more liberal with speed limits.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cjw2001 on January 08, 2016, 09:59:10 PM
On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

There are two categories that display as Orange on Google Maps, Expressway and Freeway.

Freeways cannot have any at grade intersections, only interchanges.

Expressways can be a mix of at grade intersections and interchanges.

The full definition can be found here (https://support.google.com/mapmaker/answer/1098056).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 19, 2016, 07:30:42 PM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit. Perhaps no one has tried upgrading it?

As for the US 24 example mentioned above, I can see that one now. The Napoleon-Defiance section does have a much higher frequency of at grades than Defiance-Indiana.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 19, 2016, 11:46:21 PM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit.

As far as I'm concerned, US 23 is an expressway from the Delaware – Marion County line to where it exits itself at Carey.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 20, 2016, 11:15:29 AM
^ going by the definition in that link, I don't see why US 23 from just north of the OH 231 interchange north of Marion to the OH 229 intersection south of Waldo isn't an expressway. It's a 20 mile section that has 6 interchanges, only 3 at grade intersections, and a 65 mph speed limit.

As far as I'm concerned, US 23 is an expressway from the Delaware – Marion County line to where it exits itself at Carey.

I would tend to agree, but since the google definition says that "(at grade) intersections should be relatively rare and widely spaced" I didn't include the OH 231 to OH 199 section because it has 7 at grade intersections in a 7 mile stretch, including one with a state route.

I just now submitted an upgrade in map maker for the section from the first at grade intersection north of 231 to the Delaware County line, so I guess we'll see how that goes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on January 20, 2016, 11:25:07 AM
are there any real plans to upgrade us 23 to toledo to an interstate standard road?  Kind of weird that there isn't a freeway link there already. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 20, 2016, 11:38:15 AM
are there any real plans to upgrade us 23 to toledo to an interstate standard road?  Kind of weird that there isn't a freeway link there already.

Not much reason to do 23 from Carey to Toledo, as that traffic already uses OH 15 to I-75, and there are plans to redo the 75/15 interchange and widen 75 from there all the way to Toledo (the widening from the north side of Findlay to Perrysburg is already under construction)

The real problem in the Toledo-Columbus corridor is Delaware County, where US 23 is highly developed and the only good workarounds involve cutting over to I-71 on either 2 lane roads or an also well developed 36-37 corridor that you must first traverse Delaware city streets to get to.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 21, 2016, 05:30:19 PM
Well, this is kinda odd. My submission to upgrade the northbound carriageway of 23 to expressway in Marion County went through almost immediately. But the submission for the southbound carriageway is still pending.

So right now if you zoom in close enough on the map, 23 north is orange while 23 south is still yellow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on January 22, 2016, 11:41:15 AM
Well, this is kinda odd. My submission to upgrade the northbound carriageway of 23 to expressway in Marion County went through almost immediately. But the submission for the southbound carriageway is still pending.

So right now if you zoom in close enough on the map, 23 north is orange while 23 south is still yellow.

That is pretty odd. Who knows what goes through their minds at Google. Also, what is the deal with US 20?  There are freeway/expressway portions in and around Norwalk and Fremont, but not according to Google.....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 22, 2016, 09:57:16 PM
Also, what is the deal with US 20?  There are freeway/expressway portions in and around Norwalk and Fremont, but not according to Google.....

Yeah, I might try editting those as well sometime.

anyway, here's an update on the SPUI being built at I-457 and US 20 (Central Ave) in Sylvania

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on January 22, 2016, 10:24:27 PM
I must have missed the I-57 extension from the south side of Chicago eastward across Indiana and over to Toledo. :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 23, 2016, 02:56:59 PM
Buck87, of course, meant the construction of a SPUI Interchange on Interstate 475 in Sylvania.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mrsman on January 27, 2016, 11:32:05 AM
On the topic of US 30, I see Google Maps now shows it as freeway orange from Upper all the way to Convoy, even though that section has at grade intersections. Kind of hard to figure out how they decide what gets the orange vs yellow, as there is a very similar section of US 23 around Marion with limited at grade intersections that is still yellow. And then on US 24 there there's a section west of Defiance to Indiana with at grade intersections that is orange and a section between Defiance and Napoleon with at grade intersections that is yellow.

Maybe the speed limit has something to do with it? I know 23 around Marion is 65. Not sure about 24 (other than I'm pretty sure it was 65 when I was on it last). 30 used to be 65, but I did post on another thread about seeing an article stating that it was going to 70 from Indiana all the way to Mansfield (except for the Upper Sandusky bypass)

There are two categories that display as Orange on Google Maps, Expressway and Freeway.

Freeways cannot have any at grade intersections, only interchanges.

Expressways can be a mix of at grade intersections and interchanges.

The full definition can be found here (https://support.google.com/mapmaker/answer/1098056).

I wish that Google Maps used a different color to denote toll route (like green).  On the existing maps it looks too close to free routes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 30, 2016, 10:19:55 PM
Noticed today that southbound lanes portion of my US 23 edit went through, so that awkward bicolor setup didn't last too long.

So now I've submitted several new edits to upgrade various Ohio roads to either expressways or freeways. They include the US 20 bypasses of Norwalk and Fremont, US 30 and OH 83 in Wooster, US 23 south of US 30 to just past OH 199, US 52 from Sciotoville to Hanging Rock, US 35 from OH 279 to Henderson, WV and US 23 from US 35 to just past OH 104. It'll be interesting to see how many of those go through, and whether or not any of them will have the same issue of the carriageways being different colors for a while.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on January 30, 2016, 11:18:48 PM
I just noticed that the Cedar Point Causeway seems so quaint and low traffic.

This video shows it during the summer season of 2013.



The strange thing is that there's only four lanes, and there's not enough room to widen the road. This would be a problem when everyone comes and goes, is there any plans in widening the causeway? Also, signing is totally desolate, all you get is a VMS near the park entrance.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 11:34:20 PM
At one time (I don't know if they still do) they would have a contraflow lane in which they would add a 3rd lane by sticking plastic cones/sticks in holes in the road to allow better flow in the morning and evening "rush hours".

And they also have the 2-lane Cedar Point Chaussee on the east side (aka the original entrance to CP), but that was always is maintained as a 2-way traffic road due to residential properties and houses along that road.

I have had issues getting out at the end of the night on occasion, but once you are out of the parking areas, the drive along the causeway or chaussee is usually a steady flow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 30, 2016, 11:54:17 PM
Also, signing is totally desolate, all you get is a VMS near the park entrance.

Do you mean entrance signage? There are two big ones on the mainland side (that the people who took the video had already passed before filming)

This is what you see just before you start onto the causeway itself:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sandusky,+OH/@41.4510803,-82.6741655,3a,66.8y,36.31h,88.84t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9NYjWDMOi7vI7lDWv7pX9A!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a4160ab1e4547:0xff2a84906612320f

and there's also this one at the corner of US 6 and Cedar Point Dr a little bit before that:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sandusky,+OH/@41.4417574,-82.6809863,3a,18.7y,53.15h,88.46t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sLo7vL3ZBu_E87uU1BAHOUg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a4160ab1e4547:0xff2a84906612320f

Also, I'm pretty sure the causeway itself is owned by the park. Not sure if they have any plans to expand it. Though traffic has been an issue at times on high volume nights, one time it was so bad that it became a news story because people had to wait for hours to get out:
 http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-erie/hundreds-of-people-were-stuck-in-the-cedar-point-parking-lot-saturday-night-after-halloweekends
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: noelbotevera on January 31, 2016, 12:16:18 AM
It could be maintained by the DOT, note the gantry. Excuse the blurriness, that's US 250.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4515384,-82.6740471,3a,75y,244.11h,79.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOR2VPQDrKZqJtKR4Y2mrQA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 31, 2016, 11:11:28 PM
I just noticed that the Cedar Point Causeway seems so quaint and low traffic.

I found it a pleasant drive when I was there in 2011.  Drove up to the entrance for early entry from one of their hotel properties.  Much better than the drive to Six Flags New England, for example. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 11, 2016, 10:27:11 PM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on February 12, 2016, 01:16:37 AM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1


Also noted as a related article, the "new" Shoot The Rapids log flume ride is being torn down after only 6 years.

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Business/2016/02/11/Shoot-The-Rapids-coming-down
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on February 12, 2016, 07:54:00 AM
According to this article from today, the causeway is owned and operated by the park:

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Transportation/2016/02/11/Cedar-Point-s-bridge-foundation-falters.html?ci=breaking&lp=1


Also noted as a related article, the "new" Shoot The Rapids log flume ride is being torn down after only 6 years.

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/Business/2016/02/11/Shoot-The-Rapids-coming-down

Makes me wonder about the boondoggle that is Mean Streak.  The ride was jolting people around too much (to the point of injury) when it first opened, so they rehabbed some of the track.  I rode it during the 2011 season after one of the rehabs and then they rehabbed it again after that.  All I know is that if I were managing the place, I'd be facedesking and considering the thing a money pit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 12, 2016, 03:38:45 PM
How is the conversion of the SR 2 section of the Cleveland Memorial Shoreway into a parkway going? Don't ask me why, but I seem very interested in that project.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 15, 2016, 09:50:04 AM
Another new traffic light coming to US 23 in Delaware

http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/delaware/news/2015/12/18/intersections-upgrade-will-give-drivers-more-options.html

This is a downgrade of the northern Sandusky Street half-interchange.  Apparently the southbound exit ramp will be converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street, which will meet US 23 at a traffic light.  The northbound entrance ramp will remain.

This just adds to the case for a proper new-alignment freeway route through Delaware County that the powers that be aren't even considering.  See also fictional I-171 (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4801.0).

Drove through there on Wednesday and noticed construction has started on this. Looked like the exit ramp from southbound 23 has already been removed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 26, 2016, 04:17:23 PM
Out with the old, in with the new...

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/64da9254f93483f1ba8fe870ea635a2d.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/c3f1766f7231ac85ee22dae082b75bf9.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 26, 2016, 05:47:19 PM
Did the old sign not have an exit marker?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: tdindy88 on April 26, 2016, 05:57:41 PM
If my recollection is correct, that is at the southeastern interchange between US 33 and I-270 in Columbus. Are they adding exit numbers along that stretch of road now or is this just in one place?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 26, 2016, 06:57:18 PM
There is a large scale sign replacement going on in Franklin County, and they're adding exit numbers anywhere they aren't currently posted.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on April 26, 2016, 08:34:41 PM
^ so I wonder if some of the ancient ones at the southern I-270/US 23 interchange will be (or have been) repalced
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on April 26, 2016, 10:48:00 PM
Nice catch 6a, I saw them doing something there and was wondering what was going on. Are they dumping control cities with all these sign replacements?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on April 27, 2016, 11:33:21 PM
Nice catch 6a, I saw them doing something there and was wondering what was going on. Are they dumping control cities with all these sign replacements?

I believe so, at least as it relates to I-270.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on April 28, 2016, 12:18:22 PM
Out with the old, in with the new...

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/64da9254f93483f1ba8fe870ea635a2d.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160426/c3f1766f7231ac85ee22dae082b75bf9.jpg)

This is a perfect example of how ODOT wastes money on signage &/or construction "upgrade" projects.  That Cincinnati Sign does not look to me more than 10 years old, and yet elsewhere on I-270, you have button-copy signs that are still standing at 30+ years old.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on April 28, 2016, 03:49:24 PM
This is a perfect example of how ODOT wastes money on signage &/or construction "upgrade" projects.  That Cincinnati Sign does not look to me more than 10 years old, and yet elsewhere on I-270, you have button-copy signs that are still standing at 30+ years old.

Button copy signage could be cleaned and refurbished and basically last indefinitely. Newer signs lose retroreflectivity over time, so they have to be replaced periodically.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: halork on May 04, 2016, 02:46:43 AM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on May 04, 2016, 10:02:22 AM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

Pennsylvania has Breezewood. Ohio has Beaverdam. The indirect connection probably has something to do with I-75 running right next to the railroad tracks.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on May 04, 2016, 12:29:20 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

I asked ODOT when they built the new US 30 freeway. They said there was insufficient traffic traveling between the two routes to justify the cost of building a new interchange.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on May 04, 2016, 04:13:08 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

I asked ODOT when they built the new US 30 freeway. They said there was insufficient traffic traveling between the two routes to justify the cost of building a new interchange.

I go through that area about 4 or 5 times a year and I have never seen much traffic making the transition.

As noted the railroad tracks running adjacent to 75 combined with the angle of intersection make for a difficult direct interchange.  I believe this is one of the oldest sections of 75 in Ohio.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 04, 2016, 07:55:51 PM
South of old US 30, they both turn a bit. With the tracks, it would just be way too expensive and the interchange would be very 'tight' with another interchange for both of them to the old US30 and the gas stations and truck stops located right there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Fox 11 News on May 11, 2016, 09:19:46 AM
random news release we got today:

BEAVERCREEK, Ohio (May 11, 2016) — Woolpert has been contracted by the city of Beavercreek to realign Shakertown Road in Beavercreek and eliminate its intersection with U.S. 35. The revised Shakertown will connect to Factory Road to the east, in a four-way intersection with Yellow Brick Road, south of U.S. 35.

This project is part of the Ohio Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) ongoing efforts to improve the safety of U.S. 35 through Beavercreek, primarily between Factory and Orchard Lane.

ODOT is moving toward more interchanges and fewer intersections along this section, and has been seeking public input.

Nathan Fischer, Woolpert project manager, said the intersection of Shakertown and U.S. 35 is a dangerous one, with 32 reported crashes at that site in the last three years and 20 percent of those incurring injury.

“We’re going to fix a safety concern that’s been in the area for a while,” Fischer said. “It also affects us on a personal level, since the intersection is 4 miles from our headquarters. A lot of our staff drives through the intersection.”

This project also will involve a slight realignment of Alpha-Bellbrook Road, which currently is part of an offset intersection with Yellow Brick. Alpha-Bellbrook will be diverted into a T-intersection with Shakertown, west of Factory.

The project is in the design phase, and likely will start construction in 2020.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on May 11, 2016, 10:21:35 AM
random news release we got today:

BEAVERCREEK, Ohio (May 11, 2016) — Woolpert has been contracted by the city of Beavercreek to realign Shakertown Road in Beavercreek and eliminate its intersection with U.S. 35. The revised Shakertown will connect to Factory Road to the east, in a four-way intersection with Yellow Brick Road, south of U.S. 35.

This project is part of the Ohio Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) ongoing efforts to improve the safety of U.S. 35 through Beavercreek, primarily between Factory and Orchard Lane.

ODOT is moving toward more interchanges and fewer intersections along this section, and has been seeking public input.

Nathan Fischer, Woolpert project manager, said the intersection of Shakertown and U.S. 35 is a dangerous one, with 32 reported crashes at that site in the last three years and 20 percent of those incurring injury.

“We’re going to fix a safety concern that’s been in the area for a while,” Fischer said. “It also affects us on a personal level, since the intersection is 4 miles from our headquarters. A lot of our staff drives through the intersection.”

This project also will involve a slight realignment of Alpha-Bellbrook Road, which currently is part of an offset intersection with Yellow Brick. Alpha-Bellbrook will be diverted into a T-intersection with Shakertown, west of Factory.

The project is in the design phase, and likely will start construction in 2020.

Beavercreek is to Dayton, OH what Howard is to Green Bay, WI and US 35 is very analogous to WI 29 in the Green Bay and central Wisconsin area, except that this part of US 35 here is more of a 'street' than WI 29 is in the Howard area.  This news item refers to a short section of major suburban non-freeway surface street (it looks a lot like a cross between Ashland Ave, Lombardi Ave and Military Ave in the Green Bay area) between US 35's part of the Dayton freeway system and the start of the more rural 'almost interstate' US 35 at Xenia, OH and on across the far southern part of Ohio towards Charleston, WV.

This is a badly needed upgrade

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 12, 2016, 09:28:53 PM
That last little stretch of US35 to complete the freeway to I-75 has been badly needed. I've been on that stretch a few times and hated it. Freeway-level traffic on a four-lane with lights. No wonder it's dangerous. Reminds me of US71 south of Kansas City. Just completely needs to be freewaytized.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: triplemultiplex on May 12, 2016, 11:06:56 PM
Reminds me of US71 south of Kansas City. Just completely needs to be freewaytized.

(http://williamthecoroner.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/istock_can-of-worms.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 18, 2016, 07:09:32 PM
I'm planning to travel from southern Ohio to western Michigan, and am thinking of taking US-30 between I-75 and Fort Wayne. I notice there is no direct connection between US-30 and I-75! Why? That whole area seems really poorly designed. Is there any plan to add a direct connection in the future?

Pennsylvania has Breezewood. Ohio has Beaverdam. The indirect connection probably has something to do with I-75 running right next to the railroad tracks.

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Stephane Dumas on May 19, 2016, 07:42:21 AM

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.

That reminds me of some interchange ideas I saw on Fictionnal highways section.
http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3618.msg113621#msg113621
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n208/triplemultiplex/Interchanges/75-30all.png?t=1314385866
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on May 22, 2016, 10:58:33 PM

US 30/OH 696/I-75 looks a lot worse on paper than it operates in reality.  There is not much need for redoing it all to make a direct connection--OH 696 handles it quite capably and indeed the rail line paralleling I-75 adds to the complexity.  The angle that US 30 crosses I-75 at doesn't make a direct connection any easier either.

That reminds me of some interchange ideas I saw on Fictionnal highways section.
http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3618.msg113621#msg113621
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n208/triplemultiplex/Interchanges/75-30all.png?t=1314385866

It describes that as economical, but the US 30 and I-75 roadbeds are at significantly different elevations where they cross (as US 30 also passes over the railroad), so I-75 couldn't take over US 30's ROW without being lowered significantly or I-75 being boosted, either of them in place so a detour alignment would have to be constructed, requiring additional right of way temporarily. There are so many loops, and the braided ramps seem tight.  The existing condition is good enough given the current traffic--I have never encountered anything that would require a total redo like this.  Taking the additional property would add to the cost as well.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on June 26, 2016, 12:25:16 AM
Further evidence that ODOT's freeway sign replacement program is completely random…

All the guide signs on I-670 between I-70 and SR 315 — all good-condition button copy that was put up in 2001 or 2002 — has been recently replaced.  The new signs look good, even in Clearview, but there was nothing wrong with the old signage.

Meanwhile, signs at entrances to I-270 from US 23 and Alum Creek Dr date to (I'm guessing) the early 80's at best, the background colors in the Interstate shields are fading, and in some cases pieces of the sign have fallen off.  Maybe they'll be replaced next week, or maybe they'll still be standing in a decade. It's a crapshoot.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on June 30, 2016, 11:08:54 PM
Further evidence that ODOT's freeway sign replacement program is completely random…

All the guide signs on I-670 between I-70 and SR 315 — all good-condition button copy that was put up in 2001 or 2002 — has been recently replaced.  The new signs look good, even in Clearview, but there was nothing wrong with the old signage.

Meanwhile, signs at entrances to I-270 from US 23 and Alum Creek Dr date to (I'm guessing) the early 80's at best, the background colors in the Interstate shields are fading, and in some cases pieces of the sign have fallen off.  Maybe they'll be replaced next week, or maybe they'll still be standing in a decade. It's a crapshoot.

I found it especially sad when they replaced signage on I-70 between 270 on the west side and just west of 315 in 2003 with reflective lettering signage, replacing button copy that was only two years old!  The Exit 96 signs for 670 had "Airport" legend in button copy covered with an orange plaque reading "Open to 315" and the signs were replaced before the plaque was even removed when 670 opened up through the trench.  Two years of service for the signs while on 315 there were signs from the 70s (at best) still there until a year or two ago?  Bonkers.

Figures that they were replaced with Clearview.....the damned Clearview signs will probably still be there in 50 years!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 13, 2016, 07:31:47 PM
Oh great....we have yet another new traffic light on US 23 in Delaware County

(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14322739_1110188002364226_4259575413175991660_n.jpg?oh=fadc6b4e861d02e0c9c2221609c6a307&oe=586F28E8)

photo caption:
Quote
New roadway, Meeker Way, opens in Delaware County on Thursday. After Meeker Road is open, Stratford Road closes for up to a month.

Clarification: When the project is complete in October, US 23 north and south traffic will be able to access Stratford Road. However, traffic coming from Stratford Road will only be able to turn right onto US 23 north. For access to US 23 south, drivers will use Meeker Way.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 14, 2016, 08:52:21 AM
Oh great....we have yet another new traffic light on US 23 in Delaware County

(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14322739_1110188002364226_4259575413175991660_n.jpg?oh=fadc6b4e861d02e0c9c2221609c6a307&oe=586F28E8)

photo caption:
Quote
New roadway, Meeker Way, opens in Delaware County on Thursday. After Meeker Road is open, Stratford Road closes for up to a month.

Clarification: When the project is complete in October, US 23 north and south traffic will be able to access Stratford Road. However, traffic coming from Stratford Road will only be able to turn right onto US 23 north. For access to US 23 south, drivers will use Meeker Way.

They're also taking out the light at Stratford, so that's a net no new traffic signals.  On the other hand, the 315 and Stratford lights were synced for 23 through traffic, and the Meeker light probably won't be synced.  On the other other hand, traffic on the Meeker approach will probably be so light that signal won't have to stop 23 often.

I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on September 14, 2016, 12:02:05 PM

They're also taking out the light at Stratford, so that's a net no new traffic signals.  On the other hand, the 315 and Stratford lights were synced for 23 through traffic, and the Meeker light probably won't be synced.  On the other other hand, traffic on the Meeker approach will probably be so light that signal won't have to stop 23 often.

Yeah, so while it's not a net gain of signals, it's still a net gain of possible places of having to stop (however unlikely that might end up being.)

Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on September 14, 2016, 05:45:57 PM
us 23 needs to be upgraded to interstate standards one day.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 14, 2016, 09:01:06 PM
Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?

Nearing completion. When I drove through on Friday night, they were applying the permanent lane markings on 23. I couldn't see if signals were hung or the status of the Sandusky St extension, but I imagine they're close to wrapping that project up, except possibly for landscaping which might be finished in the spring.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 17, 2016, 07:43:02 AM
Quote
I'm more annoyed at the other end of Delaware, where the southbound exit to Sandusky Street is being converted to a two-way extension of Sandusky Street which meets 23 at a completely new signal.  At least the northbound to northbound movement will still be handled by the old northbound entrance ramp.

Agreed that this one is more annoying. Anyone know how that project is progressing?

Nearing completion. When I drove through on Friday night, they were applying the permanent lane markings on 23. I couldn't see if signals were hung or the status of the Sandusky St extension, but I imagine they're close to wrapping that project up, except possibly for landscaping which might be finished in the spring.

Update: as of yesterday, Sandusky St extension open, operating as RIRO at US 23. Left turn lane from NB 23 to (SB) Sandusky closed. Sandusky St ends with right turn only to 23 SB, and this is apparently final configuration. Signal mast arms in place, with no signals on them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: alecscradle on September 21, 2016, 02:06:05 AM
At this point it's almost easier to take Sawmill or Liberty to Delaware.  I've driven up both those routes, and while Sawmill south of Powell rd sucks, both roads are a relative ease to take.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 21, 2016, 08:53:39 AM
At this point it's almost easier to take Sawmill or Liberty to Delaware.  I've driven up both those routes, and while Sawmill south of Powell rd sucks, both roads are a relative ease to take.

Sawmill will be open to US 42 soon, which will help that alternative.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on September 29, 2016, 09:37:58 AM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 29, 2016, 10:18:56 AM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.

My guess is, in the very recent past, revenues were coming up short of projections, so some larger impending projects were delayed, freeing up some money for immediate use; and now, revenues are exceeding projections, so some smaller projects are being moved up.  Assuming competence on the part of ODOT, it looks like the goal to spend as much of the cash they expect to have in any given year, and changing cash flow expectations result in reshuffled project timelines.  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on September 29, 2016, 12:15:07 PM
Could it have been from issuing more bonds?  That's happening quite a bit now in NYSDOT's program.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on September 29, 2016, 02:26:12 PM
Could it have been from issuing more bonds?  That's happening quite a bit now in NYSDOT's program.

(personal opinion emphasized)

that might actually be true, the same thing has happened in indiana before due to this
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on September 29, 2016, 08:45:53 PM
  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

I'm still wondering if design-build has to do with it as well. Meaning design-build leads to a lot less long-term planning. The idea will be put out there at some point, but nothing will be truly planned long term in a specific time frame. Like, "ehhhh, sometime before 2027."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on September 30, 2016, 10:07:27 AM
  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

I'm still wondering if design-build has to do with it as well. Meaning design-build leads to a lot less long-term planning. The idea will be put out there at some point, but nothing will be truly planned long term in a specific time frame. Like, "ehhhh, sometime before 2027."

Hm.  At least here in NY, design-build only pertains to detailed design (final design report to PS&E) and construction phases of the project.  Typically treat the proposals due date as the equivalent to a traditional letting date for the project and for incorporation into NYSDOT's capital program database.  Not sure how that would translate into less long-term planning overall, since they get thrown into the mix anyway somewhere along the line.

Then again, NY tends to treat any "plan" beyond whatever is considered the current program as fluff anyway and even within the current program, anything beyond the first couple of years is considered tentative (i.e., most likely going to move later).

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on October 04, 2016, 03:28:04 PM
Idle curiosity has me wondering about something. Recently some projects have been moved up because "the money was available now." The 270 west side widening and the newest phase of the 270/23/315 construction come to mind right away. Where did this money come from? We aren't talking about spare change here...are other areas not using all their funds? Are tax collections higher? Accounting magic? Genuinely curious.

My guess is, in the very recent past, revenues were coming up short of projections, so some larger impending projects were delayed, freeing up some money for immediate use; and now, revenues are exceeding projections, so some smaller projects are being moved up.  Assuming competence on the part of ODOT, it looks like the goal to spend as much of the cash they expect to have in any given year, and changing cash flow expectations result in reshuffled project timelines.  A more cynical interpretation is there is basically no long term planning anymore, and the agency is making decisions with the goal of maintaining people's short-term opinion of their ability to spend wisely.

Oh, how I want to be cynical, but you're probably right. It just seemed like someone opened a magic can of money and poof! all the projects got bumped up.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on November 03, 2016, 03:25:31 PM
I don't know if Ohio has any APLs yet, but District 6 is getting rid of the dancing arrows and throwing in an APL along US 33: https://www.facebook.com/ODOTColumbusDistrict6/photos/a.253516568031378.57989.240292776020424/1154169991299360/?type=3&theater
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 03, 2016, 04:06:01 PM
I'm pretty sure there have been APLs installed in Ohio before those on US 33.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on November 03, 2016, 06:31:55 PM
Why not just do that for both directions lol I love you ODOT. Never change.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 25, 2016, 01:06:14 AM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: delstein on November 26, 2016, 12:24:42 PM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on November 29, 2016, 11:07:05 AM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 

That's not the end, actually.  It's supposed to curve west and end at Section Line Rd.  I very recently noticed Google has imagery from this fall of the Columbus area, and it looks like the Sawmill Pkwy construction ends about halfway between US 42 and Section Line Rd, leaving a short stretch to be completed in the future.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on November 29, 2016, 09:25:59 PM
Delaware County: Sawmill Pkwy appears to be complete, though I have not yet observed its full length.

I drove it a few weeks ago. It's a fairly nice stretch of road with plenty of roundabouts (four I believe?). I just don't like how it barges through what were otherwise quiet roads. There are houses with long driveways that used to be secluded from the road that are now bordered on the side by a four-lane parkway.

At the Delaware end by 42, there are turn lanes already put in, so I imagine there's some kind of development planned there.

 

My parents live off of Sawmill Parkway in Powell.  It seemed to be a nice alternative to US 23 (the PARKWAY, that is), until you hit the Sawmill ROAD segment going into Franklin County.  Then, like US-23, you have poor infrastructure planning from synching of traffic lights to failure to limit the number of driveway access points.  Delaware County, you've done good!!!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 02, 2016, 04:41:55 PM
I hope this link works,

http://contracts.dot.state.oh.us/common/pageIterator.do?addTo=&forward=searchResultsCondensedJSP&iteratorKey=search.page.iterator&page=next&from=topNav

PID number 89303 is a signing contract in which US 23 and 33, along with OH 104 and 315 will continue to get mileage based exit numbers. It's 665 pages in length and I thought I would pass it along. :)  It looks to me like any and all remaining button copy is getting ready to be replaced. Plans seem to be in FHWA and not clearview.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 02, 2016, 05:55:51 PM
Naturally, the above link does not work. I am trying to plug in the PIN number to find a combination that works. Sorry folks.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 03, 2016, 02:37:52 AM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 05, 2016, 03:30:08 PM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.

Excellent point! According to the plans, it is just the south end of 315 (I did not see any of I-270/315/23 signage - unless that is a separate contract altogether, which would not surprise me). 104's exit numbers were thorough :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on December 05, 2016, 03:57:14 PM
Is it actually going to be a thorough job with the exit numbers? On 315 a year or two ago, the first and last few miles of the freeway were left out, and none of the gore signs were updated.

Excellent point! According to the plans, it is just the south end of 315 (I did not see any of I-270/315/23 signage - unless that is a separate contract altogether, which would not surprise me). 104's exit numbers were thorough :)

The north outerbelt is almost certainly its own contract. It would make the most sense just to throw that in with the reconstruction and its sign replacements.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: epzik8 on December 08, 2016, 06:40:58 PM
Good God! Youngstown, Ohio is the very definition of "desolate"! You'll know what I'm talking about if you've ever been on U.S. 62 just off I-680 like I was today.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on December 08, 2016, 08:36:10 PM
You don't have to stop for red lights at night if no one is coming in Youngstown. At least it was like that in the 2000s.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 09, 2016, 04:59:32 PM
What could possibly be done to revitalize Youngstown? I doubt the answer has anything to do with its roads, though.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on December 09, 2016, 06:43:58 PM
What could possibly be done to revitalize Youngstown? I doubt the answer has anything to do with its roads, though.

It's all Eds and Meds these days. Our capitalist system can only thrive by cannibalizing what used to be services.

Investing a few billion in Youngstown State University, making it Ohio's second flagship university, for example, or consolidating Mayo clinics in the eastern third of the country in the city might push it back. Manufacturing is largely automated, and Youngstown has no natural advantages in distribution or services; it needs an institutional anchor.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on December 09, 2016, 06:57:30 PM
i think this article poses an interesting idea: http://www.vox.com/new-money/2016/12/9/13881712/move-government-to-midwest
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 14, 2016, 10:45:22 AM
I hope this link works,

http://contracts.dot.state.oh.us/common/pageIterator.do?addTo=&forward=searchResultsCondensedJSP&iteratorKey=search.page.iterator&page=next&from=topNav

PID number 89303 is a signing contract in which US 23 and 33, along with OH 104 and 315 will continue to get mileage based exit numbers. It's 665 pages in length and I thought I would pass it along. :)  It looks to me like any and all remaining button copy is getting ready to be replaced. Plans seem to be in FHWA and not clearview.

I've got it. At the top of the page, click on documents; then in the PID blank type 89303 and then the project comes up and you can download at the far right.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on December 20, 2016, 10:50:31 AM
"No documents found" it says.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on December 20, 2016, 02:30:52 PM
well crap!  :banghead:    trying again.  PID is correct - just trying something else to get access.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 01, 2017, 10:14:51 AM
A fairly new sign has turned up near me that I find kinda funny. Thanks to ODOT's abbreviation of "Islands" to "Is"....there is now a sign on OH 2 before the OH 4 exit that lists 3 different things, but can be read together as a complete sentence that says:

"Lake Erie Is Cedar Point Ferry Service"

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4001029,-82.7108622,3a,36.5y,294.22h,89.63t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sy4LZF7KOqRfmzXvpHUkf2w!2e0
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on January 03, 2017, 01:16:30 AM
My wife and I decided to head to Jeffersonville, OH to shop at the Tanger Outlets yesterday.  After finishing, I decided to drive along US 35 east to the Frankfort exit, turn around, then drive back to I-675 near Dayton with a small side trip along "Old 35" from Jamestown through Xenia.

Some observations...

     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

     - A glaring inaccuracy on a mileage sign at the "Old 35" exit (Exit 62) west of Jamestown.  Washington C.H. is shown as being 36 miles away at this point (and Dayton 25).  At the OH 72 exit two miles east, Washington C.H. is shown at the correct mileage of 19 (with Dayton also correct at 27 miles).  Six miles west of the "Old 35" exit, Washington C.H. is shown as being 29 miles away.  That 36 should be a 21 or 22.  This is what I do not like much on highways--as mentioned in another thread.

     - The westbound Xenia mileages are wrong--they all are around 4 miles less than what they supposed to be.  From OH 753 to the other side of I-71, Xenia should be listed at 32, 26, and 16 instead of 27, 22, and 12.

     - As usual, a pleasant drive.  Too bad the day looked as if I was in Seattle.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: marleythedog on January 03, 2017, 09:10:19 PM
     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

The sign job at 35 and 675 made nightly news at the time. The contractor screwed up the BGSs on the 675 SB C/D road so that Dayton was the control city on both 35 East and West. They came back and crossed it out on 35 East with what looked like green duct tape, then came back a few months later and put on a Xenia patch that IIRC looks small compared to the rest of the sign.

The other weird thing with that whole sign job is that they made liberal use of "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at the exit gores, even though 80-90% of the exits along that part of 35 just have deceleration lanes (and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before).

Maybe it's just coincidence, but it seems like there is a correlation between Ohio's Clearview era and generally sloppy quality control.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 04, 2017, 12:40:34 PM
     - Exit number tabs have been added on the BGS's along US 35 from at least I-675 to OH 753 just east of Washington C.H.  Exit 41 is I-675 with OH 753 as Exit 85.  The only one I saw prior to this (last May) was the EXIT 64 tab on the OH 72 Jamestown exit.  No exit number tabs have been added to any exits toward Chillicothe--mainly because Greene and Fayette Counties have updated signs (in Clearview and done very well) and Ross County has not.  Ross still has the second-generation signs (retro-reflective, no button copy) from the early 2000's standing.

The sign job at 35 and 675 made nightly news at the time. The contractor screwed up the BGSs on the 675 SB C/D road so that Dayton was the control city on both 35 East and West. They came back and crossed it out on 35 East with what looked like green duct tape, then came back a few months later and put on a Xenia patch that IIRC looks small compared to the rest of the sign.

The other weird thing with that whole sign job is that they made liberal use of "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at the exit gores, even though 80-90% of the exits along that part of 35 just have deceleration lanes (and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before).

Maybe it's just coincidence, but it seems like there is a correlation between Ohio's Clearview era and generally sloppy quality control.

Ohio has been adding "EXIT ↗ ONLY" at exit gores on many roads that just have deceleration lanes, and weren't marked EXIT ONLY before.   I have seen a lot of people bail out of the right lane, because they erroneously thought it was an exit-only lane.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 16, 2017, 10:36:44 PM
I just passed the OH 164 interchange on OH 11 northbound at Columbiana and saw what may be LED reflectors on the exit ramps. They seemed to be on the outsides of the stripes. The colour was distinctive - a blue/white 8,000 Kelvin 3-LED setup per unit.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 18, 2017, 10:20:23 AM
My wife and I decided to head to Jeffersonville, OH to shop at the Tanger Outlets yesterday. 

Tanger Outlets is in (or, at least, adjacent to) Octa. Jeffersonville is the next exit up on I-71, and it has a much crappier outlet mall.

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/sm-octa-jville-dim-m.png8.png)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Henry on January 18, 2017, 10:22:11 AM

(http://vidthekid.info/imghost/sm-octa-jville-dim-m.png8.png)

Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 18, 2017, 12:01:46 PM
Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D

That was my creation.  I suggested this to ODOT District 6 via Facebook. The reply was basically "we don't think these are warranted, but we appreciate the initiative".
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 18, 2017, 12:23:32 PM
Ha, there could be similar signs for

"You are in Ontario, not Mansfield"
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 18, 2017, 12:30:28 PM
The outlet malls at both exit 65 and exit 65 have a mailing address of Jeffersonville (43128).  The one at 69 is also within the village limits of Jeffersonville, the one at 65 is in unincorporated Jefferson Township just outside the village limits of Octa.

I see no problem with referring to the location of the Tanger Outlet Mall as Jeffersonville.

FWIW, the mall at exit 69 is also in the Jeffersonville rate center, but the one at exit 65 is in the Milledgeville rate center.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 19, 2017, 12:19:56 AM
The Speedway across 435 from Tanger Outlets identifies its location as Octa on its receipts, and the weather forecast displayed at the fuel pumps is for Octa, OH.

If Jeffersonville were big enough to be conveniently accessed from both exits, then I'd be fine with calling the whole vicinity Jeffersonville, but that's not the case.  On the other hand, the old town of Octa isn't particularly close either, and if it hadn't technically grown to the interchange by annexation, I might be arguing to call the junction West Lancaster.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 19, 2017, 09:59:14 AM
The Speedway is actually within the village limits of Octa, despite having a Jeffersonville mailing address.  So, I think they are OK using either Octa or Jeffersonville on their receipts.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Henry on January 19, 2017, 10:10:02 AM
Ha, there could be similar signs for

"You are in Ontario, not Mansfield"
Tell me those are actual signs... (unless you're making them up!) :D
Still, I got a big laugh out of it! :rofl:

That was my creation.  I suggested this to ODOT District 6 via Facebook. The reply was basically "we don't think these are warranted, but we appreciate the initiative".
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on January 19, 2017, 07:31:03 PM
That was funny (even at my expense).  I just say Jeffersonville because it is a bigger town than Octa.  People around Cincinnati really wouldn't know where Octa is--even though I do know as I have visited the TA across OH 435 from the outlet mall.  Receipts do use Octa on them.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2017, 12:51:58 PM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)
- all signalized intersections now have street name signage (many of which are private drives into parking lots, such as N. and S. Meijer Drive)
- most of these intersections now have "<- west US 250 east ->" signage (an idea I like, but brings up a separate beef of mine that US 250 should be signed as North/South from Sandusky to at least Ashland)
- and my favorite new addition, the turn lane signage approaching the OH 2 interchange includes OH 2 east/west shields to let you know which lane is for which (can be seen in GSV here: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4025426,-82.6582092,3a,66.8y,196.44h,86.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sAX0y6ALoHm3lkpMW3caAcw!2e0 )
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on January 23, 2017, 09:01:22 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Revive 755 on January 23, 2017, 09:25:50 PM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)

From all of the doghouses, I take it Ohio is not a fan of flashing yellow arrows?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on January 24, 2017, 09:19:33 AM
ODOT has recently completed a corridor enhancement project on US 250 in the Sandusky area, mainly in the commercial strip between Bogart Rd and Perkins Ave. This includes repaving most of the road, adding or improving turn lanes, adding sidewalks, adding new signals, improving intersections and also focused heavily on access management by converting most non signalized driveways to right-in-right-out. This is a heavily used stretch of road by both the local and tourist populations.

Some things I've noticed about the new signage:

- all traffic signals and overhead signage are now on mast arms (which are all a decorative green)

From all of the doghouses, I take it Ohio is not a fan of flashing yellow arrows?

The flashing yellow arrow is not used in this part of Ohio. Not sure about other areas....
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: frankenroad on January 24, 2017, 10:04:07 AM
I have not seen a flashing yellow arrow anywhere in Ohio - but there are some right across the river in Northern Kentucky (specifically at Dixie Highway (25/42/127) at I-71/75.)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: busman_49 on January 24, 2017, 01:39:06 PM
I have not seen a flashing yellow arrow anywhere in Ohio - but there are some right across the river in Northern Kentucky (specifically at Dixie Highway (25/42/127) at I-71/75.)

Dayton at Dixie Drive & Wagner Ford Rd.; West Chester at Tylersville Rd & Kingsridge Dr, and OH 741 at Bethany Rd. are three that I know of.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 24, 2017, 04:59:34 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.

I can remember it being 2 lane as well, that section was widened to its current 5 lane configuration in 2002.

I don't remember the Blue Hole signs, as it was sadly closed to the public when I was 3. Though on a side note, while that Blue Hole is closed, there is another nearby blue hole that can be visited by the general public at the Castalia State Fish Hatchery (not nearly as built up though, it just has one little railing-less dock you can view it from)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on January 26, 2017, 11:00:46 PM
I'm old enough to remember US-250 being just a 2-lane road from the Turnpike to Bogart Road.  Bumper-to-bumper Cedar Point traffic in the morning and signs for The Blue Hole which damn near seemed like every hundred feet.

I can remember it being 2 lane as well, that section was widened to its current 5 lane configuration in 2002.

I don't remember the Blue Hole signs, as it was sadly closed to the public when I was 3. Though on a side note, while that Blue Hole is closed, there is another nearby blue hole that can be visited by the general public at the Castalia State Fish Hatchery (not nearly as built up though, it just has one little railing-less dock you can view it from)

How about "The Earth Crack" at Seneca Caverns? I've never been, but since we're talking about holes in the ground…
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 27, 2017, 10:07:47 AM
How about "The Earth Crack" at Seneca Caverns? I've never been, but since we're talking about holes in the ground…

It's a very unique cave, in that it formed due to a subsurface collapse rather than being slowly carved out by water like most caves. It's also left really close to its natural state, so there's not the typical concrete path with railings everywhere, but rather natural surface floors and rocks used as steps with a lot of climbing involved. The cave is made up of a series of levels stacked on top of each other, and how deep you can go on the tour depends on the water table, which fluctuates all year long based on rainfall, with the deepest you can get on a tour being 110 feet when the 7th level is dry. One thing this cave does not have much of is formations, just a few tiny stalactites.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2017, 05:26:04 PM
There is an Ohio thread in both the Midwest/Great Lakes and the Ohio Valley Regional Boards. Could the two be merged, or differentiated from one another?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 27, 2017, 06:45:45 PM
<sigh>

Can we not do this in this thread? The Ohio thread in the Ohio Valley forum has already been dominated by discussion about how Ohio should be divided/what to do with these threads , and it would suck to see that happen to this thread too.

Perhaps a new thread about this subject in the Suggestions and Questions forum would be a better place to hash this stuff out and bring it to the attention of the admins.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on January 28, 2017, 07:09:37 PM
Not sure where to put this, but figured this would be as good of a place as any. Don't think this qualifies as 'fictional roads' since we're discussing a real road.

Someone on another board (non-road related, and I won't give out the URL) has gotten the bright idea that Canton would be so much better if I-77 were boulevardized essentially the entire length of the US62 multiplex. That being either just north of Fulton Rd to US30, or including what would be US62 as an 'intersection' north of Fulton Rd.

Their argument being that it there isn't much traffic on it (it averages 86k per day along that stretch), it cut off two neighborhoods from eachother (it didn't, but they think it did), it won't cost much (?), and that safety isn't a pressing concern.

So, I've spewed some facts at them, and like a duck, they wash right off. So, I'd like a little better argument. Since I-77 is elevated between US62 and south of Fulton Rd, and then sunken from south of Fulton Rd through past Lincolnway, how much would it cost over that 2.8 mile stretch to raise/lower the road accordingly. Including demolishing bridges. Simply for argument sake.

Their next response, was that they could sink all of I-77 and cover it to 'connect the two neighborhoods'(sic). Which, as I pointed out with Woodall Rodgers Freeway in Dallas, was $51 million for 0.2 miles, and 2.8 miles would mean, just the cost of covering it at $714 million. Not including the cost of grading I-77 to be low enough to match the surrounding landscape.

And lastly, if anyone has the precise calculations on how much added time travel would take between those two points. They feel 'a minute or two' extra is all it will take. I've argued that the road averages 60 vehicles per minute throughout an entire 24 hour period, which means even if light are times perfectly, there will be monumental stagnation approaching any light from any direction, even if left turns were restricted and it was simply two phases for the main line.

So, what would be the actual expectation of time to work through that type of bottleneck. Including the reduced speed limit that would come with the intersection-infested area. I've pointed out US71 in Kansas City regarding safety aspects, but they feel that isn't what would happen in Canton. But, rather since it's cheaper and 'connects the neighborhoods' the safety aspects and 'reduced cost' somehow are worth it. Though, they've yet to explain how 'connecting the neighborhoods' works when nobody would have the testicular fortitude to try and cross such a highway with regularity.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: hbelkins on January 28, 2017, 07:14:35 PM
Just tell them that they're an idiot for wanting to remove a freeway, especially part of a multi-state high-speed thoroughfare, and leave it at that.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on January 28, 2017, 07:55:32 PM
Just tell them that they're an idiot for wanting to remove a freeway, especially part of a multi-state high-speed thoroughfare, and leave it at that.

I've tried leaving it at that from the beginning. The problem is they've started to attract other idiots who also see merit in it. Most, though, understand the idiocy of it, but simply saying 'you're an idiot' is galvanizing others to their cause.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 30, 2017, 01:17:29 PM
I spotted this a few weeks ago but finally got photos of the LED reflector testing along OH 11 at the OH 164 interchange in Columbiana. There are three LED lights per unit and they are flush with the asphalt.

(http://i.imgur.com/kIbbiGR.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/d6K2Tz0.jpg)

My preferences:

1. Recessed reflectors, such as what Kentucky now uses. A diamond grinder goes into newly laid asphalt or concrete and carves out a little bit of space where two reflector units are glued in place. The recessed units are not hit by snowplows. The visibility is great, even in wet weather.

2. Regular reflectors, as what most states uses. I think ODOT said there was a loss of 30% of reflectors in a given year due to snowplows. They are also replaced every few years or when a road is repaved, so there will be gaps in visibility.

3. LED reflectors. These just were not that bright and I think that if brighter units were used, it would have been a tremendous improvement. There was also not a lost LED unit despite some good snowfalls.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 30, 2017, 01:20:15 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on January 30, 2017, 02:10:31 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Could have sworn they have been using them on I-91 far longer than just a few years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on January 30, 2017, 03:48:52 PM
Massachusetts switched to the recessed reflectors a few years ago. They seem to be holding up quite nicely, even in the Berkshires.
Could have sworn they have been using them on I-91 far longer than just a few years.

"Few years" is relative. They switched some time between the early 2000s and 2011.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: JREwing78 on January 30, 2017, 09:55:05 PM
It looks like there's a few of the LED reflectors in use on I-39/90 a few miles south of the Wisconsin line near Rockford, IL. It's kind of hard to tell for sure at highway speeds; they seemed to be tiny beams of light compared to normal reflectors.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 01, 2017, 04:44:08 PM
note: this quote is from another thread about stub ramps, though I'm responding to it here as it pertains to general Ohio discussion:
This is the northeast end of the Norwalk (OH) bypass. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norwalk,+OH/@41.2481038,-82.5741857,571m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x883a12e5240c76c9:0x6278f31e62fad3ac

This would have brought US-250 from just south of Norwalk to just south of Milan.  Had it ever come to fruition, the bypass (currently used as-is by US-20 and OH-18)  probably would have had OH-61 rerouted along the bypass as well, while OH-13 would have probably remained running thru town as-is, and would remain duplexed with US-250 on either side of the bypass.

It's a shame that it never got completed, at least extended to OH-61 on the east side, although you could still technically bypass downtown north-south by using the Bypass to US-20 East to OH-601 North in Milan to get back to US-250/OH-13.  The majority of the proposed route still looks like forest and farmland, so technically it is still possible to build it without knocking down too many houses.

Regarding the possibility of this originally envisioned bypass extension for 250 ever being completed, from what I've heard from a Huron County public official, this idea is completely dead. Supposedly the current plan is to wait until the existing bridge (that carries US 20 west over itself after the loop ramp) reaches the end of its useful life and then tear it down and make the entire intersection at-grade.

This would have been a great bypass for Cedar Point/Lake Erie traffic. Too bad they weren't able to complete this back when the existing bypass was built. Could have been done before the Milan Rd segment of 250 in Norwalk had built into a main commercial strip (where I would imagine a lot of the opposition to the bypass comes from, along with landowners in the potential path) and perhaps the Walmart, chains etc. would have been built at exits off the bypass instead.
 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 20, 2017, 08:43:19 PM
From District 3's latest weekly construction update:
Quote
Interstate 90 ***NEW***
I-90, at its bridges over West River Road and over SR 57, will have nightly lane closures as crews begin work for the bridge replacements. The project is expected to be complete in May 2019.

The new bridges will almost certainly be built wide enough to accommodate 3 lanes, as was the case with several other new bridges recently built on the same section of I-90 (over the Black River, Ford Rd, Lake Ave and a north/south rail line.) Once the OH 57 and West River Rd bridges are done, there will only be one pair of bridges left that aren't wide enough for 3 lanes (which are over a rail line just west of OH 611)

No idea when ODOT plans to 6 lane I-90 from OH 611 to the OH 2 split, but they are clearly making sure the bridges will be ready for it when the time comes. 



Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on March 20, 2017, 10:21:32 PM
I remember 15-20 years ago when they were quickly widening I-90 from SR-252/Columbia Road down to SR-611/Colorado Avenue and thought they'd have it done to the Turnpike in no time.  Then things came to a grinding halt. Then all the attention turned to widening/rebuilding I-90 east of Cleveland.

At least in the time since the last widening project on the west side, they have slowly rebuilt many mainline bridges (mentioned above) and the SR-57 interchange in advance of the impending widening & rebuild.

Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on March 21, 2017, 10:07:11 AM
Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.

They did just replace the first two bridges on OH 2 west of the I-90 split, so knowing whether or not those new bridges were built wide enough for 3 lanes would go a long way to answering that. I was actually just through there last week, but unfortunately wasn't paying attention to this detail. Anyone know if they were built wide enough for 3 lanes? 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 28, 2017, 08:37:54 PM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mvak36 on March 29, 2017, 12:11:07 AM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)


I just scanned the map quickly but one of the things that caught my eye was seeing that a few more segments of the Columbus project will be under construction (Phases 2E,3B,4R) or in ROW acquisition (Phases 3,4B,5,6). It's good to see that starting up again.

Also, the 70, 71, and 270 widenings will be good once they're done.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: dvferyance on March 30, 2017, 12:37:19 PM
I remember 15-20 years ago when they were quickly widening I-90 from SR-252/Columbia Road down to SR-611/Colorado Avenue and thought they'd have it done to the Turnpike in no time.  Then things came to a grinding halt. Then all the attention turned to widening/rebuilding I-90 east of Cleveland.

At least in the time since the last widening project on the west side, they have slowly rebuilt many mainline bridges (mentioned above) and the SR-57 interchange in advance of the impending widening & rebuild.

Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.
They did a nice job cleaning up OH-57 around the Midway Mall area. The way it used to be was just insane.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on April 01, 2017, 03:54:50 AM
MORPC Open house in Columbus next week...
Federal, state and local agencies have committed to invest $2 billion in highway, public transit and bikeway/pedestrian projects in our local communities over the next four years.
Join us at our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Open House from 3:30-6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4th at our offices (111 Liberty St., Suite 100, Columbus). A presentation will take place at 5:30 p.m.
You can also view and comment on the projects through the link below. More info at morpc.org/tip (http://morpc.org/tip)


Sweet, I think I can make that open house
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 16, 2017, 11:22:40 PM
http://www.columbusunderground.com/bridge-work-to-shut-down-stretch-of-indianola-avenue-for-six-months-bw1
For the two or three of you traveling around Columbus, bypassing High St in Clintonville will be a little harder to do this summer.

Bridge in question, from 14 years ago.
http://www.roadfan.com/clinton3.html#echo (http://www.roadfan.com/clinton3.html#echo)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 20, 2017, 09:50:19 PM
ODOT having more discussions concerning the "new" I-71/US 36-Oh 37 interchange (for the outlet mall)
http://www.thisweeknews.com/news/20170413/berkshire-township-more-interchange-meetings-planned (http://www.thisweeknews.com/news/20170413/berkshire-township-more-interchange-meetings-planned)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on April 20, 2017, 11:47:33 PM
I don't think I've seen this posted before.

Stumbled across this Youngstown Vindicator story from August 2016 about the 40 year anniversary of the completion of I-680.

Interesting story on the history of the road and a pdf that includes original blueprints of the road.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/ (http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/)

I remember to opening of the full highway, made my commute to YSU for four years starting Fall 1977 a lot easier. 

I also remember the explosion during the construction.  I've tried to find more information about it, but haven't had much luck.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 07, 2017, 09:36:47 PM
One of the biggest things that bugs me about living around Youngstown today is that I-680 does not connect with OH 11 southwest of town. The only easy way is to head north on I-680 to the I-80/OH-11 interchange. You can take US224 if you feel like taking forever through Boardman, or you can run through US62 if you feel like driving city streets for a while. Or, you can take OH 165 from the Western Reserve Rd exit through North Lima, and then cut at an angle to OH11, which conveniently does not interchange with the most likely road to complete such an angle. Instead, you have to then cut up on OH14 to OH11.

Continuing I-680 south/southwest around North Lima and ending at OH11 near Columbiana would have been a perfect route for traffic between Youngstown and points south. And with the addition of OH-711, the shorter 'through route' while the current OH-11 west of town acting as an easy bypass for points north or traffic to/from I-80.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: alecscradle on May 08, 2017, 08:09:47 AM
Is there a lot of need to get on OH 11 S from the Boardman area?  I've only been on 11 in that area only a couple of times and it's seemed very sparse on traffic each time.  If there were any improvements that needed to be made, I could see them adding an interchange to OH 11 and Western Reserve Rd.  But that would probably only happen if there were significant growth in the Boardman/Canfield area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 08, 2017, 02:41:53 PM
One of the biggest things that bugs me about living around Youngstown today is that I-680 does not connect with OH 11 southwest of town. The only easy way is to head north on I-680 to the I-80/OH-11 interchange. You can take US224 if you feel like taking forever through Boardman, or you can run through US62 if you feel like driving city streets for a while. Or, you can take OH 165 from the Western Reserve Rd exit through North Lima, and then cut at an angle to OH11, which conveniently does not interchange with the most likely road to complete such an angle. Instead, you have to then cut up on OH14 to OH11.

Continuing I-680 south/southwest around North Lima and ending at OH111 near Columbiana would have been a perfect route for traffic between Youngstown and points south. And with the addition of OH-711, the shorter 'through route' while the current OH-11 west of town acting as an easy bypass for points north or traffic to/from I-80.

It's possible that the lack of a southwesterly extension of I-680 past the Ohio Turnpike to intersect with OH-11 was a result of long-ago "future plans" (described below) which never came to fruition.

Specifically, I'm referring to the freeway/expressway portion of Route 62, coming from Canton, which goes north of Alliance and ends abruptly at OH-225.  That 4-lane divided section was intended to continue eastward towards Salem.  There is a portion of that 4-lane freeway that was built north of Salem, between OH-14 and the 2-lane US-62--Youngstown-Salem Road (which is basically running north and south at that point).

That 4-lane expressway section was also intended to continue further eastward, with plans to intersect with OH-11 with an apparent full-cloverleaf interchange.  Go to Google Maps (or Earth) and you will see the clear outlines of that proposed cloverleaf, due west of OH-46 and south of W. Garfield Rd., just a bit northwest of Columbiana.  Link:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9116346,-80.7182689,979m/data=!3m1!1e3

I recall seeing some maps in the late 60's or early 70's that showed that "proposed" east-west expressway section continuing east past the "proposed" interchange at OH-11, and now carrying OH-14, north of the current 2-lane OH-14 alignment, and perhaps continuing all the way to the Pennsylvania line, connecting up with the 4-lane PA-51.

That final eastward stretch would have accepted a southward extension of OH-680, likely east of Pine Lake, which would have allowed OH-680 South traffic to move to OH-14 West and then to OH-11 South.

It would appear that those plans, long dormant as they've been, are unlikely to ever become reality.  But that's very possibly why an OH-680 to OH-11 South connection was never made.

EDIT:  Also see this thread:

http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5212.msg2071152#msg2071152

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 08, 2017, 10:11:56 PM
I don't think I've seen this posted before.

Stumbled across this Youngstown Vindicator story from August 2016 about the 40 year anniversary of the completion of I-680.

Interesting story on the history of the road and a pdf that includes original blueprints of the road.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/ (http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/aug/21/i-680-1643-mile-interstate-took-16-years-complete/)

I remember to opening of the full highway, made my commute to YSU for four years starting Fall 1977 a lot easier. 

I also remember the explosion during the construction.  I've tried to find more information about it, but haven't had much luck.

Here's a detailed report from the Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission regarding the accident/explosion you are referring to.

http://www.oshrc.gov/decisions/html_1974/2684_2716.html
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on May 10, 2017, 11:03:14 PM
I recall seeing the same Mahoning County map that showed an extension of 680 south to that relocated 62 expressway.  I know that I have an old Columbiana County map that showed 62 going all the way to the Pennsylania line, presumably going to connect with what is now I-376 near Chippewa. 

I believe I made a post a few years back about the Columbiana County map and described the route.  Now that I have a scanner, I will try to dig that map out and see if I can scan the appropriate sections - although its going to be awhile until I can. 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on May 11, 2017, 09:47:45 AM
Are there still any plans to complete that US 62 expressway? It seems like that would be ideal to have cross SR 11, curve around the south and east of North Lima, and connect to 680.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 11, 2017, 10:32:17 AM
No. It's not in any long range plans that I have come across from ODOT. The traffic just isn't there.

There was a proposal at one time to four-lane US 62 between Alliance and Salem, with ODOT acquiring ROW east of Alliance towards Damascus. The widening never occurred.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 11, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on May 11, 2017, 02:47:27 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 11, 2017, 03:03:25 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike

Yes, the long-planned "Hubbard Expressway", intended to carry either and/or both OH-7 and US-62, from the stub freeway end at Albert Street, continuing northeast through the east side of Youngstown, then connecting with I-80 in Hubbard Township.

This project has been dormant for some time; certain officials have attempted to "revive" it a few times over the past 30 years, but as I recall, at some point about 10 years ago, ODOT officially withdrew their support....meaning it will likely never get built.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on May 11, 2017, 06:44:36 PM
There also are/were plans to extend a freeway off of that ghost end in the eastern part of the downtown freeway loop in Youngstown.  According to those city/metro maps (they were printed on regular office copy paper) that I got from a Turnpike service plaza in the late 1990s, it was to continue eastward and then northward to connect with I-80 near Hubbard.

Mike

Yes, the long-planned "Hubbard Expressway", intended to carry either and/or both OH-7 and US-62, from the stub freeway end at Albert Street, continuing northeast through the east side of Youngstown, then connecting with I-80 in Hubbard Township.

This project has been dormant for some time; certain officials have attempted to "revive" it a few times over the past 30 years, but as I recall, at some point about 10 years ago, ODOT officially withdrew their support....meaning it will likely never get built.

Somewhere just a year or two ago about reviving it. Mostly for the argument that gets used a lot: industrial development. Build a freeway there, and you can bring business there. With 711 built, it's not as necessary. But with the new Chill-Can area being built at the end of the US422 freeway and the Himrod interchange from US622, there may be some truth to that. Those two freeways easily accessing that property made it quite attractive to the develpers (it was their family's original location for Star Bottling, so it had some sentimental value, but easy access to the east side of Youngstown made it stick).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on May 12, 2017, 10:11:18 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf

Huh, I wonder what PennDOT had planned to connect to it. It couldn't have been more US 62 since by the state line, current US 62 is already way up in the Sharon-Hermitage area.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: coldshoulder on May 12, 2017, 11:10:17 AM
Here is a Mahoning County Highway Map from 1970 showing the proposed US-62 running across the southern portion of Mahoning County, north of Sebring, Salem, and Washingtonville; and showing the cloverleaf interchange with OH-11, before proceeding eastward into Columbiana County and then onto Pennsylvania.  However, there is no indication of a proposed southerly extension of OH-680 to that freeway...although I recall seeing that in another map of some sort.

http://gisapp.mahoningcountyoh.gov/Public_FTP_Folder/Historical_Maps/H1970/HIGHWAY_1970A.pdf

Huh, I wonder what PennDOT had planned to connect to it. It couldn't have been more US 62 since by the state line, current US 62 is already way up in the Sharon-Hermitage area.

Had that proposed east-west freeway/expressway been built, it's likely that US-62 would have proceeded in a northerly direction via the cloverleaf at OH-11, multiplexing with OH-11 to US-224 in Canfield, then up South Raccoon Road to the Shields Rd./Canfield Rd. intersection, where US-62 currently continues northeasterly along Canfield Road.

OH-14 would have multiplexed on this proposed east-west freeway, beginning northwest of Salem (in fact, that short 4-lane portion north of Salem that was built was, or has been signed as "14T"), with OH-14 continuing on this route eastward past OH-11 towards Pennsylvania, to connect with PA-51, northeast of East Palestine, where the current two-lane OH-14 meets PA-51 at the Ohio-Pennsylvania border.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 17, 2017, 10:14:06 PM
Anybody know if they are even considering adding lanes on SR-2 from the I-90 split to SR-58 in the near future?  That's about the only other widening I can consider being warranted out there in the next 20-30 years.

They did just replace the first two bridges on OH 2 west of the I-90 split, so knowing whether or not those new bridges were built wide enough for 3 lanes would go a long way to answering that. I was actually just through there last week, but unfortunately wasn't paying attention to this detail. Anyone know if they were built wide enough for 3 lanes?

I was through there yesterday and the OH 2 bridges west of the I-90 split were NOT built wide enough for 3 lanes.

Also, work has started in the medians on either side of the I-90/OH2 bridges that are about to be replaced at the OH 57 interchange, and that construction zone has the first variable speed limit signs I've seen in Ohio. When I went through eastbound around 2pm the speed limit was 60, and when I came back westbound around 11pm it was 50. (the regular speed limit there is 65)

And in other news on this corridor, there hasn't been any progress on adding exit numbers to OH 2 in over a year. The exit numbering, (which also includes median mile markers every 0.2 miles) still stops at OH 61, with only the westbound set of BGS for that exit having exit number tabs. The rest of the exits in Erie County around Huron and Sandusky remain unnumbered, however, once you cross into Ottawa County (which is also crossing into a different ODOT district) there are exit numbers in place for remainder of the freeway, although without median mile markers.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 03, 2017, 10:25:23 PM
More roadwork coming to Columbus
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/pinball-ramp-to-be-removed-from-route-315-to-north-broadway (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/pinball-ramp-to-be-removed-from-route-315-to-north-broadway)

And some wishful thinking
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/widening-route-161-west-of-worthington-on-table-again (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170603/widening-route-161-west-of-worthington-on-table-again)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on June 13, 2017, 12:31:30 AM
Sure, blame a long straight ramp for drivers' bad behavior. How is this different from any straight rural highway entering a small town? Park a police car at the east end of the bridge over the Olentangy, issue hundreds of speeding tickets, problem solved.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 05, 2017, 09:44:14 AM
Seeing more of these "toll" banners added to Ohio Turnpike signage in district 2. This set of signs is at the OH 53 north exit off the US 20/US 6 bypass in Fremont

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170705/ebb55ac6dffcc9cfdee210da363688c5.jpg)

VS986

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on July 05, 2017, 11:13:12 PM
^ This is actually a good thing.  I see nothing wrong with it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on July 06, 2017, 08:08:56 AM
illinois does it
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 06, 2017, 08:34:40 AM
Doesn't the MUTCD require this anyways? The signage for the Ohio Turnpike varied greatly and it wasn't always obvious that the highway you were turning onto was a toll road.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on July 10, 2017, 09:04:03 AM
I see nothing wrong with adding these "TOLL" signs. However, I thought it was pretty self-explanatory that if you were getting onto the "Turnpike" you knew you were going to pay a toll. :D
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on July 10, 2017, 04:19:14 PM
I see nothing wrong with adding these "TOLL" signs. However, I thought it was pretty self-explanatory that if you were getting onto the "Turnpike" you knew you were going to pay a toll. :D

Not necessarily. Parts of the Pennsylvania Turnpike are free, for example.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 05:07:54 PM
And there are a lot of roads with the name "Turnpike" in them that are not toll. Folks from other countries (or even different regions of the states) may not know what Turnpike even is.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sandwalk on July 10, 2017, 09:25:19 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: mgk920 on July 10, 2017, 09:44:25 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

Why 'turnpike'?  In the early years, the toll taker would go out and manually 'turn the pike' to let the traveler pass once his or her toll was paid.

Mike
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Roadsguy on July 10, 2017, 09:53:16 PM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

But the Connecticut Turnpike and most of the Delaware Turnpike don't have tolls. Yes a turnpike "should" be tolled, but clearly not all are, so a road having "Turnpike" in the name isn't enough of an indication to drivers that a road is tolled. Not to mention the numerous toll roads not named "XYZ Turnpike" that need some standardized toll indicator.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on July 10, 2017, 10:46:20 PM
And in other countries (notably Mexico and Canada), Turnpike is not used in any sense of a toll road. With the examples above, there are many local roads that have "Turnpike" in the name but have not collected tolls in over one-hundred years.

There is a legal and logical rationale to providing TOLL banners when a road is tolled. It's clear, concise and to the point, unlike tiny logos for roads that do not imply if it's tolled or not. Can you tell, at 65 MPH, if the New York Thruway logo is a toll road or not (where Thruway is not a clear indicator of a tolled facility)? The New Jersey Turnpike logo (where Turnpike is in very tiny lettering)? Pennsylvania Turnpike? Chicago Skyway?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GeekJedi on July 11, 2017, 07:46:47 AM
Tolls are literally in the definition of "turnpike." Also, the Ohio Turnpike has been collecting tolls since it opened in 1955.

Taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
Definition of turnpike
a (1) :  a road (such as an expressway) for the use of which tolls are collected (2) :  a road formerly maintained as a turnpike

However, someone who (for example) lives in Wisconsin and has never heard of a turnpike would likely not know of the type of road, nor the definition of "turnpike", regardless of the literal definition. It's one of those words that would literally never come up in everyday conversation. However, "toll" is a pretty universal word used in many different contexts, but always means a fee.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on July 11, 2017, 06:56:24 PM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2017, 08:24:34 AM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.
...or even "shunpikes."
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on July 13, 2017, 07:52:58 AM
As there were "turnpikes" there were also "free pikes" - with High Free Pike in Madison County OH remaining as the only existing example I'm aware of that still retains that designation.

Cool, I never knew the etymology of that road. However, it seems that in the early 20th century every road in Madison County was of the form "___ Pike"; roughly half of them have now taken the suffix Road instead.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: plain on July 13, 2017, 11:22:05 AM
There are several "turnpikes" I can think of, especially in Connecticut and Virginia, that are not only toll-free but aren't even freeway.

I definitely like the idea of the MUTCD guidelines requiring the yellow TOLL banners. Pennsylvania is doing it now too and Virginia has them at at least two slip ramp entrances to VA 195. But judging by what I've seen on Street View, the state of Oklahoma needs to get with the program like right nooooowwww
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Rothman on July 13, 2017, 01:10:38 PM
A lot of old turnpikes that are now free once had tolls a very long time ago.

It was also not unheard of for a resident along a road to set up their own makeshift toll booths in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on July 14, 2017, 06:04:07 PM
There was also 'free' Pikes. Notable around Pittsburgh, as the Steubenville Pike (US22) and Washington Pike (US19) were still well known as the actual name of stretches of the road. The Freeway US22 bypassed the old two-lane Steubenville Pike (now called Old Steubenville Pike), and the current freeway is quite regularly referred to as the Steubenville Pike though it's actual name I'm not certain.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on July 28, 2017, 11:13:47 PM
On the topic of these toll banners, so far I've only seen 2 locations that have them, both along US 20 in district 2. So far none have turned up at the turnpike signs I see frequently in district 3, also on US 20. Anyone noticing them popping up anywhere else?

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 7/8 on July 28, 2017, 11:23:24 PM
On the topic of these toll banners, so far I've only seen 2 locations that have them, both along US 20 in district 2. So far none have turned up at the turnpike signs I see frequently in district 3, also on US 20. Anyone noticing them popping up anywhere else?

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

Here's a few photos I took in the Toledo area on July 2nd. I'm not sure how long these have been around.

On I-475 NB
(http://i.imgur.com/bz8VHUI.jpg)

On I-75 NB near the southern end of I-475
(http://i.imgur.com/wQDfBwO.jpg)

Also, this was taken on I-75 in Findlay
(http://i.imgur.com/2C5FxJW.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: route17fan on July 29, 2017, 06:01:46 AM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on July 29, 2017, 11:51:22 AM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 02, 2017, 10:06:11 PM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.

Add I-270 SB between US 62/I-670 and 317 and I-71 NB between OH 303 and I-80
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 02, 2017, 11:40:48 PM
That mileage sign above--did it replace the one that displayed the following...

     I-475      4
     Toledo   14         

Judging by the mileages, that seems to be around the 188 milemarker, just north of Exit 187 Luckey interchange.

Checking googlemaps, I see there was extensive roadwork done on that section of I-75 (Nov 2016) and Ohio DOT probably changed the sign with different points on it.  It does seem a bit strange that US 20 and Detroit was displayed instead of I-475 and Toledo unless a nearby VMS sign displays the distance and time to I-475 and Toledo on it.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: GCrites80s on August 04, 2017, 09:59:53 PM

Also, in a prior post I noted my first time seeing a variable speed limit in an Ohio construction zone (OH 2 bridges over OH 57 in Elyria). Today I saw another one on US 23 in Chillicothe, which  varried between 50 and 60 mph. Not sure how long Ohio has been doing variable speed limits, but I like it.

VS988

There is a construction zone on I-77 south from OH 82 past the Ohio Turnpike with a variable speed limit - and I am told the I-271 express lane extension construction from I-480 south to OH 8 has a variable speed limit as well. :)

It indeed does, and they have also used the variable signs on US 30 out near Van Wert.  They are all over the state now.

Add I-270 SB between US 62/I-670 and 317 and I-71 NB between OH 303 and I-80



Also a project on I-675 at I-70
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 23, 2017, 11:02:47 AM
Widening Oh 161 (Dublin-Granville Rd) through Linworth (NW Columbus) has been talked about for decades, but the locals living along the road had resisted. Now there are more commercial interests than homeowners along this stretch of road, so the sentiments towards widening have changed. Maybe this will get done in time for the crush of humanity that will be Solar Eclipse 2024.
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170823/adding-center-turn-lane-on-route-161-on-northwest-side-has-support?rssfeed=true (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170823/adding-center-turn-lane-on-route-161-on-northwest-side-has-support?rssfeed=true)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on August 25, 2017, 01:36:16 AM
Just a center turn lane? That barely counts as a widening!
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 07, 2017, 11:58:26 AM
ODOT/City of Columbus appear to be going through another round of sign replacements. Exit tabs have been added to Oh 104, between US 33 & I-71 (and a button copy sign at High St appears to be on the chopping block).
315 is getting new overhead signs, with exit tabs, to replace older signs. That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 19, 2017, 12:22:49 AM
That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).

Considering Town/Rich is exit 1A, I think the ramps at the southern terminus are going to remain unnumbered. I do think it's strange that the ramps to 33 and 670 are in the 1* range instead of the 2* range. But I still can't figure out how they get all the way up to 1F without skipping some letters, unless the four ramps to 670 get four distinct designations, which is a dumb idea.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 19, 2017, 01:09:16 AM
That said, 315 between the I-70/71 west split and I-670 is going to be an alphabet soup for exit 1 (Town/Rich St, Spring St, 670, Broad St, and the split).

Considering Town/Rich is exit 1A, I think the ramps at the southern terminus are going to remain unnumbered. I do think it's strange that the ramps to 33 and 670 are in the 1* range instead of the 2* range. But I still can't figure out how they get all the way up to 1F without skipping some letters, unless the four ramps to 670 get four distinct designations, which is a dumb idea.

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 19, 2017, 06:49:58 PM

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)

South end of Ohio 8 got an exit 0?!? That would be a first for Ohio. Even the I-71/75/US 50 alphabet soup in Cincy is an exit 1.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2017, 08:06:01 PM

The analog of this interchange up north, where a state route freeway's southern end is at the same interchange where an Interstate duplex breaks up/forms, namely Route 8 in Akron, got Exit 0A-B numbering for the exits at the central interchange a couple years ago long after the other exits on Route 8 got exit numbers.  It seems to be the only Exit 0 in Ohio, with other end-of-route interchanges (e.g., I-271) already being Exit 1.  Why not do the same for 315 as was done with 8 and use Exit 0 for some of the ramps at the 70/71 interchange? 

(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.  Not what I would have done, but there is still 0A and 0B at least.)

South end of Ohio 8 got an exit 0?!? That would be a first for Ohio. Even the I-71/75/US 50 alphabet soup in Cincy is an exit 1.

I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 19, 2017, 10:54:13 PM
I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.


I guess the unwritten rule of thumb is that if a routed freeway ("A") ends at another routed freeway ("B"), and you wind up on route "B" no matter which exit you take, there is no need to number those exits/ramps.  This means that I-271 especially should have no exit number at I-71 as there is only one option / ramp and that is to I-71 South.

However, if highway "A" ends at an interchange where you can wind up on highway "B" or highway "C", "D", etc... then there should be an exit number associated with the possible ramps/exits at the intersection (as in the case of SR-8 in Akron @ the Central Interchange / I-76 & I-77).

Now the remaining question is:  Should this terminus for highway "A" be labeled Exit 0 (A/B,...) or Exit 1 (A/B,...)? 

In the case of the Central Interchange in Akron?  Yes, Exit 0x is suitable as Route 8 ends there.  In the case of the interchange at the north end of the Brent Spence in Cincinnati?  No, Exit 1x is more suitable as all 3 highways continue there AND the exit numbers are simply resetting at the state line. As a bonus:  I-270 is right to have an Exit 1 vs an Exit 0 at I-71 as the route continues and starts counting down the miles again for another lap around Columbus.

The only other example of numbered highways in Ohio that could fit the "should it be Exit 0 or Exit 1" scenario that I know of is Southbound I-280 at the Ohio Turnpike in Toledo.  I would rename that as an Exit 0 for the Turnpike I-80/90 and the continuing of the expressway onto OH-420 would not be numbered.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 19, 2017, 11:33:39 PM
I was going to say, definitely a first. And a few of the 71/75/50 exits are on top of the border, with A/B being roughly 500 feet north of it. I don't even understand why I-71 gets a number from I-271.


I guess the unwritten rule of thumb is that if a routed freeway ("A") ends at another routed freeway ("B"), and you wind up on route "B" no matter which exit you take, there is no need to number those exits/ramps.  This means that I-271 especially should have no exit number at I-71 as there is only one option / ramp and that is to I-71 South.

However, if highway "A" ends at an interchange where you can wind up on highway "B" or highway "C", "D", etc... then there should be an exit number associated with the possible ramps/exits at the intersection (as in the case of SR-8 in Akron @ the Central Interchange / I-76 & I-77).

Now the remaining question is:  Should this terminus for highway "A" be labeled Exit 0 (A/B,...) or Exit 1 (A/B,...)? 

In the case of the Central Interchange in Akron?  Yes, Exit 0x is suitable as Route 8 ends there.  In the case of the interchange at the north end of the Brent Spence in Cincinnati?  No, Exit 1x is more suitable as all 3 highways continue there AND the exit numbers are simply resetting at the state line. As a bonus:  I-270 is right to have an Exit 1 vs an Exit 0 at I-71 as the route continues and starts counting down the miles again for another lap around Columbus.

The only other example of numbered highways in Ohio that could fit the "should it be Exit 0 or Exit 1" scenario that I know of is Southbound I-280 at the Ohio Turnpike in Toledo.  I would rename that as an Exit 0 for the Turnpike I-80/90 and the continuing of the expressway onto OH-420 would not be numbered.


The Exit 1 for 71 from 271 has been there for so long that they probably wouldn't change it if they ever did decide on a mass implementation of Exit 0; even the old button copy signs with lighting had Exit 1 tabs.  There is never a gore sign saying Exit 1, though.

I-490 should use Exit 0 at 90/71/176.  It uses Exit 1 with letters. At the other end, it lacks numbers for 77, which it should have.

I-280 should indeed also use Exit 0 for current Exit 1A for its parent I-80; that would allow current Exit 1B about a mile away to just be Exit 1.

I think the end of I-675 should have numbers, preferably Exit 0A-B as well since there is a choice, not just defaulting onto 75 SB.  If there were ramps for NB and SB elsewhere, they would get A-B suffixes, so why not here too.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2017, 11:48:36 PM
How could  there be a gore sign for I-271 Exit 1? The first Exit 1 advance is well after the last gore point on the road. First time through there as an 8 year old, I thought the road continued with that sign. Nope. That thing shouldn't have any number, period.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: PurdueBill on September 20, 2017, 01:04:02 AM
How could  there be a gore sign for I-271 Exit 1? The first Exit 1 advance is well after the last gore point on the road. First time through there as an 8 year old, I thought the road continued with that sign. Nope. That thing shouldn't have any number, period.

Exactly.  Although there is a gore sign at the end of the US 3 expressway in Mass, albeit at what would have been an actual gore point if the road had continued.  It isn't unprecedented to have a gore-like sign for a default movement like 271 to 71.  Indeed it shouldn't have an exit number, but if it has to, I wish it were Exit 0.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on September 20, 2017, 07:00:25 AM
(If done analogous to Route 8, the movement from 315 south to 71 south would get no exit number, just as 8 to 77 south gets no exit number.

Technically, 315 northbound begins from I-70 eastbound and descends the loop ramp. Southbound 315 is not technically defined, but to me the logical inference from what northbound 315 does is that southbound 315 takes the ramp to 70 westbound and terminates where it meets the latter. So the connection to 71 southbound and the ramp to 70/71 eastbound would be left exits, while the ramp to 70 westbound is not an exit at all. Not that I'm advocating it should be signed that way.

If it were up to me:
1A: [SB only 70/71 E]
1B: [SB only 71 S]
1C: [SB only 70 W]
1D: 62 / 3 / Rich / Town / [SB only Sullivant (future)]
1E: [SB only Broad]
2A: 670 W / [NB only 33 / Dublin / Long]
2B: 670 E
2C: Goodale

But ODOT didn't ask me. And even if they did, they probably would have modified my plan so the northbound exit to Rich / Town is simply exit 1, rather than exit 1D.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: thenetwork on September 20, 2017, 09:40:50 AM
The Exit 1 for 71 from 271 has been there for so long that they probably wouldn't change it if they ever did decide on a mass implementation of Exit 0; even the old button copy signs with lighting had Exit 1 tabs.  There is never a gore sign saying Exit 1, though.

The reason why they probably numbered I-271 / I-71 Exit 1 was there were 2 ideas being kicked around over the decades that never came to fruition:

1) Creating a Western Cleveland beltway that would have linked I-90 to I-71, and I-271 would have been extended from it's current terminus.  I think it was mentioned only once or twice in the area papers.

2) This was the more realistic possibility:  Creating a northern bypass of Medina, where SR-18 would have gone up one exit on I-71 then head west on a freeway/express bypass at I-271 rejoining the current alignment of SR-18 somewhere near Mallet Creek / SR-252.  The bypass would have roughly followed the high-tension power lines between said two points.  This proposal was shot down by the NIMBY's (as was a second proposal to build a southern bypass near/along SR-162). 

Had either of these ideas came to fruition, the I-271/I-71 exit would have been completely revamped and an Exit 1 (or Exit 0), or a new renumbering (if I-271 was extended) would have made sense.


I forgot about I-490 -- that western end should have been numbered Exit 0 A/B as well.  With the new Opportunity Parkway / SR-10 extension in the works, the eastern terminus may still get assigned an exit number yet when it is opened and new signs are needed.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: doglover44 on December 11, 2017, 12:27:15 AM
Anything on I 75
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 02:53:34 PM
ODOT plans to add a "smart lane" to Eastbound I-670 from Fourth Street to I-270. This will be a left side shoulder that opens up as an extra lane to traffic during peak times.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/SmartLane/Pages/default.aspx
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on December 12, 2017, 03:31:20 PM
The OH 2 west to OH 269 north ramp has been closed since the end of November because of this:

(https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/fancy_images/OHDOT/2017/12/1679624/1645064/11292017-slide-repair-sr-2-to-sr-269_crop.jpg)

ODOT estimates it will be closed until August of 2018, and OH 2 westbound though the area will be reduced to one lane. Luckily the OH 53 exit comes very soon after that spot and provides an alternative to access the Marblehead Peninsula that only adds a few miles to the trip.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D02/newsreleases/Pages/Update-WB-SR-2-to-NB-SR-269-.aspx
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 23, 2018, 12:00:47 AM
Forgot that this project was a thing.
https://www.10tv.com/article/concerns-over-i-270i-70-interchange-southeast-franklin-county (https://www.10tv.com/article/concerns-over-i-270i-70-interchange-southeast-franklin-county)
P.S. Here's what ODOT is proposing to do to I-270/I-70/Brice Rd (no mention of I-70-Hamilton Rd interchange).
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: triplemultiplex on January 23, 2018, 10:33:27 AM
P.S. Here's what ODOT is proposing to do to I-270/I-70/Brice Rd (no mention of I-70-Hamilton Rd interchange).
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D06/projects/FarEastFreewayStudy/Documents/20170411_FRA70_VE_Phase%20Exhibit%20Full.pdf)

Looking good!  The WB -> SB ramp in particular strikes me as something that should've been there originally given the southern part of 270's utility as a bypass for thru traffic.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on January 23, 2018, 12:09:30 PM
The 270 SB to 70 EB ramp is listed under Tier 2 without funding on the current TRAC 2018-2021 project draft list.

Though on the topic of TRAC, they are scheduled to vote on the final list tomorrow.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 25, 2018, 10:32:04 PM
ODOT's allotment of money for road construction over the next 4 years...
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2018.01.24_FINAL_MN_CONSTRUCTION_PROGRAM.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2018.01.24_FINAL_MN_CONSTRUCTION_PROGRAM.pdf)

And their corresponding press release
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/news/Pages/TRACapproves2018List.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/news/Pages/TRACapproves2018List.aspx)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on January 26, 2018, 07:14:56 AM
Looks like SR 32, at some point, will receive interchanges at Glen Este-Withamsville Road and Bach Buxton Road, with an overpass at Old SR 74 to the east of that. Clepper Lane east of Glen Estate-Withamsville Road will be extended east to Bach Buxton Road, and SR 32 will be widened to six lanes throughout - to I guess at Olive Branch-Stonelick Road.

Unspecified improvements will happen at SR/32Mt. Carmel-Tobasco Road/Bell Lane and the continuation of work at the SR 32/I-275, and work from US 50 (I guess in Newtown?) towards Eastgate.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 26, 2018, 09:41:43 PM
Looks like SR 32, at some point, will receive interchanges at Glen Este-Withamsville Road and Bach Buxton Road, with an overpass at Old SR 74 to the east of that. Clepper Lane east of Glen Estate-Withamsville Road will be extended east to Bach Buxton Road, and SR 32 will be widened to six lanes throughout - to I guess at Olive Branch-Stonelick Road.

Unspecified improvements will happen at SR/32Mt. Carmel-Tobasco Road/Bell Lane and the continuation of work at the SR 32/I-275, and work from US 50 (I guess in Newtown?) towards Eastgate.

Yeah, see the Oh 32/I-74 thread over on the Ohio Valley board.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21895.0
Someone posted an article specifically concerning TRAC funding for this project there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on February 25, 2018, 11:38:20 PM
OH 113 has an interesting history. At its longest point it went from the Indiana border to Rocky River, but after part of it got rerouted onto the Fremont bypass it had a really long section of concurrencies from Fostoria to Bellevue, so in 1970 it was truncated at Bellevue and the part west of Fostoria came OH 613.

Now you would think it would make the most sense to have 113 end right at US 20/OH 18 on the east side of Bellevue... however, on paper the official designation of 113 continues for 0.9 miles along US 20/OH 18 to the Huron/Sandusky County Line right in the center of Bellevue. I can only assume it officially ends there  because that's the border between ODOT districts 3 and 2 (and also used to be the intersection with OH 269)

However, never in my life have I seen any mention of OH 113 over that 0.9 mile concurrency on any of the signage.....that is until now. Very recently an "End OH 113" sign has turned up at the county line in downtown Bellevue. However, that is the only new sign that has gone up, there is still no mention of 113 anywhere else in either direction between the county line and the 113/20 intersection (where the end sign should have been put in the first place.) So as it stands, 113 has the interesting distinction if having pointless concurrencies with US 20 at both ends.

Here are a couple pics of the new sign, with the purpose of the 2nd one being to include the county line sign.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180226/1442826cfea32e48e8aaf357bdbeca02.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180226/f1c8c349e9c48144f57f8ae4deaec48d.jpg)


Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 13, 2018, 09:02:34 PM
Be careful out there, people!  :pan:
https://www.10tv.com/article/about-70-vehicles-involved-crashes-i-71-closed-east-mount-gilead
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ftballfan on April 26, 2018, 12:11:31 PM
The last few weeks, I've been in Ohio three separate times, and here are some of my thoughts:
1. I-75 between Dayton and Cincinnati should be 70 mph. On a related note, that 55 stretch in Dayton is way too long (most of that could be 65 or even 70)
2. Many state highways (including US-250 between Ashland and Norwalk) have little to no shoulders. At least US-68 between Springfield and Findlay does have decent shoulders.
3. There are A LOT of concurrencies, especially in/near cities.
4. OH 15 between Findlay and Carey should be US-23.
5. Many county roads are barely wide enough for two cars to pass each other. I noticed that when I had to detour around a US-68 closure south of Bellefontaine.
6. Whether a non-Interstate has exit numbers depends on the area of the state.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: silverback1065 on April 28, 2018, 11:15:36 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus? 
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Sykotyk on April 29, 2018, 01:28:40 AM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus? 

You mean US33 or US23/OH15?

US 33 is probably a non-starter. The talk was always completing 23, but there's so many places to do major work it just won't happen.

It would be nice if US33 had at least a Super 2 connection to avoid some of the traffic right by I-75.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: LM117 on April 29, 2018, 02:01:44 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: sparker on April 29, 2018, 08:44:09 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.

Part of the problem with this routing was that in the late '90's planners originally wanted to plant a corridor up either the US 23 or OH 199 corridors and connect that route with I-280 (which would presumably be replaced).  Since it would have required the taking of valuable farmland, residents and interests in the Fostoria area let ODOT know in uncertain terms that such an Interstate-grade facility would face serious political opposition.  That, and a lack of consensus regarding plans to effect an interchange with I-71 north of Columbus, effectively doomed this corridor, despite much of the alignment already deployed as expressway.  ODOT lost interest in such a project back in the early 2000's and it's likely not to be revived -- even with a revised alignment along OH 15 and a multiplex with I-75 north of Findlay -- any time soon.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on April 29, 2018, 10:05:25 PM
is ohio interested in ever connecting 71 and 75 north of colombus?

I-73 was supposed to have done that by roughly following the US-23 corridor and linking with I-75 near Findlay, which would’ve given Columbus an interstate connection to Toledo and Detroit, but Ohio killed the idea years ago.

Part of the problem with this routing was that in the late '90's planners originally wanted to plant a corridor up either the US 23 or OH 199 corridors and connect that route with I-280 (which would presumably be replaced).  Since it would have required the taking of valuable farmland, residents and interests in the Fostoria area let ODOT know in uncertain terms that such an Interstate-grade facility would face serious political opposition.  That, and a lack of consensus regarding plans to effect an interchange with I-71 north of Columbus, effectively doomed this corridor, despite much of the alignment already deployed as expressway.  ODOT lost interest in such a project back in the early 2000's and it's likely not to be revived -- even with a revised alignment along OH 15 and a multiplex with I-75 north of Findlay -- any time soon.

ODOT, sitting funding issues, kicked I-73 to the Turnpike Commission in the early 90s. Otherwise, everyone thought it was great idea, long as someone other them, had to sacrifice for I-73
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on April 30, 2018, 08:58:47 AM
And the improvements of US 23 north of I-270 renders it effectively dead as an interstate connection until well further north towards Delaware.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: vtk on May 12, 2018, 12:36:46 AM
I've never understood the term "valuable farmland". There's millions of acres of it. We're using less of it than we were a century ago. And low-density developments cost far more farmland than new highways statewide.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on May 12, 2018, 01:02:09 AM
Not all farmland is the same. A lot of the farmland in Ohio is glaciated and ones that are have a high lime content are very valuable and irreplaceable. For that reason, many states and regions have farmland or land trusts so that it's protected from development (e.g. purchase of development right programs). And while highways don't consume that much land, they enable the type of developments that can consume farmland further away from the city.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Buck87 on May 16, 2018, 08:49:48 AM
Some welcome changes have been made to the speed limit on US 20 in a couple north central Ohio towns, and I've heard it was the state overriding what the municipalities had set.

In Clyde, US 20 used to have a ridiculous 35 mph zone in a grass median section on the east side of town from OH 101 out to CR 260. I always thought it should at least 45 through there, so I'm pretty pleased to see that it is now 50 mph. Also, the rest of the 35 mph zone through town, which I thought was perfectly acceptable, has been somewhat surprisingly bumped up to 40 mph. So now the speed limit sequence for through traffic going through Clyde is 60-50-40-50-60, which is pretty nice.

In Monroeville, which is known for being a speed trap, the sequence used to be 60-50-35-25-35-50-60. However, the former 50 mph zone west of OH 99 has been changed to 55, and the area between the Huron River and the east edge of town that used to have a short 35 mph zone followed by a short 50 mph has been combined to form one 45 mph zone, with eastbound traffic jumping up to 60 a few tenths of a mile sooner than before. So now W-E it's 60-55-35-25-45-60.

So far no changes have been made in Bellevue, though the Clyde and Monroeville changes happened months apart, so perhaps Bellevue could be next. The thing I expect to see changed is the 60 mph zone dropping directly to 35 on the east side of town, which occurs about halfway between OH 113 and Prairie Rd. I think there should be a 45 mph buffer zone in there.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on July 10, 2018, 11:34:41 AM
I-680 northbound through Youngstown closed for bridge rehabilitation.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2018/jul/09/no-major-problems-reported-first-part-i-680-projec/

This is the oldest section of 680 in Youngstown.  It is also the section that is the easiest to close due to the detour options available.  To me the detour is East River Crossing to Madison Avenue Expressway to West River Crossing.  :)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: 6a on August 06, 2018, 05:07:52 PM
The crew working on SR 309 in Marion made an interesting find:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180806/76f6f61377ab52bf3f50e79b90eba3d1.jpg)
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 11, 2018, 02:22:50 PM
Was it just buried in the dirt??
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 11, 2018, 09:52:07 PM
Was it just buried in the dirt??
From ODOT District's tweet (on the find)...
Quote
Marion Co: You never know what you will find. The contractor on the 309 project found this old sign buried under the road. We're guessing since Rt. 309 used to be Route 30 back in the day, that sign has been there for decades.
So your guess is good as mine.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: amroad17 on August 16, 2018, 09:39:01 PM
Yes, OH 309 was US 30S until November 1973.  I wonder if there are any more "lost" signs?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: seicer on August 29, 2018, 09:23:39 AM
Had to go to Cleveland over the weekend and was able to see significant progress with the express lanes being added along I-271 between Northfield and Bedford Heights. The new ramps at the south junction of I-271/480 seem to be well underway, and the new concrete express lanes are being poured. I-271 between the two legs of I-480 is being widened to six lanes.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 29, 2018, 09:07:12 PM
As one of the stops for NE Ohio Roadmeet (in 30 days!)
I get to attempt to have everyone imagine a new bridge over the Grand River for Vrooman Rd
http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20180828/vrooman-road-bridge-work-to-begin-in-september (http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20180828/vrooman-road-bridge-work-to-begin-in-september)
ODOT Page - http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Deputy%20Director/News/Pages/Construction-Begins-on-Vrooman-Road-Bridge.aspx

We will see the "shrunken" truss bridge, and hopefully enough foliage will be down to easily locate the retaining wall for (now "old") Vrooman Rd.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: ysuindy on September 05, 2018, 02:47:54 PM
ODOT has blocked crossover traffic on two Wyandot County roads across US 23/30 outside of Upper Sandusky.

The story indicates they are studying complete elimination of access for these roads.

As of now you can make right turns off of and on to 23/30.

I drove through this past weekend and right now there are orange barrels on the crossovers and in the left turn lanes leading to them.

There were the only two crossovers on the section of road where 23 and 30 run concurrently around Upper.

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Bitmapped on September 05, 2018, 09:44:53 PM
ODOT has blocked crossover traffic on two Wyandot County roads across US 23/30 outside of Upper Sandusky.

The story indicates they are studying complete elimination of access for these roads.

As of now you can make right turns off of and on to 23/30.

I drove through this past weekend and right now there are orange barrels on the crossovers and in the left turn lanes leading to them.

There were the only two crossovers on the section of road where 23 and 30 run concurrently around Upper.

ODOT has really been slow to control access around the Upper Sandusky bypass. It took them a long time to build a complete interchange at SR 53 and to close the adjacent old SR 67 intersection. The other intersections have decent access nearby interchange and should be RIRO if not outright eliminated.
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 25, 2018, 09:38:44 PM
Roads & Bridges (trade) magazine let ODOT describe their new variable speed limit system that will be in use on I-90 in Lake County.
https://www.roadsbridges.com/lake-effect

Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on September 25, 2018, 10:04:40 PM
Earlier in September, MORPC released their list of the top 100 "high crash" intersections from 2015-2017.
Top 10 for just Franklin Co - https://www.10tv.com/article/morpc-releases-top-100-high-crash-intersections-central-ohio
MORPC's map showing the locations of their top 100 - https://apps.morpc.org/safety/
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: westerninterloper on October 11, 2018, 02:44:11 PM
I live in Toledo, and it seems like this summer, a very significant number of state and US routes in the area were repaved. Someone mentioned that Toledo has seen more road construction in the last three years than in the past thirty. 

Nearly all of the downtown routes, part of the Anthony Wayne Trail (SR 25); Central Avenue (US 20/Ohio 120). Within the last year or so, work was also completed on parts of Detroit Avenue; I-75 and 475 on the northside; I75 between Perrysburg and to around Findlay.

Does anyone know if this paving wave is part of the Ohio Turnpike bond, and whether other areas along the turnpike are seeing this kind of investment?
Title: Re: Ohio
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 11, 2018, 04:48:15 PM
According to Spectrum Cable, ODOT has extended I-670 east to Mt. Vernon or Coshocton (or wherever it can meet US 36).
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1942/45200904932_8945b3879f.jpg)

Or maybe there is a I-670 in Denver I wasn't aware of.