Ohio Legislature Mandates Feasibility Study of Future I-73

[sprjus4]

Any north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.

There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.

[FutureInterstateCorridors]

Couldn't an Interstate 73 follow the US 23 corridor from Portsmouth to Interstate 270 south of Columbus, ride the 270 beltway either east or west of Columbus, and then continue northward on the US 23/OH 15/US 68 corridor to Interstate 75? If 73 is ever built in Ohio (which still seems remote to me), I think that would be the most logical routing for the Interstate.

It could, and would make more sense, except the feasibility study directed by the Ohio Legislature is to investigate a new terrain route parallel to U.S. 23.  ODOT already investigated upgrading U.S. 23 north of Columbus to an interstate-standard freeway in the "Route 23 Connect" study and concluded the upgrade was not feasible. The best answer is it depends on exactly what alternative routes ODOT includes in the feasibility study, which has not been established whatsoever, so speculation at this time is useless.  You will have time to add your ideas when the public comment meeting are convened, so watch for them on the ODOT website some time in the future.  We will know the  exactly what alternative routes will proceed to a draft environmental study in two years.

[FutureInterstateCorridors]

Any north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.

There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.

The Ohio Legislature is not interested in converting U.S. 35 to Future I-73 and is determined instead that Future I-73 follow U.S. 23 and U.S. 52 to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia.  You can submit your input at the public comment meeting that will be part of the feasibility study, so keep an eye on the ODOT website when the public comment meetings are convened, probably in 2026.

[Beltway]

What about the segment of US 23 in Virginia? That would be the main obstacle in extending Interstate 26 further north. Would it be difficult to upgrade that portion of US 23 to Interstate Standards? An eastern bypass of Weber City off the end of the existing US 23 alignment south of the Tennessee/Virginia border would have to be constructed. While there are some portions of 23 that are freeway, it looks like it would take a massive undertaking to make all of 23 in Virginia an extension of Interstate 26.

VA US-23 is 61.0 miles long, with 26.3 miles of new location bypasses

US-23 bypasses -- Gate City (8.9), Big Stone Gap-Appalachia (8.8), Norton-Esserville (3.0), Wise (2.9), Pound (2.7) [61.0 mi. total, 26.3 mi. byp. 33.1%]                                                       

Only in rare cases do I see the value of replacing or upgrading a high-speed rural four-lane highway with an Interstate highway.

This is not one of them.

[sprjus4]

Any north-south interstate should follow US-35 into West Virginia to I-64, OR US-33 to I-77.

There is no reason to continue south to Portsmouth. I-73 will never exist south of I-64 in West Virginia. Follow the route that is the closest to upgraded and easiest to build, and where the traffic is currently going.

The Ohio Legislature is not interested in converting U.S. 35 to Future I-73 and is determined instead that Future I-73 follow U.S. 23 and U.S. 52 to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia.

Why?

A routing to I-64 in Charleston, WV is around 25 miles longer following US-23 and US-52 and would require significantly more construction.

30 miles of US-23 south of Chillicothe would be need to be upgraded or relocated, much of that only 5 lanes, and at least two town bypasses around Waverly and Piketon.

The Portsmouth Bypass provides a limited access section but is substandard - although it's no different than the new I-49 in southern Missouri through the mountains with a narrow cross section so we'll assume it's up to interstate standards for the purposes of this.

South of there, US-52 is mostly limited access with long freeway portions. Some overpasses and an interchange or two may need to be built.

Then there's the challenge of crossing the Ohio River and connecting with I-64. The existing route is limited access and 4 lanes through Huntington, but you would need a second parallel Ohio River bridge or an outright 4 lane replacement.

Now, let's look at US-35. 10 miles south of Chillicothe would need upgrading, which appears mostly doable on existing location. The rest of the route? Existing or limited access with some overpasses and interchanges sporadically needed. 4 lane existing bridge over the Ohio River. And it's 25 miles shorter to I-64.

You tell me which is the better route.

[sprjus4]

What about the segment of US 23 in Virginia? That would be the main obstacle in extending Interstate 26 further north. Would it be difficult to upgrade that portion of US 23 to Interstate Standards? An eastern bypass of Weber City off the end of the existing US 23 alignment south of the Tennessee/Virginia border would have to be constructed. While there are some portions of 23 that are freeway, it looks like it would take a massive undertaking to make all of 23 in Virginia an extension of Interstate 26.

Granted, I only drove on it one time, but US-23 did not appear to carry nearly the level of traffic to warrant a limited access highway. Not to mention, it would be prohibitively expensive. The route exists today as a mostly 60 mph divided rural highway with limited interruption, and as Beltway mentioned above, has a good amount of limited access portions (although nowhere near interstate standards). The light amount of regional and through traffic that does use it is adequately served.

If you're going to spend a billion+ dollars improving north-south travel, widen I-77 to six lanes. Or build I-73 up to Roanoke from NC. US-23 is not anywhere close to a priority or need 50 years from now.

I will say - one area of US-23 could be improved and that's near Weber City. I could see extending I-26 into Virginia up to US-58 to bypass that strip, but US-23 becomes a 60 mph divided highway near Gate City beyond that point with only a few traffic signals the rest of the way to Kentucky.

[JREwing78]

Should Ohio even be pursuing construction of Interstate 73? Michigan abandoned study on their portion of 73 in 2001. West Virginia and Virginia (mostly) have no plans to construct their portion of the Interstate. If US 23 needs upgrades, do that, but without the Interstate strings attached.

Why not? Michigan won't give a s*** unless the feds want to fund reconstruction of US-23 north to Flint or building a freeway between Toledo and Jackson on their dime (or 9 cents out of said dime). But I-73's existence in Ohio doesn't need Michigan's involvement.

As long as Ohio has a logical terminus at an Interstate at each end (i-75 in Findlay and I-64 or I-77 in W Virginia), their I-73 can stand alone. It also doesn't necessarily need to encompass all of US-23 - they can shunt over to US-33 south of Columbus or US-35 SE of Chillicothe and have a logical Interstate route.

If and when Kentucky decides to make US-23 an Interstate, simply extend the I-26 routing northward towards Columbus. Extend north or west as desired along US-30, US-33, or US-35 for a logical terminus wherever.

Another harebrained idea. Besides the stretch through Catlettsburg/Ashland/southern Greenup County, the only problematic stretch of US 23 in Kentucky is the commercial area in northern Pike County (Coal Run Village) and southern Floyd County (Harold/Betsy Layne). An interstate through this area would be prohibitively expensive and not worth it.

The point of my statement is that Ohio doesn't need US-23 south of Columbus to be an Interstate. ONLY at the point Virginia and Kentucky want to punch I-26 northward should they consider it. (Sometimes, I post the harebraned idea to make the point.)

ODOT would be better served routing this "I-73" south of Columbus along US-33 or US-35 to connect to West Virginia. At that point, it can be like I-86 or I-88 with a state or two separating each I-73 instance. Or, each I-74 instance - because North Carolina's already twinned that designation onto I-77, and that's still the shortest path between NC and Columbus.

What number the Interstate is designated is kind of irrelevant. What's not is the need and viability of a NW to SE Interstate across Ohio linking Toledo to Columbus to Charleston, WV. 

[Beltway]

Granted, I only drove on it one time, but US-23 did not appear to carry nearly the level of traffic to warrant a limited access highway. Not to mention, it would be prohibitively expensive. The route exists today as a mostly 60 mph divided rural highway with limited interruption, and as Beltway mentioned above, has a good amount of limited access portions (although nowhere near interstate standards). The light amount of regional and through traffic that does use it is adequately served.

Based on what some states use for Interstate highways, two of the bypasses wouldn't take much to upgrade to Interstate standards -- Big Stone Gap-Appalachia (8.8 mi), Norton-Esserville (3.0 mi), names I used on a spreadsheet for what is actually a continuous bypass, the first being what was called the Powell Valley Relocation when it was being built in the 1980s.

Serious slope collapse problems held up completion for several years and led to building a 590 foot long viaduct near the Powell Valley Overlook.

[TempoNick]

The point of my statement is that Ohio doesn't need US-23 south of Columbus to be an Interstate. ONLY at the point Virginia and Kentucky want to punch I-26 northward should they consider it. (Sometimes, I post the harebraned idea to make the point.)

ODOT would be better served routing this "I-73" south of Columbus along US-33 or US-35 to connect to West Virginia. At that point, it can be like I-86 or I-88 with a state or two separating each I-73 instance. Or, each I-74 instance - because North Carolina's already twinned that designation onto I-77, and that's still the shortest path between NC and Columbus.

What number the Interstate is designated is kind of irrelevant. What's not is the need and viability of a NW to SE Interstate across Ohio linking Toledo to Columbus to Charleston, WV.

US 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.

I like the idea of scrapping I-73 and treating this as five or six different projects. I would give the Ohio section the I-875/877 number.

I like the way that US 23 and US 30 are intertwined south of Chillicothe and at Upper Sandusky. No goofy configurations like at Beaverdam (I-75/US 30) or Jeffersonville (I-71/US 35).

[sprjus4]

US 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.

If you're following US-35, you don't need to bypass or upgrade Waverly. Most of US-35 southeast of Chillicothe is a 4 lane partially controlled access highway, and freeway or mostly freeway in many section.

[I-55]

US 23 needs to be upgraded between Columbus and Chillicothe and through Waverly to connect to the bypass.

If you're following US-35, you don't need to bypass or upgrade Waverly. Most of US-35 southeast of Chillicothe is a 4 lane partially controlled access highway, and freeway or mostly freeway in many section.

This is a key to why portions of US 23 and US 33 don't live up to the performance of US 30 and US 35: US 30 is free flowing between the IN state line and Riceland, US 35 is free flowing from Xenia to I-64. No traffic signals or stop signs on those routes, and they have the least number of problems.

23 and 33 have stop lights and 23 in particular has too many. Part of why I think sections of 23 and 33 should get freeway upgrades is because there's no other way to get free flowing corridors when intersections hve enough volume to warrant signalization.

To the point of growth: Look at Indianapolis. The most expansive side of the metro is the north side (same as Columbus). Hamilton County IN has growing at 8% annually since 2000, with a 2025 population of 371,645. Delaware County OH has growing at 8.4% annually since 2000, with a 2025 population of 231,636. 15 years ago, US 31, Keystone Pky, and SR 37 were all signalized 4 lane highways like US-23. US-31 was widened to 6 lanes and converted to interstate grade, Keystone Pky was converted to freeway, and SR 37 is in an ongoing process of freeway conversion. The interchange between US 31 and I-465 was rebuilt a decade ago and INDOT is already planning on adding lanes to the ramps. Traffic using Keystone Pky has nearly doubled since 2014. I-465 has one ongoing widening and interchange reconstruction project on the northeast side and another planned for the northwest side.

These are the steps to handling the growth Columbus will be experiencing in the next 25 years. ODOT was ahead of INDOT when it comes to I-270 vs I-465, but INDOT (and the city of Carmel) have demonstrated how these 4 lane signalized corridors should be handled. US 23 has 4 lanes and 40,000+ vpd between I-270 and Gregory. 40-50k is where we start looking to widen INTERSTATES from 4-6 lanes, let alone surface streets.

[seicer]

The Portsmouth bypass is a limited-access freeway but is not interstate compatible. It has one-lane terminuses that cannot be easily widened and a two-lane segment at its southern end. The freeway is pretty new (completed in 2018), so I don't foresee ODOT reconstructing the two terminuses to accommodate two lanes.

[Rothman]

The idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it.  Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is.  If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.

[SP Cook]

Well, I don't agree that they are perfectly adequate,

In what manner?  They easily handle the traffic that exists and will do so for generations to come.  Some stoplight removals, such as Ohio has done near the end of Corridor D, can be done.   Stoplights are a bane on proper highway design on roads such as these.

But there is another point here that doesn't get hit upon enough.

Interstate numbers are important to me. That means the road is of a certain quality usually. I also like the control city signing better. A control city of some import is usually listed on interstates. On lesser highways, minor stops along the road are the control cities listed. Major control cities help travelers, minor cities just confuse people from out of the area.

Spending billions of dollars so a road can have a blue and red sign rather than a black and white one is perhaps among the worst ideas.

There are places, many of them, particularly in Appalachia but also everywhere else where a logical routing, even for many 100s of miles, involves roads other than interstates.  That's OK. 

[GCrites]

They don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight.

The idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it.  Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is.  If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.

[74/171FAN]

They don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight.

The idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it.  Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is.  If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.

I am surprised that it is six lanes through the stoplights at Coal Run Village on the north side of the Pikeville area.

[lepidopteran]

Couldn't an Interstate 73 follow the US 23 corridor ... continue northward on the US 23/OH 15/US 68 corridor to Interstate 75?

The problem with updating the US 23 corridor between I-270 and Waldo is, the current (northern) 23/270 interchange is not freeway-to-freeway.  In fact, it was recently downgraded from a cloverleaf to a parclo.  And it would not be a good idea to upgrade the interchange because of its proximity to two other freeway junctions -- I-71 to the east, and SR-315 to the west.

[seicer]

They don't get the kind of US Route signature platooning that higher-volume areas see anywhere within 5 miles of a stoplight.

The idea of turning the "Four Lane" (US 23...or US 23/460/119/KY 80...) in KY into an Interstate is just silly given the level of traffic on it.  Serves the communities and coal traffic as intended just fine as is.  If anything, it is overbuilt with the decent-sized median.

I am surprised that it is six lanes through the stoplights at Coal Run Village on the north side of the Pikeville area.

Some of the comments being made are by individuals who have never driven through the region. However, that does not automatically render their points invalid. Corridor-level highways are essential for attracting businesses and industries, as well as for improving safety on major routes—especially those with higher-than-average accident rates.

Whether these roads should be built as full freeways or limited-access expressways is open to debate. That said, modern US 23 in Kentucky replaced a network of narrow, winding two-lane roads that passed through numerous small and medium-sized towns. Those routes were shared by passenger vehicles, commercial trucks, and coal haulers, making them among the most dangerous highways in the state. (I researched this while preparing documents for the Appalachian Regional Commission.)

In Coal Run Village, average annual daily traffic (AADT) counts exceed 30,000 vehicles per day in some sections. US 23 is the only major thoroughfare in that area, and it experiences significant congestion due to numerous side street entrances and traffic signals. Corridor-level improvements—such as the construction of frontage or backage roads, consolidation of entrances, installation of restricted crossing U-turns (RCUTs), and construction of interchanges at major junctions—would be beneficial. However, with US 460 currently receiving the bulk of transportation funding in the district, such upgrades are unlikely in the near future.

In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.

[sprjus4]

In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.

This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.

[Beltway]

In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.

This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.

This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.

[Beltway]

However, with US 460 currently receiving the bulk of transportation funding in the district, such upgrades are unlikely in the near future.

Same thing with US-460 in Virginia, the last segments of ADHS Corridor Q in each state.

Kentucky: US-23 to Virginia State Line
+ Total Mileage: 16.7 miles
+ Spending to Date: Approximately $700 million

Virginia: State line to existing US-460 near Grundy
+ Total Mileage: 14 miles
+ Spending to Date: Estimated at over $1 billion

Both consuming a huge amount of funding.

[Molandfreak]

Virginia completely cancelled the I-73 project

Why do people continue to believe this? VA cancelled the plans to build an eastern bypass of Martinsville for I-73; they did not preclude signing I-73 along the planned Martinsville connector and existing US 220 to the west, though I still wouldn't hold my breath.

I mean, this is FutureInterstateCorridors you're talking to.

[Daniel Fiddler]

I do feel this interstate is not only feasible, but necessary, especially between Columbus and Findlay.  I don't know this for a fact as I have not traveled it, but I have heard the route from I-270 to and through Delaware is treacherous.  And Columbus has a little over 2 million and Detroit well over 4 million population (I don't have my exact figures offhand) so the demand is indubitably there.

[Rothman]

In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.

This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.

This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.

Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81?  I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.

[sprjus4]

In other locations, traffic volumes alone may not support four-lane construction. Yet the presence of steep grades and heavy truck traffic could justify alternatives to a two-lane design. A similar rationale was used for the ongoing Interstate 79 widening project between Clarksburg and Morgantown. While traffic counts alone did not warrant the expansion, the persistent congestion caused by slow-moving trucks on steep inclines supported the need for additional capacity.

This pretty much describes I-81 through Virginia in a nutshell.

This pretty much describes I-81 between TN I-40 and Harrisburg PA in a nutshell.

Traffic volumes alone may not justify four-lane construction on I-81?  I'd imagine it does for I-81 through most of Virginia and up to I-78.

Traffic volumes get down to around 40,000 - 45,000 AADT on a lot of I-81. On an interstate highway with level terrain and low truck volumes, this would suffice. I-64 between Richmond and Staunton is closer to these conditions and similar volumes, and rarely has any congestion issues. I wouldn't say that highway needs widening any time soon. This is a route I have driven semi-frequently, and often the difference between I-81 and I-64 on the days that I-81 gets pretty bad is night and day.

I-81 on the other hand, with similar volumes but varying grades and high truck percentages, warrants widening throughout due to those additional factors.