Ohio Legislature Mandates Feasibility Study of Future I-73

[FutureInterstateCorridors]

BTW, who made you people hall monitors?

In my case, Alex did. He also gave me the ability to delete or move off-topic posts and ban users that make too many of them.

Consider not making me use those abilities.

Let's stay on the topic of only upgrades that are being officially considered by the government of Ohio.

Thanks for recognizing that my original post was only about the issue of reviving Future I-73 in the new Ohio Legislature feasibility study.  The feasibility study focusses on building a new terrain freeway generally parallel to the U.S. 23 corridor from Toledo to Cheasepeake to the Ohio River.  The Ohio Legislature's goal is to establish an interstate freeway between the two cities in Ohio with eventual connection to I-64 in Huntington West Virginia as required by Federal law and with I-75 near Toledo.  ODOT has final discretion to decide exactly what the route will become when the feasibility study is concluded.  ODOT will listen to the public at the public comment meetings as part of the feasibility study, and anyone, including fans on this website, are welcome to give their input at that time.  One thing that people on this website are ignoring is that public opposition today will probably be the same as in the 1990's if not worse because more developments have been built along any potential route.

[sprjus4]

The feasibility study focusses on building a new terrain freeway generally parallel to the U.S. 23 corridor from Toledo to Cheasepeake to the Ohio River.

You're still stuck on this whole "new terrain freeway" thing, huh. OH-823, OH-15, and most of US-23 north of Columbus on limited access right of way would all be bypassed, and using the existing corridor is outside the scope of the study, according to you. 

Ohio Legislature's

as required by Federal law

ODOT has final discretion to decide exactly what the route will become when the feasibility study is concluded.

And their final discretion will likely either: use existing freeways and highways to the extent possible (such as existing limited access facilities), and also: the significant amount of money required to upgrade and relocate this corridor (particularly south of Chillicothe) for the light amount of traffic that uses it, does not justify the expense.

If Ohio wants a limited access route south, they have two largely limited access highways that would require far less expensive upgrades and would provide a more direct connection by 30 miles.

One thing that people on this website are ignoring is that public opposition today will probably be the same as in the 1990's if not worse because more developments have been built along any potential route.

One thing you're ignoring is the practicality of this entire concept. A corridor on new location, parallel to a lot of existing freeway segments, one that travels over 30 miles out of the way for a motorist connecting from Columbus to I-64 East / I-77 South, etc.

[thenetwork]

More info from outside the Forum Thread:

https://sciotovalleyguardian.com/2025/07/28/route-23-could-soon-become-i-73/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwL18YNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtZB1s5mPva1fIOA3BLhYPYWTRzkq7Y9b7YhSWOiQ2yOO5VskbJQVHPB0G3V_aem_1KcuXp_hTHgYg9okjV5QiA#mdova5p050lp31ynw9d

[FutureInterstateCorridors]

The feasibility study focusses on building a new terrain freeway generally parallel to the U.S. 23 corridor from Toledo to Cheasepeake to the Ohio River.

You're still stuck on this whole "new terrain freeway" thing, huh. OH-823, OH-15, and most of US-23 north of Columbus on limited access right of way would all be bypassed, and using the existing corridor is outside the scope of the study, according to you. 

Ohio Legislature's

as required by Federal law

ODOT has final discretion to decide exactly what the route will become when the feasibility study is concluded.

And their final discretion will likely either: use existing freeways and highways to the extent possible (such as existing limited access facilities), and also: the significant amount of money required to upgrade and relocate this corridor (particularly south of Chillicothe) for the light amount of traffic that uses it, does not justify the expense.

If Ohio wants a limited access route south, they have two largely limited access highways that would require far less expensive upgrades and would provide a more direct connection by 30 miles.

One thing that people on this website are ignoring is that public opposition today will probably be the same as in the 1990's if not worse because more developments have been built along any potential route.

One thing you're ignoring is the practicality of this entire concept. A corridor on new location, parallel to a lot of existing freeway segments, one that travels over 30 miles out of the way for a motorist connecting from Columbus to I-64 East / I-77 South, etc.

The new terrain route is not a fiction; the Ohio State Legislature ordered the feasibility study of the Future I-73 route parallel to U.S. 23 from Toledo to Chesapeake,  "The Director of Transportation shall conduct a feasibility study for the creation of an Interstate Route 73 corridor connecting the municipal corporation of Toledo to the municipal corporation of Chesapeake, primarily alongside current United States Route 23".   Nothing about this proposal from the Ohio Legislature is practical, so I don't know why you think I am promoting it, it is unfeasible from the start just like it was in the 1990's, another road to nowhere as all of I-73 was when first proposed.

[Henry]

More info from outside the Forum Thread:

https://sciotovalleyguardian.com/2025/07/28/route-23-could-soon-become-i-73/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwL18YNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtZB1s5mPva1fIOA3BLhYPYWTRzkq7Y9b7YhSWOiQ2yOO5VskbJQVHPB0G3V_aem_1KcuXp_hTHgYg9okjV5QiA#mdova5p050lp31ynw9d

So we're looking at another rinse and repeat; however, I'm not seeing any mention of I-74 because they probably didn't think it would've been worth it to continue past Cincinnati, as no good route can be found between its terminus at I-75 and that of OH 32 without consuming some very expensive land, which is not an ideal thing to do these days.

[sprjus4]

More info from outside the Forum Thread:

https://sciotovalleyguardian.com/2025/07/28/route-23-could-soon-become-i-73/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwL18YNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtZB1s5mPva1fIOA3BLhYPYWTRzkq7Y9b7YhSWOiQ2yOO5VskbJQVHPB0G3V_aem_1KcuXp_hTHgYg9okjV5QiA#mdova5p050lp31ynw9d

So we're looking at another rinse and repeat; however, I'm not seeing any mention of I-74 because they probably didn't think it would've been worth it to continue past Cincinnati, as no good route can be found between its terminus at I-75 and that of OH 32 without consuming some very expensive land, which is not an ideal thing to do these days.

If they were going to continue it beyond Cincinnati, the easiest thing would be to sign-post it along I-75, I-71, I-471, and I-275. There is no way a new location route would ever be built.

[hbelkins]

The feasibility study focusses on building a new terrain freeway generally parallel to the U.S. 23 corridor from Toledo to Cheasepeake to the Ohio River.

You're still stuck on this whole "new terrain freeway" thing, huh. OH-823, OH-15, and most of US-23 north of Columbus on limited access right of way would all be bypassed, and using the existing corridor is outside the scope of the study, according to you. 

Ohio Legislature's

as required by Federal law

ODOT has final discretion to decide exactly what the route will become when the feasibility study is concluded.

And their final discretion will likely either: use existing freeways and highways to the extent possible (such as existing limited access facilities), and also: the significant amount of money required to upgrade and relocate this corridor (particularly south of Chillicothe) for the light amount of traffic that uses it, does not justify the expense.

If Ohio wants a limited access route south, they have two largely limited access highways that would require far less expensive upgrades and would provide a more direct connection by 30 miles.

One thing that people on this website are ignoring is that public opposition today will probably be the same as in the 1990's if not worse because more developments have been built along any potential route.

One thing you're ignoring is the practicality of this entire concept. A corridor on new location, parallel to a lot of existing freeway segments, one that travels over 30 miles out of the way for a motorist connecting from Columbus to I-64 East / I-77 South, etc.

The new terrain route is not a fiction; the Ohio State Legislature ordered the feasibility study of the Future I-73 route parallel to U.S. 23 from Toledo to Chesapeake,  "The Director of Transportation shall conduct a feasibility study for the creation of an Interstate Route 73 corridor connecting the municipal corporation of Toledo to the municipal corporation of Chesapeake, primarily alongside current United States Route 23".   Nothing about this proposal from the Ohio Legislature is practical, so I don't know why you think I am promoting it, it is unfeasible from the start just like it was in the 1990's, another road to nowhere as all of I-73 was when first proposed.

That's just semanitics. "Primarily alongside..." means not all the route would be new-terrain. The OH 15-I-75 section could be defined as "primarily alongside" existing US 23.

[GCrites]

Policy people write bills, not engineers.

[carbaugh2]

2 of the 2025 TRAC applications (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/programs/trac/home/2025-apps) are for preliminary engineering and right of way purchasing for the intersections of US 23 with Home Rd and Orange Rd. Both applications estimate $50 million for construction costs, so it looks like both intersections will become interchanges.

[seicer]

Orange Road will be an overpass over US 23, with a connector road to be constructed to facilitate that connection. Home Road will be a full interchange. (source)

[Henry]

More info from outside the Forum Thread:

https://sciotovalleyguardian.com/2025/07/28/route-23-could-soon-become-i-73/?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwL18YNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtZB1s5mPva1fIOA3BLhYPYWTRzkq7Y9b7YhSWOiQ2yOO5VskbJQVHPB0G3V_aem_1KcuXp_hTHgYg9okjV5QiA#mdova5p050lp31ynw9d

So we're looking at another rinse and repeat; however, I'm not seeing any mention of I-74 because they probably didn't think it would've been worth it to continue past Cincinnati, as no good route can be found between its terminus at I-75 and that of OH 32 without consuming some very expensive land, which is not an ideal thing to do these days.

If they were going to continue it beyond Cincinnati, the easiest thing would be to sign-post it along I-75, I-71, I-471, and I-275. There is no way a new location route would ever be built.

Or they could reroute it over the north and east sides of I-275 and make the in-town part an I-x74. As much as I like your idea of taking it down I-75, I-71 and I-471 to I-275, this creates the unfortunate side effect of entering a state briefly before returning to the other, like I-24 in TN and GA.

[The Ghostbuster]

I agree with Henry on a theoretical eastern extension of Interstate 74 (which, even if OH 32 is upgraded into an Interstate-Standard freeway, it probably will not become an extension of Interstate 74).

[Scott5114]

Again, let's keep everything in this thread real proposals only and NOT theoretical. I have already issued sanctions in this thread for this, so my options for handling it if it keeps happening are to issue more sanctions or lock the thread.

[sprjus4]

Again, let's keep everything in this thread real proposals only and NOT theoretical. I have already issued sanctions in this thread for this, so my options for handling it if it keeps happening are to issue more sanctions or lock the thread.

Was I-74 not a real proposal? Genuinely asking here.

House Passes Resolution Urging for the Extension of I-73 and I-74

COLUMBUS - The Ohio House of Representatives today unanimously passed House Concurrent Resolution 31 urging Governor DeWine and the Director of Transportation to provide for the extension of I-73 and I-74 into Ohio.

[...]

The project would also include the extension of I-74 from Cincinnati to Portsmouth. Several routes for this project are being studied for the most suitable to accommodate this addition.

"Several routes" would seem to imply that proposals to extend I-74 through Cincinnati eastward via various methods along existing interstates are indeed real proposals. These stem back to the 1990s and original discussions with I-73/I-74.

That being said, if off-topic discussion is a rampant issue here (because the current proposal is unrealistic), how about splitting the thread into its own discussion? I'm surprised it hasn't been already.

[Scott5114]

That being said, if off-topic discussion is a rampant issue here (because the current proposal is unrealistic), how about splitting the thread into its own discussion? I'm surprised it hasn't been already.

Not being a local, I'm having a hard time figuring out what is and isn't real because people keep pulling crap like posting three sentences about something ODOT might plausibly be studying and then saying "Theoretically that could be part of I-23."

This is the one situation where regional moderators really come in handy.