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.

[carbaugh2]

Let me see if I can help out.

About I-74, the House Continuing Resolution referenced died in committee once it went to the Ohio Senate (https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/134/hcr31). While ODOT has been working to reduce access points on Ohio 32 (see this overpass project, these Eastern Corridor projects, and this project in Brown County), I think that I-74 is outside the scope of this discussion. There is no mention of it in the studies added to the transportation budget.

When it comes to I-73, I think that this has legs in Ohio. We will see the results of the 71-23 connector study in a little under 60 days (end of September). ODOT has been quietly working to build overpasses and interchanges from Findlay to Marion. This project is located in Hancock County (and I suggest watching the imbedded YouTube video on the page around the 7:30 mark), while the US 23/Ohio 294 intersection will become an interchange in 2027 (start watching around the 4:30 mark for the long-term goal). While the focus in our discussions about I-73 in Ohio has been traffic counts, the recurring theme I have found from the project videos is that the focus is on safety due to serious accidents in these stretches of highway.

I know that there have been posts made about US 23 being sufficient south of Columbus. Since I'm not an engineer, I am simply going to share the data I found on ODOT's traffic countsite. Anecdotally, I have found my drives from 270 to Circleville to feel very slow with all of the traffic lights between 270 and South Bloomfield. The most recent count at the US 23/Ohio 665/Ohio 317 intersection puts the volume at 37,000 AADT, and it fluctuates between 27,000-35,000 from there down to the Ohio 207 interchange. The lowest count anywhere between Columbus and the Portsmouth Bypass at 17,000 AADT about 2 miles north of the Ohio 823 interchange.

[GCrites]

^Thanks for the link to the ODOT traffic count tool. According to it traffic counts were higher (13,000) in 2024 on 23 just south of the Portsmouth Bypass than on the Bypass itself (9,000).

[JREwing78]

The most recent count at the US 23/Ohio 665/Ohio 317 intersection puts the volume at 37,000 AADT, and it fluctuates between 27,000-35,000 from there down to the Ohio 207 interchange. The lowest count anywhere between Columbus and the Portsmouth Bypass at 17,000 AADT about 2 miles north of the Ohio 823 interchange.

This is well into freeway territory, and comparable to roads like US-24 between Toledo and the Indiana state line. 

It's not terribly surprising that the Portsmouth Bypass has lower traffic than vehicles headed into and out of Portsmouth. That doesn't make Ohio 823 unimportant - the reduction in traffic going through Portsmouth is certainly welcome. But Portsmouth is a regional destination, and currently the corridor between there and points south and east aren't well developed for interregional traffic. 

For example, following the signed US-23 corridor between Portsmouth and I-64 means lots of in-town traffic and stoplights along the way. US-52 on the Ohio side doesn't have that issue, but the only free-flowing crossing takes you several miles out of your way if you intend to continue south on US-23. 

Would through traffic increase if there was a free-flowing connection between US-23 at I-64 and US-23 at Ohio 823? Likely. Would it be enough to justify building one? The fact it doesn't exist already speaks volumes.

[GCrites]

For example, following the signed US-23 corridor between Portsmouth and I-64 means lots of in-town traffic and stoplights along the way. US-52 on the Ohio side doesn't have that issue, but the only free-flowing crossing takes you several miles out of your way if you intend to continue south on US-23.

Would through traffic increase if there was a free-flowing connection between US-23 at I-64 and US-23 at Ohio 823? Likely. Would it be enough to justify building one? The fact it doesn't exist already speaks volumes.

OH-823->US-52->KY-10 (Greenup Dam)->US-23->KY-67 (Industrial Parkway)->I-64 attempts it.

[FutureInterstateCorridors]

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.

The Ohio State House passed resolutions urging Governor Dewine and the Ohio Department of Transporation to revive the I-73 and I-74 projects cancelled in the 1990's.  What the Ohio State Legislature finally voted into law is to fund a feasibility study of Future I-73 following the U.S. 23 corridor from Toledo to Chesapeake Ohio.  The Ohio Department of Transporation has issued a request for proposals to study all options for a Future I-73 highway. The request for proposals clearly gives objectives of the study:
• Provide an objective, transparent analysis of what it would take to construct I-73.
• It's important to remember that this is not a commitment to build the interstate—but strictly
informational. It arms the state's decision makers with data so they can execute accordingly. 
• The study assesses county-by-county impacts and will identify pinch points and areas of concern.
• The findings of this study will help guide future transportation investment decisions using accurate,
comprehensive data.
• Ultimately, it helps determine where scarce funding can be most effectively allocated.