http://www.urbancincy.com/2011/01/809m-identified-for-long-planned-i-74-extension-through-hamilton-county/

Kinda strange when you talk about North Carolina and I-74. Isn't I-74 an West to East route? Getting to North Caroline would require it to go south.

The I-74 extension is not planned nor will it happen

It is planned to some degree.  Years ago when the Sierra Club was heavily opposing the highway bridge over the Little Miami, the biggest concern was the indirect expansion of I-74 to the east side.  These projects seem innocent as separate entities but what would stop it from being designated a Federal Highway in the future in order to get federal funding?  Either way, the plan is to make this route highway grade more or less, designating it as I-74 eventually makes it easier to improve and maintain.

But it takes more than just putting up "I-74" signs. The road has to conform to Interstate Standards, e.g shoulder width median width, ramp merge lengths, etc. This would incur some serious reconstruction to the Norwood Lateral, and existing Red Bank Expressway. The TRAC funded parts of the Eastern Corridor, as far as I know, involve construction of something less than a freeway and more than a surface arterial. There will be some grade intersections along SR 32.

There is some info to peruse here:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Pages/PublicInvolvementMeetingSchedule.aspx

 

Look under CLE-32-2.25, 32(PID82370) Eastgate Improvements Project-Eastgate to Olive Branch Stonelick

and Clermont County I-275 & SR-32 Interchange

See http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Documents/Planning%20docs/Board%208%20-%20Preferred%20Alternative%20Detail.pdf

a grade intersection is proposed at Old 74, west of the I-275 I/C and no R/W is being preserved for a future I/C

 

You can also see info on the Cle County TID Site:

 

http://www.tid.clermontcountyohio.gov/CurrentProjects.aspx

 

Hamilton County Project info is not posted

 

What the road is called is irrelevant. What it does for worsening automobile dependence in a non-attainment area and for oil dependence in a nation on a collision course with global fuel shortages is relevant.

KJP, I know its a new road and of the associated issues that come with it. But to call it an extension of I-74 when it is clearly not as the linked blog post is is deceptive. IMHO this is being done to drum up fear about the project by incorrectly calling it an Interstate. That is what I am pointing out (whether I am for the road or against the road is irrelevant).

 

FWIW, Ohio backed out of the I-74/73 Extension Plan many moons ago.

Cool. I don't know if it's an extension of I-74 or not. Like I said, that's not relevent to me.

It looks like the only real construction will occur on Red Bank (basically turning Red Bank into an expressway) and construction of an entirely new expressway starting at the intersection of Red Bank and Columbia Parkway in Fairfax, East through the flood plane around Newtown eventually connecting with 275 around Eastgate.  This will really help Anderson Twp. connect with the rest of the city.  Anderson and Mt. Washington are pretty isolated due to the lack of expressway across the Little Miami.  I don't think this is a bad plan.  It may help spur growth of near-in suburbs like Newtown and Anderson.  But it isnt worth $809 million.

^ Spur growth, but where is that growth coming from? This type of project is not going to draw residents from another region, so the "growth" will come with corresponding shrinkage across other parts of the region. Zero-sum growth is not worth $1m, let alone $809m.

The east side has been pretty disconnected from the city center for awhile, but it hasn't stopped growth there.  If anything, this project will imrpove the likelihood of far-eastsiders coming to places downtown.  Right now, depending on where you are, it's an awkward drive up to 71 in order to come down, or down to Columbia Parkway.  Hopefully, whatever bridge ends up going over the Little Miami flood plain has accommodations for light rail. 

KJP, I know its a new road and of the associated issues that come with it. But to call it an extension of I-74 when it is clearly not as the linked blog post is is deceptive. IMHO this is being done to drum up fear about the project by incorrectly calling it an Interstate. That is what I am pointing out (whether I am for the road or against the road is irrelevant).

 

FWIW, Ohio backed out of the I-74/73 Extension Plan many moons ago.

 

Agreed, and West Virginia is not considering any proposal to construct either Interstate 73 or 74 (or 66) through their state. The King Coal/Tulsia Highway projects are being built to limited-access freeway standards, with intersections and some grade-separated interchanges - much like Ohio State Route 32, not U.S. Route 32 (as the UrbanCincy blog entry incorrectly stated).

 

What has been proposed and programmed is a reconstructed Interstate 275/OH 32 interchange because the existing cloverleaf design is outdated and has serious weaving issues. There are also long-range plans to install grade-separated interchanges eastward to Batavia, and some dreamed-plans to convert all of OH 32 to an expressway, all grade-separated.

 

There are also proposals for the conversion of Red Bank Road into a limited-access facility, which is sorely needed given the heavy traffic volumes that clog the road even during non-rush hour, and for the extension of the highway eastward to OH 32, which would greatly improve east-west travel given that OH 124 has been canceled east of Montgomery to what was US 50F. It would also reduce perpetual Ohio-bound congestion on Interstate 471 and 275.

 

All that was done in the blog piece was hypothesizing about funding. Just ran this by Jindal at District 8 who confirmed there is nothing more going on than what was described by Mr. Sparkle and myself.

I keep hearing all this talk about converting Red Bank into some sort of limited-access expressway, but I just don't see how that's even remotely possible, especially considering how so much of it has already been rebuilt/widened in the last few years.  It's not like it's some remote suburban road, it's got development all around it, and without a bypass of sorts, there's simply not enough room to turn it into a fully grade-separated freeway with interchanges without creating huge access problems for all the abutting businesses.  I've driven on it a lot and while some intersections can get kind of congested (Madison Road and Erie/Brotherton for example), it's not really all that busy. 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/noncms/transeng/mlk/

 

Am I the only one who finds this project offensive?  Inner-city road widening is bad enough, but damn this is going to demolish every single building on the north side of MLK between Dixmyth and McMicken.  That's more than 30 houses and apartments, possibly 100 people being displaced, and I'd estimate a good $30,000-$50,000 per year in property taxes that'll evaporate and never return.  I wouldn't be surprised of the powers that be at UC have some hand in this to try to make the drive up from I-75 look "less offensive" to prospective new students and parents.  The shared use path seems like a bit of a waste, a bone thrown to what'll be left of the neighborhood, as this is quite a steep and difficult climb that's usually avoided by cyclists. 

This has been in the works for awhile, as has an interchange with I-71 on MLK.  It mostly has to do with the capacity issues that occur during rush hour when every hospital has tens of thousands of workings coming and going.  Basically, 60,000 people clear out of uptown over the course of two hours.  The concept  behind everything is to funnel nearly all of the traffic onto MLK, so people are less likely to cut down neighborhood streets like Riddle and Marshal.  Similarly, the 71/MLK interchange is intended to keep people from having to use Taft and McMillan, which were always neighborhood streets and should be returned to such. 

 

Redoing MLK down the hill is happening alongside the reconstruction of the interchange at Hopple St. (look that up on the Mill Creek Expressway project website if you want to see what a huge, huge project that is going to be). 

The proposed alternatives for East and West of Dixmyth on MLK are completely unacceptable in my opinion. What they are proposing will turn the intersection of MLK and Clifton into a pedestrian danger. The high speed turn corners are already dangerous for pedestrians. I've nearly been hit on numerous occasions. Their proposal only makes traffic faster, it doesn't think of the safety of the numerous students who traverse that area daily.

 

The destruction of the homes and apartments on the north side of MLK west of Dixmyth is equally unacceptable.

 

This whole process will essentially turn MLK from Hopple to Clifton in to Queen City Blvd. II. Complete with the same high-speed traffic and dearth of pedestrians... so much for complete streets in Cincinnati.

Here are my thoughts:

 

1. MLK is currently a major east-west thoroughfare that currently congests on the downgrade into the Mill Creek valley. The right lanes are shared parking lanes, except for rush when they become through lanes. During rush, the lanes are infrequently used as the lanes are narrow and parked cars are not always moved.

 

2. MLK has some sharper curves, especially at Central Parkway, that will be remedied with the I-75 project. This is a needed project, IMO, but doesn't involve demolishing anything significant.

 

3. The shared bike lane is important, in the scope of providing more bike lanes throughout the city. There is no good way from the valley/basin to UC for cyclists that are more of the casual nature, and any way of reducing the grade or providing separated lanes (instead of a shared bike lane or a striped lane next to the roadway) can enhance bicycle movements. One of the big requests at the cycling-plan meetings in Northside last year were for bike lanes and paths - especially dedicated paths, from the valley/basin to the top, especially to Clifton and UC.

 

In the drawing of frequently made trips on a straight line from home to destination, one of the biggest destinations was on top of the hill. It holds the second largest employment center in the city, and serves a lot of younger, more able bodied individuals. This helps fulfill this need.

 

4. To reduce the grade of the bike path, perhaps the "straight-line" bike path can follow more of the terrain, to offer a gentler grade while offering more separation from the roadway. There would be a lot of room to work with if the housing units are demolished.

 

5. I'm typically not in favor of housing units being removed, but if they are, where will they go? Will new units be constructed elsewhere? That remains unanswered, but should the city be in charge of that? In all other cases, we buy up the properties at market rate and offer some other assistance if needed (e.g. majority are low-incomed?)

They would be better off building a massive garage at the bottom of the hill and providing shuttle service to the hospitals and campuses for those who park there.

 

  I also find it offensive.

 

  I have been proposing for years that MLK and Clifton grade separation be considered. Supposedly, there isn't enough room for grade separation, but now they are proposing widening. The grade separation need not be a full interchange, but simply depress MLK under Clifton with an underpass or short tunnel and not connect all the turning movements.

 

    The bike path along the highway is silly. Ludlow, Marshall, or even Straight Street makes a much better route for bicycles.

 

    By the way, did anyone notice that ODOT demolished the pedestrian bridge over I-75 by Cincinnati State? I used to use that bridge to bike between Northside and U.C.

 

 

Here are my thoughts:

 

1. MLK is currently a major east-west thoroughfare that currently congests on the downgrade into the Mill Creek valley. The right lanes are shared parking lanes, except for rush when they become through lanes. During rush, the lanes are infrequently used as the lanes are narrow and parked cars are not always moved.

 

Yes, peak hour restricted parking is a problem, and is definitely an issue on this street with Cincinnati's lax parking enforcement. It's a problem on Linwood near Mt. Lookout Square as well for many of the same reasons.  It's not an easy situation to remedy, but keep in mind that parked cars protect pedestrians and even the buildings too.  There's more than just drivers using this space.

 

2. MLK has some sharper curves, especially at Central Parkway, that will be remedied with the I-75 project. This is a needed project, IMO, but doesn't involve demolishing anything significant.

 

The curve at Central Parkway is a major problem, you're right, and it is being addressed under ODOT's jurisdiction.  I don't see any problem with fixing that.  The curve at Dixmyth is a bit more sinister though.  To smooth that out as they want will require some significant retaining wall work while changing the profile of the road very little.  Not much bang for the buck there, and smoothing out curves only encourages more speeding.

 

3. The shared bike lane is important, in the scope of providing more bike lanes throughout the city. There is no good way from the valley/basin to UC for cyclists that are more of the casual nature, and any way of reducing the grade or providing separated lanes (instead of a shared bike lane or a striped lane next to the roadway) can enhance bicycle movements. One of the big requests at the cycling-plan meetings in Northside last year were for bike lanes and paths - especially dedicated paths, from the valley/basin to the top, especially to Clifton and UC.

 

In the drawing of frequently made trips on a straight line from home to destination, one of the biggest destinations was on top of the hill. It holds the second largest employment center in the city, and serves a lot of younger, more able bodied individuals. This helps fulfill this need.

 

If it's something that'll be used, that's fine.  It just seems like a lot of effort and expense for a corridor that's not really on most cyclists radar screen.  Ludlow-Clifton is the route from Northside to UC.  I can't imagine there's much demand for cycling routes between Camp Washington UC, and much of the McMicken corridor is better served by Riddle or Marshall-Probasco I think.  Though to be fair, those are still much harder climbs than MLK.

 

The other issue is just how much the I-75 project is chopping up access to the bottom of this trail/path.  McMicken is being severed from MLK for the new connector road between MLK and Central Parkway, so anyone living down there basically has to head to Riddle or Marshall Anyway.  The path connects to Central Parkway opposite Bates Avenue, but Bates is no longer going to cross I-75, so the only way to Camp Washington by bike will be either to jump on to MLK and ride through the interchange with traffic, or to make some tenuous moves from the path onto Central Parkway then turn left onto the new Monmouth Street overpass.  Neither of those are really doable for anyone even remotely recreational. 

 

http://www.i75millcreekexpressway.com/images/pdfs/Public%20Hearing/Public%20maps/South%20Board.pdf

 

Where I can see a path being used is between Dixmyth and Clifton, where there's already nothing on the north side of MLK, to take riders who come from that area of Clifton along Whitfield, Lowell, Terrace, Howell, and maybe Morrison. 

 

4. To reduce the grade of the bike path, perhaps the "straight-line" bike path can follow more of the terrain, to offer a gentler grade while offering more separation from the roadway. There would be a lot of room to work with if the housing units are demolished.

 

I think MLK as it is now is as gentle a grade as you can get.  To follow the terrain more than the road would lead to some shallower areas balanced out by steeper areas.  The average grade is 4% over .9 miles between Central Parkway and Clifton.  That's not terribly steep, but it's more than most casual riders can handle. 

 

5. I'm typically not in favor of housing units being removed, but if they are, where will they go? Will new units be constructed elsewhere? That remains unanswered, but should the city be in charge of that? In all other cases, we buy up the properties at market rate and offer some other assistance if needed (e.g. majority are low-incomed?)

 

Much of it appears to be apartments, so I doubt any assistance or rebuilding will be offered.  The whole "market rate" thing is a bit shady though, as the mere rumor of such a project causes the market value to tank, and much like a depreciated automobile, the price paid for the property is a lot less than its replacement cost. 

 

The bike path along the highway is silly. Ludlow, Marshall, or even Straight Street makes a much better route for bicycles.

 

Straight Street?  For real?  Maybe going downhill, but not up.  Even Marshall-Probasco is a 6% grade compared to MLK's 4%.  It's not an easy situation no matter what. 

    By the way, did anyone notice that ODOT demolished the pedestrian bridge over I-75 by Cincinnati State? I used to use that bridge to bike between Northside and U.C.

 

That seems strange!  They just rehabbed it a few years back.  I used that everyday I was there.  I take it they plan to demo that office building next to the base of that bridge too?

 

Grade separation sounds much less intrusive to the surrounding area at MLK/Clifton like ES suggests.  There is no sense tearing down all those homes for suburban commuters to shave off an extra ten minutes of their already 50 minute drive home. :evil:  That pun is aimed at my sister!

I've heard UC wanted grade separation at Clifton and MLK and MLK and Vine/Jefferson. In a world of infinite money, MLK would be dropped below grade even more than that and Burnett Woods would be restored.

 

    By the way, did anyone notice that ODOT demolished the pedestrian bridge over I-75 by Cincinnati State? I used to use that bridge to bike between Northside and U.C.

 

 

 

Someone told me they did a traffic study and something like 20 people used it over the course of a month.  Aside from that, it had to come down to make way for the upcoming widening of I-75 at that point.  They built the new public bridge on Monmouth Street that was intended to replace the old bridge on Bates, as well as the pedestrian bridge you're talking about.

"Straight Street?  For real? "

 

I often take my bicycle on Straight Street. But let me explain:

 

I figure it is easier to walk up straight street, and get the uphill climb over with in about 5 minutes, while exercising some different muscle groups and resting my bicycle legs, than to pedal a long, steady, uphill route for 20 minutes or more. So, if I am bicycling from, say, Northside to Hughes Corner, either Spring Grove or Central Parkway along with Straight Street is not a bad route. 

 

Going in the reverse direction, I wouldn't ride down Straight Street and waste all of that energy on friction brakes. I would take Clifton Avenue and Ludlow Avenue, which is a long, steady, fast downhill ride with hardly any pedaling. 

 

Glad we put up all those cables.... now we have a bunch of eye sore busted cables in the middle of the road everywhere. I drive between i-74 and rt 4 every day and I'd say 50% of the cable linkages are destroyed at any given time and have been since they went up. What a complete waste of money.

Uh, hardly.

 

ODOT's typical response time on repairing the cable is less than 3 days, given the manpower and supplies.

 

The high-tension, pre-stretched cables are installed - usually between 2,000 lb. and 9,000 lb. and run for several miles in a stretch before a break occurs in the median. When an impact occurs, the cables can be stretched as far as 8 feet in a typical crash scenario, and leave the remainder of the cabling in that segment intact and workable. The barriers on I-275 are TL-4 cable-median-barriers and can withstand impacts of over 50 MPH by passenger vehicles. They are not designed for tractor trailers, but can redirect and deflect damage to those.

 

The installation of the cable barriers cost approximately $140,000-$150,000 per mile in rural areas, and can reduce fatal accidents by up to 90%. They are typically used where there is a wide central reservation, and not in place where the median is less than 24'-36'. In those instances, a concrete median barrier, which costs approximately $400,000 to $500,000 per mile, can reduce fatal accidents and eliminate cross-over incidents, but are not that cost effective for many rural areas.

 

Now tell me, what is a "waste of money"?

 

Also, check out MnDOT's report on the barriers, for everything you need to be informed of: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/reports/CableMedianBarrierFeb2010.pdf

Uh, hardly.

 

ODOT's typical response time on repairing the cable is less than 3 days, given the manpower and supplies.

 

The high-tension, pre-stretched cables are installed - usually between 2,000 lb. and 9,000 lb. and run for several miles in a stretch before a break occurs in the median. When an impact occurs, the cables can be stretched as far as 8 feet in a typical crash scenario, and leave the remainder of the cabling in that segment intact and workable. The barriers on I-275 are TL-4 cable-median-barriers and can withstand impacts of over 50 MPH by passenger vehicles. They are not designed for tractor trailers, but can redirect and deflect damage to those.

 

The installation of the cable barriers cost approximately $140,000-$150,000 per mile in rural areas, and can reduce fatal accidents by up to 90%. They are typically used where there is a wide central reservation, and not in place where the median is less than 24'-36'. In those instances, a concrete median barrier, which costs approximately $400,000 to $500,000 per mile, can reduce fatal accidents and eliminate cross-over incidents, but are not that cost effective for many rural areas.

 

Now tell me, what is a "waste of money"?

 

Also, check out MnDOT's report on the barriers, for everything you need to be informed of: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/reports/CableMedianBarrierFeb2010.pdf

 

I agree.  I think they are sliced bread.  Crossovers are horrible.

.... ~50% of the cable installations between I74 and Rt4 are damaged and have not been repaired since well before my last post. 3 day repair time? I beg to differ. It has been 30+ days and counting.... if we're going to have these things, they've got to be maintained.

Actually, they were repaired. They were hit, again. The cable repairs were performed on July 1, and it is August 9 as of this post. But hey, we all believe your observations from the road...

This project has long been completed, but it is now painfully obvious that the landscaped median should have been widen east of Walnut Street. At the time transportation engineers thought it was absolutely necessary to have two left-turn lanes going from Central Parkway to Walnut Street. This is not the case, and I think that if the city has some capital money laying around that they should remove one of those turn lanes and expand the landscaped median in this section.

 

Jake Mecklenborg suggested to me over Thanksgiving weekend that an additional lane in each direction could probably be removed on Central Parkway. This would then allow you to either further widen the central median, add dedicated bike/transit lanes, and/or widen the sidewalks on either side of the street. Just like Liberty Street though, Central Parkway certainly does not need to be this wide…and never has needed to be.

Counting curb parking lanes, it's 8 lanes wide.  Yeah, there's no reason why the median lane couldn't have been the turn lane, as it was when the parkway was originally built.  I can't say that I've ever seen anything approaching a traffic jam on it.

Please don't widen the median. The space would be much better for transit, bike, and/or extra sidewalk space. More median would serve little purpose.

Revive the Drive

The Revive the Drive - NKY interstate project repairs are ready to begin!  The 2012 construction season will finish replacing  old pavement on I-275 WB in Campbell County and continue the painting project on nearly two dozen bridges in Kenton County.  The biggest project for 2012 and 2013 will be replacing the deteriorated pavement on I-471 in Campbell County.  The total construction costs of the 8 Revive the Drive – NKY Projects is approximately $185 million.  Collectively, the projects will result in markedly improved driving conditions, added safety, and the routine maintenance that is crucial for the interstate infrastructure of Northern Kentucky.

 

--

 

I-471 NB from US 27 in Highland Heights to the Daniel Carter Beard Bridge - Campbell County

•  The I-471 from US 27 to the Ohio River pavement rehab will begin March 30, 2012.

 

I-275 from  Ohio River to KY 9 (AA Highway) in Campbell County

• The I-275 WB from the Ohio River to KY 9 (AA Highway)  pavement rehab will begin March 28, 2012. 

Although this is not HOV they are starting construction on an Auxiliary lane Northbound from Pfeiffer Rd to I-275.

Although this is not HOV they are starting construction on an Auxiliary lane Northbound from Pfeiffer Rd to I-275.

 

It boggles my mind how ODOT "finds" money for projects like this while I-71 and I-75 through the city are neglected.

Good grief. This project was programmed -years- ago and was funded out of usual fuel taxes. It is a minor project to add an auxiliary lane that matches the auxiliary lane from the Interstate 275 EB to Interstate 71 SB ramp to Pfeiffer Road. The addition of the auxiliary lane, which is 1.1 miles in length, alleviates one of the greatest choke points for outbound rush hour traffic that causes severe delays due to the merging of traffic and then the almost immediate dispersal of traffic.

 

But since you think that Interstate 71 and 75 are neglected in the city...

 

a) A $53.649 million project, from MP 5.58 to 6.78 on I-75, is widening the highway to four lanes, adding a full left shoulder, and reconstructing the Mitchell Avenue interchange into a tight urban diamond. The Mitchell and Clifton avenue bridges are both being rebuilt as they are at the end of their life expectancies.

b) A $735,000 project to rehabilitate the concrete deck and bridge railings on SR 562 WB to I-75 SB was just completed, a project that began in April.

c) A $54.923 million project is ongoing on US 50/Sixth Street Expwy. to rehabilitate and/or replace several bridges. The project began in March and will be completed by October 2014.

d) The $68 million Waldvogel Viaduct Improvement Project is funded mostly from ODOT. link

e) The $13 million I-74 and US 27/Colerain Avenue reconstruction project includes the addition of a new ramp from Beekmand SB to I-74 WB, a new retaining wall and new ramps. The project began in January and will be completed by September 2014. The project was coordinated with MSD to alleviate CSO issues that required the demolition of three homes.

f) A $2.22 million project is ongoing along US 27/Colerain Avenue from Virginia Avenue to Leeper Street to add new sidewalks, storm sewer/CSO coorections and minor widening.

 

Look for an asphalt milling and overlay project on parts of I-75 next year as the pavement is at the end of its lifespan and is now experiencing serious rutting.

 

I know it's popular to bash ODOT, but come on...

Yes, I'm aware of all the upcoming work along the I-75/74 corridor as well as the viaduct work. It's just convenient that ODOT focused on the I-275 beltway widening and I-75 widening north of I-275 before doing the necessary work on I-75 inside the beltway... you know, the section that still has left-hand exits and other antiquated features left over from the original design... but I guess things like new suburban interchanges take precedence over necessary safety improvements.

What widening on Interstate 275? Auxiliary lanes were added in the vicinity of the Interstate 75 and 71 interchanges towards the Mosteller Road and Princeton Pike interchanges, and from the Lebanon Road/US 42 interchange towards Mosteller Road and Reed Hartman Highway interchanges. Those bridges (and pavement) were built in 1960 and were replaced in 2007-2009, with minor widening to incorporate the auxiliary lanes and full inside shoulders.

 

Further east/south from I-71, widening was completed in segments from 2000 to 2002. Further into Clermont County, widening was completed in 2003-2004.

 

I-275 west of Winton has not been modified or widened. That was also one of the last sections of I-275 to open in 1975-1978.

 

I-75 has been modified so many times that it's hard to say that no work has been done. Shoulders were added on the bridges in the 1990s when the pavement was rehabilitated. Auxiliary lanes were added around that time. The highway out by GE was rebuilt in 1964-1965, which added a lane and added the "split" at Lockland. That project also added the collector/distributor lanes that were to extend out towards Hamilton but were never finished (think of I-271 east of Cleveland).

 

I-75 saw the addition of the ramps to SR 126 in 1990 and 1992. The Paddock Road interchange was reconstructed in 2003. And it was not until that project was completed that the fourth-lane widening project was proposed - something that ODOT had publicly stated that was not needed only prior to the beginning of the Paddock Road project, which is the main reason why it was not built with a larger horizontal clearance. It can still fit four lanes of traffic, once the shoulders are eliminated - not ideal but what has to be done to progress on that segment of widening.

 

But as for the left-hand ramps and other quirks with the Western Hills Viaduct - that ramp will not be eliminated until that viaduct is replaced or reconstructed. I posted up meeting notes from a public forum I attended a while back - the project is alive and is in the preliminary design phase, but is being coordinated with the MSD Lick Run project and with the I-75 reconstruction project. And further south towards the Brent Spence, that entire section south of Findlay is part of the Brent Spence Bridge project - independent of the development work ongoing to the north.

Well the governor did delay most of I-75 widening for up to 20 years. Due to lack of funding. Yet I-270 in Columbus on the northern part was just widened a few years ago now all of a sudden they get  another 70 million from the feds to widen it more. Why was this not delayed 20 years? http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/morning_call/2012/09/odot-project-will-ease-congestion.html So im guessing Ohio had to come up with 70 million in matching funds.

Well here you go. Hot lanes.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121222/BIZ/312220070/Hate-idea-bridge-tolls-Try-

If this needs to be somewhere else, please move it...

 

Since our amazing governor fails to see the benefits of investing in other forms of transportation, I expected our roads to at least get some MUCH needed attention and work.  I-71 is one of the worst freeways I have driven on in a major city surface wise.  75 is just as bad.  Plans on resurfacing either one of these?  I don't see the bridge project happening anytime soon. 

Considering that ODOT just recently went to the trouble of doing patching and grinding of high spots on I-71 I don't think repaving is high on their priority list.  A simple surface milling and repaving of just the travel lanes with patches on shoulders where necessary would do wonders.  They somehow found the funds to do that to the eastern part of Cross-County Highway, which didn't even need it! 

I'm not sure when this happened, but the lanes - especially the middle one/two, on I-75 have become extremely rutted. You can clearly see the tire wear and it's like driving over a small hill changing lanes. In wet weather, it's a hydroplaning nightmare. Even on the minor mill-and-resurface closer to downtown, those same lanes have become very much rutted.

I am in no way a champion of spending more and more money on our interstates, but it pisses me off that 71 and 75 are so immaculate and gorgeous in Butler and Warren counties, but in the city of Cincinnati it looks like the state hasn't spent a penny especially on 71 in decades. If not for the stimulus package none of the Resurfacing of 75 That happened a couple years ago would be done. 71 from downtown to about Dana is Horrendous.

If I recall correctly, I-71 from downtown to the lateral was last resurfaced during the summer of 99.

Check out this story from WCPO on the new bridge:

 

 

Notice anything missing?

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

Ok, I'll tell you: the cost! They fail to mention that this single half-mile bridge is costing taxpayers $88.1 million dollars.

 

Funny how the media doesn't mention the cost when it comes to roads, but they lead with the cost when it comes to transit.

Actually, they say it will "save taxpayers money" because it doesn't need to be painted, as if it's entirely maintenance-free. 

Let's keep building more roads to save taxpayers even more money!

What are they doing to 275 between Blue Rock and 74? I feel like they just repaved like 5 or 6 years ago if I remember correctly. There are a couple crossovers built across the median, so are they doing something bigger than just fresh asphalt?