I wouldn't mind providing a completely separate parallel bicycle route somewhere in the vicinity of Mitchel, possibly with a new bicycle and pedestrain bridge or underpass crossing I-75.  There's talk of a Mill Creek bikeway that partly takes advantage of the old canal, and it would be great to cross I-75 somewhere around Mitchel.  Mitchel is a mess, and the local traffic gets tiied up in the interchange traffic.

 

  I was bicycling on Mitchel once when I saw a car accidentally make a left turn on the wrong side of Mitchel against traffic at a place where Mitchel is divided, and a bunch of cars followed her. Near head on collision!

^Ahaha, right under the RR bridge? I can see that happening there.

There actually is a bike trail on part of the canal in Bulter county, but it is only 3 miles long and is as mediocre of a bike trail as you'd expect from the minds of Butler County. 

^Actually, I used that bike trail while I did a reverse commute to a co-op in Hamilton. I'd say it's really nice, having ridden it five days per week. I only wish it went farther south. The future connection to Middletown is irrelevant to my life though, as I will likely never ride to Middletown. All in all though, I feel it's a great path, as you bypass many streets that are unfit for bicycling.

There actually is a bike trail on part of the canal in Bulter county, but it is only 3 miles long and is as mediocre of a bike trail as you'd expect from the minds of Butler County. 

 

Hamilton's bike trail along the river actually isn't bad, it just isn't connected with any city areas.  I would classify it as charming.

It's terminus IS High Street though. I'm confused.

 

    The Hamilton bike trail has one terminus downtown on High Street, but there is nothing else along the route other than the treatment plant and Joyce park. So, if you live in downtown Hamilton and work at the treatment plant or if you live in Hamilton and want to go to Joyce Park, then it is useful as a transportation corridor. Any other use will likely be recreation only.

 

  Which brings me back to the I-75 corridor: if a bike trail is going to be useful for transportation and not just recreation, it has to connect with activity centers. Many, many bike trails do not connect with anything other than parks, and while they are beneficial for recreation, they are not useful for any actual commuting. I would say that in most places, anyone who commutes by bicycle will more likely ride on the street instead of on a bike trail, particularly if the bike trail follows a more circuitous route.

 

  The I-75 corridor is different. I-75 follows the only reasonably level route in the region, which is obviously why it is so developed, so it would be a natural corridor for bicycling. However, most of the local streets are terrible for bicycling, and the Mitchell crossing is one of the worst. Bicycles obviously aren't allowed on I-75 itself, and with few crossings at all and even fewer good ones, I-75 becomes a serious barrier to bicycling. A separate bike trail in the I-75 corridor that also connected the communities of Northside, St. Bernard, Hartwell, Wyoming, etc, would likely be very popular both as a recreational trail and a commutor corridor.

 

So, is there any route available? I worked one out once, and it doesn't look too bad, but there are some serious challenges. The former Miami and Erie Canal is available in some places, and passes right through the St. Bernard business area through a chain of parks, and continues north on the other side of I-75. There is also land available along the Mill Creek and Spring Grove Avenue. Central Parkway is a fairly bicycle-friendly street that connects to downtown, and there are lots of connecting streets in Hartwell, Elmwood Place, Wyoming, etc., that could be joined together to make a nice bike route with a minimum of construction work. However, the crossings of I-75 and the railroads are going to be very difficult.

 

If ODOT could see beyond strictly highways, they could build some crossings, both over and under I-75, to link these pieces together and form a reasonably coherent bicycle system that would be really popular. It might even reduce some of the short-distance automobile traffic and improve congestion on I-75!

Anyone know if this will be light rail ready down the median?  I know the new Paddock bridge can't accommodate light rail down the median.

No.

^ So they are going to make the same mistake they did in the 50's now in the 2010's by not making I-75 wide enough and for future widening or light rail. DUMB if you ask me. Well i guess if gas get's to $10 a gallon they can rip out a lane or two in each direction to put one in. Ohio is not efficient when they plan things.

^ So they are going to make the same mistake they did in the 50's now in the 2010's by not making I-75 wide enough and for future widening or light rail. DUMB if you ask me. Well i guess if gas get's to $10 a gallon they can rip out a lane or two in each direction to put one in. Ohio is not efficient when they plan things.

 

Ohio legislators feel the money is in the "come back".  If they do half of a job, then they still have the other half of the job to get paid for in the future.

^If gas gets to $10 a gallon I don't ODOT will be able to afford to rip out a lane to build light rail.

At one point, the whole project preserved a ROW for light rail along the east side of the interstate.  From a quick glance at the web page, it appears that is no longer the case.  I believe it was one of the early alternatives.  The old blog “Phony Coney” had an article about it.

^If gas gets to $10 a gallon I don't ODOT will be able to afford to rip out a lane to build light rail.

 

Unfortunately ODOT has a thousand ways to force taxpayers like us to foot the bill.  Dios mio!

Interesting presentation on efforts to coordinate with MSD to include some green infrastructure and separate storm water from the combined sewers in the I-75 projects which will help MSD get towards meeting the requirements of the Consent Decree:

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Engineering/Hydraulic/Documents/MSD%20Cooperative%20Efforts.pdf

(about 19 Mb)

Since the ramps from Spring Grove Ave to I-74 S and I-74 N to Colerain Ave will be eliminated, what will be done with the reclaimed land?  Looking at this map, you can see that once the ramp is gone, two segments of Powers St could be reconnected.  (It looks like Powers St is the Duck Creek Rd of the west side.)

The I-74 light rail line is planned for the east side of the rebuilt highway in that area.  Some of that land could become a parking lot for the station.

Im in DC right now and on I-495. They use the outside berm as an extra lane during rush hour. Im not sure why that can't be used here or after I-75 is complete. They just have a green LED sign pointing to the berm if it can be sued or an red X if it can't be used.

I'm generally not a fan of using shoulders for extra lanes, and here is why: when I was in Boston on MA 128 - the bypass around Boston, they were using shoulders as extra travel lanes during rush hour. Since 1991, the Massachusetts Highway Department has allowed the use of shoulders as lanes from Exit 20 to Exit 12 along MA 128/I-95, and from Exit 1 to Exit 4 on I-93. That posed several issues:

 

a. Pullouts had to be provided for disabled vehicles at designated intervals when there was a clear right-of-way. There have been several major accidents and deaths as a result of vehicles breaking down and shoulder-traveling vehicles hitting them from behind.

b. There are conflicts at interchanges, where traffic on the ramp has to come to a stop due to a lack of acceleration lane (the shoulder uses up that lane). There are some incidents where the ramp traffic has conflicted with shoulder traffic. I did not take any of the ramps, so I am unsure on how it is signed.

c. The shoulders on older highways are typically not as thick. For most interstates, a 20" asphalt thickness or 12" concrete thickness is desired for the mainlines. That is why when Interstate 275 was being reconstructed in northern Kentucky, and traffic was shifted onto the concrete shoulder, the concrete shoulder was replaced with asphalt for the duration of the construction project as the thickness of the concrete pavement was not sufficient to handle heavy traffic.

 

This book provides some examples: http://bit.ly/zOTstV

^The purpose of the shoulders is for safety. I can think of a few reasons why:

 

The shoulder provides additional clearance.

The shoulder provides room for breakdowns.

The shoulder provides staging area for emergengy vehicles.

The shoulder provides staging area for enforcement.

 

Using the shoulder as an extra lane for capacity must be weighed against the loss of these safety features.

I'm generally not a fan of using shoulders for extra lanes, and here is why: when I was in Boston on MA 128 - the bypass around Boston, they were using shoulders as extra travel lanes during rush hour. Since 1991, the Massachusetts Highway Department has allowed the use of shoulders as lanes from Exit 20 to Exit 12 along MA 128/I-95, and from Exit 1 to Exit 4 on I-93. That posed several issues:

 

a. Pullouts had to be provided for disabled vehicles at designated intervals when there was a clear right-of-way. There have been several major accidents and deaths as a result of vehicles breaking down and shoulder-traveling vehicles hitting them from behind.

b. There are conflicts at interchanges, where traffic on the ramp has to come to a stop due to a lack of acceleration lane (the shoulder uses up that lane). There are some incidents where the ramp traffic has conflicted with shoulder traffic. I did not take any of the ramps, so I am unsure on how it is signed.

c. The shoulders on older highways are typically not as thick. For most interstates, a 20" asphalt thickness or 12" concrete thickness is desired for the mainlines. That is why when Interstate 275 was being reconstructed in northern Kentucky, and traffic was shifted onto the concrete shoulder, the concrete shoulder was replaced with asphalt for the duration of the construction project as the thickness of the concrete pavement was not sufficient to handle heavy traffic.

 

This book provides some examples: http://bit.ly/zOTstV

 

It is very common in Puerto Rico to use both shoulders as through lanes in congested areas.  In my view, it makes it worse because there are huge conflicts at exit ramps.  People using the shoulder have to cross over the traffic exiting from the normal right-hand lane.  Same with merging on-ramp traffic, as noted above.

 

Of course, traffic in Puerto Rico is a whole different animal in a lot of other respects, too...

Does anyone know the reason why ODOT is so against carpool lanes when they are definitely needed here? It wouldn't hurt and would make the freeway 5 lanes.

Lots of earth moving around Mitchell Ave., plus a few hundred feet of pipe stacked and ready to party.  So we should start seeing real work here shortly. 

Does anyone know the reason why ODOT is so against carpool lanes when they are definitely needed here? It wouldn't hurt and would make the freeway 5 lanes.

Because Ohio don't think like Tennessee. Tennessee builds for the future. Ohio builds for now then everything is obsolete when finished.

Does anyone know the reason why ODOT is so against carpool lanes when they are definitely needed here? It wouldn't hurt and would make the freeway 5 lanes.

 

The use of carpool lanes is not accepted by all state highway departments. Some say that the additional complication is not worth the benefit. Adding more lanes to I-75 is a very expensive proposition whether the new lanes are carpool lanes or standard lanes.

Lots of earth moving around Mitchell Ave., plus a few hundred feet of pipe stacked and ready to party.  So we should start seeing real work here shortly. 

 

Anyone else notice the rotational slides on the cut slope above I-75 near Mitchel?

Some major delays here recommended by ODOT staff -- declining ODOT funds due to less gas tax revenue.  It will be interesting to see if fiscally "prudent" Republicans who decry public transportation doesn't pay for itself will start to throw general fund money at road projects...  I'm not sure this wasteful project will ever happen.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/Recommended-DRAFT-TRAC-List-1-17-11.pdf

 

The days of transportation mega-projects may be over.  I think there are a lot of minor things that could be done which would improve this stretch considerably much cheaper. 

#@@&@ 2029?

LOL

 

By that time gas will be $6 or $7 a gallon and then it would be pushed back even further since no one will be paying into the fund as they do today. They better raise the gas tax before $4 or $5 a gallon.

What is the project listed as "RR spur south of SR562"? It associates the project with I75 through Hamilton county for some reason. 

It could be the railroad yard throat that passes over the Norwood Lateral right at the interchange. 

 

No matter -- I think we're seeing a fork being stuck in the I-75 reconstruction, aside from what's currently budgeted.  So we could very well see the Mitchell Ave. section rebuilt...and that's it.  So this is "a highway expansion to nowhere". 

Some major delays here recommended by ODOT staff -- declining ODOT funds due to less gas tax revenue.  It will be interesting to see if fiscally "prudent" Republicans who decry public transportation doesn't pay for itself will start to throw general fund money at road projects... 

 

They already have at the federal level since 2008 -- between three general treasury bailouts of the insolvent Highway Trust Fund and use of Stimulus dollars to pay for road projects that would have been funded by the HTF, you paid for $62 billion worth of road projects out of taxes you pay every April 15 -- for many years to come.

 

For more on this discussion, go to:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4500.0.html

It could be the railroad yard throat that passes over the Norwood Lateral right at the interchange. 

 

No matter -- I think we're seeing a fork being stuck in the I-75 reconstruction, aside from what's currently budgeted.  So we could very well see the Mitchell Ave. section rebuilt...and that's it.  So this is "a highway expansion to nowhere". 

Actually, the interchange rebuild was needed, the existing ramps stink. The project was designed to tie into existing I-75 at its ends and can function independently

Was thinking this morning that the new overpass built in Camp Washington with the stimulus funds might be the only work on that stretch for 10+ years, and the expansion itself might never happen.

^That'd be cool by me.  On a side note, building all those noise walls in the suburbs really paid off, huh!?!?!?

My favorite are the noise walls for houses that were purposely built next to active highways.

Yeah, where's the cost-benefit analysis on those walls?  *sigh*

 

Also, does anyone know why they added that right turn slip road to the ramp from southbound I-75 to westbound Mitchell?  The current ramps all have them, but they're dangerous for both drivers (who have to look almost all the way behind them to see if anyone's coming) and pedestrians.  The redesigned interchange had none, but they added that one back at some point, but I can't find a reason.  I see that it dumps into its own lane (one of those "Continuous Right Turn With Caution" situations) but it just bugs me. 

Don’t start project then shut it for 15 years

01/20/12 at 7:57am by Letters Editor  |  0 Comments

 

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation announced that the addition to northbound and southbound I-75 from Ohio 562 (the Norwood Lateral) to Mitchell will be completed in 2030 instead of 2016. (“Local highway projects face delays,” Jan.18).

 

The length of this delay is utterly ridiculous. Workers started grading the hills last year. Apparently, it makes sense in somebody’s mind that you should stop the project now, wait 15 years, instead of finishing the project in four years. If you’re not going to finish a road construction project you’ve started in a reasonable time period, then don’t start it!

 

Jeremy Sicking

 

Monfort Heights

They voted yesterday and it is officially delayed.

 

http://www.local12.com/news/local/story/Vote-to-Delay-Road-Construction-For-More-Than/EYuezvEmgkeu41u5WQ8eLQ.cspx

Don’t start project then shut it for 15 years

01/20/12 at 7:57am by Letters Editor  |  0 Comments

 

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation announced that the addition to northbound and southbound I-75 from Ohio 562 (the Norwood Lateral) to Mitchell will be completed in 2030 instead of 2016. (“Local highway projects face delays,” Jan.18).

 

The length of this delay is utterly ridiculous. Workers started grading the hills last year. Apparently, it makes sense in somebody’s mind that you should stop the project now, wait 15 years, instead of finishing the project in four years. If you’re not going to finish a road construction project you’ve started in a reasonable time period, then don’t start it!

 

Jeremy Sicking

 

Monfort Heights

 

I don't mind delaying the project a bit to come up with funding, but to me it sounds like there's no clear cut plan as to where funding might come from so they're just assuming its someone else's problem... in 15 years... by which point the currently in-progress construction plan may no longer make sense, so they'll just have to start from scratch.

If it means delaying or rethinking the plans to widen and reconfigure the interchanges on an urban interstate that's going to cost hundreds of millions to billions of dollars and further erode the built fabric of the city, then I'm all for it.  The thing that disappoints me the most is that the Butler County and adjacent I-275 widening is already done (mostly).  So we have a brand new, extra wide, smooth as glass, gold plated interstate running through exurban Butler County, while the urban I-75 in Hamilton County is left to crumble.  Those suburb-to-suburb commuters, or even those commuting between Dayton and northern Cincinnati get a huge break, while the core of the system, so to speak, gets one interchange reworked and a few other little scraps.  Brilliant.

 

Now that so many projects have been tabled, what are they going to do in the meantime?  By not jumping on these projects like they had planned, the deferred maintenance on these highways will still have to be dealt with.  I-75 between I-74 and I-275 needs to be resurfaced soon.  It won't last more than a few years in the condition it's in, and they're not even bothering to fill potholes.  All of I-71 in Hamilton County needs resurfacing as well, especially south of Kenwood.  Will they be able to do even this little bit of work?  There's potholes on both interstates that have been there since last winter. 

They say less and less people are driving but i don;t see that on I-75. It's been the same for decades. Someone is paying the gas tax and they are not going to Ky to get gas. Fuel efficient cars is just an excuse. No ones buying them $40,000 volts. At least not enough to justify millions lost to these cars.

 

So what happened to the money the Feds sent Ohio for these projects? Will they now hold the funds until Ohio gets it act together?

The implication in the Columbus coverage is that all they will be doing for the next 20 years is filling potholes and repaving the roads and fixing a couple bridges.

What doesn't seem to be taken into consideration is that for every new highway you build or existing highway you widen, you increase maintenance costs for future years. I've read about many states starting to look at the total lifecycle cost of road projects, but ODOT doesn't seem to be doing this. Really, they should be making sure that every highway in the state is well maintained; then looking at making safety-related improvements (i.e., eliminating left-hand exist); and finally, adding capacity only if they have the budget to maintain it for decades.

That's the trap with Federal money, it's only for building but not for maintenance.  So the infrastructure gets built with all the Federal money, and it lasts for a while with little maintenance because it's all brand new.  Woo hoo.  Once it starts getting old and needs maintenance, then the States can just cry about how it's under capacity and crumbling, so instead of needing maintenance it needs replacement and expansion (if it's gotta be replaced, might as well enlarge it too right?).  More Federal money, and the maintenance problem goes away for another life cycle.  The only problem is that by now this has gone on so many times that even the Feds can't afford to keep bailing out this non-productive pattern of development. 

+1

I think I mentioned it somewhere else but I'd like to see what the actual cost of this project is -- totally reconstructing I-75 with the current number of thru lanes (8 south of I-74, 6 north of that point to I-75) versus totally constructing the highway but adding one thru lane, as is the current plan.  I'd bet after all that commotion, adding the lane adds maybe 10-20% to the overall project cost. However, all of this speculation is complicated by the fact that, I believe, they were planning to add left-side shoulders to the whole thing in addition to widening the right shoulder by 1 or 2 feet.

 

I also think I might have mentioned before that the Millcreek Expressway as built by Ohio and Cincinnati in the mid-1950s did not have paved emergency shoulders, but rather gravel.  Also, there were no shoulders at all on the overpasses.  Paved shoulders and a widening of the overpasses was done just a few years after the highway opened, with federal money from the newly created highway trust fund.  That is why the overpasses all have that one extra pillar that isn't connected to the rest. 

 

More information on recent budget cuts at the ODOT.

 

http://www.urbancincy.com/2012/01/massive-funding-cuts-at-odot-pose-threat-for-cincinnati-area-projects/

Im in DC right now and on I-495. They use the outside berm as an extra lane during rush hour. Im not sure why that can't be used here or after I-75 is complete. They just have a green LED sign pointing to the berm if it can be sued or an red X if it can't be used.

 

Here is some examples of the SL lanes.

 

Images are from the federal highway administration.

 

I-71 can easily fit these in with maybe minor widening around the Ridge road exit.

 

I-75 is a bit narrow but with some minor widening this can be implemented and would be cheaper than major widening.

 

Ohio is terribly un-progessive when it comes to stuff like this. Ohio has traditionally overbuilt everything just for peak. We've been terrible at differentiating speed limits and lane use for peak and off-peak.

^Ride down I-75 sometime and watch the berm, and try to imagine another lane there, without more widening. There are lots of places where there just isn't room: the southbound section through Lockland, the Brent Spence Bridge, etc.