Except everything she's saying is legitimate. Building new roads, especially bypasses, doesn't open up economic opportunities for existing places, it drives people away to further sprawled areas.

 

And Ohio is already overbuilt in the road department. The lack of ability to handle road care should make this obvious. We aren't really growing as a state and our total vehicle mileage is stagnant so why should we be spending billions on new roads while our existing ones are falling apart? It's just increasing the burden for the future.

Bypasses don't benefit the places they bypass. They just allow the bypassers to pass by more quickly. It's not economic development -- it's an expensive policy to help the trucking industry become an very tiny bit more efficient. Interesting that the cost of a bypass around a single small and shrinking city is the same as the amount Kasich rejected  for a passenger-rail line across the state linking the three largest metropolitan areas that would have spurred all sorts of economic development.

Bypasses don't benefit the places they bypass. They just allow the bypassers to pass by more quickly. It's not economic development -- it's an expensive policy to help the trucking industry become an very tiny bit more efficient. Interesting that the cost of a bypass around a single small and shrinking city is the same as the amount Kasich rejected  for a passenger-rail line across the state linking the three largest metropolitan areas that would have spurred all sorts of economic development.

 

It's also yet another "gimme" for highway contractors.

I think in the case of Portsmouth, it's a bypass worth considering for the overall ARC system that's multi-state, not just Ohio. It's part of Corridor B-1, or US 52 at the Greenup Locks & Dam to the north end of the Portsmouth Bypass at Lucasville. Overall, it's part of Corridor B, and this is the last segment to be built.

 

The article is a bit misleading, though. ODOT spent a considerable amount of change to completely rebuild US 23 through Portsmouth north of the tracks about a decade ago. It required the rebuilding of a sewer and water line, new buried utilities, and an entirely new road base. It's one of the rare ODOT maintained roads inside city limits, and I suspect it's maintained by ODOT because it's the only north-south route through the city. But it and US 52 both pass through residential and other developed areas and carries a high proportion of truck traffic. Some detour through Rosemont Garden and an extremely steep grade (>13%) with switchbacks, but the majority use US 52-US 23.

 

A bypass has been planned for decades. Other ARC improvements from the original completion (in Ohio, other than Portsmouth) include a South Bloomfield bypass but that isn't in the pipeline.

Of course it’s a gimme for contractors, in the modern political climate this goes without saying.

 

I’m not familiar enough with Portsmouth to know the benefits of this project, but I recall the Route 2 bypass around Huron.  The traffic heading towards Cedar Point (or in our case, Sawmill Creek) got unbearable in the summer, and the people in town hated it too.  That one was needed.

 

Of course it’s a gimme for contractors, in the modern political climate this goes without saying.

 

I don't understand the resistance to repair old roads then.  Don't the same contractors still benefit?  Especially if we're putting more money into better repairs?

Of course it’s a gimme for contractors, in the modern political climate this goes without saying.

 

I don't understand the resistance to repair old roads then.  Don't the same contractors still benefit?  Especially if we're putting more money into better repairs?

 

The roads will have to be repaired eventually in any case.  Building the new road is new business, not just existing.

Of course it’s a gimme for contractors, in the modern political climate this goes without saying.

 

I don't understand the resistance to repair old roads then.  Don't the same contractors still benefit?  Especially if we're putting more money into better repairs?

 

The roads will have to be repaired eventually in any case.  Building the new road is new business, not just existing.

 

Yes understood, but in the short term there is probably enough repair work to keep every contractor in the state busy for the next 30 years!

Project in tiny Portsmouth overtakes Cleveland's Inner Belt Bridges as ODOT's costliest (photos)

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cleveland's new Inner Belt Bridges, first the westbound span, and now its eastbound sister under construction, held title to being the most expensive projects ever undertaken by the Ohio Department of Transportation until this spring.

 

With orange barrel season underway, ODOT has embarked on something even bigger -- a $429 million, 16-mile bypass that will wind through the sparsely populated Appalachian foothills of Scioto County.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/04/biggest-ever_odot_project_move.html#incart_m-rpt-1

What a joke.

That article is highly misleading and I've informed the author to change some specifics. Like the clickbait title. Here is why StrapHanger[/member] and Cleburger[/member] :

 

* The Westbound Bridge (completed) cost $293 million (up from approx. $287 million). It was financed with $200 million in federal funds and $85 million in federal transportation stimulus funds via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

* The Eastbound Bridge (under construction) is projected to cost $273 million. I am unsure on its financing structure but I suspect it is very similar.

 

The Portsmouth bypass has been planned for over 40 years. It has received little to no federal funding support and has received little state support - much like the 40-year project to complete the Chesapeake-Proctorville bypass further east. As a result of the state's inaction for the past several decades, it has to use the public-private partnership route to complete the project, the first instance (and not the last) of its kind in the state.

^I think you're missing the forest for the trees here. The joke is spending hundreds of millions of State of Ohio highway funding to build a project like this in a thinly populated corner of the state. The financing mechanism and the comparisons to other big projects are red herrings.

It's not thinly populated, though. Scioto County has 80,000 residents and Portsmouth is still a major hub of industry and commerce in southern Ohio - that is completely unserved by an interstate or a modern highway. Lawrence County to the east has 62,000 and it lies on a limited-access highway, and while it is not an interstate, it's still above the grade of US 23.

 

I believe that if US 23's widening (between Portsmouth and Columbus) had been delayed until the 1960's or 1970's, it would have been a successful candidate for an interstate highway, but it was still fairly fresh and new when those routes were initially proposed in Ohio. It carried enough traffic in the 1940's and 1950's to justify the project.

 

TARC was implemented to distribute the funds evenly and not to concentrate it in any one city or region. It's succeeded on that point.

Agree to disagree, I guess. Spreading around spending without regard to population is incomprehensible to me.  Scioto County has about 130 people per square mile, less than half the state's overall population density, and way lower the density experienced by the median Ohioan.  Southeastern Ohio shouldn't be neglected, but these mega projects are absurdly extravagant in this part of the state, IMHO. 

Agree to disagree, I guess. Spreading around spending without regard to population is incomprehensible to me.  Scioto County has about 130 people per square mile, less than half the state's overall population density, and way lower the density experienced by the median Ohioan.  Southeastern Ohio shouldn't be neglected, but these mega projects are absurdly extravagant in this part of the state, IMHO. 

 

This is actually close to the southern tip of Ohio, and IMO the area has a lot of economic potential.  Though I admit to being biased as my dad is from there.

That project is the epitome of Big Asphalt.  I'll bet $50 it actually ends up leading to more job losses in urban Portsmouth and adds to more sprawl.

 

ODOT needs to invest in its already built infrastructure before it adds more wasteful belts. 

Unless that road leads to more jobs earning $15+ hour, residents won't be able to afford the cars to use it unless businesses/governments subsidize their car use. Either way, it's an economic cost to the region.

The Portsmouth Bypass *IS* the I-74 that ODOT has been trying to build since Voinovich tried to get the Turnpike Authority to build I-73 and I-74 in the early 90s.  That process avoided ODOT altogether but fell apart when WVDOT decided to do its portion of I-73/74 as the so-called King Coal Highway, which is actually being built as we speak, but is going to take at least 10 more years.  In West Virginia the coal companies are being permitted to mine areas they would not have access to otherwise in exchange for doing earth moving to build this interstate highway 500 feet above the valley floors.  West Virginia citizens are getting this mostly useless superhighway built at a relatively low cost but it's holding up the central link in the I-73/74 corridor that Congress authorized back in 1991. 

Also, in 2013 I called several people related to the Portsmouth Bypass project in Scioto county and elsewhere, including the headquarters of the so-called I-73/74 Association in North Carolina.  People were acting dumb and/or not returning phone calls.  I just plain didn't believe the guys with Scioto County who told me there was absolutely zero objection to this road in the county. 

a lot of people down there think new roads are always good.

Can someone post a map of exactly where this taxpayer boondoggle goes?

Also, in 2013 I called several people related to the Portsmouth Bypass project in Scioto county and elsewhere, including the headquarters of the so-called I-73/74 Association in North Carolina.  People were acting dumb and/or not returning phone calls.  I just plain didn't believe the guys with Scioto County who told me there was absolutely zero objection to this road in the county. 

 

It wouldn't surprise me.  People down there typically figure that if the money isn't spent on their area, it will just get spent in the cities.

 

This is how Byrd kept getting re-elected in West Virgina.

Can someone post a map of exactly where this taxpayer boondoggle goes?

 

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/InnovativeDelivery/PortsmouthGenProcurement/PortsmouthDeliveryAnalysis.pdf

The cost  scenarios  is scary!!

There's also bluster from ODOT about this being "their biggest modern earthwork project".

There's also bluster from ODOT about this being "their biggest modern earthwork project".

 

Exactly, they're going *through* the hills, by far the most expensive option, rather than routing this through the various valleys.  They're also building the thing to full interstate highway specs rather than something that can be incrementally improved like the divided 4-lanes that it will connect.  About 100 miles away the 33 Athens-Darwin extension was built the same way up in the hills, but it's a "Super 2" that can be expanded to four lanes. 

Ridiculous. Pull the plug, statehouse, please.

 

State’s share of Portsmouth bypass rises to $1.2 billion over 35 years

Ohio’s largest road project and first public-private partnership will cost taxpayers nearly three times its announced price tag of $429 million.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/05/25/states-share-rises-to-1-2b-over-35-years.html

"ODOT officials say that paying for the project over time rather than waiting for enough money to become available is smart because the road will spur economic development in beleaguered southern Ohio."

 

No, it won't.

Not to the tune of $1.2 billion.

“What (the state is) really saying is, the road is not important enough to be built with its current money pile,” said Hartgen, who also is a fellow at the Reason Foundation.

 

The $1.2 billion represents the construction cost, bond financing, transaction and maintenance costs over 35 years. Maybe that will open the public's eyes since that is the 'real' cost of a road over time (Essentially operating costs).  Typically -- only speak in up-front construction costs.

Did ODOT ever publish any sort of general "philosophy" re: its reconstruction of the state's urban interstate highways?  In particular I'm interested in anything in writing that committed ODOT to building full interchanges, eliminating left-side ramps, etc.  I have seen many people allude to those things as if they were put in writing at some point but I've never actually seen it.  I'm planning to write a short article on a Cincinnati project so I'd appreciate a link if anyone knows of one.

 

Is anyone aware of any left-side ramps or new incomplete interchanges being built in Columbus or Cleveland despite the rumored existence of ODOT's policy?  Also, is anyone aware of any new system-to-system ramps which *also* branch for a local entrance or exit ramp?  Specifically, I am asking if something like the I-74E to I-75N ramp in Cincinnati has been built anywhere else in the state -- a ramp which forks and also features a local exit ramp to Central Parkway.

 

Does the Central Interchange in Cleveland count? There's a ramp from I-77 NB to I-90 EB that will be exiting onto East 22nd Street when the reconstruction is done. It currently exits onto E. 14th.

 

(Link to the full image: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/PublishingImages/innerbelt%20map2.swf)

Did ODOT ever publish any sort of general "philosophy" re: its reconstruction of the state's urban interstate highways?  In particular I'm interested in anything in writing that committed ODOT to building full interchanges, eliminating left-side ramps, etc.  I have seen many people allude to those things as if they were put in writing at some point but I've never actually seen it.  I'm planning to write a short article on a Cincinnati project so I'd appreciate a link if anyone knows of one.

 

Is anyone aware of any left-side ramps or new incomplete interchanges being built in Columbus or Cleveland despite the rumored existence of ODOT's policy?

 

This is an FHWA policy, despite the State DOT's  funding and design of the interstate reconstruction, changes to interchanges (Interchange Modification - IMS) or new interchanges (IJS) must be approved by the FHWA and left hand exits and partial interchanges are verboten.

 

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Engineering/Roadway/studies/Pages/IJSandIMS.aspx

 

Interstate System Access Informational Guide - FHWA

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/design/interstate/pubs/access/index.cfm

 

6.2.2 Interchange Configuration and Spacing

....Left-hand entrances and exits to the Interstate are contrary to driver expectation and may bring slower-moving ramp traffic into the higher-speed mainline lanes. With the exception of direct entrances to HOV or managed lanes, left-hand entrances should be avoided.

 

6.2.11 Issues with Partial Interchanges

Drivers have the expectation that when they exit the Interstate, they will be able to enter again, either to continue their journey in the same direction or make the return trip. Partial system interchanges affect regional travel by forcingdrivers who remain on the Interstate System to follow other corridors on the return journey and may take them many miles off course. Partial system interchanges also eliminate the opportunity to use alternate freeway corridors to maintain traffic operations during construction, traffic incidents, special events, or emergencies.

In the rare and extraordinary circumstances that consideration is given to a partial interchange, way-finding signage is critical for the routes to which traffic is diverted, whether surface streets or another freeway corridor. With local development having multiple approaches to the Interstate, adequate signage can be difficult to achieve. Additional improvements may also be needed to increase capacity on those corridors providing the movements not available at the interchange.

Even when there is sufficient and compelling justification for consideration of a partial interchange, there are long-term considerations to take into account. If all movements are not provided when the interchange is first constructed, it may not be possible to ever build the missing movements even when a need for them emerges. With consideration of a partial interchange, priority should be given to a design that will accommodate the later addition of the missing movements and to preservation of right-of-way.

 

Also, is anyone aware of any new system-to-system ramps which *also* branch for a local entrance or exit ramp?  Specifically, I am asking if something like the I-74E to I-75N ramp in Cincinnati has been built anywhere else in the state -- a ramp which forks and also features a local exit ramp to Central Parkway.

 

ibid.  Local Road access within System interchanges are not allowed

 

6.2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS

....Satisfying the need for access between the Interstate System and the local highway and street network becomes more complicated when attempted within the vicinity of a system interchange. To every extent possible, system movements should be preserved as separate and independent of service movements to avoid mixed speed environments and to keep related signing clear and simple. When this is not possible, other solutions, such as the use of collector-distributor roadways, may help to overcome some challenges, but designers should be careful to avoid introducing movements that are counterintuitive or confusing to a motorist.

Thanks, that is what I was looking for!

I noticed this past weekend that ODOT built a local exit ramp to Leonard Ave. in the middle of the new I-71/I-670 interchange.  Does anyone know why this was done?  Not only is it a local exist in the center of a "system" interchange, there appears to be no reciprocal entrance ramp. 

I don't think they wanted to get rid of that connection. It was there before. There are a lot of warehouses in the vicinity whose landlords would get cranky you couldn't get off there. They can get back on the highway at the next Leonard Ave. interchange on 670

Also, in 2013 I called several people related to the Portsmouth Bypass project in Scioto county and elsewhere, including the headquarters of the so-called I-73/74 Association in North Carolina.  People were acting dumb and/or not returning phone calls.  I just plain didn't believe the guys with Scioto County who told me there was absolutely zero objection to this road in the county. 

 

Well, I just happened talked to a friend of mine who works at that ODOT office who said that there was indeed a lot of opposition. So I don't know if they're supposed to clam up when somebody calls or what.

The Portsmouth bypass started last week.  So it's full go ahead.

 

http://highlandcountypress.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=20&ArticleID=28250

From Matt Zone's facebook, just in case KJP wants to infiltrate ODOT with some like minded interns  :-D

Transit Internships Posted

 

ODOT is pleased to announce that applications are now being accepted for two paid part-time (less than 30 hours/week) transit internship positions with the Division of Planning, Office of Transit. Applicants must be enrolled in a college or university and be in good academic standing. Pay is based upon academic status. The work location is in Franklin County at the ODOT Central Office (1980 West Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43223). The positions were posted on August 20 and will remain posted until Saturday, August 29.

 

If you are interested in applying, please go to careers.ohio.gov. Instructions for applying online are available in the Online Application Guide.

 

Please forward this information to anyone you know that may be interested.

I got an e-mail about that too! So if anyone is interested.....

 

http://agency.governmentjobs.com/ohio/default.cfm?action=viewJob&jobID=1223794

 

Also see:

http://careers.ohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NeSRwdcArmQ%3d&tabid=121

Wow, they're really delving into critical transportation issues affecting Ohioans....

 

 

JOINT LEGISLATIVE TASK FORCE ON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

 

Wed., Sep. 30, 2015, 9:00 AM, Hearing Room 110

 

Rep. Cheryl Grossman, Co-Chair: 614-466-9690

 

The first meeting will hear all testimony on methods and recommendations for increasing the speed on and access to rural highways and freeways in Ohio as well as ways to save money on license plates, including the use of a single license plate.

Seriously?  Rural highways aren't fast enough? 

We should only need one plate, imho

The Highway Patrol is going to fight that tooth and nail.

^ Yeah, this isn't the first time the one-plate rule has been floated.  Somewhere around 2004 they were talking about it, and I remember this because I was leasing a car and asked that they add the front plate mount, as the car didn't have it.  The service rep asked if I was sure, because in a few months I might not need it.  11 years later, here we are again/still.

 

My understanding - and I don't know how true it is - is that it gives police a nice flat, vertical, and reflective surface to radar/laser off of in speed traps. 

It also provides an excuse to pull over anyone not in compliance.

It'll be a tough fight, but I would think that there is more public/political willpower behind removing front plates after the Ray Tensing incident.

^ Yeah, this isn't the first time the one-plate rule has been floated.  Somewhere around 2004 they were talking about it, and I remember this because I was leasing a car and asked that they add the front plate mount, as the car didn't have it.  The service rep asked if I was sure, because in a few months I might not need it.  11 years later, here we are again/still.

 

My understanding - and I don't know how true it is - is that it gives police a nice flat, vertical, and reflective surface to radar/laser off of in speed traps. 

 

They used to sell license plate covers that would absorb/deflect signals.  They may still.  I had one on my old Fiero GT, which itself had a radar signature much lower than most cars.

 

I don't know if they worked or not, but a friend who worked for Walton Hills once saw me from a distance while he was moving a cruiser and turned the radar on to mess with me, and got no signal.

I'm in favor of two plates, no designs, no slogans, and no mounts that advertise a car dealer or obscure the license number or the name of the state. Nothing but a clearly readable license number.

Yes, the way that states have transformed license plates into places to display artwork promoting their state is just gross. Keep it simple.