RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubeNew outerbelt would solve growth problemSunday, March 05, 2006
I was surprised by the counties surrounding Franklin turning a deaf ear to land conservation, as opposed to unfettered and chaotic growth ("Region’s growth plan hits barriers," Dispatch article, Monday).
I was even more surprised to find that the federal, state and local governments provide about $8.2 million for the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission to discuss such simplistic issues. Simply scanning the map presented in the article, one readily sees a well-defined "outer-outerbelt" with about 15 major interchanges. People will live only in areas with ready access.
Announce the intention to build the outer-outerbelt, construct it incrementally over the next 10 to 20 years and the issue is moot.
RICHARD J. DICK
Columbus
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion
New outerbelt would solve growth problem
[223 posts] [42 contributors]
Rate this topic:
-
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
I think an outer-outerbelt may eventually become a necessity for our sprawling city, it's not going to be an end-all solution for these growth problems and may actually cause more new problems than it would fix. Many of the outer-lying areas that are hot growth spots will eventually need faster transportation between them and driving inward to 270 and back outward to these areas will only cause more 270 congestion.
Anyone else care to share some thoughts on an outer-outerbelt?
Posted 6 years ago # -
ZHC
101 East Main Street, Downtown
Login to Send PM
If I remember correctly this has already been considered by ODOT fairly extensively back in the 80's possibly early 90's. The original plan would have had the new belt being 8 miles further out from I-270. I believe they decided against it at the time mainly based on prohibitive eminent domain acquistion costs (which would only be much higher now as there quite a few more individual property owners on more developed tracts of land).
I don't believe many of these have been done nationwide lately for usually the same reasons (E-470 in Denver is the most recent one I know of, and Denver is considerably less developed than us outside their metro)
I'm afraid I don't have a source for this other my memory (which may or may not be completely accurate).
Posted 6 years ago # -
Brewmaster
Portland, OR
Login to Send PM
This thread made me throw up in my mouth. The solution isn't to keep sprawling, it is to increase the density within the outerbelt. Traffic isn't bad, and there's plenty of unused land.
^ This is where we need to go with our city...not to Delaware, Licking, and Pickaway Counties. Ugh.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM
Yeah, an outerbelt is exactly what we don't need. Think of the cost of not only building the massive thing, but the upkeep as well. Not to mention this will end up in even more gas being wasted. We need to build up, not out. If you don't like living in a medium/high density area, go live in a self-sufficient small town.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM
I should add that if the streetcar idea comes to fruitition and is successful )there's no reason it shouldn't be) it could help make light-rail a reality.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
Realistically:
1. People will never stop driving cars. (At least not in our lifetimes)
2. Oil will eventually be replaced with other fuels.
3. Sprawl will not slow down anytime soon.
It doesn't mean that I like these sorts of trends, but the hotspots for growth are still moving further and further from downtown. The north end of 270 was just widened a few years ago and it already sucks during rush hour. It's going to get worse as places like Delaware and Marysville and Sunbury grow.
Light Rail is wonderful, and I'd love to see it come to life as soon as possible, but it's not a end-all answer to our transportation problems. New highways are an important part of our growth as a region, and hating on new highway construction is just as bad as some suburbanite hating on a rail system just because THEY won't be using it.
Really, it doesn't bother me to see the possibility of new highways cutting swaths through suburban housing developments and strip malls while we work on capping over our downtown highway scars and reuniting the real neighborhoods that they've divided.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
True. And I'm all about using that first and building UP instead of OUT.
I was just wondering what people thought of an outer-outerbelt not as something COOL, but something that may eventually be a necessity whether you like it or not. :oops:
Posted 6 years ago # -
Big_Ben
Login to Send PM
I don't really like the idea but I support it. It would take over a decade to build (including the planning phase) and would cost tons of money. Although I think the majority of money would come from the feds (it would be considered a federal highway) and from the surrounding counties. I doubt a single inch of it would fall within Franklin county.
As Walker pointed out, the north side traffic on 270 is RIDICULOUS. I used to work in Lewis Center (basically the corner of 23 and Polaris). When I had to drive up there between 4-6 o'clock, the traffic was unbelievable. If I went up 315-270-23, I would get stuck at 161 and it would take no less than 45 minutes to travel 3 miles. It it is almost as bad at the 71/270 interchange as well. If you try to get on 23 that way, atleast 30 minutes for a mile stretch of road.
There are two things you can do to improve this. Force people to move inside 270 and force them to accept light rail, or build the infrastructure to make it easier for them to get around and stay where they are at.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
Big_Ben wrote There are two things you can do to improve this. Force people to move inside 270 and force them to accept light rail, or build the infrastructure to make it easier for them to get around and stay where they are at.
My point exactly. You can't force people to move.
We WILL see more and more people moving downtown as it becomes more appealing, but there's no way you're ever going to get everyone to adopt the urbanized way of thinking. And it's part of the government's job to provide transportation as needed. I think there is room in the future for both a light rail system AND an improved highway system in the outerlying regions.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM
Walker wrote Realistically:
1. People will never stop driving cars. (At least not in our lifetimes)
2. Oil will eventually be replaced with other fuels.
3. Sprawl will not slow down anytime soon.
I disagree with #2. Oil will run out and we may not necessarily find a viable alternative. It is not healhy to just assume that we'll find somehing else. Even if it is replaced, we will go through it like no tomorrow and will be pointless if we don't change the way we live as a country.
#3 may not be the case once we reach $3 and who knows when that will be.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM
$3 a gallon, I mean.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
Columbusite wrote I disagree with #2. Oil will run out and we may not necessarily find a viable alternative. It is not healhy to just assume that we'll find somehing else. Even if it is replaced, we will go through it like no tomorrow and will be pointless if we don't change the way we live as a country.
#3 may not be the case once we reach $3 and who knows when that will be.
No, we will never drain the planet completely of oil. It will eventually get too pricey to obtain and there will be alternatives where energy companies can make more money. They exploit oil right now because that's where the most money is to be made. There ARE already some alternatives on the market, and we'll see more appear as that becomes more profitable for companies.
So, I'm not assuming anything since there are already some alternatives available. I agree that we need to change the way we live as a country, but that's going to take a lot more time and effort than it will be to just switch to another type of fuel... I'm not advocating the continuation of sprawl, and I'm trying to be as much of an urban pioneer as I can right now as set a good example and share some good information, but if I were to sit here and talk about how cars are going to become extinct in our lifetime just because we're going to stop using gasoline sometime in the next 50 years and how we should halt ALL new road construction this minute would just be plain absurd.
The suburbs aren't going to vanish overnight, and so as long as they are there and as long as people live and work and shop there, they deserve methods of transportation that work the best, just as the downtown area deserves some form of mass-transit to fit the lifestyle of the urban dwellers.
I wish we could convert everyone into an urbanist overnight, i really do. :cry:
Posted 6 years ago # -
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM
Also, the issue of oil is not entirely synonymous with the need for highways. Even tf we eventually make the transition to hydrogen or electric transportation industry, it will just mean that there are different kinds of cars on the roads, not that the highways will suddenly become abandoned and overgrown with moss and lichens.
Honavery has a point, though. D.C. doesn't have two outerbelts. No city that I know of has two complete ones. Several major metro areas don't even have one full outerbelt (Philadelphia, for example, really only has a 2/3 belt). To make it viable in terms of eminent domain acquisition costs at this point, it would have to be built *way* beyond the current growth boundary in a lot of areas ... figure a giant loop connecting Delaware, Marysville, London, Circleville, Lancaster, and Newark. Almost completely impractical. (Of course, the same acquisition-cost nightmare could be said vis-a-vis a light rail system, too--which will face the same ballooning costs from urban reclamation that the second outerbelt faces from sprawl.)
I'm a fan of "up not out," too, but until a developer comes with with a way to provide 2000sf for $250,000 in a moderately decent school district (which Columbus isn't), the suburbs are going to have some distinct advantages that new urbanism can't yet match. Mixed-use living just simply isn't economically viable for an enormous swath of the American population ... particularly those with kids.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM
Walker wrote No, we will never drain the planet completely of oil. It will eventually get too pricey to obtain and there will be alternatives where energy companies can make more money. They exploit oil right now because that's where the most money is to be made. There ARE already some alternatives on the market, and we'll see more appear as that becomes more profitable for companies.
So, I'm not assuming anything since there are already some alternatives available. I agree that we need to change the way we live as a country, but that's going to take a lot more time and effort than it will be to just switch to another type of fuel... I'm not advocating the continuation of sprawl, and I'm trying to be as much of an urban pioneer as I can right now as set a good example and share some good information, but if I were to sit here and talk about how cars are going to become extinct in our lifetime just because we're going to stop using gasoline sometime in the next 50 years and how we should halt ALL new road construction this minute would just be plain absurd.
The suburbs aren't going to vanish overnight, and so as long as they are there and as long as people live and work and shop there, they deserve methods of transportation that work the best, just as the downtown area deserves some form of mass-transit to fit the lifestyle of the urban dwellers.
I wish we could convert everyone into an urbanist overnight, i really do. :cry:
I didn't mean running ouit of all oil in existence, I just meant until it's pointless to drill for it. Yes, there are alternatives, but they just can't replace oil (at the rate we currently use it) and so are not viable alternatives. Hydrogen, for example, is a crock since it takes more energy to make it than what you get out of it. Oil is also needed to make it too. I don't think cars will go out of existence, but we need to work on crubing our use of them and increase mpg. I'm not anti-car, believe it or not. Another outerbelt though, yeah...no. Not yet, anyway.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
Groundbreaking news, folks!
Earlier this evening, I was able to sneak through the ventilation shaft deep in the underground secret base of ODOT (where all of their plans are laid out) and was able to get my hands on a map of the proposed OUTER-OUTER-BELT!!!
This thing is scheduled to be completed and open during late summer of 2016, but it's pretty cool to think about right now, eh?
Some interesting things to point out...
At the northern end of the Outer-outer-belt, a decent-sized intersection will be constructed to connect 71 to Delaware which will also serve as a third exit for Polaris for those who don't want to get off at the first two extremely congested exits further south. An express route bypass may soon follow where you can get off 71 in Mansfield to get to the mall quicker.
Heading east, the O.O.B. (slang!) will cut a nice swath right between Granville and Newark/Heath. Plenty of homes and farms will need to be demolished in this construction process. This will be justified by plenty of new fast food stops and strip malls that will pop up along the highway and bring tax revenue into the area. SWEET!
Next, the highway will continue south and be built right over top of Buckeye Lake. Part of Buckeye Lake State Park may need to be shoved aside to make room for the 10-lane stretch of road that needs to be laid here. If the highway ends up making too much noise, a 5-year case study analysis can be done and then some sort of 30-foot tall sound-barrier wall will be constructed between the highway and the state park running along both sides. Gotta keep everyone happy!
On the south end, Circleville will be a major interchange with 23 South probably becoming just as congested as 23 North is at Crosswoods. But it will all be worth it because the new highway will shave off a few extra minutes during your annual trip to the Pumpkin Show (which will still be the only reason anyone ever goes to Circleville (unless you're one of the three dozen students who attend the Bible College there)).
Out west, the OOB will sweep up into Madison county and into the heart of London, Ohio. No one is really sure WHY we need an 18-lane road going through London, but I'm sure in just a few more years people will be trampling all over each other to escape the declining ghettos once known as Dublin and Hilliard and into the new suburban sanctuaries of London. Ahh.... I can picture it now... Brookdale Apartments... Creekview Condos... Valleyridge Shopping Centre... Brookdayle Apartments (not to be confused with Brookdale Apartments mentioned earlier)... and so on and so forth.
Lastly the new highway will have a major interchange at Marysville, which will actually suffer a massive decline in population as people now have a quicker way to get to Honda and can live somewhere else instead of Marysville. They may still get a second McDonald's though. Have to wait and see on that one.
TOTAL ROUND TRIP: 176 MILES
So, what does everyone think? Pretty sweet strip of asphalt, eh? 8)
Posted 6 years ago # -
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM
You know, I wonder.
That's clearly the most logical layout for the OOB if something like that is to be constructed. It connects all the county capitals of the six counties surrounding Franklin (just missing Newark, but close enough). I seriously don't know why we'd need ten lanes of traffic across Buckeye Lake now, but by 2016, anything is possible. The IOB (a.k.a. I-270) was a long, long way from the central city when it was built; development came to it, rather than the other way around.
I have to admit I kind of like the idea of the MORPC-area county capitals being connected to one another directly, not just by way of passing through Columbus and back out again. Also, by 2016, those empty fields might well not be so empty. The question is thus is this "planning ahead" or "wishful thinking" to think that this will actually serve demand when it's finished that isn't there at the start. No one has a crystal ball good enough to answer that, IMHO.
Posted 6 years ago #
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.