Talk:Ohio State Route 59

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

U.S. Roads: Ohio Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Locations	Ohio
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Untitled[edit]

as far as i know akron can still annex surrounding municipalities, as it threatened to do a year ago regarding Blakemore.

--UltraSkuzzi 23:37, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Annexation[edit]

I don't think Akron can annex any more land. It made JEDD agreements with all of the townships around it and part of the agreement was that Akron could not annex land from the townships for a long time, 99 years I believe. I don't know what the deal was with Lakemore, but Akron can't annex it since it is incorporated. It could merge with Lakemore or any other surrounding communities, but that is unlikely to happen.

Lemuel

Huh, i'll have to recheck my facts. I'm not a big fan of destroying infrastructure, so i hope Pasquelic (sp?) errs on the side of caution and works on revitalization of what we do have rather then the endless cycle of build and abandon.

--UltraSkuzzi 00:56, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Beacon Writeup[edit]

They had a rather interesting Piece in The Beacon today about Future Plans for the Innerbelt

Let's grow Innerbelt, not nuke it

Exit list adjustment[edit]

Someone needs to update the exit list to reflect the actual routing, not the signposted one along Perkins and the MLK Innerbelt, and a separate exit list for 59T should be created to account for the Perkins/MLK routing. (If nobody else does, I will eventually.) Mapsax (talk) 20:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I just checked the SLD (now the revision of Jan '08), and the official and signposted routings now match. I will revert my edits. Mapsax (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC) [Added] The SLD for SR-8 (also from Jan '08) still shows the old set-up on the diagram portion, though no longer on the interchange illustration. Mapsax (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Applicable[edit]

See Talk:Ohio State Route 261#Categories as my restoration of a category and an external link, along with the addition of other relevant categories, was for the same reasons as there. An "inapplicable" link would be a link to something that has nothing to do with the specific route. And remember, appropriate categories are anything that the route can be associated with, especially the cities and counties it passes through. --JonRidinger (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]